Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T09:02:57.341Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The inter-relationship between formal and informal care: a study in France and Israel

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 December 2008

HOWARD LITWIN  and
CLAUDINE ATTIAS-DONFUT
HOWARD LITWIN*
Affiliation:
Israel Gerontological Data Center, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel.
CLAUDINE ATTIAS-DONFUT
Affiliation:
Caisse Nationale d'Assurance Vieillesse, Paris, France.
*
Address for correspondence: Howard Litwin, Israel Gerontological Data Center, Paul Baerwald School of Social Work and Social Welfare, Hebrew University, Jerusalem 91905-IL, Israel. Email: howie.litwin@huji.ac.il.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examined whether formal care services delivered to frail older people's homes in France and Israel substitute for or complement informal support. The two countries have comparable family welfare systems but many historical, cultural and religious differences. Data for the respondents aged 75 or more years at the first wave of the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) were analysed. Regressions were examined of three patterns of care from outside the household: informal support only, formal support only and both formal and informal care, with the predictor variables including whether informal help was provided by a family member living in the household. The results revealed that about one-half of the respondents received no help at all (France 51%, Israel 55%), about one-tenth received care from a household member (France 8%, Israel 10%), and one-third were helped by informal carers from outside the household (France 34%, Israel 33%). More French respondents (35%) received formal care services at home than Israelis (27%). Most predictors of the care patterns were similar in the two countries. The analysis showed that complementarity is a common outcome of the co-existence of formal and informal care, and that mixed provision occurs more frequently in situations of greater need. It is also shown that spouse care-givers had less formal home-care supports than either co-resident children or other family care-givers. Even so, spouses, children and other family care-givers all had considerable support from formal home-delivered care.

Keywords

formal careinformal caresubstitutioncomplementarityaged 75+ yearsSHARE survey
Type
Research Article
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 29 , Issue 1 , January 2009 , pp. 71 - 91
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 Cambridge University Press

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

Agree, E. M., Freedman, V. A., Cornman, J. C., Wolf, D. A. and Marcotte, J. E. 2005. Reconsidering substitution in long-term care: when does assistive technology take the place of personal care? Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 60, 5, S272–80.Google Scholar
Albertini, M., Kohli, M. and Vogel, C. 2007. Transfers of time and money among elderly Europeans and their children: common patterns: different regimes? Journal of European Social Policy, 17, 4, 319–34.Google Scholar
Arber, S. and Ginn, J. 1995. Gender differences in informal caring. Health and Social Care in the Community, 3, 1, 19–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Attias-Donfut, C., Ogg, J. and Wolff, F.-C. 2005. European patterns of intergenerational financial and time transfers. European Journal of Ageing, 2, 3, 161–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ben Shalom, Y. (ed.) 2007. Annual Survey 2006. National Insurance Institute Research and Planning Administration, Jerusalem.Google Scholar
Bonoli, G. 1997. Classifying welfare states: a two-dimension approach. Journal of Social Policy, 26, 3, 351–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Börsch-Supan, A. and Jürges, H. (eds) 2005. The Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe: Methodology. Mannheim Research Institute for the Economics of Aging, Mannheim, Germany.Google Scholar
Cantor, M. H. 1991. Family and community: changing roles in an aging society. The Gerontologist, 31, 3, 337–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Commailles, J., Strobel, P. and Villac, M. 2002. La politique de la famille [Family Policy]. La Découverte, Paris.Google Scholar
Daatland, S. O. and Herlofson, K. 2003. ‘Lost solidarity’ or ‘changed solidarity’: a comparative European view of normative family solidarity. Ageing & Society, 23, 5, 537–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damon, J. 2006. Les politiques familiales [Family Policies]. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris.Google Scholar
Damon, J. 2008. Les politiques familiales dans l'union européenne: une convergence croissante [Family policies in the European Union: a crossing convergence]. Recherches familiales 5: Familles et Europe [Family Research Review 5: Families and Europe]. Union Nationale des Associations Familiales, Paris, 33–53.Google Scholar
Davey, A., Femia, E. E., Zarit, S. H., Shea, D. G., Sundström, G., Berg, S., Smyer, M. A. and Savla, J. 2005. Life on the edge: patterns of formal and informal help to older adults in the United States and Sweden. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 60, 5, S281–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denton, M. 1997. The linkages between informal and formal care of the elderly. Canadian Journal on Aging – Revue Canadienne du Vieillissement, 16, 1, 30–50.Google Scholar
Dutton, P. V. 2002. Origins of the French Welfare State: The Struggle for Social Reform in France, 1914–1947. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esping-Andersen, G. 1990. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Polity and Princeton University Press, Cambridge and Princeton, New Jersey.Google Scholar
European, Commissions 2006. Euro-Mediterranean Statistics: General and Regional Statistics. European Commissions, Brussels. Available online at http://www.cbs.gov.il/www/publications/medstat/versions_fr.pdf [Accessed April 2008].Google Scholar
Eurostat 2007. Living conditions and welfare. In Eurostat, Europe in Figures: Eurostat Yearbook 2006–07. Eurostat, Luxembourg. Available online at ec.europa.eu/eurostat [Accessed April 2008].Google Scholar
Feld, S., Dunkle, R. E. and Schroepfer, T. 2004. Race/ethnicity and marital status in IADL caregiver networks. Research on Aging, 26, 5, 531–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferrera, M. 1996. The southern model of welfare in social Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 6, 1, 17–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, L. R., Green, C. A., Goodman, M. J., Brody, K. K., Aickin, M., Wei, F., Phelps, L. W. and Leutz, W. 2003. Community-based care and risk of nursing home placement. Medical Care, 41, 12, 1407–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friedman, S. M., Steinwachs, D. M., Temkin-Greener, H. and Mukamel, D. B. 2006. Informal caregivers and the risk of nursing home admission among individuals enrolled in the program of all-inclusive care for the elderly. The Gerontologist, 46, 4, 456–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Habib, J., Sundström, G. and Windmiller, K. 1993. Understanding the pattern of support for the elderly: a comparison between Israel and Sweden. Journal of Aging and Social Policy, 5, 1–2, 187–206.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelman, H. R. 1994. Longitudinal patterns of formal and informal social support in an urban elderly population. Social Science and Medicine, 38, 7, 905–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewin-Epstein, N., Stier, H. and Braun, M. 2006. The division of household labor in Germany and Israel. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 68, 5, 1147–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, L. W. 2005. Longitudinal changes in the amount of informal care among publicly paid home care recipients. The Gerontologist, 45, 4, 465–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Litwin, H. and Auslander, G. 1992. Understanding the interface between formal and informal support systems. European Journal of Gerontology, 1, 3, 464–70.Google Scholar
Llacer, A., Zunzunegui, M. V., Gutierrez-Cuadra, P., Beland, F. and Zarit, S. H. 2002. Correlates of wellbeing of spousal and children carers of disabled people over 65 in Spain. European Journal of Public Health, 12, 1, 3–9.Google Scholar
Lowenstein, A. and Daatland, S. O. 2006. Filial norms and family support in a comparative cross-national context: evidence from the OASIS study. Ageing & Society, 26, 2, 203–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messeri, P., Silverstein, M. and Litwak, E. 1993. Choosing optimal support groups: a review and reformulation. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 34, 2, 122–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miner, S. 1995. Racial-differences in family support and formal service utilization among older persons: a non-recursive model. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 50, 3, S143–53.Google Scholar
Moscovice, I., Davidson, G. and McCaffrey, D. 1988. Substitution of formal and informal care for the community-based elderly. Medical Care, 26, 10, 971–81.Google Scholar
Motel-Klingebiel, A., Tesch-Roemer, C. and Von Kondratowitz, H. J. 2005. Welfare states do not crowd out the family: evidence for mixed responsibility from comparative analyses. Ageing & Society, 25, 6, 863–82.Google Scholar
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) 2007. Statistical Profile of France. OECD, Paris. Available online at http://stats.oecd.org/wbos/viewhtml.aspx?queryname=314&querytype=view&lang=en [Accessed April 2008].Google Scholar
Penning, M. J. 2000. Self-, informal and formal care: partnerships in community-based and residential long-term care settings. Canadian Journal on Aging – Revue Canadienne Du Vieillissement, 19, 1, 75–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penning, M. J. 2002. Hydra revisited: substituting formal for self- and informal in-home care among older adults with disabilities. The Gerontologist, 42, 1, 4–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pitrou, A. 1994. Les politiques familiales: Approches sociologiques [Family Policies: Sociological Approaches]. Syros, Paris.Google Scholar
Prouix, J., Bourque, D. and Savard, S. 2007. The government-third sector interface in Quebec. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 18, 3, 293–307.Google Scholar
Sabbagh, C., Powel, L. A. and Vanhuysse, P. 2007. Betwixt and between the market and the state: Israeli students' welfare attitudes in comparative perspective. International Journal of Social Welfare, 16, 3, 220–30.Google Scholar
Schneider, J., Hallam, A., Islam, M. K., Murray, J., Foley, B., Atkins, L., Banerjee, S. and Mann, A. 2003. Formal and informal care for people with dementia: variations in costs over time. Ageing & Society, 23, 3, 303–26.Google Scholar
Spitze, G., Logan, J. R., Joseph, G. and Lee, E. J. 1994. Middle generation roles and the well-being of men and women. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 49, 3, S107–16.Google Scholar
Sundström, G., Malmberg, B. and Johansson, L. 2006. Balancing family and state care: neither, either or both? The case of Sweden. Ageing & Society, 26, 5, 767–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sundström, G., Johansson, L. and Hassing, B. 2002. The shifting balance of long-term care in Sweden. The Gerontologist, 42, 3, 350–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed