1 / 9

Family carers in the Finnish welfare state : challenges and coping strategies

Carers and Work-Care Reconciliation International Conference University House, University of Leeds Tuesday 13th August 2013. Family carers in the Finnish welfare state : challenges and coping strategies Outi Jolanki , PhD Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy

niyati
Download Presentation

Family carers in the Finnish welfare state : challenges and coping strategies

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Carers and Work-CareReconciliation International ConferenceUniversity House, University of Leeds Tuesday 13th August 2013 Familycarers in the Finnishwelfarestate: challenges and copingstrategies Outi Jolanki, PhD Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy University of Jyväskylä outi.jolanki@jyu.fi

  2. The Finnishwelfarestate • Rathergenerouspubliclyfinancedservices, directed to all and usedbyall social groups, no means-testing • Helpsbothpeopleneedingcare and theirfamilymembers/carers • The responsibility to providecarerests with highlyindependentlocalstate (municipalities)

  3. The general idea of familycare in the Finnishsociety • No legalresponsibility for family to care for adults • Mostpeoplesupport the idea thatfamilymembersshould help theirolderrelatives, butexpectstate to participate and providecareservices for olderpeople • According to surveys no clearpreference for the formalcareorfamilycare • Duringlastfewyearsfamilycare and need to supportfamilycarers of olderpeoplehasbeenbrought to the political agenda and hasbeen a common topic in publicdiscussions (in media)

  4. Services: differenttrends for olderpeople and people with disabilities • General social and healthcareservicesavailable for all – helpsbothpeople with careneeds and the carers • Services for disabledpeople • De-familising/normalisingaim – to increase the independence of users and familymembers • Publiclyfundedservices: housingservices (cleaning, group-homes), transportation, interpreters, technicalassistance, reimbursement for homrenovation • Personal Assistancescheme(employer/employee-relation, not a familymember) • Services for olderpeople • Aim to supportfamilycarers (re-familisation) • Decliningresources and coverage of home careservices – targeted for those with extensivecareneeds – othersneed to rely on self-help, familyorprivateserviceproviders • increase in privateserviceprovidersf.ex. providingcleaningservices, home maintenance, personalcare etc. • Challenge: largeregionalvariationin coverage and quality of servicesdue to LAsdiscretion– concernsallserviceusers

  5. Payments for familycare • CareAllowance (1982- ) to care for person whoneeds help due to illness, oldageordisability (2011, 39.000) • LA discretion, budgetfunding, taxableincome • 364 – 728€/month • highestamount for 24/7 caresituation, notenough to compensatesalary, mainlyusedbyolderspouses(bothretired) • Since 2005 the right to have 3 daysoff/month – respitecareorganisedby the municipality (daycentre/residentialcarefacility) • Constantlack of goodqualityrespitecareplaces and carerscoming to home • 2011 Support for InformalCarers Act (revised) LAsmaycontract with ’respitecare’ worker to replacefamilycarer • SpecialCareAllowance (duringtreatment of a sickchild, based on the parent’sincome) • DisabilityAllowance (to parents of under 16-year-old disabledchild to supportcare at home, 92/215/417€/month) • Job AlternationLeaveBenefit (nottargeted for the carers, butusedbysomecarers to havetimeofffromwork) • 70-80% of unemploymentbenefit, 90-365 days • Only for those with long workhistories (oftenusedbywomenworking in public social and healthcaresector)

  6. Employmentrelatedpolicies • Hardlyanyrights for carers • Whencaring for an adult: flexibleorreducedhours and timeoff in the case of emergenciesneed to benegotiated with the employer, no absolutelegalrights • Verydifferentfromemploymentpolicies for parents of smallchildren, whoserightsprotectedmorestronglybylaw • Paidparentalleave, paidtemporaryleave for caring for a sickchild, right to return to work (same) afterparentalleave • Temporarycareleave to care for someonewhoneeds help due to illness, disabilityoroldage • EmployersContracts Act 2001, Amendment 2011 • Amendmentstrengthened the carersrights i.e. the empolyerneeds to provide an explanationif the leave is denied, employeehas the right to return to sameworkduties • Unpaid, suggested for short-timeabsenceonly (durationnotdefined) • Employersdiscretion • Politicaldiscussion in 2007 of the lawamendmentwasdirectlylinked to the need to supportfamilycarers of olderpeople

  7. Summary • In Finland: • Duringrecentyearsfamilycare and the need to supportfamilycarers of olderpeoplehavereceivedincreasingattention in publicdiscussions (in media) and in politicaldecision-making & national and regionalstrategies – family ’rediscovered’ • New govermentbudgetproposal (August 2013): 10 millioneuros to developfamilycarers’ supportservices • Workingcarersarestillquiteinvisible and havefewrights; carersallowanceusedmostlybyretiredpeople • Copingstrategies: use of public home careservices, part-timework (ratherrare in Finland) orearlyretirement • Recentlymodestattention to familycare as a work-lifeissue (mentionedbriefly in national strategypapers etc.) • Familycare is notseen as an genderissue • Carers and thosewhoneedcareexpectgoodqualitypublicservices and not to be ’leftalone’ by the state; yetfamilycareseems to beseen as an alternative for formalcareservices in Finland

  8. Similarities and differencesbetweenSweden and Finland Similarities: Carersexpect to receive help frompubliccareservices Rathergenerous social and healthcareservices Disabilitybenefits and servicesmoregenerousthanservicesavailable for olderpeople In daily life carersfacesimilarchallenges and problemsthancarerseverywhere - ambiguoussituations: will to carebutcombiningcare and workexperienced as stressful, potentiallyreducework-lifeparticipation, canhavenegativeeffect on carer’shealth and social life, carerscall for flexibleworkplacearrangementsand tailoredindividualservices

  9. Differences… • Differences: • Swedenhasmoregenerous, tailored and individualisedpubliccareservices and benefitsthanFinland • In particurlarlypubliclyfundeddisabilityservices and benefits • The role of the familyseenmorevoluntary in Sweden(bycitizens and byauthorities) whereasin Finland familycarersmorestrongly at the ’politicial agenda’ and morestronglytied with the formalcaresystem (in practice and in politicalspeech) • In Finland new worklawamendment (careleave) to supportcaringworkers • Finnishpeoplefavour ’sharedcare’ i.e. sharingresponsibilitybetweenfamily and formalcareservicesslightlymorethanSwedishpeoplewhoemphasisemorestrongly the need to havegoodqualityformalservices as a primarysource of support?

More Related