Hostname: page-component-6b989bf9dc-g5k2d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-14T15:30:12.381Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘Returning the love’, not ‘balancing the books’: talk about delayed reciprocity in supporting ageing parents

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 May 2011

LAURA M. FUNK
LAURA M. FUNK*
Affiliation:
Centre on Aging, University of Victoria, Victoria, Canada.
*
Address for correspondence: Laura M. Funk, Centre on Aging, University of Victoria, PO BOX 1700, STN CSC, Victoria, British Columbia, CanadaV8W 2Y2. E-mail: lmfunk@uvic.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A desire to ‘return’ or ‘pay back’ past care has been identified as a potential motivator of support provided by adult children to their ageing parents. The purpose of this study is to examine whether, how and in what ways adult children interpret and apply the concept of delayed reciprocity in filial relationships. Twenty-eight men and women supporting one or both ageing parent(s) in a Western Canadian city participated in a qualitative study of filial responsibility. Data were analysed interpretively, using thematic coding, contextualised reflection and guiding questions. Findings suggest delayed reciprocity is limited as an interpretive framework for describing parent support. Overall, comments reflected qualification or rejection of ‘paying back’ in the sense of a filial contract. Delayed reciprocity appears for most participants to symbolise imbalance, expectedness or obligation, and a lack of affection. In response, participants tended to reject delayed reciprocity in favour of interpretations emphasising mutuality, family role duties and reciprocated love. Findings are discussed in relation to interpretive purposes, symbolic meanings of parent support, participant characteristics and cultural contexts.

Keywords

delayed reciprocityfilial responsibilitysocial supportinterpretive research
Type
Articles
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , May 2012 , pp. 634 - 654
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

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

Akiyama, H., Antonucci, T. C. and Campbell, R. 1997. Exchange and reciprocity among two generations of Japanese and American women. In Sokolovsky, J. (ed.), The Cultural Context of Aging: Worldwide Perspectives. Second edition, Bergin and Garvey, Westport, Connecticut, 1–14.Google Scholar
Antonucci, T. C. 1985. Personal characteristics, social support, and social behavior. In Binstock, R. H. and Shanas, E. (eds), Handbook of Aging and the Social Sciences. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 94–128.Google Scholar
Atkinson, P., Coffey, C. and Delamont, S. 2003. Key Themes in Qualitative Research: Continuities and Change. Alta Mira Press, Walnut Creek, California.Google Scholar
Baines, C., Evans, P. and Neysmith, S. 1998. Women's caring: work expanding, state contracting. In Baines, C., Evans, P. and Neysmith S. (eds), Women's Caring: Feminist Perspectives on Social Welfare. Second edition, Oxford University Press, Toronto, 3–22.Google Scholar
Beck, U. and Beck-Gernsheim, E. 2001. Individualization: Institutionalized Individualism and its Social and Political Consequences. Sage, London.Google Scholar
Becker, G., Beyene, Y., Newsome, E. and Mayen, N. 2003. Creating continuity through mutual assistance: intergenerational reciprocity in four ethnic groups. Journals of Gerontology, 58B, 3, S151–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengtson, V. L. and Roberts, R. E. L. 1991. Intergenerational solidarity in aging families: an example of formal theory construction. Journal of Marriage and Family, 53, 856–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blieszner, R. and Hamon, R. R. 1992. Filial responsibility: attitudes, motivators, and behaviors. In Dwyer, J. W. and Coward, R. T. (eds), Gender, Families, and Elder Care. Sage, Newbury Park, California, 105–19.Google Scholar
Brakman, S. V. 1995. Filial responsibility and long-term care decision making. In McCullough, L. B. and Wilson, N. L. (eds), Long-term Care Decisions: Ethical and Conceptual Dimensions. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, 181–96.Google Scholar
Breheny, M. and Stephens, C. 2009. ‘I sort of pay back in my own little way’: managing independence and social connectedness through reciprocity. Ageing & Society, 29, 8, 1295–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Call, K. T., Finch, M. A., Huck, S. M. and Kane, R. A. 1999. Caregiver burden from a social exchange perspective: caring for older people after hospital discharge. Journal of Marriage and Family, 61, 688–99.Google Scholar
Cantor, M. H. and Brennan, M. 2000. Social Care of the Elderly: The Effects of Ethnicity, Class and Culture. Springer, New York.Google Scholar
Carruth, A. K., Tate, U. S., Moffett, B. S. and Hill, K. 1997. Reciprocity, emotional well-being, and family functioning as determinants of family satisfaction in caregivers of elderly parents. Nursing Research, 46, 2, 93–100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clarke, E. 2001. Ageing and Caregiving in Canada. Edwin Mellen Press, Lewiston, New York.Google Scholar
Cranswick, K. and Dosman, D. 2008. Eldercare: what we know today. Canadian Social Trends, 89, 48–56.Google Scholar
Dwyer, J. W., Lee, G. R. and Jankowski, T. B. 1994. Reciprocity, elder satisfaction, and caregiver stress and burden: the exchange of aid in the family caregiving relationship. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56, 1, 35–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finch, J. and Mason, J. 1993. Negotiating Family Responsibilities. Tavistock/Routledge, London.Google Scholar
Fine, G. A. 2005. Individualization, risk, and the body: sociology and care. Journal of Sociology, 41, 3, 247–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Funk, L. M. 2008. Responsibility for aging parents: independence and obligation within filial relationships. PhD dissertation, University of Victoria, Victoria, Canada.Google Scholar
Funk, L. M. 2010 a. The interpretive dynamics of filial and collective responsibility for aging parents. Canadian Review of Sociology, 47, 1, 71–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Funk, L. M. 2010 b. Prioritizing parental autonomy: adult children's accounts of feeling responsible and supporting aging parents. Journal of Aging Studies, 24, 57–64.Google Scholar
George, L. K. 1986. Caregiver burden: conflict between norms of reciprocity and solidarity. In Pillemer, K. A. and Wolf, R. S. (eds), Elder Abuse: Conflict in the Family. Auburn House, Dover, Massachusetts, 67–92.Google Scholar
Gouldner, A. W. 1960. The norm of reciprocity: a preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 2, 161–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grundy, E. 2005. Reciprocity in relationships: socio-economic and health influences on intergenerational exchanges between third age parents and their adult children in Great Britain. British Journal of Sociology, 56, 2, 233–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gubrium, J. F. 1988. Family responsibility and caregiving in the qualitative analysis of the Alzheimer's Disease experience. Journal of Marriage and Family, 50, 1, 197–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gubrium, J. F. and Holstein, J. A. 1997. The New Language of Qualitative Method. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Gubrium, J. F. and Holstein, J. A. 2000. Analyzing interpretive practice. In Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (eds), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, California, 487–508.Google Scholar
Hansen, K. V. 2004. The asking rules of reciprocity in networks of care for children. Qualitative Sociology, 27, 4, 421–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henretta, J. C., Hill, M. S., Soldo, W. L. B. J. and Wolf, D. A. 1997. Selection of children to provide care: the effect of earlier parental transfers. Journals of Gerontology, 52B, special issue, 110–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hochschild, A. R. 1983. The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling. University of California Press, Berkeley, California.Google Scholar
Holroyd, E. 2003. Chinese family obligations toward chronically ill elderly members: comparing caregivers in Beijing and Hong Kong. Qualitative Health Research, 13, 3, 302–18.Google Scholar
Holstein, J. A. and Gubrium, J. F. 1994. Phenomenology, ethnomethodology, and interpretive practice. In Denzin, N. K. and Kendig, H. (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, California, 262–72.Google Scholar
Hong, Y. and Liu, W. 2000. The social psychological perspective of elderly care. In Liu, W. and Kendig, H. (eds), Who Should Care for the Elderly? Singapore University Press, Singapore, 165–82.Google Scholar
Hsu, H.-C. and Shyu, Y.-I. L. 2003. Implicit exchanges in family caregiving for frail elders in Taiwan. Qualitative Health Research, 13, 8, 1078–93.Google Scholar
Jansson, W., Almberg, B., Grafstrom, M. and Winblad, B. 1998. A daughter is a daughter for the whole of her life: a study of daughters' responsibility for parents with dementia. Health Care in Later Life, 3, 4, 272–84.Google Scholar
Keller, S. 2006. Four theories of filial duty. The Philosophical Quarterly, 56, 223, 254–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klaus, D. 2009. Why do adult children support their parents? Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 40, 2, 227–41.Google Scholar
Klein-Ikkink, K., van Tilburg, T. and Knipscheer, K. C. P. M. 1999. Perceived instrumental support exchanges in relationships between elderly parents and their adult children: normative and structural explanations. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 4, 831–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koh, S. K. and MacDonald, M. 2006. Financial reciprocity and elder care: interdependent resource transfers. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 27, 3, 420–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Komter, A. E. and Schans, D. 2008. Reciprocity revisited: give and take in Dutch and immigrant families. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 39, 2, 279–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewinter, M. 2003. Reciprocities in caregiving relationships in Danish elder care. Journal of Aging Studies, 17, 357–77.Google Scholar
Lu, L. 1997. Social support, reciprocity and wellbeing. Journal of Social Psychology, 137, 5, 618–28.Google Scholar
McGrew, K. 1998. Daughters’ caregiving decisions: from an impulse to a balancing point of care. Journal of Women and Aging, 10, 2, 49–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Molm, L. D., Schaefer, D. R. and Collett, J. L. 2007. The value of reciprocity. Social Psychology Quarterly, 70, 2, 199–217.Google Scholar
Moody, M. 2008. Serial reciprocity: a preliminary statement. Sociological Theory, 26, 2, 130–51.Google Scholar
Munsch, R. 1995. Love You Forever. Firefly Books, Richmond Hill, Canada.Google Scholar
Nakano Glenn, E. 2000. Creating a caring society. Contemporary Sociology, 29, 1, 84–94.Google Scholar
Neufeld, A. and Harrison, M. J. 1995. Reciprocity and social support in caregivers’ relationships: variations and consequences. Qualitative Health Research, 5, 3, 348–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parrott, T. M. and Bengston, V. L. 1999. The effects of earlier intergenerational affection, normative expectations, and family conflict on contemporary exchanges of help and support. Research on Aging, 21, 1, 73–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pyke, K. 2000. ‘Normal American family’ as an interpretive structure of family life among grown children of Korean and Vietnamese immigrants. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 1, 240–55.Google Scholar
Schwarz, B., Trommsdorff, G., Albert, I. and Mayer, B. 2005. Adult parent–child relationships: relationship quality, support, and reciprocity. Applied Psychology, 54, 3, 396–417.Google Scholar
Schwarz, B., Trommsdorff, G., Zheng, G. and Shi, S. 2010. Reciprocity in intergenerational support: a comparison of Chinese and German adult daughters. Journal of Family Issues, 31, 2, 234–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selig, S., Tomlinson, T. and Hickey, T. 1991. Ethical dimensions of intergenerational reciprocity: implications for practice. Gerontologist, 31, 5, 624–30.Google Scholar
Sheehan, N. and Donorfio, L. 1999. Efforts to create meaning in the relationship between ageing mothers and their caregiving daughters: a qualitative study of caregiving. Journal of Aging Studies, 13, 2, 161–76.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M., Conroy, S. J., Wang, H., Giarrusso, R. and Bengston, V. L. 2002. Reciprocity in parent–child relations over the adult life course. Journals of Gerontology, 57B, 1, S3–13.Google Scholar
Smith, P. 1993. Family responsibility and the nature of obligation. In Tietjens Meyers, D., Kipnis, K. and Murphy, C. F. J. (eds), Kindred Matters: Rethinking the Philosophy of the Family. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 41–58.Google Scholar
Stark, O. 1995. Altruism and Beyond: An Economic Analysis of Transfers and Exchanges Within Families and gcroups. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Stoller, E. P. 1985. Exchange patterns in the informal support networks of the elderly: the impact of reciprocity on morale. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 47, 2, 335–42.Google Scholar
Stuifbergen, M. C. and Van Delden, J. J. M. 2011. Filial obligations to elderly parents: a duty to care? Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 14, 63–71.Google Scholar
Uehara, E. S. 1995. Reciprocity reconsidered: Gouldner's ‘moral norm of reciprocity’ and social support. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 483–502.Google Scholar
Verbrugge, L. M. and Chan, A. 2008. Giving help in return: family reciprocity by older Singaporeans. Ageing & Society, 28, 5–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, O. M. H. and Chau, B. H. 2006. The evolving role of filial piety in eldercare in Hong Kong. Asian Journal of Social Sciences, 34, 600–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wuest, J. 1998. Setting boundaries: a strategy for precarious ordering of women's caring demands. Research in Nursing and Health, 21, 39–49.3.0.CO;2-U>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed