Elder Care Policy and Gender Justice

Abstract

As the population across Europe ages and the demand for elder care significantly rises, welfare states face critical decisions regarding how to organise elder care. Historically, providing elder care has been a family’s responsibility, mainly provided by women. Women were the ones in charge of caring tasks, among others, while men engaged in the labour market, a household arrangement known with the term “the gendered division of labour.” Although women are increasingly taking part in the paid employment, some of the gender norms that once governed the traditional division still remain, placing women in a disadvantaged position in comparison to men. In this thesis, I analyse how elder care policies impact these gendered disadvantages through the lens of feminist liberalism. Drawing on Gina Schouten (2019), I argue that political liberalism, committed to neutrality and respect for pluralism, possesses the normative tools to justify state intervention in elder care policies when existing arrangements undermine the conditions for exercising comprehensive autonomy, which is essential for political autonomy, a fundamental value of political liberalism. I categorise elder care policies using Chiara Saraceno’s (2016) familialism-defamilialism spectrum, focusing on supported familialist policies on one hand, which financially and socially supports family caregivers, and supported defamilialization on the other hand, where elder care is publicly financed or subsidised. While supported familialism offers valuable recognition of elder care within the family, I argue that without complementary support for defamilialization, this arrangement risks limiting women’s capacity to exercise comprehensive autonomy, which is necessary for pursuing a conception of the good, a fundamental interest of citizenship within political liberalism. On the contrary, a defamilialization of elder care policy can enhance the capacity of those women wishing not to endorse caregiving roles within the family, but at the same time can disadvantage those who prefer providing elder care within the family. Finally, I advocate for an optional familialism model, an equal generous state support for both family elder care (familialism) and formal elder care services (defamilialism). This hybrid approach best addresses gendered elder care arrangements within the family and supports both women who prefer specializing outside the family and those who prefer endorsing caregiving roles, not for economic or social constraints, but by choosing based on their values and preferences.