Affiliations: [a] School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, W. Hamilton, ON, Canada | [b] Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada | [c] Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), Toronto, ON, Canada | [d] Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
Correspondence:
[*]
Corresponding author: Rebecca E. Gewurtz, School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, 1400 Main St., W. Hamilton, ON, L8S 1C7, Canada. Tel.: +1 905 525 9140 ext. 22189; E-mail:gewurtz@mcmaster.ca
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Government policy shapes and is shaped by society's views of
important social issues such as employment among people with disabilities. OBJECTIVE: This article explores how unemployment among people with mental
illness has been understood and characterized within social policy. METHODS: Drawing on a qualitative case study that explored the
construction and implementation of policy reform within the employment
support branch of the Ontario Disability Support Program, this paper
examines assumptions about unemployment among people with mental illness
that underlie social policy and their impact on employment services and
supports. RESULTS: The most prominent messages that emerged from the data
focused on unemployment among people with mental illness as a function of
personal responsibility, limitations and a lack of motivation. Although
there was awareness of the role of social and systemic factors, these issues
were given less weight, especially when describing employment support
practices. There is a lack of sufficient attention to complex and
deeply-rooted social and systemic inequalities within social policy and
employment services. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to expand conceptualizations of unemployment
among people with mental illness within social policy, and develop interventions
that address complex social factors and systemic constraints that can limit employment opportunities.
Keywords: Causes of unemployment, employment supports, funding structures, policy reform
