According to Miller1 there are two core values at the heart of social care. The first is “respect for the worth and dignity of every individual”2. The basis of this value is accepting the worth of each individual as a fellow human being. Thus responsibility is placed on the person being cared for to treat the carer with respect. Without this responsibility there is a danger that those receiving care become passive recipients of care and this would not allow them to fully participate in the caring process.

The second core value is that of “granting social justice and promoting the social welfare of every individual”. “Social justice refers to the right to fair treatment in society, especially ensuring that legal rights. Social Welfare refers to ensuring that well-being is maximised, including the right to welfare services and benefits”3.

A value is that which is desirable or worthy for its own sake, something which has in

Two such pieces of relevant legislation are:

The housing support (HS) clients, many of whom have spent the majority of their lives receiving total care, appear to have met their desired goal of independent living by holding their own tenancy of a council or housing association flat.

less favourably because of disability, employer has defence of

In conclusion the reality of putting legislation into practice can be challenging. The tribunals and courts are often used frustrate those with genuine grievances from seeking redress.

Some topics in this essay:
Ibid Miller’s, Cap Foundation, Discrimination Act, According Miller1, Social Welfare, Act Employers, Learning Outcome, Offenders Act, European Union, social care, Janet Miller, · promoting, social welfare, confidential information, care practice, principle choice, social care practice, third party care-workers, provisions act, act ·, main provisions, respect giving, promoting social welfare, social justice promoting, justice promoting social,