Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T11:01:46.690Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The different faces of care work: understanding the experiences of the multi-cultural care workforce

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 March 2009

MARTHA DOYLE  and
VIRPI TIMONEN
MARTHA DOYLE*
Affiliation:
Social Policy and Ageing Research Centre, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland.
VIRPI TIMONEN
Affiliation:
Social Policy and Ageing Research Centre, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland.
*
Address for correspondence: Martha Doyle, Social Policy and Ageing Research Centre, School of Social Work and Social Policy, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland. E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An increased demand for long-term care services coupled with the decreased availability of informal (family) carers in many industrialised countries has led to the employment of growing numbers of ‘migrant care workers’. Little is known about this heterogeneous group or of their experience of employment in long-term care. Providing an important insight into a hitherto little researched and poorly understood topic, this article presents the findings of a qualitative study in Ireland that sought greater understanding of migrant carers' experience of care work and of the intra-group differences among them. The findings suggest that some members of the long-term care workforce are more likely to confront obstacles and discrimination than others. The data indicate that the experiences of European, South Asian and African carers are significantly different and that relationships may exist between carers' region of origin and their experience of care work, employment mobility and long-term plans for remaining in the sector. The findings underscore the significance of acknowledging the unique barriers and obstacles faced by particular populations of care workers. A better understanding of the changing demographic profile and needs of both care recipients and their paid (migrant) care-givers is required to ensure that appropriate policy and practical interventions are developed to support both groups.

Keywords

long-term caremigrant carersdomiciliary careinstitutional carecare workforcediscrimination
Type
Research Article
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , April 2009 , pp. 337 - 350
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 Cambridge University Press

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

Ahern, D., Doyle, M. and Timonen, V. 2007. Regulating home care of older people: the inevitable poor relation? Dublin University Law Journal, 29, 374–96.Google Scholar
Anderson, B. 2006. A Very Private Business: Migration and Domestic Work. Working Paper 28, Centre on Migration, Policy and Society, University of Oxford, Oxford.Google Scholar
Anderson, B. and Rogaly, B. 2005. Forced Labour and Migration to the UK. Centre for Migration, Policy and Society (COMPAS), Oxford, in association with the Trades Union Congress, London.Google Scholar
Bakan, A. B. and Stasiulis, D. 1995. Making the match: domestic placement agencies and the racialisation of women's work. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 20, 2, 303–35.Google Scholar
Central Statistics Office 2005. Statistical Yearbook of Ireland 2005. Central Statistics Office, Dublin.Google Scholar
Daatland, S. O. and Lowenstein, A. 2005. Intergenerational solidarity and the family welfare state balance. European Journal of Ageing, 2, 3, 174–82.Google Scholar
Degiuli, F. 2007. A job with no boundaries: home eldercare work in Italy. European Journal of Women's Studies, 14, 3, 193–207.Google Scholar
Doyle, M. 2006. The market: role in provision of home care. In Timonen, V., Doyle, M. and Prendergast, D. (eds), No Place Like Home, Domiciliary Care Services fo Older People in Ireland. Liffey Press, Dublin, 115–76.Google Scholar
Doyle, M. and Timonen, V. 2007. Home Care for Ageing Populations: A Comparative Analysis of Domiciliary Care in Denmark, Germany and the United States. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, UK.Google Scholar
European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions 2006. Employment in Social Care in Europe. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Dublin.Google Scholar
Hondagneu-Sotelo, P. 2000. The international division of caring and cleaning work. In Harrington, M. H. (ed.), Care Work: Gender, Class and the Welfare State. Routledge, New York, 149–62.Google Scholar
Hochschild, A. R. 2000. Global care chains and emotional surplus value. In Hutton, W. and Giddens, A. 2000 (eds), On the Edge: Living with Global Capitalism. Jonathan Cape, London, 130–46.Google Scholar
Irish Nursing Home Organisation (INHO) 2006. Annual Private Nursing Home Survey 2006. INHO, Dublin.Google Scholar
McGinnity, F., O' Connell, P. J., Quinn, E. and Williams, J. 2006. Migrants' Experience of Racism and Discrimination in Ireland. Results of a survey conducted by the Economic and Social Research Institute for the European Union Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia, Economic and Social Research Institute, Dublin.Google Scholar
McGregor, J. 2007. Joining the BBC (British bottom cleaners): Zimbabwean migrants and the UK care industry. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 33, 5, 801–24.Google Scholar
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) 2005. The OECD Health Project: Long-term Care for Older People. OECD, Paris.Google Scholar
Parreñas, S. R. 2000. Migrant Filipina domestic workers and the international division of reproductive labor. Gender and Society, 14, 4, 560–81.Google Scholar
Pope, C., Ziebland, S. and Mays, N. 2000. Qualitative research in health care: analysing qualitative data. British Medical Journal, 8, 320 (7227), 114–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, R. I. and Wiener, J. M. 2001. Who Will Care for Us? Addressing the Long-Term Care Workforce Crisis. The Urban Institute and the American Association of Homes and Services for the Ageing, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Timonen, V., Convery, J. and Cahill, S. 2006. Care revolutions in the making? A comparison of cash-for-care programmes in four European countries. Ageing & Society, 26, 3, 455–74.Google Scholar
Ungerson, C. 2003. Commodified care work in European Labour markets. Journal of European Societies, 15, 4, 377–96.Google Scholar
Ungerson, C. 2004. Whose empowerment and independence? A cross-national perspective on ‘cash for care’ schemes. Ageing & Society, 24, 2, 189–212.Google Scholar
Ungerson, C. and Yeandle, S. 2007. Cash for Care Systems in Developed Welfare States. Palgrave Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar
US Bureau of Labour Statistics 2005. Occupational Employment Statistics May 2005. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Department of Labor, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Yeates, N. 2005. Global Care Chains: A Critical Introduction. Global Migration Perspectives 4, Global Commission on International Migration, Geneva, Switzerland. Available online at http://www.gcim.org/attachements/GMP%20No%2044.pdf [Accessed June 2008].Google Scholar
Yeoh, B. S. A. and Huang, S. 2000. Home and away: foreign domestic workers and negotiations of diasporic identity in Singapore. Women's Studies International Forum, 23, 4, 413–29.Google Scholar