Aafke Komter

Solidarity in Dutch Families: Family Ties Under Strain?

The nature and extent of interpersonal exchange of care and help may indicate solidarity and cohesion in modern society. This article focuses on intergenerational solidarity. On the basis of empirical data from an earlier research project on giving in the Netherlands, the authors examine the nature and determinants of intergenerational solidarity and compare the relative importance of familial and intergenerational solidarity with solidarity toward friends. The results of their analyses show that solidarity toward parents and solidarity toward friends are based on different types of feelings. Familial solidarity appears still to have an overriding importance when compared to solidarity toward friends; however, this is so only in terms of the frequency of offered assistance and care and not in terms of the accompanying feelings: love and affection are reserved for helping friends, whereas Durkheimian norms of moral obligation are the main feeling people have when helping their parents.

Gifts and Social Relations: The Mechanisms of Reciprocity

In the modern gift literature an anti-utilitarian and a utilitarian view on the giftcan be distinguished. From the anti-utilitarian perspective, the freedom of the gift is seen as one of its main characteristics, while the idea that gifts are caught in a cycle of reciprocity is downplayed. In the utilitarian approach, assumptions about rational actors weighing their preferences according to some utility are predominant. In the first approach, reciprocity is seen as undermining ‘genuine’ gifts. The utilitarian approach does take reciprocity into account but fails to analyse why the principle of reciprocity is so effective. This article attempts to provide such an explanation. By illuminating both the variety of the forms of the gift and the universality of the underlying principle, it is argued that gifts reflect a multi-purpose symbolic ‘utility’ that transcends both utilitarianism and anti-utilitarianism.

Family, welfare state generosity and the vulnerability of older adults: A cross-national study

The availability of family can be considered a protective factor for aging well. In this article, we examine to what extent the family situation of older people creates vulnerability with respect to their quality of life. Because not everyone is vulnerable to the same degree, we try to identify the conditions under which older people benefit more from having family resources. Based on the resources perspective, we argue that the impact of family resources on life satisfaction is stronger for older people with fewer resources at both the individual level (material, physical and non-familial social resources) and the country level (welfare state services targeted at older adults). To test our hypotheses we make use of the fourth wave of the European Values Study, and the MULTILINKS Social Policy Indicators database. In general our data offer support for the idea that the presence of intimate family ties (with partner and children) can be considered an important resource for achieving psychological well-being, whereas their absence or loss may act as a constraint. Our vulnerability argument is partly supported by the findings. Partner resources are more important for the life satisfaction of older people with a low education and health problems. Similarly, having children only improves the life-satisfaction of lower educated older adults. However, family resources are not more important for older people with fewer material resources or for older people living in countries with low services levels targeted at older adults.

The Evolutionary Origins of Human Generosity

This article examines how altruism and self-interest are linked in human generosity, and what social scientists can learn from this linkage. The origins of generosity are explored by combining biological, psychological, anthropological and sociological evidence. Kinship altruism, reciprocal altruism, ‘strong reciprocity’, cultural norms and gene-culture co-evolution prove to be major explanations of the evolution of cooperation in human beings. Empirical research shows that human generosity is selective: kin and close relatives are favoured over others. Moreover, generosity generates its own rewards and is therefore again selective: the more you give, the more you receive. The selectivity of generosity reveals its evolutionary origins.

Dissolving long-term romantic relationships: Assessing the role of the social context

Previous research on the dissolution of long-term romantic relationships has mostly focused on determinants that reflect either the characteristics of the individual partners or the characteristics of the relationship itself. The role of the social context in which couples are embedded has received less attention. This study assesses the association between three characteristics of the social context and the dissolution of long-term romantic relationships simultaneously: the prevalence of divorce in the network of the couple, the extent to which the networks of partners overlap each other, and the amount of social capital in the network of the couple. Using nationally representative panel data from the first and second waves of the Netherlands Kinship Panel Study, partial support was found for the link between the prevalence of divorce and network overlap on the one hand, and the likelihood to dissolve long-term romantic relationships on the other hand, among a sample of 3406 married and 648 unmarried cohabiting respondents. The association with social capital was found to differ between married and unmarried cohabiting respondents, as well as to depend upon the type of relationship the social capital is based in. These findings were interpreted to reflect differences in the symbolic meanings of marital and cohabiting relationships, and differences in types of social capital to which a person has access: relationship-specific versus non-relationship-specific social capital, with the former potentially impeding dissolution, and the latter potentially acting as an alternative to the relationship, thereby encouraging dissolution.

The impact of family structure and disruption on intergenerational emotional exchange in Eastern Europe

Demographic trends across Europe involve a decrease in fertility and mortality rates, and an increase in divorce and stepfamily formation. Life courses and living arrangements have become less standardized and the structure of families has changed. In this article, we examine to what extent contemporary family structure and composition resulting from demographic changes affect emotional exchange between children and their parents, both from adult child to parent and from parent to child. Because the general level of well-being has been shown to be lower in Eastern Europe, thereby potentially affecting emotional exchange within families, we focus our research on Eastern Europe. We use the “conservation of resources theory” to derive hypotheses on how family structure may affect intergenerational emotional exchange. Family ties are assumed to be important resources of affection that people want to obtain and retain throughout their lives. Data from the Generations and Gender Survey (GGS) are used to test our hypotheses. In general, our data offer more support for the idea that families are resilient than for the often heard assumption that families are in decline as a consequence of the changed family structure and composition.

The disguised rationality of solidarity: Gift giving in informal relations

The concept of solidarity as we use it nowadays generates a series of rather diverging associations: the clenched fist of international workers’ solidarity; solidarity as group integration based on shared values and beliefs; a sense of attachment between individuals who are related to one another by ascriptive properties such as age, sex, kinship, ethnicity, or linguistic or territorial affinities (cf. Lockwood, 1992); forms of mutual support among certain communities such as the neighborhood, church, or family; and finally, individual acts of solidarity with those who are in need (cf. the Oliner and Oliners study on helpers of Jews during the World War II, 1989). In its common‐sense linguistic use, solidarity seems to have predominantly positive connotations: no one is actually against solidarity, as it seems to cover a content which is “morally good,” solidarity is conceived as opposite to the values embodied in individualism, competition, purely instrumental rationality, and the market, and its main connotations are with unselfishness and a willingness to act in the interest of other people.

Not Accepted by the Family: “Being Difficult” or “Being Different”?:

Using data from the Netherlands Kinship Panel Study (NKPS) and combining a quantitative approach and a qualitative approach (N = 8,148 and n = 43, respectively), this study investigates the mechanisms associated with a lack of acceptance by one’s family. From the total NKPS sample, 12.1% did not feel (entirely) accepted by their family. The authors hypothesized that people may not feel accepted by their family when they are “difficult,” for example, by exhibiting personal problems; another reason might be that they are “different,” for instance, because they have made nontraditional life course transitions or differ from their parents in educational level or religious preference. Both quantitative and qualitative results confirm the first hypothesis rather than the second. Qualitative results revealed a gender difference in the mechanisms associated with a lack of acceptance by one’s family as well as differences in the resilience of those who had had a difficult family background.

In Good and Bad Times? The Influence of Current Relations with Extended Kin on Negative Life Events

Abstract Purpose The extent to which current relationships with extended kin affect the likelihood that adult family members experience negative life events – such as serious psychological problems, financial difficulties, addictions, or criminal behavior – has received little attention in life course research, which typically focuses on the occurrence and timing of “normal” life events – that is, events occurring in almost every life course (e.g., marriage, parenthood, educational enrollment, employment). Methodology This study used prospective data from a nationally representative panel study on Dutch families. A series of clustered logistic regression models were estimated for the separate types of negative events, while a post-estimation command was used to compare and combine effects across models. Findings We show that the likelihood to experience negative life events is indeed affected by the relationships one currently has with extended kin. Moreover, by distinguishing different characteristics of family relationships in our analyses, we were able to unravel the mechanisms through which they exert an influence. Current family relationships provide feelings of integration, a sense of meaning, and act as a source of support that can be mobilized if needed. Value Given the impact negative life events have on individuals and families, as well as the costs they impose upon society, our results look promising for further advancing our understanding of the risks and the protective factors affecting the development of negative events in the lives of adults.

De mannen achter succesvolle vrouwen: Kanjers of maatjes?

Summary The men behind successful women: ‘Big shots’ or ‘sharing companions’? Using data from the Netherlands Kinship Panel Study, this paper compares the partners of successful women with those of women who have fared less well on the labor market. Success is measured as belonging to the top ten percent income bracket of the female sample. The male breadwinner model where husbands contribute most to the household income characterizes the majority of couples, particularly in the older age groups. Successful women tend to have ‘sharing companions’ who make less money than they do rather than ‘big shots’ who have high incomes. Whether their partners espouse gender egalitarian attitudes makes no differences for women’s success. Rather, having a partner who performs a fair share of domestic tasks relates to women’s socio-economic achievement. Mothers with resident children are more successful when their partners have short work weeks, but the success of childless women and empty nest mothers shows no association with their partners’ work hours. With women’s increasing socio-economic independence, partner relations will likely become premised on different logics compared with the past. For economically autonomous women, men’s disposition towards companionship will be an important consideration, whereas men faced with economically autonomous women will be required to substantively contribute to domestic work.