Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

Gender differences in intergenerational care in European welfare states

  • KLAUS HABERKERN (a1), TINA SCHMID (a2) and MARC SZYDLIK (a1)
Abstract
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.

Copyright
Corresponding author
Address for correspondence: Klaus Haberkern, Institute of Sociology, University of Zurich, Andreasstr. 15, 8050, Zurich, Switzerland. E-mail: haberkern@soziologie.uzh.ch
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

S. Arber and J. Ginn 1995. Gender differences in informal caring. Health & Social Care in the Community, 3, 1, 1931.

F. Bettio and J. Plantenga 2004. Comparing care regimes in Europe. Feminist Economics, 10, 1, 85113.

P. Bracke , W. Christiaens and N. Wauterickx 2008. The pivotal role of women in informal care. Journal of Family Issues, 29, 10, 1348–78.

M. Brandt , K. Haberkern and M. Szydlik 2009. Intergenerational help and care in Europe. European Sociological Review, 25, 5, 585601.

N. Chesley and K. Poppie 2009. Assisting parents and in-laws: gender, type of assistance, and couple's employment. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71, 2, 247–62.

B. Da Roit 2007. Changing intergenerational solidarities within families in a Mediterranean welfare state: elderly care in Italy. Current Sociology, 55, 2, 251–69.

B. Da Roit and B. Le Bihan 2010. Similar and yet so different: cash-for-care in six European countries’ long-term care policies. The Milbank Quarterly, 88, 3, 286309.

S. Feld , R. E. Dunkle and T. Schroepfer 2005. When do couples expand their ADL caregiver network beyond the marital dyad? Marriage & Family Review, 37, 1/2, 2744.

C. Jensen 2008. Worlds of welfare services and transfers. Journal of European Social Policy, 18, 2, 151–62.

M. Kalmijn and C. Saraceno 2008. A comparative perspective on intergenerational support. Responsiveness to parental needs in individualistic and familialistic countries. European Societies, 10, 3, 479508.

S. Katz 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.

J. N. Laditka and S. B. Laditka 2001. Adult children helping older parents. Research on Aging, 23, 4, 429–56.

G. L. Lee , J. W. Dwyer and R. T. Coward 1993. Gender differences in parent care: demographic factors and same-gender preferences. Journal of Gerontology, 48, 1, 916.

S. Leitner 2003. Varieties of familialism: the caring function of the family in comparative perspective. European Societies, 5, 4, 353–75.

H. Mandel and M. Semyonov 2005. Family policies, wage structures, and gender gaps: sources of earnings inequality in 20 countries. American Sociological Review, 70, 6, 949–67.

P. Michaud , A. Heitmueller and Z. Nazarov 2010. A dynamic analysis of informal care and employment in England. Labour Economics, 17, 3, 455–65.

E. Pavolini and C. Ranci 2008. Restructuring the welfare state: reforms in long-term care in Western European countries. Journal of European Social Policy, 18, 3, 246–59.

J. Plantenga , C. Remery , H. Figueiredo and M. Smith 2009. Towards a European Union gender equality index. Journal of European Social Policy, 19, 1, 1933.

K. Rummery 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.

C. Saraceno 2010. Social inequalities in facing old-age dependency: a bi-generational perspective. Journal of European Social Policy, 20, 1, 3244.

M. Szydlik 2012. Generations: connections across the life course. Advances in Life Course Research, 17, 3, 100–11.

N. Tolkacheva , M. Broese van Groenou and T. van Tilburg 2010. Sibling influence on care given by children to older parents. Research on Aging, 32, 6, 739–59.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Ageing & Society
  • ISSN: 0144-686X
  • EISSN: 1469-1779
  • URL: /core/journals/ageing-and-society
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 5
Total number of PDF views: 154 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 528 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 13th July 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.