The care receivers perspective: How care-dependent people struggle with accepting help from family members, friends and neighbours

'Let us be'. Social support needs of people with acquired long-term disabilities and their caregivers in rehabilitation practice in the Netherlands

In many European countries, including the Netherlands, current care policies encourage 'active citizens' to support each other rather than having individuals rely on paid professional help. Rehabilitation centres also put greater emphasis on social networks assisting adults with acquired long-term disabilities and their caregivers. Often these adults and their caregivers feel insufficiently prepared to cope with the disability in daily life and struggle with community integration. However, little is known about the factors that make vulnerable people accept or decline support from their social networks. We researched the social support needs of persons with acquired disabilities and their caregivers eligible for a family group conference intervention by conducting 19 semi-structured interviews in rehabilitation centres in the Netherlands. A thematic analysis revealed that most couples (15) were reluctant to request (more) support from their social network, even though many of them had a good network to rely on. We identified five reasons for this reluctance: (1) not accustomed asking support, (2) not wanting to be a (bigger) burden, (3) fear of intrusion into one's privacy and independence, (4) fear or problematic motivations such as curiosity or pity and (5) lack of reliability, competence, or comprehension. The main factor seemed to be the lack of reciprocity: couples do not see sufficient options to reciprocate the necessary support. Therefore, before instigating social support-centred interventions such as family group conferences, social care and other health professionals should be aware of any factors causing a sense of reluctance and explore the experiences of an imbalance in reciprocity.

Do oldest old individuals perceive receipt of informal care as a restriction or support of their autonomy?

OBJECTIVES

Autonomy (defined as self-governance; not equivalent to independence) is relevant to well-being and psychological functioning. However, there is a lack of research on individuals aged >85 years and their perception of autonomy when receiving informal care. This study aims to answer the question if and how the receipt of informal care is associated with perceived autonomy of individuals aged over 85 years.

METHOD

A cross-sectional study was conducted with data from follow-up 9 of the AgeQualiDe study (2015/2016), which is a multi-centric prospective cohort study in Germany. The analytical sample included 570 participants aged >85 years and with a score of ≥ 19 on the Mini-Mental-State-Examination. Perceived autonomy was assessed with the Perceived Autonomy in Old Age Scale. Receipt of care was assessed as performance of at least one care task (help with basic and instrumental activities of daily living, and supervision) by relatives or friends. Sociodemographic information, mental health, functional level and receipt of professional ambulatory care were controlled for.

RESULTS

Unadjusted and adjusted linear regression analyses indicated a significant negative association between receipt of informal care and perceived autonomy. The results remained stable in sensitivity analyses; no significant interaction effect was found for gender or education.

CONCLUSION

Findings indicate that informal care recipients aged >85 years perceive lower autonomy compared to those not receiving care. Additional or other forms of support, and improving the care relationship and communication might be considered to support autonomy of care recipients aged >85 years.

How does long-term care impact the psychological wellbeing of older adults in different care policy contexts in the Netherlands?: A comparison of 1998, 2008 and 2018: A comparison of 1998, 2008 and 2018

Receipt of long-term care (LTC) is generally associated with worse psychological wellbeing for community-dwelling older adults. In addition to objective features of care use (e.g. formal vs. informal care), the subjective evaluation of care provision in terms of perceived sufficiency might be particularly predictive of one's wellbeing but is seldomly considered in the literature. Substantial changes in the availability of long-term care in past decades raise the question to what extent these effects, if present, are consistent over historic time. The present study, therefore, aims at better understanding the associations between types of LTC use and perceived care sufficiency on psychological wellbeing in a changing LTC context in the Netherlands. Data from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (LASA) were used from three points in time: 1998 (N = 582), 2008 (N = 459) and 2018 (N = 415). At each wave, participants were between 75 and 85 years of age and living independently. The results show that after adjusting for age, gender, education and health, using formal LTC had a negative effect on depressive symptoms only in 2018, but that this effect was not significantly worse compared to previous cohorts. Perceived care sufficiency was consistently negatively associated with depressive symptoms in all three points in time. This suggests that despite a less generous Dutch LTC system, psychological wellbeing among LTC users remains stable. Perceiving care provision as sufficient, however, can help older adults maintain psychological wellbeing and should be considered by researchers and policymakers that aim to improve care recipients' wellbeing.

"I Could Not Manage This Long-Term, Absolutely Not." Aging in Place, Informal Care, COVID-19, and the Neighborhood in Flanders (Belgium)

Public health and care policies across OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries increasingly encourage aging in place, enabled by both formal care networks, and informal (family) care and social solidarity in the neighborhood. However, little is known about how a person’s neighborhood might affect their aging in place. The COVID-19 crisis unintendedly offered a good opportunity to observe the neighborhood’s role in the provision of care. Since formal care services were often limited during the lockdown, informal caregiving may have increased. However, intergenerational contacts in and outside of the household were strongly discouraged by governments worldwide, adding another layer of complexity to caregiving. The aim of this qualitative study was to assess how informal caregivers in Flanders managed to provide care to their care receivers, and what role the neighborhood played in this provision of care. Sixteen qualitative Skype and telephone interviews with informal caregivers were conducted between June and December 2020 to understand their experiences and coping strategies. Overall, most respondents increased their frequency of caregiving during the first lockdown. They took on the extra care needs during the lockdown themselves, and did not actively invoke any kind of neighborhood support. The significance of the neighborhood seemingly remained limited. This was often not because no help was offered, but rather due to a sense of pride or the fear of infection, and an increased effort by family caregivers.

The group home as moral laboratory: tracing the ethic of autonomy in Dutch intellectual disability care

This paper examines the prevalence of the ideal of "independence" in intellectual disability care in the Netherlands. It responds to a number of scholars who have interrogated this ideal through the lens of Michel Foucault's vocabulary of governmentality. Such analyses hold that the goal of "becoming independent" subjects people with intellectual disabilities to various constraints and limitations that ensure their continued oppression. As a result, these authors contend, the commitment to the ideal of "independence" - the "ethic of autonomy" - actually threatens to become an obstacle to flourishing in the group home. This paper offers an alternative analysis. It does so by drawing on a case study taken from an ethnographic study on group home life in the Netherlands. Briefly put, the disagreement stems from differing conceptualizations of moral life. Put in the vocabulary of moral anthropologist Cheryl Mattingly, the authors propose to approach the group home more from a "first-person" perspective rather than chiefly from a "third-person" perspective. They then draw on Mattingly to cast the group home as a "moral laboratory" in which the ethic of autonomy is not just reproduced but also enacted, and in which the terms of (in)dependence constantly get renegotiated in practice. What emerges is not only a new perspective on the workings of the "ethic of autonomy" in the group home, but also an argument about the possible limitations of the vocabulary of governmentality for analysing care practices.