• 177 •
Anduli
Revista Andaluza de Ciencias Sociales
ISSN: 1696-0270 • e-ISSN: 2340-4973
CARING BODIES: WOMEN’S INVISIBLE LABOR AND GENDERED
CAREGIVING IN THE TURKİSH DISABILITY CONTEXT
CUERPOS QUE CUIDAN: EL TRABAJO INVISIBLE DE LAS
MUJERES Y EL CUIDADO DE GÉNERO EN EL CONTEXTO DE
LA DISCAPACIDAD EN TURQUÍA
Fulya Doğruel
Bandırma Onyedi Eylül University, Turquía
fdogruel@bandirma.edu.tr
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9593-740X
Abstract
Disability care provides essential support
to individuals unable to manage daily life
independently. Women caring for children
with disabilities often perform informal
caregiving alongside domestic duties,
which makes their work more labor-
intensive and reinforces gendered labor
divisions. In Turkey, caregiving is largely
seen as women’s responsibility, shaped by
traditional norms and policies. This study
explores the experiences of 18 female
caregivers in Bandırma, Balıkesir province,
from a gender and citizenship perspective.
It establishes that caregiving, without
institutional support, exacerbates women’s
economic hardship, social isolation, and
physical exhaustion, while also limiting
access to citizenship rights. While nancial
assistance, such as the home carer’s
allowance, offers relief, it reinforces
traditional roles and limits caregivers’
personal and professional opportunities.
Framing care labor within broader debates
on gender and citizenship, this study
emphasizes the urgency of a rights-based
approach that includes social security,
accessible services, and legal protections
to reduce caregivers’ burdens, foster
inclusion, and ensure the well-being of
caregivers and care recipients.
Keywords: Care Labour, Disability Care,
Home Care, Corporeal Care, Care Policy
Resumen
El cuidado de discapacitados propor-
ciona un apoyo esencial a las personas
incapaces de desenvolverse de forma
independiente en la vida diaria. Las mu-
jeres que cuidan de niños discapacitados
suelen realizar esta labor de manera in-
formal, junto con las tareas domésticas.
En Turquía, la prestación de cuidados
se les atribuye a las mujeres y se rige
por normas y políticas tradicionales. Ex-
ploramos las experiencias vividas por
18 cuidadoras en Bandırma (Balıkesir),
desde perspectiva de género y ciudada-
nía. Se establece que la prestación de
cuidados, sin apoyo institucional, agrava
la precariedad económica, el aislamiento
social y el agotamiento físico de las mu-
jeres, al tiempo que limita su acceso a
los derechos de ciudadanía. Si bien las
prestaciones para cuidadores a domici-
lio ofrecen un alivio, refuerzan los roles
tradicionales y limitan las oportunidades
personales y profesionales de los cuida-
dores. Se recomienda resolver el pro-
blema adoptando un enfoque basado en
los derechos que incluya seguridad so-
cial, servicios accesibles y protecciones
legales.
Palabras clave: Trabajo de Cuidados,
Cuidado de discapacitados, Cuidados a
domicilio, Cuidados Corporales, Políticas
de Cuidado
Citation/cómo citar este artículo: Dogruel, Fulya (2025). Caring bodies: women´s invisible labor and gendered
caregiving in the Tukish disability context.
ANDULI 28 (2025) pp. 177-195, https://doi.org//10.12795/anduli.2025.i28.07
Recibido: 26.01.2025; Revisado 26.03.2025; Aprobado: 14.05.2025.
Anduli • Revista Andaluza de Ciencias Sociales Nº 28 - 2025
• 178 •
1. Introduction
Care work is inherently gendered and feminized, largely assigned to women due
to socially constructed roles and expectations. Traditionally linked to emotions and
care, women are expected to assume caregiving as a natural duty. However, care
work extends beyond physical labor, encompassing social, emotional, and economic
dimensions (Chen et al., 2025; Twigg, 2004). Informal care work is largely assigned
to women under the assumption that they possess an inherent ability to provide care.
Caring for individuals with disabilities constitutes one of the most demanding aspects
of women’s caregiving responsibilities, consuming signicant time and effort. Women
who care for children with mental or physical disabilities not only engage in unpaid
care work but also shoulder household responsibilities, ensuring the continuity of
family life. The feminization of care and its transformation into a burden remain critical
issues, highlighting the challenges faced by women caregivers.
Care work, traditionally conducted within a solidarity network of the extended family
(Nash, 2014, p. 26), has undergone signicant transformation through modernization
processes. This shift not only isolates caregiving responsibilities onto a single
individual but also reinforces the burden placed on women, who are often expected to
embody the impossible demands of care work, as reected in phrases like “performs
the impossible; works at lightning speed” (Caregivers Nova Scotia, 2024) and “shovel
prisoners of care work” (Özateş Gelmez, 2014).
Caring for individuals with mental illness presents unique challenges, not only due
to the symptoms of the conditions themselves but also because of the societal
stigma surrounding mental illness. Caregivers face heightened risks of anxiety and
depression, yet their mental health remains largely overlooked in social discourse
(Chen et al., 2025; Isaac et al., 2022). This neglect exacerbates systemic inequities
and perpetuates gender-silent narratives that fail to address the broader relational
and political dimensions of caregiving (Funk et al., 2024, p. 6).
The global crisis of care affects not only family caregivers but also paid care workers.
With increased migration from the Global South to the Global North, care labor is
increasingly commodied at progressively lower wages. At the same time, there
is a growing need for an inclusive, rights-based approach to social care policies
(Chatzidakis et al., 2020).
In Turkey, over 2.5 million individuals are registered in the National Disability Data
System, with severe disabilities affecting approximately 775,000 people (Ministry of
Family, 2023). The sharp rise in applications for the carer’s allowance—from 8,877
in 2007 to 100,812 in 2022—reects the increasing reliance on home care services.
These gures underscore the signicance of caregiving as a central societal issue.
This study examines the impact of informal caregiving on women caring for children
with disabilities, with a focus on the social, psychological, and economic challenges
they encounter. It investigates how these caregiving responsibilities intersect with
gender and citizenship, shaping women’s societal participation and limiting their
access to essential rights and resources. The ndings reveal the complex ways in
which the absence of institutional support and restricted access to citizenship rights
exacerbate caregivers’ economic precarity, social isolation, and physical strain.
These insights call attention to the urgent need for a solution-oriented approach to
inform policy changes that alleviate caregivers’ burdens and promote greater social
inclusion.
Artículos • Fulya Doğruel
• 179 •
Understanding Caregiving: A Theoretical Exploration
Studies on care work seek to understand its essence, reveal the substantial
responsibilities of caregivers, highlight the persistent gendered division of care
despite policy advancements, expose the deprivations and health challenges faced
by caregivers, and examine their civic rights. A comprehensive theoretical framework
must address care labor, the feminization of care, care burden, care policies, and
citizenship.
1.1. Care Labour and the Feminisation of Care
Women have historically been positioned as primary caregivers, a role embedded
in societal expectations, particularly for elderly family members and individuals with
disabilities (Funk et al., 2024; Bezmez & Porter, 2022). This divide is a systemic
issue rooted in broader socio-economic structures. “Globally, women perform 76.2%
of unpaid care work—over three times more than men” (Addati et al., 2018 in Fast et
al., 2024, p. 238). Despite its economic signicance, care labor remains undervalued
(Funk et al., 2024).
Economic policies and public spending cuts deepen disparities by shifting care
responsibilities onto families, particularly women, as seen in Brazil (Coffey et al.,
2020). In Canada, the privatization of eldercare has further entrenched reliance on
unpaid female caregivers (Armstrong & Braedley, 2023 in Funk et al., 2024, p. 2). This
care work, whether paid or unpaid, involves meeting the physical, psychological, and
emotional needs of care-dependent groups (Wray et al., 2023, p. 7). Similarly, in Turkey,
cultural norms designate women – especially mothers – as primary caregivers, limiting
their economic participation (Bezmez & Porter, 2022, p. 15). Structural inequities are
particularly evident among mothers of children with disabilities, who face signicantly
lower employment rates due to caregiving responsibilities. As Ehrlich et al. (2020, p.
1388) argue, “women with caregiving duties are signicantly less likely to participate
in the formal labour market, perpetuating cycles of economic dependency.”
Recognizing care labor as an economic contribution is essential for gender justice
(Phillips et al., 2023, p. 54). Policy reforms—state-supported care services, paid leave,
and care infrastructure—are critical to alleviating women’s disproportionate burden
(Ehrlich et al., 2020). Without systemic change, gendered inequities in caregiving will
persist (Chatzidakis et al., 2020, p. 92).
2.2. Care Burden and Burnout
Caregiving is physically and emotionally demanding, with signicant health, social,
and economic risks. Concepts like “burnout” and “care burden” highlight its adverse
effects on well-being, family relationships, and nancial stability (Zarit et al., 1980;
Pearlin & Aneshensel, 1994). This strain is particularly severe for those juggling both
employment and unpaid care responsibilities. Women, assuming most caregiving
duties, report heightened stress, mental health deterioration, and nancial instability
(Bezmez & Porter, 2022; Knaifel & Rubinstein, 2024).
Financial strain further limits labor market participation (Elayan et al., 2024; Hess
et al., 2022). Framing care as an individual responsibility overlooks how power
dynamics and resource inequalities shape caregiving, shifting the burden onto the
most precarious women, who often work informally without employment protections
like unemployment insurance or pensions (Greenhough et al., 2023; Kalaycıoğlu et
al., 2016) thereby restricting their economic independence and civic participation.
Anduli • Revista Andaluza de Ciencias Sociales Nº 28 - 2025
• 180 •
Underfunded care services create a “care crisis,” where unpaid caregivers compensate
for systemic gaps at great personal cost (Fast et al., 2023, p. 237). In Turkey, unpaid
family members carry most of the burden. Prolonged caregiving increases stress,
anxiety, and depression (Chen et al., 2025; Bistaraki et al., 2025). Caregivers also
face social isolation due to stigma surrounding mental illness and disability (Phillips et
al., 2023), limiting self-care and social activities (Alghamdi et al., 2025).
Addressing care burden requires nancial support, expanded public care infrastructure,
and workplace accommodations (Clough, 2021). As suggested by Kolacka et al.
(2025) and Backhouse et al. (2022), a holistic approach that recognizes caregivers’
contributions is essential for sustainable care provision.
1.3. Care, Women and Citizenship
The feminization of care necessitates a reexamination of its intersection with
democratic citizenship, particularly in neoliberal economies that commodify care while
devaluing unpaid labor. As Elayan et al. (2024, p. 1324) note, “the commodication
of care labor and the marginalization of unpaid work restrict women’s economic
independence and limit their civic engagement”
Parents of children with disabilities face barriers to employment and social
participation, “which may hinder their involvement in health-promoting behaviors”
(Alghamdi et al., 2025, p. 75). Care responsibilities shape women’s citizenship by
restricting access to social and economic rights, as “caregiving takes time, and when
duties become extensive, many caregivers cut back time in paid work” (Hess et al.,
2022, p. 7), reinforcing nancial precarity. Perry-Jenkins and Gerstel (2020) stress that
caregiving’s systemic invisibility in public policy, necessitates legislative frameworks
recognizing care as a societal responsibility.
Turkey exemplies these dynamics, as women disproportionately shoulder caregiving
duties while disabled individuals and their caregivers remain “profoundly excluded
from education, the labor market, and urban spaces” (Yardımcı & Bezmez, 2018, in
Bezmez & Porter, 2022, p. 57). Conservative and neoliberal ideologies frame care as
a familial or market-based duty rather than a collective social obligation (Sallan Gül,
2014; Funk et al., 2024). Research links parental life satisfaction to the availability
of leisure time, emphasizing the need for institutional support (Kołacka et al., 2025).
Addressing these inequities requires reframing care as a collective responsibility.
Feminist scholars emphasize that policies such as paid family leave, care credits, and
childcare and eldercare investments are crucial for gender equity (Hess et al., 2022).
As Elayan et al. (2024, p. 1324) note, “millions of caregivers make signicant personal
sacrices, dedicating billions of euros’ worth of time and resources to providing care”,
yet their contributions remain economically unrecognized. Without structural reforms,
caregiving will continue to reinforce economic marginalization and social exclusion.
Citizenship must be understood “not simply as a legal status but as political and social
recognition and economic redistribution” (Isin & Turner, 2002, p. 2).
In summary, caregiving remains undervalued, disproportionately affecting women’s
social, emotional and economic standing. Implementing exible work arrangements,
caregiver assistance programs, and comprehensive care policies is essential for
fostering a more just society.
Artículos • Fulya Doğruel
• 181 •
2. Methodology
This qualitative study, conducted in the Bandırma district of Balıkesir province
between February 10 and July 10, 2022, is based on face-to-face in-depth interviews
with 18 women providing care for children with mental disabilities. As an industrial
hub with factories and a port, Bandırma attracts migration from nearby towns and
villages, blending rural and urban cultural characteristics. This transitional nature
makes it a representative site for exploring care work at the intersection of traditional
gender roles and contemporary expectations. Qualitative research was selected for
its capacity to “uncover the meaning of a phenomenon for those involved” (Merriam,
2009, p. 22).
For data collection, a semi-structured interview format consisting of 18 open-ended
questions was employed. Participants were selected using the snowball sampling
technique. Participation was voluntary, with careful attention paid to ensuring the
collection of participant information and opinions in accordance with the principles
of anonymity, condentiality, and privacy (Neuman, 2020, pp. 149, 152). The
study’s reliability and validity were enhanced by ensuring sufcient participation,
encompassing diverse experiences, and examining the phenomenon holistically and
multidimensionally (Merriam, 2009, pp. 213–215).
The female participants, aged 28 to 65, generally had low levels of education: two
were illiterate, one had completed secondary school, eight primary school, four high
school, and three had attended university. The majority were married housewives,
while four had previous work experience—two of whom left their jobs to provide
care. All participants care for children with mental disabilities that require constant
and complex medical attention. Many also struggle with their own health conditions,
necessitating regular check-ups, treatment, and care.
2.1. Research Focus and Questions
The semi-structured interview guide, outlined in the methodology section, explores
four key themes to enhance transparency. The rst part, entitled Responsibilities
of Caregiving, included questions about the participants’ caregiving responsibilities
and their daily routines. It also addressed their perceptions of caregiving sufciency
and whether they felt the need for additional training or support. The second part of
the questionnaire, Challenges in Caregiving, asked participants about the physical,
emotional, and social difculties they encountered in their caregiving roles. The
questions explored issues such as health concerns, the impact of caregiving on their
social lives, and the adequacy of available economic resources.
The third and nal section, Opportunities for Capacity-Building, explores the
participants’ efforts to enhance their social, cultural, and economic capacities while
fullling caregiving responsibilities. It also invited them to share their future plans and
recommendations for improving caregiving conditions through support and capacity-
building initiatives.
3. Data and Findings
This section, drawing on interviews with women caregivers, explores their lived
experiences of providing informal care for physically and/or mentally disabled
children. The ndings are organized into four interrelated key themes. The study
examines, rst, the gendered nature of caregiving in daily routines; second, the
Anduli • Revista Andaluza de Ciencias Sociales Nº 28 - 2025
• 182 •
burdens and emotional toll caregiving entails, particularly under conditions of limited
institutional and social support; third, the broader economic and policy context of
caregiving, focusing on the limitations of the welfare regime and the informalization
of women’s labor; and nally, the intersection of caregiving with citizenship and labor
rights, highlighting women’s collective struggles for recognition and structural change.
3.1. Women’s Informal Care Work in Everyday Life
Care work is multidimensional, particularly when undertaken by a housewife who
must manage both familial responsibilities and caregiving throughout the entire day.
Around the globe, women consistently play a pivotal role in providing care services,
accounting for the vast majority of unpaid care labor. Studies show that women perform
the majority of personal-care tasks and spend signicantly more time on caregiving
than men (Fast et al., 2024). Care is a labor-intensive and ongoing process. There are
no breaks, escapes, or opportunities for rest, and maintaining a deep or regular sleep
rhythm is challenging. Participants providing disability care report a demanding 24/7
routine. They describe this intense workload as follows:
I prepare breakfast, dress up the child, and the school bus picks him up. Then I
prepare lunch for my husband to eat at work. Afterward, I tidy up, light the stove, put
coal in, do the dishes, and prepare the child’s belongings. I take my medication. In
the afternoon, I take the child to the rehabilitation center. If there is a training course
I attend it for the child. When I return, I prepare dinner, put away the dishes, and
put the child to sleep. I can’t spare any time for myself. I feel inadequate. (P7, 44,
Literate, Housewife)1
There is not enough time. If you try to have quality time with the child and have fun,
the house falls apart … everyone is happy, but I am unhappy. After all, I must tidy
up the house. I pretend to be happy. It is a senseless state of depression. (P16, 44,
University, Employee)
This lived experience is reected in statistical ndings. According to the Turkish
Statistical Institute (TÜİK, 2011), mothers provide 81.5% of primary care for children
with mental disabilities, while fathers contribute only 3.7%. Although more recent
data on caregiving for individuals with disabilities is limited, existing gures continue
to illustrate the disproportionate caregiving burden shouldered by women. TÜİK’s
Statistics on Women (2022) show that 94.4% of childcare and most domestic duties
are still managed by women. This exhaustive workload, which extends around the
clock, not only affects caregivers’ health but also limits their ability to maintain a
regular sleep pattern or attend to their own needs.
Beyond time use, the literature emphasizes the signicant emotional and physical
burdens shouldered by caregiving mothers, including fatigue, mental distress, and
reduced family well-being (Öztürk & Alemdar, 2023; Tuncay & Sarman, 2024). These
ndings emphasize the urgent need for comprehensive policy support.
In general, the lack of spousal support and relationship tensions are commonly identied
as major stressors for caregivers (Kara & Alpgan, 2022). Fathers’ involvement is
often limited to roles like shopping or transporting the child to medical appointments,
which align with the traditional gendered division of labor. Meanwhile, mothers face
multifaceted challenges in caring for children with mental disabilities. In addition to
daily domestic chores, disability care – like elder care – requires attention to physical,
emotional, and social needs. Caregivers provide not only practical assistance, such as
1 Participants are dened in terms of their age, education, and profession.
Artículos • Fulya Doğruel
• 183 •
feeding and cleaning, but also extensive emotional labor, offering comfort, protection,
and support. This labor, though essential, remains socially undervalued and largely
invisible (Funk et al., 2024; Coffey et al., 2020; Özateş Gelmez, 2015).
My child forgets quickly; I must teach the same things repeatedly. He has speech
disability and a physical disability. He is not well-balanced and has panic attacks.
He hits me when he gets angry and displays aggression when he wants something.
He is unable to feed himself. I abandon my meal and revert to him. It would be nice
if his father fed him one bite. His father has not even once cleaned the child after
the child has gone to the toilet. (P12, 51, Primary School, Employee)
I’ve spent my life with doctors. It is necessary to take him for a check-up every
5-6 months to Bursa [a neighboring city]. I have sole responsibility. Sometimes my
mum helps me (P15, 40, Primary school, Housewife)
Men help, but not like women, since they work, they can only take them out
on Sunday’s. They usually leave it to the women. (P14, 47, University, Former
employee)
Care work for the disabled and the ill at home is primarily assigned to women, and
they remain bound to this role until either they or their disabled children pass away.
Three participants, currently employed or having worked previously, continue to
receive long-term support from their mothers in caring for their disabled children.
This reveals the persistence of women’s invisible labor. In this context, the care of
disabled individuals, mostly handled within the family by women, is seen as a practical
solution. However, it not only ‘isolates’ women from the public and economic spheres
(Knaifel & Rubinstein, 2024), but “empirical evidence has consistently demonstrated
the negative impact that caregiving can have on an individual’s health and well-being
across multiple areas” (Cheshire-Allen & Calder, 2022, p. 51).”
3.2. From Care Giving to Care Burden
The challenges faced by women providing care services are profound and multifaceted.
As the rst inuential studies in caregiving literature illustrate, due to caregivers’ shifts
lasting both day and night and their responsibility for the care and service of not only
the disabled but also all individuals in the household, the time they can allocate to rest
or attend to their individual needs and interests is either very limited or non-existent
(see also Sörensen et al., 2006; Pearlin and Aneshensel, 1994; Zarit et al., 1998).
Due to the workload, women’s social and private lives are adversely affected.
They struggle to nd long-term solutions to their problems, worry about the future,
lack the necessary energy and synergy to develop support strategies making their
lives easier, and are left grappling with social isolation, insomnia, and depression.
My child is 90 percent severely disabled. When you work, you are separated for a
long time, and you always wonder if something is amiss at home. My mother was
bedridden, needing care. Taking care of both my child and my mother was very
difcult. I had to nd a solution, but I had a nervous breakdown … fatigue increases
with age. (P2, 50, University, Retired)
You want to go somewhere, you can’t go, you want to watch a lm with your
spouse, you want to meet your friends, you can’t go because he can’t cope with the
environment, and even if you go, you don’t enjoy it. The child experiences anger
and joy at his peak. Others may nd it difcult to understand him ... we also deal
with social pressures. (P10, 42, Secondary School, Housewife)
Anduli • Revista Andaluza de Ciencias Sociales Nº 28 - 2025
• 184 •
We feel like the living dead; we are not alive. We also want to travel; we also want
to rest. (P8, 57, Primary school, Housewife)
We struggle with fatigue, not being supported, feeling alone. (P7, 44, Literate,
Housewife)
This state of physical and emotional burnout reects broader patterns of deprivation,
where caregivers face shortages in support, health, and personal time. Structural
inadequacies in public care further exacerbate this strain intensifying the burdens
on women caregivers. Recent studies emphasize the multifaceted challenges that
caregivers encounter, particularly in terms of social, health, and nancial well-being
(Fast et al., 2024; Duncan et al., 2020; Cheshire-Allen & Calder, 2022; Özateş-
Gelmez, 2014). Women caring for disabled children often experience social isolation
and limited access to economic, cultural, and emotional capital essential for well-
being (Bourdieu, 1986). In this study, participants primarily derive emotional capital
from the honor they receive, with patience seen as key to this recognition. However,
some prioritize nancial support over emotional rewards.
Caregivers often struggle with worry, sadness, and helplessness, particularly when
their loved ones are unaware of their condition, as also observed by Chen et al.
(2025). Economically, caregiving restricts employment opportunities, increasing
nancial strain on families (Alghamdi et al., 2025). As Pinquart and Sörensen (2004,
p.33) note, caregiver “women had higher levels of burden and depression, and
lower levels of subjective well-being and physical health. So, caregivers experience
signicant negative impacts on their ‘health, wealth, and social relations” (Cheshire-
Allen & Calder, 2022, p. 51). This emotional and nancial burden is further reected
in caregivers’ lived experiences, as illustrated by the following participant.
When I was receiving a care allowance, I felt uneasy, as if I were committing a sin
– taking care of my child for money. When the care allowance was stopped, I felt
relieved. (P6, 48, Primary school, Housewife)
However, the awards, especially the ‘good’ and ‘caring mother’ honors bestowed
upon mothers of the disabled within the context of social culture and beliefs, appear
insufcient to repair the emotional, psychological problems and burnout states they
experience. Many participants expressed the need for psychological support to cope
with the challenges they face. Overall, it is evident that caregiving carries serious
negative psycho-social repercussions, as revealed in other studies as well (Gérain
and Zech, 2019; Sörensen et al., 2006; Brunner and Marmot, 2009), leading to
depression, anxiety disorders, and chronic stress-related health issues among those
burdened by it.
Every morning when I wake up, I say, ‘God, grant me patience, give me strength
to endure... I am also dealing with social pressure. (P11, 42, High School, Former
employee)
The burden we bear is unique, signicant; I think ‘my child comes before me.’ They
approach us, mothers of the disabled, with empathy. When we part ways, they
say, ‘May God give you patience.’ Now, I afrm that my child is the reason I nd
strength. However, after a certain point, we, too, face psychological challenges.
(P5, 60, High School, Housewife)
I don’t receive psychological support, but I do need it from time to time. I cry and try
to manage to get through it. We all need a psychologist. I wish a psychologist could
Artículos • Fulya Doğruel
• 185 •
be provided for us. Unfortunately, we cannot afford it. (P9, 52, Primary school,
Housewife)
On the other hand, negative physiological effects of caregiving appear to compound
the burden, as participants reported having more than one concurrent disease,
including lumbar-neck hernia, diabetes, blood pressure issues, cardiovascular
diseases, cardiac arrhythmia, and cancer. Additionally, some participants mentioned
that they struggled to nd time to receive necessary treatment when they fell ill, even
postponing necessary surgeries.
I have a looming risk of the herniated disc bursting, and I desperately need an
operation. This child is very difcult; who else but me can look after him? The
father is already angry; men don’t involve themselves in caregiving because they
work... I struggle to sleep at night; I broke out in hives from stress. (P7, 44, Literate,
Housewife).
I have become disabled due to illness, having heart rheumatism and muscle diseases,
and I am trying to take care of my child. (P17, 66, Primary school, Housewife).
It is observed that women who strive to protect the health of their families are unable to
safeguard their own health. Often neglected as invisible patients with chronic illness,
caregivers experience a decline in their physical, cognitive, and mental health as the
burden of care increases. Low levels of education and income are factors that worsen
health status and quality of life among informal caregivers (Elayan et al., 2024; Chen
et al., 2025; Cheshire-Allen & Calder,2022). This nding is also reected in studies
conducted in Turkey (Bezmez and Porter, 2022; Baysan and Mandıracıoğlu, 2021;
Özateş Gelmez, 2015). Care burden, burnout, availability of psychological and social
support, and economic conditions are crucial determinants of the quality of life for
both individuals with disabilities and their caregivers. When institutional needs are not
adequately met, individuals’ nancial capacities may also prove insufcient. Hence,
it becomes apparent that caregivers necessitate both social and institutional support
within the framework of more inclusive social policies to foster resilience and promote
healthier lives.
3.3. Unveiling Women’s Care Labor within the Economics of Care
The family remains at the heart of Turkey’s welfare regime, a structure shaped by
globalization and neoliberal policies. These shifts have raised concerns about the
erosion of social rights, particularly in relation to care labor (Buğra & Keyder, 2006).
Care services, social assistance, and the social security system form key pillars of
Turkey’s social policy framework. One notable initiative, the ‘home carer’s allowance’
(introduced in 2006), aims to reduce institutional care needs by supporting informal
caregiving within families. This allowance is intended to ease nancial burdens on
families caring for individuals with severe disabilities, yet it is contingent on strict
eligibility criteria: a household income below two-thirds of the minimum wage and a
medical report conrming at least 50% disability (Ministry of Family, 2024).
Despite its intent, many participants found the carer’s allowance insufcient to cover
caregiving expenses. Respondents highlighted the nancial strain involved in meeting
the needs of disabled family members:
My child is severely disabled. His diet is special, his clothes wear out quickly from
constant washing, and medicines are expensive. If we go to the hospital, I take a
taxi if it’s cold; otherwise, we take the bus. The allowance is not enough. (P3, 58,
Primary school, Housewife)
Anduli • Revista Andaluza de Ciencias Sociales Nº 28 - 2025
• 186 •
A lot is needed—wheelchairs, food, psychological support. His prosthesis is old; he
needs a new one. Even in the disabled café, tea is not discounted for the disabled.
(P5, 60, High School, Housewife)
These accounts expose the limited scope of state assistance, which, rather than
alleviating nancial hardship, often exacerbates gender disparities, particularly
for low-income households (Hess et al., 2022; Funk & Hounslow, 2021). The rigid
income-based eligibility criteria further limit access to support. Some participants
reported being denied the allowance due to minor classication discrepancies in
disability reports:
I cannot get an allowance because my child’s disability report does not mark
‘special needs,’ yet I assist with dressing and toileting. I dared not contest it for fear
of losing rehabilitation support. If my child is diagnosed as disabled, shouldn’t they
receive an allowance? (P10, 42, Secondary school, Housewife)
Other participants described unintended nancial trade-offs:
My daughter received an allowance, but she was removed from her father’s National
Insurance and placed on the Green Card scheme. We were shocked to nd we had
to pay for her medication in full. We had to choose between the disability allowance
and health security. (P13, 58, Secondary school, Housewife)
Beyond nancial constraints, caregiving responsibilities remain deeply gendered. The
expectation that care work should be provided within the family, without institutional or
nancial support, disproportionately burdens women. These ndings are consistent
with extensive research, including studies by Özateş Gelmez (2015), Duncan et al.
(2020) and Fast et al. (2024) all of which argue that unpaid caregiving reinforces
gender inequalities. Studies show that women performing unpaid care work often
withdraw from the labor market due to the absence of formal support structures (Funk
et al., 2024; Kalaycıoğlu et al., 2016; Hess et al., 2022; Ehrlich et al., 2020), limiting
their economic independence and social mobility (Chatzidakis et al., 2020).
Women receiving care allowances are classied as employed by TÜİK, yet they lack
formal labor protections (Toksöz, 2014). Expanding home-based care in the disability
sector has made unpaid domestic labor more visible and compensated. However, this
does not guarantee women’s right to work, as those receiving care payments remain
without essential labor rights like regulated hours, social security, and paid leave,
contrary to Turkey’s ILO commitments (Altuntaş & Atasü-Topcuoğlu, 2016, p. 9, 17).
In effect, they serve as informal state employees, providing care without access to
unemployment insurance, pensions, or other essential benets—reinforcing their
economic precarity. The exclusion of caregivers from mental health systems and
social support networks exacerbates their vulnerability (Chen et al., 2025). As Elayan
et al. (2024) emphasize, comprehensive family and professional support systems are
crucial for alleviating these burdens. Meanwhile, the high costs of care, coupled with
limited opportunities for caregivers to improve their earning potential, reinforce their
economic exclusion (Cheshire-Allen & Calder, 2022).
The prevailing model of care, framed as state-provided cash aid rather than a
fundamental right embedded in social security, perpetuates the marginalization
of women caregivers (Funk et al., 2024; Perry-Jenkins and Gerstel, 2020). This
approach fails to recognize the true costs of caregiving, often resulting in a form of
public patriarchy where women are expected to shoulder caregiving responsibilities
in isolation. While the Ministry of Family offers psycho-social support services and
Artículos • Fulya Doğruel
• 187 •
rehabilitation courses, these measures often fall short. Mentally disabled children
typically receive only twelve hours of state-supported rehabilitation per month, which
is insufcient to meet their needs or provide relief to caregivers.
Participants expressed a need for more accessible and comprehensive support
systems, such as daycare centers or respite care facilities:
If schools and rehabilitation centers were always open, it would provide relief for
both me and my child. (P14, 47, University, Former employee)
We need a place where we can leave our children, like a school or daycare center,
where we can drop them off and pick them up. (P6, 48, Primary school, Housewife)
Our biggest challenge is keeping them occupied. We send them to school so they
can socialize. We are old, and they are the children of the state, right? The state
should be involved. (P9, 52, Primary school, Housewife)
These testimonies reveal the urgent need for institutional reforms that provide
caregivers with structured, state-supported assistance. The absence of adequate
support not only increases caregivers’ isolation but also reinforces their exclusion
from formal employment (Hess et al., 2022; Chatzidakis et al., 2020). The caregiving
crisis, particularly for women in unpaid roles, requires immediate legal and policy
interventions (Hess et al., 2022).
In conclusion, while Turkey’s welfare model provides some nancial support for
informal caregivers through programs like the ‘home carer’s allowance,’ it remains
insufcient in addressing the full spectrum of caregiving needs. The reliance on
women to perform unpaid care labor without adequate nancial or institutional backing
perpetuates gendered inequalities and deepens economic precarity. Comprehensive
reforms are urgently needed to recognize caregiving as a fundamental right, ensure
fair compensation, and provide caregivers – particularly women – with access to
professional development opportunities and social security benets. Reshaping the
economics of care is essential for fostering an equitable system that upholds the
dignity of both caregivers and care recipients.
3.4. Women’s Care Roles through Citizenship and Labour Perspectives
The unending overtime of informal caregiving, which subsequently marginalizes
individuals in various aspects of life, emphasizes the impossibility of undertaking this
task in any private or public institution. It becomes evident that the ability of women
providing informal care services to exercise basic citizenship rights is limited in
situations where women solely undertake caregiving responsibilities within the family,
without the knowledge, interest, and general support of the public, and without a
profession or a regular income.
The disproportionate burden of caregiving on women, particularly in home care
for the disabled and sick, poses signicant challenges to their citizenship rights.
Citizenship, as dened by Marshall (1950) and the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (UDHR), encompasses civil, political, and social rights, linking them to
broader societal participation. It shapes individuals’ roles and relationships in the
public sphere, forming the foundation for participation, representation, and policy
development (Nash, 2014; Isin & Turner, 2002; Janoski & Gran, 2002). In line with the
UDHR, the Turkish Constitution (Articles 10, 17, 60, and 61) guarantees fundamental
rights such as equality before the law, the right to life, social security, and protection
of the disabled (Ofcial Gazette, 1982; UN, 1948). Women providing informal care
services often struggle to exercise their rights, especially when they bear caregiving
Anduli • Revista Andaluza de Ciencias Sociales Nº 28 - 2025
• 188 •
responsibilities alone without public support, professional engagement, or nancial
independence.
The lack of institutional support marginalizes caregivers, particularly women, by
limiting their rights, resources, and social participation (Allen and Calder, 2022;
Fast et al., 2024; Duncan et al. 2020). This deepens their economic vulnerability
and raises concerns about women’s citizenship rights. Addressing these challenges
requires stronger social security, rehabilitation programs, and childcare services to
ensure a more equitable care framework. Meanwhile, precariously employed female
caregivers recognize the value of paid work and stress the need for social protections.
The lifelong demands of caregiving, often leading to health complications, highlight
the urgency of pension and healthcare security, especially as caregivers age. This
tension is evident in their experiences, as they navigate caregiving responsibilities
alongside aspirations for nancial independence and stability. Participants reect on
the difcult choice between work and caregiving, highlighting the personal sacrices
involved. For many women, this burden extends over decades, leaving them without
nancial security in later life.
I was working. My parents took care of the baby until it grew up… I quit when my
mum said I could not take care of her anymore. I wish I could improve myself, do
something, but I can’t anymore. (P14, 47, University, Former employee)
For others, caregiving has dened their entire working lives, depriving them of the
opportunity for nancial independence and retirement security.
I am a housewife for 50 years, I take care of the disabled, if I had worked, I would
have retired, we couldn’t work because of them, if we had worked, we would have
received a pension, don’t we deserve it? (P17, 66, Primary school, Housewife)
Beyond nancial insecurity, caregiving imposes structural limitations on employment,
reinforcing economic dependence. Another participant emphasizes the long-term
sacrices, describing how caregiving responsibilities restrict labor force participation
and leave families vulnerable:
We care for our children, so we are unable to work. My husband works when
he nds a job, he works, and if not, he is unemployed. Currently, my son is also
unemployed. If my child did not require constant care, I would seek employment
with National Insurance coverage. I am not free. We are tied to these children; this
restricts our ability to pursue other employment opportunities and leaves us without
job security. I would like the state to provide National Insurance for all mothers of
disabled children. Mothers should have such a right. We do not know if our children
will be able to look after us in the future. We do not know what will become of us
tomorrow. (P7, 44, Literate, Housewife).
This statement spotlights the profound personal and systemic challenges faced by
women in caregiving roles, emphasizing how these responsibilities extend beyond
individual families and reect larger societal issues. Women in caregiving nd
themselves caught in a cycle of uncertainty, both for their own future and that of
their disabled children, despite making essential yet unpaid contributions to the labor
system. Their caregiving labor is essential for sustaining households, yet it remains
largely invisible and unrecognized. Care work is not merely a personal or familial
responsibility but a structural issue deeply embedded in broader socio-economic
systems (Ehrlich et al., 2020). As Isin and Turner (2002) and Nash (2014) argue,
neoliberalism marginalizes women, limiting their full citizenship rights. This is echoed
in research highlighting the political invisibility of caregiving labor, which reinforces
Artículos • Fulya Doğruel
• 189 •
systemic barriers to women’s rights (Funk et al., 2024, p. 2). Consequently, women
with caregiving responsibilities are burdened with obligations rather than rights, face
uncertainties about the future, and, in the absence of adequate social policies, some
express distressing fears about what will happen to their dependents.
I am very afraid of who will look after her if I die. If her sister takes care of her, will
the brother-in-law accept this? How will they behave? How will the State take care
of her if the State takes over her care? May God take her rst and then me (P13,
58, Secondary school, Housewife).
I pray, ‘Lord, don’t leave my child behind. No one can take care of him if something
happens to me. (P17, 66, Primary school, Housewife).
We are able to cope for now, but when we are not able to, what will happen when
we get older? We will do as much as we can; I have no idea what will happen be-
yond that … we are faced with a deadlock. We know that the State takes over when
the parents die. Is it according to some sort of order, or what? We do not know
exactly how the State determines this (P2, 50, University, Retired).
Participants’ views on caregiving are shaped by factors such as education, socialization
with others in similar situations, and awareness. While some frame caregiving as a
personal, conscience-driven responsibility, others approach it from the perspective
of welfare, citizenship, and rights. Despite these differences, they share a common
belief that current care policies are inadequate and require reform to better address
caregivers’ well-being.
The caregiving burden is further exacerbated by systemic inequities. Underfunded
public care services, as noted by Duncan et al. (2020) and Fast et al., (2024), intensify
the crisis, leaving women to take on more responsibilities without sufcient support.
Financial constraints, particularly among those in poverty, add to caregivers’ stress,
revealing the need for policy interventions (Cheshire-Allen & Calder, 2022). The
sustainability of both formal and informal care systems is jeopardized by growing
dependence on unpaid labor. Humphries (2022) warns that the instability of the family
care sector directly endangers the formal care system, which heavily relies on family
caregivers.
These care-related disparities reinforce social inequalities, making policy interventions
critical to reducing caregiver burnout and ensuring equitable distribution of labor.
Citizenship and civil society development must be understood within “the dynamic
relationships between region, state, and global society in the modern world” (Isin &
Turner, 2002, p. 8). In the global discourse on labor and rights, women increasingly
advocate for legal protections and engage in the women’s movement. As emphasized
by Çakır (2014) and Nash (2014), achieving a democratic society requires the full
participation of women [caregivers] in decision-making, social security inclusion, and
formal recognition of their labor.
Women caring for disabled children navigate a complex intersection of pity,
sanctication, and exclusion, engaging in a “struggle for belonging” (McLaughlin et
al., 2008, p. 130) as they challenge societal norms. Their perspectives on caregiving,
shaped by their education, socialization, and awareness, reect varying frames of
caregiving. Despite these differences, they all agree that policies must be reformed to
better consider caregivers’ well-being.
However, caregiving responsibilities signicantly shape women’s access to social
and economic rights, often resulting in nancial precarity. This constraint limits their
Anduli • Revista Andaluza de Ciencias Sociales Nº 28 - 2025
• 190 •
participation in paid work and is compounded by the broader structural invisibility
of caregiving in public policy. To address these issues, there is a pressing need for
legislative frameworks that recognize care as a collective responsibility rather than an
individual one.
Insufciently funded public care services exacerbate the crisis, forcing women to
assume additional responsibilities without adequate support (Fast et al., 2024, p.
236). As Hess et al. (2022, p.1) argue, “increasing societal investments in care and
strengthening support for working adults …would afrm the value of unpaid household
and care work and contribute to the well-being of households, communities, and
societies.” However, caregiving remains structurally invisible in public policy, restricting
women’s access to social and economic rights and reinforcing nancial precarity.
Legislative recognition of care as a collective, rather than individual, responsibility is
essential.
In response to this lack of recognition, caregivers have mobilized to advocate for
systemic change. The study found that, through their efforts to engage with institutions,
a care-oriented social movement emerged. As Coffey et al. (2020, p. 18) also note,
this process should involve collaboration with women’s rights groups, feminist
economists, and civil society experts, alongside increased funding for organizations
that support caregivers’ participation in decision-making. Such “activism can also help
some home-based family carers maintain social participation and mitigate isolation,
particularly in cultures with strong traditional gender roles” (Heng-Hao, 2009 in Funk
& Hounslow, 2021, p. 457). This movement has empowered women caregivers and
positively contributed to their psycho-social well-being, reinforcing the necessity of
recognizing caregiving as a political and public issue requiring systemic change.
4. Conclusion
Informal care work, predominantly performed by women, remains an undervalued yet
essential form of labor shaped by entrenched social policies that reinforce traditional
gender norms. This study builds on existing research by examining the intersection
of disability care, gendered labor divisions, and the social isolation experienced by
caregivers in Turkish households. Like previous studies, this research draws attention
to the burdens of gendered care work; however, it also adopts a more holistic
perspective by considering the distinct challenges faced by caregivers of disabled
children and the broader socio-economic implications of their labor.
The ndings indicate that caregiving responsibilities, in the absence of institutional
support, contribute to economic precarity and limit caregivers’ access to fundamental
rights. Participants report experiencing emotional exhaustion, chronic sleep
deprivation, declining health, and restricted opportunities for personal and professional
development. Moreover, these dual pressures—care labor and nancial instability—
not only affect caregivers but also have far-reaching consequences for the well-being
of disabled individuals. By situating caregiving within a structural rather than purely
individual framework, this study stresses the need for policies that recognize care
work as integral to both economic and social systems.
Within this broader discussion, the Turkish home carer’s allowance emerges as one
of the key aspects of the analysis. While this nancial assistance provides essential
economic relief, it may also reinforce traditional caregiving roles and contribute to
social isolation. Moreover, in the absence of complementary measures—such as
Artículos • Fulya Doğruel
• 191 •
institutional support, respite care services, and spousal involvement programs—the
allowance serves as a temporary remedy rather than a comprehensive solution. The
ndings suggest that a more holistic caregiving policy framework is needed, one that
integrates social security rights, accessible care services, and legal protections to
address the vulnerabilities faced by caregivers. Additionally, the study reveals the
importance of collective advocacy in strengthening support networks and inuencing
policy reforms, highlighting the potential of grassroots mobilization in shaping more
inclusive caregiving policies
Beyond its policy implications, this research engages with feminist care theory
and citizenship studies by framing informal caregiving as both a form of labor and
a determinant of social inclusion. It extends discussions on fragile citizenship (Isin
& Turner, 2002) by illustrating how caregiving responsibilities can systematically
constrain women’s full participation in economic and political life. By integrating
lived experiences with structural analysis, this study contributes to a growing body
of literature that challenges perspectives that reduce caregiving to an individual
obligation rather than a shared social responsibility.
Ultimately, this study emphasizes the importance of reframing caregiving within a
rights-based approach that acknowledges care labor as fundamental to society. A
shift from an assistance-based model to a citizenship-oriented framework would
help ensure that caregivers receive the economic security, social protections, and
institutional support necessary to sustain both their well-being and that of those they
care for. Addressing these systemic challenges is not only a matter of gender equity
but also a crucial step toward fostering a more inclusive and just society.
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to all the carers of disabled children who
shared their valuable thoughts and feelings with me in this research.
Conict of interest
The author declares that there is no conict of interest related to this study.
Research and publication ethics statement
This article represents original research based on original data. It has not been
previously published nor submitted for publication elsewhere. The author has adhered
to ethical principles and guidelines throughout the entire research process.
The research was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Social and
Human Sciences at Bandırma Onyedi Eylül University (Approval No: 2022-4) on 01
April 2022.
6. REFERENCES
Altuntaş, B. & Atasü-Topcuoğlu, R. (2016). Care work, social care, and women’s
employment in the eld of disability care (Engelli bakımı alanında bakım emeği, sosyal
bakım ve kadın istihdamı). World Bank Working Paper No. 110376. World Bank Group.
Alghamdi, A. A., Assiri, M. I., Fallatah, R. A., Albeladi, F. M., Alabdulaziz, H. & Alsaggaf,
F. (2025). Health-promoting activities among Saudi Arabian parents of children with
disabilities: A cross-sectional study. Belitung Nursing Journal, 11(1), 75–82. DOI:
10.33546/bnj.3624
Anduli • Revista Andaluza de Ciencias Sociales Nº 28 - 2025
• 192 •
Backhouse, T., Ruston, A., Killett, A., Ward, R., Rose-Hunt, J. & Mioshi, E. (2022). Risks
and risk mitigation in homecare for people with dementia—A two-sided matter: A
systematic review. Health & Social Care in the Community, 36, 2037–2056. DOI:
10.1111/hsc.13865
Baysan, C. & Mandıracıoğlu, A. (2021). The burden of care on caregiver family members
of elders and related factors in Izmir. Turkish Journal of Clinics and Laboratory, 12(2),
133–139. DOI: 10.18663/tjcl.811470
Bezmez, D. & Porter, T. (2022). Disabled women’s care experiences in Turkey: Intimacy,
dependency, independent living. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 24(1),
54–67. DOI: 10.16993/sjdr.852
Bistaraki, A., Stefanopoulos, N., Kiekkas, P., Stamatopoulou, D. & Igoumenidis, M. (2025).
Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 81, 89–96. DOI: 10.1016/j.pedn.2024.12.007
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. E. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory
of research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York, NY: Greenwood
Press.
Brunner, E. & Marmot, M. (2005). Social organization, stress, and health. In M. Marmot &
R. G. Wilkinson (Eds.), Social determinants of health (pp. 6-30). OUP Oxford.
Buğra, A. & Keyder, Ç. (2006). The Turkish welfare regime in transformation. Journal of
European Social Policy, 16(3), 211-228. DOI: 10.1177/0958928706065233
Chatzidakis, A., Hakim, J., Litter, J., & Rottenberg, C. (2020). The care manifesto: The
politics of interdependence. Verso Books.
Chen, Y., Zhang, L., Zhang, S., Zhang, J., Yu, H., Li, Q. & Zhou, Y. (2025). Journal of
Affective Disorders, 375, 486–495. DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2025.01.129
Cheshire-Allen, M. & Calder, G. (2022). ‘No one was clapping for us’: Care, social justice,
and family carer wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic in Wales. International
Journal of Care and Caring, 6(1–2), 49–66. DOI: 10.1332/239788221X1631640864
6247
Clough, B. (2021). Disability and care: Theoretical antagonisms revisited. In B. Clough
(Ed.), Disability, Care and Family Law (pp. 13-30). Routledge.
Coffey, C., Espinoza Revollo, P., Harvey, R., Lawson, M., Parvez Butt, A., Piaget, K.,
Sarosi, D. & Thekkudan, J. (2020). Time to care: Unpaid and underpaid care work and
the global inequality crisis. Oxfam International. https://oxfamilibrary.openrepository.
com/handle/10546/620928
Çakır, S. (2014). Kadınların eşit yurttaşlık ideali neden gerçekleşmiyor? [Why does the
ideal of equal citizenship for women not materialize?]. In A. Durakbaşa, N. A. Şirin
Öner, & F. Karapehlivan Şenel (Eds.), Yurttaşlığı yeniden düşünmek: Sosyoloji, hukuk
ve siyasal tartışmalar [Rethinking citizenship: Sociology, law, and political debates]
(pp. 233-241). İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
Duncan, K. A., Shooshtari, S., Roger, K., Fast, J., & Han, J. (2020). The cost of caring: Out-
of-pocket expenditures and nancial hardship among Canadian carers. International
Journal of Care and Caring, 4(2), 141–166. DOI: 10.1332/239788220X1584555197
5572
Artículos • Fulya Doğruel
• 193 •
Ehrlich, U., Möhring, K. & Drobnič, S. (2020). What comes after caring? The impact of
family care on women’s employment. Journal of Family Issues, 41(9), 1387–1419.
DOI: 10.1177/0192513X19880934
Elayan, S., Angelini, V., Buskens, E. & de Boer, A. (2024). The economic costs of informal
care: Estimates from a national cross-sectional survey in the Netherlands. The European
Journal of Health Economics, 25, 1311–1331. DOI: 10.1007/s10198-023-01666-8
Fast, J., Duncan, K. A., Keating, N. C. & Kim, C. (2023). Valuing the contributions of family
caregivers to the care economy. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 45, 236–249.
DOI: 10.1007/s10834-023-09899-8
Funk, L. M. & Hounslow, W. J. (2021). How do daughters interpret care as a public
issue? Exploring identity, emotion, and discourse in the narratives of activist-
inclined carers of older parents. Community, Work & Family, 24(4), 455–470. DOI:
10.1080/13668803.2019.1681939
Funk, L. M., Klostermann, J., Symonds-Brown, H., Aubrecht, K., & Giguère, L. (2024).
Producing the public caregiver: The discursive politicization of family caregiving by
Canadian caregiver organizations. International Journal of Care and Caring, XX(XX),
1–18. DOI: 10.1332/23978821Y2024D000000079
Gérain, P. & Zech, E. (2019). Informal caregiver burnout? Development of a theoretical
framework to understand the impact of caregiving. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article
1748. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01748
Hess, C., Ahmed, T. & Hayes, J. (2022). Providing unpaid household and care work in
the United States: Uncovering inequality. IWPR #C487, Institute for Women’s Policy
Research.
Humphries, R. (2022). Ending the social care crisis. Bristol University Press.
Isin, E. F. & Turner, B. S. (2002). Citizenship Studies: An introduction. In E. F. Isin, & B. S.
Turner, (Eds.), Handbook of Citizenship Studies (pp. 1-11). London: Sage Publications.
Janoski, T. & Gran, B. (2002). Political citizenship: Foundations of rights. In E. F. Isin,
& B. S. Turner, (Eds.), Handbook of citizenship studies (pp. 13-52). London: Sage
Publications.
Kalaycıoğlu, S., Rittersberger-Tılıç, H. & Çelik, K. (2016). The Different Actors and
Dimensions of Unregistered Female Labor in the Care Sector [Bakım Sektöründe
Kayıt-Dışı Kadın Emeği’nin Farklı Aktörleri ve Boyutları]. The World Bank.
Kara, T. & Alpgan, Ö. (2022). Nursing personality and features in children with autism
spectrum disorder aged 0–2: An exploratory case-control study. An International Journal
on Nutrition, Diet and Nervous System, 25(6). DOI: 10.1080/1028415X.2020.1843891
Knaifel, E. & Rubinstein, L. (2024). Intersectionality and caregiving: The exclusion
experience and coping resources of immigrant women caring for a family member
with severe mental illness. Qualitative Health Research, 0(0), 1–15. DOI:
10.1177/10497323241271996
Kołacka, A., Matthews-Kozancecka, M., Komisarek, O., Kwiatkowski, J., Domagalska,
A., Samborski, W., Mojs, E., Andrusiewicz, M. & Malak, R. (2025). Understanding
parental satisfaction in caring for children with cerebral palsy. Healthcare, 13, 1-10.
DOI: 10.3390/healthcare13020110
Anduli • Revista Andaluza de Ciencias Sociales Nº 28 - 2025
• 194 •
Marshall, T. H. (1950). Citizenship and social class. New York, NY: Cambridge University
Press.
McLaughlin, J., Goodley, D., Emma Clavering, E. & Fisher, P. (2008). Families Raising
Disabled Children: Enabling Care and Social Justice. Palgrave.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Nash, K. (2014). Yurttaşlıktan insan haklarına ve tekrar geriye. [From citizenship to
human rights and back again]. In A. Durakbaşa, N. A. Şirin Öner, & F. Karapehlivan
Şenel (Eds.), Yurttaşlığı yeniden düşünmek: Sosyoloji, hukuk ve siyasal tartışmalar
[Rethinking citizenship: Sociology, law, and political debates] (pp. 24-37). İstanbul:
İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
Neuman, W. L. (2020). Toplumsal araştırma yöntemleri: Nicel ve nitel yaklaşımlar [Social
research methods, qualitative and quantitative appraaches], Cilt-1 (Ö. Akkaya, Çev.).
Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi.
Özateş Gelmez, Ö. S. (2015). The Prisoners of Family-Oriented Care: Experiences of
Female Caregivers in the Home Care System [Ailevileştirilen bakımın kürek mahkûmları:
Evde bakım uygulaması kapsamında bakım veren kadınların deneyimleri]. Fe Dergi:
Feminist Eleştiri, 7(2), 59-71. DOI: 10.1501/Fe0001_0000000143
Öztürk, M., & Küçük Alemdar, D. (2023). The care burden of mothers of children with
disability: Association between family quality of life and fatigue. Journal of Pediatric
Nursing, 73, 418–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2023.10.010
Pearlin, L. I. & Aneshensel, C. S. (1994). Caregiving: The unexpected career. Social
Justice Research, 7(4), 373-390.
Perry-Jenkins, M. & Gerstel, N. (2020). Work and family in the second decade of the 21st
Century. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82, 420–453. DOI: 10. 1111/ jomf. 12636
Phillips, S. D., Herasymova, T. & Pcholkina, U. (2023). Women with disabilities, and
communities of care in wartime Ukraine: Conversations with disability and women’s
rights activists about feminist and disability solidarities. Women’s Studies International
Forum, 98, 102740-60). DOI:10.1016/j.wsif.2023.102740
Pinquart, M. & Sörensen, S. (2004). Gender differences in caregiver experiences: An
updated meta-analysis. The Gerontologist, 44(1), 33-45. DOI: 10.1093/geronb/61.1.p33
Sallan Gül, S. (2014). Türkiye’de yoksulların sosyal hakları alanında cinsiyetçi izler. [Sexist
traces in the social rights of the poor in Turkey]. In A. Durakbaşa, N. A. Şirin Öner, & F.
Karapehlivan Şenel (Eds.), Yurttaşlığı yeniden düşünmek: Sosyoloji, hukuk ve siyasal
tartışmalar [Rethinking citizenship: Sociology, law, and political debates] (pp. 277-290).
İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
Sörensen, S., Duberstein, P., Gill, D. & Pinquart, M. (2006). Dementia care: Mental health
effects, intervention strategies, and clinical implications. The Lancet Neurology, 5(11),
961-973. DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(06)70530-8
Tuncay, S., & Sarman, A. (2024). The relationship of spiritual orientation and caregiver
burden of caregiver mothers with a child with cerebral palsy in Turkey. Child: Care,
Health and Development, 50(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/cch.13141
Twigg, J. (2004). The body gender and age: Feminist insights in social gerontology. Journal
of Aging Studies, 18, 59-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2003.09.004
Artículos • Fulya Doğruel
• 195 •
Wray, D., Keating, N. & Fast, J. (2023). Canada’s care economy: A conceptual framework.
Available online: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/89-652-x/89-652-x2023002-
eng.pdf (Accessed on 01.07.2024).
Zarit, S. H., Reever, K. E. & Bach-Peterson, J. (1980). Relatives of the impaired elderly:
Correlates of feelings of burden. The Gerontologist, 20, 649–655. DOI: 10.1093/
geront/20.6.649
Zarit, S. H., Stephens, M. A., Townsend, A. & Greene, R. (1998). Stress reductions
for family caregivers: Effects of adult day care use. The Journals of Gerontology
Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 53, 267-277. DOI: 10.1093/
geronb/53B.5.S267
Web resources
Ministry of Family (2023). YHGM Statistics Bulletin April 2023. Available online: https://
aile.gov.tr/media/135432/eyhgm_istatistik_bulteni_nisan_23.pdf (Accessed on
01.07.2024).
Ministry of Family (2024). Regulation on the identication of disabled individuals in need
of care and the determination of care service principles. Available online: https://www.
aile.gov.tr/eyhgm/mevzuat/ulusal-mevzuat/yonetmelikler/bakima-muhtac-engellilerin-
tespiti-ve-bakim-hizmeti-esaslarinin-belirlenmesine-iliskin-yonetmelik/( Accessed on
01.07.2024).
Caregivers Nova Scotia (2024). “Who we are”. Available online: https://caregiversns.org/
who-we-are/ (Accessed on 01.07.2024).
Ofcial Gazette of the Republic of Turkey [T.C. Resmî Gazete] (1982). Türkiye Cumhuriyeti
Anayasası [The Constitution of the Republic of Turkey] No. 2709. Available online:
https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.5.2709.pdf (Acsessed on 01.07.2024).
Ofcial Gazette of the Republic of Turkey [T.C. Resmî Gazete]. (1982). Türkiye Cumhuriyeti
Anayasası [The Constitution of the Republic of Turkey], No. 2709. Available online:
https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.5.2709.pdf
Toksöz, G. (2014). Kentli kadın istihdamı gerçekten artıyor mu? [Is urban women’s
employment really increasing?] BİA Haber Merkezi, 03 Şubat. Available online: http://
www.bianet.org/bianet/kadin/153221-kentli-kadin-istihdami-gercekten-artiyor-mu
(Accessed on 01.07.2024).
TÜİK (2011). Özürlülerin Sorun ve Beklentileri Araştırması, 2010 [Survey on problems
and expectations of disabled people, 2010]. Available online: https://data.tuik.gov.tr/
Bulten/Index?p=Ozurlulerin-Sorun-ve-Beklentileri-Arastirmasi-2010-6370 (Accessed
on 01.07.2024).
TÜİK (2022). İstatistiklerde kadın [Statistics on women]. Available online: https://data.tuik.
gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Istatistiklerle-Kadin-2022-49668 (Accessed on 01.07.2024).
© 2025 por los autores Licencia a ANDULI, Editorial de la
Universidad de Sevilla. Es un artículo publicado en acce-
so abierto bajo los términos y condiciones de la licencia
“Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivar
4.0 Internacional”