Chapter 11 Families and retirement1

Bibliography

Retirement processes and experiences are typically treated from an "individualistic" perspective (Szinovacz and Ekerdt 1995, Szinovacz, Ekerdt and Vinick 1992, Blossfeld 1990), that is, they are viewed exclusively in relation to individual characteristics such as health, work history, or Social Security and pension coverage. The purpose of this paper is to correct this perspective by delineating the intricate linkages between family and retirement experiences and their relationship to policies. I first present a conceptual and theoretical framework for family-retirement linkages and then a detailed discussion of available research addressing such linkages. The paper concludes with an assessment of family-policy linkages and recommendations for future research. Specifically, the paper addresses the following questions:

Why is it important to consider family-retirement linkages?
What are the connections between family and retirement experiences? An overview
How do family contexts influence retirement transitions?
How does retirement affect families?
How are retirement policies linked to families?
What research is needed on families and retirement?

Top of Page

Why is it important to consider family-retirement linkages?

The importance of considering family-retirement linkages is perhaps best understood from the life course perspective. This perspective draws attention to four concepts that are crucial for the understanding of family-retirement linkages: (a) the interdependence of life spheres; (b) linked lives; (c) contextual embeddedness of life transitions; and (d) timing and sequencing of life transitions (Bengtson and Allen 1993, Hagestad 1990, Elder 1995, Settersten 1999, Szinovacz 2002).

Interdependence of life spheres

Even though individuals occupy numerous roles and operate in diverse spheres (e.g., family, work, leisure), it is the entire role set that structures and defines individuals' lives and influences their behaviors. It is well known that family and work spheres are closely linked throughout the life course. For example, child births often foster at least temporary withdrawal from the labor force, care for older family members can lead to absenteeism and changes in work hours (Johnson and Favreault 2000, Pavalko and Artis 1997), and stress in either the family or work sphere can spill over into the other realm (Rogers and May 2003). This interdependence between work and family spheres carries over into retirement: Family considerations influence retirement decisions, and retirement transition processes affect family members' behaviors and well-being.

Linked lives

Individuals' attitudes and behaviors are often influenced by or responsive to others, most prominently the members of their families. Partners and children influence our decision-making (Szinovacz 1987b), needs of family members propel us to provide help (Börsch-Supan et al. 1990, Boaz, Hu and Ye 1999, Eggebeen 1992, Pezzin and Schone 1999), and the well-being of one partner is often tied to that of the other partner (Haug, Belgrave and Jones 1992). The linked lives of family members also permeate retirement transition processes and experiences. Partners can influence the timing of retirement, and one family member's retirement affects the lives and well-being of other family members. Retirement benefit regulations can restrain family members' retirement plans and, in doing so, have consequences for family members' post-retirement well-being.

Contextual embeddedness

Life transitions are contextually embedded, that is, the planning of and adjustment to life transitions such as retirement depend on the specific contexts under which the transition occurs. For example, retirement transitions are often related to past work history and selected job characteristics (Hayward, Friedman and Chen 1998). However, family contexts also play a role in retirement transitions and experiences as do family-related benefit rules (e.g., rules regarding benefits of spouses).

Timing and sequencing of life transitions

Sociologists speak of a "chronologization" of the life course (Kohli 1986), that is, the notion that the life course is segmented and specific life spheres dominant at particular times in our lives. For instance, education occurs mainly early in life, adulthood up to but excluding old age is devoted to employment and child bearing and rearing, and retirement is restricted to old age. Although chronologization of the life course has become less pronounced during the past decades (as exemplified by life-long learning, postponed child bearing, post-retirement employment, or early retirement), cultural norms and personal expectations about the "appropriate" timing of life transitions continue to guide behaviors (Settersten and Hagestad 1996) and "off-time" transitions can undermine well-being (Hagestad 1990).

It is not only important when specific life transitions occur but also how they develop and are sequenced in relation to other life experiences and transitions (Szinovacz 2003). Trajectories refer to development within a life sphere such as the work career. Some work career trajectories (e.g., stable work patterns that ensure adequate pensions) may enhance retirement well-being (O'Rand and Henretta 1999), whereas others may hinder it (e.g., unstable work patterns, see (Marshall, Clarke and Ballantyne 2001)). Pathways are constituted by combinations of trajectories from different life spheres and the timing of life transitions in relation to each other. For example, dual-career couples may experience retirement differently than single-earner couples, and each spouse's work career may influence the couple's joint retirement plans.

Each of these concepts, interdependence of life spheres, linked lives, contextual embeddedness, and timing and sequencing of life transitions, points to the importance of considering family circumstances and experiences as they affect and are affected by retirement transitions. A general overview of such family-retirement linkages is provided in the next section.

Top of Page

What are the connections between family and retirement experiences? An overview

Figure 11.1 summarizes a model of family-retirement linkages which is grounded in assumptions of the life course perspective. Based on this model, retirement transition processes are contingent on contexts (work, marital, familial) that define individuals' experiences in specific roles (contextual embeddedness). It is further assumed that these contexts are connected (interdependence of work and family spheres). In addition, retirement decisions can be influenced by family members and affect their lives (linked lives). Retirement transitions also must be understood in terms of changes in other life spheres (interdependence; timing and sequencing). Although contexts other than family (e.g., work, leisure) have importance for retirement experiences, this paper focuses exclusively on the family realm.

Figure 11.1
Linkages betweeen family and retirement experiences.

Family contexts consist of marital and family characteristics that precede the retirement transition and can impinge on retirement decision and adaptation processes. They include family-related statuses, spouse characteristics, activities, the quality of relationships and norms/attitudes. Statuses are the family positions held by workers, that is, whether workers are married, have children, have grandchildren, have living parents or parents-in-law, or have siblings or siblings-in-law. The influence of these contexts on retirement transitions may be either direct (e.g., wives tend to retire earlier if their husbands' retirement precedes their own) or it may be indirect. For example, having siblings per se might have little impact on retirement transitions. However, siblings who care for frail parents may enable the worker to remain in the labor force rather than to opt for perhaps premature retirement. The impact of family statuses will be conditioned by the type of activities involved in each role, the quality of each relationship and pertinent attitudes and norms. For instance, the push effect of husbands' retirement on wives' retirement may depend on the couple's gender role attitudes. If spouses abide by traditional attitudes that stress husband's role as main family provider, the continued employment of the wife after the husband's retirement can be particularly problematic (Szinovacz 1996), and husbands may be less likely to pressure their wives into retirement if spouses (and especially husbands) have more modern gender role attitudes. Family contexts can influence the initial retirement transition process itself (timing, pattern, perception), as well as the family and retirement outcomes following the initial retirement transition. In addition, the implementation of such family context-related retirement choices is contingent on policies such as benefit reductions in case of early retirement. For example, when age differences between spouses are large, couples may be unable to retire jointly (typically the preferred retirement transition for couples) because joint retirement would either require one spouse to remain in the labor force after s/he reaches benefit eligibility or lead the other spouse to retire with considerable benefit reductions due to early retirement. Past research offers some insights into family contexts that influence retirement decisions but provides little information on the interplay between family contexts and policies in retirement transition processes.

How and under which family circumstances individuals retire will then affect both post-retirement family activities and relationships as well as retirement outcomes, again contingent on policies. For example, if retirement benefit rules prompt wives to postpone their retirement well beyond that of their husbands, marital relations as well as personal well-being may suffer (impact on family outcomes), or disenchanted husbands may decide to reenter the labor force until their wives reach benefit eligibility and retire (retirement outcomes). Whether such options are feasible depends on prevalent policies. For instance, reentry may be impossible in countries with mandatory retirement rules. Current evidence on the outcomes of retirement transitions is quite limited. Some studies have addressed the impact of retirement on marital relations and personal well-being, but they rarely consider family contexts underlying the retirement transition as predictors of either family or retirement outcomes. They also lack information on how outcomes may be mutually shaped by family contexts and retirement policies. Available evidence pertaining to the family-retirement linkages shown in Figure 1 is described in the following sections.

Top of Page

How do family contexts influence retirement transitions?

A growing body of research suggests that family contexts can play an important role in retirement decisions. Much of this literature has focused on marital contexts but some evidence on other family contexts exists as well. Frequently, the impact of marital and family contexts differs by gender (Arber and Ginn 1991, Clemens 1997, Disney, Grundy and Johnson 1997, Niederfranke 1991, Ruhm 1996) and by race or ethnicity (Williamson and McNamara 2003, Szinovacz, DeViney and Davey 2001).

Marital contexts

Numerous marital contexts have been linked to retirement decision processes. They include marital status itself, health, age, employment and pension characteristics of spouses, as well as qualities of the marital relationship.

Several studies show that married individuals are more prone to retire and tend to retire somewhat earlier than unmarried persons (Blöndal and Scarpetta 1998, Flippen and Tienda 2000, Hardy and Hazelrigg 1999, Pienta, Burr and Mutchler 1994, Szydlik and Ernst 1996, for contradictory evidence see Lindeboom (1998) and Schmidt (1995). Whether the married retire earlier than their unmarried counterparts may be contingent on several factors, but especially the age difference between spouses (Ruhm 1996, Szinovacz 2002). For example, wives with much older husbands are less likely to retire early as are married men with younger wives (Ruhm 1996). The reasons for these marital status effects on retirement timing are complex. They include the association between economic well-being and marital status (Wilmoth and Koso 2002, Yabiku 2000) as well as the differential attractiveness of retirement for married and unmarried individuals. For example, both divorce and widowhood prior to retirement have been linked to lower preretirement income and assets (Holden and Kuo 1996). In addition, marital status changes preceding retirement can impinge on retirement timing. For example, White women who marry in their preretirement years tend to retire earlier, whereas preretirement marital disruptions lead especially Black women to postpone retirement (Williamson and McNamara 2003).

Increases in the labor force participation of women in general, and middle-aged women in particular, during the past 50 years imply that retirement is becoming a "couple phenomenon" (Poulin 1998, Szinovacz and Ekerdt 1995). This trend means that spouses face not only decisions about husbands' but also about wives's retirement and both spouses' retirement in relation to each other (Szinovacz 1989a). Studies from a variety of countries (US, Europe) show that dual-earner couples strive to retire jointly (Disney, Grundy, and Johnson 1997, Blöndal and Scarpetta 1998, Allmendinger 1990, Blau 1998, Henkens 1999, Johnson 2004, Johnson and Favreault 2001, Pepermans 1992, Zimmerman et al. 2000, Zweimueller, Winter-Ebmer and Falkinger 1996). One reason for this retirement pattern is that it satisfies traditional provider role expectations (i.e., husbands are the main providers). Some qualitative research indicates, for example, that husbands who retire prior to their wives exert pressure on their wives to retire as well (Skirboll and Silverman 1992, Szinovacz 1989a). According to another study, retired husbands' attitude toward their wives' continued employment proved to be one of the most potent predictors of wives' retirement (Szinovacz and DeViney 2000). Other reasons include spouses' preference for joint leisure activities , similarities in spouses' background (age, education) or shared economic restrictions (Gustman and Steinmeier 2002, Henkens, Kraaykamp, and Siegert 1993, Kohli et al. 1989). However, couples are not always able to implement this preferred timing pattern. Data from the 1997 Canadian Survey of Consumer Finances indicate, for example, that only a third of couples retire together. In 37% of couples the wife retired first, and in the remaining 30% of couples, husband's retirement preceded their wives' (Gower 1998). US data also confirm that many couples do not retire jointly (O'Rand and Farkas 2002). Selected circumstances such as a large age difference between spouses, disability of one spouse, economic need for at least one spouse to remain employed, or spouses' work commitment can keep couples from retiring jointly (Allmendinger 1990, Arber and Ginn 1995, Hurd 1990, O'Rand, Henretta and Krecker 1992, O'Rand and Farkas 2002).

Spouses' retirement timing decisions further depend at least partly on benefit eligibility and pensions of both spouses. Individuals whose spouses have achieved Social Security or pension eligibility are less likely to remain in the labor force (Anderson, Clark and Johnson 1980), but others observed the opposite effect (Allmendinger 1990) or report only effects of husbands' retirement income on their wives' retirement (Zweimueller, Winter-Ebmer and Falkinger 1996). Another study, relying on German national data, shows that husbands tend to retire earlier the higher their wives' relative contribution to the couple's income, whereas wives with relative higher incomes tend to remain longer in the labor force (Drobnic 2002).

Another factor in couples' retirement decisions is spouse's health or disability. Studies addressing this issue yield contradictory evidence. Some indicate that spouse's illness delays retirement, whereas others find that it hastens retirement (Hayward, Friedman and Chen 1998, Blau 1998, Szinovacz 2000, Arber and Ginn 1995, Hurd 1990, Honig 1996, Pienta and Hayward 1997). This inconsistency most likely derives from the fact that illness of the spouse entails both caregiving responsibilities and economic costs. The balance between these two forces will then determine whether the healthy spouse opts for earlier or delayed retirement.

That spouses do indeed exert mutual influence on each other's retirement decisions is also evident from studies that asked spouses directly about such influences (Henkens and van Solinge 2002, Smith and Moen 1998). Most couples admit to at least some influence of the spouse but it is not clear which spouse has more influence. The Dutch study by Henkens and Van Solinge (2002) indicates more influence of wives on husbands, whereas the US study by Smith and Moen (1998) indicates more influence of husbands on wives.

Retirement decisions are also influenced by the quality of the marital relationship. Spouses in close relationships, those who have joint hobbies, and those desiring more time together are more inclined to retire, whereas couples in conflict-laden relationships may delay retirement to avoid too much togetherness (Henkens 1999, Henkens and Siegert 1994, Henkens and Tazelaar 1997, Honig 1998, Kohli et al. 1989, Szinovacz and Schaffer 2000). Some husbands also postpone retirement because they fear that loss of the main provider role could diminish their power position in the marriage (Kulik 1996, Szinovacz and Schaffer 2000).

Family contexts

Evidence on other family conditions influencing retirement transitions is rather sparse. Most of this research focuses either on the presence of dependents in the household or on care obligations. Financial obligations, especially for dependent children but also for other household members, can render retirement too costly and lead to a delay of the retirement transition (Hayward, Friedman and Chen. 1998, Szinovacz, DeViney and Davey 2001, Blöndal and Scarpetta 1998, Pienta, Burr and Mutchler 1994, Zweimueller, Winter-Ebmer and Falkinger 1996, Anderson, Clark and Johnson 1980, Clark, Johnson and McDermed 1980, Talaga and Beehr 1995). In contrast, the burden of combining employment with care for frail relatives has been shown to push some caregivers into retirement. This seems to be particularly the case for women and Whites compared to Blacks (Ruhm 1996, Zimmerman et al. 2000, Szinovacz 1989a, Talaga and Beehr 1995). Very little research addressed whether close ties to relatives (including adult children) affect retirement transitions. One study indicates that childless married women and childless unmarried men may delay retirement (Szinovacz, DeViney and Davey 2001).

Although findings are not always consistent, this body of literature provides clear evidence that marital and family contexts impinge on retirement attitudes and behaviors. Marriage itself embodies financial and leisure advantages that induce some couples to retire earlier. Among dual-earner couples retirement is a particularly complex process. It involves considerations pertaining to both spouses' benefit eligibility, expected post-retirement income, health and lifestyle preferences. Financial and care obligations for family members other than one's spouse exert economic and time constraints on individuals that are reflected in their retirement decisions. These divergent marital and family influences on retirement processes create equally diverse post-retirement scenarios, ranging from single-retired to dual-retired couples, from retirees with dependent children to those caring for frail parents or spouses, or from couples who enjoy their time together to those desiring more separate life styles. Because of this diversity, individuals' adaptation to retirement varies as well. How marital and family conditions impinge on post-retirement well-being is addressed in the next section.

Top of Page

How does retirement affect families?

As is the case for retirement decisions, much of the literature dealing with effects of retirement on families addresses marital relationships. Nevertheless, a few studies go beyond the couple to explore the influence of retirement on other family relationships.

Retirement effects on marital relationships

Myths abound that retirement causes divorce or leads to serious marital problems (Harbert, Vinick and Ekerdt 1992). Generally, scientific research offers little support for such myths. Marital relationships demonstrate considerable continuity over the retirement transition and divorce among retirees remains rare (Atchley 1992, Orbuch et al. 1996). Indeed, retirement tends to reinforce the quality of the preretirement marriage: Happily married couples seem to profit from retirement, whereas unhappy couples' marriages deteriorate after retirement (Davey and Szinovacz 2003, Myers and Booth 1996). It is not entirely clear whose (the husband's or the wife's) retirement is more important for marital quality. Some studies suggest primary importance of wives' retirement especially for husbands' post-retirement well-being (Szinovacz 1996, Szinovacz and Schaffer 2000). However, other studies suggest that both spouses' retirement matters even though in different ways (Davey and Szinovacz 2003). In addition, each spouse's post-retirement adjustment spills over to the other spouse (Haug, Belgrave and Jones 1992, Buchmüller 1996, van Solinge and Henkens 2005).

Despite the overall continuity in marital quality over the retirement transition, there is evidence for specific changes (both positive and negative) in marital relations and interactions after retirement. Freedom from work-related stresses and obligations often brings about positive changes in marital relationships (Rosenkoeter and Garris 1998). Couples enjoy the increased opportunities for companionship and joint endeavors (Dorfman and Hill 1986, Vinick and Ekerdt 1991a). Similarly, couples report fewer tensions, a more relaxed atmosphere at home and fewer arguments (Vinick and Ekerdt 1991a, Szinovacz 1980), changes they attribute to cessation of the spillover from work-related stresses into the marital relationship (Hughes, Galinsky and Morris 1992, Rogers and May 2003). Another change viewed positively by some couples is that some husbands increase their housework contributions after they retire, especially if their wives are still employed or are housewives. However, wives' retirement seems to restore a more traditional division of household labor (Dorfman and Heckert 1988, Dorfman 1992, Niederfranke 1991, Szinovacz 2000, Szinovacz and Harpster 1994).

Even though retirement brings about many positive changes in marital relations, some negative consequences have been noted as well. Such negative consequences tend to center on household routines and time use. One such problem is the so-called "husband underfoot" problem. Some wives resent that retired husbands interfere in the household domain and interrupt their daily routines (Cliff 1993, Ekerdt and Vinick 1993, Siegert 1994, Schäuble 1995). Because retired husbands often rely on their wives for leisure planning or their wives feel compelled to plan leisure activities for their husbands (Gilford 1986, Vinick and Ekerdt 1991b), wives further complain that husbands' retirement curtails their privacy and the time they have for themselves (Crawford 1971, Hill and Dorfman 1982, Keating and Cole 1980, Vinick and Ekerdt 1991b). The often-cited saying: "I married him for better or for worse but not for lunch" reflects such sentiments. Whereas wives are dissatisfied with husbands' impingement on their domain, husbands are sometimes displeased with their wives' household management. As they spend more time at home, retired husbands obtain a "second look" at their wives' household routines. Both "underfoot" and "second look" problems can lead to marital conflicts (Vinick and Ekerdt 1991b, Kohli et al. 1989).

Finding the right balance between togetherness and separation or what Caradec (1994) calls a "good distance" is another prerequisite for high-quality retirement marriages. Too much togetherness or disagreement over involvement in joint activities can undermine marital quality (Kohli et al. 1989, Dorfman and Hill 1986, Schäuble 1995). Such conflicts often occur when one spouse depends primarily on the marriage for the fulfillment of intimacy and social needs (Kulik 1996). Myers and Booth (1996) found, for example, that retirement contributes to marital quality if spouses have many friends, and that a decline in friendships upon retirement reduces marital quality. Similarly, Kulik and Bareli (1997) reported higher status anxiety among retired husbands who depended heavily on wives for fulfillment of social needs. Results based on the US Health and Retirement Study further confirmed that the impact of retirement on the marital power structure may influence well-being. This study suggested that retirement undermines married retirees' retirement satisfaction if it enhances the other partner's influence in the marriage (Szinovacz and Davey 2005).

Particularly important for couples' post-retirement marital quality and spouses' personal well-being is the timing of their retirement in relation to each other and in relation to their plans. Studies show quite consistently that marital quality and personal well-being decline when husbands retire while their wives are still employed (Szinovacz 1996, Davey and Szinovacz 2003, Myers and Booth 1996, Szinovacz and Schaffer 2000, Lee and Shehan 1989, Moen, Kim and Hofmeister 2001, Kim and Moen 2002). This retirement pattern contradicts traditional gender role expectations that emphasize men's role as main providers. Indeed, its negative effect on marriages and spouses seems to be particularly strong among couples who abide by traditional gender role norms (Szinovacz 1996). However, negative outcomes associated with husband's earlier retirement may be short-lived and contingent on husbands' perception of shared leisure interests as well as couples' options to retire jointly (van Solinge and Henkens 2005). In addition, wives' retirement adjustment seems to be more difficult if spouse's health problems lead to premature retirement (Szinovacz and Davey 2004).

Thus, retirement can lead to some marital problems, especially if spouses' expectations are not met (Kohli et al. 1989, Vinick and Ekerdt 1992). It is not clear, however, whether such problems persist. Most researchers argue that the typically long-term marriages of retired couples withstand potential upheavals surrounding the retirement transition. These couples are able to work out compromises, so that retirement-related marital problems are usually of short duration (Vinick and Ekerdt 1991b). Of course, problems surrounding the single-retired husband pattern are automatically resolved once the wife retires.

Retirement effects on family relationships

Whereas post-retirement marriages have attracted the attention of numerous researchers, practically nothing is known about retirement influences on other family relationships. Because the family constitutes the main life sphere of many retirees (Kelly and Westcott 1991), family relationships tend to take on greater significance after retirement (Niederfranke 1991). It is not clear, however, whether greater significance also leads to more contacts. Some studies indicate that retirees increase contacts with children, grandchildren, or siblings, but others refute these findings or find variations by gender (Niederfranke 1991, Kohli et al. 1989, Niederfranke 1989, Kremer 1985, Schäuble 1989, Östberg 1992). For example, men in particular may catch up on previously neglected contacts with their children or grandchildren (Niederfranke 1991, Szinovacz, DeViney and Davey 2001). However, it is not clear whether such increased contacts also further post-retirement well-being. For example, Szinovacz and Davey (in press) found that high grandchild care obligations in conjunction with retirement did not improve well-being as measured through depressive symptoms. Retirees may also be less able to provide financial support to children (Kremer 1985). In addition, kin obligations such as care for relatives may become less stressful after retirement due to decreased role conflict (Kolland 1988). However, caregiving obligations also restrain retirees' leisure and may "spoil" their retirement plans (Kolland 1988, Vinick and Ekerdt 1991b). Furthermore, women who feel forced into retirement due to care obligations or family needs tend to have problems adapting to retirement (Szinovacz 1989a, Szinovacz 1987a, Szinovacz and Davey 2004).

Taken together, retirement effects on marital and family relationships seem to depend on two main factors: the preretirement quality of relationships and the extent to which post-retirement marital and family relations meet retirees' and their spouses' or family members' expectations. Retirement typically does not magically fix preretirement marital problems (unless they are tied exclusively to one or both spouses' employment), but it can enhance marital quality among already happy couples as they find more time for joint endeavors. Similarly, the quantity and quality of post-retirement kin relations will depend not only on retirees' but also on their relatives' needs and wishes. For example, parents may desire more contacts with adult children, but their children may fear that such increased contacts would render their parents too dependent on them (Remnet 1987). Realistic expectations and finding the right balance between togetherness and separation will safeguard marital and kin relationships after retirement.

Top of Page

How are retirement policies linked to families?

The institutionalization of retirement in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century was founded on the development of employer pensions and later government sponsored old age security programs such as Social Security in the United States (Costa 1998). Benefits based on these programs are typically tied to workers' age, employment history, job tenure, earnings and, in some cases, marital status (Social Security Administration 1999).² My discussion focuses on Social Security regulations in the United States, but is applicable to other countries with similar old age security rules (for a detailed discussion of these issues see also (Meyer and Bellas 1995).

Old age security programs are linked to family concerns in three main ways: They shift provision for old family members from the family to the state; they offer albeit partial relief to families with disabled workers and provide for workers' survivors; and they incorporate regulations that favor specific family arrangements and life course trajectories. On the other hand, family behaviors can influence old age security programs in a dual way: They have implications for the solvency of such programs as well as the success of specific changes in policies.

Provision for older persons

The foremost implication of old age security programs is that it shifts the main responsibility for old age economic security from the family to the state (Gratton and Rotondo 1992, Harber and Gratton 1994) through taxation of workers' earnings. It has been argued that the current Social Security system profits older persons at the expense of the young (see Pampel 1998, Williamson, Watts-Roy and Kingson 1999) for summaries of these arguments) and undermines intergenerational relations. Both arguments have been criticized in the gerontological literature (Kingson, Hirshorn and Cornman 1986, Binstock 1991, Quadagno 1991, Williamson, Watts-Roy and Kingson 1999).

Prior to the development of old age security programs, older persons either had to accumulate savings that guaranteed economic survival when they could no longer work or depended on family members or community charity for survival in old age (Gratton and Rotondo 1992, Harber and Gratton 1994, Held 1982, Laslett 1977, Thomson 1989). The accumulation of household savings (so-called family funds) was often at the expense of children and unmarried young adults whose wages constituted an integral part of this accumulation system. The system required children and young adults to join the labor force at early ages and to contribute a majority of their earnings to the family fund. Early employment precluded further education and often the prospect of upward mobility, whereas contribution of wages to the family fund hindered accumulation of own savings and could lead to delayed marriage.

Furthermore, lack of old age security programs force many older persons to work until disability or death (Costa 1998) as is still the case in some developing countries (International Labour Office 1999). Old age welfare systems thus regulate older workers' exit from the labor force and open job opportunities for younger people (Szinovacz and Ekerdt 1995).

The old family fund system not only contained considerable disadvantages for young family members, it was also vulnerable to family misfortune, as evidenced by considerable old-age poverty prior to old age security programs (Harber and Gratton 1994, Held 1982, Laslett 1977, Thomson 1989). Indeed, in developing countries that lack old age security provisions, many elders still rely on their families' economic support. Such family support often proves to be unreliable and creates unwanted dependencies (Ngan, Chiu and Wong 1999). By decreasing such dependencies, old age security systems encourage emotional kin ties that are not burdened by financial considerations and duties (Kingson, Hirshorn and Cornman 1986, Knipscheer 1988, Quandagno and McClellan 1989). Of course, families continue to provide for each other in times of need. Yet for general old age support, even today's younger generation favors state-based support of the elderly (Treas and Spence 1989, Dekker 1993, Rix 1999).

Thus, an important function of age security programs is that they release adult children from most direct financial responsibilities for their parents and allow them to devote their financial resources to their own children's upbringing and education (Szinovacz 1995). They also regulate the labor market, protect families from misfortune and foster emotional kin ties. Furthermore, as Szinovacz (2003) notes:

Provisions for family members

Many old age security programs include provisions not only for workers themselves but also for their family members in the form of spouse allowances and survivor benefits. Allowances for spouses of living partners are grounded on the traditional provider role ideology that views men as main and often single earners (Bernard et al. 1995, Arber and Ginn 1991, Sainsbury 1996, Rolf 1991). Although this ideology permeated thinking at the time many old age security programs were founded, it has undergone rapid change during the latter part of the twentieth century as evidenced by the rise in women's employment in Western countries (Prinz and Marin 1999). Nevertheless, many old age security programs still provide spouse benefits. In the United State, for example, spouses are entitled to either their own benefit (based on their own work career) or to one half of their spouse's benefit, whichever is higher (Social Security Administration 1999). Because husbands often have the higher entitlement, their wives rely on their husbands' rather than their own benefits (National Economic Council Interagency Work Group on Social Security 1998). This regulation, on the one hand, favors married recipients and, on the other hand, negates the value of women's accomplishments in the labor force (Hieden-Sommer 1993, Pampel 1998, Rosenman and Winocur 1990).

In addition to spouse allowances, most old age security programs include provisions for survivors (widowed persons and dependent children of workers). Survivor benefits reflect the same male provider role ideology as spouse allowances (i.e., economically self-sufficient survivors could rely on their own benefits as the unmarried are required to do). Survivor benefits for dependent children, on the other hand, constitute another example for the protective role of old age security programs against family misfortune and demonstrate that old age welfare programs can profit not only older persons but also children.

The regulations for spouse and (adult) survivor benefits not only reflect traditional gender role ideology, they are also at odds with other types of family change. For instance, they entail disadvantages for divorcees who (at least in the United States) are only entitled to benefits derived from their previous marriage if that marriage lasted 10 years or more. However, most marriages break up earlier. Similarly, there is continued debate about entitlements of persons in alternative family unions, especially homosexual couples.

Old age security regulations and family careers

Old age security benefits are typically based on average earnings over a considerable time period. They, therefore, favor workers with uninterrupted work histories and high earnings. This creates a dual disadvantage for many women. Women still earn less than men, and they often disrupt their careers for child bearing and child rearing or take on part-time work to accommodate parenting and employment responsibilities. The benefit penalties for work interruptions thus take on the character of child bearing and child rearing penalties (Chen 1988). Women's employment in industries that are not covered by private pensions and investment provisions in private pension plans further aggravate this economic disadvantage (Allmendinger, Brückner and Brückner 1991, Arber and Ginn 1995, Gonnot 1995, Kingson and O'Grady-LeShane 1993, O'Rand 1988, Quadagno 1988, Rolf and Wagner 1992, Walker, Alber and Guillemard 1993). The European Community countries as well as Canada (but not the United States) counteract the mother penalty in old age security provisions by crediting some care years as "work" years in benefit calculations (Prinz and Marin 1999). However, such credits do not fully compensate for lost work years. They also contain no adjustments for other family work such as care for frail parents or other disabled family members. Women's lower benefits in turn reinforce the need for spouse allowances and the perpetuation of traditional gender role ideology and contribute to economic insecurity of single mothers who never remarried and whose marriages lasted under 10 years (Holden and Kuo 1996).

In summary, then, old age security provisions for other family members offer a safety net for families whose main provider(s) are unable to work. They also guarantee economic security for spouses who either did not work at all or have interrupted work histories that preclude old age financial well-being. However, they also reinforce traditional family values and provide inadequate protection for those who follow nontraditional family careers.

The interplay between family behaviors and old age security programs

Because old age welfare programs are financed through taxes (either general income taxes or special old age security taxes), they are contingent on the size of the work force. Fertility behavior of families in succeeding cohorts thus determines to a large extent (except for migration) the solvency of old age security programs. The predicted shortfall in old age security funds in the second quarter of this century derives from the aging of the baby boom generation (those born in the 1950's and 1960's) and the continued decline in fertility since the later part of the twentieth century (Williamson, Watts-Roy and Kingson 1999). Although fertility patterns originate from a complex set of factors, mother penalties in old age security regulations certainly don't encourage women to bear more children.

Old age security rules are not only at odds with family care obligations, they also discount the wishes of many couples for joint retirement. In many Western nations husbands are slightly older than their wives, yet retirement age is the same for men and women.³ In the United States, benefits for the couple are reduced if either spouse retires before reaching full benefit eligibility (currently at age 65). This means that husbands with younger wives would have to postpone retirement beyond age 65 if their wives are to reach full eligibility, an option that runs counter to many couples' preferences. The result is an intricate interplay between spouses' preferences and old age security rules. This is demonstrated by the effect of interest in joint retirement leisure on labor force participation in the later years, as well as by the mutual influence of spouses' benefit eligibility and pension wealth on each other's retirement decisions (Gustman and Steinmeier 2002, Coile 2003, Kim and Feldman 1998). It also means that changes in old age security programs or employer retirement incentives that go counter to spouses' preferences may not fully succeed. Some regulations, on the other hand, can facilitate joint retirement of couples. For example, the addition of a spouse allowance to Canada's Income Security program resulted in increased earlier joint retirement among eligible couples (Baker 1999).

These two examples show that family behaviors have consequences for old age security programs and that policies will be more successful if they accommodate family preferences and needs. On a more general level, research linking family and retirement experiences overcomes both the individualistic and economic bias that predominates in the current literature. Retirees are (and in many cases are foremost) family members. As such they adapt their retirement decisions not only to bureaucratic rules but also (and in many cases primarily) to their families' needs.

Top of Page

What research is needed on families and retirement?

The preceding discussion leaves little doubt that family-retirement linkages are still not well understood. Although practical all family-retirement linkages deserve further exploration, some research needs seem particularly pressing. These include research on family-retirement linkages beyond the marital relationship, studies that truly capture the complexities of retirement-family linkages, and investigations of the interplay between family needs and retirement policies.

Much of the current literature on families and retirement focuses on couples. Although most men and a majority of women enter retirement while they are married, neglect of the unmarried retiree population is problematic because it implicitly entails a male bias (most unmarried retirees are women) and because it is the unmarried who may face special problems in retirement. Not only are unmarried retirees more prone to have financial difficulties in retirement (Social Security Administration 2003, National Advisory Council on Aging 1999), they also lack the companionship marriage affords. How the unmarried fare in retirement will depend on both their work and family careers, as well as the timing of marital disruptions in relation to the retirement transition. For example, divorce or widowhood following shortly after retirement may be particularly detrimental to well-being if retirees' post-retirement plans focused on joint leisure activities with their spouses.

There also is need for studies that reflect the complexity of linkages between work and family careers. To date much of the literature focuses on the retirement transition itself (typically the transition from employment to full retirement) but little is know about how the intersection of work and family career trajectories impinges on retirement processes and outcomes. Some studies indicate, for example, that variations in work interruptions due to motherhood influence women's retirement timing (Pienta, Burr and Mutchler 1994, Pienta 1999). Other research shows that close to one third of retirees experienced other family transitions (e.g., marital disruption, illness or death of family members, moves) within three years prior to or following retirement. Such accumulation of life events surrounding the retirement transitions was linked to reduced well-being especially among women (Szinovacz and Washo 1992). Only by exploring such diverse pathways will we come closer to understand the complexities of retirement transition processes.

Because old age security policies have been relatively stable and most research centered on specific countries, it is difficult to assess the interplay between family needs and policy regulations. There can be little doubt that individuals' retirement behaviors are responsive to old age security policies (Gruber and Wise 1999, Kohli and Rein 1991), but we lack knowledge on how much this response is moderated by specific family contexts such as marital relationships, family obligations and even family policies (for an overview of potential effects of family and household structures see (Gonnot 1995). For example, couples' retirement timing is affected differently when retirement ages for men and women are similar and when they are dissimilar (Szinovacz 2002). In addition, the effect of old age security programs may be influenced by other policies such as those relating to family leave and family care. Programs providing financial care support to frail older persons (such as in Austria and Germany) may enable care recipients to hire help during time periods when family caregivers are at work and thus reduce the negative impact of care on retirement benefits. Lack of such programs, on the hand, may force some middle-aged caregivers out of the labor force, thus counteracting policies that encourage postponement of retirement (Bosworth and Burtless 1998, Walker and Taylor 1998, Walker 1999, Szinovacz and Davey 2004).

Linkages between the work and family spheres throughout the life course manifest themselves in close connections between family circumstances and retirement transitions. Family contexts influence retirement transitions and retirement under diverse family circumstances has consequences for retirees' economic and psychological well-being. To further our understanding of retirement processes we will have to pay closer attention to these linkages. Such understanding is necessary to identify risk groups among retirees and to develop programs that help individuals, couples, and family members adapt to the retirement transition. In-depth knowledge of family-retirement linkages will also be needed to assess how recent changes in the old age security policies of many countries will impact families and how families will respond to these changes.

Top of Page

Bibliography

Allmendinger, J. 1990. "Der Übergang in den Ruhestand von Ehepaaren. Auswirkungen individueller und familiärer Lebensverläufe." In Lebensverläufe und sozialer Wandel. K.U. Mayer (ed.). Wiesbaden. Westdeutscher Verlag.

Allmendinger, J., H. Brückner and E. Brückner. 1991. "Auswirkungen von Familien- und Erwerbsarbeit auf die Situation im Ruhestand." In Vom Regen in die Traufe. K.U. Mayer, J. Allmendiger and J. Huinink (eds.). Frankfurt. Campus.

Anderson, K., R.L. Clark and T. Johnson. 1980. "Retirement in dual-career families." In Retirement Policy in an Aging Society. R.L. Clark (ed.). Durham, N.C. Duke University Press.

Arber, S. and J. Ginn. 1995. "Choice and constraint in the retirement of older women." In Connecting Gender and Ageing. S. Arber and J. Ginn (eds.). Buckingham. Open University Press.

Arber, S. and J. Ginn. 1991. Gender and Later Life. London. Sage Publications.

Atchley, R.C. 1992. "Retirement and marital satisfaction." In Families and Retirement. M. Szinovacz, D. Ekerdt and B.H. Vinick (eds.). Newbury Park, CA. Sage.

Baker, M. 1999. The Retirement Behavior of Married Couples: Evidence from the Spouse's Allowance. Cambridge, MA. National Bureau of Economic Research.

Bengtson, V.L. and K.R. Allen. 1993. "The life course perspective applied to families over time." In Sourcebook of Family Theories and Methods. P.G. Boss et al. (eds.). New York. Plenum.

Bernard, M. et al. 1995. "Gendered work, gendered retirement." In Connecting Gender and Ageing. S. Arber and J. Ginn (eds.). Buckingham. Open University Press.

Binstock, R.H. 1991. "Aging, politics, and public policy." In Growing Old in America. B. Hess and E. Markson (eds.). New Brunswick, NJ. Transaction Publishers.

Blau, D.M. 1998. "Labor force dynamics of older married couples." Journal of Labor Economics. 16: 595 to 629.

Blöndal, S. and S. Scarpetta. 1998. The Retirement Decision in OECD Countries. Paris. OECD.

Blossfeld, H.P. 1990. Berufsverläufe und Arbeitsmarktprozesse. "Ergebnisse sozialstruktureller Längsschnittsuntersuchungen." In Lebensverläufe und Sozialer Wandel. K.U. Mayer (ed.). Westdeutscher Verlag. Wiesbaden.

Boaz, R., J. Hu and Y. Ye. 1999. "The transfer of resources from middle-aged children to functionally limited elderly parents: Providing time, giving money, sharing space." Gerontologist. 39, 6: 648 to 657.

Börsch-Supan, A., J. Gokhale, L.J. Kotlikoff, and John N. Morris. 1990. The Provision of Time to the Elderly by Their Children. Cambridge, MA. National Bureau of Economic Research.

Bosworth, B. and G. Burtless (eds.). 1998. Aging Societies: The Global Dimension. Washington, D. C. Brookings Institution Press. 1 to 110.

Buchmüller, R. 1996. "Ehepaare vor dem Ruhestand." In Vor dem Ruhestand. R. Buchmüller et al. (eds.). Freiburg. Universitätsverlag.

Caradec, C. 1994. "Le problème de la "bonne distance" conjugale au moment de la retraite (Finding the right conjugal distance once retired)." Revue Française de Sociologie. 35: 101 to 124.

Chen, Y.P. 1988. "Better options for work and retirement: Some suggestions for improving economic security mechanisms for old age." Annual Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics. 8: 189 to 216.

Clark, R.L., T. Johnson and A.A. McDermed. 1980. "Allocation of time and resources by married couples approaching retirement." Social Security Bulletin. 43: 3 to 13.

Clemens, W. 1997. Lebenslagen in spater Erwerbstatigkeit und fruhem Ruhestand. Frauen zwischen Arbeit und Rente. Westdeutscher Verlag.

Cliff, D.R. 1993. "'Under the wife's feet': Renegotiating gender divisions in early retirement." The Sociological Review. 41: 30 to 53.

Coile, C.C. 2003. "Retirement incentives and couples' retirement decisions." NBER Working Paper Series. Cambridge, MA. National Bureau of Economic Research.

Costa, D.L. 1998. The Evolution of Retirement: An American Economic History, 1880 to 1990. Chicago, IL. The University of Chicago Press.

Crawford, M.P. 1971. "Retirement and disengagement." Human Relations. 24: 255 to 278.

Davey, A. and M.E. Szinovacz. 2003. "Dimensions of marital quality and retirement." Journal of Family Issues.

Dekker, P. 1993. "Image, self-image and participation of the elderly: An international comparison." In Report on the Elderly 1993. J.M. Timmermans (ed.). Rijswijk, NL. Social and Cultural Planning Office.

Disney, R., E. Grundy and P. Johnson. 1997. The Dynamics of Retirement: Analyses of the Retirement Surveys. London. The Stationary Office.

Dorfman, L.T. 1992. "Couples in retirement: Division of household work." In Families and Retirement. M. Szinovacz, D.J. Ekerdt and B.H. Vinick (eds.). Newbury Park, CA. Sage.

Dorfman, L.T. and D.A. Heckert. 1988. "Egalitarianism in retired rural couples: Household tasks, decision-making, and leisure activities." Family Relations. 37: 73 to 78.

Dorfman, L.T. and E.A. Hill. 1986. "Rural housewives and retirement: Joint decision-making matters." Family Relations. 35: 507 to 514.

Drobnic, S. 2002. "Retirement timing in Germany: The impact of household characteristics." International Journal of Sociology. 32, 2: 75 to 102.

Eggebeen, D.J. 1992. "Family structure and intergenerational exchanges." Research on Aging. 14, 4: 427 to 447.

Ekerdt, D.J. and B.H. Vinick. 1993. The Husband Underfoot: Explaining Resilient Ideas About Retirement's Effect on Marriage. Paper presented at the Meeting of the Gerontological Society of America. New Orleans, LA.

Elder, G., Jr. 1995. "The life course paradigm: Social change and individual development." In Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development. P. Moen, J.G. Elder and K. Lüscher (eds.). Washington, D.C. American Psychological Association.

Flippen, C. and M. Tienda. 2000. "Pathways to retirement: Patterns of labor force participation and labor market exit among the pre-retirement population by race, Hispanic origin, and sex." Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences. 55B: S14-S27.

Gilford, R. 1986. "Marriages in later life." Generations. 10: 16 to 20.

Gonnot, J.P. 1995. "Demographics changes and the pension problem: Evidence from twelve countries." In Social Security, Household and Family Dynamics in Ageing Societies. J. Gonnot, N. Keilman and C. Prinz (eds.). New York. Kluwer.

Gower, D. 1998. "Retirement patterns of working couples." Perspectives on Labour and Income. 10, 3, Autumn. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 75-001-XPE.

Gratton, B. and F.M. Rotondo (eds.). 1992. "The "family fund": Strategies for security in old age in the industrial era." In Families and Retirement. M. Szinovacz, D.J. Ekerdt and B.H. Vinick (ed.). Newbury Park. Sage.

Gruber, J. and D. Wise. 1999. Social Security Programs and Retirement Around the World. Chicago. University of Chicago Press.

Gustman, A.L. and T.L. Steinmeier. 2002. Social Security, Pensions and Retirement Behavior within the Family. Cambridge, MA. National Bureau of Economic Research.

Hagestad, G.O. 1990. "Social perspectives on the life course." In Handbook of Aging and the Social Sciences. R.H. Binstock and L.K. George (eds.). San Diego, CA. Academic Press.

Harber, C. and B. Gratton. 1994. Old Age and the Search for Security: An American Social History. Bloomington, IN. Indiana University Press.

Harbert, E., B.H. Vinick and D.J. Ekerdt. 1992. "Marriage and retirement: Advice to couples in popular literature." In Qualitative Methods in Family Research. J.F. Gilgun, K. Daly and G. Handel (eds.).Newbury Park, CA. Sage.

Hardy, M.A. and L. Hazelrigg. 1999. "A multilevel model of early retirement decisions among autoworkers in plants with different futures." Research on Aging. 21: 275 to 303.

Haug, M.R., L.L. Belgrave and S. Jones. 1992. "Partners' health and retirement adaptation of women and their husbands." Journal of Women and Aging. 4: 5 to 29.

Hayward, M.D., S. Friedman and C. H. 1998. "Career trajectories and older men's retirement." Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences. 53B: S91 to S103.

Held, T. 1982. "Rural retirement arrangements in seventeenth-to-nineteenth-century Austria: A cross-community analysis." Journal of Family History. 7: 227 to 254.

Henkens, K. 1999. "Retirement intentions and spousal support: A multi-actor approach." Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences. 54B: S63 to S74.

Henkens, K. and F. Tazelaar. 1997. "Explaining retirement decisions of Civil Servants in the Netherlands." Research on Aging. 19: 139 to 173.

Henkens, K. and H. Van Solinge. 2002. "Spousal influences on the decision to retire." International Journal of Sociology. 32, 2: 55 to 74.

Henkens, K. and J. Siegert. 1994. "Early retirement: The case of the Netherlands." Labour. 8: 143 to 154.

Henkens, K., G. Kraaykamp and J. Siegert. 1993. "Married couples and their labour market status." European Sociological Review. 9: 67 to 78.

Hieden-Sommer, H. 1993. "Pensions reform im Namen der Gleichheit?" Österreichische Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft. 23: 177 to 193.

Hill, E.A. and L.T. Dorfman. 1982. "Reactions of housewives to the retirement of their husbands." Family Relations. 31: 195 to 200.

Holden, K.C. and H.H. Kuo. 1996. "Complex marital histories and economic well-being: The Continuing legacy of divorce and widowhood as the HRS cohort approaches retirement." The Gerontologist. 36: 383 to 390.

Honig, M. 1998. "Married women's retirement expectations: Do pensions and Social Security matter?" American Economic Review. 88: 202 to 206.

Honig, M. 1996. "Retirement expectations: Differences by race, ethnicity, and gender." The Gerontologist. 36: 373 to 382.

Hughes, D., E. Galinsky and A. Morris. 1992. "The effects of job characteristics on marital quality: Specifying linking mechanisms." Journal of Marriage and the Family. 54: 31 to 42.

Hurd, M.D. 1990. "The joint retirement decision of husbands and wives." In Issues in the economics of aging. D.A. Wise (ed.). Chicago. The University of Chicago Press.

International Labour Office. 1999. Yearbook of Labour Statistics. Geneva.

Johnson, R. W. 2004. "Do spouses coordinate their retirement decisions? " Issues in Brief. Boston. Center for Retirement Research, Boston College.

Johnson, R.W. and M.M. Favreault. 2001. Retiring Together or Retiring Alone: The Impact of Spousal Employment and Disability on Retirement Decisions. Boston. Center for Research at Boston College.

Johnson, R.W. and M.M. Favreault. 2000. Parental Care at Midlife: Balancing Work and Family Responsibilities Near Retirement. Washington, DC. The Urban Institute.

Keating, N.C. and P. Cole. 1980. "What do I do with him 24 hours a day? Changes in the housewife role after retirement." The Gerontologist. 20: 84 to 89.

Kelly, J.R. and G. Westcott. 1991. "Ordinary retirement: Commonalities and continuity." International Journal Aging and Human Development. 32: 81 to 89.

Kim, J.E. and P. Moen. 2002. "Retirement transitions, gender, and psychological well-being: A life-course, ecological model." Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences. 57, 3: 212 to 222.

Kim, S. and D.C. Feldman. 1998. "Healthy, wealthy, or wise: Predicting actual acceptances of early retirement incentives at three points in time." Personnel Psychology. 51: 623 to 642.

Kingson, E.R. and R. O'Grady-LeShane. 1993. "The effects of caregiving on women's Social Security benefits." The Gerontologist. 33: 230 to 239.

Kingson, E.R., B.A. Hirshorn and J.M. Cornman. 1986. Ties that Bind: The Interdependence of Generations. Washington, DC. Seven Locks Press.

Knipscheer, C.P.M. 1988. "Temporal embeddedness and aging within the multigenerational family: The case of grandparenting." In Emergent Theories of Aging. J.E. Birren and V.L. Bengtson (eds.). New York. Springer.

Kohli, M. 1986. "The world we forgot: A historical review of the life course." In Later Life. V.W. Marshall (ed.). Beverly Hills, CA. Sage.

Kohli, M. and M. Rein. 1991. "The changing balance of work and retirement." In Time for Retirement: Comparative Studies of Early Exit from the Labor Force. M. Kohli et al. (eds.). New York. Cambridge University Press.

Kohli, M.C., Gather, H. Kunemund, B. Mucke, M. Schurkmann, W. Voges, and J. Wolf. 1989. "Je früher - desto besser? Die Verkürzung des Erwrbslebens am Beispiel des Vorruhestandes." In der chemischen Industrie. Berlin. Sigma.

Kolland, F. 1988. "Nach dem Arbeitsleben Konzentration auf die Familie?" In Arbeit - Freizeit - Lebenszeit. Neue Übergänge im Lebenszyklus. L. Rosenmayr and F. Kolland (eds.). Westdeutscher Verlag.

Kremer, Y. 1985. "Parenthood and marital role performance among retired workers: Comparison between pre- and post-retirement period." Aging and Society. 5: 449 to 460.

Kulik, L. 1996. "Perceptions of conjugal relations among Israeli males- pre-retirement versus early and late retirement phases." Contemporary Family Therapy. 18, 1: 115 to 128.

Kulik, L. and H.Z. Bareli. 1997. "Continuity and discontinuity in attitudes toward marital power relations: Pre-retired vs. retired husbands." Aging and Society. 17: 571 to 595.

Laslett, P. 1977. Family Life and Illicit Love in Earlier Generations. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.

Lee, G.R. and C.L. Shehan. 1989. "Retirement and marital satisfaction." Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences. 44: S226 to S230.

Lindeboom, M. 1998. Microeconometric Analysis of the Retirement Decision: The Netherlands. Working Paper no. 207. Economics Department. OECD.

Marshall, V.W., P.J. Clarke and P.J. Ballantyne. 2001. "Instability in the retirement transition." Research on Aging. 23, 4: 379 to 409.

Meyer, M.H. and M.L. Bellas. 1995. "U.S. old-age policy and the family." In Handbook of Aging and the Family. R. Blieszner and V.H. Bedford (eds.). Westport, CN. Greenwood Press.

Moen, P., J.E. Kim and H. Hofmeister. 2001. "Couples' work/retirement transitions, gender, and marital quality." Social Psychology Quarterly. 64, 1: 5 to 71.

Myers, S.M. and A. Booth. 1996. "Men's retirement and marital quality." Journal of Family Issues. 17: 336 to 358.

National Advisory Council on Aging. 1999. 1999 and Beyond: Challenges of an Aging Canadian Society. Ottawa, Canada. Canadian Government.

National Economic Council Interagency Working Group on Social Security. 1998. Women and Retirement Security.

Ngan, R., S. Chiu and W. Wong. 1999. "Economic security and insecurity of Chinese older people in Hong Kong: A case of treble jeopardy." Hallym International Journal of Aging. 1: 35 to 45.

Niederfranke, A. 1991. "Lebensentwürfe von Frauen beim Übergang in den Ruhestand." In Frauen-Alterrsicherung. C. Gather et al. (eds.). Berlin. Sigma.

Niederfranke, A. 1989. "Bewältigung der vorzeitigen Berufsaufgabe bei Männern." Zeitschrift für Gerontologie. 22: 143 to 150.

O'Rand, A.M. 1988. "Convergence, institutionalization, and bifurcation: Gender and the pension acquisition process." Annual Review of Gerontology. 8: 132 to 155.

O'Rand, A.M. and J.C. Henretta. 1999. Age and Inequality: Diverse Pathways through Later Life. Boulder, CO. Westview Press.

O'Rand, A.M. and J.I. Farkas. 2002. "Couples' retirement timing in the United States in the 1990's." International Journal of Sociology. 32, 2: 11 to 29.

O'Rand, A.M., J.C. Henretta and M.L. Krecker. 1992. "Family pathways to retirement." In Families and Retirement. M.E. Szinovacz, D.J. Ekerdt and B.H. Vinick (eds.). Newbury Park, CA. Sage.

Orbuch, T.L. et al. 1996. "Marital quality over the life course." Social Psychology Quarterly. 59: 162 to 171.

Östberg, H. 1992. Retirement, Health and Socio-Psychological Conditions. Malmö, Sweden. Lund University.

Pampel, F.C. 1998. Aging, Social Inequality, and Public Policy. Thousand Oaks, CA. Pine Forge Press.

Pavalko, E.K. and J.E. Artis. 1997. "Women's caregiving and paid work: Causal relationships in late midlife." Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences. 52B: S170 to S179.

Pepermans, G. 1992. "Retirement decisions in a discrete choice model and implications for the government budget. The case of Belgium." Journal of Population Economics. 5: 229 to 243.

Pezzin, L.E. and B.S. Schone. 1999. "Intergenerational household formation, female labor supply and informal caregiving: A bargaining approach." Journal of Human Resources. 34, 3: 475 to 489.

Pienta, A.M. 1999. "Early childbearing patterns and women's labor force behavior in later life." Journal of Women and Aging. 11: 69 to 83.

Pienta, A.M. and M.D. Hayward. 1997. "Labor force transitions of husbands and wives: Understanding retirement, health, and marriage." In Paper Presentation at the Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America. Washington, DC.

Pienta, A.M., J.A. Burr and J.E. Mutchler. 1994. "Women's labor force participation in later life: The effects of early work and family experiences." Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences. 49: S231 to S239.

Poulin, S. 1998. "Dual-pensioner families." Perspectives on Labour and Income. 8, 3, Autumn: 24 to 29. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 75-001-XPE.

Prinz, C. and B. Marin. 1999. Pensionsreformen. Nachhaltiger Sozialumbau am Beispiel Österreichs. Frankfurt. Campus.

Quadagno, J. 1991. "Generational equity and the politics of the welfare state." In Growing Old in America. B. Hess and E.W. Markson (eds.). New Brunswick, NJ. Transaction Publishers.

Quadagno, J.S. 1988. "Women's access to pensions and the structure of eligibility rules: Systems of production and reproduction." The Sociological Quarterly. 29: 541 to 558.

Quandagno, J.S. and M.S. 1989. "The other functions of retirement." Generations. 13: 7 to 10.

Remnet, V.L. 1987. "How adult children respond to role transitions in the lives of their aging parents." Educational Gerontology. 13: 341 to 355.

Rix, S.E. 1999. "The politics of old age in the United States." In The Politics of Old Age in Europe. A. Walker and G. Naegele (eds.). Buckingham, UK. Open University Press.

Rogers, S.J. and D.C. May. 2003. "Spillover between marital quality and job satisfaction: Long-term patterns and gender differences." Journal of Marriage and the Family. 65, 2: 482 to 495.

Rolf, G. 1991. "Ideologiekritik am Rentenrecht und ein Reformvorschlag zur eigenständigen Alterssicherung von Frauen." In Frauen-Alterssicherung. C. Gather et al. (eds.). Berlin. Sigma.

Rolf, G. and G. Wagner. 1992. "Erwerbstätigkeit von Frauen und Alterssicherung." In Frauenerwerbstätigkeit - Demographische, soziologische, ökonomische, und familienpolitische Aspekte. K.S. (Hsgb.) (ed.). Wiesbaden. Bundesinstitut für Bevölkerungsforschung.

Rosenkoeter, M.M. and J.M. Garris. 1998. "Psychosocial changes following retirement." Journal of Advanced Nursing. 27: 966 to 976.

Rosenman, L. and S. Winocur. 1990. "Australian women and income security for old age: A cohort study." Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology. 5: 277 to 291.

Ruhm, C.J. 1996. "Gender differences in employment behavior during late middle age." Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences. 51B: S11 to S17.

Sainsbury, D. 1996. Gender Equality and Welfare States. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.

Schäuble, G. 1995. Sozialisation und Bildung der jungen Alten vor und nach der Berufsaufgabe. Stuttgart. Enke.

Schäuble, G. 1989. Die schönsten Jahre des Lebens? Stuttgart. Enke.

Schmidt, P. 1995. Die Wahl des Rentenalters. Frankfurt. Lang.

Settersten, Richard A. 1999. Lives in Time and Place. Amityville, NY. Baywood.

Settersten, R.A. and G.O. Hagestad. 1996. "What's the latest? II. Cultural age deadlines for educational and work transition." The Gerontologist. 36: 602 to 613.

Siegert, W. 1994. Liebe in Pension. Wie sich Beziehungen nach dem Arbeitsleben ändern. Reinbek bie Hamburg. Rowohlt.

Skirboll, E. and M. Silverman. 1992. "Women's retirement: A case study approach." Journal of Women and Aging. 4: 77 to 90.

Smith, D.B. and P. Moen. 1998. "Spousal influence on retirement: His, her, and their perceptions." Journal of Marriage and the Family. 60: 734 to 744.

Social Security Administration. 2003. Fast Facts and Figures about Social Security. (accessed December 8, 2003).

Social Security Administration. 1999. Social Security Programs Throughout the World. Government statistics.

Szinovacz, M.E. 2003. "Contexts and pathways: Retirement as institution, process, and experience. " In Retirement. Reasons, processes, and outcomes. G.E. Adams and T.A. Beehr (eds.). New York. Springer.

Szinovacz, M.E. 2002. "Couple retirement patterns and retirement age." International Journal of Sociology. 32, 2: 30 to 54.

Szinovacz, M.E. 2000. "Changes in housework after retirement: A panel analysis." Journal of Marriage and the Family. 62: 78 to 92.

Szinovacz, M.E. 1996. "Couple's employment/retirement patterns and marital quality." Research on Aging. 18: 243 to 268.

Szinovacz, M.E. 1995. "Retirement. " In Encyclopedia of marriage and the family. D. Levinson (ed.). New York. Macmillan.

Szinovacz, M.E. 1989a. "Decision-making on retirement timing." In Dyadic Decision Making. D. Brinberg and J. Jaccard, (eds.). New York. Springer.

Szinovacz, M.E. 1987a. "Preferred retirement timing and retirement satisfaction in women." International Journal of Aging and Human Development. 24: 301 to 317.

Szinovacz, M.E. 1987b. "Family power relations and processes." In Handbook on Marriage and Family. M. Sussman and S. Steinmetz (eds.). New York. Plenum Press.

Szinovacz, M.E. 1980. "Female retirement: Effects on spousal roles and marital adjustment." Journal of Family Issues. 1: 423 to 440.

Szinovacz, M.E and A. Davey. In press. "Effects of retirement and grandchild care on depressive symptoms." International Journal of Aging and Human Development. 62, 1.

Szinovacz, M.E and A. Davey. 2005. "Retirement and marital decision-making: Effects on retirement satisfaction." Journal of Marriage and Family. 67, 2: 387 to 398.

Szinovacz, M.E and A. Davey. 2004. "Retirement transitions and spouse's disability: Effects on depressive symptoms." Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences. 59B , 6: S333 to S342.

Szinovacz, M.E. and A.M. Schaffer. 2000. "Effects of retirement on marital conflict management." Journal of Family Issues. 21: 367 to 389.

Szinovacz, M.E. and C. Washo. 1992. "Gender differences in exposure to life events and adaptation to retirement." Journal of Gerontology. 47: S191 to S196.

Szinovacz, M.E. and D.J. Ekerdt. 1995. "Families and retirement." In Handbook on Aging and the Family. R. Blieszner and V.H. Bedford (eds.). Westport, CT. Greenwood Press.

Szinovacz, M.E. and P. Harpster. 1994. "Couple's employment/retirement status and the division of household work." Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences. 49: S125 to S136.

Szinovacz, M.E. and S. DeViney. 2000. "Marital characteristics and retirement decisions." Research on Aging. 22: 470 to 489.

Szinovacz, M.E., D.J. Ekerdt and B.H. Vinick. 1992. "Families and retirement: Conceptual and methodological issues." In Families and Retirement. M. Szinovacz, D.J. Ekerdt and B.H. Vinick (eds.). Newbury Park, CA. Sage.

Szinovacz, M.E., S. DeViney and A. Davey. 2001. "Influences of family obligations and relationships on retirement: Variations by gender, race, and marital status." Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences. 56B: S20 to S27.

Szydlik, M.E. and J. Ernst. 1996. "Der Übergang in den Ruhestand in Westdeutschland zwischen 1984 und 1992." In Lebenslagen im Wandel: Sozialberichtertattung im Längsschnitt. W. Zapf, J. Schupp and R.H. (Hsgb.) (eds.). Frankfurt. Campus.

Talaga, J.T. and T.A. Beehr. 1995. "Are there gender differences in predicting retirement decisions?" Journal of Applied Psychology. 80: 16 to 28.

Thomson, D. 1989. "The elderly in an urban-industrial society: England, 1750 to the present." In An Aging World. J.M. Eekelaar and D. Pearl (eds.). Oxford, UK. Clarendon Press.

Treas, J. and M. Spence. 1989. "Intergenerational economic obligations in the welfare state." In Aging Parents and Adult Children. J.A. Mancini (ed.). Lexington, MA. Lexington Books.

van Solinge, H. and K. Henkens. 2005. "Couples' adjustment to retirement: A multi-actor panel study." Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences. 60B, 1: S11 to S20.

Vinick, B.H. and D.J. Ekerdt. 1992. "Couples view retirement activities: Expectation versus experience." In Families and Retirement. M. Szinovacz, D.J. Ekerdt and B.H. Vinick (eds.). Newbury Park, CA. Sage.

Vinick, B.H. and D.J. Ekerdt. 1991a. "Retirement: What happens to husband-wife relationships?" Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry. 24: 23 to 40.

Vinick, B.H. and D.J. Ekerdt. 1991b. "The transition to retirement: Responses of husbands and wives." In Growing old in America. B.B. Hess and E.W. Markson (eds.). New Brunswick, NJ. Transaction Books.

Walker, A. 1999. "The future of pensions and retirement in Europe: Towards a productive aging." Hallym International Journal of Aging. 1: 3 to 15.

Walker, A. and P. Taylor. 1998. Combating Age Barriers in Employment: A European Portfolio of Good Practice. Loughlinstown, Ireland. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.

Walker, A., J. Alber and A.-M. Guillemard. 1993. Older People in Europe: Social and Economic Policies. OECD. Paris.

Williamson, J.B. and T.K. McNamara. 2003. "Interrupted trajectories and labor force participation." Research on Aging. 25, 2: 87 to 121.

Williamson, J.B., D.M. Watts-Roy and E.R. Kingson. 1999. The Generational Equity Debate. New York. Columbia University Press.

Wilmoth, J. and G. Koso. 2002. "Does marital history matter? Marital status and wealth outcomes among preretirement adults." Journal of Marriage and the Family. 64, 1: 254 to 268.

Yabiku, S.T. 2000. "Family history and pensions: The relationships between marriage, divorce, children, and private pension coverage." Journal of Aging Studies. 14: 293 to 312.

Zimmerman, L., B. Mitchell, A. Wister and G. Gutman. 2000. "Unanticipated consequences: A comparison of expected and actual retirement timing among older women." Journal of Women and Aging. 12: 109 to 128.

Zweimüller, J., R. Winter-Ebmer and J. Falkinger. 1996. "Retirement of spouses and social security reform." European Economic Review. 40: 449 to 472.

Notes

1. This paper was supported by NIA grant R01 AG13180, Maximiliane E. Szinovacz, principal investigator.
2. This does not apply to universal old age pensions that are based exclusively on worker's age. However, such universal pensions are typically complemented by work-related pensions. The following discussion does not pertain to universal old age pensions.
3. Some European countries (e.g., Austria and Germany still have lower retirement ages for women than men but these provisions will be phased out.