Ageing in place with non-medical home support services need not translate into dependence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Older adults who age at home independently are often celebrated as having anticipated and planned for their care needs in the later stages of life, whereas those who receive assistance from home support services are often stigmatised as dependent and characterised as a ‘drain on the system’. However, this thematic analysis of interview data from 12 home care clients in two Canadian provinces offers evidence that counters the assumption that home care clients are passive recipients of care. Extending Corbin and Strauss' theorisation of how individuals manage chronic conditions alongside Dorothy Smiths' conception of work, we explore how home care clients ‘work’ to receive care as they age in place. Specifically, home care clients not only engage in daily life work, illness work and biographical work, but also advocate for themselves and their workers, co-ordinate and negotiate with members of their caring convoys and networks, and adapt in various ways to navigate personal, relational, structural and policy-level challenges. We suggest that work done by older adults who are ageing in place be addressed, acknowledged and incorporated into care planning and operational policy development to challenge both the stigma of dependency and neoliberal narratives of self-sufficiency.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".