|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Dis/advantaging the family and society: the role of the welfare state Course Description Moodle: https://dl1.cuni.cz/course/view.php?id=13332 This course critically explores how welfare states address, perpetuate, or deepen social inequalities, focusing on migration, gender, and labor market dynamics. Through interactive debates and case studies, students will analyze policies shaping access to resources, rights, and opportunities across different social groups. We will examine pressing issues such as the treatment of migrants in welfare systems, gendered labor market inequalities, and the future of social protections in a changing economy. Engaging with contemporary policy debates, students will assess how welfare states navigate tensions between inclusion, fairness, and economic sustainability. The course emphasizes active participation, encouraging students to develop advocacy strategies and critically engage with opposing perspectives. By the end, students will have a nuanced understanding of how welfare policies shape—and are shaped by—social inequalities.
SUMMER SEMESTER 2024-25 COURSE OVERVIEW Learning Outcomes By the end of this course, students should be able to:
Assessment Summary
Feedback
Staff Feedback Students will be given feedback in the following forms in this course: · Verbal feedback of a formative nature during seminars; · Written feedback of a formative nature based on individual assignments; and · Written feedback of a summative nature based on final (collective) assignment.
Student Feedback · Continuous and final feedback will be provided in both verbal and written way. Students are free to provide feedback on all aspects of the course: literature, content, organisation as well as study load.
COURSE SCHEDULE
ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS
General design: In assessing seminar participation, the following criteria will be taken into consideration: · (I) Discussion of the required literature („individual“ assignments) o Demonstration of preparation (i.e. done the reading and thought about it); o Demonstration of understanding of or engagement with the topic; o Raising relevant questions, points and challenges; and o Listening actively and responding to others in a constructive fashion. § Based on 8 reading assignments (written, uploaded via Moodle) each for 5 points (total 40%). · (II) Class debates (0-30%) each for 10 points – participation is mandatory. o Fulfilment of tasks o Creativity and analytical skills. · (III) Preparation of the final assignment – group presentation („collective“ assignment) - mandatory o Preparation within the semester, results being presented at the 13th seminar in June 2025 (0-30%) · Students need to fulfil at least 75% to pass the course.
Assessment I – Reading assignments
Students are required to read compulsory literature and prepare answers to set questions. · Discussion of the comprehension questions in several (2-4) subgroups o Need to find the super answer! o What are the answered? Where can answers be found? complete your answers. o Do you have any questions regarding literature? o Are you curious about any specific topic that can be covered later in the course? Continuously: there should be some feedback about the literature: how easy/difficult is to comprehend the literature (= evaluation of academic texts/writing) Contributing to discussions can be difficult for some students, especially those who have English as a Second Language (ESL), but there are different ways of contributing to discussion:
Listening actively is also part of participation. Students can show that they’re participating by looking interested, which means:
Advise to students who are not really talkative (“help for introverts”): to be shared with students
If you are someone who doesn’t find it easy to talk in Seminars, make it a personal goal to say something each week or ask a question. Don’t leave it too long before your voice is heard. The longer you leave it, the harder it will be. If there is something I can do to make it easier for you to contribute please let me know.
Assignment II – Class debate
Throughout the course, students will participate in three structured debates (each worth 10 points). These debates are designed to enhance argumentative skills—an essential tool for navigating the world of social policymaking. Debate format:
Rules & expectations:
These debates simulate the battle of ideas in social policy and provide a platform for sharpening persuasive communication, critical thinking, and teamwork.
Assignment III – group presentation
Immigration remains one of the most divisive issues in welfare states, particularly regarding access to social benefits. Governments must balance economic sustainability, social cohesion, and humanitarian obligations while determining who qualifies for welfare support. In this assignment, students will develop a political policy proposal addressing whether and how immigrants should access welfare benefits. Each group will represent one of four competing policy approaches:
Groups must prepare a 20-minute political speech, aiming to win over the audience and discredit competing proposals. This is not an academic presentation but a persuasive, strategic pitch, using emotional appeal, rhetorical techniques, and counter-arguments. Evaluation (30 points total) will focus on argument strength, persuasiveness, strategic framing, and ability to undermine opposing proposals. Participation is mandatory unless excused for illness or emergencies, and students requiring accommodations should notify the lecturer in advance. Final results will be presented in the last session in June 2025.
READING GUIDE AND WEEKLY COURSE TOPICS Reading is split into required and additional (more in Moodle). Required reading is that which we expect you have completed prior to the seminar. Additional readings point you in the direction of extra related readings. Weekly reading and course topics
Seminar 1: Introduction In the introductory presentation, we will begin by exploring the fundamental terms and concepts that will shape our discussions throughout the course. We will examine the core idea of social policy, its role in structuring societies, and the ways in which welfare states attempt to address, maintain, or even deepen social inequalities. Understanding these inequalities—whether related to migration, gender, or labor markets—is essential to critically assessing the policies that claim to resolve them. The session will also provide a clear justification for the course, emphasizing why these debates are more relevant than ever in today’s shifting political and economic landscape. Finally, we will outline the course structure and evaluation criteria, including the importance of participation, the format of class debates, and the major policy proposal assignment. This introduction will set the stage for a semester of active engagement, critical thinking, and real-world policy analysis.
Outline of the course and its requirements will be further described.
Seminar 2: Deservingness In this class, we will explore the concept of deservingness in the welfare state, drawing on the work of van Oorschot and his CARIn classification. We will begin by defining deservingness and examining why certain groups are perceived as more or less deserving of welfare support. Van Oorschot’s framework—based on Control, Attitude, Reciprocity, Identity, and Need (CARIn)—will help us analyze the criteria societies use to justify inclusion or exclusion from welfare benefits. A key focus will be on how welfare state policies actively shape these perceptions, reinforcing or challenging existing social inequalities. We will discuss how migration, labor market status, and gender influence who is seen as "deserving" and how political and media narratives play a role in constructing these views. By the end of the session, students will critically assess real-world policies through the lens of deservingness, understanding how this concept influences public support for welfare measures and the distribution of social protections.
Seminar 3: Age-orientation of social policy regimes In this session, we will examine the age-orientation of welfare state regimes, exploring how social policies distribute resources differently across generations. Many welfare states tend to prioritize older age groups, offering robust pensions, healthcare, and social security, while support for younger generations—such as childcare, education, housing, and labor market integration—often remains comparatively weaker. We will analyze why this imbalance exists, how it reflects broader political and demographic dynamics, and what it means for the sustainability of welfare systems. A key focus will be on the potential consequences for intergenerational solidarity and conflict. Does the disproportionate focus on older populations create tensions between generations? To what extent do younger cohorts feel excluded from welfare benefits they contribute to but may not equally receive? Through case studies and discussion, we will critically assess whether welfare states are adapting to the changing needs of all age groups or if they risk deepening intergenerational inequalities.
Seminar 4: Migration: Differential inclusion of non-citizens In this class, we will explore how the regulation of legal statuses and the differentiation of non-citizens' rights within states have become central mechanisms in the management of migration. However, the actual ways in which differential inclusion operates remain an underexamined aspect of migration research. We will take an empirically grounded approach, using Finland as a case study, to analyze how non-citizens experience legal hierarchies in terms of entitlements. Beyond the regulation of residence and access to labor markets, we will discuss how unequal access to the welfare system serves as a significant factor in shaping the immigration process. The entitlements of non-citizens vary based on nationality, legal status, and employment conditions, directly influencing their position in both the labor market and society. A key focus will be on the role of immigration law in shaping residence status, often challenging the notion of universal rights and a residence-based welfare system. Rather than functioning as a neutral regulatory framework, immigration controls act as institutions that create conditional subjects and reinforce asymmetrical social relations, ultimately questioning the very idea of universal citizenship.
Seminar 5: Migration: Stratified social rights In this class, we will examine how differences in economic development and national social protection systems across EU Member States create significant disparities in the substantive social rights of EU migrant citizens. The extent to which economically inactive EU migrants—such as jobseekers or pensioners—can access welfare benefits in their host country often depends on the ‘export’ of social rights from their country of origin, particularly during the initial phase of their residence. We will explore how these rights are not only stratified by economic status but also by the Member State of origin and destination, leading to unequal access to welfare benefits and, consequently, different opportunities for mobility within the EU. This stratification raises fundamental questions about the fairness of free movement and challenges the very notion of EU citizenship as a universal status. To conclude, we will discuss the proposal for a European Minimum Income Scheme as a potential solution to mitigate the inequalities embedded in the current system.
Seminar 6: Immigration and welfare access (class debate) In this class, we will hold a debate on the accessibility of welfare benefits for immigrants, building on our previous discussions on migration and social policy. The debate will focus on the resolution: "Immigrants should have full and immediate access to social welfare benefits upon arrival." Students will be divided into two opposing groups:
A key focus will be on migrants and refugees as a disadvantaged group, considering how exclusion from welfare systems impacts their integration, economic stability, and overall well-being. The debate is designed to develop argumentation skills, critical thinking, and persuasive rhetoric, simulating real-world policymaking discussions.
Seminar 7: The anti-LGBTQ campaign In this class, we will examine how local lawmaking can be used as a tool to reinforce social divisions and exclusion, focusing on the case of “anti-LGBT resolutions” adopted in over 90 local communities in Poland since spring 2019. Through an analysis of these resolutions, we will explore how they were used to create a clear distinction between the heteronormative majority and LGBTQ+ individuals, effectively territorializing majoritarian identities and constructing moralized social spaces that symbolically and institutionally exclude sexual minorities. Drawing on the theoretical frameworks of Norbert Elias and John L. Scotson, we will discuss how these resolutions operate across three dimensions of exclusion: institutional, symbolic, and proxemic. This discussion will help us understand the broader implications of law as a performative tool in shaping social hierarchies and reinforcing systemic inequalities.
Seminar 8: Transgender rights vs gender-segregated spaces (class debate) In this week's class, we will engage in a debate centered around the resolution: The debate will be split into two sides: • For: This position argues that surrogacy is a valid medical solution for people unable to conceive and that public health insurance should support equal access to family-building options. Denying public coverage for surrogacy discriminates against individuals facing infertility, same-sex couples, and others who rely on assisted reproduction, reinforcing social inequality and limiting reproductive rights. Legalization and public funding would also ensure ethical protections and fair treatment for surrogate mothers. • Against: The opposing view contends that public health insurance should prioritize essential medical treatments over elective procedures like surrogacy. They argue that publicly funding surrogacy risks the exploitation of women, commodification of reproduction, and the misuse of limited healthcare resources. Ethical concerns about surrogacy, including potential pressure on vulnerable women and the impact on children, make public support problematic. We will also examine the perspectives of the disadvantaged groups involved—such as individuals who cannot conceive and seek surrogacy as their only path to parenthood, and women who may face social and economic pressures to become surrogates, raising concerns about bodily autonomy and exploitation. This debate will challenge students to think critically about the balance between reproductive rights, public health priorities, and ethical responsibilities.
Seminar 9: Welfare reform and the shrinking disability category In this class, we will explore the question of who is considered disabled and how disability is constructed, which lies at the heart of disability studies. As Stone highlights, disability is defined by the state, and the flexibility of this definition has often been manipulated to either expand or, more commonly, limit who is recognized as disabled. This article will apply and adapt Stone’s thesis to the current plans to revise the Personal Independence Payment extra costs benefit. Drawing on both official and disabled people's narratives, the article will illustrate the powerful way in which new definitions of disability are being introduced. This process, it argues, may result in state violence against many disabled individuals. Additionally, these reforms have utilized the concept of independence in a way that distorts its original meaning and potential in an inclusive society.
Seminar 10: Atypical employment and social protection gaps In this class, we will explore how atypical forms of employment—such as part-time work, mini-jobs, fixed-term contracts, and solo self-employment—have become more significant in many European countries in recent years. These types of work often reflect irregular career patterns and carry a higher risk of unemployment. We will discuss a comparison across six countries (Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Italy, Denmark, and Poland) to understand how national social protection laws cover different forms of non-standard employment and the specific risks they present. We will also look at the variations in how countries address these types of employment and the differences within countries in their responses. Through this, we will recognize the need for better coordination between social legislation and tax laws to more effectively support non-standard workers.
Seminar 11: UBI vs Workfare policies (class debate) For the final debate, we will discuss the resolution: "This house supports the implementation of Universal Basic Income (UBI) as a replacement for traditional welfare programs."
This debate challenges us to think critically about the future of social welfare, the nature of work, and the best ways to ensure economic security for all members of society.
Seminar 12: Welfare state and gender pension gaps In this class, we will discuss the ongoing reforms in pension systems across European countries, focusing on two key ideas: the integration of public, occupational, and private pensions, and the shift towards more individualized entitlements. We will explore how the Dutch and Danish pension systems already incorporate these three types of pensions with relatively individualized benefits, and how they serve as examples of an ideal pension system. However, we will also examine the significant gender biases inherent in these systems. While citizenship-based state pensions offer some positive effects, they often mask the negative impacts, especially for women. We will analyze how recent changes to the pension schemes may undermine these positive effects and how deeply gendered life courses continue to influence the fairness and effectiveness of pension systems in these countries.
Seminar 13: Concluding seminar
The last seminar will be devoted to presentations and the overall evaluation of the seminar.
ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE
Collective assignment
Evaluation form: self-evaluation – listening group is about to evaluate the presenter group based on evaluation criteria.
Poslední úprava: Gurín Martin, Mgr. (04.03.2025)
|