Formal and Informal Support for Adults with Disabilities
This study tries to examine how formal and informal support affects the lives of people with disabilities. Particularly this study focuses on tangible support such as the provision of financial assistance, material goods or services from formal and informal sources. The study hypothesizes that informal care network would contribute to improving mental health outcomes while formal services would contribute to improving the labor market outcomes of people with disabilities.
Method
Data and sample
The study uses a part of the 2011 Korea Welfare Panel Study (KOWEPS) that specifically targets people with disabilities. The study is based on the survey findings obtained from 403 individuals who complete the questionnaires for adults with disabilities between the ages of 18 and 64.
Measures
Received support: The respondents are asked if they have received tangible support from various sources (e.g. family members (non-cohabitants), relatives, friends, neighbors, churches or other religious organizations, voluntary social organizations, social work agencies, and public officials) for the last month. Sources of social support are divided into three categories (i.e. informal care networks, formal non-profit sector, and formal public sector). In addition, received support is divided into two types, material and non-material. Material support means the provision of financial assistance or material goods. Other services such as child care, housework, and home repair was considered as non-material support.
Depression: The scale of depression consists of 11 items assessing the feelings of participants for the last week. Each item has five-point response scale: 1-rarely, 2-sometimes, 3-often, and 4-always. A high total score indicates a high level of depression.
Willingness to work: The respondents answered a question if they have a job. If respondents do not have a job, they answer another question whether they are willing to work or not.
Results
The findings from the regression analysis suggest that tangible support from informal social networks do not influence the level of depression at the statistically significant level. Furthermore, respondents who receive tangible support from formal organizations reported higher levels of depression than those who do not. In addition, respondents who received non-material help from formal organizations were more likely to have a job or seek a job than those who did not.
Conclusion and implication
This study shows that tangible support from formal organizations is a significant factor associated with mental health as well as labor market outcomes. Particularly, the study suggests that social support may not always result in positive outcomes. For example, the receipt of financial assistance and material goods from formal organizations increases levels of depression among people with disabilities. In contrast, non-material services provided from formal organizations improve the labor market outcome of people with disabilities. Overall, the formal sector can be a valuable source of social support for people with disabilities. However, financial assistance only focusing on material hardship may result in unexpected negative outcomes.