IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/lawfam/v35y2021i1pebaa015..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Informal Caregivers along the Work–Eldercare Axis: A Comparative Analysis of Australia, England, and Israel

Author

Listed:
  • Hedva Vinarski-Peretz
  • Dafna Halperin

Abstract

Contemporary Western societies face an increasing demand for informal care. The primary goals of the present article are to understand the degree to which employment rights support the needs of working carers’ of elder age relatives and to underscore the need to promote social policies to better secure both working carers and their older relatives. Drawing on findings showing that high-intensity caregiving is associated with a reduction in the labour pool for paid work and negatively affects employment status and career, this study examines how employment legislation support working caregivers from an international perspective. The study utilizes an intrinsic and case study research design to compare the employment rights and entitlements in Australia, England, and Israel. The findings indicate that, first, all three countries surveyed provide basic protection through statutory employment rights which are categorized under three fundamental occupational entitlements: Paid or Unpaid Leave, Sick Days and Equal Rights. Secondly, while Australia and England maintain a legal right to request flexible work to care for elder relatives, the analysis foregrounds the absence of flexible employment legislation in Israel. Thought that the aim of balancing limited public resources with family resources requires a broad understanding of concrete legislation, such comparison can inform policy targeted to reconcile distress along the work–eldercare axis.

Suggested Citation

  • Hedva Vinarski-Peretz & Dafna Halperin, 2021. "Informal Caregivers along the Work–Eldercare Axis: A Comparative Analysis of Australia, England, and Israel," International Journal of Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 1-015..
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:lawfam:v:35:y:2021:i:1:p:ebaa015.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/lawfam/ebaa015
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:lawfam:v:35:y:2021:i:1:p:ebaa015.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/lawfam .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.