Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5c569c448b-4wdfl Total loading time: 0.325 Render date: 2022-07-06T12:28:15.688Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Gender differences in intergenerational care in European welfare states

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2013

KLAUS HABERKERN*
Affiliation:
Institute of Sociology, University of Zurich, Switzerland.
TINA SCHMID
Affiliation:
Obsan – Swiss Health Observatory, Neuchâtel, Switzerland.
MARC SZYDLIK
Affiliation:
Institute of Sociology, University of Zurich, Switzerland.
*
Address for correspondence: Klaus Haberkern, Institute of Sociology, University of Zurich, Andreasstr. 15, 8050, Zurich, Switzerland. E-mail: haberkern@soziologie.uzh.ch

Abstract

Elderly people with functional limitations are predominantly cared for by family members. Women – spouses and daughters – provide most of this care work. In principle, gender inequality in intergenerational care may have three causes: first, daughters and sons have different resources to provide care; second, daughters and sons respond differently to the same resources; third, welfare state programmes and cultural norms affect daughters and sons differently. In this paper, we address the empirical question whether these three assumed causes are in fact responsible for gender differences in intergenerational care. The empirical analyses, based on the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE), reveal that parents in need are in fact more likely to receive care from daughters than from sons. Daughters are more responsive to the needs of their parents than sons and respond differently to the same resources. Gender inequality is highest in countries with a high level of intergenerational care, high public spending on old-age cash-benefits, a low provision of professional care services, high family obligation norms and a high level of gendered division of labour. Welfare state programmes reduce or increase gender inequality in intergenerational care by reducing or increasing the engagement of daughters in intergenerational care. In general, care-giving by sons is hardly influenced by social care policies.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arber, S. and Ginn, J. 1995. Gender differences in informal caring. Health & Social Care in the Community, 3, 1, 1931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bettio, F. and Plantenga, J. 2004. Comparing care regimes in Europe. Feminist Economics, 10, 1, 85113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonsang, E. 2009. Does informal care from children to their elderly parents substitute for formal care in Europe? Journal of Health Economics, 28, 1, 143–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bracke, P., Christiaens, W. and Wauterickx, N. 2008. The pivotal role of women in informal care. Journal of Family Issues, 29, 10, 1348–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandt, M., Haberkern, K. and Szydlik, M. 2009. Intergenerational help and care in Europe. European Sociological Review, 25, 5, 585601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, L. D. and Martin-Matthews, A. 2003. The gendered nature of men's filial care. Journals of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 58B, 6, 350–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chesley, N. and Poppie, K. 2009. Assisting parents and in-laws: gender, type of assistance, and couple's employment. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71, 2, 247–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crespo, L. 2006. Caring for parents and employment status of European mid-life women. CEMFI Working Paper Number 0615, Center for Monetary and Financial Studies, Madrid.Google Scholar
Da Roit, B. 2007. Changing intergenerational solidarities within families in a Mediterranean welfare state: elderly care in Italy. Current Sociology, 55, 2, 251–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Da Roit, B. and Le Bihan, B. 2010. Similar and yet so different: cash-for-care in six European countries’ long-term care policies. The Milbank Quarterly, 88, 3, 286309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eurobarometer 2007. Health and Long-term Care in the European Union. Special Eurobarometer Report 283, European Commission, Brussels.Google ScholarPubMed
Feld, S., Dunkle, R. E. and Schroepfer, T. 2005. When do couples expand their ADL caregiver network beyond the marital dyad? Marriage & Family Review, 37, 1/2, 2744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerstel, N. and Sarkisian, N. 2004. Explaining the gender gap in help to parents: the importance of employment. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 2, 431–51.Google Scholar
Haberkern, K., Schmid, T., Neuberger, F. and Grignon, M. 2012. The role of the elderly as providers and recipients of care. In Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (ed.), The Future of Families to 2030. OECD, Paris, 189257.Google Scholar
Haberkern, K. and Szydlik, M. 2010. State care provision, societal opinion and children's care of older parents in 11 European countries. Ageing & Society, 30, 2, 299323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heuschneider, K., Liebischer, S. and Tropf, F. C. 2011. Selbstlose Töchter – Berechnende Söhne? In Engelhardt, H. und Schmidt, C. (eds), Probleme und Konsequenzen alternder Gesellschaften. Bamberger Beiträge zur Soziologie Band 07. Bamberg University Press, Bamberg, Germany, 76108.Google Scholar
Hox, J. 2002. Multilevel Analysis. Techniques and Applications. Psychology Press, New York.Google Scholar
Huber, M., Rodrigues, R., Hoffmann, F., Gasoir, K. and Marin, B. 2009. Facts and Figures on Long-term Care. Europe and North America. European Centre for Social Welfare Policy and Research, Vienna.Google Scholar
Igel, C., Brandt, M., Haberkern, K. and Szydlik, M. 2009. Specialization between family and state – intergenerational time transfers in Western Europe. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 40, 2, 203–26.Google Scholar
Jensen, C. 2008. Worlds of welfare services and transfers. Journal of European Social Policy, 18, 2, 151–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalmijn, M. and Saraceno, C. 2008. A comparative perspective on intergenerational support. Responsiveness to parental needs in individualistic and familialistic countries. European Societies, 10, 3, 479508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, S. 1983. Assessing self-maintenance. Activities of daily living, mobility, and instrumental activities of daily living. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 31, 12, 721–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laditka, J. N. and Laditka, S. B. 2001. Adult children helping older parents. Research on Aging, 23, 4, 429–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, G. L., Dwyer, J. W. and Coward, R. T. 1993. Gender differences in parent care: demographic factors and same-gender preferences. Journal of Gerontology, 48, 1, 916.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leitner, S. 2003. Varieties of familialism: the caring function of the family in comparative perspective. European Societies, 5, 4, 353–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mandel, H. and Semyonov, M. 2005. Family policies, wage structures, and gender gaps: sources of earnings inequality in 20 countries. American Sociological Review, 70, 6, 949–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mestheneos, E. and Triantafillou, J. 2005. Services for Supporting Family Carers of Elderly People in Europe. Characteristics, Coverage and Usage. The EUROFAMCARE Consortium, Hamburg, Germany.Google Scholar
Michaud, P., Heitmueller, A. and Nazarov, Z. 2010. A dynamic analysis of informal care and employment in England. Labour Economics, 17, 3, 455–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, B. and Cafasso, L. 1992. Gender differences in caregiving: fact or artifact? The Gerontologist, 32, 4, 498507.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ogg, J. and Renaut, S. 2006. The support of parents in old age by those born during 1945–1954: a European perspective. Ageing & Society, 26, 5, 723–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) 2005. Long-term Care Policies for Older People. OECD, Paris.Google ScholarPubMed
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) 2010. OECD Social Expenditure Database. Available online at http://www.oecd.org/social/socialpoliciesanddatasocialexpendituredatabasesocx.htm [Accessed 5 September 2012].Google Scholar
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) 2011. Help Wanted?: Providing and Paying for Long-term Care. OECD, Paris.Google Scholar
Pavolini, E. and Ranci, C. 2008. Restructuring the welfare state: reforms in long-term care in Western European countries. Journal of European Social Policy, 18, 3, 246–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pillemer, K. and Suitor, J. J. 2006. Making choices: a within-family study of caregiver selection. The Gerontologist, 46, 4, 439–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Plantenga, J., Remery, C., Figueiredo, H. and Smith, M. 2009. Towards a European Union gender equality index. Journal of European Social Policy, 19, 1, 1933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rummery, K. 2009. A comparative discussion of the gendered implications of cash-for-care schemes: markets, independence and social citizenship in crisis? Social Policy & Administration, 43, 6, 634–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saraceno, C. 2010. Social inequalities in facing old-age dependency: a bi-generational perspective. Journal of European Social Policy, 20, 1, 3244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saraceno, C. and Keck, W. 2010. Can we identify intergenerational policy regimes in Europe? European Societies, 12, 5, 675–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suitor, J. J. and Pillemer, K. 2006. Choosing daughters: exploring why mothers favor adult daughters over sons. Sociological Perspectives, 49, 2, 139–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szydlik, M. 2008. Intergenerational solidarity and conflict. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 39, 1, 97114.Google Scholar
Szydlik, M. 2012. Generations: connections across the life course. Advances in Life Course Research, 17, 3, 100–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timonen, V., Convery, J. and Cahill, S. 2006. Care revolutions in the making? A comparison of cash for care programmes in four European countries. Ageing & Society, 26, 3, 455–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolkacheva, N., Broese van Groenou, M. and van Tilburg, T. 2010. Sibling influence on care given by children to older parents. Research on Aging, 32, 6, 739–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ungerson, C. 2004. Whose empowerment and independence? A cross-national perspective on ‘cash for care’ schemes. Ageing & Society, 24, 2, 189212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
67
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Gender differences in intergenerational care in European welfare states
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Gender differences in intergenerational care in European welfare states
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Gender differences in intergenerational care in European welfare states
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *