The multigenerational household is often considered a remnant of the past linked with a rural mode of life. Contemporary data from the United States and Canada show that the elderly are living with one of their children in far greater numbers than the stereotypes would allow. Given these data, multigenerational households should be explained in contemporary terms in reference to the normative and structural factors that determine the life cycle of the contemporary family. Using Canadian Census data on the elderly of the Province of Quebec, it is shown here that the frequency of multigenerational households does not vary with the rural or urban location of the elderly. Rather, age and sex of the elderly and homeownership by their children are among the factors that explain family living arrangements. It is concluded that multigenerational households can be realistically considered as a resource available to frail elderly.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrodyF., Message from the President, The Gerontologist, 19, pp. 514–515, 1979.
2.
ShanasE., Social Myth as a Hypothesis: The Case of the Family Relations of Old People, The Gerontologist, 19, pp. 3–9, 1979.
3.
Ministère des Affaires sociales, Les services à domicile; politique du ministère des Affaires sociales, Québec, Ministère des Affaires sociales, Gouvernement du Québec.
4.
Ministère des Affaires sociales, Pour mieux vieillir au Québec, Québec, Ministère des Affaires sociales, Gouvernement du Québec.
5.
BélandF., The Family and Adults Sixty-five Years of Age and Over: Co-residing and Availability of Help, Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 21, pp. 302–317, 1984.
6.
BélandF., Application of the CTMSP System to Non-institutionalized Elderly Population Identifying Profiles of Service Requirements, Systed '83, Montreal, 1984.
7.
DahlinM., Perspective on the Family Life of the Elderly in 1900, The Gerontologist, 20, pp. 99–107, 1980.
8.
MindalC., Multigenerational Family Households: Recent Trends and Implications for the Future, The Gerontologist, 19, pp. 456–463, 1979.
9.
SoldoB. and LaureatP., Living Arrangements Among the Elderly in the United States: A Loglinear Approach, Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 7, pp. 351–366, 1976.
10.
HendricksJ. and HendricksC., The Age-old Question of Old Age: Was It Really So Much Better Back When?International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 8:2, pp. 139–154, 1977–78.
11.
TreasJ., Family Support Systems for the Aged: Some Social and Demographic Considerations, The Gerontologist, 17, pp. 486–491, 1977.
12.
SalomonS. and LockhartV., Land Ownership and the Position of Elderly in Farm Families, Human Organization, 39, pp. 324–331, 1980.
13.
TartlerR., The Older Person in Family, Community, and Society, in Processes of Aging, Vol. II, WilliamsR. H.TiblittsC., and DonahueW. (eds.), Atherton Press, New York, pp. 61–76, 1963.
14.
SeelbackW. C. and SauerW. J., Filial Responsibility, Expectations and Morale Among Aged Parents, The Gerontologist, 17, pp. 494–499, 1977.
15.
PressI. and McKoolM., Social Structure and the Status of the Aged, International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 3, pp. 297–306, 1972.
16.
LozierJ. and AlthouseR., Social Enforcement of Behavior Toward Elderly in an Appalachian Mountain Settlement, The Gerontologist, 1–4, pp. 69–80, 1974.
17.
MoonM., The Role of the Family in the Economic Well-being of the Elderly, The Gerontologist, 23, pp. 45–50, 1983.
18.
BengstonV. L.OrlanderE. B., and HoddadA. A., The “Generation Gap” and Aging Family Members: Toward a Conceptual Model, in Time, Roles and Self in Old Age, GubrimJ. E. (ed.), Human Sciences Press, New York, pp. 237–263, 1976.
19.
SussmanM. B., The Family Life Cycle of Old People, in Handbook of Aging and the Social Sciences, BinstockR. H. and ShanasE. (eds.), Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, pp. 218–243, 1976.
20.
BélandF., Des données descriptives pour la planification de services sociaux et de soins de santé pour les personnes âgées, Québec, Ministère des Affaires sociales, Québec, 1983.
21.
BishopY. M. M.HollandP. N., and FienbergS. E., Discrete Multivariate Analysis, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1975.
22.
GoodmanL. A., A General Model for the Analysis of Survey, American Journal of Sociology, 77, pp. 1035–1082, 1972.
23.
GoodmanL. A., A Modified Multiple Regression Approach to the Analysis of Dichotomous Variables, American Sociological Review, 37, pp. 28–46, 1972.
24.
BélandF., ANOMHI: Un programme en APL pour l'analyse loglinéaire des tableaux de contingence, Québec, ASOPE, Université Laval, 1982.
25.
SwaffordM., Three Parametric Techniques for Contingency Table Analysis: A Non-technical Commentary, American Sociological Review, 45, pp. 664–690, 1980.
26.
GoodmanL. A., The Analysis of Cross-classified Data: Independence, Quasi-independence and Interactions in Contingency Tables With or Without Missing Entries, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 63, pp. 1091–1131, 1968.
27.
BeckW. and StreibF., Older Families: A Decade Review, Journal of Marriage and Family, 42, pp. 937–956, 1980.
28.
NydeggerC., Family Ties of the Aged in Cross-Cultural Perspective, The Gerontologist, 23, pp. 26–32, 1983.
