Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T10:58:31.518Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Living Arrangement Choices among the Elderly

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2010

Andrew V. Wister
Andrew V. Wister
Affiliation:
University of Waterloo
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This research explores factors which differentiate non-institutionalized elderly persons living alone, living only with a spouse, and living with other persons (with or without a spouse present). Special attention is devoted to the measurement and investigation of several social norms and personal preferences. These factors are organized in terms of a decision-making framework developed from micro-economic and demographic theory. Choice of a living arrangement is seen as the product of underlying norms and preferences, a set of socio-demographic factors, and constraints on choice. This research relies on data from 454 personal interviews drawn from a stratified random sample of persons 65 and over living in private households in London, Ontario, Canada.

Data analysis indicates that the decision of whom to live with is complex and is influenced by a large group of variables. However, the most important factors are the social norms and personal preferences of the respondents. Of these, a preference for independence and privacy surfaces as the strongest predictor of living arrangements. Being able to do what one wants without outside interference in conjunction with a private living style tends to be viewed by older persons as very important household ‘goods’. The expected separateness of the elderly, age segregation or differentiation, and kinship obligations and ties were found to be influential social norms affecting living arrangement decisions. The analysis also suggests that the constraining effects of domestic competence, physical strength and mobility, and availability of kin for co-residence are also important. In addition, several socio-demographic variables including age, sex and ethnicity arise as significant predictors of living arrangements.

RÉSUMÉ

Dans la présente étude, nous distinguons trois groupes de personnes âgées demeurant hors de l'institution: celles qui vivent seules, celles qui habitent avec leur conjoint, et celles qui cohabitent avec d'autres personnes (avec ou sans leur conjoint). Nous avons apporté une attention toute particulière à la mesure ainsi qu' à l'examen de diverses normes sociales et préférences personnelles. L'organisation de ces facteurs s'insère dans un schéma décisionnel découlant d'une théorie micro-économique et démographique. Le choix du cadre de vie apparît en effet déterminé par des normes et préférences sous-jacentes, un ensemble de facteurs sociodémographiques, ainsi qu'un certain nombre de contraintes. Notre recherche s'appuie sur les données recueillies au cours de 454 entrevues auprès d'un échantillon aléatoire formé de personnes âgées de 65 ans, habitant en maison privée, à London (Ontario) au Canada.

L'analyse des données indique que le choix d'un compagnon ou d'une compagne est complexe, et qu'il est affecté par un grand nombre de variables, mais que les deux facteurs les plus importants demeurent les normes sociales et les préférences personnelles. Parmi ces demières, l'amour de l'indépendance et l'amour de la discrétion s'avérent les plus propres à prédire le choix du style de vie. Les personnes âgées ont en effet tendance à attacher une grande importance au fait de pouvoir agir à leur guise sans ingérence de la part des étrangers de même qu'au maintien d'un style de vie très privé. Par ailleurs, le détachement attendu des personnes âgées, la ségrégation et la différenciation par classe d'âges, ainsi que les obligations et les liens familiaux constituent des facteurs liés aux normes sociales qui exercent une influence certaine sur les décisions concernant le choix d'un lieu d'habitation. L'analyse permet également de croire que les restrictions imposées par la diminution de l'aptitude aux travaux domestiques, des forces physiques et de la motilité d'un part, et d'autre part la disponibilité d'un parent ou d'ue parente apte à cohabiter constituent des facteurs significatifs. Enfin, plusieurs autres variables sociodémographiques telles que l'âge, le sexe et l'origine ethnique s'avèrent susceptibles de prédire le choix du cadre de vie.

Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement , Volume 4 , Issue 3 , September 1985 , pp. 127 - 144
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association on Gerontology 1985

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

REFERENCES

Abu-Laban S., M. (1980). The family life of older Canadians. In Marshall, V. (Ed.), Aging in Canada: Social perspectives. Toronto: Fitz-henry and Whiteside, 125–134.Google Scholar
Bach, R. L. & Smith, J. (1977). Community satisfaction, expectations of moving, and migration. Demography, 14, 147–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bagozzi, R. P. & Van Loo M., F. (1980). Decision-making and fertility: a theory of exchange in the family. In Burch, T. K. (Ed.) Demographic behavior: Interdisciplinary perspectives on decision-making. Boulder, Colorado: West-view Press, 91–124.Google Scholar
Becker, G. S. (1976). The economic approach to human behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beresford, J. C. & Rivlin, A. (1966). Privacy, poverty, and old age, Demography, 3 247–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Burch, T. K. (1980). Decision-making theories in demography: an introduction. In Burch, T. K. (Ed.), Demographic behavior: Interdisciplinary perspectives on decision-making. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1–20.Google Scholar
Burch, T. K. (1981). Interactive decision-making in the determination of residence patterns and family relations. Solicited Papers: International Population Conference, Manila, Vol. 1, 451–461.Google Scholar
Burch, T. K. & Wister, A. V. (1982). Residential decision-making among the elderly: a pilot study. Research grant proposal for the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Special Aging Competition, June, 1982.Google Scholar
Carliner, G. (1975). Determinants of household headship. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 37, 28–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chevan, A. & Korson, J. H. (1972). The widowed who live alone: an examination of social and demographic factors. Social Forces, 51, 45–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowgill, D. (1974). The political consequences of aging. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 415, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R. B. (1978). Late marriage and non-marriage as demographic responses: are they similar? Population Studies, 25, 215–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, G. J. & Morgan, J. N. (1976). Five thousand families: Patterns of economic progress, Vol. 4: Family composition and change and other analysis of the first seven years of the panel study of income dynamics. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Institute for Social Research.Google Scholar
Easterlin, R. A. (1978). What will 1984 be like: Socio economic implications of recent twists in age structure. Demography, 15, 397–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ermisch, J. F. (1981). An economic theory of household formation: Theory and evidence from the General Household survey. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 28, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, S. & Stone, L. O. (1982). Living arrangements of Canada's older women and their implications for access to support services. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.Google Scholar
Glick, P. C. (1979). The future marital status and living arrangements of the elderly. The Gerontologist, 19, 301–309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goode, W. S. (1963). World revolution and family patterns. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Hareven, T. K. (1981). Historical changes in the timing of family transitions: their impact on generational relations. In Fogel, R., Hatfield, E., Kiesler, S., & Shanas, E. (Eds.), Aging: stability and change in the family. New York: Academic Press, 143–165.Google Scholar
Harrison, B. R. (1980). Living alone in Canada: Demographic and economic perspectives. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.Google Scholar
Hill, D. H. & Hill, M. S. (1976). Older children splitting off. In Duncan, G. J. & Morgan, J. N. (Eds.), Five thousand families: Patterns of economic progress, Vol. 4: Family composition and change and other analysis of the first seven years of the panel study of income dynamics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Institute for Social Research, Survey Research Centre, 117–153.Google Scholar
Homans, G. (1974). Social behavior: its elementary forms. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Jirovec, R. L. (1977). Optimum residential environments across the life span. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Gerontological Society of America, San Francisco, November, 1977.Google Scholar
Kish, L. (1965). Survey sampling. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Klecka, W. R. (1980). Discriminant analysis. Series: Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Kobrin, F. E. (1976a). The fall in household size and theriseofthe primary individual in the United States. Demography, 13, 127–138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kobrin, F. E. (1976b). The primary individual and the family: Changes in living arrangements in the United States since 1940. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 233–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kobrin, F. E. (1981). Family extension and the elderly: economic, demographic and family cycle factors. Journal of Geronology, 36, 370–377.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kobrin, F. E. & Goldscheider, C. (1982). Family extension or non-family living: life cycle, economic, and ethnic factors. Western Sociological Review, 13, 103–118.Google Scholar
Lagory, M. & Pipkin, J. (1981). Urban social space. Belmont, California: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Lawton, M. P. (1980). Environment and aging. Belmont, California: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Lawton, M. P. & Hoover, S. L. (1981). Community housing choices for older Americans. New York: Springer Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Leibenstein, H. (1981). Economic decision theory and human fertility behavior: a speculative essay. Population and Development Review, 7, 381–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michael, R. T., Fuchs, V. R. & Scott, S. R. (1980). Changes in the propensity to live alone: 1950-1976. Demography, 17, 39–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mindel, C. H. (1979). Multigenerational family households: Recent trends and implications for the future. The Gerontologist, 19, 456–463.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nie, N. H., Hull, C. H., Jenkins, J. G., Steinbrenner, K. & Bent, D. H. (1975). Statistical package for the social sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Pampel, F. C. (1983). Changes in the propensity to live alone: evidence from consecutive cross-sectional surveys. Demography, 20, 433–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roos, N. P. & Shapiro, E. (1980). The Manitoba longitudinal study in aging: preliminary findings on health and utilization by the elderly, Unpublished paper, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenmayr, L. & Kockeis, E. (1963). Propositions for a sociological theory of aging and the family. International Social Science Journal, 15, 410–426.Google Scholar
Shanas, E. (1962). The health of older people: a social survey. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shanas, E., Townsend, P., Wedderburn, D., Frilis, H., Milhoj, P. & Stehouwer, J. (1968). Old people in three industrial societies. New York: Atherton Press.Google Scholar
Shanas, E. (1969). Living arrangements and housing of old people. In Busse, E. W. & Pfeiffer, E. (Eds.) Behavior and adaptation in later life. Boston: Little, Brown and Company. 129–150.Google Scholar
Shanas, E. (1980). Older people and their families: the new pioneers. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42, 9–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, D. (1981). Historical change in the household structure of the elderly in developed countries. In Fogel, R., Hatfield, E., Kiesler, S., & Shanas, E. (Eds.) Aging: stability and change in the family. New York: Academic Press, 91–114.Google Scholar
Soldo, B. J. (1977). The determinants of temporal living arrangements among the elderly: 1960-1970. Ph.D. Thesis, Duke University, Durham N.C.Google Scholar
Soldo, B. J. (1981). The living arrangements of the elderly in the near future. In Kiesler, S., Morgan, J., & Oppenheimer, V. (Eds.), Aging: Social change, New York: Academic Press, 491–512.Google Scholar
Soldo, B. J. & Brotman, H. (1981). Housing whom. In Lawton, M. P. & Hoover, S. (Eds.), Community housing choicesfor older Americans. New York: Springer Publishing Company, 36–55.Google Scholar
Stone, L. O. & Fletcher, S. (1980). A profile of Canada's older population. Montreal: The Institute for Research in Public Policy.Google Scholar
Sussman, M. B. (1976). The family life of old people. In Binstock, R. H. & Shanas, E. (Eds.), Handbook of aging and the social sciences. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 218–243.Google Scholar
Thomas, K. & Wister, A. V. (1984). Living arrangements of older women: the ethnic dimension. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 46, 301–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tienda, M. & Angel, R. (1981). Female headship and extended household composition: comparisons of Hispanics, Blacks and non-Hispanic Whites. Madison: University of Wisconsin, Centre for Demography and Ecology Working Paper, 81–1.Google Scholar
Wister, A. V. & Burch, T. K. (1983). Fertility and household status of older women in Canada. Canadian Studies in Population, 10, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolpert, J. (1965). Behavioral aspects of the decision to migrate. Papers of the Regional Science Association, 15, 159–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar