dEjournals Home Page
Central European Journal of Educational Research
Current Archives Guides Templates Submit online Search
Register Login

Central European Journal of Educational Research

Vol. 7 No. 1 (2025): Institutional Contexts and Support Systems in Education: Family, School, and Community Perspectives
Thematic articles

Supporting Background, Caring Practices and Perceptions of Care in Narratives of Parents of Children Living With Autism Spectrum Disorder

Published:
2025-06-30
DOI Linkhttps://doi.org/10.37441/cejer/2025/7/1/15936
Author
Eva Nagy
View
PDF
Keywords
parenthood; care care deficit autonomy perception children living with ASD insider research
License

Copyright (c) 2025 by the authors

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How To Cite
Selected Style: APA
Nagy, E. (2025). Supporting Background, Caring Practices and Perceptions of Care in Narratives of Parents of Children Living With Autism Spectrum Disorder. Central European Journal of Educational Research, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.37441/cejer/2025/7/1/15936
Abstract

This study explores the childrearing practices of parents raising children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), using D. H. Morgan’s family practices framework (Morgan, 1996, 2001, 2002, 2004, 2011), the concepts of care capital and Bowlby’s thoughts on caringscapes (Bowlby, 2012, 2017, 2019). It also addresses questions of care and autonomy within the context of disability. The author’s dual role as both researcher and parent plays a significant part in the research process. Using Grounded Theory methodology, the study involved 19 interviews with Hungarian parents of children with ASD. The findings reveal that parenting practices are shaped by the lack of formal care. Deficiencies in institutional support shift additional care responsibilities to the primary sphere of care (Lynch, 2007), intensifying parental care burdens. Parents are forced to stretch already limited resources, which can restrict both their own and their child’s experience of autonomy. Furthermore, the availability of formal care alone does not ensure a sense of agency or control for parents. Some parents with greater resources extend their roles beyond individual caregiving. They challenge dominant perceptions of autism and strive to reshape local caringscapes, effectively “rewriting” societal understandings of otherness and disability.

 

References
  1. Betz, T., Honig, M.-S., & Ostner, I. (2017). Parents in the Spotlight. Parenting Practices and Support from a Comparative Perspective. Verlag Barbara Budrich.
  2. Bowlby, S. (2012). Recognising the Time—Space Dimensions of Care: Caringscapes and Carescapes. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 44(9), 2101–2118. https://doi.org/10.1068/a44492
  3. Bowlby, S. (2017). Children, young people and ‘caringscapes’. In J. Horton & M. Pyer (Eds.), Children, Young People and Care (pp. 244–249). Routledge.
  4. Bowlby, S., & McKie, L. (2019). Care and caring: An ecological framework. Area, 51(3), 532–539. https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12511
  5. Brisson, D. (2009). Testing the Relationship of Formal Bonding, Informal Bonding, and Formal Bridging Social Capital on Key Outcomes for Families in Low-Income Neighborhoods. The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 36(1). https://doi.org/10.15453/0191-5096.3411
  6. Broese van Groenou, M. I., & De Boer, A. (2016). Providing informal care in a changing society. European Journal of Ageing, 13(3), 271–279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-016-0370-7
  7. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). A kvalitatív kutatás alapjai [The basics of qualitative research]. L’Harmattan.
  8. Daly, M. (2017). Parenting: Critical insights from a sociological perspective. In T. Betz, M.-S. Honig, & I. Ostner (Eds.), Parents in the spotlight. Parenting practices and support from a comparative perspective. Barbara Budrich Publishers.
  9. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed., pp. 1–33). SAGE Publications, Inc.
  10. Ells, C., Hunt, M. R., & Chambers-Evans, J. (2011). Relational autonomy as an essential component of patient-centered care. IJFAB: International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics, 4(2), 79–101. https://doi.org/10.3138/ijfab.4.2.79
  11. Francis, A. (2012). The Dynamics of Family Trouble: Middle-Class Parents Whose Children Have Problems. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 41(4), 371–401. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241611426142
  12. Francis, A. (2015). Family Trouble. Rudgers University Press.
  13. Goddard, J. A., Lehr, R., & Lapadat, J. C. (2000). Parents of Children With Disabilities: Telling a Different Story. Canadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy, 34(4).
  14. Hill, T. (2022). Understanding unmet aged care need and care inequalities among older Australians. Ageing & Society, 42(11), 2665–2694. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X21000222
  15. Hochschild, A. R. (1995). The Culture of Politics: Traditional, Postmodern, Cold-modern, and Warm-modern Ideals of Care. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 2(3), 331–346. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/2.3.331
  16. Huppatz, K. (2009). Reworking Bourdieu’s `Capital’: Feminine and Female Capitals in the Field of Paid Caring Work. Sociology, 43(1), 45–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038508099097
  17. Kittay, E. F. (1999). Love’s Labor: Essays on Women, Equality, and Dependency. Routledge.
  18. Kröger, T. (2022). Care Poverty: When Older People’s Needs Remain Unmet. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97243-1
  19. KSH. (2022). Népszámlálási adatok - A fogyatékossággal élők korcsoport és a fogyatékosság típusa szerint, 1.1.8.1. tábla. [Census data - Persons with disabilities by age group and type of disability, Table 1.1.8.1.].
  20. Lee, E., Bristow, J., Faircloth, C., & Macvarish, J. (2014). Parenting culture studies. Palgrave Macmillan.
  21. Lynch, K. (2007). Love labour as a distinct and non-commodifiable form of care labour. The Sociological Review, 55(3), 550–570. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2007.00714.x
  22. Mackenzie, C., & Stoljar, N. (2000). Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency, and the Social Self. Oxford University Press.
  23. McLaughlin, J. (2012). Understanding disabled families: Replacing tales of burden and resilience with ties of interdependency. In Routledge Handbook of Disability Studies (pp. 479–491). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429430817-34
  24. Morgan, D. (1996). Family Connections: An Introduction to Family Studies. Wiley.
  25. Morgan, D. (2001). Family sociology in from the fringe: The three ‘economies’ of family life. In R. Burgess & A. Murcott (Eds.), Developments in Sociology. Routledge.
  26. Morgan, D. (2002). Sociological perspectives on the family. In A. Carling, S. Duncan, & R. Edwards (Eds.), Analysing Families: Morality and Rationality in Policy and Practice (pp. 147–164). Routledge & CRC Press.
  27. Morgan, D. (2004a). Men in Families and Households. In The Blackwell Companion to the Sociology of Families (pp. 374–393). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470999004.ch22
  28. Morgan, D. (2004b). Risk and Family Practices: Accounting for Change and Fluidity in Family Life. In E. B. Silva & C. Smart (Eds.), The New Family? (pp. 13–30). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446218150
  29. Morgan, D. (2011a). Locating ‘Family Practices’. Sociological Research Online, 16(4), 174–182. https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.2535
  30. Morgan, D. (2011b). Rethinking Family Practices. Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230304680
  31. Morgan, D. (2019). Family Troubles, Troubling Families, and Family Practices. Journal of Family Issues, 40(16), 2225–2238. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X19848799
  32. Nica, A. (2022). Reconceptualising emotional capital and intimacy using a sociological lens: The Authentic Revolution. Emotions and Society, 4(1), 69–89. https://doi.org/10.1332/263169021X16260553458069
  33. O’Brien, M. (2009). The Impact of Economic, Social, Cultural and Emotional Capital on Mothers’ Love and Care Work in Education. In K. Lynch, J. Baker, M. Lyons, S. Cantillon, J. Walsh, M. Feeley, N. Hanlon, & M. O’Brien (Eds.), Affective Equality: Love, Care and Injustice (pp. 158–179). Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230245082_9
  34. Simmel, G. (1994). Bridge and Door. Theory, Culture & Society, 11(1), 5–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/026327694011001002
  35. Stefanik, K. (2021). Rövid beszámoló az MTA-ELTE Autizmus Szakmódszertani Kutatócsoport (MASZK) munkájáról [Brief report on the work of the MTA-ELTE Autism Methodology Research Group (MASZK)]. Gyógypedagógiai Szemle, 49(4), 295–297. https://doi.org/10.52092/gyosze.2021.4.4
  36. Tobak, O. (2012). Gondozás és prevenció az autizmussal élő gyermeket nevelő családok körében [Care and prevention among families raising children with autism]. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Pécs.
  37. Tronto, J. C. (1993). Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care. Routledge.
  38. Volgyesi-Molnar, M., Gyori, M., Eapen, V. et al. (2025). Quality of Life in Hungarian Parents of Autistic Individuals. J Autism Dev Disord, 55, 1122–1137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-024-06243-3