Sociological analysis of social policies for deaf and hard of hearing in Germany 1994-2006

Sociology - Welfare

Hard of hearing people represent a special segment in the society we live in. They are a disadvantaged group of people who due to the fact that they suffer from a health situation are faced with discriminatory behavior and lack the opportunities normal people have.

There have been several attempts made concerning the possible treatment of hard of hearing people and those with different disabilities inside the society because it is important that even the less fortunate have an equal chance for development in life. However, such policies relate in a definite way to the health care system of the country under discussion or of the region under analysis. At the same time, there are certain theories related to the issue of health care and in particular to the treatment of those with disabilities which try to set a straight set of guidelines for a possible solution to the problems people with disabilities have. In this sense, Esping- Andersen and Titmuss created a theoretical framework which can ensure not necessarily a viable solution but more a series of considerations and practices that would be useful for framing the best policy towards people with disabilities and hard of hearing people in particular.

The theories of Esping- Andersen and Titmuss will be used to analyze the way in which Germany responded to the challenges imposed by people with disabilities and hard of hearing. The period under analysis will be 1996-2006.

One of the most important theories of Esping- Anderson tries to focus on the model of the Capitalist Welfare State. More precisely, "In his research, Esping-Andersen groups countries under three models of the capitalist welfare state: The Liberal Regime Model, the Social Democratic Regime Model and the Corporatist Regime Model." More precisely as stated by the author in general he considers that states can be called "welfare states" when "it involves state responsibility for securing some basic modicum of welfare for its citizens." Therefore, from this point-of-view, Esping-Andersen's classification is based on the way in which the state is able to provide its people with some basic needs for survival and for a decent way of life inside the society.

The social aspect of the society is crucial particularly from the point-of-view of a European state such as Germany because it offers unity and cohesion to the other policies undergone at the level of the European Community as well as at the level of the state. From this point-of-view it is clear that "all of these models share a constitutive core - namely, the fundamental conviction that social rights, social compensation and social security are legitimate needs. In this view, equality and solidarity are seen as central values of the European cultural region, and the "social" is one of the central essences of that which is European." Therefore, there is a difference between states such as the United States which decide their social policy independent of any external factor, and the states of the European Union which must take into account the regulations at the European level as well.

Concerning the theoretical base Esping-Andersen proposes for the analysis of the social policies n different types of state, this is related to the way in which the respective state tends to view social security and in general its relation to the public. More precisely, there is a clear distinction made between socialist states or welfare states and liberal states. In this sense, the former was born as a result of social struggles and thus as an adaptation to the social pressures of the people; the latter on the other hand, was created as a result of self choice. Esping-Andersen argues that "to ensure that the cash nexus would remain the pivotal basis of distribution, liberal reformers preferred private insurance, company fringe benefits, and friendly societies or, where a public commitment was unavoidable, actuarially sound, voluntary social insurance." Therefore, the difference comes in terms of approaches and means of achieving social policy and social inclusion. Under this theory, people with disabilities are also part of the social policy framework.

Richard Titmuss' theory on social policy goes further that Esping-Andersen's but in a parallel manner. More precisely, he argues that in fact social administration as the entire array of measures and institutions should cater for the needs of those disadvantaged in the manner as to ensure their full inclusion in the society. Moreover, he supports the idea that in order to achieve public welfare, it is important that a more equal distribution of resources be ensured by the public administration. His beliefs represented important guidelines for center and left parties which followed them and tried to establish a more social system of policies. Therefore, it is fair to say that Titmuss advocated a new sense of social equality that would benefit those less advantaged by the society and by an eventual liberal policy.

Germany is a rather important case study because it represents the approach of the conservative corporatist policy. Given its historical background it can be said that Germany has had a troubled social life which included constant pressures from different groups of the society which determined the state to take measures that would rehabilitate rather than offer benefits. In this sense, the state prefers to assist its citizens rather than to encourage them.

There are four guiding principles concerning the protection of the people with disabilities which have come across several obstacles especially at the moment of the reunification of Germany in 1990. In this sense, it is considered by the German state that the integration of the people with disabilities is of crucial need for the society. Similar to the provisions of the European Union which underline the need for equal chances, Germany's aim is to include the persons with disabilities in the society in such a manner as to ensure their well-being. From this point-of-view, Germany falls in Esping-Andersen's theory of the welfare state.

The second principle of the finality of the assistance takes into account the fact that people should be assisted in their need regardless of the sector of policy which provides this assistance. Moreover, this assistance must be granted without considering the causes of their disabilities or the funds used to do so.

Third, the German state focuses on the need to intervene as soon as possible in order to both reduce the costs of later intervention and to insure the adequate protection. This is an interesting point because it addresses Titmuss' concern related to the fact that a strong social policy can in the end have negative effects on the overall budget. More precisely, he notes in 1968 that a social policy and administration that would cater entirely for the needs of the disadvantaged individuals would imperil the equilibrium of the society and in the end it could prove ineffective because those who do not have the means would have to face up the costs. Therefore, Germany's approach takes this matter into consideration.

Forth, the principle of individual assistance points out the fact that the assistance provided must be suited to the needs of each individual in a sense that help must be provided according to the particular situation of the disadvantaged persons, and not as a general policy aimed at solving all issues under concern.

The aspect of the treatment of people with disabilities is very important for the way in which a certain segment of the social policy tends to develop. As stated by the European Commission, "different approaches to disability determination are, therefore, deeply embedded in national institutions." Therefore, the delimitation between different systems of social security and in the end between various means to approach the issue of people with disabilities relies in whether the state provides assisted help thus centralized funding or offers incentives, thus devolved.

The four principles presented above are visible in the way in which Germany decided to deal with the assistance of those with disabilities. In this sense, on the one hand, the persons with disabilities have the right to choose between actual care and the value of the care in money. Most of the times, however, people tend to chose the financial perspective of care simply because the money can either be redirected or used to acquire different care support. In any case, the state ensured that people are offered the chance to reintegrate in the society and at the same time enabled them to benefit from other sources as well, should the income per family be too low to support special needs assistance. Even so, these funds come from the social security fund, and are not particularly designed for those with disabilities.

The need to address the issue of persons with disabilities is seen from the way in which such people have come to be treated by the society. In this sense, at the beginning of the 1990s there was a great sense that a discriminatory policy was being conducted at the level of most western states. From this point-of-view, some have argued that they have a limited access on the labor market. More precisely, "studies show that disabled persons experience lower labor force participation rates, higher unemployment rates, and higher part-time employment rates than nondisabled persons." This is largely due to the fact that there is a sense of discrimination. Still, while the United States, more or less, is independent from this point-of-view, in terms of Germany, its approach is strictly connected to that of the European Union. A proof of this aspect is the actual statement made in 1999 to strengthen its commitment "to achieving the integration into employment and work of people with disabilities by promoting equal social standards for them" thus excluding discrimination. Moreover, the Treaty of Amsterdam which was fully accepted by Germany points out the need for a fair and non-discriminatory behavior.

There are several aspects which must be taken into account concerning the German way of handling the problem of people with disabilities. Thus, according to Esping-Andersen's theory, dealing with the inclusion of disabled people implies their reintegration in the labor force. More precisely it means that the welfare state, in the first instance approaches the idea of the reintegration process through commodification. The term is used to signify the fact that the individual, through the reintegration on the labor market is made dependent on the state for its basic needs. The next step in the process is, theoretically, the de-commodification which means the ability of the people to be as less dependable of the state as possible.

The strategy of the German state concerning the approach to the issue tends to follow these lines that were established at a theoretical level. In this sense, the first measure taken was at the level of the ministries of the unified country in the sense that "At federal level a division of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (BMA) is responsible for relief payments to war victims, laws relating to disabled people and vocational integration of disabled people." Therefore, it represents the main body which coordinates the activity and the measures undergone concerning the persons with disabilities.

There is more and more often the discussion over the best means to ensure that people with disabilities are protected from discriminatory behavior and at the same time they are helped by the state to become again part of the society. The latest approach on this issue concerns the duty of the state to protect civil rights as part of the state's decision to help people with disabilities. In this sense, while the European Union has made efforts to include these provisions in the treaties of the European Community, Germany has often fallen behind, taking into account that it was only recent regulations that enabled it to have a more coherent protection policy. In this sense, "German anti-discrimination rules were, with few exceptions, based on the constitutional charter of human rights and case law."

There is explicit mentioning of the idea of discrimination on account of disability in the German which take into account "no one may be discriminated against on account of their disability." Despite the fact that the Constitution offers wide protection, there are no specific and clear rules on the way in which employers must engage in the process of reintegrating people with disabilities on the labor market. Still, as considered by the Council of Europe "constitutional provisions bind public authorities, (...) are these rules applicable in the private sector - as a result of the interpretation of private-law principles in the light of the constitution. The interpretation of private-law principles must entitle persons with disabilities to take part in the private sector on the same footing as non-disabled persons."

The 2001 Law concerning the Prohibition of discrimination of people with disabilities in the field of civil law tried to address the first issue mentioned by Esping-Andersen the commodification process. In this sense, it tried to regulate the duty of the private sector to employ people with disabilities. Still, the power of the state to impose certain aspects on the private sector is limited and from this point-of-view it is clear that the law, despite its initiatives, cannot have the best effect.

Germany finally achieved an equal status through the 2006 Anti-Discrimination Law which points out that "employers are now expressly prohibited from discriminating against job applicants or employees on the basis of gender, race or ethnic origin; religion or belief; age; disability; or sexual orientation." Therefore, under these circumstances, the means through which the state can ensure the reintegration of the people with disabilities are stated by the law. The employment need for the people with disabilities is crucial because it represents their only means for reintegration and at the same time it offers the state the possibility to distinguish between those who are severely damaged and who cannot undergo any type of jog and those who can to a certain extent be integrated in the society.

According to this classification, for the German state the most important aspect is to tailor the social service assistance according to the needs of the citizens. In this sense, "The goal of social benefits in accordance with section 1 of this Book of the Social Code is to promote self-determination of people with disabilities or who are in danger of acquiring them and their equal participation in life within society." This measure implies the financial help of those who do decide to take it in such a manner as to offer the state the possibility to take care of those who can no longer be part of the labor force through medical care.

Aside from the employment of persons with disabilities, another critical aspect in the way in which they are treated represents education. In general it can be said that the most important aspect of the human behavior is education. This is the reason for which the UN Declaration of Human Rights presented the right to an education as a universal right which must be ensured by the state. However, when children are treated in a discriminatory manner, the state automatically fails to ensure their right to schooling. From this point-of-view it is important that action be taken at this level as well.

Concerning Germany, the treatment varies according to the land the child is in. For instance, while in Brandenburg, children with disabilities have the right to day care, in other parts of Germany, they have it but only in the limit of the day care capacities. Furthermore, concerning the education system in Germany, there are efforts being made to try to include children in normal systems of education and school in order to reduce discrimination. Nonetheless, the situation in Germany cannot be fully considered a success. More precisely, it is due to the limited possibilities of children and students with disabilities that they often fail to keep up with the rhythm of the normal school. In this sense, "although there is a movement toward the integration of students with disabilities into the regular public school system, few students with disabilities currently attend the regular public schools. (...) Disabled students who were integrated into the Grundschulen (...) were usually students described as dyslexic, learning disabled, or behaviorally disabled. The teachers noted that they try to keep these students at the Grundschule and have them repeat a year if necessary." Therefore, at times, despite the legislative framework as well as the means used to support the initiatives, there is a lack of physical capacity which tends to limit the students from attending regular schools.