Journal of Gender Studies

ISSN: 0958-9236 (Print) 1465-3869 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjgs20

Care as an inequality-creating phenomenon: an

intersectional analysis of the care practices of
young female carers in Istanbul

Başak Akkan

To cite this article: Başak Akkan (2019): Care as an inequality-creating phenomenon: an

intersectional analysis of the care practices of young female carers in Istanbul, Journal of Gender
Studies, DOI: 10.1080/09589236.2019.1597338

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2019.1597338

Published online: 28 Mar 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 59

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cjgs20
JOURNAL OF GENDER STUDIES
https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2019.1597338

Care as an inequality-creating phenomenon: an intersectional

analysis of the care practices of young female carers in Istanbul
Başak Akkan
Social Policy Forum Research Centre, Bogazici University, Bebek, Istanbul, Turkey

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

This article explores care as an inequality-creating phenomenon pertaining Received 9 May 2018
to the position of young female carers. Engaging the normative theory of Accepted 15 March 2019
Nancy Fraser on ‘participatory parity’ as a framework for equality, an inter- KEYWORDS
sectional analysis of childcare practices of young female carers reveals Young female carer;
inequalities that cut across class and gender, and given the focus on intersectionality; sibling
young carers, age is incorporated as a third social category. The experiences care; participatory parity
of sibling care practices of older daughters are explored in the familialist
institutional and cultural setting of Istanbul, where the gendered identity of
the young carer is constructed, and the childhood participation is shaped in
relation to the care work. Driving on the empirical study conducted in
Istanbul, the article aims to build the link between the normative theory
of equality and intersectional analysis of care family care practices of young
female carers. The article argues that care emerges as an inequality-creating
phenomenon that cuts across not just gender and class but also age in cases
where the participatory parity is hindered.

Introduction
Drawing on Nancy Fraser’s (see Fraser & Honneth, 2003) normative theory of ‘participatory parity’
as a framework for equality and presenting an intersectional analysis, this article explores care as an
inequality creating phenomenon with a particular focus on the most invisible care providers –
young female carers, in a certain social location, Istanbul. The social practices of sibling care at the
micro level that are entrenched in the institutional framework of childcare at the macro level, is the
focus of the multi-layered intersectional analysis. In the familialist cultural setting of Turkey, the
cultural patterns define the gendered nature of care work, where it is the women members of the
family who are expected to take responsibility for providing care – a responsibility that is mostly
shared between the mother and the older daughter. Class dynamics is as an integral variable of the
analysis as commonly the daughters in low socio-economic status households provide care for
their younger siblings in an institutional setting where public childcare services are barely institu-
tionalised and private child care is too costly. In this respect, the article depicts care as an
‘inequality-creating phenomenon’1 in which family care practices are situated in a wider socio-
economic context of power relations that paves way to multiple inequalities. Contemplating the
position of the oldest daughter of a family as the carer of younger siblings, age (childhood) is
introduced in the intersectional analysis along with gender and class. The overarching research
question here is: How do the institutional and cultural patterns through which care arrangements
are settled pave the way to inequalities that cut across the inherent categories of class and gender

CONTACT Başak Akkan basak.akkan@boun.edu.tr Bogazici University Social Policy Forum, Kuzey Kampüs Otopark
Binası, Bebek, Istanbul 34342
© 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 B. AKKAN

as well as age? Accordingly, empirical analysis pursues a multi-layered approach to uncover

gendered patterns of care practices in the course of a childhood.
Care practices at the micro level refer to informal care provided in the family, a shared task by
the oldest daughter and the mother in a household. The concept of informal care here is the one
that ‘is embedded in emotional, physical, and mediatory horizontal, reciprocal social relationships
involving practical assistance and surveillance’ (Pfau-Effinger, 2011, p. 36). In the case of young
female carers, the concept also refers to a mediation of social relationships, as the oldest daughter
sharing the care task with the mother and being held responsible from their siblings’ well-being,
manifests another form of dependency relation with her siblings. Thus, the oldest daughter
engaged in sibling care is referred to as a ‘young female carer’, as she carries a weighty caring
responsibility in the course of her childhood within the realm of family caring practices. Becker
(2007, p. 25) defines ‘young carers’ as a specific group of children who are engaged in care work
regularly; and their care-providing role is substantial for their families that is different than the
children’s time to time involvement in caring tasks and household chores. In this article, gendered
position of the young carer is a significant part of the analysis as care-giving is notably a gendered
family practice in the cultural context of Turkey. At the macro level, childcare refers to the
institutional arrangement of childcare provisions. The institutional framework defines the social
and economic resources available for the care arrangements (Bowlby, 2012) and this has an impact
on the family care practices (in relation to gender, socio-economic situation, location, age, etc.) at
the micro level.
The article first provides an overview of the institutional setting of the childcare arrangements
and cultural framework of the gendered division of labour in the context of Turkey. Then, following
reflections on the theoretical and conceptual framework, an intersectional analysis of the empirical
study on young female carers in Istanbul is presented. Through the intersectional lens, it is aimed
to understand the gendered identity building process of young female carers in the course of their
childhood. Therefore, gender and childhood are explored as two social categories to contemplate
on the intersectional inequalities. Based on the qualitative work carried out with young female
carers, the article aims to contribute to the care literature by problematizing age (childhood) as
another social category of inequality in relation to care that intersects with class and gender.

Institutional and cultural framework: childcare in the familialist context of Turkey

Turkey has been identified as a familialist welfare regime where the family acts as the main care
provider for dependents (Bugra, 2011; Bugra & Keyder, 2006; Gal, 2010). Children in 86% of the
households (with children aged five and below) receive care from their mothers, 2.8% attend
a crèche (TurkStat, 2017). This familialist model is situated in a cultural framework where mothers
are perceived as the main care providers for dependent children. In the European Values Survey,
75% of respondents in Turkey indicated that family should be responsible for the care of children.
Only 21% assumed that the state has a responsibility to provide care for children (Çarkoglu &
Kalaycıoglu, 2013). Mothers’ unquestioned responsibility for the children younger than 3 is a widely
acknowledged understanding (World Bank, 2015) that reflects the familialistic tendency in the
society. This cultural frame is accompanied by an almost total lack of public childcare services for
0–3 ages.
The public childcare has never been fully institutionalized and through the years the limited
number of state-run childcare centres has decreased as the tendency is for such childcare services
to be offered by private entities with relatively high fees (World Bank, 2015). The literature provides
evidence that the care needs of families in higher socio-economic groups is being met by private
care institutions, but also migrant care workers who are engaged in care work in the households
(Akalın, 2007). Hence, the burden of childcare is particularly on those women in families of low
socio-economic status. The class-based access to childcare services perpetuates a two-fold inequal-
ity where gender and class mutually construct each other.
 JOURNAL OF GENDER STUDIES 3

When we look at how the responsibility for care in the household is shared, the numbers
illustrate that childcare is primarily a gendered issue. Fathers take little responsibility for care; only
1.5% of Turkish children receive care from their father (TurkStat, 2012). According to the Time Use
Survey (2014–2015), females (age 10+) spend an average of 4 hours 17 minutes per day on
household and family care, whereas males spend an average of 51 minutes on such activities
(TurkStat, 2016a). Whilst care work is gendered within the household in Turkey, the work is shared
among the female members of the family. According to the TurkStat Child Labour Force Statistics,
for the 6–17 year-old age group, 49.2% of the children perform household chores. For girls aged
6–17, this is 56.8% (TurkStat, 2013). The 2016 Time Use Survey shows that among children aged
10–17, girls spend, on the average, 1 hour 37 minutes per day on household chores and family
care, whereas boys spend 35 minutes (TurkStat, 2016b).
Nevertheless, the sharing of care responsibility among the female members in the household
increases with lower socio-economic status. The Turkish Population and Health Research – TNSA
(2013) shows that 22.2% of the lower-class and 33% of the middle and lower class families rely on
the (oldest) daughter(s) to care for younger siblings, while higher-class families make use of the
childcare market, by either enrolling their children in childcare centres (51.4%) or hiring nan-
nies (19.7%).

Theoretical and conceptual framework

Normative theory of participatory parity
In its pursuit of an intersectional analysis2 of multiple inequalities in relation to care work, this study
is informed by the critical normative theory of justice developed by Nancy Fraser. She suggests
‘participatory parity’ as a framework for equality that pertains to the social, political as well as
economic conditions necessary for the lifting of all obstacles to equal participation in all areas of
life (Fraser & Honneth, 2003). According to Fraser, for participatory parity to be achieved, the
institutionalised patterns of material inequality along with the cultural patterns must be challenged
that would allow people to become ‘full partners in social interaction’ (Fraser & Honneth, 2003,
p. 229). Here, participatory parity pertaining to ‘full partners in social interaction’ needs a critical
analysis pertaining to the case of young female carers as the institutional barriers and cultural
patterns of inequality need to be rethought with a particular reference to construction of child-
hood. Equal participation in all areas of life could not be perceived independent of the family
experience of sibling care but also availability of societal resources. Young female carers reconcile
the childhood practices and family care practices within the boundaries their childhood spaces by
making use of the provided resources. The literature also draws our attention to the complex
inequalities of power between the care provider and care receiver that manifest itself both in the
care relations but also as part of wider socio-economic relations that defines the roles in those
spaces (Bowlby, 2012; Milligan & Wiles, 2010). Public and private life of young female carers in
different spheres of life and nature of the power relationships in these spheres define their equal
participation in childhood places.
The paper, in this respect, seeks to build a linkage between a normative equality theory of
participatory parity and the empirical work on the family care practices of young female carers to
provide a critical understanding of the multiple inequalities that encompasses age along with gender
and class. In relation to care work, the negotiation of the gendered identity and negotiation of
childhood spaces are two analytical components of the intersectional analysis in order to form this link.

Identity construction
The analysis refers to identity construction as an ongoing process that is negotiated in the
arrangements and practices of daily life and within the boundaries of institutional and cultural
4 B. AKKAN

patterns. The gendered identity construction in the realms of the family space is not independent
of the larger cultural, social and political context. Thus, identities are embedded in a wider social
structure (Benhabib, 1987; Burke, 2003; Burke & Stets, 2009; Hunt, 2003); values and cultural norms
are important in the ‘construction, contestation, and the authorization of one’s identities’ (Yuval-
Davis, 2010, p. 16). Contemplating the boundaries of the social structure, identity construction is
defined here in relation to the specific context and social practice along the lines of multi-layered
power relations. For children, home that contextualizes family experience is a space that informs
the identities (Christensen, James, & Jenks, 2000, p. 142). The shared family care practices pave way
to a particular experience through which young female carers develop a gendered identity. Within
this conceptual understanding, the empirical analysis deals with the construction of the gendered
identities at a young age in relation to care work.

Childhood and young carers

In the analysis, age pertains to childhood as a structural category (James, Jenks, & Prout, 1998;
Jenks, 1996; Prout & James, 2005; Qvortrup, 1994, 2011; Wyness, 2006); that always relates to
other categories such as gender, class, and ethnicity (Prout & James, 2005; Qvortrup, 2007, 2011;
Wyness, 2006). Therefore, childhood, as it is conceptualized as a social category, provides
another layer of analysis where participation in childhood spaces is defined in relation to
gender and class. Young carers literature reveals a particular form of childhood; children who
provide care for other family members, disabled or sick parents and siblings (Aldridge, 2008;
Aldridge & Becker, 2003 ; Becker, Aldridge, & Dearden, 1998; Dearden & Becker, 2000; Morrow,
2008; Newman, 2002; Olsen, 1996; Ridge, 2006; Roche & Tucker, 2003). These studies not only
point to the emotional and physical burdens of family care practice for a young carer, but also
to children’s time-use through reconciliation of their time for family care with time for child-
hood activities (school work, leisure time with friends, etc.) (Aldridge, 2008; Aldridge & Becker,
2003; Becker et al., 1998; Ridge, 2006). Nevertheless, the family caring experience redefines
children’s relations with their parents and siblings and could also become an empowering
experience for the young carers (Dearden & Becker, 2000; Morrow, 2008; Olsen, 1996;
Orellana, 2001; Payne, 2012; Warren, 2007). The question that is commonly asked in the
literature; whether it is a different form of childhood experience than the modern understand-
ing of childhood (Coppens, Alcala, Mejia-Arauz, & Rogoff, 2014; O’Dell, Crafter, de Abreu, & Cline,
2010), makes the young carers concept a more contested one. However, the availability of the
socio-economic resources (care services, benefits etc.) defines the position of being a young
carer in the family. Their caring position is an interplay of cultural demands, unavailability of
care services and eventually rising demand for the care task within the family (Becker, 2007,
p. 34). Therefore, could we eagerly accept the family care practice of young carers as
a distinctive form of childhood without problematizing the prevalence of socio-economic and
gender inequalities, and inequalities regarding access to societal resources?
Moreover, considering that care is embedded in multi-layered power relations, participatory
parity as a normative framework of equality encourages one to disclose the intersectional
inequalities pertaining to care work that are hidden in the power relations at different levels
and in different spheres. In the case of young female carers, care practice that delineates
participatory parity embedded in institutional and cultural patterns of gender and class inequal-
ities occurs within a childhood space. Here, neither class nor gender is isolated from the
construction of childhood. The childhood space pertains both to the family relations, and also
to spaces such as school and friendship networks. Thus, the empirical work dealing with the
conceptual tools of gendered identity building and childhood participation reveals both the
gendered patterns of care work that pertains to power relations of gender embedded in cultural
expectations, and also family relations based on share of the care tasks among the female
members of the family.
 JOURNAL OF GENDER STUDIES 5

Methods
In the case of young female carers; to understand how gender and age (childhood) construct each
other through the care practice, the two theoretical concepts through which the fieldwork was
operationalised are gendered identity and childhood participation of young female carers. The
research questions are: How does the young female carer negotiate and shape her gendered
identity in the caring practice during her childhood? To what extent does the young female carer,
as a child, negotiate her childhood participation in relation to care work?
Data was collected through an in-depth inquiry of semi-structured interviews. The questions
dealt with the two theoretical concepts that mutually construct each other – gendered identities
and childhood participation – by uncovering the daily experiences of the young female carers in
relation to care work. Gendered identity here is understood in relation to the themes of cultural
expectations and internalisation of the gender norms. The interviews explored about how young
female carers construct and negotiate their gendered identity in relation to care practice through
the meanings that they attribute to caring for their siblings and the cultural expectations: How do
they feel about caring? What are the burdens/joys of caring? What are the expectations of the
family? How do they experience these expectations? Do they think boys should provide care?
Childhood participation here is understood as young female carer’s time use in different child-
hood spaces such as home, school, neighbourhood and her engagement with school, leisure time
and peer socialisation. The interviews, in this respect, explored how young female carers negotiate
their childhood time and activities in relation to care work: How do they spend their day? How do
they mediate their schoolwork with their caring tasks? How are they socialised? What arrangements
do they make to balance their caring tasks with leisure activities and socialising with friends? The
themes that emerged will be discussed in the analysis of the thematic narratives. NVivo,
a qualitative data analysis program, was used for the analysis.

Sample and research process

Twenty young females who are providing care for their siblings were the participants of the
research. They are from families of low socio-economic status residing in deprived neighbourhoods
in Istanbul. Previous studies demonstrate that geographical segregation in Istanbul coincides with
a family’s socio-economic status (Candaş, Akkan, Günseli, & Deniz, 2011). Families from low socio-
economic groups and those with a migrant background (rural to urban areas in Istanbul) tend to
live in deprived neighbourhoods; their children have access to the schools in those neighbour-
hoods. Taking this into consideration, the interviews were conducted at two secondary public
schools located in deprived neighbourhoods in Istanbul. After securing permission from the school
administration, the guidance counsellors of the selected schools helped to contact the girls who
have caring responsibilities in their family and who wants to participate in the research. It was
assumed that they would not talk openly in a home environment, given the likely presence of their
mother or other family members, so the interviews were conducted at the school in a room
provided by the guidance counsellors. Once the schools’ administrations had approved the
research, each participant provided written consent. As it was stated in the consent form; partici-
pation was on voluntary basis and the interview could be ended at any time. The form also stated
that anonymity was granted and the data would not be used for non-academic purposes.
Concerning the sensitivity of interviewing children and a possible disclosure by the participants,
the ethical strategy was to inform the guidance teacher at the school where the interview was
conducted. The names of the children were kept confidential (pseudonyms are used in this article).
The interviews lasted 30–60 minutes each, depending on the willingness of the child to talk about
her experience. If they were not comfortable being interviewed alone, they came in pairs. All were
between the ages of 12 and 14 and had care responsibilities, of their younger siblings and of
children of relatives in some cases. Most of the children they cared for were under the age of four,
6 B. AKKAN

although a few cases involved caring responsibilities for primary-school aged siblings and or
a disabled sibling. The interviews were carried out in Turkish; audio-recorded by taking the
permission of the research participant and transcribed (anonymously). Only the quotes of children
used in the article were translated to English, the rest is kept in Turkish in a secure environment.

Sibling care practices of the young female carers in Istanbul

The participants were engaged both physically and emotionally in caring practice for their younger
siblings. As the oldest daughter of the family, they were held responsible for the caring for their
younger siblings nearly all the time that they were not at school. They started their caring tasks as
soon as they came home from school. Depending on the age of the younger sibling(s), they
performed tasks such as changing clothes, changing diapers, bathing their sibling, feeding them,
playing with them, taking the sibling out to play in the park or the street, and putting them to bed,
as the girls explained in the interviews.
Didem, 13 years old, has three siblings, aged two, four, and six. Her mother works as a house
cleaner. She comes home from school early in the afternoon. Her younger siblings meet her at the
door and immediately demand her attention. She feeds them, puts the youngest to bed and then
takes the other two to the park or into the street to play. Ece, who is 14, has a brother who is
almost 10 months old. When she returns home from school, her mother turns the toddler over to
Ece and starts doing the housework. Ece says that when she comes home, she enjoys looking after
her little brother, but when he starts getting fussy she gets annoyed and exhausted and wants to
give him to her mother, but the mother refuses to take the baby, as she has housework to do. Ece
says she has other things to do, but she feels obliged to take care of her younger brother.
For both girls, the caring activity lasts until their siblings go to bed. Caring for a youngster is
physically and emotionally demanding for them. The girls reveal that the best time of the day is
when they are finally left alone in their room or in the house after the young ones go to sleep, or
when their mother and younger siblings go out to visit a relative or a neighbour. Longing for
solitude is a theme that emerges in their narratives as Bade (aged 14) expresses; ‘The moment I feel
relieved is when my brothers and sisters go to sleep. That’s when I feel relaxed.’

Negotiating gendered identity through the practice of caring

In order to deal with the gender aspect, the first inquiry was to understand the process of
development of a gendered identity in relation to care work. The narratives suggest that young
female carers develop a gendered identity that is embedded in cultural expectations through an
internalised sense of responsibility for the care of their younger brothers and sisters. It is inter-
nalised in such a way that, in expressing their feelings about care work, all the participants started
by conveying their gratitude and happiness about being the care provider of their younger sibling.
Zeynep (aged 13) looks after her aunt’s two babies. She pronounced the happiness she derives
from the care work: ‘I could always meet my friends, but my cousins will not remain babies, they
will grow up’.
However, their narratives point to a constant negotiation that takes place in a cultural context
that the family and the extended social networks in the community expect girls to share the
responsibility of care with their mothers. As Ece (aged 14) says ‘Everybody thinks it should be the
girls who should provide care in the family.’ She sees it as a responsibility that drives from the
expectations, rather than a voluntary act: ‘I’m expected to take care of my sibling, but I don’t do it
eagerly’.
The participants express a general belief that it is their duty to provide daily care for their
siblings. Through mirroring the general acceptance in the community; revealing their mothers’
expectation; comparing their ‘gendered’ position with the boys, they negotiate their gendered
identity in relation to their responsibility of care work. Zelal (aged 13) expresses that she is the
 JOURNAL OF GENDER STUDIES 7

older daughter in the house, so she is expected to take care of her sibling: ‘I look after the
youngest. I started helping my mum when I was in fifth grade and my sibling was 8 or 9 months
old. My family wanted me to take care of my sibling because I was the older daughter.’ According
to Bade (aged 13) ‘The boys aren’t able to provide care for their siblings, nor can they do
housework. They’re into football’. She says ‘she wishes she was a boy. Then she could go out
with my friends more easily.’
The gendered identity that is negotiated through the care practice pertains to a relational
identity which comes from trying to meet the physical and emotional demands of others in the
household: their siblings and their mother. The young female carers give priority to meeting the
needs of their younger siblings, which sometimes leads to the construction of an extreme form of
gendered identity: quasi-motherhood. They perceive themselves in the role of mother to their
younger siblings since they have the main responsibility for caring tasks and for meeting their daily
needs.
Seda (aged 13) says: ‘I am half mother, because I am their older sister. I take care of them more
than my mum does. I change their clothes and feed them. Mostly, it’s me that spends time with
them, not our mother.’ According to Ela (aged 13) as if her sibling is her own child; ‘You spend time
[with the sibling] more than your mother does. You take care of her like she is your child. You treat
her very well’.
On the other hand, helping their mother, easing the mother’s care burden and prioritising
the mother’s needs over their own are common themes in the young carers’ narratives. Seda
(aged 12) says that she does not like the task of caring for her sibling, but she does not disclose
her feelings to her mother. She does not want to disappoint her mother. Zelal (aged 13), whose
mother is ill, expresses: ‘my mum can hardly look after herself, so how can she take care of my
sibling?’ Meltem (aged 13) making a strong statement saying that she dislikes looking after her
sibling. She does not like the idea that she has to take her sibling with her when she meets her
friends. She even showed her resentment by leaving her sister at home alone (the door being
locked) when she was going to go out to street to play with her friends. However, she says she
takes care of her sibling, as her mother trusts her. She does not want to let down her mother or
breach her trust. Ece (aged 14) says that she is stressed because she has to finish her homework
but she also does not want to make her mom sad; ‘Although I get angry and sad, I don’t
disclose my anger to my mum, as I don’t want to make her miserable, because she has both the
burden of housework and a burden of care. If I get angry with her, I feel like I’m being unfair
to her.’
For the young female carers, the practice of caring for a sibling is thus an ongoing negotiation
between meeting their own needs and prioritising the needs of their siblings and their mother. By
prioritising the care needs of others in the family, they internalise the notion that caregiving is
a girl’s responsibility. The cultural expectations of the older daughters with respect to caring
responsibilities set the boundaries upon which they build their gendered identities in a process
of a constant negotiation of their time and needs. The process of building a gendered identity is
embedded in the social practice of the caring responsibilities and in the caring relationships in
which they are engaged.

Negotiating childhood participation through the practice of caring

The second area of inquiry in the intersectional analysis was the process of childhood participation.
Responsibility for care defines and shapes the childhood experiences of young female carers. First,
caring tasks define the young female carers’ relationship with their peers and their social activities
in leisure time. They constantly arrange their social activities around their caring responsibilities.
Often their care responsibilities come before their social life, and sometimes they try to combine
their social life with their caring responsibilities. The narratives of the girls reveal that when their
friends get together, they are not able to join them. They are frequently obliged to postpone or
8 B. AKKAN

cancel social activities, or else, when they meet their friends, they take their siblings with them.
They socialize and play with their friends in the presence of their siblings.
This creates difficulties in their social interactions, as they have to keep an eye on their siblings
while spending time with their friends. As Idil (aged 12) tells: ‘For example, I want to play, but
I worry that he (her brother) will go somewhere else if I don’t keep an eye on him. I feel forced to
stay next to him, so I leave the game.’ They express a longing to meet their friends without their
siblings in tow. It is constant anxiety as well as Ela (aged 13) tells: ‘If my brother sibling says she
wants to stay there, I have to stay there. If I did what I wanted to do, she would get lost’.

‘When we play hide and seek, I go to hide, taking her with me. I want to leave her at home. But if my mum says
‘take care of your sister’, then I have to stop playing. I watch my friends play. Sometimes when she is sleeping,
I go out and play. When she wakes up, I take her with me and go back to play. Sometimes when I meet my
friends, she wants to come along. Or she wants me to stay and play with her and asks me not to go meet my
friends. Then I feel sad that my friends are having fun and I am staying with my sister here. But when I think
about my sister, it is better to stay with her.’ Ela (aged 13)

Second, it defines the young female carer’s educational life. Caring has an impact on a carer’s
relationship with the school, particularly on the completion of their assignments. They face
difficulty in finding time to finish their homework and other school-related tasks when they
come home from school. Providing is demanding, and they are obligated to prioritise the needs
of their siblings over their school duties.
Zelal (aged 13) is responsible for her two-year-old brother and provides care for him after she
comes from school because her mother is ill and therefore has difficulty caring for him. Zelal does her
homework with her brother on her lap. Sometimes her sibling tears up her assignments. Once she
received a failing mark because she was unable to deliver her assignment. Ayşe (aged 13) tries to lock
herself in her room when her sibling wants to spend the afternoon with her. While she is trying to
finish her homework, her mother makes her open the door so that she can take care of her sibling.
The areas of childhood participation that pertains to the socialising with peers and educational
life interfere with the care responsibility of young female carers, who need to mediate the demand
of caring for siblings with their life as a child. They constantly negotiate their time for caring tasks
with their own time (leisure and school-related duties). The narratives of the young female carers
reveal that they generally prioritise their caring responsibilities over other social activities and
meeting friends. This internalised carer identity prevents them from participating in the daily
activities and social interactions of childhood that other children in their environment engage in.

Conclusion: intersectional inequalities of class, gender, and age

Through an analysis of young female carers’ reconciliation of family care experience with the
childhood activities, this article argues that care practice defines the construction of gendered
identity and childhood participation in an intersectional way. In this multi-layered intersectional
analysis, the first analytical level is the negotiation of a gendered identity along the lines of cultural
boundaries, which set the expectation that women and girls provide care in the family. Young
female carers have to mediate their own needs and the expectation of family care practices. While
they internalise this responsibility, as a consequence of the prevailing cultural norms about gender
roles, identification with their mothers pushes them further to prioritise care responsibilities over
their own childhood needs. The gendered identity in relation to the care tasks is developed
through both parentification (taking the role of the parent) and a constant negotiation process
with respect to their personal needs and the demands of the family.
The second analytical level pertains to the conceptualisation of age that addresses childhood as
a structural category, where the focus is on the negotiation of young female carers’ participation in
childhood space (school tasks, peer socialisation, leisure time) in relation to care work. While the
young female carers build their gendered identity in a process where they mediate their own
 JOURNAL OF GENDER STUDIES 9

needs and the needs of the others within the family, they live their childhood with a grown-up
person’s time span (see also Ridge, 2006). Caring for siblings defines their relationship with school
and friends, their leisure time, and their social interactions. In this respect, childhood participation
itself is a constant reconciliation process for girls in relation to their caring tasks. In turn, this
hindered participation in childhood creates an age inequality that is intertwined with a gender
inequality that is embedded in the cultural patterns where older daughters are expected to share
care responsibility with their mothers. The class aspect here is taken as an inherent category, given
that the institutional patterns of public childcare arrangements in Turkey, with its weak institutio-
nalisation, contribute to the familialist context where childcare is perceived as a family matter.
Thus, in a context where socio-economic class determines access to childcare facilities, class
emerges as yet another intersectional category that has to be tackled.
In the empirical study, the normative framework of ‘participatory parity’, which refers to
a situation where members of society are able to interact as equal peers, provides the theoretical
background for the intersectional analysis. The hindering property of participatory parity that is
defined here within the boundaries family care experience.
Young female carers’ relationship to home as a place of family care practices in this respect
define a particular kind of childhood for them that has a defining role on their relation to other
childhood spaces such as school and friendship networks. On the other hand, home as a place of
family care practice perpetuates cultural patterns of gendered nature of care work through sharing
of care task among the female members of the family. This process is embedded in a larger
institutional framework with its power relations that determines this particular childhood in
relation to care work where access to resources (like childcare facilities) is a determinant of
gendered and class(ed) aspect of becoming a young female carer in the context of Turkey.
The case of young female carers in Istanbul demonstrates that care could emerge as an
inequality creating phenomenon that defines the subordinated positions in society in the
intersecting grid of inequalities that cut across gender, class, and age. Not all children become
young carers. Despite its limitations, this study suggests that further inquiry is needed to
understand the intersectional inequalities that include age (childhood) as a social category in
such an analysis.

Notes
1. The term ‘inequality-creating phenomenon’ is borrowed from Winker and Degele (2011).
2. As a methodology, intersectionality addresses the mutual constitution of identities such as gender, class, race,
ethnicity and other categories that can potentially produce and perpetuate inequalities, subordination, and
oppression, instead of considering the categories of stratification separately; and the methodology identifies
the power mechanisms underpinning this mutual construction (Anthias, 2012; Collins, 1998; Crenshaw, 1991;
Davis, 2008; Lykke, 2010; McCall, 2005; Walby, 2007; Walby, Armstrong, & Strid, 2012; Winker & Degele, 2011;
Yuval-Davis, 2006).

Acknowledgments
The author is grateful to Trudie Knijn for her invaluable comments on earlier drafts of this paper.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes on contributor
Başak Akkan is a PhD candidate at Utrecht University; Department of Interdisciplinary Social Science. She is an
instructor/researcher at the Social Policy Forum, Bogaziçi University. Her research areas are care policies, child well-
10 B. AKKAN

being and social policies targeting vulnerable groups. She has various articles published in English and Turkish. She is
currently working on The Features of Familialism and Care Policies in the Mediterranean Context; young carers and
intersectional inequalities as part of her PhD thesis. She is also part of an international research team working on child
well-being from a comparative perspective.

References
Akalın, A. (2007). Hired as a caregiver, demanded as housewife: Becoming a migrant domestic worker in Turkey.
European Journal of Women’s Studies, 14(3), 209–225.
Aldridge, J. (2008). All work and no play? Understanding the needs of children with caring responsibilities. Children &
Society, 22, 253–264.
Aldridge, J., & Becker, S. (2003). Children caring for parents with mental illness. Bristol: The Policy Press.
Anthias, F. (2012). Intersectional what? Social division, intersectionality and levels of analysis. Ethnicities, 13(1), 3–19.
Becker, S. (2007). Global perspectives on children’s unpaid caregiving in the family: Research and policy on “young
carers” in the UK, Australia, the USA and Sub-Saharan Africa. Global Social Policy, 7(1), 23–50.
Becker, S., Aldridge, J. &., & Dearden, C. (1998). Young carers and their families. Oxford: Blackwell Science Ltd.
Benhabib, S. (1987). The generalized and the concrete other, the Kohlberg-Gilligan controversy and moral theory. In
E. F. Kittay & D. Meyers (Eds.), Women and moral theory (pp. 154–177). USA: Rowman & Littlefield.
Bowlby, S. (2012). Recognizing the time-space dimensions of care: Caringspaces and carespaces. Environment and
Planning, 44, 2101–2118.
Bugra, A. (2011). The changing welfare regime of Turkey: Neoliberalism, cultural conservatism, and social solidarity
redefined. In S. Dedeoğlu & A. Elveren (Eds.), Gender and society in Turkey: The impact of neoliberal policies, political
Islam and EU accession (pp. 20–66). London: Tauris Academic Studies.
Bugra, A., & Keyder, C. (2006). The Turkish welfare regime in transformation. Journal of European Social Policy, 16(3),
211–228.
Burke, P. J. (2003). Relationships among multiple identities. In P. J. Burke, T. J. Owens, R. T. Serpe, & T. Pa (Eds.),
Advances in identity theory and research (pp. 195–214). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
Burke, P. J., & Stets, J. E. (2009). Identity theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
Candaş, A., Akkan, E. B., Günseli, S., & Deniz, B. M. (2011). Devlet ilkogretim okullarında parasız ögle yemegi
saglamak mümkün mü? İstanbul: İstanbul, Açık Toplum Vakfı.
Çarkoglu, A., & Kalaycıoglu, E. (2013). Türkiye’de aile, iş ve toplumsal cinsiyet. Retrieved from http://kasaum.ankara.
edu.tr/files/2013/11/turkiyedeaileisvetoplumsalcinsiyetraporu2.pdf
Christensen, P., James, A., & Jenks, C. (2000). Home and movement: Children constructing “family time”. In S. Holloway
& G. Valentine (Eds.), Children’s geographies: Playing, living and learning (pp. 139–155). London: Routledge.
Collins, P. (1998). It is all in the family: Intersections of gender, race and nation. Hypatia, 13(3), 62–82.
Coppens, A. D., Alcala, L., Mejia-Arauz, R., & Rogoff, B. (2014). Children’s initiative in family household work in Mexico.
Human Development, 57, 116–130.
Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics and the violence against women of
colour. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299.
Davis, K. (2008). Intersectionality as buzzword: A sociology of science perspective on what makes a feminist theory
successful. Feminist Theory, 9(1), 67–85.
Dearden, C., & Becker, S. (2000). Growing up caring: Vulnerability and transition to adulthood — Young carers’
experiences. Leicester: Youth Work Press.
Fraser, N., & Honneth, A. (2003). Redistribution or recognition: A political-philosophical exchange. London: Verso.
Gal, J. (2010). Is there an extended family of Mediterranean welfare states? Journal of European Social Policy, 20(4),
283–300.
Hunt, M. O. (2003). Identity and inequality: Exploring links between self and stratification process. In P. J. Burke,
T. J. Owens, R. T. Serpe, & T. Pa (Eds.), Advances in identity theory and research (pp. 71–85). New York: Kluwer
Academic/Plenum.
James, A., Jenks, C., & Prout, A. (1998). Theorizing childhood. Cambridge: Policy Press.
Jenks, C. (1996). Childhood. London: Routledge.
Lykke, N. (2010). Feminist studies: A guide to intersectional theory, methodology and writing. New York: Routledge.
McCall, L. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs, 30(3), 1771–1800.
Milligan, C., & Wiles, J. (2010). Landscapes of care. Progress in Human Geography, 34(6), 736–754.
Morrow, V. (2008). Responsible children and children’s responsibilities? Sibling caretaking and babysitting by school-
age children. In J. Bridgeman, H. Keating, & L. Craig (Eds.), Responsibility, law and the family (pp. 105–124).
Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Company.
Newman, T. (2002). Young carers and disabled parents: Time for a change of direction? Disability and Society, 17(6),
613–625.
 JOURNAL OF GENDER STUDIES 11

O’Dell, L., Crafter, S., de Abreu, G., & Cline, T. (2010). Constructing ‘normal childhoods’: Young people talk about young
carers. Disability & Society, 25(6), 643–655.
Olsen, R. (1996). Young carers: Challenging the facts and politics of research into children and caring. Disability &
Society, 11(1), 41–54.
Orellana, M. F. (2001). The work kids do: Mexican and central American immigrant children’s contribution to house-
holds and schools in California. Harvard Educational Review, 71, 366–389.
Payne, R. (2012). ‘Extraordinary survivors’ or ‘ordinary lives’? Embracing ‘everyday agency’ in social interventions with
child-headed households in Zambia. Geographies, 10, 399–411.
Pfau-Effinger, B. (2011). Family childcare in the cultural and institutional context of European societies. In B. Pfau-
Effinger & T. Rostgaard (Eds.), Care between work and welfare in European societies (pp. 35–51). New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Prout, A., & James, A. (2005). A new paradigm for the sociology of childhood? Provenance, promise and problems. In
J. Allison & A. Prout (Eds.), Reconstructing childhood: Contemporary issues in the sociological study of childhood (pp.
pp.1–32). London: Falmer Press.
Qvortrup, J. (1994). Childhood matters: An introduction. In J. Qvortrup, M. Brady, G. Sgritta, & H. Wintersberger (Eds.),
Childhood matters: Social theory, practice and politics (pp. pp.1–23). Aldershot: Avebury.
Qvortrup, J. (2007). Editorial: A reminder. Childhood, 14(4), 395–400.
Qvortrup, J. (2011). Childhood as structural form. In J. Qvortrup, W. Corsaro, & M. S. Honig (Eds.), Palgrave handbook of
childhood studies (pp. 21–33). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ridge, T. (2006). Helping out at home: Children’s contribution to sustaining work and care in lone-mother families. In
C. Glendinning & P. A. Kemp (Eds.), Cash and care: Policy challenges in the welfare state (pp. 203–232). Bristol: The
Policy Press.
Roche, J., & Tucker, S. (2003). Extending the social exclusion debate: An exploration of the family lives of young carers
and young people with me. Childhood, 10(4), 439–456.
TNSA. (2013). Türkiye Nüfus ve Sağlık Araştırması. Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Nüfus Etütleri Enstitüsü.
TurkStat. (2012). Statistics on child monthly bulletin. Ankara. Retrieved from http://www.turkstat.gov.tr/
PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=13488
TurkStat. (2013, April 2). Child labour force survey 2012 monthly bulletin. Ankara. Retrieved from http://www.turkstat.
gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=13659
TurkStat. (2016a). Women in statistics 2015. Monthly bulletin. Ankara. Retrieved from http://www.turkstat.gov.tr/
PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=21519
TurkStat. (2016b, April 22). Statistics on child, monthly bulletin. Retrieved from http://www.turkstat.gov.tr/
PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=21521
TurkStat. (2017). Family structure research. Monthly bulletin. Ankara. Retrieved from http://www.turkstat.gov.tr/
PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=21869
Walby, S. (2007). Complexity theory, systems theory, and multiple intersecting social inequalities. Philosophy of the
Social Sciences, 37(4), 449–470.
Walby, S., Armstrong, J., & Strid, S. (2012). Intersectionality: Multiple inequalities in social theory. Sociology, 46(2),
224–240.
Warren, J. (2007). Young carers: Conventional or exaggerated levels of involvement in domestic and caring tasks?
Children and Society, 21, 136–146.
Winker, G., & Degele, N. (2011). Intersectionality as multi level analysis: Dealing with social inequality. European Journal
of Women’s Studies, 18, 51–66.
World Bank. (2015). supply and demand for child care services in Turkey: A mixed methods study. Washington, D.C.:
World Bank Group. Retrieved from http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/114451467999711217/Supply-and-
demand-for-child-care-services-in-Turkey-a-mixed-methods-study
Wyness, M. (2006). Childhood and society: An introduction to the sociology of childhood. NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Yuval-Davis, N. (2006). Intersectionality and feminist politics. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 13(3), 193–209.
Yuval-Davis, N. (2010). Theorizing identity: Beyond the us and them dichotomy. Patterns of Prejudice, 44(3), 261–280.