‘I have got my life back’: users' experience of direct payments

‘We’re not asking for anything special’: direct payments and the carers of disabled children

“…These findings are consistent with those of Stainton and Boyce (2004), who also found that the use of friends and relatives can make recipients feel more comfortable and that relationships become more enduring when payment is provided and both parties have clear expectations.…”

“…Increasing research evidence (Maglajlic et al, 2000;Williams et al, 2003;Spandler, 2004;Stainton & Boyce, 2004) suggests that the vast majority of adults receiving direct payments find the experience extremely positive and empowering, specifically in relation to facilitating increased control and flexibility over the support they receive. The Department of Health (2003) stated clearly that the ability to arrange the provision of support in flexible ways should be a central principle of any direct payment scheme.…”

“I Want to See the Queen”: Experiences of Service Use by Ageing People with an Intellectual Disability

“…Although the UK policy mandates PCP across all age groups, PCP together with health plans are identified as primary mechanisms to ensure an effective response to each individual's needs as they age. In addition to the development of PCP, disability service systems in both the UK and Australia are reorientating and shifting from the block funding of services to individualised funding mechanisms that aim to increase the control, choice, and flexibility of people with a disability over the support they receive (Davey et al, 2007;Stainton & Boyce, 2004). However, many such programs remain in the pilot/demonstration phase and include relatively small numbers of people with intellectual disability (Stainton, in press).…”

In(ter)dependent lives

“…A body of research supports this view (Andersen et al 2006;Barnes and Mercer 2006;Blyth and Gardner 2007;Dawson 2000;Stainton and Boyce 2004). However, looking more closely into the meaning of this, it becomes clear that it is about gaining greater control of some concrete decisions, as, for example, those listed in Dawson's (2000) report and confirmed by the other sources mentioned previously: to be able to employ who one chooses, to determine the hours (but not the amount of hours), to determine the tasks, to gain flexibility in the employment relationships and to decrease the involvement with professional agencies.…”