Walking the Line: Navigating Market and Gift Economies of Care in a Consumer-Directed Home-Based Care Program for Older Adults.

Jacqueline M. Torres, K. Kietzman, S. Wallace
{"title":"Walking the Line: Navigating Market and Gift Economies of Care in a Consumer-Directed Home-Based Care Program for Older Adults.","authors":"Jacqueline M. Torres, K. Kietzman, S. Wallace","doi":"10.1111/1468-0009.12163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"CONTEXT\nPaid caregivers of low-income older adults navigate their role at what Hochschild calls the \"market frontier\": the fuzzy line between the \"world of the market,\" in which services are exchanged for monetary compensation, and the \"world of the gift,\" in which caregiving is uncompensated and motivated by emotional attachment. We examine how political and economic forces, including the reduction of long-term services and supports, shape the practice of \"walking the line\" among caregivers of older adults.\n\n\nMETHODS\nWe used data from a longitudinal qualitative study with related and nonrelated caregivers (n = 33) paid through California's In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) program and consumers of IHSS care (n = 49). We analyzed the semistructured interviews (n = 330), completed between 2010 and 2014, using a constructivist grounded theory approach.\n\n\nFINDINGS\nRelated and nonrelated caregivers are often expected to \"gift\" hours of care above and beyond what is compensated by formal services. Cuts in formal services and lapses in pay push caregivers to further \"walk the line\" between market and gift economies of care. Both related and nonrelated caregivers who choose to stay on and provide more care without pay often face adverse economic and health consequences. Some, including related caregivers, opt out of caregiving altogether. While some consumers expect that caregivers would be willing to \"walk the line\" in order to meet their needs, most expressed sympathy for them and tried to alter their schedules or go without care in order to limit the caregivers' burden.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nGiven economic and health constraints, caregivers cannot always compensate for cuts in formal supports by providing uncompensated time and resources. Similarly, low-income older adults are not competitive in the caregiving marketplace and, given the inadequacy of compensated hours, often depend on unpaid care. Policies that restrict formal long-term services and supports thus leave the needs of both caregivers and consumers unmet.","PeriodicalId":78777,"journal":{"name":"The Milbank Memorial Fund quarterly","volume":"12 1","pages":"732-60"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Milbank Memorial Fund quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.12163","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

CONTEXT Paid caregivers of low-income older adults navigate their role at what Hochschild calls the "market frontier": the fuzzy line between the "world of the market," in which services are exchanged for monetary compensation, and the "world of the gift," in which caregiving is uncompensated and motivated by emotional attachment. We examine how political and economic forces, including the reduction of long-term services and supports, shape the practice of "walking the line" among caregivers of older adults. METHODS We used data from a longitudinal qualitative study with related and nonrelated caregivers (n = 33) paid through California's In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) program and consumers of IHSS care (n = 49). We analyzed the semistructured interviews (n = 330), completed between 2010 and 2014, using a constructivist grounded theory approach. FINDINGS Related and nonrelated caregivers are often expected to "gift" hours of care above and beyond what is compensated by formal services. Cuts in formal services and lapses in pay push caregivers to further "walk the line" between market and gift economies of care. Both related and nonrelated caregivers who choose to stay on and provide more care without pay often face adverse economic and health consequences. Some, including related caregivers, opt out of caregiving altogether. While some consumers expect that caregivers would be willing to "walk the line" in order to meet their needs, most expressed sympathy for them and tried to alter their schedules or go without care in order to limit the caregivers' burden. CONCLUSIONS Given economic and health constraints, caregivers cannot always compensate for cuts in formal supports by providing uncompensated time and resources. Similarly, low-income older adults are not competitive in the caregiving marketplace and, given the inadequacy of compensated hours, often depend on unpaid care. Policies that restrict formal long-term services and supports thus leave the needs of both caregivers and consumers unmet.
走在线上:在一个以消费者为导向的老年人家庭护理项目中导航护理市场和礼物经济。
低收入老年人的有偿照顾者在霍克希尔德所说的“市场前沿”中扮演着自己的角色:“市场世界”和“礼物世界”之间的模糊界限,在“市场世界”中,服务是用货币补偿换取的,而在“礼物世界”中,照顾是无偿的,是由情感依恋驱动的。我们研究了政治和经济力量,包括长期服务和支持的减少,如何塑造老年人照顾者“循规蹈矩”的做法。方法我们使用的数据来自一项纵向定性研究,其中包括通过加州家庭支持服务(IHSS)计划支付的相关和非相关护理人员(n = 33)和IHSS护理的消费者(n = 49)。我们使用建构主义扎根理论方法分析了2010年至2014年间完成的半结构化访谈(n = 330)。研究结果:相关和非相关的照顾者通常被期望“赠送”超过正式服务补偿的照顾时间。正规服务的削减和工资的下降迫使护理人员进一步在市场经济和礼物经济之间“走钢丝”。选择留下来无偿提供更多照护的亲属和非亲属照护者往往面临不利的经济和健康后果。一些人,包括相关的护理人员,选择完全退出护理。虽然一些消费者期望护理人员愿意“走线”以满足他们的需求,但大多数人对他们表示同情,并试图改变他们的日程安排或不照顾他们,以减轻护理人员的负担。结论考虑到经济和健康的限制,护理人员不能总是通过提供无偿的时间和资源来弥补正式支持的减少。同样,低收入老年人在护理市场上也没有竞争力,而且由于补偿时间不足,往往依赖于无偿护理。限制正式长期服务和支持的政策因此使照顾者和消费者的需求得不到满足。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信