The number of people who combine work and unpaid care is increasing rapidly as more people need care, public and private care systems are progressively under pressure and more people are required to work for longer. Without adequate support, these working carers may experience detrimental effects on their well-being. To adequately support working carers, it is important to first understand the challenges they face. A scoping review was carried out, using Arksey and O'Malley's framework, to map the challenges of combining work and care and solutions described in the literature to address these challenges. The search included academic and grey literature between 2008 and 2018 and was conducted in April 2018, using electronic academic databases and reference list checks. Ninety-two publications were mapped, and the content analysed thematically. A conceptual framework was derived from the analysis which identified primary challenges (C1), directly resulting from combining work and care, primary solutions (S1) aiming to address these, secondary challenges (C2) resulting from solutions and secondary solutions (S2) aiming to address secondary challenges. Primary challenges were: (a) high and/or competing demands; (b) psychosocial/-emotional stressors; (c) distance; (d) carer's health; (e) returning to work; and (f) financial pressure. This framework serves to help those aiming to support working carers to better understand the challenges they face and those developing solutions for the challenges of combining work and care to consider potential consequences or barriers. Gaps in the literature have been identified and discussed.

Combining work and care can be very challenging. If not adequately supported, carers' employment, well-being and relationships may be at risk. Technologies can be potential solutions. We carried out a scoping review to find out what is already known about technologies used by working carers. The search included academic and grey literature published between January 2000 and June 2020. Sixteen relevant publications were analysed and discussed in the context of the broader discourse on work-care reconciliation. Technologies discussed can be classified as: (a) web-based technologies; (b) technologies for direct communication; (c) monitoring technologies; and (d) task-sharing tools. Technologies can help to make work-care reconciliation more manageable and alleviate psychosocial and emotional stress. General barriers to using technology include limited digital skills, depending on others to use technologies, privacy and data protection, cost, limited technological capabilities, and limited awareness regarding available technologies. Barriers specific to some technologies include work disruptions, limited perceived usefulness, and lacking time and energy to use technologies. More research into technologies that can address the needs of working carers and how they are able to use them at work is needed.

Introduction

Informal carers in paid employment–working carers (WKCs)—have complex support needs. However, little is known about WKCs’ pattern of informal care provision, the support they receive, the impact providing care has on their employment, and how these vary between male and female WKCs. This study describes the pattern of informal care provision and received support among Swedish WKCs.

Research method/Design

The study was a cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey of a stratified random sample of the Swedish population aged 18 or over. The questionnaire addressed the type and extent of informal care provided, support received and the impact of care provision on employment. Of the 30,009 people who received the questionnaire, 11,168 (37.3%) responded, providing an analytic sample of 818 (7.32% of respondents) employed or self-employed informal carers.

Findings

A typical Swedish WKC was a middle-aged female, providing weekly or daily care to a non-cohabitant parent, who experiences care as sometimes demanding and receives no formal support as a carer. Female WKCs were more likely than males to care alone and with higher intensity, to report a need for help in meeting their care-recipient’s needs, and to experience care as demanding. Approximately 17% of WKCs reported their employment had been affected due to caring, 40% their ability to work, and 31% their career development opportunities. Female WKCs’ ability to work was affected more than males’, and they were more commonly prevented from applying for work.

Conclusion

Swedish female WKCs compared to males provide more hours of informal care, across more care domains, more often alone. This places them in a challenging situation when combining paid work and care. Greater recognition of the challenges faced by WKCs is required in Sweden and other countries, as are policies to reduce gender inequalities in informal care provision in this group.