Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-c52kr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T18:02:45.942Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Exploring Gender Differences in the Relationships between Eldercare and Labour Force Participation*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 January 2015

Yeonjung Lee*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Social Work, University of Calgary
Fengyan Tang
Affiliation:
School of Social Work, University of Pittsburgh
Kevin H. Kim
Affiliation:
School of Education, University of Pittsburgh
Steven M. Albert
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh
*
† La correspondance et les demandes de tirés-à-part doivent être adressées à : / Correspondence and requests for offprints should be sent to: Yeonjung Lee, Ph.D., M.S.W. Faculty of Social Work University of Calgary 2500 University Drive NW Calgary, AB T2N 1N4 (yeonjung.lee@ucalgary.ca)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigated the reciprocal relationship between parental caregiving and labour force participation to determine whether (1) caregiving related to subsequent employment; (2) employment related to subsequent caregiving; (3) caregiving and labour force participation had a reciprocal relationship across time; and (4) gender differences existed in these relationships. A cross-lagged panel design was applied with structural equation modeling. The study sample included adult children aged 51 or older with living parents or parents-in-law. No reciprocal relationship was found between caregiving and labour force participation, but gender differences were evident. Women caregivers in 2006 were less likely to be working in 2008, whereas employment status was not related to subsequent caregiving. In contrast, men working in 2008 were less likely to be caregiving in 2010, whereas caregiving was not related to subsequent employment status. Findings suggest that gender plays an important role in the relationship between caregiving and labour force participation.

Résumé

Cette étude a examiné la relation réciproque entre les soins des parents et la participation au marché du travail, afin de déterminer si (1) la prestation de soins est liés à l’emploi subséquent; (2) un emploi est lié à la prestation de soins subséquente; (3) la participation de la prestation de soins et la population travaillant a montré une relation réciproque à travers le temps; et (4) s’il existe des différences entre les sexes dans ces relations. Pour l’analyse, nous avons utilisé la modélisation par équation structurelle. L’échantillon de l’étude comprenait les enfants adultes de 51 ans et plus, vivant avec des parents ou beaux-parents. Aucune relation de réciprocité a été trouvée entre la prestation de soins et la participation de la population active, mais des différences de sexe étaient évidentes. Femmes soignantes en 2006 étaient moins susceptibles de travailler en 2008, bien que le statut d’emploi n’ était pas liée à la prestation de soins subséquente. En revanche, les hommes qui travaillaient en 2008 étaient moins susceptibles d’être engagés dans la prestation de soins en 2010, bien que la prestation de soins n’était pas liée à l’état de l’emploi subséquent. Ces résultats suggèrent que le sexe joue un rôle important dans la relation entre la prestation de soins et la participation au marché du travail.

Information

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association on Gerontology 2015 
Figure 0

Figure 1: Cross-lagged panel model of reciprocal relationship between caregiving and labour force participationNote: For the simple presentation, co-variates (i.e., age, race, education, marital status, health status, number of siblings, number of children, parents’ need for personal care, and household income) were not included.

Figure 1

Table 1: Demographic characteristics of sample

Figure 2

Figure 2: Male and female models of reciprocal relationship between caregiving and labour force participationUnstandardized odd ratios are reported. *p < .05, **p < .01,***p < .001.Note: Co-variates of age, race, education, marital status, number of siblings, number of children, self-rated health, and parents’ need for personal care were included in the analysis but not shown in the figure.

Figure 3

Table 2: Parameter estimates of the full model (male)

Figure 4

Table 3: Parameter estimates of the full model (female)