Policing Contingencies
Policing Contingencies
复制标题
警务突发事件
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2004
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
W. Staples
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
W. Staples
围绕精神疾病的舆论和宣传的变化；以及各州降低精神病院运营成本的愿望。第五章讨论了第二波非制度化，涉及智力障碍者。斯特罗曼简要地讨论了许多关于智障人士的刻板印象，然后记录了在美国被收容的智障人士的数量。在上个世纪，精神病院中的智障人数稳步增长，直到1967年，总共有194,657人被送往精神病院。自那时以来，这一数字出现了显著下降，最新数据表明，目前仍有大约5万名精神发育迟滞患者留在精神病院。斯特罗曼再次指出了非制度化过程背后的六个因素：对机构生活质量低下的批评；倡导运动的影响；包容、正常化和融合的新风气的发展；肯尼迪总统对非制度化的支持；与机构相关的成本增加；以及对日益增长的改革、抗议和公民权利时代的司法回应。在《肢体残疾人的多波变革》中，斯特罗曼讨论了旨在满足肢体残疾人需求的各种历史里程碑，包括工人补偿计划、对受伤军事人员的援助以及1973年的《康复法》。过去30年中残疾抗议活动的增长也得到承认，独立生活运动的诞生被认为是残疾人权利和自由的重大进步。在最后一章“日益增长的自决浪潮”中，斯特罗曼概述了自决是如何通过个性化的计划和预算、服务经纪人和财政中介的使用以及服务选择中的个人选择在实践中发挥作用的。他还探讨了残疾服务提供者的需求与残疾人作为服务消费者之间存在的冲突和紧张关系。总体而言，这本书对残疾政策和公共政策的研究做出了一些有益的贡献。我的主要批评是围绕其相当狭窄(而且基本上没有明确表达)的实证主义框架，这限制了分析的范围和气息。这种实证主义框架意味着，没有人试图将残疾作为社会不平等的一个领域与更广泛的社会结构，如分类主义、种族主义和性别歧视联系起来，而且对残疾和身份政治之间的联系没有给予足够的重视。
changes in public opinion and advocacy around mental illness; and the desire of states to reduce costs of operating mental hospitals. Chapter 5 discusses the second wave of deinstitutionalization, which involved people with mental retardation. Stroman briefly discusses many of the stereotypes about people with mental retardation and then documents the number of people with mental retardation who have been institutionalized in America. The number of people with mental retardation in institutions grew steadily over the last century until 1967, when a total of 194,657 people were institutionalized. Since then, there has been a significant decline, and most recent figures indicate that around 50,000 people with mental retardation remain in institutions today. Again, Stroman identifies six factors behind this process of deinstitutionalization: criticisms of the poor quality of life in institutions; the influence of the advocacy movement; the development of a new ethos of inclusion, normalization, and integration; President Kennedy’s support of deinstitutionalization; increasing costs associated with institutions; and judicial responses to a growing era of reform, protest, and civil rights. In “Multiple Waves of Changes for Persons with Physical Disabilities,” Stroman discusses various historical milestones aimed at addressing the needs of physically disabled people, including Workers Compensation Schemes, assistance for injured military personnel, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The growth of disability protests in the last 30 years is also acknowledged, and the birth of the Independent Living Movement is recognized as a major advance for the rights and freedoms of disabled people. In the final chapter, “The Growing Wave of Self-Determination,” Stroman outlines how self-determination works in practice, through individualized planning and budgeting, the use of service brokers and fiscal intermediaries, and individual choice in service selection. He also explores the conflicts and tensions existing between the needs of disability service providers and disabled people as consumers of services. Overall, this book makes some useful contributions to the study of disability policy and public policy. My main criticisms surround its rather narrow (and largely unarticulated) positivist framework, which limits the scope and breath of analysis. This positivist framework means that there is no attempt to connect disability as an area of social inequality to wider social structures such as classism, racism, and sexism, and there is insufficient attention paid to the connections between disability and identity politics.