A qualitative study on transnational caregiving for older parents in China
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The increasing number of international migrations in China poses challenges for the care of older parents who are left behind, considering China’s emphasis on family support. This study aims to investigate transnational care arrangements for older parents whose children are overseas. It mainly addresses three research questions:1) What are the contents of filial piety in the context of international migration? 2) How do Chinese transnational family members negotiate and distribute elder care responsibilities? 3) To what extent can the transnational caregiving model explain elder care in Chinese transnational families? The transnational caregiving model proposed by Baldassar, Baldock, and Wilding, in 2007 is used to understand the care of older parents in Chinese transnational families, combining the perspectives of care circulation, situated transnationalism, and Confucian filial piety. The study conducts 48 in-depth interviews with older parents and adult migrant children residing in the US, Canada, Australia, and the UK. The sample comprises 20 participants from rural areas and 28 from urban areas. The study has several findings. Firstly, filial piety has changed in the transnational context, with older parents prioritizing their adult migrant children’s life and personal development over expecting much care from them. Despite feeling obligated and guilty, adult migrant children have shifted their views on filial piety to prioritize personal and nuclear families. Some adult migrant children believe that caring for parents should not solely be the responsibility of children. Adult migrant children emphasise providing spiritual and emotional support to older parents. And they pay attention to their older parents’ health. There are differences in filial piety between urban and rural transnational families. Secondly, it examines the negotiation and distribution mechanism of elder care responsibilities of transnational families and finds that it is affected by migration history, kinship relationships, and life course. Migration history shapes perceptions and practices regarding caregiving responsibilities. Kinship relationships mainly include the relationship between older parents and adult migrant children, adult migrant children and siblings, adult migrant children and spouses, and older parents and their siblings. Care responsibilities must be reassessed and reallocated at different life stages. Finally, this study enriches and expands the transnational caregiving model and proposes the Chinese transnational family care model. Chinese transnational elder care practices can be divided into five categories: financial support, gift-giving, transnational communication, remote assistance, and visits. The transnational care arrangement for older parents is the result of the interaction of care capacity, culture (Confucian filial piety) informed care expectations and responsibilities, negotiated care commitment under multiple family relationships, and older parents’ ageing views. The proposed model enriches the contents of the original model’s three dimensions of factors and expands a new dimension, that is, the older parents’ ageing views. The factors influencing older parents’ ageing views include attitude towards moving abroad, care needs, and acceptance of formal old-age care. This study suggests that policies and services should be developed for both adult migrant children and older parents to facilitate transnational elder care, with a focus on labour policies, immigration policies, visa policies, and social security provisions. Services should be designed to promote the mental health of transnational family members and the harmony of family relationships. Additionally, services should fully utilize the Internet and sometimes may require cross-border cooperation to help transnational family members obtain useful information and customize special care services to enhance their care capacity.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,011 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».