Skip to main content

Gender, Children and Families in the Greek Welfare State

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Children¿s Well-Being: Indicators and Research ((CHIR,volume 2))

Abstract

Since the early 1990s there has been increased interest in the Greek welfare state and an attempt by social policy experts to categorize it within one of the main classification schemes offered by comparative social policy literature. Social policy experts have focused on the similarities the Greek welfare state shares with the other South European EU-member welfare states (Italy, Spain, and Portugal) and have concluded they constitute a discerning welfare structure (Ferrera, 1996; Petmesidou & Mossialos, 2006; Sotiropoulos, 2004; Matsaganis, 2002).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    One example (among many) is the official title of the “Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs.”

  2. 2.

    Thrace is located in northeast Greece, one of the most underdeveloped areas of Greece, where the only officially recognized minority (Muslims) resides.

  3. 3.

    The most extensive reform was introduced by Law 2082/1992 on the “reorganization of social welfare and new methods of social welfare,” which was replaced by Law 2646/1998 on the “Reorganization of the National System of Social Care and Other Provisions” which provided for the transition of the Centers for Family Care, from the state-run responsibility of the National Welfare Organization, to the second-tier local authorities in 2003 (l. 3106/03).

  4. 4.

    Unquestionably, for Greece, which has traditionally been a country of emigration, the migrant waves produced serious, multifaceted economic and social effects. At the end of 2004 the number of immigrants was estimated to be 950,000 non-EU foreigners, mostly Albanians, Bulgarians, and Romanians, and 200,000 fellow Greeks (homogeneous). This is compared to the estimated total number of immigrants in 1991 which was 270,000 (Mediterranean Migration Observatory, 2005, p. 1). Immigrants are concentrated in the Municipality of Athens, some 132,000, 17% of total population, Thessaloniki, with 27,000 and 7% of local population, and some tourist islands close to the border with Albania. According to 2001 census data, immigrants, mostly illegal, consist of 10.3% of the Greek workforce and 7% of the total population. In 2007, 112,000 illegal immigrants entered the country.

  5. 5.

    A measure for mature families is a means-tested, “social solidarity benefit” (EKAS), introduced in 1996, of 230€ (from 1/1/2008) that has been given to low income pensioners as a supplementary pension. Single people older than 65 without social insurance receive a monthly allowance of 266€ for housing assistance. In 2008 the Ministry of Economy established a National Fund for Social Cohesion “in order to reduce the risks of social exclusion aiming to define a new financial support for those at risk of poverty” (Ministry of Employment and Social Security, 2007).

  6. 6.

    In 2001 the average social expenditure in the EU-15 was 27.5%, ranging from 14.6% in Ireland to 31.3% in Sweden, whereas Greece shared the eighth position with the UK (27.2%) (European Commission, 2005, pp. 42–43).

  7. 7.

    As Ian Gough mentioned last April in his speech in Athens.

  8. 8.

    Pupils living in these deprived areas, in mountainous areas or on the borders of the big cities, have the highest drop-out rate from compulsory education. These communities face severe socio-economic problems, high unemployment rates, and large numbers of illiterate adult population. People live in very poor housing, and in some cases there is not even running water and heating facilities. Interventions aiming to develop motives or incentives for the integration of these children into primary schools and to encourage them to stay at school until they complete their 9-year compulsory education must be holistic (affecting aspects of individual, family, and social life that influence the relationship between children, their families, and school). For example, http://www.museduc.gr: supporting minority pupils living in underdeveloped areas.

  9. 9.

    Dowry was property given from a bride’s parents to her husband as a precondition for marriage. It was considered as the basis for a good start of a daughter’s married life. It has taken another form; that of immovable property given to children (daughters or sons) at the start of their independent life, usually when they get married.

  10. 10.

    People who are married in a civil wedding are not allowed to baptize a baby (to be a godfather or a godmother) and cannot expect to have an orthodox funeral ceremony.

  11. 11.

    Individuals with disability levels of 67% or more, unable to be employed are granted an allowance of 360€ per month. This allowance is administered by the welfare Ministry and financed by state off-budget, independent resources. For blind persons, the employed and pensioners receive 266€, students and lawyers 532€, whilst deaf people and those suffering from anemia receive 266€.

  12. 12.

    Within the program “Employment and Vocational Training” specialized agencies provide social support services to the above-mentioned vulnerable population groups in order to develop their social and professional skills and facilitate their social inclusion.

  13. 13.

    International research on “Improving Policy Responses and Outcomes to Socio-Economic Challenges” (IPROSEC) carried out during 2000–2003, in 11 countries, eight EU member states: France, Great Britain, Ireland, Greece, Italy, Spain, and Sweden and three under accession: Estonia, Hungary, and Poland.

  14. 14.

    The cash monthly benefit is 260€ per child, 340€ when the child or adult is disabled, 450€ in case of severe disabilities, and 850€ when the child is HIV-positive.

  15. 15.

    This is below the average percentage of children per total resident population in the European Union.

  16. 16.

    The Ministry of Education introduced “additional instruction” and “complementary training” measures offered in the schools as after-school classes in order to reduce the private lessons’ rate but this did not affect the attitudes of students and parents, who trust them more.

  17. 17.

    Reception classes are those that welcome foreign pupils or pupils who have delayed starting school aiming to improve their social and communicative skills (language etc.) and to prepare for their participation in the general classes.

  18. 18.

    The Children Rights Department during its 4.5 years of operation (until 13.12.2007) accepted 1,108 references. 38.1% of those references related to violations of children’s rights in educational issues – mostly issues concerning organization and delivery of supportive measures for weak pupils and their school access. However, 18.7% of the cases related to family and childcare substitutes. A significant number of references related to the welcome conditions and health–social care issues of immigrant and refugee minors. (http:/http://www.synigoros.gr/0-18/gr/children and http:/http://www.e-paideia.et).

  19. 19.

    A payment or allowance for this hard job has been demanded by interested associations since the middle of the 1980s, but remains unfulfilled (Triantafillou & Mestheneos, 2001).

  20. 20.

    Under the Ministry of Labor and Social Security, OAED operates decentralized offices which provide regular information on the availability of different categories of unemployed persons and on the incentives offered for their employment. It also provides activities to strengthen the position of the unemployed and develop the conditions for matching labor supply and demand (counseling on job seeking, training in utilizing specific tools like drafting a curriculum vitae and improving interview skills, etc). 625,000 people benefited from employment programmes such as “New Jobs”, “New Self-Employed Programme” and “Stage”, from 1/1/2006 to 30/4/2007 (Ministry of Employment and Social Security, 2007).

References

  • Ackers, L., & Dwyer, P. (2002). Senior citizenship – Retirement and welfare in the European Union. Bristol: The Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amera, A., Stournara, A., & Manara, A. (2002). Program help at home: Implementation report. Athens: Central Union of Municipalities and Communities (Greek).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagavos, C. (2002). General monitoring report on the situation of families in Greece. Vienna: European Observatory on the Social Situation, Demography and Family – Austrian Institute for Family Matters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin-Edwards, M. (2005). Statistical data on immigrants in Greece: An analytic study of available data and recommendations for conformity with European Union standards. Athens: Mediterranean Migration Observatory.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castles, F. G., & Ferrera, M. (1996). Home ownership and the welfare state: Is Southern Europe different. South European Society and Politics, 1(2), 163–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davaki, K. (2006). Family policies from a gender perspective. In M. Petmesidou & E. Mossialos (Eds.), Social policy developments in Greece (pp. 263–285). London: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2002). Employment in Europe. Luxembourg: Office of Official Publications of the European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2005). The social conditions in European Union 2004. Luxembourg: Office of Official Publications of the European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2008). Report on Equality between women and men 2008. Luxembourg: European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eurostat. (2004). European social statistics: Social protection expenditure and receipts. Luxembourg: European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eurostat. (2008). European social statistic: Social protection expenditure and receipts. Retrieved from http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page

  • Ferrera, M. (1996). The “Southern model” of welfare social Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 6(1), 17–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flaquer, L. (2002). Is there a special model of family policy in Southern Europe? In L. Maratou-Alipranti (Ed.), Families and welfare state in Europe: Trends and challenges in the twenty-first century (pp. 47–84). Athens: Gutenberg (Greek).

    Google Scholar 

  • Greek Ombudsman. (2006). Annual Report 2005. Retrieved from http:/http://www.synigoros.gr/annual _2005_ gr.htm

  • Institute of Social Protection and Solidarity. (2007). Report 2005–2006. Athens: Institute of Social Protection and Solidarity (Greek).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kallinikaki, T. (2000). Foster care for mentally ill adults in Greece. In National Organization of Social Care (Ed.), Foster care (pp. 207–218). Athens: Greek Letters (Greek).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kallinikaki, T. (2010, forthcoming). Tracking the rights of prevention and primary intervention in the health, mental health and welfare systems. In National Observatory for Children Rights (Ed.), The child rights in Greece of 21st century. Athens: Nea Genia (Greek).

    Google Scholar 

  • Katrougalos, G. (1996). The South European welfare model: The Greek welfare state in search of an identity. Journal of South European Social Policy, 6(1), 39–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogidou, D. (1995). Single-parent families: Reality, prospect, social policy. Athens: Nea Synora (Greek).

    Google Scholar 

  • Korpi, W. (2000). Faces of inequality: Gender, class and patterns of inequalities in different types of welfare states. Social Politics, 7(2), 27–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laboratory of Demographic and Social Analysis. (2007). Demographic profile of Greece 2007. Volos: University of Thessaly (Greek).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J. (1992). Gender and the development of the welfare regime. Journal of European Social Policy, 2(3), 159–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matsaganis, M. (2002). Social policy and family in Greece. In L. Maratou-Alipranti (Ed.) Families and welfare state in Europe: Trends and challenges in the twenty-first century. (pp. 161–186). Athens: Gutenberg (Greek).

    Google Scholar 

  • Matsaganis, M., & Tsakloglou, P. (2001). Social exclusion and social policy in Greece. In D. G. Mayers, J. Bergman, & R. Salais (Eds.), Social exclusion in European social policy. (pp. 188–203). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Economy and Finance. (2007). National reform program 2005–2008: Implementation report 2007. Athens: Ministry of Economy and Finance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Employment and Social Security. (2007). Social budget 2007. Athens: General Secretariat of Social Security.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mousourou, L. (2004). Employment: and family life. In L. Mousourou & M. Stratigaki (Eds.), Social policy issues (pp. 73–106). Athens: Gutenberg (Greek).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mousourou, L. (2005). Family and family policy. Athens: Gutenberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Statistical Services of Greece (NSSG). (2007). Greece in figures. Athens: NSSG.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papadopoulos, Th. (2006). Support for the unemployed in a Familistic Welfare Regime. In M. Petmesidou & E. Mossialos (Eds.), Social policy developments in Greece (pp. 219–238). London: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papatheodorou, C., & Petmesidou, M. (2006). Poverty profiles and trends. How do southern European countries compare with each other? In M. Petmesidou & C. Papatheodorou (Eds.), Poverty and social deprivation in the Mediterranean: Trends, policies and welfare prospects in the new millennium (pp. 47–94). London: Zed Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petmesidou, M. (2006a). Tracking social protection: Origins, path peculiarity, impasses and prospects. In M. Petmesidou & E. Mossialos (Eds.), Social policy developments in Greece (pp. 25–54). London: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petmesidou, M. (2006b). Social care services: Amidst high fragmentation and poor initiatives for change. In M. Petmesidou & E. Mossialos (Eds.), Social policy developments in Greece (pp. 319–358). London: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petmesidou, M., & Mossialos, E. (2006). Addressing social protection and policy in Greece. In M. Petmesidou & E. Mossialos (Eds.), Social policy developments in Greece (pp. 1–21). London: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scbunter-Kleemann, S. (2000, May). Gender mainstreaming as a strategy for modernising gender relations. European Commission: European Observatory on Family Matters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sotiropoulos, D. A. (2004). The EU’s impact on the Greek welfare state. Europeanization on paper. Journal of European Social Policy, 14(3), 267–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stasinopoulou, O. (2002). Modern Social Policy Issues. From the Welfare State to “new” welfare pluralism. Care and aging – the modern pluralistic challenge. Athens: Gutenberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stratigaki, M. (2004). State interventions in the private life of the family. Prospects of the family policy. In L. Mousourou & M. Stratigaki (Eds.), Social policy issues (pp. 293–328). Athens: Gutenberg (Greek).

    Google Scholar 

  • Symeonidou, H. (2002). Fertility and family surveys in countries of ECE region: Standard country report – Greece. New York and Geneva: United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Symeonidou, H. (2006). Divorce Greece: country report. Retrieved from http://www.iue.it/personal/Dronkers/divorce/Symeonidou.pdf

  • Taylor-Gooby, P. (2006). Greek welfare reform in a European context. In M. Petmesidou & E. Mossialos (Eds.), Social policy developments in Greece (pp. 405–411). London: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Triantafillou, J., & Mestheneos, E. (2001).Greece. In I. Philip (Ed.), Family care of older people in Europe (pp. 75–95). Amsterdam: IOS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trifilletti, R. (1998). Restructuring social care in Italy. In J. Lewis (Ed.), Center social care and welfare state restructuring in Europe (pp. 175–206). Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNICEF. (2007). Child poverty in perspective: An overview of child well-being in rich countries, Innocenti Report Card 7. Florence: Innocenti Research Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vergeti, A. (2009). Clinical social work with families in crisis situations. Athens: Topos (Greek).

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaimakis, G., & Kallinikaki, T. (2004). Locality and multiculturalism. Sapes Thrace. Athens: Greek Letters (Greek).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Theano Kallinikaki .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kallinikaki, T. (2010). Gender, Children and Families in the Greek Welfare State. In: Ajzenstadt, M., Gal, J. (eds) Children, Gender and Families in Mediterranean Welfare States. Children¿s Well-Being: Indicators and Research, vol 2. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8842-0_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics