Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T15:00:29.096Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Patterns of grandparental child care across Europe: the role of the policy context and working mothers' need

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 February 2016

VALERIA BORDONE ,
BRUNO ARPINO  and
ARNSTEIN AASSVE
VALERIA BORDONE*
Affiliation:
Centre for Research on Ageing, University of Southampton, UK.
BRUNO ARPINO
Affiliation:
Department of Political and Social Sciences, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.
ARNSTEIN AASSVE
Affiliation:
Department of Policy Analysis and Public Management and Carlo F. Dondena Centre for Research on Social Dynamics and Public Policies, Bocconi University, Milan, Italy.
*
Address for correspondence: Valeria Bordone, Centre for Research on Ageing, University of Southampton, Highfield Campus, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK E-mail: v.bordone@soton.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Across Europe grandparents play very different roles. This paper studies to what extent grandparents' role as providers of child care relates to the country policy context, focusing on public child-care services and parental leave regulation, and to the availability of part-time jobs for women. We also explore whether mothers' needs to combine family and work differently influence the frequency of grandparental child care across countries. The analysis combines micro-data from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe and macro-indicators from the Multilinks database and Eurostat. We find a clear association between policy context and frequency of grandparental child care. Three models emerge. In countries close to the familialism by default model (i.e. characterised by scarce public child-care services and parental leave), when grandparents provide child care they often do it daily. In countries characterised by defamilialisation and supported familialism policies (with generous public services and parental leave) grandparents take on a marginal role. An intermediate model emerges in countries characterised by a limited offer of child care or parental leave, where grandparental child care complements state support and tends to be offered on a weekly basis. Our analysis corroborates the idea that the highly intensive involvement of grandparents in countries with low availability of part-time jobs for women is influenced by the need (unmet by the welfare) of mothers to combine work and family.

Keywords

grandparental child careintergenerational relationshipsfamily policiesMultilinks databasefemale labour force participation
Type
Articles
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 37 , Issue 4 , April 2017 , pp. 845 - 873
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aassve, A., Arpino, B. and Goisis, A. 2012. Grandparenting and mothers’ labour force participation: a comparative analysis using the Generations and Gender Survey. Demographic Research, 27, 3, 53–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albertini, M., Kohli, M. and Vogel, C. 2007. Intergenerational transfers of time and money in European families: common patterns – different regimes? Journal of European Social Policy, 17, 4, 319–34.Google Scholar
Alesina, A., Algan, Y., Cahuc, P. and Giuliano, P. 2015. Family values and the regulation of labor. Journal of the European Economic Association, 13, 4, 599–30.Google Scholar
Arpino, B. and Bordone, V. 2014. Does grandparenting pay off? The effect of childcare on grandparents’ cognitive functioning. Journal of Marriage and Family, 76, 2, 337–51.Google Scholar
Arpino, B., Pronzato, C. and Tavares, L. P. 2014. The effect of grandparental support on mothers’ labour market participation: an instrumental variable approach. European Journal of Population, 30, 4, 369–90.Google Scholar
Attias-Donfut, C. and Wolff, F.-C. 2000. Complementarity between private and public transfers. In Arber, S. and Attias-Donfut, C. (eds), The Myth of Generational Conflict: The Family and State in Ageing Societies. Routledge, London, 47–68.Google Scholar
Becker, G. S. 1974. A theory of social interactions. Journal of Political Economy, 82, 6, 1063–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bordone, V. 2009. Contact and proximity of older people to their adult children: a comparison between Italy and Sweden. Population, Space and Place, 15, 4, 359–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bordone, V. and Rosina, A. 2013. The role of education in the reconciliation between female occupation and family responsibilities at mid-life: the Italian case. Journal of Population Research, 30, 1, 39–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Börsch-Supan, A., Brugiavini, A., Jürges, H., Mackenbach, J., Siegrist, J. and Weber, G. 2005. Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe – First Results from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe. MEA, Mannheim, Germany.Google Scholar
Börsch-Supan, A. and Jürges, H. 2005. Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe – Methodology. MEA, Mannheim, Germany.Google Scholar
Brandt, M., Haberkern, K. and Szydlik, M. 2009. Intergenerational help and care in Europe. European Sociological Review, 25, 5, 585–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brilli, Y., Del Boca, D. and Pronzato, C. 2013. Does childcare availability play a role in maternal employment and children's development? Review of Economics of the Household. Published online 12 November 2013. DOI 10.1007/s11150-013-9227-4.Google Scholar
Cigno, A. 1993. Intergenerational transfers without altruism: family, market and state. European Journal of Political Economy, 9, 4, 505–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, D. and Jakubson, G. 1995. The connection between public transfers and private interfamily transfers. Journal of Public Economics, 57, 1, 129–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daatland, S. O. and Herlofson, K. 2003. Families and welfare states: substitution or complementarity. In Lowenstein, A. and Ogg, J. (eds), OASIS: Old Age and Autonomy – The Role of Service Systems and Intergenerational Family Solidarity. The Final Report. University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel, 281–305.Google Scholar
Daatland, S. O. and Löwenstein, A. 2005. Intergenerational solidarity and the family–welfare state balance. European Journal of Ageing, 2, 3, 174–82.Google Scholar
D'Addio, A. C. and Mira d'Ercole, M. 2005. Trends and determinants of fertility rates in OECD countries: the role of policies. OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris.Google Scholar
Dalla Zuanna, G. 2001. The banquet of Aeolus: a familistic interpretation of Italy's lowest low fertility. Demographic Research, 4, 5, 133–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Di Gessa, G., Glaser, K., Price, D., Ribe, E. and Tinker, A. 2015. What drives national differences in intensive grandparental childcare in Europe? Journals of Gerontology: Series B. Published online 16 March 2015. DOI: 10.1093/geronb/gbv007.Google Scholar
El-Attar, M. 2007. Trust, child care technology choice and female labor force participation. IZA Discussion Paper 3135, Institute for the Study of Labor, Bonn, Germany.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geurts, T., Van Tilburg, T., Poortman, A. R. and Dykstra, P. A. 2015. Child care by grandparents: changes between 1992 and 2006. Ageing & Society, 35, 6, 1318–34.Google Scholar
Glaser, K., Ribé Montserrat, E., Waginger, U., Price, D., Stuchbury, R. and Tinker, A. 2010. Grandparenting in Europe. Grandparents Plus, London.Google Scholar
Gray, A. 2005. The changing availability of grandparents as carers and its implications for childcare policy in the UK. Journal of Social Policy, 34, 4, 557–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenland, S. 1994. Alternative models for ordinal logistic regression. Statistics in Medicine, 13, 16, 1665–77.Google Scholar
Hagestad, G. O. 2006. Transfers between grandparents and grandchildren: the importance of taking a three-generation perspective. Zeitschrift für Familienforschung [Journal of Family Research] , 18, 3, 315–32.Google Scholar
Hank, K. and Buber, I. 2009. Grandparents caring for their grandchildren: findings from the 2004 Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe. Journal of Family Issues, 30, 1, 53–73.Google Scholar
Hoff, A. 2007. Patterns of intergenerational support in grandparent–grandchild and parent–child relationships in Germany. Ageing & Society, 27, 5, 643–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Igel, C. and Szydlik, M. 2011. Grandchild care and welfare state arrangements in Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 21, 3, 210–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jappens, M. and Van Bavel, J. 2012. Regional family norms and child care by grandparents in Europe. Demographic Research, 27, 4, 85–120.Google Scholar
Keck, W. 2008. The relationship between children and their frail elderly parents in different care regimes. In Saraceno, C. (ed.), Families, Ageing and Social Policy. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, 147–69.Google Scholar
Keck, W., Hessel, P. and Saraceno, C. 2009. Database on Intergenerational Policy Indicators: Methodological Report. Wissenschaftszetrum Berlin für Sozialforschung/Rotterdam, Multilinks Project, Berlin.Google Scholar
Keck, W. and Saraceno, C. 2008. Grandchildhood in Germany and Italy. An exploration. In Leira, A. and Saraceno, C. (eds), Childhood: Changing Contexts. Comparative Social Research. Volume 25, Emerald, Biggleswade, UK, 133–63.Google Scholar
Kohli, M., Künemund, H., Motel-Klingebiel, A. and Szydlik, M. 2005. Generationenbeziehungen [Intergenerational relationships]. In Künemund, H. and Kohli, M. (eds), Die zweite Lebenshälfte: Gesellschaftliche Lage und Partizipation im Spiegel des Alters-Surveys [The Second Half of Life: Social Situation and Participation in the Mirror of the Age Survey] . Leske and Budrich, Opladen, Germany, 176–211.Google Scholar
Korpi, W. 2000. Faces of inequality: gender, class and pattern of inequalities in different types of welfare states. Social Politics, 7, 2, 127–91.Google Scholar
Künemund, H. 2008. Intergenerational relation between the family and the state. In Saraceno, C. (ed.), Families, Ageing and Social Policy. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, 105–22.Google Scholar
Künemund, H. and Rein, M. 1999. There is more receiving than needing: theoretical arguments and empirical explorations of crowding in and crowding out. Ageing & Society, 19, 1, 93–121.Google Scholar
Künemund, H. and Vogel, C. 2006. Öffentliche und private Transfers und Unterstützungsleistungen im Alter: ‘crowding out’ oder ‘crowding in’? [Public and private transfers and support in old age: ‘crowding out’ or ‘crowding in’?] Zeitschrift für Familienforschung [Journal of Family Research] , 18, 3, 269–89.Google Scholar
Laferrère, A. and Wolff, F.-C. 2006. Microeconomic models of family transfers. In Kolm, S. C. and Ythier, J. M. (eds), Handbook of the Economics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity. Volume 2, Applications. Handbooks in Economics 23, North-Holland/Elsevier, Amsterdam, 889–969.Google Scholar
Leitner, S. 2003. Varieties of familialism: the caring function of the family in comparative perspective. European Societies, 5, 4, 353–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leitner, S. and Lessenich, S. 2007. (In)Dependence as a dependent variable: conceptualizing and measuring de-familization. In Clasen, J. and Siegel, N. A. (eds), Investigating Welfare State Change. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, 244–60.Google Scholar
Lewis, J., Knijn, T., Martin, C. and Ostner, I. 2008. Patterns of development in work/family reconciliation policies for parents in France, Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK in the 2000s. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 15, 3, 261–86.Google Scholar
Moineddin, R., Matheson, F. I. and Glazier, R. H. 2007. A simulation study of sample size for multilevel logistic regression models. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 7, 34, 1–10.Google Scholar
Motel-Klingebiel, A., Tesch-Römer, C. and von Kondratowitz, H.-J. 2005. Welfare states do not crowd out the family: evidence for mixed responsibility from comparative analyses. Ageing & Society, 25, 6, 863–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Multilinks 2011. Multilinks Database on Intergenerational Policy Indicators, Version 2.0. Multilinks Project and Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung. Available online at http://multilinks-database.wzb.eu [Accessed 23 November 2015].Google Scholar
Plantenga, J. and Remery, C. 2005. Reconciliation of Work and Private Life. A Comparative Review of Thirty European Countries. Report of the EU Expert Group on Gender, Social Inclusion and Employment (EGGSIE), Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, European Commission, Luxembourg.Google Scholar
Salles, A., Rossier, C. and Brachet, S. 2010. Understanding the long term effects of family policies on fertility: the diffusion of different family models in France and Germany. Demographic Research, 22, 34, 1057–96.Google Scholar
Saraceno, C. 2004. De-familization or re-familization? Trends in income tested family benefits. In Knijn, T. and Komter, A. (eds), Solidarity Between the Sexes and the Generations: Transformations in Europe. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, 68–88.Google Scholar
Saraceno, C. 2008. Gender and Care: Old Solutions, New Developments? Annual Hirschman Lecture, 22 April, European University, Florence, Italy. Available online at http://www.sociology.ed.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/15693/saraceno_2008_gender_and_care.pdf [Accessed 23 November 2015].Google Scholar
Saraceno, C. 2010. Social inequalities in facing old-age dependency: a bi-generational perspective. Journal of European Social Policy, 20, 1, 32–44.Google Scholar
Saraceno, C. 2011. Childcare needs and childcare policies: a multidimensional issue. Current Sociology, 59, 1, 78–96.Google Scholar
Saraceno, C. and Keck, W. 2008. MULTILINKS Project Report. The Institutional Framework of Intergenerational Family Obligations in Europe: A Conceptual and Methodological Overview. Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung, Berlin. Available online at http://www.multilinks-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/Report_Saraceno_Keck_Nov081.pdf [Accessed 23 November 2015].Google Scholar
Saraceno, C. and Keck, W. 2010. Can we identify intergenerational policy regimes in Europe? European Societies, 12, 5, 675–96.Google Scholar
Saraceno, C. and Keck, W. 2011. Towards an integrated approach for the analysis of gender equity in policies supporting paid work and care responsibilities. Demographic Research, 25, 11, 371–406.Google Scholar
Schenk, N., Dykstra, P. and Maas, I. 2010. The role of European welfare states in intergenerational money transfers: a micro-level perspective. Ageing & Society, 30, 8, 1315–42.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M., Giarrusso, R. and Bengtson, V. L. 2003. Grandparents and grandchildren in family systems: a social-developmental perspective. In Bengtson, V. L. and Lowenstein, A. (eds), Global Aging and Challenges to Families. Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 75–103.Google Scholar