Toplumsal Yeniden Üretim Perspektifinden Kız Çocuklarının Ev İçi Bakım Emeği

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 47 Sayı: 1, 118 - 139, 08.07.2023

Başak Akkan

Öz

Kız çocuklarının bakım emeğinin, toplumsal yeniden üretim teorisi içerisinde çok fazla yer almadığı söylenebilir. Bunun bir sebebi feminist literatürde ‘yaş’ kategorisinin çocukluk dönemini kapsayacak şekilde sorunsallaştırılmamış olmasıdır. Diğer sebebi ise konunun çocukluk çalışmaları ile sınırlı kalmasıdır. Ekseriyetle Büyük Britanya odaklı, ‘genç bakım verenler’ (young carers) olarak tanımlanan ve engelli aile bireylerine bakan çocukların sosyal refah sistemi içerisindeki durumlarına odaklanmış çalışmalar söz konusudur. Bu çalışmaların toplumsal cinsiyet boyutunu göz ardı ettiğine dair eleştiriler gelmiştir. Son yıllarda kız çocuklarının bakım emeğinin toplumsal yeniden üretim teorileri içerisindeki yerine odaklanan tartışmalar önem kazanmaya başlamıştır. Çocukların bakım veren konumunda olmalarının yarattığı toplumsal cinsiyet temelli eşitsizlikler ve bu bağlamda kız çocukları ve ev içi emek ilişkisini ortaya koyma yönünde çalışmalar toplumsal yeniden üretimin karmaşık yapısını gösterir niteliktedir. Toplumsal cinsiyet, sınıf, yaş (çocukluk) gibi kategorilerin kesişimselliği, kız çocuklarının bakım emeğinin boyutlarını belirlemekte ve yaşam fırsatlarını şekillendirmektedir. Türkiye, kız çocuklarının ev içi emek yüklerinin oldukça yüksek olduğu bir ülkedir. Ev işlerinde faaliyette bulunan kız çocuklarının (6-17 yaş) oranı %51,3’tür (TÜİK 2019). Kesişimsellik yaklaşımı çerçevesinde toplumsal yeniden üretim teorilerinin kız çocuklarını da kapsayacak şekilde ele alınması, bakım emeğinin, özellikle alt sosyo-ekonomik ailelerden gelen kız çocuklarının topluma eşit katılımları üzerindeki belirleyici etkisini tartışmaya açabilir. Makale, toplumsal yeniden üretim çerçevesine yaş kategorisini de getirerek, ev için emeğin yarattığı eşitsizlikleri toplumsal cinsiyet ve sınıf kategorileri ile birlikte “çocukluk” kategorisini de dikkate alarak, tartışıyor. Özellikle de çocukluğu, karşılıksız bakım emeğinin feminist yazınında kesişimsel eşitsizliklerin daha az kavramsallaştırılmış bir kategorisi olarak ‘yaş’ı toplumsal cinsiyetle iç içe geçmiş bir sosyal kategori olarak ele alıyor. Bu bağlamda, bu makale kesişimsel eşitsizlikler ekseninden Türkiye’de kız çocuklarının ev içi bakım emeğine odaklanmaktadır. 2000’li yılların bakım siyaseti ve sosyal politikaları da dikkate alınarak, toplumsal yeniden üretim teorisinin eleştirel bir okuması içerisinden kız çocuklarının eşit yaşam hakları makalede tartışılacaktır. Türkiye odaklı tartışma içerisinde Rai ve vd.’nin (2014) ortaya attığı toplumsal yeniden üretim yoluyla tükenme (depletion through social reproduction) ele alınacak ve İstanbul’da kardeş bakımlarını üstlenmiş kız çocukları ile yapılan niteliksel araştırmaya dayanarak ev içi bakım emeğinin yarattığı kırılganlıklar ele alınacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

toplumsal yeniden üretim, kardeş bakımı, kız çocukları, kesişimsel eşitsizlikler, karşılıksız bakım emeği

Kaynakça

• 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), 209–25.
• Akkan B (2018) Politics of Care in Turkey: Sacred Familialism in a Changing Political Context, Social Politics, 25(1), 72-91.
• Akkan B (2019a). Contested Agency of Young Carers within Generational Order: Older daughters and sibling care in Istanbul, Child Indicators Research, 12(4), 1435-1447.
• Akkan B (2019b). Care as an Inequality-Creating Phenomenon: Intersectional analysis of the care practices of the young female carers in Istanbul, Journal of Gender Studies, 28(8), 895-905.
• Alanen L (2011). Generational Order. İçinde: J Qvortrup, W Corsaro ve MS Honig (der), Palgrave Handbook of Childhood Studies, London:Palgrave Macmillan, 159–174.
• Aldridge J (2008). All Work and No Play?: Understanding the Needs of Children with Caring Responsibilities, Children &Society, 22, 253–264.
• Aldridge J ve Becker S (1996). Disability Rights and the Denial of Young carers: The dangers of zero-sum arguments, Critical Social Policy, 16(48), 55-76.
• Aldridge J ve Becker S (2003). Children Caring for Parents with Mental Illness, Bristol: The Policy Press.
• Alexander C (2021a). Unequal Conditions of Care and the Implications for Social Policies on Young Carers, Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 38, 505–518
• Alexander C (2021b). Affects of Policy Design: The Case of Young Carers in the Care Act 2014 and the Children and Families Act 2014, Social Policy & Administration, 55(5), 968-980. Allen J, Jenkins D ve Howard M (2020). Crises Collide: Capitalism, Care, and COVID-19, Feminist Studies, 46(3), 583 - 595.
• Anthias F (2012) Intersectional What? Social division, Intersectionality and Levels of Analysis, Ethnicities, 13(1), 3–19.
• Bakker I (2003). Neo-liberal Governance and the Reprivatization of Social Reproduction: Social Provisioning and Shifting Gender Orders. İçinde: I Bakker ve S Gill (der), Power, Production and Social Reproduction: Human Insecurity in the Global Political Economy, London: Palgrave MacMillan, 66-82.
• Bakker I. ve Gill S (2003). Ontology, Method and Hypothesis, İçinde: I Bakker ve S Gill (der), Power, Production and Social Reproduction: Human Insecurity in the Global Political Economy, London: Palgrave MacMillan, 17-46.
• 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 ve Dearden C (1998). Young Carers and their Families. Oxford: Blackwell Science.
• Becker S ve Sempik J (2019). Young Adult Carers: The Impact of Caring on Health and Education, Children& Society, 33(4), 377-386.
• Bezanson K ve Luxton M (2006) der. Social Reproduction: Feminist Political Economy Challenges Neo-Liberalism, McGill-Queen’s University Press.
• Bhattacharya T (2017). Introduction: Mapping social reproduction theory, İçinde: T Bhattacharya (der), Social Reproduction Theory: Remapping Class, Recentering Oppression, London: Pluto Press, 1-20.
• Boyle G, Constantinou G, ve Garcia, R (2022). Does Gender Influence Children's and Young People's Caring? A Qualitative, Systematic Review and Meta-Ethnography’, Children & Society https://doi.org/10.1111/chso.12598
• Buğra A ve Keyder C (2006). The Turkish Welfare Regime in Transformation, Journal of European Social Policy, 16 (3), 211–28.
• Burman E ve Stacey J (2010). The Child and Childhood in Feminist Theory, Feminist Theory, 11(3), 227–240.
• Camilletti E, Banati P, ve Cook S. (2018). Children’s Roles in Social Reproduction: Re-examining the Discourse on Care through a Child Lens, Law, Social Justice and Global Development, 21, 33-48.
• Candas A ve Silier Y (2014). Quietly Reverting Public Matters into Private Troubles: Gendered and Class-based Consequences of Care Policies in Turkey, Social Politics, 21 (1), 103–23.
• Collins, P (1998). It is All in the Family: Intersections of Gender, Race and Nation, Hypatia, 13(3), 62–82.
• Coppens AD, Alcala L, Mejia-Arauz, R ve Rogoff B (2014). Children’s Initiative in Family Household Work in Mexico, Human Development, 57, 116–130.
• Crenshaw K (1989). Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: a black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics, University of Chicago Legal Forum, 140, 139-167.
• 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 ve Becker S (2000). Growing up Caring: Vulnerability and Transition to Adulthood — Young Carers’ Experiences, Leicester: Youth Work Press.
• Dearden, C ve Becker S (1997). Protecting Young Carers: Legislative Tensions and Opportunities in Britain, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 19(2), 123-138.
• Dedeoğlu S, Şahankaya A ve Sırali Y (2021) Supporting Women’s Employment through Institutional Colloboration on Early Childhood Care and Education, Ankara: International Labour Organization.
• Dowling E (2021a). Caring in Times of a Global Pandemic. Introduction, Historical Social Research, 46 (4), 7-30.
• Dowling E (2021b). The Care Crisis: What Caused It and How Can We End It? London: Verso.
• Ecevit Y (2012). Feminist Sosyal Politika Bağlamında Türkiye’de Çocuk Bakımı ve Erken Çocukluk Eğitimine İki Paradigmadan Bakmak. İçinde: A Makal ve G Toksöz (der), Geçmişten Günümüze Türkiye’de Kadım Emeği, Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Yayın Evi, 220-65
• Eder M (2010). Retreating State? Political Economy of Welfare Regime Change in Turkey, Middle East Law and Governance, 2: 152–84.
• Eley S (2004). ‘If They don't Recognize it, You've Got to Deal with it Yourself’: Gender, Young Caring and Educational Support’, Gender and Education, 16(1), 65–75.
• England P (2005). Emerging Theories of Care, Annual Review of Sociology, 31, 381–399.
• Evans R ve Becker S (2009). Children Caring for Parents with HIV and AIDS, Bristol: Policy Press.
• Fineman M (2004).The Autonomy Myth: a Theory of Dependency. New York: The New Press.
• Ferguson A ve Folbre N (2000). Women, Care and Public Good: A Dialogue. İçinde: Anatole A, Fisk M ve Holmstrom N (der), Not for Sale: in Defense of Public Goods, Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 95–108.
• Ferguson S (2017). Children, Childhood and Capitalism: A Social Reproduction Perspective, İçinde: T. Bhattacharya (der), Social Reproduction Theory: Remapping Class, Recentering Oppression, London: Pluto Press, 112-130.
• Folbre N (1994). Who Pays for the Kids? Gender and the Structures of Constraint, New York: Routledge
• Folbre N (2001). The Invisible Heart: Economics and Family Values, New York: New Press.
• Fraser N (2017). Crisis of Care? On the Social-Reproductive Contradictions of Contemporary Capitalism. İçinde: T. Bhattacharya (der), Social Reproduction Theory: Remapping Class, Recentering Oppression, London: Pluto Press, 21-36.
• Fraser N ve Jaeggi R (2018). Capitalism: A Conversation in Critical Theory. Medford: Polity Press Gal J (2010). Is there an Extended Family of Mediterranean Welfare States?, Journal of European Social Policy, 20(4), 283–300.
• Grugel J, Macias S ve Rai S (2020). Depletion, Intersectionality and the Limits of Social Policy: Child carers in Mexico City, European Journal of Politics and Gender, 3(2), 221 - 236.
• Hamilton M ve Cass B (2017). Capturing the Centrality of Age and Life-course Stage in the Provision of Unpaid Care, Journal of Sociology, 53(1), 79-93.
• James A, Jenks C ve Prout A (1998). Theorizing Childhood. Cambridge: Policy Press.
• Jenks C (1996). Childhood, London, Routledge.
• Jones A, Jeyasingham D ve Rajasooriya S (2002). Invisible Families : The Strengths and Needs of Black Families in which Young People have Caring Responsibilities, Bristol: Policy Press.
• Joseph S, Sempik J, Leu A ve Becker S (2019). Young Carers Research, Practice and Policy: An Overview and Critical Perspective on Possible Future Directions” Adolescent Research Review, 5,77-89
• Keith L ve Morris J (1995). Easy Targets: A Disability Rights Perspective on the “Children as Carers” Debate, Critical Social Policy, 15(44–45), 36–57.
• Kittay EF (1999). Love’s Labour: Essays on Women, Equality and Dependency. New York: Routledge.
• Leu A ve Becker S (2017). A Cross-national and Comparative Classification of In-country Awareness and Policy Responses to "Young Carers, Journal of Youth Studies, 20(6), 750-762.
• Leu A, Frech M ve Jung C (2018). You Don't Look for it”—A Study of Swiss Professionals’ Awareness of Young Carers and Their Support Needs, Health Social Care Community, 26, 560– 570.
• Lykke N (2010). Feminist Studies: A Guide to Intersectional Theory, Methodology and Writing. New York: Routledge.
• Mezzadri A (2019). On the Value of Social Reproduction: Informal Labour, the Majority World and the Need for Inclusive Theories and Politics”, Radical Philosophy, 2(4), 33-41.
• McCall, L (2005). The Complexity of Intersectionality, Signs, 30(3), 1771–1800.
• Memiş E ve Kongar E (2020). Potential Impact of Daycare Closures on Parental Childcare Caregiving in Turkey. The Levy Economics Institute Working Paper 978. http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_978.pdf.
• Miller P (2005). Useful and Priceless Children in Contemporary Welfare States, Social Politics, 12(1), 3-41.
• Morrow V (2008). Responsible Children and Children’s Responsibilities? Sibling Caretaking and Babysitting by Schoolage Children. İçinde: J Bridgeman, H Keating ve L Craig (der), Responsibility, Law and the Family, Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Company, 105–124.
• Nap HH, Hoefman R ve De Jong N. (2020) The Awareness, Visibility and Support for Young Carers across Europe: A Delphi Study, BMC Health Serv Res, 20, 921.
• Newman T (2002). Young Carers and Disabled Parents: Time for a Change of Direction? Disability and Society, 17(6), 613–625.
• O’Dell L, Crafter S, de Abreu G ve 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 and Society, 11, 41–54.
• Olsen R (2000). Families under the Microscope: Parallels between the Young Carers Debate of the 1990s and the Transformation of Childhood in the late Nineteenth Century, Children & Society, 14(5), 384-394.
• Orellana MF (2001). The Work Kids Do: Mexican and Central American Immigrant Children’s Contribution to Households 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.
• Prout A ve James A (2005). A New Paradigm for the Sociology of Childhood? Provenance, Promise and Problems İçinde: J Allison ve A Prout (der), Reconstructing Childhood: Contemporary Issues in the Sociological Study of Childhood, London:Falmer Press, 1–32.
• Qvortrup J (2011) Childhood as Structural Form. İçinde: J Qvortrup, W Corsaro ve M. S. Honig (der), Palgrave Handbook of Childhood Studies, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 21–33.
• Rai S, Hoskyns C ve Thomas D (2014). Depletion, International Feminist Journal of Politics, 16(1), 86-105.
• Ridge T (2006). Helping out at Home: Children’s Contribution to Sustaining Work and Care in Lone-Mother families, İçinde: C Glendinning ve PA Kemp (der), Cash and Care: Policy Challenges in the Welfare State, Bristol: The Policy Press, 203–216.
• Roche J ve 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.
• Stamatopoulos V (2018). The young Carer Penalty: Exploring the Costs of Caregiving Among a Sample of Canadian Youth, Child & Youth Services, 39 (2-3),180-205.
• TNSA (2013) Hacettepe University, Population Studies Institute Turkey demographic and health survey. https://fs.hacettepe.edu.tr/hips/dosyalar/Araştırmalar%20-%20raporlar/2013%20tnsa/TDHS_2013_main.report_compressed.pdf Tronto J (1993). Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care. New York: Routledge.
• TÜİK (2015). Zaman Kullanımı Araştırması, December 4, https://data. tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Zaman-Kullanim-Arastirmasi-2014-2015-18627
• TÜİK (2019). Çocuk İşgücü Anketi Sonuçları, Monthly Statistical Bulletins, March 31, 2020, https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Child-Labour-Force-Survey-2019-33807
• TÜİK (2021). Türkiye Aile Yapısı Araştırması, Nisan 2022, https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Turkiye-Aile-Yapisi-Arastirmasi-2021-45813
• Walby S, Armstrong J ve 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 ve Degele N (2011). Intersectionality as Multi-level Analysis: Dealing with Social Inequality, European Journal of Women’s Studies, 18, 51–66.
• 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.