Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-fwgfc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-09T08:15:27.792Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Familial Support for the Elderly in the Past: the Case of London's Working Class in the Early 1930s

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 November 2008

Chris Gordon
Chris Gordon
Affiliation:
Suntory Toyota International Centre for Economics and Related Disciplines, London School of Economics and Political Science, 10 Portugal Street, London WC2A 2HD, England.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper takes as its starting point the historical debate about the respective roles of family and state in providing, where necessary, for the elderly population. Using the original data cards from the New Survey of London it is possible to consider this in the light of the experience of the working class in London in the early 1930s by analysing data on household composition and income. This is the first time that data on household composition have been assembled for the period after 1881 and before the Census authorities themselves began systematically publishing results from 1951. The picture which emerges, supported by analyses of the income of the elderly, suggests that in this period the role of the family was small, though important no doubt in certain critical situations. It is recognised however that analyses of household structure go only part of the way in illuminating the very complex patterns of assistance which existed. We go on therefore to consider the limitations of this approach and speculate briefly on wider kinship networks, and their potential for assistance.

Type
Research Article
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 8 , Issue 3 , September 1988 , pp. 287 - 320
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1988

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

NOTES

1 Stearns, P. N.Old Age in European Society. Croom Helm, London, 1977, p. 13.Google Scholar

2 Ibid. p. 8.

3 Laslett, P.The character of familial history, its limitations and the conditions for its proper pursuit. Journal of Family History, 12 (1987), 263–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4 King, G., Policy and Practice, Old Age in the Modern World, Livingstone, London, 1955, p. 45Google Scholar, cited in Townsend, P., The Family Life of Old People, Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1963, p. 15.Google Scholar

5 See for instance Reform of Social Security, vol. 1, Cmnd 9517, HMSO, London, 1985, pp. 21Google Scholaret seq., and Population, Pension Costs and Pensioners' Incomes, DHSS, London, 1984.Google Scholar

6 Laslett, P. 1987, op. cit. p. 264.Google Scholar

7 Mitterauer, M. and Sieder, R.The European Family. Blackwell, Oxford, 1982, p. 21.Google ScholarPubMed

8 Ibid. p. 26.

9 Phillipson, C.Capitalism and the Construction of Old Age. Macmillan, London, 1982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 Ibid. p. 18.

11 Thane, P. ‘Ageing and the Economy 1945–1964’, unpublished paper (1984)Google Scholar and Johnson, P.The Economics of Old Age in Britain: A Long-Run View 1881–1981, C.E.P.R. Discussion Paper no. 47 (1985).Google Scholar

12 Smith, R. M.The structured dependency of the elderly as a recent development. Ageing and Society, 4 (1984), 409–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13 Thomson, D. ‘Provision for the elderly in England, 1830 to 1908’. Unpublished Ph.D. University of Cambridge, 1980.Google Scholar

14 Achenbaum, W. A.Shades of Gray: Old Age, American Values, and Federal Policies Since 1920. Little, Brown and Co., Boston, 1983, p. 140.Google Scholar

15 Reform of Social Security, para 1. 7.Google Scholar

16 Thomson, D.The decline of social welfare: falling state support for the elderly since early Victorian times, Ageing and Society, 4 (1984), 451–482, pp. 473–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17 Laslett, P.The significance of the past in the study of ageing, Ageing and Society, 4 (1984). 379–389. p. 387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18 Thane, P.Economic Burden or Benefit? A Positive View of Old Age. C.E.P.R. Discussion Paper no. 197 (1987), p. 11.Google Scholar

19 Guide to Census Reports Great Britain 1801–1966. HMSO, London, 1977.Google Scholar

20 Anderson, M., Family Structure in Nineteenth Century Lancashire, CUP, Cambridge, 1971Google Scholar; and Armstrong, W. A., ‘A note on the household structure of mid-nineteenth-century York in comparative perspective’, in Laslett, P. and Wall, R. (eds), Household and Family in Past Time, CUP, Cambridge, 1972.Google Scholar

21 1931 Census of England and Wales: General Report. HMSO, London, 1950, p. ii.Google Scholar

22 Gray, P. G.The British Household. Central Office of Information, London, 1949.Google Scholar

23 Wells, A. F.The Local Social Surveys in Great Britain. Allen and Unwin, London, 1935.Google Scholar

24 Booth, C., Life and Labour of the People in London, 17 vols, Macmillan, London, 1889–1903Google Scholar; Bowley, A. L. and Hogg, M. H., Has Poverty Diminished? King, London, 1925Google Scholar; Caradog, Jones D. (ed.), The Social Survey of Merseyside, 3 vols, Liverpool University Press, Liverpool, 1934Google Scholar; Llewellyn, Smith H. ed., New Survey of London Life and Labour, 10 vols, King, London, 1930–1934Google Scholar; Pilgrim Trust, Men Without Work, CUP, Cambridge, 1938Google Scholar; Rowntree, B. S., Poverty: A Study of Town Life, Macmillan, London, 1901Google Scholar; Rowntree, B. S., Poverty and Progress, Longmans, Green, London, 1941Google Scholar; and Tout, H., The Standard of Living in Bristol, Arrowsmith, n.p., 1938.Google Scholar

25 Booth, C., op. cit.Google Scholar, Pilgrim Trust, op. cit., Rowntree, B. S., 1901, op. cit.Google Scholar, and Rowntree, B. S., 1941, op, cit.Google Scholar

26 Caradog, Jones D., op. cit. vol. 3, p. 257.Google Scholar

27 Eichengreen, B. and Freiwald, S.From Survey to Sample: Labor Market Data for Interwar London. C.E.P.R. Discussion Paper no. 51 (1985 a), pp. 4–5Google Scholar. These records are deposited in the Archives at the Library of the London School of Economics (B.L.P.E.S.). NSOL; 50 boxes.

28 White, J., The Worst Street in North London, RKP, London, 1986Google Scholar, and Buchanan, I., ‘Development of a neighbourhood’, in Wallman, S. et al. (eds), Living in South London, Gower, Aldershot, 1982.Google Scholar

29 Eichengreen, & Freiwald, , op. cit. 1985 aGoogle Scholar. From survey to sample: labour market data for interwar London, Historical Methods (1985 b), 125–136.Google Scholar

30 Llewellyn, Smith H., op. cit. vol. 3, pp. 34–5.Google Scholar

31 Ibid. p. 31.

32 Ibid. p. 32.

33 See Appendix for details of coding practices.

34 Ibid. p. 414.

35 Anderson, M. ‘The study of family structure’, in Wrigley, E. A. (ed.), Nineteenth-century Society, CUP, Cambridge, 1972.Google Scholar

36 Eichengreen, and Freiwald, , ‘From Survey to Sample: Labor Market Data for Interwar London’ op. cit. 1985 a, p. 14.Google Scholar

37 Llewellyn, Smith H.op. cit. vol. 3, p. 414.Google Scholar

38 London Statistics, vol. 34, LCC, London, 1931.Google Scholar

39 Hannah, L.Inventing Retirement: the Development of Occupational Pensions in Britain. CUP, Cambridge, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

40 Llewellyn, Smith H.op. cit. vol. 3, p. 414.Google Scholar

41 Young, M. and Willmott, P., Family and Kinship in East London, Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1962, p. 27Google Scholar; and Family Expenditure Survey Report for 1967, HMSO, London, 1968.Google Scholar

42 Llewellyn, Smith H.op. cit. vol. 3, p. 61.Google Scholar

43 London Statistics, op. cit. vols. 34–35.Google Scholar

44 Llewellyn, Smith H.op. cit. vol. 6, p. 99.Google Scholar

45 Anderson, M., 1971, op. cit. p. 30.Google Scholar

46 Reeves, P., Round About a Pound a Week, Bell, London, 1913, p. 77Google Scholar; Roberts, E., A Woman's Place, Blackwell, Oxford, 1984, p. 43Google Scholar; and Roberts, R., The Classic Slum, Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1971, p. 11.Google Scholar

47 Sen, A. K.Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation. OUP, Oxford, 1981.Google Scholar

48 1931 Census of England and Wales: General Report, op. cit. pp. 90–93.Google Scholar

49 1931 Census of England and Wales: County of London. HMSO, London, 1932, Table 14.Google Scholar

50 Persons in Receipt of Poor Relief (England and Wales), Annual Return, cited in Llewellyn Smith, H. op. cit. vol. 3, p. 213.Google Scholar

51 Laslett, P., Family Life and Illicit Love in Earlier Generations, CUP, Cambridge, 1977, p. 202CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Wall, R., Residential isolation of the elderly: comparison over time, Ageing and Society, 4 (1984) 483–503, p. 487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

52 Wall, R. ‘The living arrangements of the elderly in Europe in the 1980s’ unpub. paper 1985, p. 9 and Tables 1 and 2.Google Scholar

53 Ibid. p. 11.

54 Ibid. p. 13.

55 By ‘income’ here we mean that of the elderly themselves rather than of the household in which they live.

56 Eichengreen, B. and Freiwald, S.‘Unemployment in Interwar Britain: New Evidence from London’. C.E.P.R. Discussion Paper no. 85 (1985 c).Google Scholar

57 Family members living in the household would no doubt have contributed a significant proportion of their own income to the head, but it seems not unreasonable to regard this not as a form of welfare, but instead as a payment for costs incurred as a result of co-residence.

58 Thane, P. ‘Ageing and the Economy …’, op. cit. p. 9.Google Scholar

59 Wall, R., Robin, J. and Laslett, P.Family Forms in Historic Europe. CUP, Cambridge, 1983, p. 39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

60 Anderson, M. 1971, op. cit. p. 139.Google Scholar

61 Wall, R., 1984, op. cit. p. 499.Google Scholar

62 Dale, et al. 1987.Google Scholar

63 Anderson, M., 1971, op. cit. p. 139.Google Scholar

64 Thomson, D. ‘Welfare and the historians’, in Bonfield, L. et al. (eds), The World we have Gained, Blackwell, Oxford, 1986, p. 364Google Scholar. The areas he surveyed included the village of Puddletown in Dorset (1851–81), a number of rural parishes in Bedfordshire (1851–61), Bedford borough (1851–71) and Cambridge city (1871).

65 Laslett, P., 1977, op. cit.pp. 204–5Google Scholar; Shanas, E. et al. , Old People in Three Industrial Societies, RKP, London, 1968.Google Scholar

66 Wall, R., 1985, op. cit. Table 10.Google Scholar

67 Anderson, M.Approaches to the History of the Western Family 1500–1914. Macmillan, London, 1980, pp. 39–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

68 White, J., op. cit. pp. 152–160.Google Scholar

69 Thomson, D., 1980, op. cit.Google Scholar

70 Laslett, P., 1984, op. cit. pp. 384–5Google Scholar. See also Laslett, P., 1987, op. cit.Google Scholar

71 Robin, J.Family care of the elderly in a nineteenth-century Devonshire parish. Ageing and Society, 4 (1984), 505–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

72 Anderson, M., 1971, op. cit. p. 136.Google Scholar

73 Ibid. p. 61. Young, M. and Willmott, P., op. cit. pp. 35–6.Google Scholar

74 Shanas, E., op. cit. p. 172.Google Scholar

75 Townsend, P.The Family of Old People. Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1963, pp. 74–5.Google Scholar

76 Evandrou, M., ‘Who cares for the elderly? Family care provision and receipt of statutory service’, in Phillipson, C. et al. (eds), Dependency and Interdependency in Old Age. Croom Helm, London, 1986.Google Scholar

77 Willmott, P.Kinship in Urban Communities: Past and Present. Leicester U.P., Leicester, 1987, p. 13.Google Scholar

78 Annual Report of the Registrar-General (England and Wales) 1901–1910, HMSO, London, 1903–1912Google Scholar, and The Registrar General's Statistical Review (England and Wales) 1921–1936, HMSO, London, 1923–1938Google Scholar. Net migration rates have been calculated by comparing the known populations of the boroughs with those expected using just numbers of births and deaths: the difference we attribute to net migration.

79 Hole, W. V. and Pountney, M. T.Trends in Population, Housing and Occupancy Rates 1861–1961. HMSO, London, 1971.Google Scholar

80 Schiaffino, A. and Kertzer, D. I. ‘Longitudinal perspectives on coresidential behavior: Casalecchio di Reno (1865–1921)’, paper presented to the SSRC Colloquium on ‘Family and Community in the Mediterranean, 16th–19th Centuries’, University of Essex, England, 07 1982.Google Scholar

81 Young, P. and Willmott, M.op. cit. pp. 50–1Google Scholar. Townsend, P., 1963, op. cit., p. 63.Google Scholar