The Role of Violated Caregiver Preference
The question we posed in this article was "Do mothers' preferences for caregivers play a role in their psychological well-being when facing illness or disability at a later point in their lives?" The results we have presented suggest that this is the case. However, what appears to be most important is not whether mothers received care from the children they identified as their preferred caregivers, but instead, whether they received care only from children whom they did not identify as their preferred caregivers. In fact, mothers' depressive symptoms were not predicted by receiving care either from the preferred caregivers alone or from the preferred caregivers in concert with their siblings.
These patterns mirror those found in the broader literature on support and well-being. One of the most consistent findings of this line of work is that negative interpersonal events are more salient than positive events. Research has shown that support that does meet individuals' expectations is associated with increased stress and lower well-being (Baumeister et al., 2001; Rook, 1984, 2001; Schuster, Kessler, & Aseltine, 1990). We suggest that parental caregiving is a context in which unmet expectations are especially likely to reduce well-being given that the presence of harmonious and supportive relationships plays a salient role in health and recovery from illness in the later years (Birditt, Antonucci, & Tighe, 2012; Gallant, Spitze, & Prohaska, 2007; Cornwell & Waite, 2009).
Further, qualitative analyses suggested that mothers' distress was the result of the inability to receive care from children whom they felt possessed highly desirable socioemotional characteristics. The mothers' comments revealed that in selecting their preferred future caregivers, they valued socioemotional characteristics of the children and the parent–child dyad that ensured predictability and harmonious relations—a pattern consistent with principles of socioemotional selectivity theory (Carstensen, 1992). Specifically, the mothers chose those children whom they perceived to be the most empathetic and similar to themselves from among their offspring, consistent with other research (Pillemer & Suitor, 2006; Suitor et al., 2006). Further, their perceptions by T2 were that the children they had preferred earlier were still the most empathetic and similar to them, even after receiving care from other children. Thus, mothers' preferences were strong, enduring, and very specific, making the violation of these preferences particularly problematic.
This study suggests several directions for future research. First, it is possible that unmet expectations for specific caregivers could be particularly distressing when the children's own problems preclude providing care to their mothers, as was the case for several of the mothers in our study. However, given that only 32 of the mothers reported not being provided care by their preferred children, there is not a sufficient number of cases to address this issue. Second, the present analysis is based on the reports only from the perspective of the mothers. Given that mothers' and children's perspectives often vary (Giarrusso, Feng, & Bengtson, 2004), including regarding parental differentiation (Suitor, et al., 2006), it is important to study caregiving expectations from the perspectives of both parties. Third, it is interesting to note that the mothers' preference for children focused specifically on positive expressive attitudes and behaviors, with little regard for situational factors—a finding that is consistent with the literature on fundamental attribution errors (Follett & Hess, 2002) Scholars might find fundamental attribution error a fruitful framework when studying parental differentiation.
These findings have important implications for both theory and practice. First, one of the central issues in social gerontology is determining the conditions under which caregiving is the most beneficial and the least stressful for both the caregiver and care recipient. The patterns we have presented indicate that adhering to individuals' caregiving preferences—especially avoiding children whom the parents do not want as their caregivers—plays a salient role in positive outcomes from the perspective of care recipients. Second, theoretical literature on sense of control has called for studies exploring the consequences of maintaining or losing sense of control in clearly defined contexts (Krause, 2003); this research meets this criterion by focusing on a clearly defined, highly salient, and increasingly common context. It is important that future research expands the study of met and violated expectations in the context of caregiving, including examining whether the importance of this factor varies by parents' gender and by the point in the life course when individuals face serious illness and disability.
Discussion
The question we posed in this article was "Do mothers' preferences for caregivers play a role in their psychological well-being when facing illness or disability at a later point in their lives?" The results we have presented suggest that this is the case. However, what appears to be most important is not whether mothers received care from the children they identified as their preferred caregivers, but instead, whether they received care only from children whom they did not identify as their preferred caregivers. In fact, mothers' depressive symptoms were not predicted by receiving care either from the preferred caregivers alone or from the preferred caregivers in concert with their siblings.
These patterns mirror those found in the broader literature on support and well-being. One of the most consistent findings of this line of work is that negative interpersonal events are more salient than positive events. Research has shown that support that does meet individuals' expectations is associated with increased stress and lower well-being (Baumeister et al., 2001; Rook, 1984, 2001; Schuster, Kessler, & Aseltine, 1990). We suggest that parental caregiving is a context in which unmet expectations are especially likely to reduce well-being given that the presence of harmonious and supportive relationships plays a salient role in health and recovery from illness in the later years (Birditt, Antonucci, & Tighe, 2012; Gallant, Spitze, & Prohaska, 2007; Cornwell & Waite, 2009).
Further, qualitative analyses suggested that mothers' distress was the result of the inability to receive care from children whom they felt possessed highly desirable socioemotional characteristics. The mothers' comments revealed that in selecting their preferred future caregivers, they valued socioemotional characteristics of the children and the parent–child dyad that ensured predictability and harmonious relations—a pattern consistent with principles of socioemotional selectivity theory (Carstensen, 1992). Specifically, the mothers chose those children whom they perceived to be the most empathetic and similar to themselves from among their offspring, consistent with other research (Pillemer & Suitor, 2006; Suitor et al., 2006). Further, their perceptions by T2 were that the children they had preferred earlier were still the most empathetic and similar to them, even after receiving care from other children. Thus, mothers' preferences were strong, enduring, and very specific, making the violation of these preferences particularly problematic.
This study suggests several directions for future research. First, it is possible that unmet expectations for specific caregivers could be particularly distressing when the children's own problems preclude providing care to their mothers, as was the case for several of the mothers in our study. However, given that only 32 of the mothers reported not being provided care by their preferred children, there is not a sufficient number of cases to address this issue. Second, the present analysis is based on the reports only from the perspective of the mothers. Given that mothers' and children's perspectives often vary (Giarrusso, Feng, & Bengtson, 2004), including regarding parental differentiation (Suitor, et al., 2006), it is important to study caregiving expectations from the perspectives of both parties. Third, it is interesting to note that the mothers' preference for children focused specifically on positive expressive attitudes and behaviors, with little regard for situational factors—a finding that is consistent with the literature on fundamental attribution errors (Follett & Hess, 2002) Scholars might find fundamental attribution error a fruitful framework when studying parental differentiation.
These findings have important implications for both theory and practice. First, one of the central issues in social gerontology is determining the conditions under which caregiving is the most beneficial and the least stressful for both the caregiver and care recipient. The patterns we have presented indicate that adhering to individuals' caregiving preferences—especially avoiding children whom the parents do not want as their caregivers—plays a salient role in positive outcomes from the perspective of care recipients. Second, theoretical literature on sense of control has called for studies exploring the consequences of maintaining or losing sense of control in clearly defined contexts (Krause, 2003); this research meets this criterion by focusing on a clearly defined, highly salient, and increasingly common context. It is important that future research expands the study of met and violated expectations in the context of caregiving, including examining whether the importance of this factor varies by parents' gender and by the point in the life course when individuals face serious illness and disability.
Source...