4.3 Article

Who Cares? Older Singaporeans Negotiating Care Expectations and Aging Futures

Journal

AMERICAN BEHAVIORAL SCIENTIST
Volume 66, Issue 14, Pages 1828-1845

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/00027642221075262

Keywords

Doing emotions; transnational families; eldercare; stay behind parents; aging futures; Singapore

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education, Singapore, under its Academic Research Fund Tier 2 [MOET2017-T2-019]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper explores the emotional complexities of eldercare in the context of transnational families by studying the impact of geographical distance on caregiving and the modulation of emotions related to receiving care. The analysis is based on in-depth interviews with 17 older Singaporeans with at least one adult child residing overseas. The study also investigates the aging futures envisioned by the elderly and the emotions they negotiate, particularly in anticipation of changing health situations.
International migration has meant that many transnational families develop transnational circuits of care to maintain collective family welfare. Although the emotional toll of geographical separation on the family has been recognized, the perspectives of elderly family members have remained relatively under-explored. Our paper seeks to plug this gap by first studying how emotions mediate the impact of geographical distance on caregiving and conversely, how distance modulates emotions related to receiving care. Second, it examines the aging futures that the elderly envisage, including the emotions that they negotiate, particularly as they anticipate changing health situations. Our analysis draws on in-depth interviews with 17 older Singaporeans (aged from the mid-60s to mid-90s) with at least one adult child residing overseas to highlight the emotional complexities of eldercare in the context of transnational families.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available