Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T12:10:59.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Residential care and care to community-dwelling parents: out-selection, in-selection and diffusion of responsibility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2016

THIJS VAN DEN BROEK  and
PEARL A. DYKSTRA
THIJS VAN DEN BROEK*
Affiliation:
Department of Social Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, UK.
PEARL A. DYKSTRA
Affiliation:
Department of Public Administration and Sociology, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
*
Address for correspondence: Thijs van den Broek, London School of Economics and Political Science, Department of Social Policy, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, UK E-mail: m.p.van-den-broek@lse.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Research suggests that adult children are less likely to provide care to community-dwelling parents when beds in residential care settings are more widely available. The underlying mechanisms are not well understood. Drawing on data from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) on 1,214 impaired parent–child dyads from 12 countries, we find that adult children are less likely to provide care in countries where beds in residential care settings are more widely available because (a) parents’ care needs are less severe in such countries (out-selection hypothesis) and (b) adult children and impaired parents are less likely to share a household in such countries (in-selection hypothesis). Finally (c), after taking these two factors into account, adult children remain less likely to provide care in countries where beds in residential care settings are more widely available (diffusion of responsibility hypothesis). Plausibly, being able to rely on residential care undermines adult children's sense of urgency to step in and provide care to their parents.

Keywords

crowding outsubstitutionlong-term careinformal careintergenerational solidarityfamily care-giving
Type
Articles
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 37 , Issue 8 , September 2017 , pp. 1609 - 1631
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

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

Amato, P. R. and James, S. 2010. Divorce in Europe and the United States: commonalities and differences across nations. Family Science, 1, 1, 2–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, R. M. 1995. Revisiting the behavioral model and access to medical care: does it matter? Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 36, 1, 1–10.Google Scholar
Andersen, R. M. and Newman, J. F. 1973. Societal and individual determinants of medical care utilization in the United States. Milbank Quarterly, 51, 1, 95–124.Google Scholar
Blomgren, J., Breeze, E., Koskinen, S. and Martikainen, P. 2012. Help from spouse and from children among older people with functional limitations: comparison of England and Finland. Ageing & Society, 32, 6, 905–33.Google Scholar
Börsch-Supan, A., Brandt, M., Hunkler, C., Kneip, T., Korbmacher, J., Malter, F., Schaan, B., Stuck, S. and Zuber, S. 2013. Data resource profile: the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE). International Journal of Epidemiology, 42, 4, 992–1001.Google Scholar
Börsch-Supan, A., Brugiavini, A., Jürges, H., Kapteyn, A., Mackenbach, J., Siegrist, J. and Weber, G. 2008. First Results from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe 2004–2007. Starting the Longitudinal Dimension. Mannheim Research Institute for the Economics of Aging, Mannheim, Germany.Google Scholar
Brandt, M., Haberkern, K. and Szydlik, M. 2009. Intergenerational care and help in Europe. European Sociological Review, 25, 5, 581–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broese van Groenou, M., Glaser, K., Tomassini, C. and Jacobs, T. 2006. Socio-economic status differences in older people's use of informal and formal help: a comparison of four European countries. Ageing & Society, 26, 5, 745–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chappell, N. and Blandford, A. 1991. Informal and formal care: exploring the complementarity. Ageing & Society, 11, 3, 299–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, N. G. 2003. Coresidence between unmarried aging parents and their adult children. Research on Aging, 25, 4, 384–404.Google 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. Milbank Quarterly, 88, 3, 286–309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Darley, J. M. and Latané, B. 1968. Bystander intervention in emergencies: diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 4, 377–83.Google Scholar
Dykstra, P. A. 2015. Aging and social support. In Ritzer, G. (ed.), The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology. Blackwell, Oxford, 88–93.Google Scholar
Dykstra, P. A. and Komter, A. E. 2012. Generational interdependencies in families: the MULTILINKS research programme. Demographic Research, 27, 18, 487–506.Google Scholar
Forder, J. and Fernandez, J.-L. 2011. What works abroad? Evaluating the funding of long-term care: international perspectives. Report commissioned by Bupa Care Services. PSSRU Discussion Paper 2794, Personal Social Services Research Unit, Canterbury, UK.Google Scholar
Freedman, V. A., Wolf, D. A., Soldo, B. J. and Stephen, E. H. 1991. Intergenerational transfers: a question of perspective. The Gerontologist, 31, 5, 640–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greene, V. L. 1983. Substitution between formally and informally provided care for the impaired elderly in the community. Medical Care, 21, 6, 609–19.Google Scholar
Greene, V. L. and Ondrich, J. I. 1990. Risk factors for nursing home admissions and exits. A discrete-time hazard function approach. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 45, 6, S250–8.Google Scholar
Grootegoed, E., Duyvendak, J. W. and Van Barneveld, E. 2015. What is customary about customary care? How Dutch welfare policy defines what citizens have to consider ‘normal’ care at home. Critical Social Policy, 35, 1, 110–31.Google Scholar
Grundy, E. and Jitlal, M. 2007. Socio-demographic variations in moves to institutional care 1991–2001: a record linkage study from England and Wales. Age and Ageing, 36, 1, 424–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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, 299–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hochschild, A. R. 1995. The culture of politics: traditional, postmodern, cold-modern, and warm-modern ideals of care. Social Politics, 2, 3, 331–46.Google Scholar
Howe, A. L., Jones, A. E. and Tilse, C. 2013. What's in a name? Similarities and differences in international terms and meanings for older peoples’ housing with services. Ageing & Society, 33, 4, 547–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, M., Rodrigues, R., Hoffmann, F., Gasior, K. and Marin, B. 2008. Facts and Figures on Long-term Care. Europe and North America. European Centre for Social Welfare Policy and Research, Vienna.Google Scholar
Keck, W. and Saraceno, C. 2011. MULTILINKS Database on Intergenerational Policy Indicators. Methodological Report. Version 2.1, WZB Social Science Research Center, Berlin.Google Scholar
Kohler, U., Karlson, K. B. and Holm, A. 2011. Comparing coefficients of nested nonlinear probability models. Stata Journal, 11, 3, 420–38.Google Scholar
Le Bihan, B. and Martin, C. 2012. Diversification of care policy measures supporting older people: towards greater flexibility for carers? European Journal on Ageing, 9, 2, 141–50.Google Scholar
Leopold, T., Raab, M. and Engelhardt, H. 2014. The transition to parent care: costs, commitments, and caregiver selection among children. Journal of Marriage and Family, 76, 2, 300–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Litwak, E. 1985. Helping the Elderly: The Complementary Roles of Informal Networks and Formal Systems. Guilford Press, New York.Google Scholar
Mandemakers, J. J. and Dykstra, P. A. 2008. Discrepancies in parent's and adult child's reports of support and contact. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70, 2, 495–506.Google Scholar
Meijer, A., Van Kampen, C. and Kerkstra, A. 2000. A comparative study of the financing, provision and quality of care in nursing homes. The approach of four European countries: Belgium, Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 32, 3, 554–61.Google 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.Google Scholar
Nadler, A. 2012. From help-giving to helping relations. Belongingness and independence in social interactions. In Deaux, K. and Snyder, M. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Personality and Social Psychology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 394–418.Google Scholar
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
Österle, A. and Rothgang, H. 2010. Long-term care. In Castles, F. G., Leibfried, S., Lewis, J., Obinger, H. and Pierson, C. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of the Welfare State. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 378–90.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.Google Scholar
Perrow, C. B. 1984. Normal Accidents: Living with High-risk Technologies. Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
Pfau-Effinger, B. 2005. Culture and welfare state policies: reflections on a complex interrelation. Journal of Social Policy, 34, 1, 3–20.Google Scholar
Pickard, L. 2012. Substitution between formal and informal care: a ‘natural experiment’ in social policy in Britain between 1985 and 2000. Ageing & Society, 32, 7, 1147–75.Google Scholar
Reher, D. S. 1998. Family ties in Western Europe: persistent contrasts. Population and Development Review, 24, 2, 203–34.Google Scholar
Ribbe, M. W., Ljunggren, G., Steel, K., Topinkova, E., Hawes, C., Ikegami, N., Henrard, J.-C. and Jónnson, P. V. 1997. Nursing homes in 10 nations: a comparison between countries and settings. Age and Ageing, 26, supplement 2, 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, R., Gregory, S. and Jabbal, J. 2014. The Social Care and Health Systems of Nine Countries. The King's Fund, London.Google Scholar
Rodrigues, R., Huber, M. and Lamura, G. (eds) 2012. Facts and Figures on Healthy Ageing and Long-term care. Europe and North America. European Centre for Social Welfare Policy and Research, Vienna.Google Scholar
Ross, M. M., Carswell, A. and Dalziel, W. B. 2001. Family caregiving in long-term care facilities. Clinical Nursing Research, 10, 4, 347–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rostgaard, T. 2002. Caring for children and older people in Europe. A comparison of European policies and practice. Policy Studies, 23, 1, 51–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rostgaard, T. (ed.) 2011. Livindhome – Living Independently at Home: Reforms in Home Care in 9 European Countries. SFI Danish National Centre for Social Research, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Sagan, S. D. 2004. Learning from normal accidents. Organization and Environment, 17, 1, 15–19.Google Scholar
Saraceno, C. and Keck, W. 2010. Can we identify intergenerational policy regimes in Europe. European Societies, 12, 5, 675–96.Google Scholar
Saraceno, C. and Keck, W. 2011. Towards an integrated approach for the analysis of gender equity in policies supporting paid work and care responsibilities. Demographic Research, 25, 11, 371–406.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M. 1995. Stability and change in temporal distance between the elderly and their children. Demography, 32, 1, 29–45.Google Scholar
Smits, A., Van Gaalen, R. I. and Mulder, C. H. 2010. Parent–child coresidence: who moves in with whom and for whose needs? Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 4, 1022–33.Google Scholar
Sobel, M. E. 1982. Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology, 13, 1, 290–312.Google Scholar
Stoller, E. P. and Earl, L. L. 1983. Help with activities of everyday life: sources of support for the noninstitutionalized elderly. The Gerontologist, 23, 1, 64–70.Google Scholar
Ulmanen, P. and Szebehely, M. 2015. From the state to the family or to the market? Consequences of reduced residential eldercare in Sweden. International Journal of Social Welfare, 24, 1, 81–92.Google Scholar
Van den Broek, T., Dykstra, P. A. and Van der Veen, R. J. 2015. Care ideals in the Netherlands: shifts between 2002 and 2011. Canadian Journal on Aging/La revue canadienne du viellisement, 34, 3, 268–81.Google Scholar
Van Gaalen, R. I., Dykstra, P. A. and Flap, H. 2008. Intergenerational contact beyond the dyad: the role of the sibling network. European Journal of Ageing, 5, 1, 19–29.Google Scholar
Vlachantoni, A., Shaw, R. J., Evandrou, M. and Falkingham, J. 2015. The determinants of receiving social care in later life in England. Ageing & Society, 35, 2, 321–45.Google Scholar
Walker, A. J., Pratt, C. C. and Eddy, L. 1995. Informal caregiving to aging family members. A critical review. Family Relations , 44, 4, 402–11.Google Scholar
Willis, R., Glaser, K. and Price, D. 2010. Applying the Andersen behavioural model to informal support among Britain's ethnic minorities. Generations Review, 20, 3. Available online at http://www.britishgerontology.org/DB/gr-editions-2/generations-review/applying-the-andersen-behavioural-model-to-informa.html [Accessed 30 May 2014].Google Scholar