Research Articles: Welcome to “Pine Tree Hall”: An Ethnography of Caregiving for the Elderly in Beijing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Drawing upon ethnographic observations from Songtang Guanhuai Hospital, the first institution to offer hospice care in Beijing, China, this paper is an anthropological examination of caregiving for the elderly within a contemporary, urban Chinese context from the perspectives of patients and both professional and familial caregivers. Taking a phenomenological approach to anthropology, this article explores how Chinese individuals approach the illness experience, the aging process, and the end of life of elderly family members and patients, and aims to understand the particular Chinese cultural ideologies of caregiving for the elderly. By focusing on the notion of “sensibility,” or that which allows each individual to experience in her own way the challenges and realities of moral experience, I argue that not only is the practice of caregiving a fundamentally intersubjective process, but moreover that the experience of giving care in a Chinese setting is intersubjective in culturally specific ways. Through ethnography it is possible to examine how subjectivities are shaped and how intersubjectivity is experienced within the Chinese context. This article demonstrates how the active commitment to and the moral presence of caregiving emerges in the lives of Chinese individuals amidst the confusion, messiness, and deep uncertainty of the aging process and the end of life in China.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".