Conceptualizing the Foundation of Inequalities in Care Work

Mary Romero, Nancy Pérez

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Over the past decade, social science researchers in the area of feminism, labor, immigration, and family have written extensively on the care work crisis and globalized care work. Depending on how broadly care work is conceived, these writings emphasize unique aspects of gender, race, class, and/or citizenship inequalities. Second wave of feminist perspectives, for instance, identify housework and most work culturally defined as “women’s work”—including all paid health occupations dominated by women, such as nurses, direct care workers, and hospital workers but also possibly even health, education, and social service occupations—as central to gender subordination. Another important research stream, focusing on domestic labor as women’s work, but recognizing its traditional outsourcing to slaves, servants, and later employees, highlights the complexities of the inequality generated, not only in terms of gender but race, class, and citizenship as well. Bringing these two bodies of literature together in conversation initially pointed to the inaccurate assumption that care work was valued when it became wage labor. The paid labor of domestics, nannies, and elderly care workers, however, remains deeply devalued, most often with those with limited options entering the profession. This article both assesses contradictions within dominant approaches to care work and highlights the cultural and political foundations of the very inequalities that domestic care workers experience.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)172-188
Number of pages17
JournalAmerican Behavioral Scientist
Volume60
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2016

Fingerprint

worker
labor
Feminism
gender
Slaves
Outsourced Services
citizenship
health occupations
Housekeeping
Health Occupations
Social Sciences
Salaries and Fringe Benefits
Emigration and Immigration
wage labor
housework
Social Work
Health Education
women's work
servants
outsourcing

Keywords

  • care work
  • inequality
  • intersectionality

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology
  • Social Sciences(all)
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Cultural Studies
  • Education

Cite this

Conceptualizing the Foundation of Inequalities in Care Work. / Romero, Mary; Pérez, Nancy.

In: American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 60, No. 2, 01.02.2016, p. 172-188.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{6cbfaae82353430a938e9a3e1c715d62,
title = "Conceptualizing the Foundation of Inequalities in Care Work",
abstract = "Over the past decade, social science researchers in the area of feminism, labor, immigration, and family have written extensively on the care work crisis and globalized care work. Depending on how broadly care work is conceived, these writings emphasize unique aspects of gender, race, class, and/or citizenship inequalities. Second wave of feminist perspectives, for instance, identify housework and most work culturally defined as “women’s work”—including all paid health occupations dominated by women, such as nurses, direct care workers, and hospital workers but also possibly even health, education, and social service occupations—as central to gender subordination. Another important research stream, focusing on domestic labor as women’s work, but recognizing its traditional outsourcing to slaves, servants, and later employees, highlights the complexities of the inequality generated, not only in terms of gender but race, class, and citizenship as well. Bringing these two bodies of literature together in conversation initially pointed to the inaccurate assumption that care work was valued when it became wage labor. The paid labor of domestics, nannies, and elderly care workers, however, remains deeply devalued, most often with those with limited options entering the profession. This article both assesses contradictions within dominant approaches to care work and highlights the cultural and political foundations of the very inequalities that domestic care workers experience.",
keywords = "care work, inequality, intersectionality",
author = "Mary Romero and Nancy P{\'e}rez",
year = "2016",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0002764215607572",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "60",
pages = "172--188",
journal = "American Behavioral Scientist",
issn = "0002-7642",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Conceptualizing the Foundation of Inequalities in Care Work

AU - Romero, Mary

AU - Pérez, Nancy

PY - 2016/2/1

Y1 - 2016/2/1

N2 - Over the past decade, social science researchers in the area of feminism, labor, immigration, and family have written extensively on the care work crisis and globalized care work. Depending on how broadly care work is conceived, these writings emphasize unique aspects of gender, race, class, and/or citizenship inequalities. Second wave of feminist perspectives, for instance, identify housework and most work culturally defined as “women’s work”—including all paid health occupations dominated by women, such as nurses, direct care workers, and hospital workers but also possibly even health, education, and social service occupations—as central to gender subordination. Another important research stream, focusing on domestic labor as women’s work, but recognizing its traditional outsourcing to slaves, servants, and later employees, highlights the complexities of the inequality generated, not only in terms of gender but race, class, and citizenship as well. Bringing these two bodies of literature together in conversation initially pointed to the inaccurate assumption that care work was valued when it became wage labor. The paid labor of domestics, nannies, and elderly care workers, however, remains deeply devalued, most often with those with limited options entering the profession. This article both assesses contradictions within dominant approaches to care work and highlights the cultural and political foundations of the very inequalities that domestic care workers experience.

AB - Over the past decade, social science researchers in the area of feminism, labor, immigration, and family have written extensively on the care work crisis and globalized care work. Depending on how broadly care work is conceived, these writings emphasize unique aspects of gender, race, class, and/or citizenship inequalities. Second wave of feminist perspectives, for instance, identify housework and most work culturally defined as “women’s work”—including all paid health occupations dominated by women, such as nurses, direct care workers, and hospital workers but also possibly even health, education, and social service occupations—as central to gender subordination. Another important research stream, focusing on domestic labor as women’s work, but recognizing its traditional outsourcing to slaves, servants, and later employees, highlights the complexities of the inequality generated, not only in terms of gender but race, class, and citizenship as well. Bringing these two bodies of literature together in conversation initially pointed to the inaccurate assumption that care work was valued when it became wage labor. The paid labor of domestics, nannies, and elderly care workers, however, remains deeply devalued, most often with those with limited options entering the profession. This article both assesses contradictions within dominant approaches to care work and highlights the cultural and political foundations of the very inequalities that domestic care workers experience.

KW - care work

KW - inequality

KW - intersectionality

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84951828409&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84951828409&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0002764215607572

DO - 10.1177/0002764215607572

M3 - Article

VL - 60

SP - 172

EP - 188

JO - American Behavioral Scientist

JF - American Behavioral Scientist

SN - 0002-7642

IS - 2

ER -