Capability to care and work: when dual roles intersect

B. Horrell, M. Breheny, C. Stephens
{"title":"Capability to care and work: when dual roles intersect","authors":"B. Horrell, M. Breheny, C. Stephens","doi":"10.3402/VGI.V5.24357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ageing in place is a cost-effective policy solution to eldercare that reflects a dominant positive ageing discourse of choice and independence. It satisfies older people's preference to remain at home and be involved in their community, but depends upon the provision of care and support for frail elders, particularly the oldest-old, who require assistance to achieve these goals. The traditional provision of unpaid eldercare by female relatives is changing as women are increasingly working outside the home, and they have to choose between, or manage, dual roles of caregiving and paid work. Negative effects on health, paid employment, and finances are associated with the intersection of eldercare and employment. Solutions involve reducing or relinquishing paid employment, which would have financial, social, physical, and emotional ramifications in the future. However, being able to successfully accommodate both roles provides a sense of satisfaction and fulfilment. To understand the complexity of managing the tension between work and eldercare requires a detailed analysis of unpaid caregivers’ daily lives. This paper presents findings about eldercare provision and paid work, derived from two qualitative studies that used a participatory methodology for an in-depth exploration of caregivers’ health. The participants’ stories demonstrate that rather than reflecting on access to a range of options, caregivers’ choices are constrained, and involve trading work and other capabilities for the capability to care. Providing care for a loved elder was the first priority, followed by paid work. Having the capability to maintain a healthy and balanced life was the caregivers’ lowest priority. Unpaid informal care has benefits for elders, and it is a valued emotional relationship for caregivers; however, future social policy should address the difficulties that caregiving creates in people's lives along with focusing on the benefits that such care offers in terms of positive population ageing.","PeriodicalId":356239,"journal":{"name":"Vulnerable Groups & Inclusion","volume":"76 1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vulnerable Groups & Inclusion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3402/VGI.V5.24357","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Ageing in place is a cost-effective policy solution to eldercare that reflects a dominant positive ageing discourse of choice and independence. It satisfies older people's preference to remain at home and be involved in their community, but depends upon the provision of care and support for frail elders, particularly the oldest-old, who require assistance to achieve these goals. The traditional provision of unpaid eldercare by female relatives is changing as women are increasingly working outside the home, and they have to choose between, or manage, dual roles of caregiving and paid work. Negative effects on health, paid employment, and finances are associated with the intersection of eldercare and employment. Solutions involve reducing or relinquishing paid employment, which would have financial, social, physical, and emotional ramifications in the future. However, being able to successfully accommodate both roles provides a sense of satisfaction and fulfilment. To understand the complexity of managing the tension between work and eldercare requires a detailed analysis of unpaid caregivers’ daily lives. This paper presents findings about eldercare provision and paid work, derived from two qualitative studies that used a participatory methodology for an in-depth exploration of caregivers’ health. The participants’ stories demonstrate that rather than reflecting on access to a range of options, caregivers’ choices are constrained, and involve trading work and other capabilities for the capability to care. Providing care for a loved elder was the first priority, followed by paid work. Having the capability to maintain a healthy and balanced life was the caregivers’ lowest priority. Unpaid informal care has benefits for elders, and it is a valued emotional relationship for caregivers; however, future social policy should address the difficulties that caregiving creates in people's lives along with focusing on the benefits that such care offers in terms of positive population ageing.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
照顾和工作的能力:当双重角色交叉时
就地老龄化是一个具有成本效益的老年护理政策解决方案,反映了一个主导的积极老龄化话语的选择和独立。它满足了老年人希望留在家里和参与社区活动的愿望,但这取决于为体弱多病的老年人,特别是需要帮助才能实现这些目标的老年人提供照顾和支助。随着女性越来越多地外出工作,由女性亲属提供无偿老年护理的传统正在发生变化,她们必须在护理和有偿工作的双重角色之间做出选择或管理。对健康、有偿就业和财务的负面影响与老年护理和就业的交叉有关。解决方案包括减少或放弃有偿工作,这将在未来产生经济、社会、身体和情感上的后果。然而,能够成功地适应这两个角色提供了一种满足感和成就感。要理解处理工作和养老之间的紧张关系的复杂性,需要对无薪看护人的日常生活进行详细分析。本文介绍了关于老年护理提供和有偿工作的发现,来源于两项定性研究,该研究使用参与式方法对护理人员的健康进行了深入探索。参与者的故事表明,照顾者的选择是受限的,而不是反映在获得一系列选择的机会上,并且涉及到用工作和其他能力来换取照顾的能力。照顾心爱的老人是第一要务,其次是有偿工作。有能力维持健康和平衡的生活是照顾者的最低优先级。无偿的非正式照顾对老年人有好处,对照顾者来说,这是一种有价值的情感关系;然而,未来的社会政策应该解决照顾在人们生活中造成的困难,同时关注这种照顾在积极的人口老龄化方面提供的好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Daily newspaper reporting on elderly care in Sweden and Finland: a quantitative content analysis of ethnicity- and migration-related issues Informal and formal reconciliation strategies of older peoples' working carers: the European carers@work project Housing support workers as equilibrists between instrumentality and situation Gender as headline and subtext: problematizing the gender perspective in an occupational health project Capability to care and work: when dual roles intersect
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1