“The Poor Carer”: Ambivalent Social Construction of the Home Care Worker in Elder Care Services

ABSTRACT

In this article, we examine the social construction of the home care worker from the perspective of various professionals in the elder care sector in Ireland. The research, using the Grounded Theory method, involved focus groups with 31 participants comprising health and social work professionals as well as care agency managers and policy planners. The social construction of the elder care worker is characterised by ambivalence. We connect the concept of ambivalence at the micro level of human relationships to structural factors that are driving the ambivalence. Ambivalence towards home care workers is shaped by structural factors including the precariousness of care work, the commodification of time, and the stipulated personalisation of services. The irreconcilable contrasts between portrayals of care workers as both ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are indicative of deep contradictions in the expectations that contemporary care systems direct at paid caregivers. Ambivalence arises from the commodified and dispensable status of care workers, and fundamental transformations in their training, working conditions and pay are required to move away from this ambivalence and towards care workers’ equal status with professionals in the care sector.

KEYWORDS:

• Ambivalence
• care worker
• elder care
• Grounded Theory
• Ireland
• social construction

Acknowledgments

We would like to express our gratitude to all focus groups participants and to our colleagues in the SoCaTel project. We acknowledge the role and contribution of Anne McDonald and Austin Warters of the Health Services Executive (HSE) of Ireland in setting up and conducting the focus groups.

Virpi Timonen also wishes to acknowledge support of the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2016S1A3A2924563). The authors acknowledge the role and contribution of Anne McDonald and Austin Warters in setting up and conducting the focus groups for the SoCaTel project in Ireland.Virpi Timonen also acknowledges the support of the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2016S1A3A2924563).

Ethical approval

The Research Ethics Approval Committee of the School of Social Work and Social Policy, Trinity College Dublin approved this study on 14.11.2017 (approval number 749).

Additional information

Funding

Parts of this article relate to the H2020 SoCaTel Project. This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant Agreement No 769975. The relevant contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the authors (Timonen and Lolich) and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Commission.