Recomendaciones

Marriage expands the kin network by creating affines, and generally children and grandchildren3• Wade et al (1994) found that marital status

3 This was more true in the past than today when marriage is not so closely linked with childbearing - see Chapter Four.

. had more effect than proximity or contact on likeliness of turning to family or others during stressful events, with married people being less likely to go outside the family. Conversely, the dissolution of marriage reduces the kin network and the nature of the relationship between parents and children, with implications for the support network, particularly in old age and for sole parents (Millward, 1998).

The Australian Families in Later Life study (Millward, 1997) found that parental separation and divorce results in reduced contact between parents and adult children compared to those with intact parental first marriages, and this decline in contact persists with remarriage. In the United States, Lye et al (1995) examined the effect of parental divorce on the quality of the parent/ adult child relationship and found that adult children of divorced parents report a lower quality of relationship with both parents than do children from intact marriages. The quality is inversely related to length of time divorced, especially with respect to the non-custodial parent, and is worsened by remarriage of either parent.

This reduction in contact and quality of relationship was fOund by White (1992) to be the main factor in reduction of parental support of adult children - financial, emotional and practical - rather than decreased resources, with the exception of reduced financial support, where resources were equally important. In this study, however, while remarriage did not

worsen the relationship, nor did it result in improved parent/adult child relationships.

Eggebeen's (1992) analysis of data from the United States National Survey of Families and Households found that both widowed and divorced parents were less likely to provide support to their adult children, but widowed parents were more likely to receive support. Lye et aI's (1995) study cited above found no decline in the contact or relationship with widowed parents, and Roan and Raley (1996) found contact between mothers and adult

children increased on widowhood, thus suggesting that lack of support for adult children by widowed parents is a result of decreased resources rather

than reduced relationship quality. Several other studies show lack of

financial support for adult children of divorced parents (Grissett and Furr, 1994; Marks 1995; Amato, 1997) and Eggebeen (1992) extends this finding to stepchildren. Grissett and Furr (1994) demonstrate that, in the particular instance of tertiary students, those of divorced parents receive less financial assistance than those of intact families.

Marks' (1995) study of 3000 mid-life parents of non-resident adult children, which looked at relationships between marital status and attitudes to parental obligation and support given to adult children, provides evidence that social support patterns between midlife parents and their adult children vary according to marital status of the parents. Where the first marriage of parents is still intact, there is both more sense of financial obligation to adult children and more actual provision of support than from remarried, divorced, separated, widowed or never married parents. Conversely, divorced, separated and WIdowed mothers are perceived to be most in need of support from their 'ldult children. Remarried mothers, while receiving less emotional support from adult children, are similar to single mothers in that they receive help but do not give help in return. Marks (1995:9) notes that "marital disruption upsets institutional family exchange norms". Marital disruption not only disrupts relationships, she claims, but results in increased need and conflicted loyalties. This is especially so when there is remarriage, resulting in complex and conflicting exchange relationships. Similar findings are reported from the Australian Families in Later Life study: separated, divorced and remarried parents receive less support from adult children (Millward, 1997). A large (N=2840) panel survey of lone elderly and their adult children in the United States also found that remarriage further weakens the bond between parents and adult children (Pezzin and Schone, 1999). Thus there is no evidence that remarriage will solve the breakdown in family support created by marital dissolution.

The effect of parental marital status is of particular importance for the father-child relationship. Cooney and Uhlenberg (1992), Lawton et al (1994), Marks (1995), Amato (1997), Millward (1997), Kaufman and Uhlenberg (1998) and Pezzin and Schone (1999) all report that divorce weakens the father-child relationship more so than that with the mother. Geographic proximity may be an intervening factor in this decline, as proximity is related to contact and helping behaviour, and Lawton et al (1994) found that remarried parents, especially fathers, tend to live further away from adult children. Lye et al (1995) also found contact to be an intervening variable. However, this relationship between marital status and proximity was not found in the Australian Families in Later Life study (Millward, 1997).

Whilst Eggebeen (1992) found that the marital status of the children was less important to the exchange process, paradoxically, those with the smallest networks to call on for support, the never married and childless, are those most likely to provide support to others, probably because they are seen by other family members, and perhaps society, to be free of competing demands on their time. Kendig (1986a:88) found that the never married were three times more likely than those who had married to provide support to elderly parents, yet, because they most likely had no children, they would not receive this same support when they themselves aged.

Weston (1992) and Furstenberg et al (1995) explore the effect of parental divorce on the relationship between grandparents and grandchildren, and found that for many the relationship is weakened, especially for the paternal grandparents. On the other hand, grandparents can provide a stability for children in the wake of parental divorce. In the Australian Institute of Family Studies survey about one-third of all children of divorced parents continued to see both sets of grandparents regularly, while one-third of those children living with their mother rarely see their paternal

grandparents (Weston, 1992). This is a consequence of the weakened father­ child relationship discussed above (Millward, 1997; Weston, 1992). However, in the United States, Cogswell and Henry (1995) found that young adults from divorced families perceived greater support from grandparents than those from intact families.

Thus marital status, particularly divorce of parents, affects the quality of the intergenerational relationship, particularly for men, and the provision of certain types of support in particular, such as financial support for young adult children, and care in old age. Divorced mothers are perceived as more demanding of support from their children, and divorced fathers are less likely than non-divorced fathers to receive intergenerational support in old age. While in some cases the grandparent-grandchild relationship and support is strengthened after parental divorce, in other cases it is reduced. Remarriage while having the potential to create an enlarged family network,

does not, in general, overcome these deficiencies. There are also

implications for those who do not marry in that they are more likely to be expected to provide support to parents, but are not likely to receive ,family support in old age themselves if they remain childless.

Family Size - Number of Adult Children or Siblings

A further family structure variable that might be expected to have an impact on the provision of family support is family size or number of children. From a review of the literature it is not clear, however, how important the number of adult children is for parent/adult child support relationships. Eggebeen (1992), White and Reidmann (1992), and Montgomery and Hirshorn (1991) found a strong positive relationship between number of adult children and both giving and receiving of support. This finding contrasts with Kendig (1986b), Rossi and Rossi (1990) and Stoller et aI, (1992), who found that in fact there was no overall gain in receipt of support by the elderly with large families.

This outcome may be explained by the inequality commonly found in the provision of help. Provision of help to a family member usually rests on one person, either the nearest or one not in the labour force; this has been found in New Zealand Oack and Neale, 1987; Green, 1993; Belgrave and Brown, 1997), Australia (Kendig, 1986a), the United Kingdom (Lewis and Meredith, 1988; Lewis, 1990) and Europe Oohansson, 1991; Dooghe 1992; Graham, 1999). Daughters are more likely to be the one in the family to provide caregiving of elderly parents, ahead of sons (Koopman-Boyden, 1981; Lewis, 1990; Montgomery and Hirshom, 1991). Matthews (1987) found sharing of care by adult children most unlikely where there were many children and they were of mixed sex and ties between siblings were not close. Lewis and Meredith (1988) also found that caregiving of severely disabled people usually falls on one helper, in line with Kendig's (1986a) findings in relation to the elderly, reported earlier.

This inequality in provision of support underlies the finding by Suitor and Pillemer's (1996) that, far from resulting in increased provision of support,

_ Siblings are the greatest source of interpersonal stress for adult childr�n caring for elderly parents. Tensions and resentment result from -the lack of help the provider of family support receives from other family members (Walker, 1991).

According to Farkas and Hogan (1995), type of kin - that is, the gender and genealogical relationship of those in the potential family support network - is more important than number. Issues of socio-economic status and resources may also override the expectation that large numbers of siblings or children will result in greater provision of support. White and Reidmann (1992) found that there was less exchange of help in lower socio-economic groups and non-white ethnic groups, although both these groups might have larger numbers of siblings. This may be a resource issue, as discussed in the following sections on sodo-economic status and ethnicity, with White and Reidmann joining others listed there in cautioning against assuming

disadvantaged groups have strong family support networks just because of larger family size or cultural norms.

Socio-economic Status and Material Resources

Research into the effect of socio-economic status on family helping behaviour generally finds that the higher the status, the more the resources, and the more the helping behaviour. Kulis (1992) found in a United States study that white collar workers had higher levels of all types of exchanges than blue collar workers. Conversely, Hogan et al (1993:1454) conclude that, in the United States, "families with fewer socio-economic resources are less involved in kin support", thus those families most in need of support may be the least able to provide it.

Middle-class families, and the more educated, are more likely than working class families to provide financial aid to family members (Sussman, 1988; Millward, 1998; de Vaus and Qu, 1998), which is not surprising considering they would have more discretionary income. However, they are more' likely to be providing support for adult children than for their elderly, members. - Where low income families do ' provide financial aid it tends to be from adult children to low 'income parents (Rossi and Rossi, 1990). Kulis (1992) found that assistance which flows in only one direction, such as financial aid from parents to adult children, lowers the quality of the relationship by invoking issues of dependency in a culture which values independence.

Hogan et al (1993:1455) claim that, in the United States, "many families of all races lack the resources for a sustained exchange of support and do not give or receive". There are, however, overlaps between socio-economic status and ethnicity, with many indigenous and immigrant ethnic groups being overrepresented in the lower socio-economic groups. While many of these groups have more classical extended family structures and customs, the behavioural expression of these norms may be in conflict due to lack of resources as a result of their socio-economic status. Liu (1992) investigated

the application of alternative theories to explain the lack of family support among the traditionally familistic Chinese ethnic group in New Zealand, and concluded that socio-economic factors were more relevant than factors such as assimilation, modernization, transplanted culture, double jeopardy4 or disengagement.

Ethnicity

There is a lack of empirical research in New Zealand on the actual helping behaviour in extended family networks, including for ethnic groups such as Maori and Pacific Island people for whom the literature shows highly familistic norms (see Chapter 2). The recent Te Hua Nuku Roa study of Maori individuals, families and households by the School of Maori Studies at Massey University, which is only in the early stages of analysis and publication, touches on whanau support in a general way, but apart from financial support does not provide data on amount and types of support being provided by or received from extended family, or on who is giving and receiving the support.

A dissertation from the Population Studies Centre at Waikato University by Hope (1997) uses a database collected from women of reproductive age only, to compare receipt of different types of support by Maori and Pakeha. It did not measure provision of support and does not involve support for the elderly. While Maori were more likely than Pakeha women to have received help from outside the household (mostly family), the difference was not great: 40 per cent compared with 31 per cent. This difference was mostly accounted for by higher receipt of support from siblings for Maori, which can be explained by the fact that, in the past, Maori had more children than Pakeha and thus a larger pool of siblings ' to potentially provide support. Hope's analysis showed that per kin-network size, Pakeha relatives in all groups except Siblings were more likely to provide support

4 The double jeopardy hypothesis is that minority status plus old age results in double disadvantage (Liu, 1 992:75).

than were Maori (Hope, 1997:57), and this study did not include help for the elderly. The types of support received by the two groups were similar, with childcare being the most common type of support provided for both Maori and Pakeha, which is not surprising given that the focus of the study was women of reproductive age. The two ethnic groups received this help equally (around 55 per cent in each group). Financial support was the next most common type of support received, with Maori (36 per cent) being slightly more likely than Pakeha (24 per cent) to receive this type of help.

This latter outcome is not consistent with the findings reported above on differences in support by socio-economic status. The reasons given by Hope for the higher Maori financial support are partly cultural, in that gifting of money is a custom of Maori whanau, which is consistent with the observed higher levels of reciprocity for Maori compared to Pakeha noted by Hope, but also partly socio-economic in that because of their generally lower socio­ economic status, Maori are more likely to need financial support. Hope's study also showed a decline in financial support received as the women

. aged, and as Maori women are generally younger than Pakeha women at the .time of their first and peak childbearing (Statistics New Zealand, 1998i) . this would also contribute .to their greater need for financial assistance. The ability to provide assistance may also be expected to vary by age and ethnicity, but Hope's study did not examine provision of assistance.

The Te Hua Nuku Roa study found that just over half (54 per cent) of those from the Auckland and Gisbome samples had provided financial support to whanau in the four weeks preceding the interview (Forster et aI, 1997, 1998).

In 1994, Taiapa said that low incomes did not necessarily prevent Maori

from participating in the whanau custom of providing financial assistance, but she has since modified this stance arguing that changing economic circumstances have led to a modification of expectations of whanau contributions (Taiapa, 1995, 1999). Similarly, in relation to the pressures that are put on New Zealand Maori whanau to take responsibility for their

members, Bevan-Brown (1994:218) found that while all are agreed that family care at home is the best option for care of the intellectually disabled, due to the economic, physical and emotional stresses involved, the family definitely need state assistance as "we do not have the resources to do it".

A study of 53 ethnic Chinese in Christchurch, New Zealand, also links lack of family support for the care of elderly Chinese to changing social and economic circumstances, such as the labour force participation of adult children and personal preference (Liu, 1992). Although 91 per cent of this sample had adult children living in the same city and 98 per cent had regular contact with their adult children, 81 per cent thought financial support of the elderly should be the responsibility of government and fewer than half thought that the physically dependent elderly should live with their adult children (Liu, 1992:103). According to Liu, co-residence of elderly Chinese with an adult child was more to do with lack of material resources and lack' of appropriate alternative sources of accommodation (such as rest-homes where the Chinese language is spoken) than personal preference .

. The more · comprehensive and statistically representative reviews and ' studies from the United States on the effect of ethnicity on family support are in fact contrary to the expectation that cultural norms of familism and size of extended family networks translate into higher levels of extended family support (Roschelle, 1997). Surprisingly, analysis of both national survey data (Hogan et al, 1993) and of smaller purposeful surveys in the United States (Rossi and Rossi, 1990) and in the United Kingdom (Finch and Mason, 1993), as well as a review of several United States studies by Stanford et al (1990), have not found significant differences in the degree of extended family support provided by different ethnic groups. The only aspect of difference found by Rossi and Rossi in Boston was that non-whites

had a greater sense of obligation to more distant kin5• Hogan et aI's (1993) data were nationally representative though, and did not find superior support networks among blacks or Hispanics compared with whites. Hogan et al found, in fact, that African Americans were less likely than white Americans to be involved in intergenerational assistance because of their lack of resources and the impact of social change. According to Hogan et aI, recent economic change in the United States has had more negative outcomes for minority groups. Similarly, in New Zealand (Te Puni Kokiri, 1998a, 1998b; Statistics New Zealand, 1999b), so we could expect to find similar ethnic differences in family support here.

Roschelle (1997) found that whites in the United States give and receive more of all types of help, including childcare, and that family helping behaviour increases with socio-economic status. She rejects many earlier findings on high level of extended family interaction and support as being based on small unrepresentative samples inappropriately generalised and not controlling for other factors. Hogan et al (1993) suggest a reason for this