1. DEBBIE PRICE & RACHEL STUCHBURY DINAH BISDEE AND TOM DALY BSG 2009, 2 nd – 4 th SEPTEMBER INSTITUTE OF GERONTOLOGY debora.price@kcl.ac.uk rachel.stuchbury@kcl.ac.uk dinah.bisdee@kcl.ac.uk thomas.daly@kcl.ac.uk Behind Closed Doors: Financial inequalities within older couples

2. 2 Background – ‘Behind Closed Doors’ Project How do the financial resources of men and women differ within and between older couples? What are the drivers of difference?  Quantitative Study How do older couples view, manage and negotiate about money? What (if any) are the implications of within-couple unequal ownership of financial resources for the well-being of older people and their families?  Two Qualitative Studies – focus groups and couple/individual interviews What ageing and ageist discourses and practices are prevalent in the formulation of government policy relating to money? How do these relate to the money practices of older couples?  Policy Study

3. www.householdmoney.co.uk Project Website Portal for information on older people and later life: finance, care, health, housing, advice, wills and end of life issues Findings Outputs Web Survey Researcher Blogs Public views About the project 3

4. Within couple financial inequality Understanding human behaviour; challenging the social order; influencing policy Feminist critique of the family: men have financial resources and women are dependent Implications for power, control and gender relations within and outside the household: Women’s access to resources and decision making among older couples will be limited Women will be satisfied with unequal access to resources Women will sacrifice consumption within households Women may experience poverty within non-poor households Power and control within the household is connected to power and control outside the household Implications for well being in widowhood/after divorce & vulnerability to poverty and social exclusion 4

5. Research Questions (Project) Present a nationally representative statistical picture of financial inequality between and within older couple households, investigating how different sources of income in later life contribute to or ameliorate financial inequality within households; Through multivariate analysis, investigate the correlates of later life inequality and consider whether within-couple inequality in later life is associated with measures of quality of life; 5

6. Outline Data considerations & epistemological issues Couple descriptives & financial decision making Gendered financial inequality of partnered older people Financial inequality within partnerships  Exploratory analysis of correlates 6

7. ELSA People aged 50 and over and their younger partners, living in private households in England. Sample drawn from households that had previously responded to the Health Survey for England (HSE) in 1998, 1999 or 2001. Fieldwork: March 2002 and March 2003. Repeated interviews, historical data added. Wave 1: approx 12,000 people; IFS derived financial variables (with imputed data)  Project spec: analysis of Wave 1 of ELSA; hope in future to add histories, and act as baseline data for longitudinal analysis 7

8. Data Collection: Income and Assets  Research questions require that information about income and assets is collected separately for men and women in a couple, but: “Later in the interview, I would like to ask some questions about finances generally, for example income and savings. Can I just check, do you and name keep your finances totally separate?” If person is living as part of a married or cohabiting couple and has indicated finances are shared between the couple, questions go to respondent on behalf of the couple. If person is living as part of a married or cohabiting couple and has indicated finances are not shared between the couple, questions go to each respondent separately.  Asset information – only collected at benefit unit level even though wide disparities in ownership between partners  Even apart from gender issues within the household, increasingly important for understanding financial well being in later life, especially increasing prevalence of second & subsequent marriages where spouse may not inherit 8

9. Epistemological Issues  Project raises epistemological issues with the way data on assets, wealth has been collected and reported Relatively few couples would say finances were “totally separate” – powerful norm to present ‘jointness’ within partnerships Joint does not mean joint, covers a whole range of arrangements including some that are quite separate Couples unaware of each others’ finances Secret money But income: at least attempts are made to collect separate data Assets: information not collected for each couple unless they have declared finances “totally separate” in analysis, income from assets has been apportioned equally between partners – no other options  ‘Benefit Unit’ discourse pervades data collection 9

10. ELSA: focus on benefit unit  Individual section on work and pensions collects information from individuals about their work and pension income  Not used in IFS derived financial variables, which focus on benefit units  Income and assets section (used in IFS derived financial variables)  collects information largely from one person in the couple about either individual or joint income (but not about individual occupational or personal pensions, broad brush on work income);  if couple did not say that there income is totally separate, one person only answers and then all assets are considered joint assets (whether individually or jointly held); income from assets is also considered joint regardless of how held.  In IFS derived variables, all assets and income from these are attributed to both parties if one person is answering for both.  Large amounts of imputed data (but clearly flagged and transparent) Data can’t be used to examine individual asset ownership within couples, except for couples who answer separately; query individual income where proxy answers, and income from assets can’t be apportioned. 10

11. Older Couples 4,503 heterosexual couples (9,006 people) 4,025 with financial data about both partners 1,960 couples where one partner is over 65 1, 817 with financial data about both partners 11 AgesPercentage Both under 6040% Man under 60, woman 60 – 642% Woman under 60, man 60 – 649% Both 60 – 646% Man under 60, woman 65+1% Woman under 60, man 65+4% Man 60 – 64, woman 65+1% Woman 60 – 64, man 65+7% Both 65+31%

12. Marital Status of ELSA Couples AllWhere woman <60 Where woman 60-64 Where woman 65+ First marriage for both67%57%70%80% Remarriage for both9%10%9%7% First marriage for one, remarriage for other 9%12%6%5% Married, status not known for both7%12% 7% Cohabiting, both divorced2%3%2%0.5% Cohabiting, other combinations7%6%1% 100% n=4,5012,3656701,466 12 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3, couples where at least one member is over 50

13. Living Arrangements % allWhere woman under 60 Where woman 60 – 64 Where woman 65+ Couple only71.8%56%85%92% Couple and grandchild/ren0.6% Couple, adult child/ren and grandchild/ren1.0% Couple, their parent/s, adult child/ren & grandchild/ren 0% (1 cp) Couple with adult child/ren (all over age 30)4.4%3%7%6% Couple with adult child/ren (one/some under 30) 20.9%38%5%1% Couple and their parent/s0.5% Couple with parent/s and adult child/ren (one/some under 30) 0.3% Couple with their parent/s and adult child/ren, all over 30 0% (1 cp) Other0.4% 13 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3, couples where at least one member is over 50

14. Separate or Joint Finances of Couples? Under 6060 – 64Over 65 MEN IN COUPLES Separate17%16%18% Joint83%84%82% 100% WOMEN IN COUPLES Separate18% 17% Joint83%82%83% 100% n=1900/2365731/6701871/1466 No significant differences 14 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3

15. Who answered the Income & Assets Section? Where couples declared joint finances, who answered for the couple? Man answered IA65% Woman answered IA35% 15 Gendered issues of power and control 94% of cases: at least one of the couple answered the financial questions; 5% missing; 1% other household member answered Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3

16. Organisation of Money (Individuals) Man looks after all except woman’s personal spending Woman looks after all except man’s personal spending Man looks after, woman gets housek eeping Woman looks after, man gets house Keeping Share and manage jointly Keep finances completel y separate Some other arrangem ent Declared Separate (18%)21%14%31%19%14%74%15% Declared Joint (82%)79%86%69%81%86%26%85% 100% All individuals (100%)14%22%6%<1%55%2%<1% n=83391200183347236456420826 Note: only one person answers this for the couple, even if finances totally separate – if separate, about half men, half women answer (‘first person to answer IA”) Data notes: need to ‘decode’ all answers as where finances are ‘joint’ the same answer can’t be attributed to both partners as it refers to the other in the ELSA dataset; where couples have ‘separate’ finances, they are coded as missing in the ELSA data if the other person was asked the questions, need to match couples, attribute, and ‘decode’ these answers; cannot compare answers given by partners within a couple 16 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3

17. Who has final say in big financial decisions? ManWomanEqual say Declared Separate Finances (18%)21%28%15% Declared Joint Finances (82%)79%72%85% 100% All individuals (100%)18%10%73% n=8,36679614906050 P<0.001 Note: only one person answers this for the couple, even if finances totally separate – if separate, about half men, half women answer (‘first person to answer IA”) Data notes: need to ‘decode’ all answers as where finances are ‘joint’ the same answer can’t be attributed to both partners as it refers to the other in the ELSA dataset; where couples have ‘separate’ finances, they are coded as missing in the ELSA data if the other person was asked the questions, need to match couples, attribute, and ‘decode’ these answers; cannot compare answers given by partners within a couple. 17 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3

18. Distribution of income from private and occupational pensions for those in receipt, couples 65+ Outliers for men into the hundreds of thousands of pounds 72% of men in couples in receipt of some private or occupational pension income 28% of women in couples in receipt of some private or occupational pension income 18 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3

19. Distribution of income from paid work or business for those in receipt, couples 65+ Outliers for men up to £60,000 11% of men aged 65+ in couples in receipt of some income from paid work or business 7% of women aged 65+ in couples in receipt of some income from paid work or business 19 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3

20. Distribution of weekly income from state pension for those in receipt, couples 65+ 94% of men aged 65+ in couples in receipt of some income from state pension 93% of women aged 65+ in couples in receipt of some income from state pension 20 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3

21. 4% of men aged 65+ in couples in receipt of some income from state income support 1% of women aged 65+ in couples in receipt of some income from state income support Income support is assessed at benefit unit level, but paid to the claimant 21 Distribution of weekly income from state income support for those in receipt, couples 65+ Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3

22. Gender differences in annual net income from private/occ pensions & paid work, men and women, 65+, in couples Median, for those in receiptMedian GapWomen as % of Men MenWomen Net private/occ pension£4,104£1,770£2,33443% Net earnings/profits£3,334£2,666£66880% Pens+Earn£4,674£2,052£2,62244% Percentage in receipt Net private/occ pension72%29% Net earnings/profits11%8% Pens + Earn75%34% Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3 22

23. Gender Differences in Net Weekly Income All income, weekly, net, men and women in couples MedianMedian gap Median women's income as % of men's AGEMenWomen 60 - 64 £212 £ 98 £11546% All 65+ £180 £69 £11039% n= 65- 69 £198 £77668/600 £12139% 70 - 74 £178 £67544/429 £11238% 75 - 79 £167 £60368/252 £10636% 80 - 84 £ 151 £56193/125 £9438% 85+ £159 £8177/35 £ 7851% Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3 Note: includes individual income from paid work, private and occupational pensions, state pensions, income support, state benefits, income from assets and all other sources of income. All income is measured at the individual level (although one partner often answers for both), except income from assets, which has been apportioned equally between partners. 23

24. Quintiles of Individual Income, 65+ in Couples, according to sex 24 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3 Couples where at least one member is over 65

25. Components of Net Weekly Income 25 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3 Couples where at least one member is over 65

26. Relative Importance of Income Components 26 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3, couples where at least one member is over 65

27. Inequality of income within couples, (1+=65+) 27 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3 Couples where at least one member is over 65

28. Distribution of Income Inequality within Couples Percentile of share of joint income Men 5 th 40% 10 th 48% 20 th 56% 25 th 59% 50 th (Median)70% 75 th 80% 80 th 82% 90 th 87% 95 th 91% Percentile of share of joint income Women 5 th 9% 10 th 13% 20 th 18% 25 th 20% 50 th (Median)30% 75 th 41% 80 th 44% 90 th 52% 95 th 60% 28 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3 Couples where at least one member is over 65

29. Income inequality within couples, 65+ Women’s share of joint income* Between 0% and 20%24% Between 20% and 40%49% Between 40% and 60%22% Between 60% and 80%4% Between 80% and 100%1% 100% n=1,817 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3 * Where at least one member of the couple is over 65 29

30. Income quintile, age and within couple inequality 30 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3 Couples where at least one member is over 65

31. Social class, age and within couple income inequality 31 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3 Couples where at least one member is over 65

32. Man’s Social Class and Income Inequality Her Male Partner’s Social Class, col % Income share of woman IIIIIIIVVAll Between 0% and 20%37332117 24% Between 20% and 40%43445053 49% Between 40% and 60%161923262522% Between 60% and 100%447465% 100 100% n=2553933245402691,781 p<0.001 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3 32

33. Woman’s Social Class and Income Inequality Her own Social Class, col % Income share of woman IIIIIIIVVAll Between 0% and 20%6212724 24% Between 20% and 40%414049545149% Between 40% and 60%443220192122% Between 60% and 100%984445% 100 100% n=2553933245402691,781 p<0.001 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3 33

34. Educational qualifications, age and within couple income inequality 34 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3 Couples where at least one member is over 65

35. Woman’s Education and Income Inequality Her own Educational Qualifications, col % Income share of woman Higher Education al Qual School Leaving Educatio nal Qual Forei gn or other NoneAll Between 0% and 20%223123 24% Between 20% and 40%4241535449% Between 40% and 60%2724232022% Between 60% and 100%95345% 100 100% n=3965101197651,790 p<0.001 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3 35

36. Health, age and income inequality within couples 36 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3 Couples where at least one member is over 65

37. Marital status, age, and income inequality within couples 37 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3 Couples where at least one member is over 65

38. Woman’s Marital Status and Income Inequality Income share of woman Married, first marriage Re- married, 2 nd or subs. CohabitingAll Between 0% and 20%25%24%7%24% Between 20% and 40%51%24%36%49% Between 40% and 60%21%42%48%22% Between 60% and 100%4%9%10%5% 100% n=1,524228421,794 p<0.001 Source: ELSA, Wave 1, 2002/3 38

39. Further Work Understanding the role that different components of income play in within-couple financial inequality Multivariate modelling of financial inequality within couples in later life  Possibly adding lifecourse history data from Wave 2 Testing whether within couple financial inequality is related to quality of life outcomes e.g. marriage quality, health Understanding the drivers of financial inequality between couples in later life Considering explanations and implications arising from the qualitative strand of the project 39

40. Conclusions The financial contributions of men and women within older couples are very unequal, especially state pensions, private pensions and earnings from paid work Older couples are poorer, but at all ages from 65 to 85, median partnered women’s income is about 38% of partnered men’s Older partnered women dominate the lower individual income quintiles, and older partnered men the higher; private pensions are the main driver of difference Within older couples, at all ages, women contribute about 30% to the couple’s joint income  A quarter of women contribute between 0% and 20%, and only 5% more than 60% Social class, education and marital status all play a (small?) part in explaining income inequality within the household; age, health and income quintiles seem to have little impact  Multivariate analysis will help to understand the mechanisms at work 40

41. Conclusions The data suggests that gendered financial inequality within couples is a lifelong condition that men and women must find ways of accommodating A substantial body of work on younger couples suggests that such inequality has implications for power, control and access to resources within relationships, as well as impacts on wider society Through our qualitative work we hope to contribute to understanding the importance of age and ageing in these debates 41