Who cares? UK lesbian caregivers in a heterosexual world

Hegarty, Peter; Parslow, O

doi:10.1016/j.wsif.2013.03.003

Cited by 14 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…LGBT people who provided informal care to family members, where providing informal care was viewed as both a female and heterosexual endeavour (Parslow and Hegarty, 2013). Inability to express sexual identities contributed to older LGBT people's feelings of invisibility in care settings (McParland and Camic, 2018).…”

Section: Physical Health Inequalities and Inequalities In Accessing Hmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inequalities in older LGBT people's health and care needs in the United Kingdom: a systematic scoping review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The hostile environment that older lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people faced at younger ages in the United Kingdom (UK) may have a lasting negative impact on their health. This systematic scoping review adds to the current knowledge base through comprehensively synthesising evidence on what is known about the extent and nature of health and care inequalities, as well as highlighting gaps in the evidence which point the way towards future research priorities. We searched four databases, undertook manual searching, and included studies which presented empirical findings on LGBT people aged 50+ in the UK and their physical and mental health or social care status. From a total of 5,738 records, 48 papers from 42 studies were eligible and included for data extraction. The synthesis finds that inequities exist across physical and mental health, as well as in social care, exposure to violence and loneliness. Social care environments appeared as a focal point for inequities and formal care environments severely compromised the identity and relationships that older LGBT people developed over their lifecourse. Conversely, the literature demonstrated how some older LGBT people successfully negotiated age-related transitions, e.g. emphasising the important role of LGBT-focused social groups in offsetting social isolation and loneliness. While there exist clear policy implications around the requirement for formal care environments to change to accommodate an increasingly diverse older population, there is also a need to explore how to support older LGBT people to maintain their independence for longer, reducing the need for formal care.

show abstract

Section: Physical Health Inequalities and Inequalities In Accessing Hmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inequalities in older LGBT people's health and care needs in the United Kingdom: a systematic scoping review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies that rely on qualitative and nonrepresentative samples suggest that gay and lesbian midlife adults (much like heterosexual adults) provide intensive care to family members such as parents (Cayleff, ; Price, ). For example, qualitative research shows that lesbian women (Parslow & Hegarty, ; Price, ) as well as gay men (Cronin, Ward, Pugh, King, & Price, ; Washington et al, 2015) often provide care to parents even in the face of homophobic rejection from parents. These prior studies do not examine gender differences in the ways that gay men and lesbian women approach the provision of care to parents.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These studies show that relationship quality is similar across gay, lesbian, and heterosexual couple types, but the gender composition of a couple plays an important role in who provides spousal support within a marriage. At least some studies relying on nonrepresentative qualitative samples have focused on gay or lesbian intergenerational caregivers without considering the context of marriage (Parslow & Hegarty, ; Price, ) as well as gay and lesbian individuals who provide care for ill partners and friends in “communities of care” (Muraco & Fredriksen‐Goldsen, , ). However, we were unable to locate any studies that specifically examined spousal support among gay and lesbian married adults in the context of intergenerational caregiving.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Greedy Spouse, Needy Parent: The Marital Dynamics of Gay, Lesbian, and Heterosexual Intergenerational Caregivers

Reczek

Umberson

2016

J of Marriage and Family

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is well established that married heterosexual women do more intergenerational caregiving for aging parents and parents-in-law than married heterosexual men do. However, gay men and lesbian women’s recent access to marriage presents new questions about the gendered marital dynamics of intergenerational caregiving. We use dyadic data with gay, lesbian, and heterosexual spouses to examine the marital dynamics of intergenerational caregivers. Results show that gay and lesbian spouses provided intensive time and emotional support for an intergenerational caregiver. In contrast, heterosexual women described their intergenerational caregiving as rarely supported and at times even undermined by their spouse. Dyadic data on heterosexual men corroborate women’s accounts; heterosexual men rarely reported providing intergenerational caregiving, and thus heterosexual women rarely described providing spousal support. These findings provide new insight into the intermingled roles of “greedy” marriages and “needy” parents, wherein marital negotiations around caregiving vary by gender for gay, lesbian, and heterosexual marital dyads.

show abstract

“…Second, we noted that some articles stemmed from social or nonbiomedical sciences and focused especially on describing and explaining how social and psychological phenomena and processes occur or unfold, using theories and concepts such as the convoy model of social relations (Kim, Fredriksen-Goldsen, Bryan, & Muraco, 2017; Tester & Wright, 2017), communal relationship theory (Muraco & Fredriksen-Goldsen, 2014), social integration theory (Williams & Fredrisksen-Goldsen, 2014), social capital theory (Erosheva, Kim, Emlet, & Fredriksen-Goldsen, 2015), the sailing model of estrangement (deGuzman et al, 2017), defensive othering (Suen, 2017), the individualization thesis (Almack et al, 2010), a framework explaining long-term care strategies of older lesbians (Gabrielson, 2011), sexual fluidity (Averett et al, 2011), normative creativity (Parslow & Hegarty, 2013), aging capital (Simpson, 2013), successful aging (Fredriksen-Goldsen, Kim, Shiu, Goldsen, & Emlet, 2014; Porter, Ronneberg, & Witten, 2013; Van Wagenen, Driskell, & Bradford, 2013), subjective well-being (Sagie, 2015), internalized ageism (Wight, LeBlanc, Meyer, & Harig, 2015), agency in the life course (Fabbre, 2017), coping and coping strategies (Seelman et al, 2017), perceived control (Hostetler, 2012), the Andersen Model (Brennan-Ing, Seidel, London, Cahill, & Karpiak, 2014), Ryff and Singer’s conceptualization of psychological well-being (Putney, 2014), socioemotional selectivity theory (Sullivan, 2014), social practice theory (SPT; Cohen & Cribbs, 2017), and internalized and enacted sexual identity stigma (Emlet, Fredriksen-Goldsen, Kim, & Hoy-Ellis, 2017). While examining different processes, these approaches “dig deep” into the complex ways that social forces and psychological functioning inform identity and well-being.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The State of Theory in LGBTQ Aging: Implications for Gerontological Scholarship

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social research in lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) aging is a rapidly growing field, but an examination of the use of theory has not yet been conducted for its impact on the field’s direction. We conducted a systematic review of empirical articles published in LGBTQ aging in the years 2009–2017 (N 102). Using a typology of theory use in scholarly articles, we analyzed these articles for the types of theories being used, the degree to which theories were used in each article, and the analytical function they served. We found that 52% of articles consistently applied theory, 23% implied or partially applied theory, and 25% presented as atheoretical. A wide range of theories were used and served multiple analytical functions such as concept development and explanation of findings. We discuss the strengths and weaknesses of theory use in this body of literature, especially with respect to implications for future knowledge development in the field.

show abstract

Who cares? UK lesbian caregivers in a heterosexual world

Cited by 14 publications

References 46 publications

Inequalities in older LGBT people's health and care needs in the United Kingdom: a systematic scoping review

Inequalities in older LGBT people's health and care needs in the United Kingdom: a systematic scoping review

Greedy Spouse, Needy Parent: The Marital Dynamics of Gay, Lesbian, and Heterosexual Intergenerational Caregivers

The State of Theory in LGBTQ Aging: Implications for Gerontological Scholarship

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About