Skip to main content
Report
Care

What pushes unpaid carers into poverty?

Unpaid carers do difficult, skilled and life-saving work, but this labour can prevent them doing paid work and push them into poverty.

The overall entry rate includes all unpaid carers, regardless of how long they have been undertaking care. To get a more complete picture of the impact of unpaid caring on poverty, Figure 2 compares the poverty entry rate of all carers, new carers and those who became carers unexpectedly, for each type of carer from 2011 and 2012 to 2019 and 2020. The entry rates for new carers are higher than for carers overall, indicating the heightened poverty risk experienced by unpaid carers is caused by caring per se, rather than other factors such as their characteristics.

For both groups of carers, the entry rates for unexpected carers are higher still, to the extent that these carers are twice as likely to enter poverty as adults overall, with entry rates of around 12% compared to 6% for the adult population as a whole. This could imply that some individuals who would expect to enter poverty if they became carers choose not to undertake unpaid caring. In other words, the expectation of poverty may be deterring some individuals from becoming unpaid carers when an element of choice is involved.

Poverty exits

While many households move into poverty each year, others move out of poverty, and it is the balance of these 2 flows that ultimately determines overall levels of poverty. Figures 3 and 4 show the poverty exit rate, defined as the proportion of individuals in poverty who move out of poverty, for all adults and for each type of carer from 2011 and 2012 to 2019 and 2020. The exit rate over the whole period for new carers and those experiencing a caring shock is also shown.

Exit rates for unpaid child-carers and unpaid social-carers are similar, despite the entry rate generally being higher for the latter group, and both are lower than for adults as a whole. For both types of unpaid carer, exit rates are lower for new carers, and lower still for unexpected carers.4

While at first glance this might appear to suggest that more people are exiting poverty than entering it, the 2 rates cannot be straightforwardly compared. Whereas the poverty entry rate is defined as the proportion of people not in poverty in the previous wave who entered poverty in the current wave, the poverty exit rate is defined as the proportion of people in poverty in the previous wave who exited poverty in the current wave.

This means that as long as most people are not in poverty, which will always be the case when using a relative poverty measure, the exit rate will be higher than the entry rate, and differences in exit rates between groups will appear smaller, even though a relatively even number of people move in and out of poverty.

This is shown in Figure 5, which displays flows in and out of poverty as proportions of adults, unpaid child-carers and unpaid social-carers. Within each group, a similar number of people move in and out of poverty each year. Across groups, these numbers are proportionate to the initial poverty rate: in groups with higher poverty rates, more people move both in and out of poverty.

This indicates that the combination of higher risk of entering poverty and lower likelihood of exiting poverty experienced by unpaid carers mainly reflects higher initial poverty rates, which stay relatively stable over time, rather than a smaller proportion of the overall caring populations exiting.

In summary, unpaid carers enter poverty at a higher rate, and exit poverty a lower rate once there, than adults as a whole. These differences are larger when it comes to new carers, indicating that becoming a carer is associated with a higher risk of entering poverty and a lower likelihood of exiting it once there. The fact that these differences are even more pronounced for those who become carers unexpectedly further demonstrates that caring, rather than just the characteristics associated with being a carer, induces poverty.

Poverty duration

So far we have only examined the year in which carers enter or exit poverty. However, we should also be concerned with the length of time that carers spend in poverty after they enter. The scarring effects of poverty may compound over time, and the longer a household remains in poverty, the more difficult it may be for them to escape it (Jenkins and Rigg, 2001). Conversely, just because a carer exits poverty one year does not mean that they have escaped it permanently, so we need to consider poverty recurrence in addition to poverty persistence.

Unpaid carers are more likely to remain in poverty after they enter and more likely to re-enter poverty after they exit. Figures 6 and 7 show the proportion of individuals who are in poverty the year after transitioning into poverty (the persistence rate) or out of poverty (the recurrence rate). Both rates are higher for unpaid carers than for adults as a whole. For both groups of carers, around half of those who enter poverty remain in poverty the following year, and around one-third of those who exit poverty re-enter poverty the following year.

New unpaid child-carers, particularly those who became carers unexpectedly, have even higher persistence rates, whereas persistence rates are not markedly different among different groups of unpaid social-carers. This is in line with our findings (Thompson et al., 2023) that unpaid social care is often intermittent and variable. By contrast, unpaid child care follows more of a standard pattern, and the period around the beginning of child care often involves a permanent increase in household size.

When it comes to recurrence rates, new unpaid child-carers have similar or lower recurrence rates, while recurrence rates are higher among new unpaid social-carers. In both cases, the pattern is especially marked for unexpected carers. The particularly low recurrence rate among unexpected child-carers could reflect the fact that their child-care responsibilities are more likely to be temporary and one-off than most other child-carers.

Meanwhile, the higher recurrence rates among new unpaid social-carers could indicate that the period when the need for caring arises is particularly volatile, particularly if the need for unpaid caring was unexpected.

We saw in the previous section that unpaid carers enter poverty at a higher rate, and exit poverty at a lower rate, than adults as a whole. The fact that they are also more likely to stay in poverty once they enter, and more likely re-enter poverty after they exit, further highlights the struggles that unpaid carers face in maintaining a decent standard of living while caring for others.

Trigger events and poverty exits

Figure 9 repeats this analysis for poverty exits. For all adults and social carers, labour-market events are less significant in terms of poverty exits than they are for poverty entries. Labour-market events do make up the largest grouping of trigger events for unpaid child-carers and adults as a whole.

Meanwhile, changes in benefit income are significant for all groups, overtaking labour-market events in the case of unpaid social-carers, particularly those who became carers unexpectedly, for whom increases in benefit income account for around two-thirds (68%) of poverty exits. Also notable is that around one-quarter (27%) of poverty exits among unexpected social-carers involve increases in other household income.

Similar patterns are observed when it comes to poverty exits as shown in Figure 11.

A man and a woman standing in front of a building and trees.

This report is part of the care topic.

Find out more about our work in this area.

Discover more about care