‘Mainstreaming’ Meets ‘Choice and Control’: Unsettling Neoliberal Imaginaries of Service Choice

Abstract

‘Mainstreaming’ and ‘Choice and control’ agendas have played a dominant role in shaping disability policy and advocacy in many countries since the 1970s, however scholarship is yet to critically explore the tensions and synergies between the two. ‘Mainstreaming’ is the aspiration to move people with disability out of ‘specialist’ spaces designed specifically for them, and into ‘mainstream’ spaces open to people of all abilities. ‘Choice and control’ concerns efforts to enhance autonomy and self-determination for people with disability. In this paper we interrogate the relationship between ‘choice and control’ and ‘mainstreaming’, both conceptually and through empirical examination of choices made by people with intellectual disability about use of mainstream services in four Australian cities. Our analysis shows their ability to choose is severely constrained by excessive control practiced by supporters, funding restrictions, affordability constraints, and exclusionary practices in mainstream services. We argue that the potential for both ‘choice and control’ and ‘mainstreaming’ has been constrained by neoliberal socio-spatial imaginaries in which they have been framed.