Council on Contemporary Families
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • RSS
Yes, I want to support CCF's work
  • Home
  • About
    • About CCF
    • The Society Pages
    • Make a Gift
    • Become a Friend of CCF
    • CCF’s Student Internship Program
  • CCF News & Events
    • Biweekly Media Briefings
    • News & Upcoming Events
    • Members In The News
    • About the CCF Media Awards
  • Publications
    • By Topic
      • Aging
      • Economic Inequality
      • Couples Conflict, Separation & Divorce
      • Family Counseling, Therapy & Parenting Intervention
      • Gender & Sexuality
      • Health & Illness
      • LGBTQ Partnering & Families
      • Parenthood
      • Public Policy
        • Aging (Public Policy)
        • Child Welfare
        • Health Care
        • Labor & Workforce
        • Marriage & Divorce
        • Reproductive Health
        • TANF & Public Assistance
      • Race, Ethnicity & Culture
        • African American Families
        • Asian American Families
        • Latino Families
      • Singles & Dating
      • Work & Family
    • By Publication Type
      • Brief Reports
      • Fact Sheets
      • Online Symposia
        • 2019 Defining Consent Symposium
        • 2019 Parents Can’t Go It Alone Symposium
        • 2018 Gender Matters Symposium
        • 2017 Gender and Millennials Symposium
        • 2016 Welfare Reform Symposium
        • 2015 Intimate Partner Violence Symposium
        • 2015 Housework, Gender, and Parenthood Symposium
        • 2014 New Inequalities Symposium
        • 2014 Gender Revolution Rebound Symposium
      • Press Releases
      • Unconventional Wisdom
      • Opinion Pieces
    • CCF Books
      • Families as They Really Are (2009)
      • Revised Edition Ensuring Inequality
  • Conferences
    • 2020 CCF Conference
      • 2020 Conference Registration
      • 2020 CCF Conference Program
      • 2020 Flash Session & Pamela Smock Travel Award
    • Previous Conference Archives
      • 2018 CCF Conference – Highlights, Pictures, and More!
      • 2016 CCF Conference – Recap!
      • 2014 CCF Conference – Highlights, Summary Talks, Pictures, and More!
  • Membership
    • New Membership
    • Membership Profile Update
  • Experts
    • Find an Expert
    • View by Topics

Same-Sex Couples Devote More Attention to End-of-Life Plans than Heterosexual Couples

Posted on June 19, 2018 in Brief Reports

A Research Brief Prepared for the University of Texas at Austin Population Research Center Research Brief Series

Download a PDF of the Brief

 

Mieke Beth Thomeer, Rachel Donnelly, Corinne Reczek, and Debra Umberson

 

Introduction

End-of-life planning enhances the quality of later-life caregiving, health, and death. Ideally, informal planning—conversation with loved ones about future care and end-of-life preferences—and formal planning—wills, healthcare proxies, advance care directives, and other legal documents—begins long before the end of life process. Planning is most beneficial when implemented in midlife before people are confronted with debilitating conditions or difficult decisions. Yet only about one-fourth of adults in midlife have advance care directives.

The institution of marriage, particularly heterosexual marriage, involves socially established and legally sustained patterns of norms, roles, values, and behaviors that provide spouses with informal guides to their roles and obligations. Yet norms about husbands and wives taking care of each other “in sickness and in health” may interfere with actually discussing and planning such care prior to serious illness or infirmity. Indeed, studies repeatedly show that heterosexual married couples often do not know each other’s wishes, do not always provide care for each other or receive adequate care from children and extended family, and sometimes even face interference from families.

On the other hand, the institution of marriage is less-established for same-sex couples—marriage only recently became a right and the spouses do not necessarily conform to the marital norms often seen in different-sex couples—which may change the incentives for end-of-life planning. For example, same-sex couples may be less likely to expect end-of-life care from a spouse and therefore be more likely to discuss their expectations for the end of life. In addition, same-sex spouses may worry about encountering discrimination that could lead to family interference and lack of family support and therefore take proactive steps to protect themselves at the end of life. Conversely, they may be wary of going to a lawyer or asking for help from family members because of those same fears of discrimination.

Therefore, formal and informal end-of-life planning unfolds differently for same-sex and different-sex spouses due to different incentives and disincentives that result from the institutional aspects of marriage and higher levels of discrimination against sexual minorities. Thinking about the end of life can be difficult for anyone but you can look at this latest infographic to see how you can slow down your mind’s perception of time, in order to make you feel more in control.

The authors conducted in-depth interviews with 90 spouses at midlife in 45 gay, lesbian, and heterosexual marriages. All respondents were Massachusetts residents at the time of the study (2012–2013); Massachusetts was the first U.S. state to legalize same-sex marriage, in 2004. At the time of the interviews, same-sex marriage was not federally protected and was not legal in the majority of U.S. states.

Key Findings

  • Informal planning conversations and formal end-of-life plans differ for same-sex and different-sex couples. Same-sex spouses devote considerable attention to both informal and formal end-of-life planning, while heterosexual spouses report minimal informal or formal planning. Two key motivators explain this difference:
    • Weaker legal protections for same-sex relationships: Greater engagement in end-of-life planning among gay and lesbian couples has been largely motivated by the weaker legal protections around same-sex relationships, especially prior to legalization of same-sex marriage across the U.S.
    • Concerns about family interference and a lack of family support:
      • Same-sex couples—especially lesbian couples—expressed concerns about family interference and about a lack of support from extended family at the end of life.
      • Heterosexual couples were largely unconcerned about the potential for extended family going against their end-of-life wishes. Therefore, heterosexual couples may be unprepared if they do encounter family interference.
  • Couples have different assumptions about what their spouse knows and what family will do at the end of life.
    • Heterosexual couples tended to assume that their spouses knew their wishes and that family members (especially adult children) would provide end-of-life care.
    • Gay and lesbian couples did not make these same assumptions and instead relied on multiple explicit conversations with spouses and friends about their plans and wishes.
      • Same-sex couples often created plans for multiple hypothetical scenarios and worked with lawyers to put legal protections in place.
      • Most gay and lesbian couples did not discuss being concerned about lack of family support. Rather, they talked about building strong friendship networks and having explicit conversations with those friends about providing future care.

Thomeer brief figure

Click here to expand figure

Policy Implications

The norms and expectations of heterosexual marriage serve as disincentives for different-sex couples to plan for later-life care and end of life. On the other hand, while gay and lesbian couples may be better prepared for death, their greater planning for end of life may reflect valid concerns about the need for more protection. Recent state initiatives—such as Florida’s proposed bill that would allow hospices to refuse to serve lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender adults—indicate that the end of life may actually be a time of heightened discrimination for gay and lesbian couples. Initiatives should aim towards more equality at the end of life. Indeed, policymakers should develop end-of-life planning incentives for all—as well as those not in long-term relationships—which would have the potential to increase well-being for the dying and the bereaved.

Reference

Thomeer, M.B., Donnelly, R., Reczek, C. & Umberson, D. (2017). Planning for Future Care and the End of Life: A Qualitative Analysis of Gay, Lesbian, and Heterosexual Couples. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 58(4):473-487.

Suggested Citation

Thomeer, M.B., Donnelly, R., Reczek, C. & Umberson, D. (2018). Same-sex couples devote more attention to end-of-life plans than heterosexual couples. PRC Research Brief 3(8). DOI: 10.15781/T2RF5KZ8Q.

About the Authors

Mieke Beth Thomeer (mthomeer@uab.edu) is an assistant professor of sociology at the University of Alabama at Birmingham; Rachel Donnelly is a doctoral student in the Department of Sociology and the Population Research Center at The University of Texas at Austin; Corinne Reczek is an associate professor of sociology and women’s, gender, and sexuality studies and a faculty affiliate at the Institute for Population Research at The Ohio State University; and Debra Umberson is a sociology professor and director of the Population Research Center at UT Austin. Thomeer and Reczek are also former Population Research Center NICHD Predoctoral Trainees.

Acknowledgements

This research was supported, in part, by an Investigator in Health Policy Research Award to Debra Umberson from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation; grant R21AG044585 from the National Institute on Aging (PI: Debra Umberson); grant P2CHD042849 awarded to the Population Research Center at The University of Texas at Austin by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; and grant T32 HD007081, Training Program in Population Studies, awarded to the Population Research Center at the University of Texas at Austin by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Post Views: 1,708
Share
Topics: Aging / Cohabitation, Committed Relationships & Marriage / Gender & Sexuality / LGBTQ Partnering & Families

Recent News & Publications

  • CCF’s Joshua Coleman on the Complicated Realities of Parental Estrangement
  • New from CCF! Do the Media’s “Sexy Girl” Messages Trump Their “Girl Power” Ones?
  • Media Messages to Young Girls: Does “Sexy Girl” Trump “Girl Power”?
  • CCF Board Member Barbara Risman On How To Help Working Parents While Also Equalizing Children’s Educational Access
  • New From CCF! What’s the Role of Child Protective Services? New Study Points to Parallels with Policing

Featured Expert

Elizabeth Gershoff

Professor, University of Texas at Austin

View Expert

Browse Publications by Topic

  • Adoption & Foster Care
  • Aging
  • Biracial/ Multicultural Children and Interracial/ Multicultural Families
  • Childcare (Providers & Systems)
  • Children
  • Cohabitation, Committed Relationships & Marriage
  • Couples Conflict, Separation & Divorce
  • Division of Labor in Families
  • Domestic Violence & Child Abuse
  • Economic Inequality
  • Family Caregiving (for Adults, Children, and Disabilities)
  • Family Counseling, Therapy & Parenting Intervention
  • Family Law
  • Feminism & Families
  • Fertility,Reproduction & Sexual Health
  • Gender & Sexuality
  • Health & Illness
  • History & Trends on Gender, Marriage & Family Life
  • Immigrant, Mixed Status & Transnational Families
  • LGBTQ Partnering & Families
  • Loss & Resiliency within Families
  • Media Briefs
  • Military Families
  • Parenthood: Motherhood/Fatherhood
  • Public Policy
  • Race, Ethnicity & Culture
  • Sexual Abuse & Misconduct
  • Singles & Dating
  • Step-Families
  • Transition – Adolescents to Adulthood
  • Transition – Couples to Parenting
  • Trauma and Disaster
  • Work & Family

The Council of Contemporary Families is housed at the University of Texas at Austin through the generous support from:

Why should you support CCF?

Loading Quotes...
© 2014 Council on Contemporary Families - Web Design by HelloAri - Managed by CCF Admin Team