Abstract

Flemish care policy is headed towards more community care, meaning that care should be given not only in, but also by the community. Therefore carers are given a central role in the organisation of care. Most of them have positive experiences with giving care, but some are feeling burdened as well. In this article we study experienced burden and look at multiple individual and contextual factors that may add to the risk of over-burdening the informal carer or protecting him/her from it. We use data from the survey ‘Duurzame Mantelzorg in Vlaanderen’, conducted with 2.148 informal carers. We find three dimensions in experienced burden measured by the Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) with 12 items: personal strain, negative emotions and guilt. Using path analysis (structural equation modeling) we study which variables explain those dimensions. We looked at the impact of the individual carer characteristics, the care situation and of mediating support variables. The results confirm the importance of a supportive social environment. The quality of the relationship between the carer and the person in need, emotional support and the use of professional services all have a significant impact. Background characteristics of the carer are less influential than stressors from the care situation. The largest total effects stem from effects of behavioral problems of the person in need. Intensive carers report more personal strain and negative emotions, but at the same time experience less guilt. People caring for closer relationships experience more burden. Both background characteristics and stressors in the care situation influence burden indirectly via mediating support variables. This study points to important issues and possible instruments that policy makers and care professionals can use in their effort to strengthen informal care.

How to Cite:

Vandezande, V. & Bronselaer, J. & Vanden Boer, L. & Demeyer, B., (2018) “Mantelzorgbelasting ontrafeld: dimensies in de ervaren belasting van mantelzorgers en de rol van sociale steun”, Sociologos 39(4), 354–375. doi: https://doi.org/10.21825/sociologos.86989