The number of relatives and geographical proximity between them affects informal support provided to older persons. In this study, we investigate whether (a) childless persons and parents living remotely from their adult children experience similar shortages in informal support, and (b) whether neighbours, friends and other non-family helpers compensate for these shortages. On the basis of Survey on Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) data for 12 European countries, we estimate the probability and amount of informal non-financial support received by persons aged 65 and over who remain childless or live at different distances to their children. The contribution of non-family individuals is rather complementary to the help from family. Parents residing in the proximity of their children rely almost exclusively on family; as the geographical distance between adult children and older parents increases, the probability and amount of non-family support increase as well. But childless individuals differ from parents of remotely living children: the former rely on smaller support networks and resort more often to other relatives than the latter. Non-family individuals compensate for the scarcity of informal support only in the case of parents of distant children, but not in the case of childless individuals.

Western societies are ageing rapidly. Today people do not only live longer, they also have fewer children. These developments exert considerable pressure on welfare states. Children have usually been the mainstay of old age support, especially when there is no partner. We thus face new challenges: On which support networks can a growing number of childless older people rely? (How) can the lack of children be compensated in the informal social network? What role does the state play and how is informal and formal support linked? Our comparative analyses of the support networks of childless elders are based on the first two waves of the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe, including 14,394 people with (instrumental) activities of daily living limitations aged 50 and over from 12 European countries. On average, 10 per cent of older Europeans today have no children. Sporadic informal support for these elders is often taken over by the extended family, friends and neighbours, and thus the lack of children is compensated within the social network. Intense care tasks, however, are more likely provided by professional providers, especially in the case of childless older people. In countries with low social service provision, childless elders are therefore likely to experience a lack of (formal) support, especially when depending on vital care.

This paper considers the support networks of older people in populations with a preponderance of multigenerational households and examines the most vulnerable network types in terms of loneliness and isolation. Current common typologies of support networks may not be sensitive to differences within and between different cultures. This paper uses cross-sectional data drawn from 590 elders (Gujaratis, Punjabis and Sylhetis) living in the United Kingdom and South Asia. Six variables were used in K-means cluster analysis to establish a new network typology. Two logistic regression models using loneliness and isolation as dependent variables assessed the contribution of the new network type to wellbeing. Four support networks were identified: ‘Multigenerational Households: Older Integrated Networks’, ‘Multigenerational Households: Younger Family Networks’, ‘Family and Friends Integrated Networks’ and ‘Non-kin Restricted Networks’. Older South Asians with ‘Non-kin Restricted Networks’ were more likely to be lonely and isolated compared to others. Using network typologies developed with individualistically oriented cultures, distributions are skewed towards more robust network types and could underestimate the support needs of older people from familistic cultures, who may be isolated and lonely and with limited informal sources of help. The new typology identifies different network types within multigenerational households, identifies a greater proportion of older people with vulnerable networks and could positively contribute to service planning.

This paper addresses the question of whether or not today's adults, by dramatically reducing their fertility, are jeopardizing the very source of support they will need in their old age. Part of the answer may be found in examining how present-day elderly with a demographic profile similar to that of a great many future old, cope with the prospect of isolation. Using Canadian data, the authors test the hypothesis that when there are few children to look after their aging parents, a transfer does exist from offspring support to that of collaterals, and that isolation in old age is not necessarily linked to previous fertility.

Developmentally grounded research on norms for social exchange in adult relationships is equivocal, and rife with theoretical and methodological inconsistencies. We examined the applicability of three theoretical perspectives to specific relationships differing in self-perceived closeness in three groups of adults. Participants were first year (n = 37, MAge = 19.1 years) and fourth year (n = 42, MAge = 22.1 years) undergraduates, and retired teachers (n = 42, MAge = 66.8 years). We find considerable similarity among the three age groups on exchange norms and reciprocity expectations, despite considerable differences in sources of supportive relationships. Results indicate greatest support for exchange based upon need over either equity or social exchange perspectives, with this being especially true for very close relationships. Older adults report relationships operating to a greater extent on expectations for long-term over short-term reciprocity than young adults. Findings highlight the importance of considering intra-individual variation in exchange norms and expectations for reciprocity.

This study examines the caregiving networks of older adults, with particular emphasis on differences according to cognitive status (n = 303). Individuals with cognitive impairment were significantly more likely than those who were cognitively intact to receive assistance with personal care, linking with the outside world, and mobility. The types of network were generally similar for care receivers with cognitive impairment and those who were cognitively intact, although the percentage of networks comprised solely of the identified caregiver varied depending on the tasks. Coresidence of the caregiver and care receiver was more important than the care receiver's cognitive status for exclusive care by the identified caregiver. Having more ADL/IADL limitations was associated with a reliance on a network of the identified caregiver, in conjunction with other caregivers in several task areas. The findings highlight the complexity of sources of help in later life and the need for future research to consider the caregiving network as a whole.

Population ageing and constraints on public sector spending for older people with long-term health problems have led policy makers to turn to the social networks of older people, or the ‘informal sector’, as a source of long-term care. An important question arising from this policy shift is whether these social networks have the resources to sustain the high levels of care that can be required by older people with chronic health problems. In the face of both dire warnings about the imminent demise of the informal sector, and concurrent expectations that it will be the pillar of community long-term care, it is timely to undertake a critical analysis of the caring capacity of older people's social networks. In this paper we argue that the best way to understand the caring capacity of informal networks of frail older people is to establish their membership and caring capacity. It is useful to make conceptual distinctions between ‘social’, ‘support’, and ‘care-giving’ networks. We argue that transitions of networks from social through support to care roles are likely to show systematic patterns, and that at each transition the networks tend to contract as the more narrowly defined functions prevail. A focus on ‘care networks’, rather than the more usual ‘care dyads’, will move forward our understanding of the caring capacity of the informal sector, and also our ability to forge sound social and health policies to support those who provide care.