This paper overviews the emergence of a philosophy of “consumer-direction” in personal, home, and community care for the disabled elderly in North America and Europe. Consumer direction is associated with direct payment schemes and other mechanisms that support user choices in the purchase of care, user empowerment and independence. To illustrate the strengths and limitations of consumer direction in practice, the paper analyses interview data collected from users and providers of existing care arrangements where elders and families choose and/or hire, supervise, and manage their “own” homecare workers who are self-employed. Interviews conducted separately with care users and providers illustrate how structural and interpersonal power related to financial, social and geographic proximity affect the way independent care arrangements are established, and maintained. Power issues embedded in marketized arrangements suggest the need for caution against wholesale adoption of market principles in social provisions for serving elders.

In many countries one approach to supporting family-and-friend caregivers is direct financial or monetary support. Debates about the benefits and consequences of such policies pervade the literature. Building on the premise that values underlie public policy, the paper examines four policy paradoxes in the literature and uses selected examples from an international policy analysis to illustrate the underlying objectives and values upon which many of the policies were developed. These include the responsibility to care, economic or social objectives, gender equity, and the autonomy of care receivers. The authors conclude that policy makers need to be cautious about the unintended effects of financial support policy and develop a menu of policies and services to support caregivers. Future policy development in Canada must enable legitimate choice across the life course and ensure that neither the caregiver nor the care receiver will experience short- or long-term financial consequences of his or her choice.

Concerns over growing numbers and proportions of older people in industrialised societies have prompted interest in the development of cheaper ways of providing long-term care for older people. While debate in the UK is currently focused on the costs of residential and nursing care, other European and Nordic countries have introduced schemes designed to encourage or sustain the provision of ‘social’ care by family members, friends and ‘volunteers’, on the assumption that this can be provided at lower net public expense than either residential care or formally-organised domiciliary services.

Drawing on material from a detailed comparative study, this paper describes four different models on which such payments are currently based. These models are discussed and evaluated, taking into account factors which include the eligibility criteria for payments; maximising the autonomy of older people and family care-givers; and the relationships between financial payments and access to services.

These models locate systems of payment within the broader context of financial and service support designed to help frail older people and those who support them. They therefore highlight the importance of considering both financial support and services in comparative studies of social welfare provision. However, further evaluation and policy development is hindered by the lack of evaluation of different models of paying for care and a lack of evidence about the experiences of older people and care-givers.