earticle

영어

Welfare service user becomes a party for the contract when the administrative measure transfers to contract. This is, so to speak, to consider the welfare service user as a consumer. Such understanding, although it differs significantly to the original intent of previous measures, is now becoming a core form in welfare service usage. Even under the previous administrative measure structures, somewhat different service usage forms are being recognized. For example, self-supports for the homeless under the area of public assistance policy has become to gain the social interests. Under such approach, the service user gets social service from social service supplier and at the same time, it requires to become or forced to become self-supportive. This is a changed form of user type to the ‘ user who are required or forced to become self-supportive’. The consideration point at this stage is that in reality these various type of issues does not occur independently but such factors appear in a complex form within a single issue resolving. These realistic issues arising from the complex request of usage relation should be accepted from the users’ right and human right perspective. However accepting such complex request may comprise difficult issues that could not be overlooked. Naturally, each individual form of usage types often differ from fundamental policy principles. Also, even when it seems that the same principle is applied, the application method differ frequently. For example, in the case when the same principle of ‘self-supportive’ is becoming the issue, there is significant difference in meaning among ‘the consumer user’, ‘the service user who is being requested to become self-supportive’, and ‘the service user who need protection.’ Therefore, to resolve a reality cases with issues from the complex plural user form, the difference arising from the policy principles must also need to be considered. Moreover, the considerate point with the various user relation is that the traditional welfare state perspective regarding state, society and individual relation only does not explain what the diverse user relation confer with the rights and human right issues. This is to say that the right and human right structure under the traditional welfare model where the state only is the service provider does not explain the said problems arising from the diverse right and human right issues. For example, the trend of market orientation now requires the state with the roll of service provider, and the regulation controller to set the rule to control the service supply. Likewise, concerning the poverty arrangement issues, state roll does not satisfy only with the roll of being the subject of service provider regarding self-support, and right protector for the venerable group. Under the premise that the general right and human rights are ultimately related to the structure of individual, state and society, it is clear that such change largely impact the substance of human right and general rights.