Family-centered care: A transcultural way to deal with the

dynamic Socioeconomic status of the Elderly

In the Filipino culture, having a family-oriented household remain as one of the most
predominant traditional values in the society being possessed. This cultural view is personally practiced
in my family and always center relationship ties which being apart or losing ties is not an option or
frowned upon. So, the idea of putting elderly to a nursing home as presented in the video isn’t
customary to our tradition in general. It is evident from studies that this perspective provides pressure
for Filipino families to sustain “ownership” of caring the elderlies and take accountability as caregivers
traditionally (Antonio, 2015). I consider this challenging point to be an acceptable custom for elderly as a
long-term care while with cultural conditions followed and respected in a dynamic traditional way of
care to preserve by the Filipino families.

As a person who had a grandmother with Alzheimer’s, family care was opted rather than a
nursing home and the provided support led contribution into psychosocial health. In contrast, studies
evidently showed that there’s an elevated mortality and morbidity in the general population of elderly
upon admitting into nursing home (Wolinsky et al. 1997). These included diseases under the mortality
of advanced age are primarily non-communicable such as COPD at 70%, cardiovascular at 66%,
pneumonia at 65%, peptic ulcer and GI disorders at 56%, Diabetes mellitus at 52%, and tuberculosis at
51% (Philippine Health Statistics, 2000). Meanwhile for the morbidity rate, involves mainly infectious
regarding respiratory, neurologic, and musculoskeletal conditions, and degenerative diseases such as
visual & hearing impairment, difficulty in walking, chewing, arthritis and incontinence.

The occurrence and prevalence of these diseases under the mortality and morbidity rates
among elderly is significantly associated with their socioeconomic status and condition. In which have
been proven to be an indicative host affecting physical function via attribution from the psychosocial
health, relative on deciding of admitting elderly into nursing home as debated (Zimmer et. al, 2004). For
instance, there’s an elevated percentage of educational attainment of elderly Filipino from 9.6 (1990) to
19.9% (2010) have secondary level of education. It is apparent though that this improvement accords to
the place of residence in which elderly who live in Metro Manila (39.2%) have completed secondary
education compared to rural areas (13.9%) (Abalos, 2018). The place of residency and level of education
reflects an increase dependency burden with prevalence of older adults living in poverty and threshold,
having a reportedly occupation involve farming, forestry and fishing at around 41% while 10% are
laborers and inexperienced workers (DSWD’s Philippine Country Report, 2007). As educational
attainment contributes to the occupation and income of the elderly, it dependently produces negative
effects existing in the poverty of older Filipinos’ social welfare. Specifically, the high underemployment
issue in the workforce offers a disadvantage for older Filipino worker to find a job considering the gap
competencies usually compared to younger workers. But elderly workers who remained in the
workforce by long-term employment standing or own business can provide benefits to supplement the
insufficient financial pension provided by the government, as well as ease reliability to their young
dependents.
 Therefore, these studies’ data suggest that this positive status of socioeconomic factors lead to
better access to health services as maintenance and recovery from diseases. That systematic elderly care
whether received from family and institutionalized link to the improvement of physical functioning
health as shown in the study entailing the relationship bet. Socioeconomic status and health among
older Asians (Zimmer et. al, 2004). It can be concluded that reasons for the linkage between these two
concepts involved in the health of elderly population are integrated and impact the overall health
outcomes. It is the responsibility of nurses to incorporate the current epidemiological status and trends
present in the area to clearly trace to rooting socioeconomic factor playing a significant affect to the
health and death-related statistics through providing interventions to prevent these diseases and
promote health. Thus, providing a family-centered care remains to be a transcultural care for older
Filipino adults with clinical acceptance of institutionalized care together will create a transformative
dynamic environment to deal with continuous changing of socioeconomic status, trends and issues.

Reference:

- Abalos, J. (2020). Older Persons in the Philippines: a Demographic, Socioeconomic and Health Profile.
Ageing International. 45. DOI: 10.1007/s12126-018-9337-7.

- Antonio, Alfred. (2015). Challenges to the Filipino Elderly as Traditional Caregivers: The Changing
Landscape of Long Term Care Management of the Filipino Elderly.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304019497_Challenges_to_the_Filipino_Elderly_as_Traditio
nal_Caregivers_The_Changing_Landscape_of_Long_Term_Care_Management_of_the_Filipino_Elderly

- Badana MPH, A.N, Andel PhD, R. (2018). Aging in the Philippines. The Oxford University Press: The
Gerontologist, 58(2), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnx203

- Philippine Country Report (2007). Community Services for the Elderly in the Philippines: A
Collaboration of the Department of Social Welfare and Development and the Department of Health. 5 TH
ASEAN and Japan High Level Officials Meeting on Caring Societies: Tokyo, Japan.
https://www.academia.edu/35094860/PHILIPPINE_COUNTRY_REPORT_Community_Services_for_the_El
derly_in_the_Philippines_A_Collaboration_of_the_Department_of_Social_Welfare_and_Development_
and_the_Department_of_Health

- Zimmer, Z., Chayovan, N., Lin, H.-S., & Natividad, J. (2004). How Indicators of Socioeconomic Status
Relate to Physical Functioning of Older Adults in Three Asian Societies. Research on Aging, 26(2), 224–
258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027503260624