More men are becoming family caregivers
On a special episode (first released on February 21, 2025) of The Excerpt podcast: With an aging baby boomer population, the demand for family caregivers in the U.S. has never been higher. While traditionally, most family caregiving has fallen to women, men are now increasingly joining their ranks. Although both sexes face a financial, emotional and physical toll, men are still the primary breadwinners in most opposite sex families, and in that aspect, face unique challenges. How can we as a society better support them? Jason Resendez, president and CEO of the National Alliance for Caregiving, joins The Excerpt to dig into these issues.
Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text.
Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here
Dana Taylor:
Hello and welcome to The Excerpt. I'm Dana Taylor. Today is Thursday, February 20th, 2025, and this is a special episode of the Excerpt.
With an aging baby boomer population, the demand for family caregivers in the US has never been higher. While traditionally, most family caregiving has fallen to women, men are now increasingly joining their ranks. Although both sexes face a financial, emotional and physical toll, men are still the primary breadwinners in most opposite-sex families and in that respect, face unique challenges. How can we as society better support them? Jason Resendez, president and CEO of the National Alliance for Caregiving is here to dig into these issues. Thanks for joining me, Jason.
Jason Resendez:
Thanks for having me.
Dana Taylor:
It's frequently an emergency or at least an unexpected change when someone becomes a family caregiver, which of course is a huge challenge when it needs to be balanced with a career and other family responsibilities. What do you hear from men who are caregivers, particularly when it comes to employment and careers?
Jason Resendez:
The simple fact is, you're right, there are more and more family caregivers being enrolled into care every year. In fact, between 2015 and 2020, the number of family caregivers jumped by over 10 million to around 53 million Americans providing ongoing, complex care in this country. But our perceptions of who those caregivers are have not kept up, and our policies and culture haven't kept up.
More men are becoming family caregivers
Men face a unique set of challenges when it comes to stepping into the role of a caregiver.
So while the majority of caregivers are still women, there's a large share of men that are providing care, about 39% or 20 million men are providing ongoing complex care for someone in their life. And that care looks a lot like the care that women provide. It's ongoing, intense, helping with activities of daily living, with managing medical and nursing tasks, helping with transportation and meal preparation.
So there's a lot of similarities, but where there are differences are the cultural differences that we see around caregiving, deeply ingrained assumptions around who caregivers are and what policies are in place to support them. So what we see and hear from male caregivers are similar to what we hear from women caregivers in terms of, we work in a system that doesn't recognize and value their care. There are too few policies in place to support family caregivers in the workplace, like paid family and medical leave. And as a result, over 60% of male caregivers feel burnout. And of those who are balancing both care and work, 70% face workforce disruption. So care is a lot harder than it needs to be or should be for both men and women.
Dana Taylor:
Emotional distress is one of the top problems that caregivers point to. Men and women typically handle this in different ways. How are men receiving support differently from women, or are they?
Jason Resendez:
There are fewer supports in place for male caregivers. And this goes back to the reality that our culture and policies are deeply ingrained with these gender-based assumptions around who caregivers are. So when we think about one of the key supports for family caregivers are peer support groups. Caregivers want to hear and engage with other caregivers. These peer support groups rarely are led by or include men. So there's a lot of issues with accessing gender-tailored care supports.
We also hear from men that about one in four feel that other folks don't trust them to provide safe and caring support just because they're men. So there's a bias against male caregivers because of these deeply ingrained assumptions around who caregivers are that lead to additional isolation and distress. And so it's up to us, up to employers, up to policymakers, up to service providers to consider this changing face of who caregivers are in America and think more about the role that men are playing in providing care as we develop tailored supports and policies.
Dana Taylor:
Why are so many family caregivers unpaid? Aren't there federal funds available to cover the expense?
Jason Resendez:
There is a huge demand for care in this country. As our nation ages, as folks experience and navigate disability and serious illness, and without formal care supports in place like a healthy and growing direct care workforce, the responsibility of care falls squarely on the shoulders of family caregivers. So it really is that lack of infrastructure that contributes to that demand and hardship placed on families to shoulder the responsibilities of care.
And during the COVID-19 pandemic, we did see an increase in states stepping up and leveraging Medicaid dollars and flexibilities to address the direct care workforce shortage, to recognize this growing hardship being placed on the shoulders of family caregivers, both men and women. And so introduced programs like expanded consumer direction, getting dollars in the pockets of family caregivers when they couldn't find a direct care worker because of the crisis that we were all in.
So there are more programs at the state level, but they're fragmented, they're underfunded. We're talking about major cuts to Medicaid right now, and those are some of the programs that'll be the first to go if Medicaid gets slashed. So there's just not enough investment in the family care support system that we need, and that impacts both men and women. And it's exactly why we need to recognize the role that men play, right? We need to recognize the shared responsibility that caregiving is and the shared contribution that caregivers provide to our communities, to our families, to our economy. And that means recognizing and building gender equity so that responsibility is more equitably shared.
Dana Taylor:
So in terms of federal funding, what would it take for that to change? Do you see it as even being a possibility?
Jason Resendez:
I think we are on the road to better recognizing and valuing the contributions of family caregivers. And what that will look like are investments in programs like paid family and medical leave that allow both men and women to provide care, whether it's for a newborn baby or for an aging or ill parent or a grandparent. It looks like stronger home and community-based supports and access to respite services to limit the disruption on workforce issues that both men and women face. It looks like better training through the Medicare program to take on these complex medical and nursing tasks that both men and women are facing.
And we're seeing some incremental progress. We're seeing more states pass paid family and medical leave policies at the state level that recognize both the work of men and women in providing care. We're seeing states like Washington state step up for and invest in long-term care insurance programs that'll benefit both men and women. And we're seeing states even introduce caregiver tax credits, right? We know that caregivers spend about $7,000 out of pocket every year in providing care, and that's not tax-deductible. And so we're seeing more states step up and recognize and address those out-of-pocket costs. So while the progress is moving towards incremental investments, we still need those larger, whole-scale investments at the federal level in order to make care more sustainable. And to recognize over $600 billion in value that caregivers provide to our economy each year without adequate support.
Dana Taylor:
The Trump administration made news recently announcing a plan to halt federal grant funding. That's now been temporarily paused by a judge, but if that does move forward, what would it mean for caregivers and their loved ones if these funds disappear?
Jason Resendez:
So it would be devastating to our nation's already crumbling care infrastructure from cuts to aging and older adult services in the form of respite care in the form of Older Americans Act. National family Caregiver support programs which provide resources to states to provide direct services to family caregivers, to cuts to the Medicaid program, which is the number one payer of long-term services and supports in this country, the number one payer of home and community-based supports in this country, which millions of Americans and their family caregivers rely on. So a freeze is extremely disruptive. Cuts would be extremely devastating to Americans, both men and women who are already having a hard time providing this essential care for people in their lives.
Dana Taylor:
We have technology and apps that are made with caregivers and patients in mind. Does that help fill the gap? And what's a problem that can be solved with specific tech that wasn't available in the past?
Jason Resendez:
Technology can play a really critical role in helping family caregivers navigate their new realities and their changing realities when it comes to caregiving. One of the biggest issues we see in caregiving, according to our data, caregiving in the US, is care coordination. We see care coordination becoming harder and harder for family caregivers as they navigate different services, different policies, different insurance policies, et cetera. And so technology plays a big role in helping families coordinate care, identify what resources and benefits they can access at the state and federal level. So technology I think is a really critical tool in the toolbox, but it's not enough. We need whole-scale investments in care at the federal level, from the private sector, from philanthropy to keep up with the demand of care in this country. But certainly, technology could play a role in helping to meet that demand.
Dana Taylor:
Jason, I'm sure you have a list, but what's the most urgent need for caregivers in general? If you could pick just one.
Jason Resendez:
I think one of the most critical things that we can do is to shift the paradigm from seeing and viewing care as an individual responsibility and struggle to a shared responsibility. And from that, I think we'll see greater recognition and value and political will to invest in policies like paid family and medical leave, home and community-based supports and tax credits to recognize and value the contributions of family caregivers.
Dana Taylor:
Caregiving is something that many of us may find in our lives, either being the person providing care, or accepting it. And Jason, I know that you have a personal experience here, as do I. Can you please share the challenges you faced?
Jason Resendez:
I grew up watching my mom raise three kids while working a full-time job and caring for my grandmother who battled multiple chronic conditions. And I didn't know it at the time, but she was one of America's 11 million sandwich caregivers, balancing care for an older loved one while also care for children. And that care came out of a deep sense of love and commitment for her family, but it also came with consequences. It meant that she was never able to finish her college education. It meant that she had to dip into her hard-earned savings in order to make moments like my college graduation possible for me and for her family. And that had ripple effects. It limited our opportunities as a family. It limited her opportunities and career development. It exacerbated deeply-ingrained gender inequities. And so it shaped my life and it shaped my perspective on the importance of valuing and advocating for the work of family caregivers.
Dana Taylor:
What do you think is the most important area to focus on for the people who want to fix this issue, to improve the lives of caregivers across the country?
Jason Resendez:
I think the most important thing to focus on is recognizing that caregiving is our common ground. It cuts across party lines, it cuts across age, it cuts across genders, and it's something that we all benefit from. Caregiving is the work that makes all other work possible. And so it's from that common ground that we can start investing in the policies and supports needed to value caregiving, to make caregiving more sustainable, more equitable, and more dignified.
Dana Taylor:
Jason, thank you so much for being on The Excerpt.
Jason Resendez:
Thanks for having me.
Dana Taylor:
Thanks to our senior producers, Shannon Rae Green and Kaely Monahan for their production assistance, our executive producer is Laura Beatty. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending a note to podcasts@usatoday.com. Thanks for listening. I'm Dana Taylor. Taylor Wilson will be back tomorrow morning with another episode of The Excerpt.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Drastic changes coming to homeless services, new Trump order promises
Trump wants to lock up people with drug or mental health challenges. Advocates say lack of housing is the real problem. The United States is taking a sharp turn in how it addresses homelessness after President Donald Trump ordered a tough new approach that rejects the longstanding "housing first" template. Trump, angered by messy encampments of homeless people near the White House and on the nation's streets and parks, declared that organizations receiving federal funding must focus first on locking up people with drug or mental health challenges. Trump has long criticized how the United States manages homelessness, and argues public streets aren't safe for either the homeless or residents. "Surrendering our cities and citizens to disorder and fear is neither compassionate to the homeless nor other citizens," Trump said in his July 24 order. "The federal government and the states have spent tens of billions of dollars on failed programs that address homelessness but not its root causes, leaving other citizens vulnerable to public safety threats." Longtime social workers, medical experts and mental health service providers say the new approach will likely worsen homelessness across the country, particularly because Trump's order contains no new funding for mental health or drug treatment. Additionally, they say the president appears to misunderstand the fundamental driver of homelessness: People can't afford housing. The president's order calls for more "involuntary commitment," which is a process in which mental health workers can forcibly detain and medicate people against their will. Studies have shown that the housing first model is significantly cheaper and more effective than involuntary detention. "Nobody wants people sleeping outside. But if you are someone who doesn't want people sleeping outside, you should vigorously oppose this effort," said Dr. Margot Kushel, a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco and physician at the Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, who studies unhoused people. "Americans want there to be no homelessness. And this is literally a formula to worsen homelessness." 'There's tents outside the White House. You can't have that.' Supporters of Trump's approach, which was bolstered by a recent Supreme Court ruling, say it's about time police officers were given the go-ahead to vigorously arrest people for drug possession while reducing the risk of human waste and fire hazards posed by the encampments and "chronic vagancy" cited by the president. Last year, the annual nationwide assessment found that about 770,000 people were experiencing homelessness on a single night in January. That number includes people living in hotels or shelters, as well as 5,200 individuals still displaced by the 2023 Maui wildfires. Trump issued the order a day before flying to Scotland to visit his golf club, and appeared particularly concerned about an encampment near the White House. But it reflects his longstanding frustration with homelessness in the United States. During his first administration, Trump urged police to "get tough" on encampments, and his new executive order goes even further by ordering authorities to expand involuntary detentions and withdraw funding from communities that don't comply with his approach. "When leaders come to see me to make a trade deal for billions and billions and even trillions of dollars and they come and there's tents outside the White House. You can't have that," Trump said. Nationally, many housing and homeless service providers have moved away from routine involuntary commitments, not just because they're expensive but because the practice is widely considered dehumanizing. "The intention here in New York is not to and never should be to warehouse anybody," said Patrick Wildes, the director of Albany Law School's Government Law Center and the former state assistant secretary for human services and mental hygiene. "The goal is to help them to get well and, in almost every case, help them return to living among their brothers and sisters in society." Like other experts, Wildes said the housing first model being targeted by Trump, while not perfect, represents the best, most effective way to stabilize people. "When it comes to supporting people who are struggling with serious mental health or substance use disorders, it's been proven time and time again that having a roof over your head gives you a substantially better chance of getting back on your feet,' he said. 'No funding or mechanisms in place to make this executive order happen.' Jesse Rabinowitz, a spokesman and social worker for the National Homelessness Law Center, said Trump's focus on encampments reflects the president's own background as a wealthy developer who doesn't support government-supplied affordable housing. "All this does is treat it like a crime to be sick and poor," Rabinowitz said. The executive order also mandates significant new data collection about people who receive services, allowing the government to track who has gotten help and where. While Trump has criticized the amount of money spent on providing shelter for homeless people, advocates say taxpayers have never provided nearly enough to solve the problems caused by the high costs of rent, stagnant salaries for low-wage workers, and a lack of affordable counseling and drug treatment for people without jobs. In Colorado, a study of people served by community-based mental health provider WellPower, the state's largest, found that getting homeless people into supportive housing saved taxpayers more than $3,700 per person annually in costs such as jail and police time. The study found that 77% of people who were given housing first remained in that housing three years later. Heidi Eastman, WellPower's vice president of housing and resources, said that while advocates are still trying to understand the full ramifications of Trump's order, it's not clear how fast change will come and where. "There's no funding or mechanisms in place to make this executive order happen," said Eastman, a longtime clinical social worker. "It's going to put a bigger strain on the providers, it's going to overload the system, and it will require more expensive services for people who may not need inpatient hospitalization."
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
‘Dr. Butthole' reveals surprisingly common problem that can make pooping hell — Botox can help
No need to crack under pressure. Each year, an estimated 250,000 Americans suffer a small tear or crack in the lining of their anal canal, which can lead to painful and bloody bowel movements. 'Anal fissures are incredibly common, especially among people who engage in anal sex,' Dr. Evan Goldstein, founder and CEO of Bespoke Surgical in Manhattan and the Future Method sexual wellness brand, told The Post. 6 Dr. Evan Goldstein has developed a regimen for addressing anal fissures. 'They can be caused by a number of things: sometimes it's muscular, like spasms or tightness during bowel movements or bottoming,' added the anal surgeon, who goes by 'Dr. Butthole.' 'Other times, it's structural: thinner skin or tissue that simply can't accommodate penetration or pressure, which we often see in women.' It sounds really tear-ible, but Goldstein reports that there are three major ways to wipe out anal fissures. Here's what you should do to prevent — and treat — this gaping problem. Anal fissure symptoms Brutal and annoyingly persistent pain that feels like you're pooping glass Blood Spasms or tightness in the muscle Burning or itching around the anus A visible tear in the anal skin Constipation 6 Anal fissures can lead to painful and bloody bowel movements. cunaplus – Most fissures start acute — around 50% or more heal on their own. Left untreated, a fissure can progress to a chronic problem. 'The tissue becomes fragile and prone to re-tearing,' Goldstein explained. 'You might develop skin tags or scar tissue that affects both function and appearance.' At-home remedies If you're dealing with a new fissure, the tush technician typically recommends this protocol for a week. An over-the-counter stool softener like Colace three times a day A fiber supplement such as Metamucil Calmol 4 suppositories twice a day Sitz baths with Epsom salts A prescription compound ointment (pea-sized amount of Lidocaine 2% / Anusol 2.5% / Cardizem 2%) that is applied at night, in the morning and after bowel movements High-fiber foods like grains, fruits, veggies, legumes and seeds Eight to 12 10-ounce glasses of water daily No caffeine because it dehydrates Gently wash and blow dry the area. Limit wiping and don't use baby wipes or medicated pads because they can contain chemicals that delay healing. Healing takes time — try to be patient. 'The area is delicate, and every bowel movement is a potential setback,' Goldstein said. 'But don't avoid pooping.' 6 Anal fissures, anal fistulas and hemorrhoids can cause pain, bleeding and discomfort while pooping. Loh – If there's no improvement after five to seven days, or if it's a recurring issue, it's time to see a specialist. An evaluation can include a physical exam, anoscopy to examine the anal canal and rectum, anal manometry to assess the anal and rectal muscles and a skin analysis. From there, Goldstein suggests one of three paths. Acute care Topical therapies, such as prescription creams, suppositories and stool softeners, aim to reduce inflammation. 'Once symptoms stabilize,' Goldstein said, 'we introduce at-home anal dilation using the Future Method Glass Anal Dilators and then the Future Method Silicone Anal Cone to gently train the area.' 6 A proctologist performs a rectal exam to diagnose and treat conditions related to the colon, rectum and anus. Tatsiana – Dilation is like physical therapy for your butt, helping to manage scar tissue and improve muscle tone. The glass dilators focus on the deeper muscle mechanics and the mind-body connection, while the silicone cone targets the skin and rim tissue. Botox and tissue optimization You've heard of Botox, but did you know there is Butt-tox? 'For more chronic or recurrent fissures, anal Botox has been a game changer,' Goldstein said. 'It works by temporarily relaxing the anal muscles to reduce pressure and allow healing.' 6 Administering anal Botox is a booming business in the Big Apple. Piotr Marcinski – Butt-tox typically lasts three to four months. Goldstein tends to recommend two or three in-office rounds, paired with at-home dilation and pelvic floor therapy. 'We also use a radiofrequency device called TempSure to stimulate collagen production in the anal tissue,' he said. 'This specialized treatment thickens the skin, improves elasticity and helps the tissue better tolerate pressure from both bowel movements and sex.' Fissure surgery 'When a fissure has progressed to scarring or excess tissue, Botox alone won't cut it,' Goldstein said. 'Many people come to me after failed treatments elsewhere.' The scar tissue needs to be surgically removed to rebuild the area with healthy, pliable skin. 6 The first three days after anal fissure surgery are the most painful. 'You're not going to love me,' Goldstein admits. Satjawat – Patients can usually return to the gym and basic activity within five days of anal fissure surgery. They can resume masturbating and vaginal sex one to two weeks after the procedure and anal play and sex by the third month. Dilation and physical therapy help with long-term success. Prevention of fissures 'It all comes down to pressure — too much of it, from too many angles,' Goldstein said. 'Hard bowel movements, pushing too hard, sitting too long, skipping lube or using the wrong kind, toys that are too big — or too pointy — all of these increase your risk of fissures.' Here's what to do instead:
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
New York gunman said football damaged his brain. How at risk are youth athletes?
Every fall, more than a million young Americans don helmets and padded shoulder pads to play high school football. But this year, questions are intensifying over the risk youth athletes face from repeated head injuries after a gunman who played football in Southern California claimed he suffered from a degenerative brain disease. After killing four and taking his own life, Shane Tamura — a former varsity player at two Los Angeles-area high schools — left behind a three-page suicide note, authorities say, alleging he suffered from chronic traumatic encephalopathy. 'Football gave me CTE,' Tamura reportedly wrote. 'Study my brain please.' It remains unclear whether the 27-year-old actually suffered from CTE, because the disease can only be diagnosed definitively through brain dissection. However, the claim comes at a time of growing concern over the health risks of contact sports in high school — football in particular. Caused by repeated head injuries, including concussions and non-concussive impacts, CTE tends to be mostly diagnosed in those who have played football for a decade or longer. However, four years of high school football could expose a player to CTE, said Chris Nowinski, co-founder of the Concussion Legacy Foundation, a nonprofit group that supports athletes and others affected by CTE and concussions. 'The odds of having CTE are best correlated to the number of seasons played,' Nowinski said. 'The best window we have is we have studied 45 former high school players who died before 30, and 31% had CTE.' The issue of chronic brain injury and youth football has been a heated one in Southern California. Facing political pressure last year, Gov. Gavin Newsom vowed to veto any legislation that sought to ban youth tackle football in the state. Citing parental freedom to decide on which sports their children can participate in, Newsom said he would work with legislators to strengthen safety in the sport. Currently, California maintains protocols for student athletes who experience concussions or a head injury during a game. Those measures include removing the student from play and evaluation from a licensed health care professional. The California Youth Football Act also limits full-contact practices for youth football teams to no more than 30 minutes a day for no more than two days per week. It also bans full-contact practices for youth football teams during the off season. While such laws attempt to limit the risk of injury, experts say the threat cannot be removed entirely. 'What ends up mattering more than anything else, really, is just how long you're playing, how many hits to the head you've gotten over that time, and the intensity of those hits to the head that you experience: Those are what play the biggest role in someone's risk,' said Dr. Daniel Daneshvar, chief of brain injury rehabilitation at Harvard Medical School. 'So can a high school player get it? Yes,' Daneshvar said. Tamura appeared to blame the NFL for his condition, according to officials, although he never played football beyond high school. Experts say players such as Tamura, who is listed in online player profiles as performing offensive and defensive roles, are particularly at risk for CTE. 'On his online Huddle profile, it says he was also a defensive back, and he was clearly a very good running back, which would have twice the exposure,' Nowinski said. It could take from two to six months for scientists to determine whether the gunman actually suffered from CTE, experts say. Such an examination however would require the family's permission. High school athletes who are playing football warrant greater study and treatment, Daneshvar said. 'Of the 3.97 million football players in this country, those that are playing at the college and the professional level are less than 4%, so we're talking about over 96% of people are playing at some youth or high school level,' Daneshvar said. 'Although they're likely to be at lower risk, based on the fact that they likely have played fewer years than someone who plays at the collegiate pro level, their numbers are greater.' One of the most well-known cases of a young football player who developed severe CTE is Aaron Hernandez, a tight end in the National Football League who played three seasons with the New England Patriots until his 2013 arrest in the murder of fellow football player Odin Lloyd. Hernandez was convicted in 2015, and when he died at the age of 27, researchers at Boston University studied his brain and diagnosed him with CTE Stage 3, caused by repeated head trauma. 'When you see someone with Stage 1 and a couple of microscopic lesions, it's tough to make an interpretation as to how that might affect their behavior,' Nowinski said. But with a person with Stage 3, such as Hernandez, he said, 'you can be confident he was not the same person at 27 as he was at 15. Everybody in Stage 3 has some level of symptoms and impairment. ' The disease starts with small lesions developing in the prefrontal cortex, along the brain stem, which sets off a chain reaction that slowly kills brain cells. It's a reaction that can continue to spread long after repeated impacts stop, Nowinski said. If scientists determine that Tamura had CTE, Nowinski stressed that did not mean the brain disease caused him or others to commit crimes. 'It's very clear that most people who have developed CTE have not become murderers, and most people have not had extraordinary psychiatric symptoms that involve them to have involuntary psychiatric holds,' Nowinski said. However, other forms of brain damage could have affected his behavior. 'CTE is not the entire story,' Nowinski said, noting that experts have identified at least 15 other types of changes to the brain that are associated with traumatic brain injury and repetitive traumatic brain injury. 'Even in the absence of CTE, it doesn't mean that brain damage can't be driving this. And in many cases, we think that the non-CTE changes are more profound than the early stage CTE changes in people who are young, who have changed' Diagnosing CTE is a complex process and involves the study of more than 20 regions of the brain, Nowinski said. First, the brain is preserved in formalin for two weeks. When it is pulled out, it is examined for patterns of atrophy or old contusions. Then, the brain is sliced up and very thin sections are put on glass slides and stained with antibodies that help make abnormal proteins visible. There is currently no treatment for CTE, but Daneshvar said it should not be viewed fatalistically. 'We have many patients who are experiencing symptoms that may be associated with CTE pathology, and we're able to identify their symptoms and treat them, and they get better,' he said. 'If somebody has a severe depression, there are medications and interventions we can do to help manage their depression.' As another high school football season approaches, California legislators are proposing Assembly Bill 708, which would allow youth players to wear padded helmet add-ons that are sometimes worn by NFL players. Such equipment is currently prohibited.
