Vulnerable persons in society: an insider's perspective.

Purpose: Self-reliance and social participation are strongly promoted by social policy. Both concepts are linked to the concept of vulnerability, for people who do not meet these standards are labelled "vulnerable people". In this paper, the insider's perspective takes central stage by seeking to explore what it means to be labelled a "vulnerable person", and through this to further our insight into the meaning of the concept of vulnerability. Method: Thirty-three in-depth interviews were conducted with 16 allegedly vulnerable people. The data were subjected to thematic content analysis. Results: Our analysis revealed three main dimensions and eight sub-dimensions of perceived vulnerability, outlining an insider's concept of vulnerability. This concept includes manifestations of vulnerability, feelings coexisting with vulnerability, and the image of vulnerable people. Conclusion: The perception of vulnerability changes when interacting with others in society, especially with social policy implementers. In this interaction, the perceived vulnerability increases and becomes societal vulnerability. It concerns a dependency situation in which one's strength and self-determination are not recognized, and the help needed is not provided. By acknowledging the insider's perspective, social policy can fulfil a more empowering role towards "vulnerable people" and contribute to people's well-being.

Self-managed programmes in homeless care as (reinvented) institutions.

Purpose: Self-managed institutional homeless programmes started as an alternative to regular shelters. Using institutional theory as a lens, we aim to explore the experiences of stakeholders with the institutional aspects of a self-managed programs.Method: The data we analysed (56 interviews, both open and semi-structured) were generated in a longitudinal participatory case-study into JES, a self-managed homeless shelter. In our analysis we went back and forth between our empirical data and theory, using a combination of systematic coding and interpretation. Participants were involved in all stages of the research.Results: Our analysis revealed similarities between JES and regular shelters, stemming from institutional similarities. Participants shared space and facilities with sixteen people, which caused an ongoing discussion on (enforcement of) rules. Participants loathed lack of private space. However, participants experienced freedom of choice over both their own life and management of JES and structures were experienced more fluid than in regular care. Some structures also appeared stimulated self-management.Conclusion: Our analysis showed how an institutional context influences self-management and suggested opportunities for introducing freedom and fluidity in institutional care.