New evidence suggests that caregivers may derive health
benefits from their altruistic efforts. In a recent study, older people who
spent at least 14 hours a week taking care of their disabled spouses lived
longer than those who did not.
The study, which will be published in Psychological
Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, supports
earlier findings that altruistic actions may improve health and longevity.
Researchers from the University of Michigan reviewed seven years of
data from the University of Michigan Health and
Retirement Study. The analysis included 1,688 couples who were 70 years of age
or older and living unassisted.
At the beginning of the study, participants reported how
many hours a week their partners helped with everyday activities such as
eating, dressing and preparing meals.
Most participants (about 81 percent) did not provide any
living assistance to their spouses. Nine percent provided less than 14 hours of
help per week, and 10 percent provided 14 hours or more of help per week.
By the end of the study, 909 people died. After controlling for health, age, race, gender, education, employment status and net worth, the authors found that those who provided at least 14 hours of care a week were significantly less likely to have died during the study than those who did not provide any care.
"These findings suggest that caregivers may actually
benefit from providing care under some circumstances," said University of Michigan researcher Stephanie Brown,
lead author of the study report. "Previous studies have documented
negative health effects of caregiving. But the current results show that it is
time to disentangle the presumed stress of providing help from the stress of
witnessing a loved one suffer."
In 2009, Brown plans to conduct a new study that will
examine how altruistic behavior affects well-being. This research, funded by
the National Science Foundation, will focus on the neurological effects of
altruistic behavior.
For more information about caregiviging, please visit Natural Standard's Medical Conditions database.
Was there a differentiation made among those who had assistance from Long-Term Care Insurance and those who did not?
Posted by: Bernie Cohen | December 02, 2008 at 01:01 PM
I am surprised that 81 percent did not provide any living assistance to their spouses; the number seems high. Were the disabled spouses in care homes or living at home? I think that would make a difference because daily caregiving such as preparing meals and helping people get dressed may be provided in retirement homes. The report says they were living unassisted, but how severe were the disabilities? Perhaps many did not require or want help from their spouses?
Posted by: J. Young | December 02, 2008 at 01:09 PM
I wonder if there is a difference between family (i.e., non-paid) caregivers versus those who are paid for their services.
Posted by: Herb | December 03, 2008 at 09:19 AM
Perhaps caregivers live longer because they have to. In other words, because they are depended upon, they cannot "afford to" die.
Posted by: Ruth | December 03, 2008 at 09:27 AM
I always thought if you hung out with dying people you would begin dying too. I often try and be nice but just not hang out with those who are dying. This study is flawed and in the very least does not account for confounding factors or other reasons this population died less if they hugged more. Brown is on the right track scheduling a follow-up study examining the effect on well being. If the results are promising I will have to be nicer.
Posted by: Karen | December 03, 2008 at 01:38 PM
J. Young,
Yea, the definitions of what is considered "unassisted’"and other terms need to be presented with this interesting study. I know this is a blog, but I think it should be included. In the coming weeks I’ll try and look into this, but I could just make my hubby something tasty to eat knowing that it may help me to "not die."
Posted by: Nettles | December 03, 2008 at 01:43 PM
Brown's study on the benefits of caregiving for the caregiver, soon to be published in the Journal of Psychological Science, provides scientific evidence for what one may intuit: there are both physical and psychological benefits to altruistic behavior. Further studies on the benefits of altruistic behavior will be of interest and add to our general understanding of humanity.
Posted by: h. ariel | December 03, 2008 at 04:58 PM
I have read many articles about how the mind can affect or control a person’s physical condition that I don’t doubt that this has something to do with this caregiving effect. This must be part of people’s reaction to helping their partners; they feel a purpose for their lives and a reason to keep on going. I think that in many cases older people lose this and feel that they are no longer needed by anyone; they loose old friends and in many cases, the family does not give them that extra support that they need at this stage in life. Caregiving is an incentive for them, and I am sure that it keeps them mentally occupied, not thinking all the time about their own problems. People need to feel some kind of purpose for their lives, and those who participate in caregiving must have positive feelings about themselves, which is a plus for their health.
Posted by: Anna H. | December 04, 2008 at 01:51 PM
I agree that altruistic caregiving can provide longevity to some individuals. Taking care of someone involves physical, as well as mental, activity. However, this study or future studies should also include other activities of the individuals. For example, what else stimulated the minds of both groups, and what other physical activities did both groups engage in?
Posted by: K.K. | December 05, 2008 at 12:57 AM
When the authors stated, “These findings suggest that caregivers may actually benefit from providing care under some circumstances," what are the circumstances they are referring to? I think this study only reflects a small percentage of caregivers. Most caregivers become so involved in caring for the sick that their own health start to deteriorate.
Posted by: Nicole | December 05, 2008 at 10:51 AM
I am looking forward to the new study mentioned in this article. Next year, in 2009, Brown is going to conduct a study on how altruistic behavior affects one’s sense of well-being. I am very interested in seeing the neurological effects of altruistic behavior. The brain is so fascinating!
Posted by: Mia | December 05, 2008 at 10:51 AM
I thought this blog was interesting, so I did a quick search for additional information on the topic. Dr. George E. Vaillant, a Harvard University research psychiatrist who drew from more than five decades of data from the Harvard Study of Adult Development, reports that helping behavior focused on others is among the strongest predictors of health and longevity. Midlarsky and Kahana {1994} associated adult helping behavior with improved morale, self-esteem, positive affect and well-being -- all with psychoneuroimmunological implications.
A study done by Kahana Eve and and Elizabeth Midlarsky on altruism, well-being and mental health in late life found that older adults were more likely to engage in altruistic behavior because it gave their lives meaning, and they were not motivated by secondary gains such as keeping busy, making, friends or being helped in return.
I do agree with the author that previous studies that have documented negative health effects of caregiving-presumed stress of providing help versus stress of witnessing a loved one suffer-need to be “disentangled.” It is one thing to assist another with simple activities of daily living (such as eating or dressing), but it is quite different when one is caring for someone with a chronic, debilitating illness or terminal condition.
Posted by: SUMA | December 05, 2008 at 01:44 PM
I appreciate that this research is heading in a new direction. Caregiving for a loved one is commonly associated with increased stress and a decrease in one's quality of life. I think it is great that this research is exploring another effect. I guess that's one part of research. It doesn't have to always be about affirming what you already know, but what you might have missed. I hope future research is more conclusive.
Posted by: Gracie K. | December 05, 2008 at 03:44 PM
Could it be that the caregivers were in better health conditions and had positive attitudes? They probably did not consider spouses’ disabilities as burdens and were not stressed by it.
Posted by: liz | December 05, 2008 at 10:54 PM
Helping people in distress represents altruism, a form of prosocial behavior. It is the opposite of selfishness. I could see how this type of behavior could be linked to longevity. It would be a reason to keep you going and make you feel good about yourself. If it increases a sense of well being and pleasure in the brain I would think it would then increase the immune response. This type of prosocial behavior is very popular in some religions. It is a wonderful thing, and unfortunately, true selfless altruism is hard to find in our busy stressful lives these days.
Posted by: Becca | December 06, 2008 at 02:43 PM
I wonder if this is a bit biased since all the baby boomers are getting older, and there is already such a shortage of non-disgruntled workers in the elderly care sector. Maybe this is supposed to inspire old people to help each other? I can’t wait for the 2009 follow-up to see what happens neurologically when something the opposite of selfish happens...
Posted by: jasperoza | December 09, 2008 at 04:26 PM
This result is really surprising to me. It makes me wonder whether the caregivers lived longer because they became more/better educated about health and wellness as they took care of their spouses. Although the total number of subjects is large, the number of those who really got the altruistic benefit was really small, which makes me think there must be some other factors at play. The follow up will certainly be interesting, not to mention extremely relevant for the large number of graying boomers who need or will need help from their spouses and others.
Posted by: Tricia | December 10, 2008 at 01:45 PM
I bet for some people, caregiving gives ‘em a boost, and I bet it actually kills some other people, depending on their condition and depending on how they feel about the person they are caring for. If the person is a real creep and you have to do helpful things while he/she is being obnoxious, then it could be detrimental. But maybe for your friendly grandma it would be different. This study’s not designed to get to the bottom of this.
Posted by: JJbar | December 16, 2008 at 10:35 AM
Caring for others may have some benefits as the study mention, but there is also a dark side to being a caregiver. When a person starts caring for others more then they care for themselves, their own health may also start to deteriorate. Therefore, this study can only apply to caregivers to a certain extent but cannot be applied to all.
Posted by: nick | December 22, 2008 at 05:08 PM
I'm quite skeptical about the findings of this study. I think it's an interesting and great that altruism can extend one's lifespan. However, I'd have to read more about it to be convinced.
Posted by: RZD | January 05, 2009 at 01:24 PM
Caregiving is a major social aspect of the culture where I originally came from (West Africa). I believe that taking care of a loved one gives you a purpose of life and keeps you going, thus helping you maintain that continuous flow of karma throughout the entire mind and body.
Posted by: Luce | January 06, 2009 at 11:29 AM
I personally believe this is not a very strong study. Also, can you please define the term “unassisted”? The way I see this is that perhaps caregiving keeps them mentally occupied so they are not thinking about their own problems, but caregiving can also be stressful in itself. Also, are there any other factors that may have stimulated the minds of both groups? This is an interesting study, but I’m still skeptical about the findings. Further studies on the benefits of altruistic behavior must be done to validate this study.
Posted by: Angie | January 06, 2009 at 11:38 AM
I feel that a caregiver can receive great rewards by helping the ones they love. This happiness and will to have their loved one live longer may be the strength they find within themselves to live longer. Once the loved one dies I've heard that the caregiver doesn't live too much longer because of the sadness and loneliness.
Posted by: Patricia | January 09, 2009 at 01:26 PM
I think as caregivers take care of loved ones, they too turn to make better life choices for themselves, making them live better and healthier lives that contribute to their life expectancies.
Posted by: Ho | January 29, 2009 at 10:04 AM
I wonder if there would be a difference between those who are providing care to spouses/other loved ones as compared to those who provide care in a nursing home-type setting.
Posted by: K8T | February 02, 2009 at 02:31 PM
They said they controlled for health status and what not, but to me, with this study, I would just assume that the person who is being the caregiver would be healthier anyway and therefore live longer. But if the study is right, I suppose we should all make sure we treat are spouses well!
Posted by: GF | February 10, 2009 at 05:23 PM
Thanks for sharing such a good information; brilliant concept!
Posted by: Caregiving For the Elderly | February 27, 2010 at 05:52 AM