Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T10:29:03.446Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Between Family and State: Ageing in Poland and Norway

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 November 2008

Georges Midre  and
Brunon Synak
Georges Midre
Affiliation:
Institute of Social Science, University of Tromsö, PO Box 1040 N–9001, Troms¨, Norway.
Brunon Synak
Affiliation:
Institute of Philosophy and Sociology, University of Gdańsk, Wita Stwosza 55, Gdańsk, Poland.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A comparative analysis of the life circumstances of older people in Poland and Norway is presented. It examines differences and similarities in attitudes to both family- and state-provided care, for those living in their own homes. In more prosperous Norway, public services are more frequent, elderly people are more independent and play a more active role in the labour market. In Poland formal care is seen as the last resort, with the responsibility for supporting elderly people placed firmly with the family. State services are directed towards those without families. The Norwegian system places no legal obligation on families, which results in a higher proportion living in institutions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , September 1989 , pp. 241 - 259
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

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

NOTES

1 Streib, Gordon F., Old age in sociocultural context: China and the United States. Journal of Aging Studies, 1, no. 2 (1987), 95–112.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

2 Ibid.

3 Listhaug, Ola., Confidence in institutions: findings from the Norwegian Values Study. Acta Sociologica, 27 (1984), 111–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lafferty, William, Den sosialdemokratiske stat, Nytt Norsk Tidsskrift, 3 (1986), 23–37Google Scholar. There have been several works that discuss to what extent these views are correct. One of the latest is from Marthinussen. Compared to Poland it seems, however, safe to conclude that the gap between ‘state’ and ‘society’ is narrow in Norway. Marthinussen, Willy, Solidaritetens grenser, Universitetsforlaget, Oslo, 1988.Google Scholar

4 Kolberg, Jon Eivind, Førtidspensjonering i velferdsstaten, Sosial Trygd, 76 (1988), 26–29Google Scholar; Solem, P. E. and Lauvli, Marit, Pensjoneringsmønstre. yrkesavgang og pensjonsuttak i årene omkring pensjonsalderen, Norsk Gerontologisk Institutt, Rapport nr. 2, 1987Google Scholar. According to Kolberg, between ¼ to ⅓ of the elderly between 59 and 65 years old were receivers of disability in 1984. Also in Poland the elderly may receive a retirement pension on grounds of disability. This is called ‘old age pension’ and may be granted 5 years before the statutory retirement age.

5 SSB, Statistical Arbok, Oslo, 1987Google Scholar; Kondrat, W., ‘Demograficzne aspekty starzenia sie ludnosci Polski’, in Wojcik, P. (ed.), Waruki zycia i problemy ludzi starych, ANS, Warszawa, 1986Google Scholar. Sources for Norway are computed on the basis of table 170. A person in the labour force is defined as such if he or she has had at least one hour of salaried work in one predetermined week. Sources for Poland do not include people working in agriculture where the percentage of employed older persons is very high.

6 Synak, Brunon. Mlodzi emeryci. Warszawa, 1987.Google Scholar

7 Sources for Poland: GUS (1987), Warszawa, 1987, and for Norway: SSB (1987), table 50. The figures for Poland are for 1985 and for Norway mean values for the years 1981/1985.

8 Synak, Brunon. The elderly in Poland: an overview of selected problems and changes. Ageing and Society, 7 (1987), 19–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9 Statistical Yearbook 1987, table 15.

10 GUS 1987.

11 Statistical Yearbook 1987, table 509.

12 SSB 1982,. table 22. A densely populated area is defined by the distance between houses (not more than 50 metres) and by a population size of more than 200.

13 Synak, Brunon, Mlodzi emeryci, Warszawa, 1987Google Scholar; Aas, Dagfinn, Hvem bor sammen med hvem i eidre år?, Gerontologisk Magasin, 3, no. 3 (1986), 128–138.Google Scholar

14 Daatland, Svein Olav. Boform og husholdsstruktur i eldre år Endringer i Perioden 1960–1980. Norsk Gerontologisk Institutt, rapport no. 2, 1986, p. 19.Google Scholar

15 Piotrowski, J., Miejsce czlowieka starego w rodzinie i spoleczenstwie, PWN, Warszawa, 1973, 176Google Scholar; GUS (1985).

16 Piotrowski, (1973)Google Scholar showed that nearly every third older woman and every fourth man living with children complained about unsatisfactory relations.

17 GUS (1985).

18 Ibid.

19 Ibid.

20 Harper, S., ‘The kinship network of the rural aged: a comparison of the indigenous elderly and the retired immigrants’. A paper presented at the Annual Conference of the British Society of Gerontology, Glasgow, 1986.Google Scholar

21 Lingsom, Susan. ‘Fragmenter i et samspill. Den offentlige og private hjelpen i eldres hverdag’, in Daatland, Svein Olav (ed.), Gammel i eget hjem. Nordiske erfaringer om belingelser og tilrettelegging for en selvstendig boform i eldre år. Nordisk Ministerråd, København, 1987.Google Scholar

22 Nordhus, Inger Hilde, Isaksen, Lise Widding and Wærness, Kari. De fleste gamle er kvinner. Universitetsforlaget, Bergen, 1986.Google Scholar

23 It has been argued that these comparisons may deceive. Demographologists in Norway have shown that there were earlier many childless and many families with a number of children. The childless could of course not rely on children from other families for help. In the future it is expected that the extent of childlessness will be smaller, but that families will have a smaller number of children. We are indebted to Svein Olav Daatland for having made this point clear to us.

24 Wenger, Clare. Dependence, interdependence and reciprocity after eighty. Journal of Aging Studies, 1, no. 4 (1987), 355–377.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

25 SSB (1983), fig. 3.3.

26 Lingsom, Susan. Informal care of sick and elderly. Samfunnsøkonomiske studier, 57, Statistisk Sentralbyrå, Oslo, 1985, pp. 90ffGoogle Scholar. The author concludes, however, that according to her findings labour market participation among women does not, on the whole, represent a serious threat to informal care.

27 In 1983 880,000 women took the opportunity of going on payment relief. Reszke, I. ‘Zroznicowanie rynku pracy w Polsee jako zrodlo nicrownosci miedzy mezczyznami i koblictami’, in Wnuk-Lipinski, E. (ed.), Malerialy z VIII Ogolnopolskiego Zjazdu Socjologicznego, PTS, Warszawa, 1987.Google Scholar

28 On the basis of several case studies, it is possible to assume that, depending of the type of community, from 5 to 20% of elderly people receive some kind of help (mainly financial) from social service institutions. Frackiewicz, L., Karta praw czlowieka starego, Warszawa, 1985Google Scholar; GUS, Sytuacja bytowa ludzi starych w 1985 r., Warszawa, 1985Google Scholar; Wojciechowska, Z. and Czechowicz, Z., ‘Warunki zycia ludzi starych i ich potrzeby w zakresie opieki w rodzinie’, a paper presented at the Gerontological Conference in Gdansk, 10 1986.Google Scholar

29 Thorsen, Kirsten and Skre, Arnhild (eds). Eldre, omsorg, nœrmiljø, Universitets-forlaget, Oslo, 1985Google Scholar. Estimates made from 1981/82 based on tables 1.1 and 1.4.

30 Kjell, Bakken. Hjemmehjelpen i en landkommune. Norsk Gerontologisk Institutt, rapport no. 5, 1987.Google Scholar

31 Daatland, (1986), op. cit.Google Scholar

32 Markoswski, R. ‘Spoleczne przyzwolenie na udzielenie swiazdczen przez instytucje pomocy spolecznej’. Praca Socjalna, 1986, no. 3.Google Scholar

33 Daatland, Svein Olav, Holdninger til hjelp og hjelpere – endringer i løpet av 1970-årene, Gorontologisk Magasin, 1, (1984), 112–120, esp. p. 114Google Scholar; Wodz, K., Pomoc spoleczna w swiadomosci mieszkancow miasta, Uniwersytet Slaski, Katowice, 1985, pp. 87–88.Google Scholar

34 Daatland, (1984)Google Scholar, ibid. p. 114; Wodz, (1985)Google Scholar, ibid. p. 192.

35 Daatland, Svein Olav. Egne krefter, eget hjem, Norsk Gerontologisk Institutt, rapport no. 2, 1988.Google Scholar

36 In Poland old parents accept financial assistance mainly from the welfare institutions, and they gladly accept it, while expecting help in routine chores and nursing care mainly from their children and relatives. It should also be mentioned that in the 1950s the elderly may have feared that they would not have the possibility to take part in religious services while living in an institution.

37 Lingsom, (1985), op. cit.Google Scholar

38 Streib, (1987), op. cit.Google Scholar

39 Daatland, Svein Olav. ‘The growing reservation towards family care in Norway: passive adjustment to failing solidarity or active maintenance of family ties?’, paper presented at the conference ‘Application of theoretical and methodological approaches of social science to gerontological research’, University of Gdansk, Poland, 10 1988.Google Scholar

40 Ibid.