IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/geronb/v80y2025i12pgbaf183..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Kinlessness and end-of-life care quality: does race and ethnicity matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Yaolin Pei
  • Zexi Zhou
  • Shaoqing Ge
  • Xiang Qi
  • Kaipeng Wang
  • Weiyu Mao
  • Bei Wu

Abstract

ObjectivesClose family members provide the majority of end-of-life (EoL) caregiving. However, the number of kinless older adults (defined as lacking children and a partner) is increasing. Moreover, non-White older adults are more likely to rely on close families to provide care at the EoL than their White counterparts. Therefore, we examined the association between kinlessness and the quality of EoL care among older adults and the intersectional effect of kinlessness and race/ethnicity on EoL quality.MethodsData were derived from the combined Rounds 2–11 of the National Health and Aging Trends Study. The working sample included 3,045 older adults who were over 65 and living in the community or residential care facilities at the last interview. We used ordered logistic regression to examine both the independent effect of kinlessness and its intersection with race/ethnicity on the quality of EoL care among older adults.ResultsA total of 7.7% of decedents were kinless at the EoL. Kinless older adults were less likely to receive higher-rated EoL care than those with kin, with non-White older adults being disproportionately affected compared to their White counterparts.DiscussionThese results highlight a significant disadvantage for non-White kinless older adults, who had worse EoL care quality. From a policy standpoint, there is a need to invest more in supporting alternatives to the family-centered model in EoL care delivery for those without close kin.

Suggested Citation

  • Yaolin Pei & Zexi Zhou & Shaoqing Ge & Xiang Qi & Kaipeng Wang & Weiyu Mao & Bei Wu, 2025. "Kinlessness and end-of-life care quality: does race and ethnicity matter?," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 80(12), pages 183.-183..
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:80:y:2025:i:12:p:gbaf183.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/geronb/gbaf183
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:80:y:2025:i:12:p:gbaf183.. 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.