New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Graying Parent Care Falls to Daughters, Not Sons

Sisters spend double the time caring for parents as their brothers. Dina Fine Maron reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Daughters of aging parents, be aware: you and your sisters spend twice as much time caring for your graying parents compared with your brothers: about seven more hours each month. That new snapshot of how adult children share parent care comes from a study by Princeton doctoral student Angelina Grigoryeva. She presented her research at a recent meeting of American Sociological Association in San Francisco. [Angelina Grigoryeva: When Gender Trumps Everything: The Division of Parent Care among Siblings]

The data originated from the 2004 portion of the Health and Retirement Survey, a national study that samples more than 26,000 Americans over the age of 50 every couple of years. The research reveals that women appear to provide as much elderly parent care as their jobs and family responsibilities will allow, while men’s caregiving decisions appear to be largely based on whether or not they believe a female sibling can shoulder the responsibility. 

Grigoryeva writes that the findings are particularly concerning since women already more often take on other “invisible” domestic work compared with men. Of course, not all families have children of both sexes. But as a rule, Grigoryeva writes, “Sons  reduce their relative caregiving efforts when they have a sister, while daughters increase it when they have a brother.”

—Dina Fine Maron
 
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe