IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/geronb/v76y2021isupplement_1ps64-s75..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Gender Matter in the Receipt of Informal Care Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults? Evidence from a Cross-National Comparative Study Across the United States, South Korea, and China

Author

Listed:
  • Minyoung Kwak
  • BoRin Kim
  • Hyunjoo Lee
  • Jiaan Zhang
  • Jennifer Ailshire

Abstract

ObjectivesThis study compares patterns of gender difference in the receipt of informal care among community-dwelling older adults across the United States, Korea, and China where family-oriented systems for providing care to older adults are emphasized.MethodData came from the 2014 Health and Retirement Study, the 2014 Korea Longitudinal Study of Aging, and the 2015 China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study. Logistic regression models were used to predict the receipt of informal care by gender. We also examined how the effects of health and living arrangement on the receipt of informal care differ depending on gender.ResultsIn the United States and China, older women were more likely to receive informal care than men. However, older Korean women were less likely to receive informal care than men. The effects of health and living arrangement on the use of informal care were moderated by gender in different ways across countries.DiscussionThis study provides evidence that patterns of gender differences in the receipt of informal care vary across the three countries. More attention needs to be paid to the design and implementation of long-term supports and services to address the unique patterns of gender difference in care arrangement in each country.

Suggested Citation

  • Minyoung Kwak & BoRin Kim & Hyunjoo Lee & Jiaan Zhang & Jennifer Ailshire, 2021. "Does Gender Matter in the Receipt of Informal Care Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults? Evidence from a Cross-National Comparative Study Across the United States, South Korea, and China," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 76(Supplemen), pages 64-75.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:76:y:2021:i:supplement_1:p:s64-s75.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/geronb/gbaa018
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:76:y:2021:i:supplement_1:p:s64-s75.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.