This paper examines the availability and dynamics of family supports across a range of Australian families, in order to determine whether distinctive patterns exist for families from non-English speaking (NES) backgrounds. The first part of the paper provides an overview of cultural diversity in Australia,the general directions of immigration and family policies, and a summary of current research in family exchanges. The second part includes an analysis of data on exchanges within a range of culturally diverse Australian families. This will lead to a consideration of the extent to which families from non-English speaking (NES) backgrounds reveal distinctive patterns of exchanges.
The main source of all settlers throughout these decades has been the United Kingdom (UK) and Ireland, with New Zealand the second largest source country. However, the proportion of immigrants from the UK and Ireland has steadily declined from 48 per cent of the total in the 1947-51 period to just over 11 per cent in 1995-96. Throughout the 1950s and 1960s continental Europe provided the other major source of settlers with significant numbers arriving from the Netherlands, Germany, Italy, Greece and the Former Yugoslavia.
With the dismantling of the 'White Australia' policy, which was finally achieved in 1973, immigration from Asia steadily increased. Since then Australia has received immigrants from many Asian nations, with the large groups from Vietnam, China, the Philippines, Hong Kong, Sri Lanka and Indonesia. The range of countries from which Australia draws its immigrants has continued to broaden with significant numbers in recent years arriving from countries in the Middle East, the Pacific Rim, and South America. By mid-1995, 23 per cent of Australia's population had been born overseas compared to 10 per cent in 1947. Settlers born in non-English speaking countries represented around three quarters of the total intake in 1996. While most data on immigrant diversity is expressed in terms of country of birth, it is important to note that some immigrant groups define themselves primarily in terms of their ethnicity, language or religion.
The impact of post-war immigration has been the major source of diversity in Australia, whether based on country of birth, ethnicity, religion or language. It has made a marked impact on Australia's economic, social and cultural life and, in the process, changed Australia's identity from being an outpost of British civilisation to a multicultural nation.
For example, the migrant intake for 1996-97 was cut by 11 per cent to 74,000, including a 25 per cent reduction in family reunion. Within this intake there has been an increase in numbers of skilled migrants and a reduction in numbers coming under family reunion. In particular, business migration has been encouraged and investment-linked migration visas introduced. Other policy and administrative changes have led to increases in fees and charges for immigration procedures and services, including visas and tuition under the Australian Migrant English Program (AMEP) for certain categories of entrants. A major change has been the general extension to two years' residence in Australia before immigrants become eligible for a range of social security payments and benefits.
These changes have several implications for the composition and
settlement of the
immigration intake. First, the decline in family reunion numbers will
mean that there is
less likelihood that extended family members such as parents and
siblings will be able
to join their family members in Australia. This will have the effect of
decreasing the
assistance available for some families. Second, some of the more recent
immigrants
from the business migration stream will have considerable financial and
other resources
to enable them to meet their practical and financial settlement needs.
Third, the
maintenance of the refugee and humanitarian intake will mean that there
will continue to
be a group of the most needy immigrants, often without the resource of
other family
members to help with their practical, financial and emotional needs.
Family Policies
The directions noted in immigration and settlement policies have their counterpart in family policies. Government policy directions have been towards shifting the boundaries between government and family responsibilities. Thus families are being encouraged to assume greater responsibility for meeting their needs and to maintain less reliance on state provision. This can take a number of forms. First, the principle of smaller government is leading to the contracting out of services to private agencies rather than services being provided directly by Government. Second, there is a move towards user pays policies which place responsibility upon families to pay in part or in full for the services they consume. Third, the state is increasingly placing resources at the disposal of the family, through the taxation system or cash payments, rather than through direct government provision of services. These policy directions are leading to changes in the provision of services and resources in areas such as child care, youth allowances and facilities and services for frail older persons.
One impact of these changes in both immigration and family policies is to encourage greater family self-reliance in meeting their financial and practical needs. Thus it is expected that family members, both within the household and beyond, will have both the capacity and desire to provide various forms of assistance to other family members. The extent to which overseas-born Australian families from a NES background meet this expectation is the main focus of this paper.
This paper adopts an inclusive definition of 'family' which extends beyond the 'nuclear' family resident in a single household to 'a wider range of relatives by birth or by marriage (whether legal or de facto) who may live in separate households but who are linked by mutual experiences, affection, obligations and exchange' (Millward, 1998). There is considerable research evidence that the wider extended family provides the central core of support networks for individuals in a range of circumstances (McDonald 1995, Millward 1992).
While the extended family living in a number of households may provide
an important
network of support for many Australians, it is important to note that
variations to this
norm exist both across and within the various family types being
examined in this
paper. Among these variations to the extended family are immigrant
families which
may be spread over two or more countries and refugees whose family ties
have been
lost through traumatic events in their countries of origin (Cass
1994).
Proximity of family members
Proximity of family members can be measured in terms of the physical distance of family households from each other. While proximity of households in itself is no guarantee of frequency of contacts or of family support, it does provide the potential for both to occur. Allied to proximity must be the willingness of relatives to help each other which, in turn, is dependent on the nature of their relationship. Two extremes related to proximity of family members are more likely to be found among overseas-born Australians: the extended family being located overseas and the extended family being co-resident in the one household. Neither of these patterns is common for Australian-born people, particularly those of English-speaking background.
The first of these can lead to a degree of social isolation. Kendig notes that 'migration from the country of one's birth, especially if the move is made late in life, can have a major impact on the pool of family and other close relationships' (Kendig 1986: p.17). In these cases, contact with their family in the country of origin is maintained by return visits, telephone and video contacts, seeking marriage partners overseas, and the sending of remittances overseas.
The second example, where the extended family is co-resident, may be influenced by a number of factors such as values of family members, size and location of housing, family resources, and the inability of family members to live separately because of language and cultural difficulties (McDonald 1991: p.105). In these families, grandparents, parents and children may live in the one household. This is generally the home of the middle aged children and is more common among Southern European, Asian and Middle Eastern families in Australia than those from Anglo or Western European backgrounds. However, this arrangement is contrary to the more traditional one found in some overseas countries where married children live in their parents' home. In situations where parents live with their adult children the flow of support and the positions of power are reversed. This form of co-residence not only makes intergenerational sharing of domestic tasks and mutual assistance more likely but it is a necessity if the family is to provide constant personal care (Kendig 1986: 18).
Contacts with family members
While there is no guarantee that living nearby will mean frequent contact between family members, proximity does seem to be a pre-condition for that to occur. This is supported by the Australian Living Standards Study (ALSS) 1992-93 which found that the majority of the 4,900 family households surveyed had kin within reasonable proximity and enjoyed a great deal of contact within extended family networks. This study produced a number of important findings related to family contact of relevance to this paper. For example, people from non-English-speaking backgrounds had the lowest levels of kin available, with many having no relatives from the parents' immediate family of origin available at all. However, where people from non-English speaking backgrounds had relatives living in Australia, they had the most frequent contact with them (Millward 1998).
Apart from structural factors such as proximity, the variations in contact between family members derive from the different values they hold, especially those related to parental expectations and filial obligations. There is considerable variation in attitudes towards filial obligation across groups from different ethnic backgrounds. For example, 'Australians who come from Asia, Southern Europe, and the Middle East placed more weight on all forms of responsibility and obligation than those who came from Western Europe and from Anglo backgrounds' (de Vaus 1996). De Vaus canvasses a number of likely reasons for these differences including the less developed welfare state in these regions requiring greater family responsibility in the care of the elderly; the poor economic situation of some immigrant groups requiring greater support from families; the marginalisation of some immigrant groups within the dominant Australian culture which can make for greater cohesion within both the community and family and lead to the ethic of 'looking after one's own.' Finally, he puts forward the more general argument that advanced industrial capitalistic societies with their emphasis on individualism are antithetic to the development of familistic values and that people from those societies would score lower on family obligation measures than those from countries where industrial capitalism is less advanced (de Vaus 1996: 20).
Family Assistance
What types of support are provided by family members, both within and beyond the household? A number of categorisations exist including one proposed by McDonald which includes financial (money), physical (providing care or assistance) emotional (love, understanding, counsel), legal (guardianship) and spiritual (performing religious duties) (McDonald, 1995). Whichever schema one adopts, it is clear that the extended family provides a network of family supports which touches almost all dimensions of personal, economic and social life (Finch 1989).
What is the direction of these family exchanges? The Australian Living Standards Study showed that association and exchange were stronger between adult respondents and their parents (often grandparents) than with their siblings or other relatives (Millward 1998). This finding was confirmed by the Australian Family Life Course Study which asked people between 50 and 70 years about intergenerational exchange with their children. This study found that, in general, assistance flows from older to younger generations, with the middle generation (those in their fifties and sixties) providing most of the assistance in both directions (Millward 1998). Thus these later life respondents were more likely to help their adult children than their elderly parents or parents-in-law. The ABS Survey of Australian Families 1992 also confirmed that the 'balance of the flow of transfers favours children rather than older parents: that adult children were more likely to receive help from their older parents than to give them help' (de Vaus and Qu 1998).
This intergenerational provision of support is also mediated by a number of factors, including ethnicity. We have seen above that extended family ties can be disrupted by migration, sometimes severely so in the case of refugees. These truncated families without the benefit of practical assistance in matters such as child minding or financial assistance for young adults and without the parents/grandparents who provide for cultural continuity may suffer severe social disadvantage. Even where these parents/grandparents in some immigrant groups live in Australia, they may lack the resources to provide practical assistance to their children. In the case of immigrants from Southern Europe, the Middle East and Asia a different pattern in intergenerational exchanges emerges. Despite the high value these groups place on helping one another, people from these groups were less likely to provide personal care/home help to their parents and less likely to be receiving child care help from their parents. However adults from these regions were more likely to be giving their parents financial support (de Vaus and Qu 1998). This may be explained by the fact that these immigrant groups were more likely to have parents living overseas and to provide assistance to their parents through sending remittances.
Each of these groupings include considerable diversity related to countries of birth, languages spoken, ethnicity and religious affiliation. Nevertheless, they do allow us to compare those who have immediate experience of immigration (their own or their parents) with those who do not have such experience. These data also allow us to compare those born overseas from English speaking and non-English speaking countries.
Some 73 per cent of the respondents were married or in de facto relationships. A higher proportion of those born in a NES country were married and a lower proportion were in de facto relationships than respondents in the other comparison groups. The great majority of respondents (81.5 per cent) were parents with some 56.7 per cent with children at home. Of all respondents, some 36.4 per cent had at least one adult child aged 18 or over living independently outside of the household. It is this latter group that is of interest in terms of proximity, contacts and flow of assistance between family generations.
While recognising that family assistance can be of many types, the financial resources of family members are an important requisite for certain forms of assistance. Significant differences emerged across the different groups of respondents with respect to those whose main source of income was a pension or benefit, superannuation and those with no personal income. Those born overseas tended to have a greater reliance on pensions and benefits than those born in Australia. This may be related to the higher levels of unemployment experienced by certain groups of immigrants: women of NESB, recently arrived immigrants, refugees and humanitarian entrants. The higher levels of superannuation for the Australian-born as against the overseas-born may be related to the different occupational patterns of both groups, with the Australian-born more likely to be employed in occupations which have a longer history of superannuation benefits. A key factor in family resources and capacity to provide assistance is the employment status of family members. Overseas-born from a NES country were less likely to be couples where both were working and more likely to be couples where neither partner was working. This is reflected in the relatively lower incomes of respondents born overseas in a NES country when compared with those born overseas in an ES country and those born in Australia
Family Values and Attitudes Toward Support
Attitudes and values held by family members constitute a key element in
whether and
what type of assistance is provided. Three key questions throw light on
these attitudes:
'Who would you confide in?'; 'Who would you turn to if you became ill?';
'Who
would you turn to in an emergency?' (
Table 2). While responses to these
questions
may reveal something about the attitudes held by family members, they
also importantly
reveal the actual sources of support available to family members.
The majority of all respondents indicated they would most likely confide in their partners, followed by friends, their parents/ parents in law, their brothers/sisters and then their sons and daughters. A somewhat different pattern emerges among those born in a NES country. While this group would also be most likely to confide in their partners, they then would select their brothers/sisters, friends, parents and sons/daughters. Interestingly, confiding across the generations is limited, despite the evidence (to be presented later) of considerable intergenerational support from parents to adult children. The higher ranking of siblings than friends among NES overseas born, compared with the total group, may testify to the importance of extended family interactions among the NES overseas-born. These data also strikingly reveal that respondents would, in all cases, prefer to confide in women than men.
The question of who respondents would turn to if they became ill produced responses across the board in the following order: partners, parents/parents in law, brothers/sisters, sons/daughters and friends. While friends were good to interact with and confide in, when it came to assistance during illness family members were most often turned to. This pattern was even more strongly evident among respondents from NES countries. For example, although fewer NES than ES respondents would turn to their parents and siblings for help, more would turn to their children for help. This probably represents an added burden on these adult children. Again females were more likely to be turned to for support than males, perhaps reflecting the perceived nurturing role of women relatives.
When confronted with an emergency all respondents would turn to their partners, parents, siblings, children and friends in that order. Respondents from NES countries differed from this pattern in one important respect: they would be least likely to turn to their parents in an emergency. The likely explanation is that their parents may not be living in Australia or, if so, may lack the resources to provide assistance to their children. The pattern of turning to female rather than male relatives is again in evidence.
Attitudes towards family responsibility revealed a generally consistent pattern across each of the comparison groups ( Table 3). Almost all respondents (98.2 per cent) agreed that parents and children should stay in touch on a regular basis. A majority also agreed with various forms of reciprocal assistance: adult children should help their parents financially if they need it (82.3 per cent); parents should let their adult children live with them if they need to (78.3 per cent); and parents should help adult children financially if they need it (73.4 per cent). In the area of children letting ageing parents live with them, respondents born in NES overseas countries more strongly endorsed family responsibility. It should be noted that these are statements of values and that actual behaviour may not accord with these for a number of reasons including resources, location, views of others in the household and conflict in relationships.
Proximity, Contact and Exchanges with Adult Children
Over one third of all respondents (36.4 per cent) had adult children who
were living
independently. There is a high level of geographic proximity and
frequency of contact
between respondents and adult children living independently across all
groups.
However, analysis also shows that there are statistically significant
differences between
groups (Table 4).
Almost two thirds of all respondents who have adult children living elsewhere, live within 30 minutes of their children and about one third had adult children living elsewhere in Australia. Respondents born overseas in a NES country were more likely to have their children living nearby than other groups of respondents and also more likely to have their children living overseas. Those born overseas in a NES country were more likely than other groups to have frequent contact with their adult children, with over one third speaking with their adult children daily.
While proximity and contact may be no sure guarantee of support, there is strong evidence that respondents provide substantial support (financial, emotional and practical) to their adult children living independently (Table 5). In all cases, this is greater than the support received by respondents from their adult children. The overseas-born respondents from an NES country receive significantly more financial support from their adult children and conversely are able to provide less financial support to their adult children. Overseas-born respondents from a NES country provide less practical support to their adult children but receive more practical support from their adult children than do Australian-born respondents. This is most likely related to a relative lack of resources. However, no such differences across groups emerge in terms of emotional support.
Proximity, Contact and Exchanges with Parents
Eighty-three per cent of respondents had one or more of their
parents/parents in law
living. Around one third of respondents have one or more parents/parents
in law living
in close proximity (within 30 minutes) and almost as many living
elsewhere in Australia
(Table 6). Respondents born overseas in a NES country were more likely
to have their
mother living with them than other groups. Understandably, overseas-born
respondents
had large numbers of parents living overseas. While communications
technology and
two-way visits may be used to maintain family contacts, families with
parents living
overseas (and in some parts of Australia) lack the ongoing contact and
support that
families with parents living in close proximity can enjoy. The data on
how often
respondents speak with mother or father largely reflect their proximity
to their parents.
They also show the greater degree of communication respondents have with
their
mother than their father.
Patterns of bidirectional exchanges between respondents and their parents were also examined (Table 7 ). As we have seen above, over two thirds of respondents provided financial support to their adult children (Table 5). However less than one half of all respondents provided financial support to their parents (Table 7). Respondents born overseas in a NES country were more likely than other groups to provide financial support to their parents. Given that almost 50 per cent of their parents were living overseas, this financial assistance would most likely take the form of remittances sent overseas. Those born in a NES country received the least financial support from their parents, probably for the same reason.
Respondents reported providing uniformly high levels of practical and emotional support and advice to their parents but receiving less in return. Given the locations of many of their parents, it is to be expected that the overseas-born respondents were less likely than the Australian-born respondents to engage in exchanges of practical and emotional support and advice with their parents.
Women, including those from a NES background, were more likely than men to take part in the exchange of both practical and emotional support and advice with their parents. This accords with the pattern already established of the greater involvement of women in intergenerational exchanges with both their children and parents.
Profiles of the four types of Australian families provide some indication of levels of need and resources based on factors directly related to immigration (language ability, length of time in Australia) as well as personal characteristics (age, gender) and other factors (income, attachment to labour force). Those born overseas in a NES country were more likely to be on pensions and benefits, more likely to have one or both partners unemployed, and have lower incomes than those born overseas in an ES country or in Australia. While this would reduce capacity to provide financial assistance to family members, it does not preclude other forms of material and emotional assistance. This suggests that the NES overseas born may experience greater need and less capacity to offer financial assistance to their family members.
It is clear that the extended family is alive and well in Australia. It was regarded by all groups as providing the major source of confidants and assistance in sickness and other emergencies. Positive attitudes towards a range of family responsibilities, especially between parents and children, were also strongly supported across all groups. Those born in a NES country expressed even stronger support for the value of the extended family. For example, they would, unlike the Australian-born, choose to confide in their siblings before friends. In the two areas of helping parents financially and children letting ageing parents live with them, respondents born in NES overseas countries expressed significantly stronger statements of family responsibility.
In considering the geographic proximity of family members, their frequency of contact, and levels of supports available, provided and received by respondents, a great deal of commonality across groups was discovered. However, some distinctive patterns were found.
A considerable level of geographic proximity and frequency of contact were found between parents and their adult children living independently across all groups. There is also a considerable flow of support (financial, emotional and practical) from parents to adult children, which in all cases exceeds the support received by parents from their adult children. Again, there is variation according to birthplace. Parents born overseas in a NES country were more likely to have their children living nearby and also more likely to have their children living overseas. Overseas-born parents from a NES country receive more financial support from their adult children but are able to provide their adult children with less financial assistance.
About one third of the respondents had their parents living in close proximity. However, intergenerational transfers were in favour of the younger rather than the older generations. Less than one half of the respondents provided financial support to their parents while two thirds provided such support to their adult children. The pattern for those born in a NES country differed significantly. They had large numbers of parents living overseas but they were also more likely than other groups to have a parent, usually their mother, living with them. They were also more likely to help their parents financially and least likely to receive such help.
A major finding of this study is the key role played by all women, including those from a NES background, in the various interactions and exchanges across the extended family. In terms of values, they were the preferred confidants and providers of assistance in times of need. In practice, respondents were more likely to communicate with their mothers than their fathers. Women were involved in more emotional transactions and exchanges of practical support with their adult children than were their male counterparts. Women were also more likely than men to provide and receive emotional support and practical assistance from their parents. While factors such as male employment and greater longevity of women, may partly account for this gender differentiation, it raises significant questions about the role of men, both as fathers and sons, in families.
Changing migration and family policies would seem to be moving towards the notion of family independence and self-reliance. This is accompanied by the popular view that immigrant families are cohesive units which provide a great deal of interaction and support for their family members. The evidence presented here challenges this stereotype. First, there is much similarity in attitudes, values and experiences across families of all cultural groups. Second, immigrant families from ES countries approximate to Australian born families on most measures and do not present a clearly distinctive pattern in terms of family exchanges. Third, NES background families certainly hold values which favour close interaction and mutual assistance and, where possible, translate this into practice within their extended families. However, a lack of resources and family members living overseas too often prevents them from realising these values.
de Vaus, D. (1996), 'Children's responsibilities to elderly parents', Family Matters, no. 45, Spring/Summer, pp. 16-21.
de Vaus, D. and Qu, L. (1998) 'Intergenerational transfers across the life course', Family Matters, no. 50, Winter, pp. 27-30.
Finch, J. (1989), Family Obligations and Social Change, Polity Press, Cambridge , UK.
Kendig, H. (1986) 'Informal support networks', in Community and institutional care for aged migrants in Australia: Research Findings, Australian Institute of Multicultural Affairs, Melbourne.
McDonald, P. (1991) 'Migrant Family Structure', in Funder, K. (ed.), Images of Australian Families, Longman, pp. 102-121.
McDonald, P. (1995) Families in Australia: A socio-demographic perspective, Australian Institute of Family Studies, Melbourne.
Millward, C. (1992) 'Keeping in Touch: Extended Family Networks'
Family Matters ,
no. 32, Australian Institute of Family Studies, Melbourne.
Millward, C. (1998) 'Family support and exchange', Family
Matters, no. 50, Winter,
pp. 19-23.