Separation and intergenerational family obligations.

Evidence from the Netherlands (and Flanders)

8th meeting of the European Network for the Sociological and Demographic Studies of Divorce, Valencia – Spain

14-16 October 2010

Belinda Wijckmans & Jan Van BavelInterface Demography

Introduction

• Process of ageing: • Family members important source of informal support

o E.g. childcare by grandparentso E.g. care and support for ageing parents by their adult children

• BUT rising divorce rates!• General assumption: divorce & repartnering weaken family ties

=> Less support by family=> Demand on welfare state provisions rises

• Most research has focused on actual and specific transfers between generations

• BUT family solidarity is based on attitudes, norms, and values=>Reciprocity often not (legally) guaranteed

=>In order to understand why some transfers happen and others don’t, it is important to know the underlying norms, values, and attitudes

Main research questions

1. How are divorce and repartnering in either the parent or adult child generation related to the adult child’s feelings of family obligations - taking into account current parent-child relationship characteristics?

2. Does a change in partnership status have an effect on the adult child’s feelings of family obligations? (preliminary)

Data and methods

• Netherlands’ Kinship Panel Study (NKPS) – first wave: large scale survey (N=8161)

• Subsample: Adults with at least one parent living indepently; parent has ever been married (N=5.088)

• Focus on adult child

• OLS Regression: E(Family obligations) = β0 + β1Xi1 + β2Xi2 + β3Xi3

Partnership status: N %

Still in first marriage 2226 51,7

Never married, currently cohabiting 598 13,9

Never married, living alone 883 20,5

Divorced, currently in higher order union 230 5,3

Divorced, currently living alone 291 6,8

Never divorced, widowed 77 1,8

Variables

1. Dependent variables

Attitudes on family obligations (filial & parental): explorative factor analysis

– Filial obligations (α = .75)• Children should look after their sick parents• In old age, parents must be able to live in with their children• Children who live close to their parents should visit them at least

once a week• Children should take unpaid leave to look after their sick parents

– Parental obligations (α = .79)• Parents should support their adult children if they need it• Parents should help their adult children financially if they need it• Parents should provide lodging to their adult children if they need

it

Variables

2. Independent & control variables

• Divorce and repartnering history of both generations• Age & gender adult child• Relationship quality• Support exchanges• Age parent = proxy for health status• Educational level adult child• Employment adult child• Presence of siblings and children

Results NKPS 1: gender

Results NKPS 1: effect of age of respondent

< 30 30-39 40-49 50-59 >=60-.700

-.600

-.500

-.400

-.300

-.200

-.100

.000

Filial obligations

Effec

t

< 30 30-39 40-49 50-59 >=60-.600-.500-.400-.300-.200-.100.000.100.200

Parental obligations

Age

Effec

t

Results NKPS 1: respondent’s divorce

Results NKPS 1: parental divorce

Main research questions

1. How are divorce and repartnering in either the parent or adult child generation related to the adult child’s feelings of family obligations – taking into account current parent-child relationship characteristics?

2. Does a change in partnership status have an effect on the adult child’s feelings of family obligations? (preliminary)

Longitudinal analysis: data & sample

• NKPS wave 1: 2002 – 2004 & wave 2: 2006 - 2007• Subsample: never divorced/widowed adults in W1

(N=4.694)• Very few respondents legally divorced between W1

& W2=> Married (1st) or cohabiting in W1 & separated between waves

N %

Partnership status:

In first marriage/cohabiting in both waves 3523 75,1

Started living together/got married between waves 247 5,3

Separated between waves 144 3,1

Never married, living alone in both waves 780 16,6

Longitudinal analysis: preliminary results (OLS)

1. Dependent variables:Δ(Family obligations) = FamOblT2 – FamOblT1

2. Independent & control variables:• Age & gender• Change in partnership status• (Parent(s) deceased between waves)• (First and/or subsequent birth(s))

Longitudinal analysis: preliminary results (OLS)

Conclusions NKPS 1 & 2

1. How are divorce and repartnering in either the parent or adult child generation related to the adult child’s feelings of family obligations – taking into account current parent-child relationship characteristics?

 No evidence of loosening of family ties in adult child’s feelings of obligations:

• Stronger feelings of obligations for respondents who ever experienced a divorce

• In general stronger feelings of obligations for respondents who experienced parental divorce

• Effects are tied to generation in which divorce occurred

Conclusions NKPS 1 & 2

2. Does a change in partnership status have an effect on the adult child’s feelings of family obligations? (preliminary)

Results for ‘divorcees’:

NS difference in change in feelings of family obligations with respondents who are still in same marriage/relationship

BUT parameters remain positive = NO evidence of negative divorce effect!

further detailed analyses needed using LGM

Limitations

• Feelings of family obligations ≠ behaviour!General normative expectations (‘what should be done) vs.

individual circumstances (‘what I would do’) Role of formal care

• Direction – upward or downward - of interpreting?e.g. if adult child = parent

• Causality?

Appetizer: Flemish data – sample (pre-preliminary results)

• Divorce in Flanders (DiF) – “first wave”: large scale survey• Subsample:

– Adults with at least one parent living indepently; parent has ever been married (N=2.416)

• Focus on partner = adult child

Partnership status: N % Still in first marriage 502 20,8 Divorced, currently in higher order union 1123 46,5 Divorced, currently living alone 791 32,7Total 2416 100,0

Appetizer: Flemish data – variables

1. Dependent variablesAttitudes on family obligations (filial & parental): explorative factor analysis

– Filial obligations (α = .74)• Children should take responsibility for caring for their parents when parents

are in need• Children should adjust their working lives to the needs of their parents• Children ought to provide financial help for their parents when their parents

are having financial difficulties• Children should have their parents to live with them when parents can no

longer look after themselves

– Parental obligations (α = .56)• Grandparents should look after their grandchildren if the parents are unable

to do so• Parents ought to provide financial help for their adult children when their

parents are having financial difficulties• If their adult children were in need, parents should adjust their own lives in

order to help them

Appetizer: Flemish data – variables

2. Independent & control variables

• Age & gender adult child• Partnership status adult child• Partnership status parent(s)

Appetizer: Flemish data - Pre-preliminary results (OLS)

Appetizer: Flemish data - Pre-preliminary results (OLS)

Appetizer: Flemish data - Pre-preliminary results (OLS)

Filial obligations Parental obligationsPartner (adult child)Divorced, repartnered + 0Divorced, not repartnered + +ParentEver divorced - 0

Data limitations!!!

Thank you!

bwijckma@vub.ac.be

b S.E. Sig. b S.E. Sig. b S.E. Sig. b S.E. Sig.Constant 0,41 0,12 0,00 0,34 0,10 0,00 0,49 0,12 0,00 0,29 0,10 0,00Educational level (Up to lower general secondary = ref.)

Up to intermediate vocational -0,17 0,04 0,00 -0,16 0,03 0,00 -0,23 0,04 0,00 -0,18 0,04 0,00 Higher education -0,28 0,04 0,00 -0,24 0,04 0,00 -0,32 0,05 0,00 -0,24 0,04 0,00Number of working hours/week 0,00 0,00 0,37 0,00 0,00 0,48 0,00 0,00 0,38 0,00 0,00 0,51Respondent has children (Yes = 1) 0,09 0,05 0,06 0,03 0,04 0,50 0,20 0,05 0,00 0,18 0,04 0,00Siblings (No siblings = ref.) Only brothers -0,12 0,08 0,15 -0,10 0,07 0,14 -0,19 0,09 0,03 -0,20 0,07 0,00 Only sisters -0,14 0,09 0,10 -0,15 0,07 0,03 -0,21 0,09 0,02 -0,24 0,07 0,00 Both (brothers and sisters) 0,00 0,08 0,99 -0,02 0,06 0,72 -0,15 0,09 0,08 -0,20 0,07 0,00Current father-child relationshipRelationship quality father: (Very good/good = 1) 0,08 0,05 0,09 -0,03 0,05 0,59Need: Father over 75 (Yes = 1) -0,10 0,05 0,06 -0,02 0,05 0,74Support: Exchange socio-emotional support: father 0,07 0,02 0,00 0,03 0,02 0,09 Providing instrumental support: father 0,06 0,02 0,00 0,03 0,02 0,10 Receiving instrumental support: father 0,04 0,02 0,01 0,01 0,02 0,77Current mother-child relationshipRelationship quality mother: (Very good/good = 1) 0,21 0,04 0,00 0,16 0,04 0,00Need: Mother over 75 (Yes = 1) -0,06 0,04 0,17 -0,02 0,05 0,73Support: Exchange socio-emotional support: mother 0,04 0,01 0,01 -0,01 0,02 0,46 Providing instrumental support: mother 0,02 0,01 0,24 0,01 0,01 0,65 Receiving instrumental support: mother 0,06 0,02 0,00 0,02 0,02 0,18

Filial obligations Parental obligationsFather MotherMother Father