Valuing the work of those who care for the elderly

One of the challenges of today's society is certainly the aging of the population and the consequent need for care for the elderly. The European Union estimates that, in twenty-five years' time, 38.1 million Europeans will need long-term care, compared to 30.8 million at present. In the case of Spain, the potentially dependent population will increase from 2 million in 2019 to 2.32 million in 2030 and 2.92 million in 2050.

At the same time, the authorities also point to the increasing difficulty in attracting more workers to the long-term care sector. Caritas reports provide first-hand data on the harshness of working conditions in terms of wages, working hours, etc. In addition, many families cannot afford professional care, so that, according to available estimates, caregivers lack specific professional training and are mostly immigrants. This last factor can add to the experience of these workers (mainly women), making it more difficult for them to integrate their work into their life as a whole. Think, for example, of staff who live in the home of the person in need of care, sometimes with a greater psychological burden due to lack of independence. 

For all these reasons, for some time now, several economists have been suggesting the need for public policies to attract companies and workers to the long-term care sector. In my opinion, in this matter it would be enriching to pay attention to the considerations of the Social Doctrine of the Church, because no one can deny that the experience of the Catholic Church in caring for the elderly and other vulnerable people is unparalleled. 

The Social Doctrine of the Church

As Pope Francis said, it must be recognized “first of all, and as a duty of justice, that the contribution of the Church in today's world is enormous. Our pain and our shame for the sins of some members of the Church, and for our own sins, should not make us forget how many Christians give their lives out of love: they help so many people to be cured or to die in peace in precarious hospitals, or accompany people enslaved by various addictions in the poorest places on earth, or they devote themselves to the education of children and young people, or care for the elderly abandoned by all, or try to communicate values in hostile environments, or give themselves in many other ways that show that immense love for humanity that God made man has inspired in us”.” (Evangelii gaudium 76). 

The recent Apostolic Exhortation of Leo XIV, Dilexi te, reinforces the understanding of the Catholic Church's contribution in this area.

The approach of the Social Doctrine of the Church maintains the attention to the dignity of each person united with a look at the whole, the common good, solidarity and subsidiarity. For example, subsidiarity would lead to the question of how to help families to cope with this care, since, as far as possible, the first and most appropriate environment for caring for the elderly is the family itself.

The role of governments

However, the public policies to come need to address in parallel a change of mentality, a cultural change that translates into the messages conveyed by public authorities, civil society and the media on two very sensitive points: the social and economic valuation of those who work in this sector and that of the elderly and the disabled. 

Even the European Union itself, with all its contradictions, realizes what is at stake. In their own words, “the way we value care should reflect the way we want children, older people, people with disabilities and those who care for them to be valued” (European Commission, On the European Care Strategy. 7.9.2022. Brussels, 23). 

Growth of euthanasia

This is precisely the heart of the matter: how do we value children, the disabled, the elderly and their caregivers? 

Societies facing the challenge of revaluing the long-term care sector are characterized by having made a fundamental choice to defend the autonomy and freedom of the individual and the maximum possible extension of his or her rights to self-determination. 

Just one example: the decriminalization of euthanasia and the progressive expansion of the cases in which it can be used, to the point of making it a right that must be guaranteed by the State, is increasingly common in countries afflicted by the demographic situation we have described. Whether it is wanted or not, it conveys the message to dependent persons that for them, in the context of a loss of autonomy or a diminished quality of life, an option of freedom is open: assisted suicide. 

With the demographic projections we have, it is very reasonable to conclude that the (covert and subtle) social pressure on the elderly to end their lives through euthanasia will grow. They themselves will come to the conclusion that it is the most reasonable option, considering their personal and national economic situation, the availability of health means and their family situation.

This is to show that the individualistic approach characteristic of our societies finds it difficult to find coherent arguments to promote the long-term care sector, as well as a change in the way we value these workers.

On the other hand, an important part of the problem lies in how to achieve a wage improvement that will make work in this sector more attractive. However, and with all the importance that the salary issue may have, it is necessary to address first the social revaluation of care professionals (and of the elderly). This would require a public effort similar to what the State and the media powers have done and are doing in many countries with gender issues. 

Learning from the pandemic

Professor Mary Hirschfeld has shown that at the root of the much-reported economic inequality in our societies lies the deep-rooted conviction that social success lies above all in the accumulation of wealth, which is considered the ultimate goal. People become visible or invisible according to their economic wealth. But the pandemic has made us see very clearly the value of these jobs for the common good: caregivers, delivery workers, cleaners, and a long etcetera. 

I think that in the year of the pandemic and in view of the contribution to the common good as decisive as it is extreme and meritorious, the competent authority could have considered rewarding so much applause and social recognition with tax benefits in that year for professionals in certain sectors. 

In short, the challenge of long-term care needs to be met with more than just the best economic policy and an emphasis on the autonomy of individuals. The Social Doctrine of the Church can help by underlining other equally crucial principles: the common good, solidarity and subsidiarity.