透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.133.160.156
  • 期刊

對依賴者的道德責任:另一種詮釋“福利依賴”的觀點

The Moral Responsibility for Dependents: An Alternative Interpretation of "Welfare Dependency"

摘要


對於「福利依賴」,人們一向都依循新右派的思考路徑,將它看待成一個用來打擊福利國家體制的重要概念。本文即在擺脫這種討論「福利依賴」的傳統路徑,不再著重於「福利依賴」現象背後因果機制的探究,而將焦點置於「福利依賴」概念本身的詮釋與意涵。新右派在建構「福利依賴」這個概念時,他們的意圖並不僅止在指出福利國家體制是一種誘發人們逃避對自己行為負起責任的「誘因結構」;我們認為,這種指責的背後其實隱含著一種深沈的、關乎自我與他人份際的焦慮:對於依賴者的「道德責任」界限到底有多大?就這個意義而言,新右派一九八○年代與九○年代在英美兩地發起的「福利改革」,其實是一種對「道德責任」的重新劃界。然而,這種重新劃界所依據的基本預設並不完全站得住腳。因此,本文在呈現出批評者對「道德責任」重新劃界的根本侷限之後,最後也嘗試著指出另一種更能關照「福利依賴」問題全貌的詮釋觀點、與解答線索。

並列摘要


”Welfare dependency” is usually approached from the perspective of the New Right, using this notion to attack the welfare state regime. In this article, we try to eschew the traditional approach that explores the causation of the formation of ”welfare dependency” as a phenomenon, and put the focus on the interpretation and implications of ”welfare dependency” as a concept. We suggest that in constructing the concept of ”welfare dependency”, the intention of the New Right is not only to accuse the welfare state regime of an ”incentive structure” which attracts people to escape their responsibilities, it also implies an anxiety, which is closely related with the division between self and others: where is the boundary of the ”moral responsibility” for dependents? In this sense, the ”welfare reform”, which during 1980s and 90s the New Rights undertook in US. and Britain, may be seen to be a redefinition of the boundary of the ”moral responsibility” for dependents, but we cannot accept all the presumptions upon which their redefinition is based. Thus, we will also try to show the limitation of their redefinition, and then point out an alternative view and possible solutions that should provide a more comprehensive account of the problem of ”welfare dependency”.

參考文獻


Abramovitz, M.(1996).Under Attack, Fighting Back: Women and Welfare in the United States.New York:Monthly Review Press.
Barry, N.(1987).The New Right.London, New York and Sydney:Croom Helm.
Barry, N.(1999).Welfare.Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press.
Bussemaker, J., Van Kerbergen, K.(1994).Gendering Welfare States.London, Thousand Oaks, and New Delhi:Sage Publication.
Dickens, C.(1993).Oliver Twist: Authoritative Text, Backgrounds and Sources, Early Reviews, and Criticism.New York and London:W. W. Norton & Company.

被引用紀錄


簡月翠(2012)。我國政府推動以工代賑方案之研究 —以臺北市政府為例〔碩士論文,淡江大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6846/TKU.2012.00805
甘獻基(2011)。社會救助法制之建構-我國與法國法制之比較研究-〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2011.01899
林淑婷(2009)。我國國民年金制度演變及其對政府財政負擔之研究〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2009.10307
黃宗旻(2004)。台灣更生保護制度之研究〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2004.00618
周琬琳(2014)。腦神經倫理之道德責任的歸屬: 人格同一性判準的再建構〔博士論文,國立中央大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0031-0412201512010057

延伸閱讀