In Dutch policy and at the societal level, informal caregivers are ideally seen as essential team members when creating, together with professionals, co-ordinated support plans for the persons for whom they care. However, collaboration between professionals and informal caregivers is not always effective. This can be explained by the observation that caregivers and professionals have diverse backgrounds and frames of reference regarding providing care. This thematic synthesis sought to examine and understand how professionals experience collaboration with informal caregivers to strengthen the care triad. PubMed, Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, Cochrane/Central and CINAHL were searched systematically until May 2015, using specific key words and inclusion criteria.Twenty-two articles were used for thematic synthesis. Seven themes revealed different reflections by professionals illustrating the complex, multi-faceted and dynamic interface of professionals and informal care. Working in collaboration with informal caregivers requires professionals to adopt a different way of functioning. Specific attention should be paid to the informal caregiver, where the focus now is mainly on the client for whom they care. This is difficult to attain due to different restrictions experienced by professionals on policy and individual levels. Specific guidelines and training for the professionals are necessary in the light of the current policy changes in the Netherlands, where an increased emphasis is placed on informal care structures. K E Y W O R D Scollaboration, diversity, informal care, professional role

This scoping review focuses on the views of informal caregivers regarding the division of care responsibilities between citizens, governments and professionals and the question of to what extent professionals take these views into account during collaboration with them. In Europe, the normative discourse on informal care has changed. Retreating governments and decreasing residential care increase the need to enhance the collaboration between informal caregivers and professionals. Professionals are assumed to adequately address the needs and wishes of informal caregivers, but little is known about informal caregivers' views on the division of care responsibilities. We performed a scoping review and searched for relevant studies published between 2000 and September 1, 2016 in seven databases. Thirteen papers were included, all published in Western countries. Most included papers described research with a qualitative research design. Based on the opinion of informal caregivers, we conclude that professionals do not seem to explicitly take into account the views of informal caregivers about the division of responsibilities during their collaboration with them. Roles of the informal caregivers and professionals are not always discussed and the division of responsibilities sometimes seems unclear. Acknowledging the role and expertise of informal caregivers seems to facilitate good collaboration, as well as attitudes such as professionals being open and honest, proactive and compassionate. Inflexible structures and services hinder good collaboration. Asking informal caregivers what their opinion is about the division of responsibilities could improve clarity about the care that is given by both informal caregivers and professionals and could improve their collaboration. Educational programs in social work, health and allied health professions should put more emphasis on this specific characteristic of collaboration.

Aim: Informal caregivers share common experiences in providing care to someone with health and/or social needs, but at the same time their experiences differ across diverse backgrounds such as gender, age, culture, as these aspects of diversity co-shape these experiences. This scoping review aims to explore how aspects of diversity, across their intersections, are currently incorporated in informal care research and discusses how an intersectional perspective can further develop our understanding of informal care. Methods: A scoping review was performed to map relevant caregiving literature from an intersectionality perspective. Key terms ‘informal care’ and ‘intersectionality’ were used for a search in four databases resulting in the inclusion of 28 articles. All 28 studies were analysed based on a scoping review created intersectionality informed coding scheme. Results: Aspects of diversity are largely understudied in informal care research, in particular across their intersections and from a critical perspective. This intersectional informed analysis revealed that when studying diverse caregiving experiences the use of intersections of dimensions of diversity provides a nuanced understanding of these experiences. Conclusions: Adopting an intersectional perspective ensures that not only different categories or social identities of caregivers are included in future studies, but the mutual relationships between these categories embedded in their specific context are actually studied.

The European policy emphasis on providing informal care at home causes caregivers and home care professionals having more contact with each other, which makes it important for them to find satisfying ways to share care. Findings from the literature show that sharing care between caregivers and professionals can be improved. This study therefore examines to what degree and why caregivers’ judgements on sharing care with home care professionals vary. To improve our understanding of social inequities in caregiving experiences, the study adopts an intersectional perspective. We investigate how personal and situational characteristics attached to care judgements are interwoven. Using data of the Netherlands Institute for Social Research, we conducted bivariate and multivariate linear regression analysis (N = 292). We combined four survey questions into a 1–4 scale on ‘caregiver judgement’ (α = 0.69) and used caregivers’ personal (such as gender and health status) and situational characteristics (such as the care recipient's impairment and type of care) as determinants to discern whether these are related to the caregivers’ judgement. Using a multiplicative approach, we also examined the relationship between mutually constituting factors of the caregivers’ judgement. Adjusted for all characteristics, caregivers who provide care to a parent or child with a mental impairment and those aged between 45 and 64 years or with a paid job providing care to someone with a mental impairment are likely to judge sharing care more negatively. Also, men providing care with help from other caregivers and caregivers providing care because they like to do so who provide domestic help seem more likely to be less satisfied about sharing care. This knowledge is vital for professionals providing home care, because it clarifies differences in caregivers’ experiences and hence induce knowledge how to pay special attention to those who may experience less satisfaction while sharing care.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The aim of this study is to investigate Dutch citizens’ care attitudes by looking at care-giving norms and citizens’ welfare state orientation and to explore to what extent these attitudes can be explained by combinations of diversity characteristics. We combined two datasets (2016 and 2018, N = 5,293) containing citizens’ opinions regarding society and conducted multivariate linear and ordered probit regression analyses. An intersectional perspective was adopted to explore the influence of combinations of diversity characteristics. Results show that citizens’ care-giving norms are relatively strong, meaning they believe persons in need of care should receive help from their families or social networks. However, citizens consider the government responsible for care as well. Men, younger people, people in good health and people of non-Western origin have stronger care-giving norms than others, and younger people assign relatively more responsibility to the family than the government. Level of education and religiosity are also associated with care attitudes. Primary diversity dimensions are more related to care attitudes than secondary, circumstantial dimensions. Some of the secondary dimensions interact with primary dimensions. These insights offer policy makers, social workers and (allied) health professionals the opportunity to align with citizens’ care attitudes, as results show that people vary to a large extent in their care-giving norms and welfare state orientation.