Last updated 09/07/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 November 2008
Through a descriptive and analytical account of recent trends in the care of elderly people in Sweden, a number of lessons are indicated for America and countries with similar health and social welfare arrangements. Clarity of objectives within a ‘normalising’ framework; sound organisational arrangements based on small local areas; effective knowledge of services by consumers and cost-effective provision are factors identified as significant.
1 Trager, B., ‘Non-institutional long-term care in England, France and Sweden’, in Reif, L. and Trager, B. (eds), International Perspectives on Long-Term Care. The Haworth Press, New York, 1985, pp. 229–240.Google Scholar
2 Estes, C., ‘The United States: long-term care and federal policy’, in Reif, L. and Trager, B. (eds), International Perspectives on Long- Term Care The Haworth Press, New York, 1985, pp. 315–338.Google Scholar
3 Sidel, V. W. and Sidei, R., ‘Medical care in Sweden – planned pluralism’. Social Change in Sweden, 02, No. 10 Swedish Information Service. New York, 1979.Google Scholar
4 The Swedish Institute, ‘General Facts on Sweden’, Fact Sheets on Sweden. Printed in Sweden, April, Classification: FS 99 0 Nc, 1984.
5 Soldo, B., America's elderly in the 1980's. Population Bulletin, 35, 4, 1981. 7, 9. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
6 Hakansson, S., Care for the Elderly and Economics. The Swedish Planning and Rationalization Institute of the Health and Social Services (Spri) Stockholm, 1984.Google Scholar
7 Sidel, and Sidel, , 1979, op. cit.Google Scholar National Commission on Aging, 1982.
8 Erikson, R., ‘Welfare Trends in Sweden Today. Current Sweden, 03, No. 330. The Swedish Institute, Stockholm, 1985.Google Scholar
9 National Commission on Aging, Just Another Age: A Swedish Report to the World Assembly on Aging 1982. Departmenteus Reprocentral, Stockholm, 1982.
10 Ministry of Health and Social Affairs, Health and Medical Services Act. International Secretariat, Stockholm, 1984.
11 Ministry of Health and Social Affairs, Social Services Act. International Secretariat. Stockholm, 1982.
12 Approximately 5% of institutional beds are provided in private nursing homes.
13 Spri, , Primary Care and Care of the Elderly. Spri Special Publication S 100–107. Civiltryck AB, Stockholm, 1979.Google Scholar
14 County care and regional care primarily deals with persons with life-threatening conditions who need highly skilled specialists and special equipment. Thus, while an obviously important component of the Swedish health care system for the elderly, these components do not provide the day-to-day services needed by the majority of the elderly.
15 The Swedish Institute, ‘The Health Care System in Sweden’, Fact Sheets on Sweden. Printed in Sweden, June. Classification: FS 76 1 Vpd. 1983.
16 National Commission on Aging, Just Another Age, 1982.
17 The Swedish Institute, ‘Social Welfare Legislation in Sweden,’ Fact Sheets on Sweden. Printed in Sweden, January. Classification: FS 89 Oe. 1984.
18 The Swedish Institute, 1984, op. cit.
19 National Commission on Aging, 1982, op. cit.
20 Of historical interest is the fact that home help care was originally intended for families with children. However, the nature of clientele has changed since the early 1960s. Currently, 90% of the help is for elderly people.
21 Area service centre is used here rather than day centres in order to avoid confusion with day hospital care.
22 National Commission on Aging, 1982, op. cit.
