ESPN thematic report on work-life balance measures for persons of working age with dependent relatives

Abstract

Malta’s regime to cater for long-term care (LTC) has a long history and is quite extensive. Through state, church and increasingly public-private partnership and private-sector initiatives, it covers the three distinct sectors most in need of the service: the elderly, the disabled and persons suffering from mental health problems. In respect of the needs of the elderly, demand exceeds supply. But the services available, primarily in the form of institutional care, are addressed at the beneficiaries, rather than the carers. There is, in fact, very scant direct provision to meet the needs of carers, since this has traditionally been considered the realm of the family – and more specifically the role of women – so long as those persons requiring long-term care remain in the family. With the increasing number of women joining the labour market, it is slowly becoming more evident that not all families can look after their dependants at home. At the same time, the idea of allowing dependants to remain in the community, rather than being institutionalised, is being pushed by the government, especially in relation to the elderly. Recent social policy measures have, in fact, contributed to more elderly people remaining in the community through support services provided by the state. These include services like Telecare, a telephone-based emergency alarm system; Home-Help, a special service that provides part-time domestic and counselling services to the elderly; and other services like the Handyman and Meals on Wheels services. The most recent initiative in this respect is a pilot project, launched in January 2016, under which elderly people who are waiting to be admitted to a state institution can apply for a subsidy to help with the wages of a private full-time carer, if they decide to employ one. In Malta, the vast majority of carers who opt to look after their dependants requiring long-term care do not receive compensation, and they have to find a way of financing themselves. This is because it is generally assumed that women who are not gainfully occupied are supported by their husband/partner. The only exceptions to this are single or widowed people, who may be eligible for a carer’s pension or for social assistance for carers. In both cases, the carer has to satisfy both a stringent capital and an income means test. A carer’s pension is only granted if the dependant is bedridden, while social assistance is given even if the dependant is not bedridden. At present, only 90 individuals have successfully qualified for a carer’s pension. Persons employed in the public sector/public administration are in an advantageous position: there is a set of family-friendly measures that are open to them, but are denied to workers in the private sector. Although these measures are not specifically intended to assist carers with dependants requiring long-term care, they are available for use in such circumstances. The exact level of take-up as it relates specifically to LTC is not available, since the unit that collects the data centrally draws no distinction between the actual reasons for a claim. Studies on LTC and the work-life balance are very scant in Malta. A study conducted in 2006 did explore some aspects of this issue, but it has never been updated. It is also not clear how the data contained in this study were collected, and on what basis the estimates were done. If the family-friendly measures open to public-service employees were to be extended to all workers, this would enable more workers – especially women – to balance paid work and long-term care, rather than exiting the labour market. More focused research is required to update the data on current trends and on the needs of workers who undertake long-term care. If the educational system taught that LTC should be undertaken equally by both genders, there would be long-term consequences.