Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T08:02:58.510Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Help from spouse and from children among older people with functional limitations: comparison of England and Finland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2011

JENNI BLOMGREN ,
ELIZABETH BREEZE ,
SEPPO KOSKINEN  and
PEKKA MARTIKAINEN
JENNI BLOMGREN*
Affiliation:
Research Department, The Social Insurance Institution of Finland, Helsinki, Finland. Department of Health, Functional Capacity and Welfare, National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland.
ELIZABETH BREEZE
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK.
SEPPO KOSKINEN
Affiliation:
Department of Health, Functional Capacity and Welfare, National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland.
PEKKA MARTIKAINEN
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
*
Address for correpondence: Jenni Blomgren, Research Department, The Social Insurance Institution of Finland, P.O. Box 450, 00101 Helsinki, Finland. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Future increases in need of old-age care warrant research on receipt of informal care among older people in different policy and cultural contexts. Separating informal care into help provided by spouse and by children may shed more light on dynamics of informal help, important in alleviating the demands on the formal sector. Using nationally representative data from England and Finland, we performed logistic regression analyses to study receipt of help from spouse and children among community-dwelling persons aged 70+ years with functional limitations. In both countries, women and those with more functional limitations had higher odds of receiving spousal and filial help. In England – but not in Finland – those receiving formal public help had lower odds of receiving spousal help than those with no formal help. Those with low education received more filial help in England, but no association was found between formal and filial help. In Finland, the effect of education was not significant but those receiving formal help had higher odds of also receiving filial help. The results suggest that in a liberal market-led state, the role of children may be to help their parents living alone and with low financial resources. In the context of a generous welfare state, children may function more as active agents bridging the gap between their parents and formal services.

Keywords

older peopleinformal careformal carespousal helpfilial helpEnglandFinland
Type
Articles
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 32 , Issue 6 , August 2012 , pp. 905 - 933
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

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

Aromaa, A. and Koskinen, S. 2004. Population and methods. In Aromaa, A. and Koskinen, S. (eds), Health and Functional Capacity in Finland. Baseline Results of the Health 2000 Health Examination Survey. National Public Health Institute, Helsinki, 11–23. Available online at http://www.terveys2000.fi/publications.html.Google Scholar
Birrell, D. 2007. Devolution and social care: are there four systems of social care in the United Kingdom? Paper presented at Social Policy Association Conference, July 2007, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK. Available online at http://www.sochealth.co.uk/news/birrell.htm [Accessed 7 June 2011].Google Scholar
Blomgren, J., Martikainen, P., Martelin, T. and Koskinen, S. 2008. Determinants of home-based formal help in community-dwelling older people in Finland. European Journal of Ageing, 5, 4, 335–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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. L. 1991. Living arrangements and sources of caregiving. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 46, 1, S1–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheshire, H., Cox, K., Lessof, C. and Taylor, R. 2006. Methodology. In Banks, J., Breeze, E., Lessof, C. and Nazroo, J. (eds), Retirement, Health and Relationships of the Older Population in England: The 2004 English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (Wave 2). The Institute for Fiscal Studies, London, 367–83.Google Scholar
Comas-Herrera, A., Wittenberg, R. and Pickard, L. 2003. Long-term care for older people in the UK. In Comas-Herrera, A. and Wittenberg, R. (eds), European Study of Long-term Care Expenditure. Report to the European Commission, Employment and Social Affairs DG. PSSRU Discussion Paper 1840, London School of Economics, London, 77–88.Google Scholar
Comas-Herrera, A., Wittenberg, R. and Pickard, L. 2010. The long road to universalism? Recent developments in the financing of long-term care in England. Social Policy & Administration, 44, 4, 375–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davey, A., Femia, E. E., Shea, D. G., Zarit, S. H., Sundström, G., Berg, S. and Smyer, M. A. 1999. How many elders receive assistance? A cross-national comparison. Journal of Aging and Health, 11, 2, 199–220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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. Journals of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 60, 5, S281–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davey, A. and Patsios, D. 1999. Formal and informal community care to older adults: Comparative analysis of the United States and Great Britain. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 20, 3, 271–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deeming, C. and Keen, J. 2002. Paying for old age: can people on lower incomes afford domiciliary care costs? Social Policy & Administration, 36, 5, 465–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Djerf, K., Laiho, J., Lehtonen, R., Härkänen, T. and Knekt, P. 2008. Weighting and statistical analysis. In Heistaro, S. (ed.), Methodology Report, Health 2000 Survey. National Public Health Institute, Helsinki, 182–200. Available online at http://www.terveys2000.fi/publications.html.Google Scholar
Dunér, A. and Nordström, M. 2007. The roles and functions of the informal support networks of older people who receive formal support: a Swedish qualitative study. Ageing & Society, 27, 1, 67–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esping-Andersen, G. 1990. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Polity Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, G. 2003. Towards the good society, once again? Presentation at the 4th International Research Conference on Social Security, 5–7 May, Antwerp, Belgium.Google Scholar
European Commission 2007. Health and Long-term Care in the European Union. Special Eurobarometer 283, European Commission, Luxembourg.Google Scholar
Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E. and McHugh, P. R. 1975. Mini-Mental State: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 3, 189–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaymu, J., Ekamper, P. and Beets, G. 2008. Future trends in health and marital status: effects on the structure on living arrangements of older Europeans in 2030. European Journal of Ageing, 5, 1, 5–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geerlings, S. W., Pot, A. M., Twisk, J. W. R. and Deeg, D. J. H. 2005. Predicting transitions in the use of informal and professional care by older adults. Ageing & Society, 25, 1, 111–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giannakouris, K. 2008. Ageing characterises the demographic perspectives of the European societies. Population and social conditions. Statistics in Focus, 72/2008.Google Scholar
Glaser, K., Tomassini, C., Racioppi, F. and Stuchburry, R. 2006. Marital disruption and loss of support in later life: a longitudinal study of the United Kingdom. European Journal of Ageing, 3, 4, 207–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hank, K. and Jürges, H. 2007. Gender and the division of household labor in older couples: a European perspective. Journal of Family Issues, 28, 3, 399–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HM Government 2009. Shaping the Future of Care Together. HM Government, London.Google Scholar
Kalogirou, S. and Murphy, M. 2006. Marital status of people aged 75 and over in nine EU countries in the period 2000–2030. European Journal of Ageing, 3, 2, 74–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Katz, S. J., Kabeto, M. and Langa, K. M. 2000. Gender disparities in the receipt of home care for elderly people with disability in the United States. JAMA – Journal of the American Medical Association, 284, 23, 3022–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kenrick, D. T. and Keefe, R. C. 1992. Age preferences in mates reflect sex differences in human reproductive strategies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 15, 1, 75–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koskinen, S., Laiho, J., Rinne, S., Kuosmanen, N., Alha, P., Rissanen, H. and Martelin, T. 2008. Participation, complementary data collection and other measures to increase participation rate. In Heistaro, S. (ed.), Methodology Report, Health 2000 Survey. National Public Health Institute, Helsinki, 132–49. Available online at http://www.terveys2000.fi/publications.html.Google Scholar
Künemund, H. and Rein, M. 1999. There is more to receiving than needing: theoretical arguments and empirical explorations of crowding in and crowding out. Ageing & Society, 19, 1, 93–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laiho, J., Djerf, K. and Lehtonen, R. 2008. Sampling design. In Heistaro, S. (ed.), Methodology Report, Health 2000 Survey. National Public Health Institute, Helsinki, 13–5. Available online at http://www.terveys2000.fi/publications.html.Google Scholar
Langa, K. M., Chernew, M. E., Kabeto, M. U. and Katz, S. J. 2001. The explosion in paid home health care in the 1990s: who received the additional services? Medical Care, 39, 2, 147–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larsson, K. and Silverstein, M. 2004. The effects of marital and parental status on informal support and service utilization: a study of older Swedes living alone. Journal of Aging Studies, 18, 2, 231–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsson, K. and Thorslund, M. 2002. Does gender matter? Differences in patterns of informal support and formal services in a Swedish urban elderly population. Research on Aging, 24, 3, 308–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Litwin, H. and Attias-Donfut, C. 2009. The inter-relationship between formal and informal care: a study in France and Israel. Ageing & Society, 29, 1, 71–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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
Marmot, M. et al. 2007. English Longitudinal Study of Ageing: Wave 0 (1998, 1999 and 2001) and Waves 1–2 (2002–2005) [computer file]. Sixth edition, SN: 5050, UK Data Archive [distributor], Colchester, UK, January.Google Scholar
Ministry of Social Affairs and Health 2003. Finnish Social Protection in 2003. Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, Helsinki.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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, M., Martikainen, P. and Pennec, S. 2006. Demographic change and the supply of potential family supporters in Britain, Finland and France in the period 1911–2050. European Journal of Population, 22, 3, 219–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niemelä, H. and Salminen, K. 2003. Social Security in Finland. Finnish Centre for Pensions, Helsinki.Google Scholar
Nihtilä, E. and Martikainen, P. 2008. Why older people living with spouse are less likely to be institutionalized: the role of socioeconomic factors and health characteristics. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 36, 1, 35–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nordberg, G., von Strauss, E., Kåreholt, I., Johansson, L. and Wimo, A. 2005. The amount of informal and formal care among non-demented and demented elderly persons – results from a Swedish population-based study. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 20, 9, 862–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nordic Social-Statistical Committee 2003. Social Protection in the Nordic Countries 2001. Scope, expenditure and financing. Nordic Social-Statistical Committee, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2005. Long-term Care for Older People. The OECD Health Project. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris.Google 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
Rostgaard, T. and Fridberg, T. 1998. Caring for Children and Older People – A Comparison of European Policies and Practices. Social Security in Europe 6, The Danish National Institute of Social Research 98:20, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Royal Commission on Long Term Care 1999. With respect to old age: long term care – rights and responsibilities. Cm 4192-I, The Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Sainio, P., Koskinen, S., Heliövaara, M., Martelin, T., Härkänen, T., Hurri, H., Miilunpalo, S. and Aromaa, A. 2006. Self-reported and test-based mobility limitations in a representative sample of Finns aged 30+. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 34, 4, 378–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shea, D. G., Davey, A., Femia, E. E., Zarit, S. H., Sundström, G., Berg, S. and Smyer, M. A. 2003. Exploring assistance in Sweden and the United States. The Gerontologist, 43, 5, 712–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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
Sussman, M. 1976. The family life of older people. In Binstock, R. and Shanas, E. (eds), Handbook of Aging and the Social Sciences. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 415–49.Google Scholar
Taylor, R., Conway, L., Calderwood, L. and Lessof, C. 2003. Methodology. In Marmot, M., Banks, J., Blundell, R., Lessof, C. and Nazroo, J. (eds), Health, Wealth and Lifestyles of the Older Population in England. The 2002 English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. The Institute for Fiscal Studies, London, 357–74.Google Scholar
Tomassini, C., Glaser, K., Wolf, D. A., Broese van Groenou, M. I. and Grundy, E. 2004 a. Living arrangements among older people: an overview of trends in Europe and the USA. Population Trends, 115, 24–34.Google Scholar
Tomassini, C., Kalogirou, S., Grundy, E., Fokkema, T., Martikainen, P., Broese van Groenou, M. and Karisto, A. 2004 b. Contacts between elderly parents and their children in four European countries: current patterns and future prospects. European Journal of Ageing, 1, 1, 54–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Houtven, C. H. and Norton, E. C. 2004. Informal care and health care use of older adults. Journal of Health Economics, 23, 6, 1159–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, A. 1999. Attitudes to Population Ageing in Europe. A Comparison of the 1992 and 1999 Eurobarometer Surveys. Available online at http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_129_en.pdf.Google Scholar