Are the gender gaps in informal caregiving intensity and burden closing due to the COVID‐19 pandemic? Evidence from the Netherlands

Project info

Work package
  • Care
Sustainability threat
  • Spillovers
Challenge
  • Facilitating work life balance

Study info

Description of Study
This research note presents the findings of changes in the gender gap in informal care provision and caregiver burden during the Spring 2020 COVID‐19 lockdown in the Netherlands. Government measures in response to the pandemic strongly restricted informal caregivers in providing help and care to persons with health‐related needs. At the same time, formal care was scaled back and informal caregivers' urge to help their loved ones was likely higher than before the pandemic. Generally, women pick up a larger share of informal care and experience more caregiver burden. We assessed whether the COVID‐19 pandemic affected the gender gaps in informal caregiving by analyzing unique data on Dutch informal caregivers (N = 1672 caregiving situations in 1196 respondents). Results showed that women, compared to men, were more likely to have stopped and reduced caregiving, but also to have cared more during the pandemic. Moreover, based on longitudinally comparing levels during and before the lockdown, we found that the gender gap in caregiver burden narrowed down, especially because burden decreased for women. This means that the caregiver burden was more equally distributed among women and men during the Spring 2020 COVID‐19 lockdown than before.
Study research question
To what extent did the gender gap (a) in the intensity of informal care provision and (b) in caregiver burden decrease or increase during the Spring 2020 lockdown in the Netherlands?
Collection provenance
  • Collected during project
  • Data collected added to existing collection
  • External data
Collection methods
  • Questionaire
Personal data
No
External Source
Source description
Retrospective informal care career - Main measurement
Retrospective informal care career - Follow-up measurement
Background variables
File formats
  • .dta
  • .sav
Data types
  • Structured
Languages
  • Dutch
Coverage start
Coverage end
01/03/2020
31/05/2021
Spatial coverage
The Netherlands
Collection period start
01/03/2020
Collection period end
31/07/2021

Variables

Unit
Unit description
Sample size
Sampling method
Individuals
Caregiving episodes of informal caregivers that cared in March 2020 and did continue caregiving (partly) during spring 2020 or stopped caregiving due to reasons related to the pandemic
1671
Hypothesis
Theory
Variable type
Variable name
Variable description
Dependent variable
Change in caregiving intensity
This was measured by self‐reported changes in caregiving on the question “Did the corona crisis affect the amount of time you helped <> in April/May? Indicate which statement best describes your situation.” There were five possible, ordered outcomes: compared to the period before the corona crisis, the caregiver did (1) care much less, (2) care less, (3) continue to care the same amount, (4) care more, or (5) care much more. The longitudinal design of our data allowed for an extra category (0) that comprised caregivers who stopped providing care to the care recipient because the COVID‐19 crisis prevented the caregiver from providing care.
Dependent variable
Subjective measurement of burden
Measurement reflected a subjective evaluation of the respondent based on the question: “Indicate for each statement to what extent it applied to you in April/May in comparison to the period before the corona crisis: I found providing help to <> hard.” Answer categories were (1) much less in April/May than before the corona crisis, (2) less in April/May than before the corona crisis, (3) as much in April/May than before the corona crisis, (4) more in April/May than before the corona crisis, or (5) much more in April/May than before the corona crisis.
Dependent variable
Objective measurement of burden
For the objective measurement on caregiver burden, we compared responses to the item “I find/found providing help to <> hard” (answer categories ranging from 1 “completely disagree” to 5 “completely agree”) as provided by the respondent in the March data with that to the July data. Note that the assessment of the caregiver referred to the same care recipient in both time points. The comparison resulted in three options: (1) less burden, (2) no change, or (3) more burden in the lockdown period than before.
Independent variable
Sex
men 0, women 1
Control variable
Age
Dependent variable
Number of people cared for
How many people the person was caring for at the moment of the interview.
Discipline-specific operationalizations
Conflict of interest
None

Data packages

Retrospective informal care career - Main measurement

Data package DOI
10.17026/dans-xyf-v7vu
Description
Data foundation
Accessibility
Open Access
Repository
DANS
User license
Retention period
10

Retrospective informal care career - Follow-up measurement

Data package DOI
10.17026/dans-z6w-rd24
Description
Data foundations
Accessibility
Open Access
Repository
DANS
User license
Retention period
10

Publications

Are the gender gaps in informal caregiving intensity and burden closing due to the COVID‐19 pandemic? Evidence from the Netherlands

Documents

Filename
Description
Date

Ethics

Ethical assessment
Unknown
Ethical committee
By Centerdata