industry & policy
provided by real people. Interestingly, no evidence was presented
that documented reduced personal input to caregiving. It seems
you just have to believe in the transformational capabilities of the
new technology.
A second, very different note was sounded by those who pointed
to the limits of current minor changes to policy, such as those
sought by the campaigns to ‘recognise’ the work of carers. This
sounds nice, but the results to date, it was pointed out, are rather
underwhelming. The alternative advanced by a number of speakers
is to demand legally enforceable rights for carers, such as those set
out in human rights legislation, from which unpaid caregivers are
currently omitted.
A related refrain was expressed in a number of proposals to
develop an international movement, a movement seeking long-
term cultural change, in which the altruistic ideals of care and
interpersonal support are promoted and adopted as alternatives to
self-interest and greed.
Just as feminism and the environmental movement have been
adopted as life-changing ideals by billions of people across the
globe and have changed human behaviour, in turn reshaping
government policy in many countries, so too could care become an
inspiring ideal.
Rather than punishing those who provide care, it could become
seen as the sort of spontaneous life-affirming behaviour that would
offer an alternative to the superficial and alienating emphasis on
consumerism and wealth.
A third theme, long familiar to carers’ advocates, concerns the
way in which existing service systems and policies conspire to
marginalise unpaid carers and dismiss even the few achievements
that social policies have presented them with in recent years.
The removal of carers as direct beneficiaries from aged care and
disability programs in Australia was a constant reminder of how
easily these sorts of gains can turn into losses.
In both the NDIS and in aged care provided to those at home
through either the Commonwealth Home Support Programme or
CDC-based home care, carers are no longer personally eligible for
assistance. Instead, they have been identified as a distinct consumer
group with their own much reduced set of needs and eligibilities.
The relationship of care, in which the needs of carers are seen
to be linked to their personal interaction with and responsibility
to the recipients of assistance, is no longer seen as central in the
new policies. Instead, they are to have their own specialised ‘portal’
– the Carer Gateway – which so far turns out to be a gateway to
nowhere. Sure, there are promises. Sure, there has to be a move
away from seeing care and the care recipient simply as a burden.
Whether the future has care robots or not, unpaid carers will
continue to be essential. They cannot be simply portrayed as self-
interested consumers, as individuals. Care can only be understood
as a form of interpersonal intimacy, an expression and a product of
a social relationship. ■
Michael Fine is an honorary professor at Macquarie University.
SUBSCRIBE FOR
UNDER $2 A WEEK
THE LATEST NEWS AND RESOURCES FOR
HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS
Nursing Review is essential reading for
anyone involved in the healthcare sector in
Australia. It provides unrivalled coverage of
specialist topics from features and opinion
pieces, to international news and profiles.
• Latest news and resources for all health
care professionals
• Comprehensive coverage of a diversity
of topics
• Analysis of the major issues facing the
health sector as a whole
• Delivered free of charge
• 6 issues per year
• Only publication in the country dedicated
to reporting issues important to nurses
Please call 02 9936 8666 to find out more.
agedcareinsite.com.au 11