Premium
‘More time for what ?’ Exploring intersecting notions of gender, work, age and leisure time among people with cognitive disabilities
Author(s) -
Lövgren Veronica,
Bertilsdotter Rosqvist Hanna
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
international journal of social welfare
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.664
H-Index - 47
eISSN - 1468-2397
pISSN - 1369-6866
DOI - 10.1111/ijsw.12135
Subject(s) - recreation , ideology , welfare , work (physics) , inclusion (mineral) , population , population ageing , social work , welfare state , social welfare , psychology , sociology , public relations , social psychology , political science , law , politics , mechanical engineering , demography , engineering
This article explores intersecting notions of leisure among middle‐aged people with intellectual disabilities in the setting of the S wedish welfare state. The participants are recipients of long‐term disability services and have experienced the changing ideological frameworks of the welfare effort, which has recently focused on normalisation, inclusion and participation. Structured activities are arranged by disability services in order to normalise living conditions and provide recreation for disabled people. However, the range of activities is constrained by financial resources, by notions of gender and age and by an institutionalised emphasis on the work ethic – leading to constructions of leisure partly as ‘time beside’ where ‘free time’ activities should not interfere with the duties of the working week. The participants' limited resources and their lack of a strong voice limit their ability to demand their legal rights and leave many of them with ‘too much time with too little to do’. Key Practitioner Message: ● A common idea of leisure is the relationship between social and physical activities, well‐being and health; ● People with disabilities, regardless of age, engage in fewer leisure activities than the general population due to a lack of resources; ● Even with legal rights, the lack of a strong voice as well as institutional constraints limit their leisure opportunities .