The grip of personalization in adult social care:between managerial domination and fantasy

This paper examines the 'ideological grip' of personalization. It does so empirically, tracking the trajectory of personalization through austerity budgeting in one English local authority. In this case, personalization continued to signify hope and liberation even though the most draconian cuts in the Council's history effectively rendered personalization a practical impossibility. This requires critical theorization. Two bodies of theory are interrogated. First Boltanski's sociology of critique, and, in particular, his notion of managerial domination illuminate the way in which change imperatives and crises come to cement ideological formations. Here it is argued that the articulation of personalization with transformation lends itself to managerial domination. It is further argued, though, that while institutional actors may be able to manipulate the symbolic to evade, what Boltanski terms, deconstructionist critique, this cannot entirely explain the hold of this particular discourse. Here, the Lacanian concept of enjoyment is deployed to interrogate its extra-symbolic function and fantasmatic form. Finally, the paper explores the political implications of such affective attachment and, in particular, the guarantee that personalization offers in a period of welfare state decline. © The Author(s) 2012.

Making it real of sustaining a fantasy? Personal budgets for older people

The restructuring of English social care services in the last three decades, as services are provided through a shifting collage of state, for-profit and non-profit organisations, exemplifies many of the themes of governance (Bevir, 2013). As well as institutional changes, there have been a new set of elite narratives about citizen behaviours and contributions, undergirded by modernist social science insights into the wellbeing benefits of ‘self-management’ (Mol, 2008). In this article, we particularly focus on the ways in which a narrative of personalisation has been deployed in older people’s social care services. Personalisation is based on an espoused aspiration of empowerment and autonomy through universal implementation to all users of social care (encapsulated in the Making it Real campaign [Think Local, Act Personal (TLAP), no date)], which leaves unproblematised the ever increasing residualisation of older adult social care and the abjection of the frail (Higgs and Gilleard, 2015). In this narrative of universal personalisation, older people are paradoxically positioned as ‘the unexceptional exception’; ‘unexceptional’ in the sense that, as the majority user group, they are rhetorically included in this promised transformation of adult social care; but ‘the exception’ in the sense that frail older adults are persistently placed beyond its reach. It is this paradoxical positioning of older adult social care users as the unexceptional exception and its ideological function that we seek to explain in this article.

‘Death talk’, ‘loss talk’ and identification in the process of ageing

In this paper, we examine the injunction issued by the prominent politician, broadcaster and older people's advocate, Baroness Joan Bakewell, to engage in ‘death talk’. We see positive ethical potential in this injunction, insofar as it serves as a call to confront more directly the prospects of death and dying, thereby releasing creative energies with which to change our outlook on life and ageing more generally. However, when set against a culture that valorises choice, independence and control, the positive ethical potential of such injunctions is invariably thwarted. We illustrate this with reference to one of Bakewell's interventions in a debate on scientific innovation and population ageing. In examining the context of her intervention, we affirm her intuition about its positive ethical potential, but we also point to an ambivalence that accompanies the formulation of the injunction – one that ultimately blunts the force and significance of her intuition. We suggest that Gilleard and Higgs' idea of the third age/fourth age dialectic, combined with the psycho-analytic concepts of fantasy and mourning, allow us to express this intuition better. In particular, we argue that the expression ‘loss talk’ (rather than ‘death talk’) better captures the ethical negotiations that should ultimately underpin the transformation processes associated with ageing, and that our theoretical contextualisation of her remarks can help us see this more clearly. In this view, deteriorations in our physical and mental capacities are best understood as involving changes in how we see ourselves, i.e. in our identifications, and so what is at stake are losses of identity and the conditions under which we can engage in new processes of identification.