IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsoctx/v12y2022i5p130-d916467.html

Each Person as an End? The Users’ Choices in the Service Delivery Process for Assistive Technology in Hungary

Author

Listed:
  • Nóra Menich

    (Centre for Social Sciences, 4. Tóth Kálmán str, H-1097 Budapest, Hungary
    Eötvös Loránd University, Faculty of Social Sciences, 1/A Pázmány Péter s., H-1117 Budapest, Hungary)

Abstract

Based on notions from the Capability Approach, this study investigates the service delivery process for assistive technology in Hungary. The research aimed to explore whether the service delivery is person-centered, with a specific focus on the users’ possible choices. In addition to a comprehensive analysis of legislative and policy documents, qualitative data were collected in semi-structured interviews with users and professionals ( n = 31) to gain a deeper understanding of personal experiences. Our findings indicate that the service delivery system is product-centered and dominated by financial considerations. The policy and legislation framework does not provide an institutional guarantee for users to be able to have their voices heard; the extent to which their opinions and preferences prevail depends on the attitude, knowledge, and goodwill of the professionals involved in the process. The realization of a person-centered approach will be hindered as long as the users’ needs are viewed from a medical point of view.

Suggested Citation

  • Nóra Menich, 2022. "Each Person as an End? The Users’ Choices in the Service Delivery Process for Assistive Technology in Hungary," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-14, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:12:y:2022:i:5:p:130-:d:916467
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/12/5/130/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/12/5/130/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. ., 2006. "Capability Approach," Chapters, in: David Alexander Clark (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Development Studies, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Ricky Buchanan & Natasha Layton, 2019. "Innovation in Assistive Technology: Voice of the User," Societies, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-10, June.
    3. Emily J Steel, 2019. "The Duplicity of Choice and Empowerment: Disability Rights Diluted in Australia’s Policies on Assistive Technology," Societies, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-12, May.
    4. repec:qeh:ophiwp:ophiwp009 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Dreze, Jean & Sen, Amartya, 2002. "India: Development and Participation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780199257492.
    6. Alvaro Díaz Ruiz & Natalia Sánchez Durán & Alexis Palá, 2015. "An Analysis of the Intentions of a Chilean Disability Policy Through the Lens of the Capability Approach," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 483-500, November.
    7. Miriam Teschl & Flavio Comim, 2005. "Adaptive Preferences and Capabilities: Some Preliminary Conceptual Explorations," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 63(2), pages 229-247.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Natasha Layton & Johan Borg, 2023. "Assistive Technology and the Wellbeing of Societies from a Capabilities Approach," Societies, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-3, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gasper, D.R., 2006. "What is the capability approach?: its core, rationale, partners and dangers," ISS Working Papers - General Series 19187, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    2. Mohamed I. Maalim & Malcolm MacLachlan, 2022. "The Assistive Technology Passport: A Resource for Enhancing Capabilities as a Result of Better Access to Assistive Technology," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-21, December.
    3. Shivani Gupta & Agnes Meershoek & Luc P. de Witte, 2022. "Using the Capability Approach to Review the National Legislative Frameworks for Support Services for Persons with Disabilities in Four Countries in Asia," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Gasper, Des, 2007. "What is the capability approach?: Its core, rationale, partners and dangers," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 335-359, June.
    5. Malte Dold, 2025. "Endogenous preferences: a challenge to constitutional political economy’s normative foundation?," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 424-443, December.
    6. Sripad Motiram & Lars Osberg, 2010. "Gender Inequalities in Tasks and Instruction Opportunities within Indian Families," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3), pages 141-167.
    7. Vizard, Polly, 2005. "The contributions of Professor Amartya Sen in the field of human rights," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6273, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Kristian Alm & David S. A. Guttormsen, 2023. "Enabling the Voices of Marginalized Groups of People in Theoretical Business Ethics Research," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 182(2), pages 303-320, January.
    9. repec:kqi:journl:2018-2-1-2 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Gulati, Namrata & Ray, Tridip, 2016. "Inequality, neighbourhoods and welfare of the poor," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 214-228.
    11. Cassan, Guilhem, 2019. "Affirmative action, education and gender: Evidence from India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 51-70.
    12. Tadashi Hirai, 2025. "The validity of subjective assessments of deprivation: Can it be true that poor people are happier than those who are well off?," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.
    13. Teresa Bago d'Uva & Maarten Lindeboom & Owen O'Donnell & Eddy van Doorslaer, 2011. "Education‐related inequity in healthcare with heterogeneous reporting of health," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 174(3), pages 639-664, July.
    14. Clots-Figueras, Irma, 2011. "Women in politics: Evidence from the Indian States," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7-8), pages 664-690, August.
    15. Oyvat, Cem & Tekgüç, Hasan, 2019. "Ethnic fractionalization, conflict and educational development in Turkey," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 41-52.
    16. Yuka Fujimoto & Jasim Uddin, 2022. "Inclusive Leadership for Reduced Inequality: Economic–Social–Economic Cycle of Inclusion," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 181(3), pages 563-582, December.
    17. Prabir C. Bhattacharya, 2006. "Economic Development, Gender Inequality, and Demographic Outcomes: Evidence from India," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 32(2), pages 263-292, June.
    18. M.A. Oommen, 2018. "Deepening Decentralised Governance in Rural India: Lessons from the People’s Plan Initiative of Kerala," Working Papers id:12519, eSocialSciences.
    19. Victoria Austin & Catherine Holloway, 2022. "Assistive Technology (AT), for What?," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-17, November.
    20. Sandeep Sharma & Dora Marinova & Diana Bogueva, 2020. "Transitioning to Better Primary Education: The Role of an Expatriate Organisation in India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-21, August.
    21. Qhayiya Magaqa & Proochista Ariana & Sarah Polack, 2021. "Examining the Availability and Accessibility of Rehabilitation Services in a Rural District of South Africa: A Mixed-Methods Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-16, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:12:y:2022:i:5:p:130-:d:916467. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.