How Much Care is Enough? Carer’s Guilt and Bergsonian Time

Abstract

Despite devoting their time to another person’s needs, many carers paradoxically experience guilt during their caregiving tenure concerning whether they are providing enough care. When discussing the “enough” of anything, what is at stake is that thing’s quantification. Given that there are seemingly no quantifiable units of care by which to measure the role, concerns regarding whether enough care is being provided often focus on what constitutes enough time as a carer. In exploring this aspect of the carer’s experience, two key parameters emerge; (1) guilt, and, (2) quantified time. The guilt that carers report regarding whether they devote “enough time” to their caring responsibilities can be examined through Henri Bergson’s philosophical conception of quantification. By integrating contemporary analyses of carers’ guilt from the social sciences, most significantly via the sociology of Rebecca Olson, the relationship between quantified time and guilt becomes apparent. A quantified conception of time frames the assumption that spending more time on caregiving will reduce the amount of guilt felt by a carer. However, whilst care is structured according to quantified, clocked and calendared time, there are not comparable, quantifiable parameters for guilt. This means that suppositions of an inverse relationship between how much time one spends giving care, and how much guilt they will feel in terms of their caregiving, are problematic. These insights become relevant to health care policies via a coherence with calls to make the role of unpaid, caregiving, labour time more visible, and by explaining how understanding quantified time can help policies guide how caregivers negotiate guilt.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

  1. 1.

    Bergson explains this via the counting of sheep in a paddock, where we “neglect their individual differences” in order to “take into account only what they have in common” [2:76].

  2. 2.

    This evokes Saint Augustine’s exasperation regarding the double-movement of time’s passage, which when dealing with grief provides solace in terms of new experiences, but also fragments and upsets the self with its consequent passing [1:77–79].

  3. 3.

    When considering carers’ control of time, Olson integrates the concept of “discretionary time” founded by Robert Goodin, James Rice, Antti Parpo and Lina Eriksson’s [10]. Discretionary time avoids the mistakes of conceptions that categorise the time spent in care work as a leisure activity.

  4. 4.

    In The rules of sociological method [5], Durkheim describes the social fact as if it is an objective thing. As with other sciences, the relation of the social scientist to the phenomena being explored is “objective. It is dominated entirely by the idea that social facts are things” [5:143].

  5. 5.

    Lewis subsequently states that Freud mistakenly conflates guilt and shame [15], a claim also made by Tangney and Dearing in Shame and guilt [24].

References

  1. 1.

    Augustine of Hippo. (1961 (circa 400 B.C.E.)). Confessions. London: Penguin Books.

  2. 2.

    Bergson, H. (1960 (1889)). Time and free will: An essay on the immediate data of consciousness. New York: Harper Torchbooks.

  3. 3.

    Bergson, H. (2007 (1934)). The creative mind: An introduction to metaphysics. New York: Dover Publications.

  4. 4.

    Clark, C. (1987). Sympathy biography and sympathy margin. American Journal of Sociology, 93, 290–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Durkheim, É. (1938 (1895)). The rules of sociological method. New York: The Free Press.

  6. 6.

    Engels, F. (1987(1845)). The condition of the working class in England. London: Penguin Books.

  7. 7.

    Family caregiver alliance. (2016). National center on caregiving. www.caregiver.org/caregiver-health.

  8. 8.

    Fields, J., Copp, M., & Kleinman, S. (2006). Symbolic interactionism, inequality, and emotions. In J. Stets & J. Turner (Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of emotions (pp. 155–178). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Fontana, M. (2013). Gender in economy-wide modelling. In S. Rai & G. Waylen (Eds.), New frontiers in feminist political economy (pp. 154–174). London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Goodin, R., Rice, J., Parpo, A., & Eriksson, L. (2008). Discretionary time: A new measure of freedom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Häggström, E., Skovdahl, K., Fläckman, B., Kihlgren, A., & Kihlgren, M. (2004). To feel betrayed and to feel that you are betraying the older residents: Caregivers’ experiences at a newly opened nursing home. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 13(6), 687–696.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Hochschild, A. (1983). The managed heart: Commercialization of human feeling. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Laschinger, H. & Montgomery, A. (Eds.) (2010). Special edition: Burnout and healthcare. Burnout research, 1(2).

  14. 14.

    Lefebvre, H. (1999 (1974)). The production of space. New Jersey: Wiley.

  15. 15.

    Lewis, H. (1971). Shame and guilt in neurosis. New York: International Universities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Marx, K. (1976[1867]). Capital: Volume 1: A critique of political economy. London: Penguin Books.

  17. 17.

    Marx, K. (1981[1894]). Capital: Volume 3: A critique of political economy. London: Penguin Books.

  18. 18.

    National alliance for caregiving (2016). National policy statement. https://www.caregiver.org/national-policy-statement.

  19. 19.

    Olson, R. (2014). A time-sovereignty approach to understanding carers of cancer patients’ experiences and support preferences. European Journal of Cancer Care, 23(2), 239–248.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Olson, R. (2015). Towards a sociology of cancer caregiving. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Rai, S., Hoskyns, C., & Thomas, D. (2010). Depletion and social reproduction. In Workshop on depletion and social reproduction: Centre for the study of globalisation and regionalisation, University of Warwick, 21 April 2010. http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/pais/research/researchcentres/csgr/papers/workingpapers/2011/27411.pdf.

  22. 22.

    Rai, S., & Waylen, G. (2013). Feminist political economy: looking back, looking forward. In S. Rai & G. Waylen (Eds.), New frontiers in feminist political economy (pp. 1–18). London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Spillers, R., Wellisch, D., Kim, Y., Matthews, A., & Baker, F. (2008). Family caregivers and guilt in the context of cancer care. Psychosomatics, 49(6), 511–519.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Tangney, J., & Dearing, R. (2002). Shame and guilt. London and New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Turner, J., & Stets, J. (2006). Moral emotions. In J. Stets & J. Turner (Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of emotions (pp. 544–566). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Will Johncock.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Johncock, W. How Much Care is Enough? Carer’s Guilt and Bergsonian Time. Health Care Anal 26, 94–107 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-016-0331-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Carers
  • Caregiving
  • Time
  • Bergson
  • Guilt
  • Quantification