The living arrangements of older immigrants from the former Soviet Union: A comparison of Israel and the United States

Journal of Aging Studies 26 (2012) 401–409

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Aging Studies journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jaging

The living arrangements of older immigrants from the former Soviet Union: A comparison of Israel and the United States Jeffrey A. Burr a,⁎, Ariela Lowenstein b, Jane L. Tavares a, Caitlin Coyle a, Jan E. Mutchler a, Ruth Katz c, Galina Khatutsky d a b c d

Department of Gerontology, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA, USA Center for Research and Study of Aging, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel Center for Research and Study of the Family, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel RTI International, Waltham, MA, USA

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 29 February 2012 Received in revised form 22 April 2012 Accepted 7 May 2012 Keywords: Living arrangements Former Soviet Union Immigrants Multigenerational households Israel United States

a b s t r a c t With the unprecedented emigration from the former Soviet Union (FSU) during the 1990s as context, this study described the living arrangements of older FSU immigrants living in Israel and the US. Living arrangement choices represented an important strategy for coping with the migration process. Census data from Israel and the US were employed to examine the relationships among living arrangements (independent households, multigenerational households, and extended households) and personal characteristics, including duration of residence, Jewish identity, education, and home ownership. Results showed that the less time older immigrants lived in the host country, the more likely they lived in a multigenerational or extended household. The residency length and household relationship was stronger in Israel than in the US. Also, older FSU immigrants who owned their own home and who lived in a metropolitan area were more likely to live in a complex household than in an independent household. We discussed how the economic and social environments in each country contributed to the variability in living arrangement options among these older immigrants. © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Introduction During the late 20th century, unprecedented levels of emigration occurred from the countries that made up the former Soviet Union (hereafter, FSU), especially but not exclusively among Jews. Many persons who emigrated chose either the US or Israel as their destination. When the Soviet Union began to disband in 1989 (officially disbanding in 1991), and as emigration restrictions eased, the number of immigrants to Israel increased dramatically, but slowed ⁎ Corresponding author at: Department of Gerontology, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA 02125, USA. Tel.: + 1 617 287 7318; fax: + 1 617 287 7080. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (J.A. Burr), [email protected] (A. Lowenstein), [email protected] (J.L. Tavares), [email protected] (C. Coyle), [email protected] (J.E. Mutchler), [email protected] (R. Katz), [email protected] (G. Khatutsky). 0890-4065/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jaging.2012.05.002

somewhat to the US due to changes in the way the federal government viewed the political situation of the Jews (Rosenberg, 2003). In some cases, persons who immigrated initially to Israel ultimately settled in the US, although this process of step-migration was also made more difficult over time due to changes in US immigration policy. The reasons for choosing one country over another varied, but were typically related to cultural, family, and economic factors. The act of immigrating substantially impacts immigrants and their families (Angel & Angel, 1992; Gurak & Kritz, 2010; Usita, 2001). The challenges and opportunities for immigrants vary depending on when during the life course they immigrate, on the characteristics of the immigrant, on the immigrant's legal status, and on the nature of the group's reception in the host country (Clark, Glick, & Bures, 2009). Elderly immigrants may be especially burdened by the process due to role loss and other consequences of aging, such as social network shrinkage, language acquisition

402

J.A. Burr et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 26 (2012) 401–409

difficulties, and health and disability factors (Angel & Angel, 1992; Katz, 2009; McConatha, Stoller, & Oboudiat, 2001; Treas & Mazumdar, 2002). One of the ways that migrants cope with the immigration process and adapt to the host country is through living arrangement choices (Becker, 2003; Clark et al., 2009; Lowenstein & Katz, 2005). A limited body of research shows that sharing living arrangements with others, especially adult children, may enhance the well-being of older immigrants and reduce depressive symptoms (Angel & Angel, 1992; Lowenstein & Katz, 2005; Wilmoth, 2001; Wilmoth & Chen, 2003). The purpose of this study is to systematically describe and compare the living arrangements of older FSU immigrants residing in the USA and Israel. The choice of household composition and structure is partly a consequence of personal circumstances and partly a consequence of the country-specific social and policy milieu, especially immigration and social welfare policies (Cohen, 1993). To a significant extent, living arrangements are shaped by social and cultural values, therefore it is of scholarly and policy interest to examine this emigrant group, as they resettled in two different countries. Comparing the living arrangements of older FSU immigrants in the US with those of older FSU immigrants in Israel provides an opportunity for a cross-cultural comparison of this aspect of social behavior. We use census data from each country to describe the patterns of several types of living arrangements, including living alone or in a couple-only household, living with adult children, and living in complex households that do not include adult children. Using multinomial logistic regression techniques, we examine whether the likelihood of living in specific types of households is related to duration of residence in the host country and other demographic characteristics expected to shape the decisions about the different options. We also investigate whether Jewish FSU immigrants are similar to nonJewish FSU immigrants in terms of their living arrangement behaviors.

employed elsewhere, including such topics as immigrant residential segregation (White, Fong, & Cai, 2003), immigrant settlement policies (Schmidt, 2007), and immigrant intermarriage (Lee & Boyd, 2007). It is informative to study the living arrangements of FSU immigrants who settled in these two countries because each country presents a unique social, political, economic, and demographic context.

Background and literature review

Prior to 1991, older FSU immigrants to the US entered under an established refugee policy. US refugee status has been traditionally reserved for those with a “well founded fear of persecution” based on race, religion, nationality, or political opinion. Due to state-sponsored anti-Semitism in the former Soviet Union, Jews who managed to leave the Soviet Union were accepted in the US as refugees. The Refugee Act of 1980 created a comprehensive refugee policy giving the President, in consultation with the Congress, the authority to determine the number of refugees that would be admitted on a yearly basis (U.S. Congressional Budget Office, 2006). Emigration from the Soviet Union became an important issue in US–Soviet relations in the 1970s, when the US government pressured the Soviet Union to allow emigration to its Jewish citizens. In 1974, the US Congress passed the Jackson–Vanik amendment, which stipulated that states with non-market economies that restricted emigration would not be granted most-favored-nation trading status (Gitelman, Englund, Brook-Krasny, & Goldberg, 2005). Immigration from the FSU to the US peaked in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Following the disbandment of the Soviet Union, FSU immigrants were admitted to the US on the basis of a revised refugee status program, or under the family reunification

Approximately 800,000 FSU immigrants settled in Israel during the 1990s (Brodsky, Shnoor, & Be'er, 2010). Altogether, from 1989 to 2004, more than 1 million FSU immigrants arrived in Israel, and they represent 14% of the total Israeli population (Dayan, 2004), creating a demographic shift of dramatic magnitude. In comparison, approximately 420,000 FSU immigrants came to the US during the 1990s, adding to a national population that was about 280 million at the end of the decade (Perry & Mackun, 2001). The impact of these immigration trends on each country was quite different; FSU immigration flows to Israel had a substantial influence on Israeli culture and its infrastructure while flows to the US were much more easily absorbed. FSU emigrants of all cultural backgrounds were escaping government upheaval and FSU Jewish emigrants were also fleeing anti-Semitism and persecution (Gibson & Howard, 2007; Rapoport, 1990; Schor, 2005). This study compares living arrangements of older immigrants who come from similar backgrounds but who choose to settle in two different host countries. The comparative study of social processes in this manner has been effectively

Israeli immigration and immigrant absorption policy Older FSU immigrants to Israel, especially Jewish immigrants, enter a country which actively recruited them. Jewish immigrants are by virtue of the “Law of Return” immigration policy not only officially welcomed with open arms, but are also granted citizenship immediately. After arriving, Jewish immigrants are assisted in the settlement process through Israel's complex and wide-ranging absorption policies (Horowitz, 2005; Shuval, 1994). FSU immigrants have become a large, visible, and politically important minority group in Israeli society. Upon arrival, Jewish immigrants were given an “absorption basket” composed of financial allowances, special housing considerations, cultural education (especially language courses, eventually rescinded for persons age 60 and over), subsidized mortgages, and special terms on loans for businesses (Naon, King, & Habib, 1993). Although older immigrants from all cultural backgrounds were not given access to state pensions, they were eligible to receive other social services. Many Jewish non-governmental support organizations also played a role in smoothing the immigration process (e.g., the Jewish Agency). FSU immigrants were more secular than non-immigrant Jewish Israelis and were unlikely to speak Hebrew. Although they received a mixed reception from the Israel population, they entered a well-established sub-culture within the larger Israeli society, often living in immigrant enclaves (Horowitz, 2005). US immigration and immigrant absorption policy

J.A. Burr et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 26 (2012) 401–409

403

provision as they joined relatives already resettled in the US. New immigration application guidelines resulted in a reduced but still significant influx of immigrants (Rosenberg, 2003). Although ceilings on the number of immigrants were set, exceptions to these limits were made. Under these new conditions, Immigration and Naturalization Service officials often required FSU immigrants to prove that they had family in the US and a likely means of economic support. The federal government did not provide services or supports specifically for FSU immigrants and FSU immigrants were required to go through the naturalization process if they wanted full citizenship. Nevertheless, FSU immigrants were eligible for the same programs as other refugee immigrants: they were eligible to work, eligible for a green card after one year in the country, eligible for Social Security provided they worked in the US for 40 quarters, and eligible for employment assistance. Through the US Office of Refugee Resettlement, they were also given cash and health benefits for eight months, English language tutoring, and they were eligible for the same welfare benefits as US citizens, if they qualified on the basis of need. Most importantly, refugee elders who often found it difficult to obtain work in the new country, in the absence of any earned income or Social Security benefits, were eligible to apply for and receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI). In addition, the Jewish community in the US, as in Israel, supported Jewish immigrants through Jewish philanthropies (e.g., United Jewish Communities, Combined Jewish Philanthropies, Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, The Jewish Agency). Community-based agencies funded by these organizations provided resettlement programs, counseling, case management, vocational training and other support. As important as these non-governmental organizations were for the integration of FSU Jewish immigrants, their families, when present, were even more important for successful adaptation to a society (Schor, 2005).

meet sustenance needs. Duration of residence conditions the amount of economic resources available and thus influences living arrangement options. Immigrants who lived in a country for longer periods of time have an opportunity to work, earn private and public pension credits, and save for retirement. In addition, a longer period of residence in the host country provides more opportunity to assimilate to its living arrangement norms. Research by Kritz et al. (2000) represents one of only a few studies that use US census data (1990) to examine the factors associated with older FSU immigrant living arrangements. They find that elderly immigrants from the former Soviet Union are older and have more functional limitations, lower mean education, and lower personal income than USborn non-Hispanic Whites. These immigrants are more likely to live alone than non-Hispanic Whites, but less likely to live in couple-only households and more likely to live with children. However, after controlling for a set of personal characteristics, they find that FSU-born immigrants are no more likely to live alone than native-born non-Hispanic Whites. Tran, Khatutsky, Aroian, Balsam, and Conway (2000) observe that housing shortages and economic difficulties in the former Soviet Union led to a social norm of living in more complex households, especially multigenerational ones. Their research on a community sample of 300 older Russian immigrants finds that persons living alone have more stress and more depression, likely due to isolation and unmet expectations for emotional support. This finding is consistent with another study indicating that many older Russian immigrants in the US show serious adjustment problems (Aroian, Spetzer, & Bell, 1996) and that each shows the importance of the need to understand better immigrant living arrangements.

Older immigrant living arrangements: the US

Quantitative research regarding the living arrangements of older persons in Israel, especially FSU immigrants, is limited. Researchers estimate that 70% of the FSU immigrant population in Israel lives in multigenerational households, especially during the first few years of immigration (Katz & Lowenstein, 1999). Multigenerational living arrangements in Israel are motivated in part by economic considerations, housing shortages, few public-based subsidies geared especially toward older immigrants, the need for support, and a continuation of this type of household brought in from the country of origin (Litwin, 1997; Strosberg & Naon, 1997 from Lowenstein & Katz, 2005: 750). Research shows that the rate of older adult intergenerational living arrangements among FSU immigrants living in Israel is higher than the rate of such arrangements for older persons who live in the countries that made up the former Soviet Union and higher than among older native (veteran) Israelis (Naon et al., 1993). What needs further investigation is how duration of residence, a proxy for assimilation to the norms of the host country and the amount of time needed to become economically independent, impact living arrangement choices in later life (Lewin & Stier, 2003). Research shows that in Israel younger adults are accepting of combining households with older parents because of

Much of the research on living arrangements among older immigrant persons in the US has focused on household complexity (defined by relationships among household members and size of the household). This is notable because of the national trend away from larger, more complex households toward more independent living among elderly persons (Kramarow, 1995; Wolf, 1995). Research demonstrates that older immigrants are more likely to coreside with others, including family and non-relatives, than are US-born older persons and this finding holds after controlling for economic and demographic characteristics (Burr & Mutchler, 2003). Studies of elderly US immigrants often focus on whether cultural, economic or policy factors are related to these living arrangement patterns (Burr & Mutchler, 1993; Gurak & Kritz, 2010; Kritz, Gurak, & Chen, 2000; Wilmoth, 2001); support is found for each explanation. Although health and availability of kin (especially children) are related to extended household living arrangements, some authors argue that economic resources play a more important role (Glick & Van Hook, 2002; Wilmoth, 2001). Many older immigrants have relatively few economic resources of their own and are often dependent on others to

Older immigrant living arrangements: Israel

404

J.A. Burr et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 26 (2012) 401–409

housing shortages in Israel (especially during the 1990s), child care provided by grandparents, and income sharing, including sharing grants given by the state (Naon et al., 1993). Attitude surveys show that adult children are somewhat less satisfied with this type of living arrangement and prefer more independence while older persons report being more satisfied (Katz & Lowenstein, 1999; Lowenstein, 2002). This research shows that overall adjustment was better among the younger generation (Katz & Lowenstein, 1999); other research shows that both generations generally have higher life satisfaction when living independently (Lowenstein & Katz, 2005). Objectives and research questions The objective of this paper was to describe and compare the living arrangements of older FSU immigrants in Israel and the US, and to investigate which set of individual characteristics is expected to be associated with these outcomes. We assumed the policy environments of the two countries, and other macro-level forces, influenced the living arrangement decisions of older immigrants and their families. Although we did not directly examine these issues in our models, a comparison of the results by country is suggestive of the effects of these forces. We address the following questions: 1. How did the living arrangements of older FSU immigrants in the US and Israel compare with respect to the likelihood of living in an independent household, living in a multigenerational household, and living in an extended household that does not include adult children? 2. Were the factors expected to be related to the likelihood of contrasting types of households, such as age, gender, marital status, education, and homeownership, similar across the two countries? 3. What was the unique role of duration of residence in the host country with respect to the likelihood of living in a multigenerational household across the two countries? Research design Data We employed national census data from Israel and the US to examine the living arrangements of older FSU immigrants. These data were appropriate because they contained sufficient sample sizes to study these groups, many of the relevant variables were available, the data were nationally representative, and the data covered a significant period of immigration history among older FSU immigrants for each country. US census data have a long history of use among social scientists for studying older ethnic group differences in living arrangements, while relatively few studies have exploited Israel census data for this purpose. Although census data from each country had strengths, they also included limitations. The limitations included no language or health information in the Israel census and no information in the US census on whether the respondent had any children. Despite the limitations, these data were useful for describing living arrangement behavior among these unique immigrant groups. The data for both countries were downloaded from the International Integrated Public-

Use Microdata Series (IPUMS) web site (https://international. ipums.org/international/; Minnesota Population Center, 2010). The variables in the data files were harmonized (made consistent) by the IPUMS staff. To study older FSU immigrants in Israel, we employed the 1995 Israel Census of Population, conducted by the Israel Central Bureau of Statistics. The Israel Census of Population micro-data files contained a random sample of 10% of the population and the data were self-weighting. For the US data, we employed the 2000 US Census of Population and Housing (PUMS), conducted by the US Bureau of the Census. These micro-data files contained 5% of the population and needed to be weighted to account for the sampling procedures employed by the US Census Bureau: we applied a personcentered weight in all of our analyses with the US data. In both cases, we included community dwelling persons age 65 and over who were born in the former Soviet Union. Because the Israel census took place five years earlier than the US census and because we include the same age groups in both censuses, the older Israeli FSU immigrants experienced historical events (such as the demise of the Soviet Union) five years earlier in their life courses as compared to the older US FSU immigrants. We know of no reason why this small difference in the age experience of these events would compromise our results. Nevertheless, readers should keep this time difference in mind when interpreting our results. The FSU countries include Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan. There were no missing data in the US census because the US Census Bureau imputed values before releasing the data to researchers. The Israel census had missing data for some variables. In most cases, the amount of missing data, when present, was relatively small. For the Israel sample, missing data for employment status and education was 0.1%, homeownership was about 13%, and relationship to householder was 1.2%. Persons with missing values on these variables were excluded from the analysis. After taking into consideration the sampling issues outlined above, the study sample for the US contained 7516 subjects and the study sample for Israel contained 10,977 subjects. Measures Living arrangements were defined with a three category variable. First, we identified persons who lived independently (reference group) as lived alone, lived as a couple only (two person household), or as a couple with minor children (less than 18 years old). Second, we identified whether older immigrants lived in a multigenerational household that included at least one adult child who was 18 years of age or older. We engaged in sensitivity analysis to determine if using age 18 or older as a cutoff for the definition of an “adult” child substantially changed the results of the regression analysis (table of results available upon request). To do this, we estimated a new living arrangement variable whereby an adult child was defined as 25 years and older. A comparison of results indicated no difference in the interpretation of the regression results. Third, we identified whether older immigrants lived in extended households that included two or more persons where an adult child was

J.A. Burr et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 26 (2012) 401–409

not present. All non-institutionalized adults were classified into one of these categories. The Israel census reported date of immigration in uneven groups of years to protect the confidentiality of respondents; these groups included immigrated between 1990–1995, 1980–1989, 1975–1979, 1965–1974, 1955–1964, 1947–1954, and 1947 or earlier. The US census reported date of immigration by single year. We used date of immigration from each census to create a measure of duration of residence in the host country, based on the parameters of the Israel census reporting strategy. We generated four dichotomous variables that included less than 6 years, 6–15 years, 16–30 years, and 31 years or more (reference group). To investigate whether the relationship between duration of residence and living arrangement outcomes varied by country, we formed multiple interaction terms for duration of residence by country categories. Age was measured in five-year groups in the Israel census to protect the confidentiality of respondents and is top-coded at age 80. To accommodate this decision, age in both censuses was measured with dichotomous variables for 65–69 years old, 70–74 years old, 75–79 years old, and 80 years old and older (65–69 years old was the reference group). Sex was measured as female (1) and male (0). Because data on income were missing for about 80% of the respondents in the Israel census, we were unable to control for this characteristic. In the Israel census, the question on income was only asked of persons who reported working in the previous year. This means that most Israeli elderly persons did not report an income in the census. As a proxy for relative economic standing, we controlled for education. We measured education as 1 = university completed (in Israel terminology, and 16 years or more completed schooling in the US) and 0 = less than university completed (in Israel terminology, and 15 years or less completed schooling in the US). We also included a measure of homeownership (1 = lived in an owned home and 0 = lived in a rental home). Work status was measured as 1 = employed and 0 = other. We included a variable for whether the immigrant was born in Russia (1) or one of the other FSU countries (0). Finally, we included a measure of geographic residence defined as 1 = lived in a metropolitan area and 0 = did not live in a metropolitan area (only two metropolitan areas are identified in the Israeli census). This variable captured some of the variability in housing characteristics for those living in large urban areas as compared to those living in less populated settlements. We also included a variable identifying whether the older immigrant was Jewish (1) or not Jewish (0). Information about religion was collected in the Israel census and included the categories of Jew, Muslim, Christian and others; approximately 98% of older FSU immigrants were reported as Jewish in the Israel census. Religion was not collected in the US census. Thus we identified whether a person was Jewish following a strategy developed by Cohen and Haberfeld (2007: 653) based on language use and ancestry codes. Census respondents who migrated from one of the Former Soviet Union republics, who spoke English, Yiddish, Hebrew or Russian at home, and who stated a Russian, Israeli, or Jewish (recorded as “other” in the US census) ancestry were categorized as Jewish. This was a reasonable but inexact approximation of whether a person belonged to the Jewish

405

faith. This strategy provided a conservative estimate of the number of older Jewish FSU immigrants in the US. Sensitivity analysis based on incorporating a more expansive definition of ancestry yielded similar results to those reported here (except that the proportion Jewish was higher and the effect of Jewish identity was statistically significant in the multigenerational versus independent living arrangement contrast). We examined all variables to determine if any bias was present due to multicollinearity. Variance Inflation Factors (VIF) and tolerance levels were within appropriate thresholds in all cases. Analytic strategy We began by describing the two samples using the variables identified above. We then estimated parallel multinomial logistic regression models for each country, comparing the coefficients with t-tests to determine if the slopes were statistically different. Finally, we estimated predicted probabilities for lived in a multigenerational household versus lived in an independent household for immigrants from each country from a pooled data file (both censuses combined). These probabilities were plotted in graph form to make them easier to comprehend. Results The descriptive characteristics of the country samples are presented in Table 1. The data showed that the Israel older FSU immigrant population was younger than the US older immigrant population, but that differences in the gender distribution were not statistically significant. A higher percentage of older immigrants living in Israel reported being married and they lived in larger households than did their US counterparts. More than 98% of the Israel older FSU

Table 1 Descriptive characteristics for older FSU immigrants in Israel (1995) and the United States (2000).a

Age 65–69 years 70–74 years 75–79 years 80 or more years Female Married Household size (mean) Jewish Born in Russia Duration of residence 5 years or less 6 to 15 years 16 to 30 years 31 or more years College education Lived in owned home Worked Lived in metropolitan area N = (unweighted) a b

Israel

US

Differenceb

(1)

(2)

(3) *

33.0 30.9 16.2 19.9 60.7 53.9 2.5 98.1 54.9

23.3 24.4 22.0 30.4 59.7 51.1 2.1 40.8 32.7

62.0 4.1 16.3 17.7 26.0 52.0 7.2 68.5 10,977

13.9 32.2 11.4 42.6 30.0 40.6 5.8 96.8 7516

* country differences statistically significant at p b .01. Statistics are based on weighted data (US only).

* * * * *

* * * *

406

J.A. Burr et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 26 (2012) 401–409

immigrant population was Jewish, whereas an estimated 40% of the US older FSU immigrant population was Jewish. Compared to the US, more Israel FSU immigrants were born in Russia. Duration of residence among Israel's FSU older immigrants was heavily concentrated within the less than six year group (62.0% immigrated between 1990 and 1995). For the US, the single largest duration of residence group was in the 31 or more year category (42.6% immigrated before 1970); however, 46.1% of older FSU immigrants lived in the US for 15 years or less (immigrated between 1985 and 2000). More of the older US FSU immigrants had a college education than the older Israel immigrants, but more of the Israel FSU immigrants owned their own home than was the case for US immigrants. Employment among older immigrants of both countries was low (Israel = 7.2%, US = 5.8%), and older FSU immigrants in both countries tended to live in metropolitan areas. The distribution of different living arrangement types by country is provided in Fig. 1. Almost three-quarters of the US elderly FSU immigrants lived in independent households while two-thirds of the Israel elderly FSU immigrants lived in this most common residential type. Multigenerational household living arrangements were more common among the Israel population (28.8%) as compared to the US population (18.6%). Extended households represented the least common alternative in both countries (9.1% for Israel and 7.2% for the US). Multinomial logistic regression results for living arrangement types are presented in Table 2 (odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals). The models were estimated independently for each country. However, the results are displayed for ease of comparison across the two countries such that the same living arrangement contrasts were placed side-by-side (compare columns 1 and 3 for the living in multigenerational versus living in an independent household contrast; compare columns 5 and 7 for living in an extended household versus living in an independent household contrast). Compared to persons 65–69 years old, Israel FSU immigrants who were 75–79 years old were more likely to live in a multigenerational household than to live in an independent household. Compared to persons 65–69 years old, US FSU immigrants who were 75–79 years old

were less likely to live in a multigenerational household than in an independent household. In both countries, FSU immigrants who were 80 years old and older were more likely to live in a multigenerational household than an independent household. Female immigrants in both countries were more likely than their male counterparts to live in a multigenerational household than in an independent household. There was no statistically significant effect in either country for the Jewish identification measure, while the older Israel FSU immigrants born in Russia were less likely than immigrants born in other FSU countries to live in a multigenerational household compared to an independent household. For both countries, as duration of residence increased, the probability of living in a multigenerational household versus an independent household decreased. The effect for six or fewer years of residence compared to 31 or more years was stronger in Israel than it was in the US (compare the slope coefficients shaded in gray). For older FSU immigrants in both countries, persons who lived in an owned home (versus a rental home) and persons who lived in a metropolitan area (versus a non-metropolitan area) were more likely to live with an adult child than to live in an independent household. In the US, older immigrants who worked (versus did not work) and older immigrants who had a college education (versus did not have a college education) were less likely to live with an adult child as compared to living in an independent household. For older Israel FSU immigrants, persons in the 75–79 and 80 or older age groups were more likely to live in an extended household versus an independent household as compared to those in the 65–69 age group (no significant effects for age groups were found for the US group). The probability of living in an extended household versus an independent household was higher for females than for males in both countries. In the US only, older immigrant Jews were less likely than non-Jews to live in an extended household versus an independent household. For older immigrants in both countries, the likelihood of living in an extended household versus living in an independent household decreased as duration of residence increased. The effects (slope) for the six or less years and six to 15 years of residence compared to 31 or more years of residence were

Living Arrangements of Older FSU Immigrants: Israel and US 90

74.1

80 70

62.1

60

%

Israel

50 40

US

28.8

30

18.6

20

9.1

10

7.2

0 Independent

Multigenerational

Extended

Household Type Fig. 1. Living arrangements of older FSU immigrants: Israel and the US.

J.A. Burr et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 26 (2012) 401–409

407

Table 2 Multinomial logistic regression results: living arrangements regressed on selected characteristics for Israel and US samples of older FSU immigrants (N=10,977 for Israel and 7516 for US).

Multigenerational versus independent Householda USc

Israel Independent Variables

Extended versus independent Household Israel

US

OR

95%CI

OR

95%CI

OR

95%CI

OR

95%CI

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

Age 65 - 69 years (reference) 70 - 74 years

.974

.865, 1.097

.913

.762, 1.094

1.027

.860, 1.226

1.003

.776, 1.297

75 - 79 years

1.268*d

1.097, 1.465

.806*

.664, .978

1.278*

1.033, 1.582

.860

.653, 1.134

1.729* 1.678*

1.507, 1.983 1.519, 1.853

1.3 96* 1.484*

1.169, 1.667 1.304, 1.690

2.167* 1.532*

1.794, 2.618 1.326, 1.769

1.119 1.196†

.862, 1.453 .995, 1.438

80 or older Female Jewish

.742†

.542, 1.015

.963

.829, 1.119

1.240

.724, 2.125

.736*

.590, .918

Born in Russia

.864*

.785, .950

.913

.785, 1.062

.970

.845, 1.113

.971

.779, 1.210 1.750, 3.418

Duration of residence 19.232, 28.100

7.413*

5.874, 9.357

8.090*

6.293, 10.400

2.446*

6 to 15 years

23.247* 5.205*

3.880, 6.982

3.847*

3.138, 4.715

2.977*

1.980, 4.476

1.621*

1.217, 2.159

16 to 30 years

2.126*

1.719, 2.628

1.660*

1.303, 2.114

1.629*

1.125, 2.166

1.175

.841, 1.641

5 years or less

31 or more years (reference) .931

.836, 1.038

.724*

Lived in owned home

4.743*

4.246, 5.299

6.051*

Worked

1.167

.955, 1.426

.687*

Lived in metropolitan area

1.441*

1.299, 1.598

1.504*

College education

.627, .836

1.000

.855, 1.170

.958

.784, 1.172

5.076, 7.214

2.456*

2.097, 2.878

2.432*

1.904, 3.106

.510, .925

1.050

.780, 1.413

1.125

.785, 1.612

1.028, 2.200

1.148†

.991, 1.330

1.902*

1.037, 3.491

a

Pseudo-R2 — Israel model = .245; US model = .111. Statistics are based on weighted data (US only). c CI = confidence interval. d Israel and US coefficient (slope) differences are statistically significant when shaded in gray. ⁎ p b .05, two-tailed test. † .10 > p > .05, two-tailed test. b

larger in Israel than in the US. In both countries, older immigrants who lived in an owned home were more likely than those who lived in a rented home to live in an extended household as compared to living in an independent household. A graph of the predicted probabilities of living in a multigenerational household versus an independent household by duration of residence group for Israel and US older FSU immigrants is presented in Fig. 2. These estimates were based on regression results from a pooled US and Israel data file, whereby we included a dichotomous variable for country to capture differences by geographic location. In order to generate these predicted probabilities of living in a multigenerational household versus an independent household, we need to identify a prototypical immigrant. We did this by referring to the descriptive data in Table 1. Here, we are able to rely on means and modal responses to select the prototypical (but not

actual) immigrant. For this demonstration, we assumed that an older FSU immigrant in each country was female, between the ages of 75 and 79, was Jewish, was Russian born, did not work, had less than a college education, lived in her own home, and lived in a metropolitan area. The results showed for an immigrant with these characteristics that the probability of living with an adult child versus living in an independent household was higher in Israel than in the US in the early years following immigration (i.e., less than six years living in the host country). However, as duration of residence increased (beginning with the 6–15 years duration of residence category), the probability of living in a multigenerational household versus an independent household was higher in the US than it was in Israel. Thus, there is evidence of a “cross-over effect” associated with living longer in the host country such that older Israeli FSU immigrants appear to adopt independent households at a

Predicted Probabilities of Living in a Multigenerational Household 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0

US Israel

Under 6 years

6-15 years

16-30 years

31+years

Duration of Residence Fig. 2. Predicted probabilities of living in a multigenerational household.

408

J.A. Burr et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 26 (2012) 401–409

higher rate than older US FSU immigrants. However, the older Israeli FSU immigrants usually choose to live in close proximity to their child when establishing an independent household (Lowenstein & Katz, 2005). Discussion The results of this descriptive analysis showed that among older FSU immigrants in Israel and the US, living independent of other adults (alone or as a couple) was the most common living arrangement, followed by living with an adult child (multigenerational) and living in an extended household. These results were similar to those found in other studies (Kritz et al., 2000). We also found that Israel older FSU immigrants were more likely to live in multigenerational and extended households than were US older immigrants. In both countries, duration of residence showed a strong relationship with living arrangement types, such that a shorter duration of residence was associated with a greater likelihood of living in complex households as compared to independent households. The coefficients were larger in Israel than in the US. Further, when we analyzed the probability of living in a multigenerational household by duration of residence, we found a “cross-over effect” such that the likelihood of living with one or more adult children as compared to living independently was actually lower for the Israel FSU immigrants than for their US counterparts. Additional explanations for living arrangement outcomes There were a number of issues raised by our study that deserve additional research. First, in terms of human capital and financial resources, coresidence with adult children was due to financial constraints that made it difficult to purchase independent living as well as to shortages of jobs and housing in Israel, especially for elderly immigrants. Further, difficulty in absorbing a large population influx created a need for multigenerational households even when preferences for simpler arrangements. Translating skills and credentials into jobs was difficult in both countries and it took time to find suitable employment. However, as the younger generations found employment and saved money during the time they lived in multigenerational households, they generated resources necessary to establish separate households (e.g., Demian & Rosenbaum-Tamari, 1999). Others may not have been able to afford independent living arrangements, or they preferred living with relatives, and thus did not modify their initial living arrangement strategies. Census data did not allow us to pursue these possibilities. Second, research on Israel FSU immigrants has shown that in many cases when two generations (adult children and older parents) lived in separate households, these households were in the same neighborhood (Lowenstein & Katz, 2005; see also Usita, 2001), permitting mutual support and aid. In the US, the situation was somewhat different. We observed anecdotally that when the younger FSU generation was established financially and became more acculturated to US values and norms regarding living arrangements, they often moved from the larger, urban gateway cities to the suburbs. It was not unusual in these cases for elderly

immigrants to prefer to stay behind where they had access to public transportation and to co-ethnic social networks. Qualitative research in the US and Canada supported these observations, showing that older immigrants preferred to stay in urban centers when their children moved to the suburbs (Becker, 2003; Chan, 1983). More research on these processes is required. National data containing both household and non-household social network member information is needed to address these issues. Third, as we discussed earlier, government policies regarding social support services and welfare, as well as local housing market conditions and aid from non-profit organizations, impacted immigrant living arrangements. In the case of the Israel FSU immigrants, government policies aimed at expanding housing construction and providing mortgages to participants in the labor market enabled many immigrants to purchase their own apartments. The Israel government provided a broader basket of absorption goods and services than did the US government, providing greater opportunity to establish an independent household over time. Our results allowed us to speculate that national policy issues have impacts on family decision making. Further, low income elders in the US were eligible for senior housing, some of which was supported and subsidized by members of local Jewish communities. Such housing tended to cluster in urban areas, creating naturally occurring residential communities for immigrant elders. Moreover, as low-income Supplemental Security Income recipients, frail FSU elders in many states were eligible for Medicaid home and community-based services, further extending their independence and ability to live independently as they aged and their health declined. Such housing was valued not only because it fostered independence and allowed low income seniors to live alone, but also because many provided supportive services on-site, often hiring bilingual staff. Information about such places spread via immigrant social networks, leading to further clustering. These forces also were associated with the shift from more complex living arrangements to more independent living as duration of residence increased. Local area studies are necessary to uncover the effects of these factors. Limitations These census data were cross-sectional and did not allow for any statements about causal relationships among the variables. Also, each census was restricted in the types of questions it asked (e.g. no children data provided in the US files and no language use data provided in the Israel file). Neither census allowed for the examination of non-household social networks, including potential and actual sources of social support provided by friends, neighbors, and relatives not living with the elder immigrants. Our measure of Jewish ethnicity was based on recent work by Cohen and Haberfeld (2007) and we employed a more conservative set of assumptions to help increase the validity of the variable. It is likely that an unknown amount of measurement error was present. We re-estimated our models without the Jewish ethnicity measure and the results for the other variables remained consistent with the results reported here. Nevertheless, readers should use caution

J.A. Burr et al. / Journal of Aging Studies 26 (2012) 401–409

when interpreting these results. Despite these limitations, the descriptive analyses presented here shed light on the living arrangement characteristics of older FSU immigrants who settled in two quite different societies. References Angel, J., & Angel, R. (1992). Age at migration, social connections, and well-being among elderly Hispanics. Journal of Aging and Health, 4, 480–499. Aroian, K. J., Spetzer, A., & Bell, M. (1996). Family stress and support among former Soviet immigrants. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 18, 655–674. Becker, G. (2003). Meanings of place and displacement in three groups of older immigrants. Journal of Aging Studies, 17, 129–149. Brodsky, J., Shnoor, Y., & Be'er, S. (2010). The elderly in Israel: The 2009 statistical abstract. Jerusalem: MASHAV. Burr, J. A., & Mutchler, J. E. (1993). Nativity, acculturation and economic status: Explanations of Asian American living arrangements in later life. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 48, S55–S63. Burr, J. A., & Mutchler, J. E. (2003). English language skills, ethnic concentration, and household composition: Older Mexican immigrants. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 58B, S83–S92. Chan, K. (1983). Coping with aging and managing self-identity: The social world of elderly Chinese women. Canadian Ethnic Studies, 15, 36–50. Clark, R., Glick, J., & Bures, R. (2009). Immigrant families over the life course: Research directions and needs. Journal of Family Issues, 30, 852–872. Cohen, S. (1993). Issues in absorbing aged Russian Jewish immigrants: Observations from the current Israel experience. Journal of Jewish Communal Service, 69, 30–37. Cohen, Y., & Haberfeld, Y. (2007). Self-selection and earnings assimilation: Immigrants from the former Soviet Union in Israel and the United States. Demography, 44, 649–668. Dayan, N. (2004). The empowerment of the Russian immigrants in Israel: Towards successful integration and the role of integration in minimizing discrimination and hostility. Presented at the ICSW Expert Meeting, Bratislava, 13–15th June 2004. Demian, N., & Rosenbaum-Tamari, Y. (1999). Immigrants from the former Soviet Union and their social integration in Israeli society: Expectations and realities. International Review of Sociology, 53, 91–105. Gibson, J., & Howard, M. (2007). Russian anti-Semitism and the scapegoating of Jews. British Journal of Political Science, 37, 193–223. Gitelman, Z., Englund, W., Brook-Krasny, A., & Goldberg, E. (2005). The silent embargo: Russian immigration to the United States and its effects on foreign policy. Presented at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars Retrieved October 15, 2010 from http://www.wilsoncenter.org/ index.cfm?event_id=116667&fuseaction=events.event_summary Glick, J., & Van Hook, J. (2002). Parents' coresidence with adult children: Can immigration explain racial and ethnic variation? Journal of Marriage and the Family, 64, 240–253. Gurak, D., & Kritz, M. (2010). Elderly Asian and Hispanic foreign-born and native-born living arrangements: Accounting for differences. Research on Aging, 32, 567–594. Horowitz, T. (2005). The integration of immigrants from the Former Soviet Union. Israel Affairs, 11, 117–136. Katz, R. (2009). Intergenerational family relations and life satisfaction among three elderly population groups in transition in the Israeli multi-cultural society. Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology, 24, 77–91. Katz, R., & Lowenstein, A. (1999). Adjustment of older Soviet immigrant parents and their adult children residing in shared households: An intergenerational comparison. Family Relations, 48, 43–51. Kramarow, E. A. (1995). The elderly who live alone in the United States: Historical perspectives on household change. Demography, 32, 335–352. Kritz, M., Gurak, D., & Chen, L. (2000). Elderly immigrants: Their composition and living arrangements. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 28, 85–114.

409

Lee, S., & Boyd, M. (2007). Marrying out: Comparing the marital and social integration of Asians in the US and Canada. Social Science Research, 37, 311–329. Lewin, A. C., & Stier, H. (2003). Immigration, state support, and the economic well-being of the elderly in Israel. Research on Aging, 25, 195–223. Litwin, H. (1997). The network shifts of elderly immigrants: The case of Soviet Jews in Israel. Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology, 12, 45–60. Lowenstein, A. (2002). Solidarity and conflicts in coresidence of three-generational immigrant families from the former Soviet Union. Journal of Aging Studies, 16, 221–242. Lowenstein, A., & Katz, R. (2005). Living arrangements, family solidarity and life satisfaction of two generations of immigrants in Israel. Ageing and Society, 25, 749–768. McConatha, J. T., Stoller, P., & Oboudiat, F. (2001). Reflections of older Iranian women adapting to life in the United States. Journal of Aging Studies, 15(4), 369–382. Minnesota Population Center (2010). Integrated public use microdata series, international: Version 6.0 [machine-readable database]. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota. Naon, D., King, Y., & Habib, J. (1993). Resettling elderly Soviet immigrants in Israel: Family ties and the housing dilemma. Journal of Psychology and Judaism, 17, 299–314. Perry, M., & Mackun, P. (2001). Population change and distribution 1990–2000: Census 2000 brief. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau Retrieved October 10, 2010 from http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-2.pdf Rapoport, L. (1990). Stalin's war against the Jews: The doctors' plot and the Soviet solution. New York: Macmillan. Rosenberg, V. (2003). Refugee status for Soviet Jewish immigrants in the United States. : Touro Law Review Retrieved August 12, 2010 from http:// heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein. journals/touro19&div=35&id=&page= Schmidt Sr., R. (2007). Comparing federal government immigrant settlement policies in Canada and the United States. American Review of Canadian Studies, 37, 103–122. Schor, M. (2005). A comparative study of Russian Jewish immigrants based on absorption strategies in Israel and in the Los Angeles Jewish community in the last decade. Masters Thesis, University of Judaism. Retrieved June 15, 2010 from http://academics.ajula.edu/Content/InfoUnits.asp?CID=1639. Shuval, J. (1994). Resettlement of Russian immigrants in Israel: 1989–93. Refuge, 14, 3–6. Strosberg, N., & Naon, D. (1997). The absorption of elderly immigrants from the former Soviet Union: Selected findings regarding housing, social integration and health. Gerontology, 79, 5–15 (In Hebrew). Tran, T., Khatutsky, G., Aroian, K., Balsam, A., & Conway, K. (2000). Living arrangements, depression, and health status among elderly Russian-speaking immigrants. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 33, 63–77. Treas, J., & Mazumdar, S. (2002). Older people in America's immigrant families: Dilemmas of dependence, integration, and isolation. Journal of Aging Studies, 16, 243–258. U.S. Congressional Budget Office (2006). Immigration policy in the United States. Washington, DC: US Congress Retrieved October 10, 2010 from http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/70xx/doc7051/02-28-Immigration.pdf Usita, P. M. (2001). Interdependency in immigrant mother–daughter relationships. Journal of Aging Studies, 15(2), 183–200. White, M., Fong, E., & Cai, Q. (2003). The segregation of Asian-origin groups in the United States and Canada. Social Science Research, 32, 148–167. Wilmoth, J. M. (2001). Living arrangements among older immigrants in the United States. The Gerontologist, 41, 228–238. Wilmoth, J. M., & Chen, P. C. (2003). Immigrant status, living arrangements, and depressive symptoms among middle-aged and older adults. Journal of Gerontology Social Sciences, 58(5), S305–S313. Wolf, D. (1995). Changes in the living arrangements of older women: An international study. The Gerontologist, 35, 724–731.