Search results

This chapter engages Heidegger’s notion of caring-for-others to consider what it means to care authentically for young students who are struggling to engage in their professional education. While care is commonly understood as an emotive or cognitive state, from Heidegger’s perspective, caring for students is expressed in human action. In “Being and Time”, Heidegger examines how humans care for one another in variable ways in the course of everyday life and distinguishes between “inauthentic” and “authentic” modes of caring. The author critically builds upon Heidegger’s underdeveloped analysis, which articulates a binary between “leaping in” for others (inauthentic modes), and “leaping ahead” of others (authentic modes). From within this conceptual binary, the author argues that authentic care could be mistaken for the educator’s capacity to somehow always care for students in leaping ahead modes, and that such a view leaves little room for the possibility of pedagogic situations that sometimes call educators to leap in for students. Drawing on an Australian youth work lecturer’s story about her experience caring for a student, the author shows how any authentic caring on the educators’ part is predicated on students leaping ahead of themselves, toward their own futural selves as caring professionals in the world.

Economists and sociologists have proposed arguments for why there can exist wage penalties for work involving helping and caring for others, penalties borne disproportionately by women. Evidence on wage penalties is neither abundant nor compelling. We examine wage differentials associated with caring jobs using multiple years of Current Population Survey (CPS) earnings files matched to O*NET job descriptors that provide continuous measures of “assisting & caring” and “concern” for others across all occupations. This approach differs from prior studies that assume occupations either do or do not require a high level of caring. Cross-section and longitudinal analyses are used to examine wage differences associated with the level of caring, conditioned on worker, location, and job attributes. Wage level estimates suggest substantive caring penalties, particularly among men. Longitudinal estimates based on wage changes among job switchers indicate smaller wage penalties, our preferred estimate being a 2% wage penalty resulting from a one standard deviation increase in our caring index. We find little difference in caring wage gaps across the earnings distribution. Measuring mean levels of caring across the U.S. labor market over nearly thirty years, we find a steady upward trend, but overall changes are small and there is no evidence of convergence between women and men.

The purpose of this chapter is to assess the importance of individual social capital characteristics in determining wages, both directly through their valuation by employers and indirectly through their impact on individual occupational choice. We find that a person’s level of sociability and care for others works through both channels to explain wage differences between social and nonsocial occupations. Additionally, expected wages in each occupation type are found to be at least as important as a person’s level of social capital in choosing a social occupation. We make use of restricted 2000 Decennial Census and 2000 Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey.

The population is aging. The desire to remain in one’s own home through the aging process appears universal. Home health caregivers provide a vital role in allowing people to age in place. Women, and in particular immigrant women, have become the face of home health caregivers. Caregiving is generational. Paid caregiving is viewed as a natural extension of a skill set women have used most of their adult life. Home health caregivers view their work as a continuation of their roles in the family and they often frame their work as providing services that family members cannot, or will not perform. Reimbursement for these services is problematic. Assigning a monetary value to caregiving seems callous, and as a result caregivers are underpaid and undervalued. Global push–pull factors and the creation of a gray economy also contribute to a devaluation of these jobs. Caregivers themselves are poor advocates for better pay and working conditions because they believe it commodifies a kinship like experience. The future of caregiving is problematic. Poor countries will suffer greatly exporting their women; rich countries will need a tremendous number of caregivers to match their demographics and women will be overwhelmed providing care for others and themselves.

This study compared different types of full-time caregiver (e.g., children, older adults, COVID-19 patients) and subgroups (e.g., disability, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation) in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic for potentially meaningful distinctions.

Data from the 9,854 full-time caregivers identified in Phase 3.2 (July 21–October 11, 2021) of the US Census Household Pulse Survey (HPS) were analyzed in this study using multinomial logistic regression to examine relationships between caregiver types, marginalized subgroups, generation, and vaccination status.

The prevalence of caregiving was low, but the type of full-time caregiving performed varied by demographic group (i.e., disability, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, generation, and vaccination status). The relative risk of being a COVID-19 caregiver remained significant for being a member of each of the marginalized groups examined after all adjustments.

To date, the HPS has not been analyzed to predict the type of full-time informal caregiving performed during the COVID-19 pandemic or their characteristics. Research limitations of this analysis include the cross-sectional, experimental dataset employed, as well as some variable measurement issues.

Prior informal caregiver research has often focused on the experiences of those caring for older adults or children with special healthcare needs. It may be instructive to learn whether and how informal caregivers excluded from paid employment during infectious disease outbreaks vary in meaningful ways from those engaged in other full-time caregiving. Because COVID-19 magnified equity concerns, examining demographic differences may also facilitate customization of pathways to post-caregiving workforce integration.

Celiac disease is an auto-immune disorder that requires strict lifelong adherence to a gluten-free diet. I explore how a celiac diagnosis affects gendered feeding work within families.

This chapter is based on a grounded theory analysis of field research with five celiac support groups and 80 in-depth interviews. I interviewed 15 adult men and 56 adult women with celiac, plus nine additional family members.

Gendered care work norms place the onus of responsibility for gluten-free feeding work on women, multiplying time spent planning, shopping, and preparing meals. Women employ distinct gendered strategies to accommodate the gluten-free diet. Following a strategy of integration, women tailor family meals to meet other diagnosed family members’ dietary needs and the entire family’s taste preferences. However, when women themselves have celiac, they follow a pattern of deferential subordination, not allowing their own dietary needs to alter family meals. Thus, women continue to prepare family meals as a form of care for others, even when their medical needs justify putting themselves first.

Social support is a key determinant of compliance with necessary lifestyle and dietary changes in chronic illness. However, little research explores the gendered dynamics within families accounting for the link between social support and dietary compliance. I show how gendered care work norms benefit husbands and children with celiac, while simultaneously disadvantaging women with celiac.

While women remain the majority of caregivers, gender parity is reported among Millennials, people of color, and LGBTQ caregivers. Such dynamics of care dyads are rarely explored in relationship with caregiver selection, social support, or care outcomes, and without standardized measures we are uncertain whether this trend is associated with youth, demographic changes, or a societal shift. Utilizing the Caregiving in the US 2015 data set, this exploratory, quantitative study examines relationships between gender, primary condition, and two social designations around age (kinship generations and birth cohorts) to develop a preliminary categorization of informal caregivers in the United States by reviewing descriptives and correlations, then testing with multivariate regression. A model combining Millennial caregivers, same-generation dyads, and two primary conditions (mental illness and stroke) successfully predicts variance as to whether a dyad will comprise one woman caring for another woman, the most common dyad. Findings demonstrate the interconnectedness of caregiving generational models, suggesting that categorizing dyads from such variables is viable. This study deepens inquiry into intergenerational caregiving and makes a case for generationality and caregiving to be studied together.

This paper explores and elaborates on emotions and capability in organizations through the phenomenon of care. Drawing upon multi-disciplinary theory, as well as empirical material from a case study in the hotel industry (involving four organizations), a theoretical framework is offered for understanding the multidimensional, dynamic, social relational nature and role of care in organizations. This is shown through the suggestion of a conceptual framework of four ideal types of practices in frontline work. In the practice of care, emotions are one of the vital parts in a larger whole. Regarding the role of care in organizations, it is suggested that what, and how, one cares for, are continually created, tested, negotiated and/or re-constructed. This paper suggests that the claims regarding care also provide implications for the study and understanding of emotions and capability in organizations.

Images and ideals of organization design have changed dramatically in the past decade in response to the need for a redirection in the purpose and strategy as well as leadership styles following the global economy, new brave networked world, emerging new forms of organizing, and social innovations. This chapter is an invitation to explore a new genre of organization design and organizing as if life matters. It is a call to embrace organizations designed to affirm, nurture, and sustain life. The chapter discusses two key questions: “What Gives Life to Human Organizing” and “What Are We Designing.” The first part aims to uncover what gives life to human organizing through an exploration of nine principles of appreciative organizing. The second part aims to expand what we mean when we talk about organization design through an examination of six fundamental structures that seem to be at play in organized action.