NIDI Report No. 76, Amsterdam KNAW Press, 117 p.

139 Pages·2008·0.5 MB·English

N
i D
i
report 76
76
Tin Tineke Fokkema
e
k Susan ter Bekke
e
F
o Pearl A. Dykstra
k
k
e
m
a
, S
u
s
a
n
te
r B
e
k
k
ISBN 97I8S-9S0N-6 0998242--574291-04 e, Pe SOLIDARITY BETWEEN
arl A PARE NTS AND THEIR ADULT
The Netherlands Interdisciplinary . D CHILDREN IN EUROPE
y
Demographic Institute (NIDI) ks
is an institute of the tr
a
Royal Netherlands Academy
of Arts and Sciences (KNAW) 9 789069845494
S
O
At present, our knowledge of the current state of solidarity between parents and their L
adult children in Europe is limited. Insight into contemporary intergenerational solida- ID
A
rity is not only important for the well-being of individuals but is also of great interest R
to policy makers. Patterns of intergener ational solidarity are not only affected by social ITY
policies and services but also reveal a number of important social policy issues and di- B
E
lemmas. Will encouraging labour force participation among women and older workers T
W
mean they have less time to care for t heir dependents? Should formal care services be EE
further expanded to relieve the burden faced by family members with the risk that they N
start to replace informal care? PA
R
E
This report aims to contribute to this insight by providing a more differentiated picture N
T
of the strength, nature and direction of solidarity between parents and their adult S
A
indcihcialdter ethna, ti tps avraernita-tcihoinl da mtieosn agr Ee uq ruoiptee astnr ocnogu.n Ttrhiees m aanjdo ritisty d oefte Ermurionpaenatns.s O aguer dfin d5i0n agns d ND T ninettehredrilsacnipdlsinary
over live in close proximity and are in frequent contact with at least one of the children. HE demographic
Moreover, strong family care obligations still exist and a substantial amount of support IR institute
is being exchanged between parents and their non-co resident children. A
D
U
fatherIsn taerree smtionrge dinifcfleinreendc teos ,a hssoiwste tvheeri, re cmheilrdgree bne fintwaneceina liln yd, imviodtuhaelrss ahnadv ec omuonrter iferse.q Wuehnitl e LT CH
contact and exchange more help in kind with their children. Being religious and having IL
D
a large family have a positive impact on several dimensions of intergenerational solida- R
rity. Parental divorce and a better socioeconomic position of parents and children, on EN
the other hand, lead to a weakening of parent-child ties in many respects. Contrary to IN
common belief, employed children show solidarity with their parents as much as those E
U
without a paid job. Differences in the nature of intergenerational solidarity between the R
O
European countries tend to follow the general division into an individualistic north and P
E
a familistic south.
KNAW Press Royal Netherlands Academy
of Arts and Sciences

Solidarity between parents and their adult children in Europe

SOLIDARITY BETWEEN
PARENTS AND THEIR
ADULT CHILDREN IN
EUROPE

Tineke Fokkema
Susan ter Bekke
Pearl A. Dykstra

netherlands
interdisciplinary
demographic
institute

Report no. 76

Amsterdam, 2008
The series NIDI reports is published on behalf of the Netherlands
Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute

Director:
Frans Willekens

Editors:
Joop de Beer
Pearl Dykstra
Frans van Poppel

Editorial secretariat:
Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute
P.O. Box 11650, 2502 AR The Hague
Lange Houtstraat 19, 2511 CV The Hague
Telephone: + 31 (0) 70 - 3565200
Fax: + 31 (0) 70 - 3647187
E-mail: [email protected]
Internet: http://www.nidi.knaw.nl

Technical coordination:
Jacqueline van der Helm

Publisher: Aksant, P.O. Box 2169,
1000 CD, Amsterdam, www.aksant.nl

ISSN 0922-7210
ISBN 978-90-6984-549-4

© 2008, NIDI, The Hague

No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by means, print,
photocopy, microfilm, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the
publisher.
Table of Contents
Executive summary .............................................................................................. xiii
Acknowledgement .............................................................................................. xvii
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1
Background ........................................................................................ 1
Aim of the study ................................................................................. 4
Data ..................................................................................................... 5
Analytical strategy ............................................................................. 6
Policy relevance ................................................................................. 8
Organisation of the report .................................................................. 9
2. Geographical proximity .................................................................................. 11
Introduction ...................................................................................... 11
Multi-generation household: a southern European phenomenon .. 12
At least one non-coresident child close by ...................................... 16
No major gender differences ........................................................... 16
Parental divorce leads to greater distance ....................................... 16
Shorter distances to children in the event of health problems ........ 17
Status creates distance ...................................................................... 17
Other significant personal characteristics ....................................... 18
Between-country differences ........................................................... 18
3. Contacts ........................................................................................................... 19
Introduction ...................................................................................... 19
Frequent and good contact ............................................................... 27
Most contact between mothers and daughters, least contact
between fathers and sons ................................................................. 29
More contact in large families, but less contact per child .............. 30
Parental divorce has major negative social consequences ............. 30
Higher status leads to less contact ................................................... 31
Other differentials by parent and child characteristics ................... 32
How contact relates to distance ....................................................... 33
Between-country differences ........................................................... 34
vi

4. Family care obligations ................................................................................... 35
Introduction ...................................................................................... 35
Strong preference for government support in northern Europe ..... 40
Strong sense of duty to care ............................................................. 41
Women feel weaker family care obligations .................................. 41
Parental divorce weakens sense of family duty .............................. 42
Status weakens sense of obligation ................................................. 42
Religion strengthens sense of duty to care ...................................... 42
Need for care does not lead to a stronger sense of duty to care ..... 42
Burden of care leads to a weaker sense of duty to care .................. 43
Between-country differences ........................................................... 43
5. Support exchange ............................................................................................ 45
Introduction ...................................................................................... 45
5.1. Help in kind ............................................................................................ 46
Upwards ............................................................................................ 46
Less but more regular in southern Europe ...................................... 53
Elderly parents ‘net receivers’ ......................................................... 57
5.2. Financial support .................................................................................... 57
Downwards ...................................................................................... 57
Older adults ‘net givers’ ................................................................... 59
Reasons ............................................................................................. 61
5.3. Looking after grandchildren .................................................................. 61
More often, but less formal in northern Europe ............................. 61
5.4. Support given to and received from parents ......................................... 64
Clear age and gender differences .................................................... 64
Necessity increases support ............................................................. 64
Matthew effect.................................................................................. 64
Other personal differentials ............................................................. 65
Crowding in ...................................................................................... 66
Main preconditions: geographical proximity and contact
frequency .......................................................................................... 66
Between-country differences ........................................................... 67
vii

6. Typology of late-life families ......................................................................... 69
Introduction ...................................................................................... 69
Four types of late-life families ......................................................... 71
Differentials by parent and child characteristics ............................. 75
Between-country differences ........................................................... 79
7. Conclusion and discussion .............................................................................. 81
7.1. Introduction ............................................................................................ 81
7.2. Summary of findings .............................................................................. 82
Intergenerational solidarity alive and well ...................................... 82
Differentials at the individual level ................................................. 83
Between-country differences ........................................................... 87
7.3. Limitations and suggestions for further research .................................. 89

References .............................................................................................................. 93

Appendix Measurement of the independent variables ....................................... 103

List of NIDI reports ............................................................................................. 113