Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-7f7b94f6bd-q7wkk Total loading time: 0.585 Render date: 2022-06-29T21:36:53.332Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Generational Solidarity in Europe and Israel

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2015

Ruth Katz
Affiliation:
Max Stern Yezreel Valley College
Ariela Lowenstein
Affiliation:
Max Stern Yezreel Valley College
Dafna Halperin*
Affiliation:
Max Stern Yezreel Valley College
Aviad Tur-Sinai
Affiliation:
Max Stern Yezreel Valley College Israel Gerontological Data Center, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
*
La correspondance et les demandes de tirés-à-part doivent être adressées à: / Correspondence and requests for offprints should be sent to: Dafna Halperin, Ph.D. Max Stern Yezreel Valley College Yezreel Valley 19300, Israel (dafnah@yvc.ac.il)

Abstract

This study explored various dimensions of generational relationships between older parents and their adult children using the second wave of SHARE (Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe), comparing it to Dykstra’s and Fokkema’s (2011) analyses of the first wave. Results were further compared to the OASIS study (Old Age and Autonomy: The Role of Service Systems and Intergenerational Solidarity). The intergenerational solidarity model served as the main conceptual framework. Analyses yielded four family relationship types present in all countries, albeit with different frequencies. Around half of the respondents in the 11 countries were identified with close ties and flow of support. Four conclusions were drawn: (1) importance of personal resources; (2) cultural differences and meanings for families; (3) highlighting within-country difference; and (4) strength of intergenerational solidarity. The importance of understanding generational relationships in the current era with higher longevity and changing family structures is emphasized and explicated.

Résumé

Cette étude a exploré différentes dimensions des relations générationnelles entre les parents âgés et leurs enfants adultes, utilisant la deuxième vague de SHARE (Enquête sur la santé, le vieillissement et la retraite en Europe), et a comparée cela aux analyses de Dykstra et Fokkema (2011) de la première vague. Puis on a effectué un autre comparaison avec l'étude OASIS (Vieillesse et l'autonomie: le rôle des systèmes de service et de la Solidarité). Le modèle de la solidarité intergénérationnelle a servi de cadre conceptuel principale. Les analyses ont donné quatre types de relation familiale présentes dans tous les pays, mais avec des fréquences différentes. Environ la moitié des personnes interrogées dans 11 pays ont été identifiés avec des liens intimes et un flux de soutien. Les quatre résultats suivants: (1) l'importance des ressources personnelles; (2) les différences culturelles et les significations pour les familles; (3) soulignant les différences nationales; et (4) la force de la solidarité intergénérationnelle. L'importance de comprendre les relations générationnelles est soulignée et expliquée dans le contexte actuel de la longévité et de la modification des structures familiales.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association on Gerontology 2015 

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

Attias-Donfut, C., Ogg, J., & Wolff, F. C. (2005). European patterns of intergenerational financial and time transfer. European Journal of Ageing, 2(3), 161173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengtson, V. L., Giarrusso, R., Mabry, J. B., & Silverstein, M., (2002). Solidarity, conflict, and ambivalence: Complementary or competing perspectives on intergenerational relationships? Journal of Marriage and Family, 64(3), 568576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengtson, V. L., Giarrusso, R., Silverstein, M., & Wang, H. (2000). Families and intergenerational relationships in aging societies. Hallym International Journal of Aging, 2(1), 310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengtson, V. L., & Roberts, R. E. L. (1991). Intergenerational solidarity in aging families: An example of formal theory construction. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53(4), 856870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengtson, V. L., & Schrader, S. S. (1982). Parent-child relations. In Mangen, D. & Peterson, W. (Eds.), Handbook of research instruments in social gerontology (Vol. 2). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Biggs, S., & Lowenstein, A. (2011). Generational intelligence: A critical approach to age relations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Börsch-Supan, A., Hank, K., & Jürges, H. (2005). A new comprehensive and international view on ageing: Introducing the “Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe”. European Journal of Ageing, 2(4), 245253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connidis, I. A. (2001). Family ties and aging. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Connidis, I. A., & McMullin, J. A. (2002). Ambivalence, family ties, and doing sociology. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64(3), 594601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durkheim, E. (1933). The division of labor in society. G. Simpson, (Trans.). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Dykstra, P. A., & Fokkema, T. (2011). Relationships between parents and their adult children: A West European typology of late-life families. Aging and Society, 31(4), 545569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Oxford, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, G. (1997) Hybrid or unique - the Japanese welfare state between Europe and America. Journal of European Social Policy, 7(3), 179189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giarrusso, R., Silverstein, M., Gans, D., & Bengtson, V. L. (2005). Ageing parents and adult children: New perspectives on intergenerational relationships. In Johnson, M. L., Bengtson, V. L., Coleman, P. G., & Kirkwood, T. B. L. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of age and ageing (pp. 413421). London: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glaser, K., Tomassini, C., & Grundy, E. (2004). Revisiting convergence and divergence: support for older people in Europe. European Journal of Ageing, 1(1), 6472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoff, A., & Tesch-Roemer, C. (2007). Family relations and aging: Substantial changes since the middle of last century? In: Wahl, H.-W., Tesch-Römer, C. & Hoff, A. (Eds.), New dynamics in old age: Individual, environmental and societal perspectives (pp. 6583). Amityville, NY: Baywood.Google Scholar
Katz, R., Daatland, S. O., Lowenstein, A., Bazo, M. T., Ancizu, I., Herlofson, K., et al. (2003). Family norms and preferences in intergenerational relations: A comparative perspective. In Bengtson, V. L. & Lowenstein, A. (Eds.), Global ageing and challenges to families (pp. 305326). New York: Aldine de Gruyther.Google Scholar
Katz, R., & Lowenstein, A. (2003). Elders' quality of life and intergenerational relations: A Cross-national comparison. Hallym International Journal on Aging, 5(2), 131158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, R., Lowenstein, A., Phillips, J., & Daatland, S. O. (2005). Theorizing intergenerational family relations: Solidarity, conflict and ambivalence in cross-national contexts. In Bengtson, V. L., Acock, A. C., Allen, K. R., Dilworth-Anderson, P., & Klein, D. (Eds.), Sourcebook of family theory and research (pp. 393402). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Kluge, S. (2000). Empirically grounded construction of types and typologies in qualitative social research. Forum qualitative social research, 1(1), Art. 14, January 2000.Google Scholar
Liao, T. F. (1994). Interpreting probability models: Logit, probit, and other generalized linear models. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowenstein, A. (2005). Global aging and the challenges to families. In Johnson, M., Bengtson, V. L., Coleman, P. G., & Kirkwood, T. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook on age and aging (pp. 403413). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowenstein, A. (2007). Solidarity-conflict and ambivalence: Testing two conceptual frameworks and their impact on quality of life for older family members. The Journals of Gerontology, 62B(2), S100S107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowenstein, A., & Bengtson, V. L. (2003). Challenges of global aging to families in the twenty-first century. In Bengtson, V. L., & Lowenstein, A. (Eds.), Global aging and challenges to families (pp. 371379). Hawthorne, NY: Aldine De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lowenstein, A., & Daatland, S. O. (2006). Filial norms and family support in a comparative cross-national context: evidence from the OASIS study. Ageing & Society, 26(2), 203223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowenstein, A., & Katz, R. (2010). Family and age in a global perspective. In Dannefer, D., & Phillipson, C. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of social gerontology (pp. 190201). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowenstein, A., Katz, R., & Daatland, S. O. (2004). Filial norms and intergenerational support in Europe and Israel: A comparative study. In Silverstein, M. (Ed.), Annual review of gerontology and geriatrics (pp. 200223). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Lowenstein, A., Katz, R., & Gur-Yaish, N. (2007). Reciprocity in parent-child exchange and life satisfaction among the elderly: A cross-national perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 63(4), 865883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lüscher, K. (2004). Conceptualising and uncovering intergenerational ambivalence. In Pillemar, K. & Lüscher, K. (Eds.), Intergenerational ambivalences: New perspectives on parent-child relations in later life (pp. 2362). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science Ltd.Google Scholar
Lüscher, K., & Pillemer, K. A., (1998). Intergenerational ambivalence: A new approach to the study of parent-child relations in later life. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 413425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, V. W., Matthews, S. H., & Rosenthal, C. J. (1993). Elusiveness of family life: A challenge for the sociology of ageing. In Maddox, G. L. & Lawton, M. P. (Eds.), Annual review of gerontology and geriatrics: Focus on kinship, ageing, and social change (pp. 3974). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Phillips, J., Ogg, J., & Ray, M. (2003). Ambivalence in intergenerational relations. In Lowenstein, A., & Ogg, J. (Eds.), OASIS final report (pp. 193-–226). Haifa, Israel: The University of Haifa.Google Scholar
Pinquart, M., & Sorensen, S. (2000). Influences of socioeconomic status, social network, and competence on subjective well-being in later life: A meta-analysis. Psychology and Aging, 15(2), 187224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reher, D. S. (1998). Family ties in Western Europe: Persistent contrasts. Population and Development Review, 24(2), 203234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, R. E. L., Richards, L. N., & Bengtson, V. L. (1991). Intergenerational solidarity in families: Un-tangling the ties that bind. In Pfeifer, S. K. & Sussman, M. B. (Eds.), Families: Intergenerational and generational connections (pp. 1146). Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.Google Scholar
Rodrigues, R., Huber, M., & Lamura, G. (Eds.) (2012). Facts and figures on healthy ageing and long-term care – Europe and North America. Vienna: European Centre for Social Welfare Policy and Research.Google Scholar
Rossi, A. S., & Rossi, P. H. (1990). Of human bonding: Parent-children relationships across the life course. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Schutz, A., & Luckmann, T. (1974). The structure of the life-world. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M., & Bengtson, V. L. (1997). Intergenerational solidarity and the structure of adult child-parent relationships in American families. American Journal of Sociology, 103(2), 429460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, M., Gans, D., Lowenstein, A., Giarrusso, R., & Bengtson, V. L. (2010). Older parents-child relationships in six nations: The intersection of affection and conflict. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(4), 10061021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, M. (1949/1904). The objectivity of the sociological and social-political knowledge. In, Shils, E. A. & Finch, H. E., (Trans & Eds.), The methodology of the social sciences (pp. 5065). Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
Wolf, D. A., & Ballal, S. S. (2006). Family support for older people in an era of demographic change and policy constraints. Aging and Society, 26(5), 693706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Generational Solidarity in Europe and Israel
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Generational Solidarity in Europe and Israel
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Generational Solidarity in Europe and Israel
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *