Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T19:59:53.723Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sons Who Care: Examining the Experience and Meaning of Filial Caregiving for Married and Never-Married Sons

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 March 2010

Lori D. Campbell
Lori D. Campbell*
Affiliation:
McMaster University
*
†Correspondence and requests for offprints should be sent to / La correspondance et les demandes de tirés-à-part doivent être adressées à: Lori D. Campbell, Ph.D., Sociology and Health, Aging and Society, McMaster University, KTH 230a, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4M4 ([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In filial caregiving, women typically provide more care than men. The numerical predominance of female caregivers has been explained such that diversity among male caregivers has been overlooked. That is, “internalist” explanations, which emphasize the differing socialization experience of females and males, tend to homogenize each gender’s caregiving experience. “Externalist” explanations, which emphasize various factors that push or pull women and men into caregiving, reduce the actors involved to passive agents whose subjective understanding of caregiving over time is ignored. Both explanations divert attention from the diversity in male caregiving. This article presents qualitative data derived from interviews with 48 caregiving sons to provide evidence of that diversity. Some themes are common to both married and never-married male caregivers, yet there are also systematic differences between the two groups of caregivers. For example, caregiving for married sons was more limited; caregiving for never-married sons was a more central element in their lives.

Résumé

Les femmes fournissent généralement plus que les hommes dans les soins des enfants. La prédominance numérique des aidantes féminines a été expliquée de telle façon que la diversité chez les aidants masculins a été négligée. C’est à dire que les explica-tions internes, qui mettent l’accent sur l’expérience de socialisation divergentes des femmes et des hommes, ont la tendance à homogénéiser l’expérience de soins du groupe de chaque sexe. Pourtant, les explications externes, qui permettent de faire ressortir les facteurs divers qui motivent les femmes et les hommes à s’occuper des soins, réduisent les acteurs aux agents passives dont la compréhension subjective des soins au fil du temps est ignorée. Les deux explications détournent l’attention de la diversité dans les soins de sexe masculin. Cet article présente des données qualitatives dérivées des entrevues avec 48 des fils de soins pour fournir des preuves de cette diversité. Certains thèmes sont communs aux hommes aidants mariés et aidants jamais mariés, mais il y a également des différences systématiques entre les deux expériences des soins. Pour les fils mariés les soins étaient plus limités; les soins pour les fils jamais mariés étaient un élément plus central dans leurs vies.

Keywords

vieillissementsoinssoins filialesaidant(e)agingcaregivingfilial caremen’s caregiving
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement , Volume 29 , Issue 1: Special Issue from the Social and Economic Dimensions of an Aging Population Project (SEDAP) – Caring for an Aging Population: Context, Practice & Policy , March 2010 , pp. 73 - 84
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association on Gerontology 2010

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

Abel, E.K., & Nelson, M.K. (1990). Circles of care: An introductory essay. In Abel, E.K. & Nelson, M.K. (Eds.), Circles of care: Work and identity in women’s lives (pp. 1–34). New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Amirkhanyan, A., & Wolf, D.A. (2006). Parent care and the stress process: Findings from panel data. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 61B, S248–S255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archer, C.K., & MacLean, M.J. (1993). Husbands and sons as caregivers of chronically-ill elderly women. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 21, 5–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohan, J. (1993). Regarding gender: Essentialism, constructionism and feminist psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 17, 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brody, E.M., Litvin, S.J., Albert, S.M., & Hoffman, C.J. (1994). Marital status of daughters and patterns of parent care. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 49, S95–S103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Calasanti, T.M., & Slevin, K. (2001). Gender, social inequalities and aging. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, L.D., & Carroll, M.P. (2007). The incomplete revolution: Theorizing gender when studying men who provide care to aging parents. Men and Masculinities, 9, 491–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, L.D., & Martin-Matthews, A. (2000a). Caring sons: Exploring men’s involvement in filial care. Canadian Journal on Aging, 19, 57–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, L.D., & Martin-Matthews, A. (2000b). Primary and proximate: The importance of co-residence and being primary provider of care for men’s filial care involvement. Journal of Family Issues, 21, 1007–1031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, M.P., & Campbell, L.D. (2008). Who now reads Parsons and Bales?: Casting a critical eye on the “gendered styles of caregiving” literature. Journal of Aging Studies, 22, 24–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chang, C.F., & White-Means, S.I. (1991). The men who care: An analysis of male primary caregivers who care for frail elderly at home. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 10, 343–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chodorow, N.J. (1978). The reproduction of mothering. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Creswell, J.W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Daly, K. (1992). Toward a formal theory of interactive resocialization: The case of adoptive parenthood. Qualitative Sociology, 15, 395–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dressel, P.L., & Clark, A. (1990). A critical look at family care. Journal of Marriage and Family, 52, 769–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dwyer, J.W., & Seccombe, K. (1991). Elder care as family labour: The influence of gender and family position. Journal of Family Issues, 12, 229–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerstel, N., & Gallagher, S.K. (2001). Men’s caregiving: Gender and the contingent character of care. Gender & Society, 15, 197–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard.Google Scholar
Globerman, J. (1996). Motivations to care: Daughters- and sons-in-law caring for relatives with Alzheimer’s disease. Family Relations, 45, 37–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grundy, E., & Henretta, J. (2006). Between elderly parents and adult children: A new look at the intergenerational care provided by the “sandwich generation”. Aging and Society, 26, 707–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guberman, N. (1999). Daughters-in-law as caregivers: How and why do they come to care? Journal of Women & Aging, 11, 85–102.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, P.B. (1998). Listening to caregiving sons: Misunderstood realities. The Gerontologist, 38, 342–352.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, P.B., & Bichler, J. (1997). Men giving care: Reflections of husbands and sons. New York: Garland Publishing.Google Scholar
Horowitz, A. (1985). Sons and daughters as caregivers to older parents: Differences in role performance and consequences. The Gerontologist, 25, 612–617.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jansen, S.C. (1990). Is science a man? New feminist epistemologies and reconstructions of knowledge. Theory and Society, 19, 235–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaye, L.W., & Applegate, J.S. (1990). Men as elder caregivers: Building a research agenda for the 1990s. Journal of Aging Studies, 4, 289–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kimmel, M.S. (2000). The gendered society. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kramer, B.J., & Thompson, E.H. Jr. (2002). Men as caregivers: Theory, research and service implications. New York: Springer Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Laditka, J.N., & Laditka, S.B. (2001). Adult children helping older parents: Variations in likelihood and hours by gender, race, and family role. Research on Aging, 23, 429–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, S.H. (1995). Gender and the division of filial responsibility between lone sisters and their brothers. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 50B, S312–S320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, S.H. (2002a). Brothers and parent care: An explanation for sons’ underrepresentation. In Kramer, B.J. & Thompson, E.H. Jr. (Eds.), Men as caregivers: Theory, research and service implications (pp. 234–249). New York: Springer Publishing.Google Scholar
Matthews, S.H. (2002b). Sisters and brothers/daughters and sons: Meeting the needs of old parents. Bloomington, IN: Unlimited Publishing.Google Scholar
Matthews, S.H., & Heidorn, J. (1998). Meeting filial responsibilities in brothers-only sibling groups. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 53B, S278–S286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, S.H., & Rosner, T.T. (1988). Shared filial responsibility: The family as the primary caregiver. Journal of Marriage and Family, 50, 185–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGraw, L.A., & Walker, A.J. (2004). Negotiating care: Ties between aging mothers and their caregiving daughters. Journals of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 59B, S324–S332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messner, M. (1998). The limits of ‘the male sex role’: An analysis of the men’s liberation and men’s rights movements discourse. Gender and Society, 12, 255–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parsons, K. (1997). The male experience of caregiving for a family member with Alzheimer’s disease. Qualitative Health Research, 7, 391–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinquart, M., & Sörensen, S. (2006). Gender differences in caregiver stressors, social resources and health: An updated meta-analysis. Journal of Gerontology, 61B, P33–P45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, H., & Bruce, E. (1995). Mutual care but differential esteem: Caring between older couples. In Arber, S. & Ginn, J. (Eds.), Connecting gender & ageing: A sociological approach (pp. 114–128). Buckingham, England: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Russell, R. (2001). In sickness and in health: A qualitative study of elderly men who care for wives with dementia. Journal of Aging Studies, 15, 351–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarkisian, N., & Gerstel, N. (2004). Explaining the gender gap in help to parents: The importance of employment. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 431–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sims-Gould, J., Martin-Matthews, A., & Rosenthal, C.J. (2008). Family caregiving and helping at the intersection of gender and kinship: Social dynamics in the provision of care to older adults in Canada. In Martin-Matthews, A. & Phillips, J.E. (Eds.), Aging and caring at the intersection of work and home life: Blurring the boundaries (pp. 65–83). New York: Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
Thompson, E.H. Jr. (2000). Gendered caregiving of husbands and sons. In Markson, E.W. & Hollis-Sawyer, L.A. (Eds.), Intersections of aging: Readings in social gerontology (pp. 333–344). Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Thompson, E.H. Jr. (2002). What’s unique about men’s caregiving? In Kramer, B.J. & Thompson, E.H. Jr. (Eds.), Men as caregivers: Theory, research and service implications (pp. 20–47). New York: Springer Publishing.Google Scholar