MIAMI UNIVERSITY The Graduate School

Certificate for Approving the Dissertation

We hereby approve the Dissertation

of

Nytasia Monet Hicks

Candidate for the Degree

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

______Dr. Katherine M. Abbott, Director

______Dr. Kate de Medeiros, Reader

______Dr. Suzanne Kunkel, Reader

______Dr. Sara Mclaughlin, Reader

______Dr. Gwendolyn Etter-Lewis, Graduate School Representative

ABSTRACT

“IT’S A CARE FREE WAY OF LIFE”: A QUALITATIVE DESCRIPTIVE STUDY ON LIVING-APART-TOGETHER RELATIONSHIPS AMONG OLDER BLACK WOMEN

by

Nytasia M. Hicks

Click here to enter text.Despite recent developments in gender roles and in later- life, research is limited on roles and expectations in non-traditional relationships among minority older adults. Living-apart-together (LAT), where individuals are in a committed relationship and live separately, is a relatively new form of partnership. LAT has gained the attention of older adults in the United States as the arrangement often allows partners to maximize their independence. However, gaps in LAT literature exist. First, little is known about minority older adult experiences in LAT and it is unclear how these groups experience LAT. More specifically, studies exploring older minority female groups is sparse and the roles in which this group enacts or rejects while in a LAT partnership are limited. Second, there is a dearth of literature exploring what LAT means in terms of relieving partners from traditional partner role expectations (e.g., care support). Furthermore, we lack knowledge on if participants prioritize their role as a LAT partner over societal and familial roles and relationship management strategies. This qualitative study focuses on understanding if older Black women who are in LAT partnerships subscribe to or reject traditional partner roles and how these roles, or lack thereof, are prioritized. Additionally, an underlying focus of this study sought to explore older Black women’s expectations for caregiving in LAT. Via purposive and snowball sampling methods, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 older adult Black female LAT partners. Deductive thematic analytic methods revealed three major themes that include: (1) prioritizing freedom and self-governance over traditional partner role expectations, (2) flexible obligations in partnership maintenance, (3) partner caregiving roles influence one’s lifestyle. This study adds a theoretical lens to understand the prioritization of the multiples role in which older LAT is a partnership that offers women flexibility in prioritizing roles a , , and workers, while also engaging in companionship. Findings draw attention to the substantial need for the examination of non-traditional relationship arrangements in later life, multiple roles, blending , and conceptualizing LAT. The findings from this study contributes significantly to our knowledge on LAT in later life as it revealed nuances in how LAT is experienced in minority women groups. Last, findings from this study contribute to a growing body of knowledge to professionals supporting caregiving families and studies of gerontology.

“IT’S A CARE FREE WAY OF LIFE”: A QUALITATIVE DESCRIPTIVE STUDY ON LIVING-APART-TOGETHER RELATIONSHIPS AMONG OLDER BLACK WOMEN

A DISSERTATION

Presented to the Faculty of

Miami University in partial

fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Department of Sociology and Gerontology

by

Nytasia M. Hicks

The Graduate School Miami University Oxford, Ohio

2020

Dissertation Director: Dr. Katherine M. Abbott

©

Nytasia Monet Hicks

2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter 1: Introduction ...... 1 Introduction ...... 1 Background and Context...... 1 Research Questions ...... 3 Chapter 2: Supporting Literature ...... 4 Introduction ...... 4 LAT Partnerships and Older Adults…………………….…………………………………4 Conceptualizing Living-Apart-Together ...... 4 Distinguishing LAT from Other Relationships Types ...... 5 Influential Factors ...... 6 Caregiving and LAT Partnerships ...... 7 LAT and Minority Women ...... 8 Older Black Women’s Social Inequalities and Role Beliefs ...... 9 Theoretical Framework………………………………………………………………….....9 Role Theory……………………………………………………………………………...... 9 Chapter 3: Methodology...... 12 Methodological Approach ...... 12 Participants ...... 12 Criteria for Inclusion ...... 12 Sampling ...... 12 Data Collection ...... 14 Data Analysis ...... 15 Deductive Thematic Analysis ...... 15 Coding and Analysis ...... 15 Trustworthiness ...... 16 Chapter 4: Results ...... 17 Demographic Characteristics of Participants ...... 18 Themes ...... 19 Theme 1: Prioritizing Freedom and Self-governance over Traditional Partner Roles ...... 20 Theme 2: Flexible Obligations in Partnership Maintenance...... 23 Spending Time ...... 24 Communication ...... 25 Considerations for Blending Families ...... 27 Theme 3: Caregiving Roles Influence on Lifestyle ...... 28 Additional Findings………………………………………………………………………31 Considerations for Live-In Family...... 31 Perspectives on Growing Older ...... 32 Defining Living-Apart-Together ...... 33 Chapter 5: Discussion ...... 35 Role Theory ...... 35 Freedom and Self-governance ...... 36 Familial Roles and Obligations ...... 37 Flexibility in LAT Partnership Maintenance……………………………………………..37 Affording LAT ...... 38

i Partner Caregiving and Life Adjustments...... 38 Limitations of the Study and Future Directions………………………………………….39 Implications for Policy ...... 40 Conclusion ...... 41 References ...... 42 Appendices ...... 46 Appendix A: IRB Approval ...... 46 Appendix B: IRB Addendum...... 47 Appendix C: Informed Consent Form ...... 48 Appendix D: Recruitment Flier ...... 49 Appendix E: Participant Demographic Information Form ...... 50 Appendix F: Interview Guide Part 1 ...... 51 Appendix G: Interview Guide Part 2 ...... 52

ii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Participant Demographic Information ...... 18 Table 2. Themes and Sub-themes ...... 19

iii

DEDICATION

Rufus Scroggins 1939-2020 Sonja A. Richardson 1939-2019 Marvin S. Daniels 1971-2019 Jimmy Felton 1935-2018 & Dr. Jerome Tillman Senior 1944-2006

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My doctoral journey could not have been completed without the financial support of Scripps Gerontology Center and the Department of Sociology and Gerontology at Miami University. I am especially indebted to Dr. Katy Abbott who has challenged me to be the doctoral scholar that I am today. Thank you for being a compassionate leader. Your unwavering support, insight, and sound advice is invaluable. I look forward to following in your footsteps on my journey to becoming a leader in the gerontological and implementation science discipline. To my committee members, Drs. Suzanne Kunkle, Sara McLaughlin, Kate de Medeiros, and Gwendolyn Etter-Lewis, I am appreciative of the endless support that you all provided throughout the maturation of my doctoral studies. To Dr. Sherrill Sellers, thank you for being an empathetic spirit. You have been a guiding light in times of uncertainty and it was my pleasure to be under your unmatched mentorship. I look forward to one day passing on the knowledge in which you have shared with me with those that follow. I would also like to express my thanks to the participants of this study. Your experiences are meaningful and should be shared with the world. I am forever thankful that you allowed me to share your powerful stories. Last, I’d like to acknowledge the efforts that I received from my support system. Thank you to my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. To my Grandmother, Maebelle Hicks, you manifested this moment since I was a little girl and I am overjoyed that you get to witness your grandchild obtain a doctorate degree. To my fiancé, Justin Tillman, I am thankful for your patience, unrelenting guidance, and nurturing soul. I you.

To my beautiful family, WE DID IT!

v Chapter 1: Introduction

Introduction

As older adults are living longer, many pursue partnerships that are often not considered to be traditional or socially acceptable. Living-apart-together (LAT) where partners are in an on- going relationship but live in separate residences is a relatively new form of partnership that has become preferred among some older adults (60+ years) in the United States (Benson & Coleman, 2016b). The context in which older adults pursue LAT partnerships is often due to their preference to maintain independence or autonomy while also mitigating relationships risks (e.g., division of assets) associated with (Benson & Coleman, 2016b; Funk & Kobayshi, 2016). However, research is limited in exploring how older Black women prioritize multiple roles including their role as a LAT partner. Specifically, little is known about their roles in managing the partnership and expectations for caregiving. Beyond the lack of research on partner roles while LAT, there is also a dearth of literature on the exploration of LAT partnerships across gender and racial groups. The need to explore LAT relationships across and within race or gender groups is necessary as expectations for family caregiving can vary between these groups. Particularly for Black women, the need to explore LAT partnerships is important as their social positioning is largely informed by the cumulative disadvantages experienced throughout their lives, especially regarding assuming informal care roles (Baker et al., 2015; Beale, 1970, 2008; Ferraro, 1987; Ferraro & Farmer, 1996; Fredrikson-Golden & Farewell, 2005). For instance, informal caregiving has been embedded in African cultures as there has been a history of distrust between persons of African descent and health care systems. Overtime, the distrust has resulted in additional care and support roles for Black women. To avoid experiences of distrust in systems, Black women often informally assume health related caregiving roles (Armstrong et al., 2008; Corbie, Thomas, & George, 2002; Davis & Waites, 2008). The social positions of Black women in society and their extensive histories of caregiving suggested that their romantic partnerships may vary compared to other groups. This is because Black women might feel obligated to assist in their partner’s care while also fulfilling other social roles. Additionally, as LAT partnerships may vary due to cultural backgrounds, this dissertation study was developed to highlight older Black women’s LAT roles, including their expectations for partner caregiving. The first chapter of this dissertation presents a brief introduction to the study by describing older adult LAT partnerships in the United States. Additionally, the first chapter identifies the specific aims this study seeks to address. Next, Chapter 2 provides background on the relevant literature on LAT partnerships in later life with special attention to caregiving. Next, Chapter 3 explains the methodology for this qualitative descriptive study. The study’s results are reported in Chapter 4, while Chapter 5 provides an in-depth discussion on the study’s results and implications for research and policy.

Background and Context

There is no universal definition to describe living-apart-together (Benson & Coleman, 2016a; Bowman, 2018; Levin, 2004; Lyssens‐Danneboom & Mortelmans, 2014). Additionally, little to no data exists on the significance of LAT partnerships among older adults in the United States (Benson & Coleman, 2016b). However, recent literature suggests that LAT partnerships

1 are becoming more preferred among older adults in the United States (Benson, 2013; Brown & Shinohara, 2013). This preference for older adults to engage in LAT partnerships in the United States has become a trend and socially acceptable as new ways of partnering have evolved with cultural shifts regarding cohabitation (Levin, 2004). Historically, the conception of cohabitation was socially acceptable and considered “traditional” among married couples. Today, new views on and cohabitation suggest that the two concepts are not interrelated, as unmarried couples often share one household, while some married couples live separately. With this change in the social acceptability of marriage and cohabitation in the United States and the minimal data on older adult LAT partnerships, further exploration of older adult couples who are in LAT partnerships is warranted. Existing literature on this topic primarily considers older adult LAT partnerships in international settings where LAT is a part of the social norm. It is possible that LAT partnerships are prevalent among older adults in both Australia and Europe as LAT partnerships are often considered socially acceptable (Benson & Coleman, 2016a). Particularly, this section will highlight older adult LAT couples in the Netherlands, Australia, and Sweden, as LAT relationships are common in these countries. For example, Europe has social insurance programs that grant citizen’s income security and health care benefits that are not tied to marital status (Benson & Coleman, 2016a). Additionally, older married LAT partners in Australia and Europe are not entirely dependent on their for financial and or physical assistance. However, in the United States, benefits for older adults (e.g., social security) are usually tied to marital status and employment. Therefore, further research is needed to explore older adult LAT partnerships in the United States as their experience may differ from LAT partnerships internationally. Beyond international older adult LAT experiences, the small amount of literature highlighting aging LAT couples’ experiences is often representative of majority groups, such as European American partners (Benson & Coleman, 2016a; Strohm, Seltzer, Cochron, & May, 2009). Literature exploring the experiences of older minority women who are in LAT partnerships is minimal (Or, 2013; Qiu, 2019). As a result, LAT scholars may overlook the disadvantages associated with the social positions of some minorly women groups. Additionally, LAT partnerships among minorities may be portrayed as uncommon, stigmatized, or non- existent in the United States. Therefore, this study intends to explore the experiences of older Black women’s LAT experiences. Aside from understanding LAT relationships from the perspective of older Black women, it is necessary to consider LAT partner’s experiences regarding the ways in which they prioritize their role as a LAT partner. Exploring the prioritization of roles among this group is needed as some older Black women often have extensive histories in simultaneously assuming multiple roles as , grandparents, sole provider, and caregivers. Holding these multiple roles can often be convoluted and result in either role enhancement (Sieber, 1974) or role strain (Goode, 1960; Lee & Tang, 2015). Keeping these multiple roles in mind, living-apart-together scholars suggests that women are less likely to provide physical care for LAT partners compared to men (Benson & Coleman, 2016b; Karlsson et al., 2007; Karlsson & Borell, 2002). However, older women’s perspectives to provide care to their LAT partner are not without defined boundaries, as they have a strong aversion to perform gender-stereotypical domestic work, including cooking, cleaning, and caregiving responsibilities (Funk & Kobayashi, 2016). These studies emphasize the need to explore caregiving in LAT partnerships as some women may not prefer to provide care.

2 This current study argues that older Black women who are in LAT partnerships reject traditional partner roles. Although the information gathered by previous studies on older LAT couples in the United States provides a foundation to understand this relationship type, it is unclear if findings are applicable to older Black women LAT experiences. The dearth of information on older Black women who are in LAT partnerships, the prioritization of roles, and expectation for caregiving for a LAT partner needs to be described. This study seeks to address this gap while also informing future research on family gerontology by exploring the experiences of older Black women in LAT partnerships.

Research Questions

In order to understand the experiences of older Black women in LAT partnerships, the researcher explored two guiding questions, which serve to conceptualize specific components of older Black women’s experiences with LAT including role prioritization and expectations for partner caregiving roles:

1. For older Black women, how are multiple roles prioritized in LAT partnerships?

2. What are older Black women’s expectations for assuming partner caregiving roles in LAT partnerships?

Knowledge gained from the study contributes to family gerontology literature by providing information on an unexplored topic. As a result of this study, LAT scholars can begin to conceptualize how older Black women experience LAT partnerships and identify expectations for providing emotional, financial, and physical care among this study’s participants. More broadly, this study contributes understanding of informal care based on relationship types.

3 Chapter 2: Supporting Literature

Introduction

Much uncertainty exists in terms of how older Black women perceive their LAT partnership. This chapter synthesizes relevant studies that discuss LAT regarding older adults, and the social positioning of Black women. The final section of this chapter will highlight the theoretical framework, role theory, used to guide this study.

LAT Partnerships and Older Adults

Conceptualizing Living-Apart-Together

There has been a lack of consensus on how to conceptualize LAT Among LAT scholars (Benson & Coleman, 2016a; Bowman, 2018; Levin, 2004; Lyssens‐Danneboom & Mortelmans, 2014). Reasons why there has been a struggle to make sense of LAT is that there is a lack of data. Few LAT scholars have sought to identify the prevalence and trends among older adult LAT partners in the United States (Benson & Coleman, 2016b). Specifically, little research has been done to quantify a national estimate of LAT partnerships in the United States among older adults (Connidis, Borell, & Karlsson, 2017; Wu, 2019). Reasons why there has also been an issue to conceptual LAT is that LAT scholars themselves have not agreed on a singular definition as LAT lacks terminology that are exclusive to the term. With the lack of terms, many LAT scholars have been simplistic in their descriptions of LAT as definitions only focused on commitment and separate living arrangements. But in some cases, the definition of LAT includes ambiguous terms that are not fully defined. To demonstrate, Bowman (2018) described LAT as a lifestyle where committed partners maintain separate residences. In this definition, commitment can be perceived as multifaceted where its meaning may vary from person to person. LAT scholars’ definitions include marital status where partners must be unmarried. For example, Benson and Coleman (2016a) suggested that LAT is often defined as a partnership in which unmarried individuals identify as a monogamous couple yet live apart. Although in this definition, the term partnerships can also vary in definition, it excludes persons who engage in multiple LAT partnerships as well as married persons. Some of the most recent definitions of LAT move away from marital status while emphasizing choice, duration, and expectations for long-term living arrangements. To demonstrate, Connidis and colleagues (2017) described LAT as a lifestyle where partners choose to live apart with no plans to ever live in the same household. With these variations in definitions, debates on conceptualizing LAT remain unsolved. Furthermore, LAT scholars have not determined if LAT partnerships can be categorized as a family form (Levin, 2004). In one study, researchers suggested that individuals living separately from their romantic partner were considered a couple (Levin, 2004). On the other hand, more recent studies are unclear if LAT couples should be considered family. According to Bowman (2018), LAT couples are often financially independent, but operate as a family in other ways including caregiving. With this divide, advocates for LAT suggest that LAT partners receive legal rights if selected as a medical power of attorney, family and medical leave, and health insurance coverage similar to a married partner (Bowman, 2018). Outside of categorizing LAT, studies have explored how LAT partners themselves make

4 meaning of LAT (Benson & Coleman, 2016; Karlsson et al., 2007). First, Benson and Coleman (2016) explored defining LAT relationships among older LAT couples in the Midwest United States. They found that there was a lack of age appropriate descriptions to define older non- traditional partnerships. Terms that LAT partners referred to each other varied. The majority of participants described LAT with “youthful terms,” such as and . Second, Benson and Coleman (2016) suggested that older LAT partners often described LAT partnerships in opposition to marriage. Third, participants described their LAT partner as “family” (Benson & Coleman, 2016), while female LAT partners provided a concrete definition. For example, older women LAT partners, explained that there was some level of security with intimacy coupled with personal freedom (Karlsson et al., 2007).

Distinguishing LAT from Other Relationship Types

LAT scholars have yet to explicitly explore ways in which LAT relationships differ from dating, (Benson and Coleman, 2016; Duncan et al., 2013a; Karlsson et al., 2007). Commitment plays a complex role in ways LAT relationships and dating are perceived. For example, dating often included low levels of commitment where a person might identify as single. Whereas LAT relationships can encompass dating as well as a range of commitment from the early stages of dating to marriage (Duncan et al., 2013a). Overall, it appears that LAT excludes persons who identify as single where dating does not. Beyond discussions on dating and LAT, researchers (Karlsson et al., 2007) found that LAT partners were flexible in descriptions of their LAT partnership. Participants in Karlsson and colleagues (2007) qualitative study stated that LAT partnerships were flexible in nature and could not be defined. LAT scholars in other studies support this notion and suggest that the partnerships are unique. In other words, limited expectations regarding communication and interactions guide these partnerships (Bowman, 2018; De Jong Gierveld, 2015). Additionally, interactions are limited, yet meaningful where there is an emphasis on positive communication and time spent together is considered to be less taxing compared to partners who live together (De Jong Gierveld, 2015). Generally, LAT partners reported that LAT is less stressful compared to living with a partner (De Jong Gierveld, 2015). A study of four older LAT couples found their partnerships can include daily communication, coordination of long vacations, integration of family throughout the holidays, and multiple overnight visits throughout the week (Bowman, 2018). Another unique quality of LAT partnerships is the lack of expectations to cohabitate or marry (Wu, 2019). It is believed that this lack of expectation allows LAT partners to balance independence and togetherness (Funk & Kobayashi, 2016). Moreover, LAT partnerships are distinct from long-distance relationships as LAT partners do not necessarily live far away from one another. Instead, the premise of LAT is more about separate households than distance between partners (Benson & Coleman, 2016b).

Influential Factors for LAT

LAT scholars reported multiple reasons why individuals LAT. These reasons largely included relationship histories, minimal partner care responsibilities, and agency (De Jong Gierveld, 2004; Levin, 2004). Additionally, preferences to LAT, protection of finances, and the

5 protection of one’s sexuality were among other influential factors for older adults who are in LAT partnerships (Benson & Coleman, 2016; Duncan, 2015; Funk and Kobayashi, 2016). Two studies explore the various ways that LAT partnerships are informed by previous relationship histories (De Jong Gierveld, 2004; Levin, 2004). According to De Jong Gierveld (2004) LAT partners, particularly women, expressed that their experiences with bereavement, , and poor choices in partners reinforced their decisions to live apart from their current partner (De Jong Gierveld, 2004). Women LAT partners also explained that ending a relationship would be easier when living apart as there would be a level of emotional protection as household and assets likely would not have to be divided. Beyond relationship histories, LAT studies suggest preferences to assist partners with care needs ranges among older adults who are in LAT partnerships. Many LAT partners prefer not to be involved in their partners care, some prefer to be involved, while others prefer to just arrange and coordinate care. For those who do not want partner care responsibilities, according to Levin (2004), some opt to be in LAT partnerships because care responsibilities are often separate. Additionally, LAT couples in Levin’s (2004) study found that keeping care support roles separate made it less likely to disrupt any preexisting role obligations. The separation of care responsibilities was especially important for LAT partners who live with older parents, adult children, and/or grandchildren. In these roles, not having to assist with partner caregiving allows LAT partners to make decisions about how they might spend their time with family, friends, or LAT partners. For LAT partners who feel a responsibility to assist in their partners care, it is important to note that issues with competing role obligations arise where LAT partners became exposed to role strain or caregiver burden (Levin, 2004). Furthermore, literature on factors that influence older LAT preferences spoke to the prioritization independence (Benson & Coleman, 2016b; Duncan, 2015; Funk and Kobayashi, 2016). LAT partners reported being emotionally and financially capable of living on their own and did not see a need to live with their partner (Duncan, 2015; Funk & Kobayashi, 2016). Specifically, Funk and Kobayashi’s (2016) study on 28 mid-to later-life LAT couples highlighted a personal preference to take care of oneself. Because of this preference for independence in LAT relationships, participants suggested that LAT partnerships were of better quality compared to cohabiting. Participants reported that this is because there were additional opportunities to promote independence Finally, LAT couples in Funk and Kobayashi’s (2016) study, emphasized how LAT partnerships also allowed for balance between independence and companionship. Moreover, older adult LAT couples discussed the protection of personal independence regarding finances as an influential factor in their LAT partnership. Multiple studies on LAT relationships among older adults revealed that the separation of finances and the protection of assets were among the reasons why some older adults LAT (Upton-Davis, 2012; Upton-Davis & Carroll, 2017; Lyssens-Danneboom & Mortelmans, 2014). As “provider” roles to one’s family are often fulfilled by male partners (Lyssens-Danneboom & Mortelmans, 2014), the separation of finances and assets is a benefit in LAT relationships as each partner is often responsible for their own financial needs. Additionally, LAT partners preferred to keep their finances separate and reported that LAT relationships allow them to make financial decisions independently where they are able to protect assets. With finances being protected, LAT partners suggested they could leave the partnership with minimal financial harm and remain financially secure (Upton-Davis, 2012). Older LAT partners’ sexual orientation was described as an influential factor when in LAT partnerships (Strohm et al., 2009). Strohm and colleagues (2009) surveyed 3,500

6 heterosexual, lesbian, and gay LAT partners in California, ranging in age from 23 to 70 years regarding LAT partnership characteristics. Findings revealed that older participants particularly had a preference to not disclose intimate relations with family and friends as the individual may not publicly identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgendered. Thus, being in a LAT relationship prevented family and friends from learning about a LAT partners sexuality.

Caregiving and LAT Partnerships

As caregiving has been previously described as an influential factor in LAT partnerships among older adults, the goal of this study is to understand caregiving expectations among older Black women. Therefore, we provide a more robust literature for this influential factor. Older adults may experience issues with their health and encounter the need for assistance. Therefore, understanding the motivations to explore caregiving in LAT partnerships is relevant. However, there lies a gap in literature investigating care exchanges in LAT partnerships in the United States. Much of the literature addressing LAT partnerships, aging couples, and caregiving has focused on international older non-marital perspectives in Netherlands, Australia, and Sweden (De Jong Gierveld, 2015; Karlsson et al., 2007; Upton- Davis, 2012). Additionally, the minimal literature on LAT and caregiving are contradictory where it is unclear if LAT partners prefer to assist in caregiving (Benson & Coleman, 2016b; Bowman, 2018; De Jong Gierveld, 2015; Karlsson et al., 2007; Upton-Davis, 2012). However, findings from these studies can be used to fill the gap in literature that may be reflective of older adult LAT partner’s experiences in the United States. In the few studies that have explored caregiving among LAT partners, LAT partners discussed stipulations that influence their decisions to participate in their partners care. In De Jong Gierveld’s (2015) study comparing 25 non-married LAT partners and 17 married older adults in the Netherlands, participants were asked about “doing good partnership” where they considered providing care for a partner growing older with chronic illness. In this study, a majority of LAT couples reported wanting to provide care for their partners in need, but also expected to receive care. This finding suggests that some LAT partners participate in partner care support if reciprocity exists. Findings from this study highlighted the need to explore the role of reciprocity when providing care for LAT partners. Partner care exchanges has also been examined in LAT research (Benson & Coleman, 2016b; Bowman, 2018; De Jong Gierveld, 2015). Regarding providing care support, some LAT partners have fulfilled roles as primary caregivers within and outside of their LAT partnership (Bowman, 2018). With this caregiving experience, many LAT partners envisioned themselves providing care support regardless of their partners health status (De Jong Gierveld, 2015). Additionally, participants described how their role as a LAT partner would not be challenged but embraced as commitment influenced decisions to provide partner care support. However, in terms of receiving care support, although these studies suggest that LAT partners were willing to provide care support, some LAT partners have reservations about receiving care from their partner (Benson & Coleman, 2016b; De Jong Gierveld, 2015). Reservations exist because LAT partners did not want to burden their partner, as well as maintain independence (Bowman, 2018; De Jong Gierveld, 2015). Moreover, regarding caregiving and LAT, researchers have explored gender role expectations of LAT partners as primary caregivers (Bowman, 2018; Karlsson & Borell, 2002; 2005; Karlsson, et al., 2007). Some research suggests that older women were unlikely to take on

7 roles as a caregiver in LAT relationships (Karlsson & Borell, 2002; 2005), due to the prioritization of autonomy and independence (Kobayashi et al., 2017; Upton-Davis, 2012; 2015). On the other hand, in a quantitative study that examined expectations and attitudes regarding older adult care in LAT partnerships in Sweden, male and female LAT participants described their LAT partner as the main care provider compared to family and friends (Karlsson et al., 2007). The study found no variation between male and female LAT partners in their expectations for assuming care roles. However, men in the study reported that they were more prepared to provide care compared to women LAT partners. This perspective is largely explained by the normalization of LAT partnerships in Sweden and confidence in providing care among Swedish men. Lastly, while women are typically expected to take on the role as spousal caregivers (Calasanti & Bowen, 2006), other studies suggest that LAT older adult partners may rely on extended kin or close friends as caregivers if adult children are unavailable to assist (Rae, 1992).

LAT and Minority Women

Currently in the United States, few studies have described minority women LAT experiences across any age groups. Several international researchers however, have explored LAT partnerships among Israeli midlife women in second partnerships (Or, 2013) and Chinese women (Qiu, 2019). Specifically, these two studies focused on three areas of identity formation including personal, partnership, and familial roles and the effect LAT has on families. Regarding personal identity while in a LAT partnership, Israeli women were similar to other LAT partners as they have a want for independence and companionship. In terms of identity with LAT partnership and familial roles, differences compared to westernized countries were identified. In general, future expectations of the partnership regarding a long-term commitment, and the involvement of extended family in the LAT partnerships were among the nuanced ways in which Israeli women experience LAT. However, for Chinese women, specifically Chinese , LAT decisions are often driven by educational mobility. According to Qiu (2019), LAT for Chinese women is often perceived as a strategy to privilege ‘motherhood’ as opposed to ‘wifehood’. In other words, some Chinese women’s responsibility to mother or supersedes their role as a partner. Taking in to account both of these studies on minority women who are in LAT partnerships, it appears that there is a gendered and cultural context that influences the way in which LAT is experienced.

Older Black Women’s Social Inequities and Role Beliefs

The goal of this study is to understand LAT partnerships among older Black women, their roles, and expectations for caregiving. It is important to highlight this groups social positioning in society and roles as these concepts may inform the way in which LAT is experienced. Generally, capturing the intersection of gender and race regarding Black women in research is necessary to understand the inequities associated with this social position as their experiences, expectations, and standards differ from European American women (Beale, 1970; 2008). The variation in Black women’s experiences, expectations, and standards are explained by the marginalization of Black women where disadvantages resulting in powerlessness are associated with their identity as a person of color (e.g., racism) as well as a woman (e.g., sexism; Beauboeuf-Lafontant, 2007; Romero, 2000). Particularly for older Black women, although not the focus of this study, it is important to note that social inequities exist in disability among this

8 group as they hold the highest rates of disability across both race and gender groups (Read & Gordman, 1982). Despite the progress to identify and address issues associated with social positions of Black women, their experiences in relation to partnerships in later life have not been adequately explained. While the aforementioned social inequities continue to marginalize Black women, Black women are still expected to embody socially constructed roles and behaviors. Due to the disadvantages associated with the intersection of race and gender, roles and behaviors of Black women vary (Abrams, et al., 2016). Most women are expected to fill nurturing roles, but for Black women, their roles and beliefs are often described as unlikely to assume traditional gendered stereotypes (Dade & Sloan, 2000) while incorporating both feminine (e.g., nurturer) and masculine (provider) behaviors (Binion, 1990). Regarding care and support roles enacted among older Black women who are in LAT partnerships, it is unclear if they will subscribe to a nurturing role and ignore their own emotional and physical needs in order to care for others (Baker et al., 2015). Generally, the constant ignoring of needs can be explained by the overextension of support while holding multiple roles, including a parent, partner, or caregiver (Jackson, 2011). As some Black women often share similar experiences in regard to providing support for others, it is possible that older Black women in LAT partnerships deny or overlook their emotional and physical needs while fulfilling roles. Ignoring these needs can negatively affect older Black women as physical health limitations might warrant assistance (Baker et al., 2015). Of relevance to this study is how these roles and behaviors as LAT partners and potential caregivers are enacted or rejected in LAT partnerships among older Black women as they may also assume multiple social roles (parent, , employee, caregiver) while navigating disadvantages.

Theoretical Framework

Role Theory

This study was guided by role theory. Role theory, as defined by Biddle (1986), describes roles as a predetermined presumption for behaviors in which individuals are expected to perform according to socially constructed titles. Biddle and Thomas noted multiple theorists as the originators of role theory including the sociological works of social psychologist G. H. Mead (1934), sociologists Linton’s (1936) research on differentiating status from roles, Moreno’s (1960) descriptions on theatric performance roles, and Goffman’s (1959) premise that majority of human behavior is acted. As described in In Van der Horsts (2016) review of role theory developments, two essential sociological elements effect the context in which role theory is understood: societal structures and interactions. Role theory scholars argue that there are two elements to conceptualizing the framework despite its variations in applicability across disciplines. The first approach, structuralist perspectives or the “lintonian model” suggest that roles are perceived to be an influencer of behaviors in which individuals enact (Parson & Shils, 2008). This perspective builds on Linton’s (1936) argument where roles and statuses were described to be interrelated. For example, Linton suggests that although individuals may hold certain titles or assume certain statuses, to fulfil a role, that individual must act on duties associated with that title or status. The second approach, interactionalist perspective builds on Mead and Goffman’s work where the

9 interactionalist perspective of role theory suggest that roles are enacted through interactions (Mead, 1972). As both structuralist and internationalist perspectives continued to be research throughout the 1970s and shifts in social structures attempted to be more inclusive, critical role theorists began to critique the framework and its two approaches. In Van der Horsts (2016) review of role theory developments, the author describes three critiques of role theory. The first critique highlights the shortcomings regarding the theory’s generalizability and broadness (George,1993). The second critique states that the theory is flawed in its lack of recognition for time. Scholars believe that the concept of time influenced roles, as roles are everchanging (George, 1993). The third critique of role theory questions its ability to acknowledge diversity (George, 1993; Granoveter, 1985). With these critiques, role theory scholars saw fit to view the approaches as co-dependent. Acknowledging these concepts as co-dependent allowed scholars to recognize how society structures informed individual experiences while also acknowledging an individual’s choice in enacting roles based on interactions (Callero, 1994; Hilbert, 1981; and Stryker, 2002). Furthermore, this framework has been extended to integrate both exhibited and expected behaviors within a micro and macro context. Micro applications for role theory include: multiple roles, work and family roles, sex/gender role theory, role norms, and micro role transitions; while macro contexts of role theory consist of applications regarding international relations (Van der Horst, 2016). For this study we examine role theory in the context of multiple roles as LAT partners and potential caregivers. This approach informs the study of relationships in older adulthood by highlighting the concept of participant’s roles in LAT partnerships and societal expectations. The coupling of changing role demands and shifts in social norms regarding partnerships has created an opportunity’s for older adults to engage in partnerships that accommodate their preexisting roles. However, enacting these roles may lead to role strain and role enhancement. Role strain suggests that the accumulation of multiple roles will have a negative impact on the person’s well-being (Goode, 1960; Lee & Tang, 2015), while role enhancement involves an accumulation of roles that benefit the individual and those involved (Sieber, 1974). Role strain and enhancement may assist in understanding caregiving expectations of LAT partners as role theory components have been used to understand spousal caregiving roles and expectations in other studies. For instance, Lee and Tang (2015) suggested that adding on the role of a caregiver can either create role strain or role enhancement in relationships. This perspective is associated with partners stepping into the caregiving role in addition to be a spouse, parent, grandparent, worker. With this knowledge, it is unclear if adding the role of a caregiver to LAT partners will result in role enhancement or strain. The role theory framework has been used to explore the caregiving expectations among partner relationships in family studies literature. This theoretical framework can shed light on what is expected regarding unique relationship styles in later life as well as caregiving for aging couples in LAT partnerships. In addition, role theory highlights the dynamic nature of these social positions. To demonstrate, role norms, where the expectation to perform certain tasks based on title or gender, provides a socially acceptable way for couples to behave. However, in LAT partnerships, role expectations for each partner may vary due to living apart. The partner caregiving role typically is determined by society, in which a spouse is likely to be the primary caregiver. Providing care for a spouse can be both rewarding and challenging. For example, caregiving may cause relationship strain especially when caregiving duration and tasks increase (Litzelman et al., 2015). However, in later life, partner caregiving can be

10 physically and emotionally demanding as caregiving is often focused on assisting a spouse with Instrumental Activities of Daily living (IADLs), ADLs?? Or chronic illness that may cause physical, emotional, and financial burden (Edmond, Graves, Whiting, & Karlson, 2016). Although these role expectations have been explored in gerontology literature, they mainly explore the role of spousal care in the context of marriage and couples living together. The role of the caregiver in LAT partnerships may be outside of role norms where different tasks and activities may vary or even be non-existent. LAT partners may take on non-traditional partner caregiving roles where they are not the primary caregiver. This may be true in that LAT partners live apart and value independence over traditional caregiving roles (Levin 2004; Funk and Kobayashi, 2016).

11 Chapter 3: Methodology Methodological Approach

This qualitative descriptive (QD) study examined roles of older Black women who are in LAT relationships. This approach was selected to provide additional knowledge about minority, older adult women in LAT partnerships. Applying the QD approach is necessary to achieve this goal as it is rooted in naturalistic inquiry, which seeks to develop an understanding of experiences in their “natural” states. The QD approach has an extensive history of not being recognized as epistemically credible (Thorne, Kirkham, & Macdonald-Emes, 1997). However, the efforts of researchers, like Sandelowski (2010), have brought a new understanding of the need for QD studies in social science research. Sandelowski (2010) argued that, with a multitude of qualitative methodologies being developed and re-conceptualized, a “precise” methodology that explicitly reflects the perspectives of participants with low inference has become of greater need. The use of the QD approach is particularly important for topics where there is minimal prior literature such as this study. Qualitative descriptive methods are often described as a positivist leaning qualitative methodology with unique qualities to promote the participant’s experiences through breadth and depth (Creswell, Hanson, Clark-Plan, & Morales, 2007; Kahlke, 2014; Sandelowski, 2010). Qualitative descriptive methods provide a platform where the individual’s experiences, perceptions, and perspectives are considered factual (Kim, Sefcik, & Bradway, 2017). Additionally, the interpretive nature of the QD approach is unique and necessary for this study as the topic has yet to be explored. Since older Black women in LAT partnerships are overlooked in regard to LAT in family gerontology, the unique qualities of QD methods allow for descriptions of participants’ roles and expectations for caregiving.

Participants

Criteria for Inclusion

Thirteen older adults (age 59 or older) who self-identified as a woman of African descent (e.g., African-American) participated in this study. Participants lived in the U.S. and self- identified as being in an ongoing relationship where they lived separate from their partners. Participants aged 55 or older were included in the study as LAT is not necessarily about chronological age, but informed by an individual’s beliefs, actions, and behaviors. Potential participants who were excluded from this study were a part of younger age groups that were ultimately outside of this study’s age requirement. For example, during the screening process, three participants were between the ages of 30 to 35. Therefore, these potential participants were excluded as they did not meet the inclusion criteria of being age 55 or older. Beyond the age requirements for this study, participants were not excluded based on marital, socioeconomic, or work status’ as there is limited data on this group.

Sampling

The researcher used purposive sampling methods to recruit participants. Purposive sampling involves the intentional recruitment of specific individuals that meet the inclusion criteria. Additionally, in line with QD methods, purposive sampling identifies participants as the

12 experts (Creswell, Hanson, Clark-Plan, & Morales, 2007). The researcher first contacted predominantly Black community service organizations in the Miami Valley, Ohio. The organization’s director was contacted via phone. The researcher requested a visit to recruit older Black women who live separate from their partner, consider themselves to be in an ongoing partnership, and were willing to complete two interviews. The organization’s director and members were not made aware of who participated in this study, as participants were asked to contact the researcher via email or phone. Throughout the visit, the researcher discussed and distributed fliers with information highlighting the purpose of this study, the importance of participants’ perspectives, informed consent, and compensation (Appendix B). From this strategy, four participants were identified. Purposive sampling methods were also used to recruit participants via social media. Fliers or posts were distributed using Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, where the researcher targeted existing older Black women, dating in later life, and LAT social media groups. Potential participants were found using hashtags, keywords, or search terms associated with the topic. Keywords and search terms for hashtags and social media groups included LAT, living- apart- together, older Black women, and Black older adults dating. Six participants were recruited in total using social media strategies. To recruit more participants, snowball sampling methods were also used in this study. Snowball sampling involves asking participants to identify other people who meet the inclusion criteria. After the researcher received each participant’s information via email or phone, participants were contacted via email to schedule a screening phone call. Phone screening took place within two days of the participant contacting the researcher. During this brief phone call, the researcher explained the overall study and ensured that the participant met the inclusion criteria. It was during this time that snowball sampling methods were used. As such, participants were asked to identify older Black women who live separately from their partner. Participants were also asked to identify potential participants at the end of the first and second interview. The identified participants were instructed to contact the researcher via email or phone. From this snowball recruitment strategy, three additional participants were identified. Both purposive and snowball sampling methods were successful in the recruitment of participants for this study, as 13 potential participants fit the study’s criteria and completed two interviews. The researcher expected to sample 10 to 12 participants. However, the data collection process of this study ended once saturation was reached at 13 participants. In line with qualitative research methods, the researcher concluded the interview process after the 13th interview revealed no new information (Dey, 1999). In other words, no new themes were uncovered from the data (Fusch & Ness, 2015). Although sampling and recruitment was successful, there were a few challenges with sampling and recruitment. Conducting research on a subject that lacks an established terminology is challenging as qualified participants might be unfamiliar with terms that represents their experiences. Additionally, this was largely because living-apart-together is a relatively new, self-defined, partnership type where participants might not have heard of the term. Because some participants might be unfamiliar LAT, the researcher was uncertain if participants would initially understand what living-apart-together meant and if they would consider themselves eligible for the study. By recognizing this challenge, the researcher took additional procedures to ensure that information regarding LAT was clearly explained. First, this concern was mitigated by only using definition through verbal and written communication. For example, recruitment and social media materials included language such as “on-going

13 relationship“ and “separate residences” to describe LAT. This language was also used for when communicating and developing recruitment and interview materials. Similarly, the social media venues and organizations used to recruit participants also presented some challenges. Although recruiting on social media and service organizations help to obtain a broader sample, participant responses may also be limited. First, regarding participants recruited via social media, their responses may be limited in that the way they communication with their LAT partners could involve social media. Next, for participants recruited from service organizations, their response may be limited in that their time away or with their LAT partner will be influenced by community service activities.

Data Collection

Qualitative research provides a naturalistic inquiry that seeks to understand an individual’s experiences, perceptions, and perspectives (Creswell, 2017; Merriam, 2009; Ritchie et al., 2013). In regard to qualitative research, data are obtained through the researchers’ observations and discussions with participants (Creswell, 2017). For this study, the data collection process involved two in-depth, semi-structured, one-hour phone interviews. The first interview focused on roles assumed in LAT partnership and how the partnership is maintained. The length of the first interviews ranged from 45 minutes to one-hour and thirty minutes. The second interview focused on caregiving expectations with their LAT partner and lasted between 25 and 45 minutes. The semi-structured interview approach is fitting for this study, as this strategy allows both the researcher and participant to guide the discussion (Ritchie et al., 2013). This approach emphasized the participant’s voice throughout the data collection process. Conducting two in-depth interviews was an intention strategy to build rapport with participants. By conducting multiple interviews, the participant and researcher developed rapport early in the initial interview by focusing on less intrusive questions about the participant’s experiences (Matteson & Lincoln, 2009). Also, two interviews were conducted to minimize challenges with data collection. For example, the researcher recognized the sensitivity and challenges of this research project as older Black women may not be comfortable discussing experiences surrounding their biographies (e.g., divorce, , religion, and relationship history) that inform their LAT experience. In addition, a second interview provided participants and researcher the chance to clarify data collected in the first interview. All data were collected via phone at a time that was convenient to the participant using interview guides (Appendices E and F). The interview guides were revised as new insights between each interview assisted the researcher in achieving depth and richer data throughout data collection. For example, the question “how do you foresee yourself providing care for your partner? In the future?” needed to be revised to speak to specific components of care including physical, financial support, and emotional support. Participants also recommended that questions about poor health be inserted throughout the second interview guide as certain health statuses may influence the participant’s decision to provide care for a LAT partner. Moreover, the question “how would you feel if you had to take on the caregiving role of your partner unforeseen?” was followed with “what about if your partner was in poor or critical health?” This helped clarify LAT experiences among this group, and the researcher modified the interview guide to include these concepts for the remaining participants. To protect the participant’s identity, the researcher conducted phone interviews in private locations. These locations included the researcher’s home or work office. Each interview was

14 audio-recorded using two Sony recorders. The need for two recorders was necessary as one recorder may present challenges in capturing the entire interview. Additionally, recorders and phones were placed side by side to capture the interview. Field notes and memos were used to move the data collection process forward. Memos captured descriptive data and served as a documentation of thoughts throughout the research process (Birks, Chapman, & Francis, 2008). As the project grew rich with data, memo writing methods were key in recording any new ideas and provided additional contexts to interview recordings and transcripts. Memos for this study included notes on background noise, pausing of the interview, and verbal expression (e.g., tone). Apart from memo writing, qualitative research field notes were also used to describe key observations in this study. Following each interview, field notes describing the overall impression of the interview, context of the interview (e.g., who was in the room with participant at time of each interview), and unclarified responses were noted via written and audio recording. Once each interview concluded, recordings and all notes were saved to a secure Box.com file. After the completion of both interviews, participants were mailed a $20 gift card for their participation. Interview recordings were then transcribed using both cloud based Trint.com and Rev.com services as costs associated with transcription fluctuated. Upon completion of transcription, transcript documents were reviewed for accuracy by the researcher. Moreover, in line with IRB confidentiality procedures, pseudonyms were used to remove possible identifiers associated with participants to protect their identity. Once transcripts and notes were de- identified via pseudonyms, the documents were then stored in an electronic file where the researcher exclusively has access.

Data Analysis

Deductive Thematic Analysis

Deductive thematic analytic methods were applied to analyze interview data in this study. Braun and Clarke (2006) state that thematic analysis in qualitative research is commonly used to identify patterns and describe details with no connections to previous empirical research. Deductive thematic analytic methods include a systemic approach to analyzing data to ensure rigor and trustworthiness. Deductive thematic analysis often does not rely on any theoretical approaches to guide data analysis or identify themes. Instead, deductive thematic analysis identifies a patterned realist perspective that assists in describing nuances without interpretation (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Bryman, 2012, 2012 P. 493). By using this approach, the descriptive nature of the study is supported by what participants describe.

Coding and Analysis

A six-step interactive process guided the coding and analysis of this study (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Bryman, 2012). The first step of the analytic process involved the researcher immersing herself in the data through multiple readings of 26 transcripts (two per participant). The second round of reading involved reading transcripts with special attention given to concepts identified in memos and field notes. The third round of reading involved listening to the interview recordings while following along. After becoming familiar with the data, the second

15 step included the identification of initial codes (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Bryman, 2012). In step 3 of this interactive process, codes were revised and then grouped according to similarity. Once codes were grouped, theme names were assigned and defined. In the final step of this process a codebook including code names, their meaning, and example quotes (Fereday & Muir-Cochrane, 2006) was created. Moreover, reflexivity suggested by Hadi and Closs (2016) was also used through the coding and analysis process. Reflexivity provided the researcher with an opportunity to distance herself from any biases that may be related to the study. The researcher shares a similar ethnicity and race with participants and has close relationships with Black women who are in LAT partnerships, and thus a plan to address potential biases was warranted. The plan to avoid potential biases included writing preconceived notions about what the participants may have experienced. This strategy helped avoid leading questions during interviews, as the notes were reviewed prior.

Trustworthiness

Trustworthiness was ensured by using peer debriefing and audit trails strategies suggested by Hadi and Closs (2016). First, throughout the early stages of this study (e.g., interview guide development), the researcher addressed biases via monthly peer debriefing meetings. During this time, the researcher consulted with a trained qualitative researcher to review the analysis and interpretation of the findings. This method assisted the researcher in the revision of themes. The second strategy applied to ensure trustworthiness in this study included the use of audit trails. Audit trails involved recording detailed notes to organize coding decisions throughout the research process (de Kleijn & Leeuwen, 2018). Using this strategy allowed the researcher to be transparent in comprehensive reporting regarding the coding of participants’ experiences (Tuval-Mashiach, 2017).

16 Chapter 4: Results

Demographic Characteristics of Participants

Participants were recruited from multiple states across the United States including Georgia, Maryland, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas, Washington D.C., and Virginia. All 13 participants self-identified as an African American or Black female and were English-speakers. The ages of participants ranged from 59 to 75, and the average age was 66 (Table 1). Although the inclusion criteria for this study was initially set at age 60 or older, one participant was 59 years of age and was included in the study as age 60 was a proxy for life-stage than an experience related to a specific age. Additionally, four of 13 participants were married. Participants were similar in their economic levels, where 92% of the sample reported being financially able to meet their needs. Fifty-three percent of participants completed a master’s degree or higher. Participants LAT relationships lengths ranged from 1 to 35 years with an average of 12 years. Sixty-three percent of participants reported living with an adult child, grandchild(ren), and or parent. Nine participants reported living less than 30 miles away from their LAT partner; while four participants reported living more than 100 miles from their LAT partner, often separated by three or more states.

17 Table 1. Participant Demographic Information Pseudonym Age Health Marital Education Duration Distance Living alone (years) status status (years) between partners (miles) Amy 59 Excellent Divorced (4 Some- 2 20 No times) college/ 2- w/adult son year degree Janay 64 Excellent Married – Bachelor’s 8 5 No previously degree w/ divorced adult (twice) daughter Linda 64 Very Divorced Bachelor’s 1 ½ 100+ Yes good degree Tennessee to Georgia Tonya 75 Very Divorced Master’s 25 100+ Yes Good degree or Tennessee higher to Alabama Dawn 72 Excellent Divorced Master’s 15 100+ Yes (3 times) degree or Ontario to higher Georgia Karen 74 Very Divorced Master’s 32 30 No good degree or w/ higher adult granddaughter Lorie 67 Very Married Some- 6 15 Yes good college/ 2- year degree Diane 63 Very Divorced Some- 20 10 No good college/ 2- w/ adult son year degree Brenda 62 Very Divorced Master’s 30 10 No Good degree or w/ higher adult daughter Alicia 59 Good Divorced Bachelors 1 5 No (twice) degree w/ adult daughter Monica 66 Excellent Divorced Master’s 1 1/2 100+ No degree or Georgia to w/ adult higher Texas son Nikki 72 Good – Married - Master’s 9 25 No Knee previously degree or w/ adult son, issues widowed and higher granddaughter divorced (w/disability), and mother (100+ y/o; w/ disability) Marina 66 Excellent Married - Master’s 6 15 No previously degree or Adult son and divorced higher his family

18 Themes

This section discusses themes grouped by the study’s research questions (Table 2). The themes include: 1) prioritizing freedom and self-governance over traditional partner role expectations; 2) flexible obligations in partnership maintenance; and 3) partner caregiving roles influence on lifestyle.

Table 2. Themes and Sub-themes (R1) For older Black women, how are roles prioritized in LAT partnerships? Prioritizing Freedom Comments that reference a preference for lack of obligations or regulations and Self-Governance regarding LAT. over Traditional Partner Role Example Quote: “If I am in a bad mood and I come home and don’t want to Expectations be bothered, I don’t want my mood to affect him. I don’t want to feel like I got to come and act cheerful or act like I care, when I really don’t. That’s how that (LAT) started for me. It protects them from me.”

Flexible Obligations in Statements that describe patterns of relations or interaction between LAT Partnership partners including discussions on spending time, communication, and Maintenance blending families. Sub-themes Spending Time Example Quote: “We might do lunch. He'll hang around until 5:00 or 6:00 and then he'll head home.”

Communication Example Quote: “We communicate when we communicate. Sometimes he'll send me a text in the middle of the day… Sometimes I'll send him a text. It's just is what it is.”

Considerations for Blending Family Example Quote: “I don’t spend time with his [LAT partner] family; that’s not a part of my [LAT] relationship.” (R2) What are older Black women’s expectations for assuming partner caregiving roles in LAT partnerships? Partner Caregiving Statement that describes an expectation to willingly or unwillingly provide Roles Influence on care with boundaries (e.g., changes in lifestyle). Preserving One’s Lifestyle Example Quote: “The limitations are um, do I have to lift? … I think I would be able to, but I don't want to put my life on hold to do it.” Additional Findings Considerations for Comments that reference experiences surrounding managing family Live-In Family relationships.

Perspectives on Statements that describe participants perceptions on aging. Growing Older

Defining Living-Apart- Discussion on how participants give meaning to living apart Together

19 Theme 1: Prioritizing Freedom and Self-Governance over Traditional Partner Role Expectations

Understanding how older Black women prioritize roles in LAT partnerships addresses the first research question of this study and focuses on how participants prioritize multiple roles. The exploration of this research question identified what participants consider or prioritize in LAT partnerships. Roles and considerations discussed by participants included: freedom and self- governance to reject traditional role expectations, flexible obligations in partnership maintenance, and partner caregiving roles influence on preserving one’s lifestyle. Many participants prioritized autonomy over traditional partner roles and described freedom in terms of self-governance. These descriptions included discussion on cooking, cleaning, grooming, and decision making. For example, Karen (74, divorced twice, living with grandchild) said, “I put my want and needs before anything else and that includes my role as a partner. I enjoy that type of freedom.” Karen went on to describe her perception of LAT relationships and the independence she enjoys. Karen stated:

It’s a freer life. You don’t have to cook for anyone. You don’t have to clean anybody else’s clothes, iron for anybody. You don’t have to do what the other person expects you to do, or needs to do, or wants you to do. You could buy whatever you want to buy, go wherever you want to go, do what you want to do when you want to do it. I mean its freer, it’s a care-free way of life.

When prompted to explain her role as a LAT partner in further detail, Karen added:

When I want to go somewhere, I don't have to ask permission or get an approval or a common agreement. If I want to buy something, I can do what I want to do, when I want to do it, with who I want to do it. I like that. I like that lifestyle. I really enjoy having my own space and not having to share. Not so much having to share what I want to share but sharing space. When I want to go somewhere I don’t have to ask permission or get an approval or common agreement.

Similarly, Lorie (62, married, lives alone) described what her role in her LAT partnership:

I am a companion and I enjoy the fact that I still have a lot of my freedom. And that's why I say it [LAT] works for me. Now I will let him [LAT partner] know where I'm going sometimes, and sometimes I'll go and tell him when I get there [destination]… I don't like reporting all the time where I'm going…because I've been so independent on my own. And sometimes it bothers me now when I have let him know where I'm going.

Other participants reported similar perceptions. Brenda (62, divorced, lives with adult daughter) stated, “I prioritize being a partner to my spouse [LAT partner] but I can admit that other obligations, like work, raising my children, and finding time to do what I want, consumes most of my time.” The aforementioned quotes suggested that roles as a parent or worker, and the preference for freedom and self-governance is prioritized over being a LAT partner.

20 Diane (63, divorced, lives with adult son) also described freedom and self-governance regarding overstepping one’s roles when LAT. However, Diane discussed her reservation in fulfilling the role of an emotional support for her LAT partner. Diane reported:

I recognized it’s a certain amount of freedom, but it also helps you not to step on other people’s toes; that my role. There’re some days I don’t want to be bothered. I don’t want to worry about how somebody else is feeling, because when your around other people, you are kind of responsible for their feelings. If I am in a bad mood and I come home and don’t want to be bothered, I don’t want my mood to affect him. I don’t want to feel like I got to come and act cheerful or act like I care, when I really don’t…That’s how I look at it. It protects them from me.

Diane’s quotes highlights self-governance in LAT partnerships, where the separation between partners minimizes the opportunity to interfere with their partner’s self-governed preferences. Nikki (72, married, lives with parent, son, and granddaughter) stated, “I try to balance it all, but sometimes somethings have to take a backseat and often times it is being a partner to him {LAT partner].” Diane, Karen, and Nikki’s comments imply the prioritization of self and familial role. Additionally, the aforementioned quotes suggest that LAT minimized the need or want to compromise personal wants and needs that would ultimately be compromised if one chose to live together. Some participants further described hypothetical scenarios to demonstrate ways that freedom and self-governance contribute to their roles as LAT partners. Diane mentioned:

My role is limited… Most of the time, when I come home from work, I don’t even want to talk to people, but suppose if I come home and I don’t want to talk to people and he [LAT partner] has something on his heart that he has to talk about. You have to consider that. It’s not just you. I just didn’t want to do that [consider LAT partner].

Diane’s comments demonstrated that she is aware of her LAT partner’s potential needs but stated that living together would compromise her freedom and self-governance as living together and catering to someone’s needs is not something that she wanted to do at that time. Diane went on explain how behaviors regarding a need for freedom and how it has influenced her preference to live apart.

… I think that certain people need a certain amount of freedom. When you're living in the same place as another person, you have to have certain kind of considerations for them, in regard to your comings and goings and how much noise you make, whether you pick up your socks. I mean, it's a lot to consider when you're living with another human being… Whether it's in a relationship or just a roommate, but even more to consider when you're in a relationship, because you have to worry about whether your behavior is something that you’re doing is going affect them. I don't want all of that. I just don't want all of that.

Participants also discussed how experiences surrounding divorce informed the prioritization of roles. Dawn (72, divorced three times, lives alone) said, “Then once I got a divorce, I really enjoyed having my own space and knew that I could not compromise this

21 again.” Diane provided a similar response. However, Diane discussed how her current LAT role was influence by her LAT partner’s divorce and dating history, as it had potential for it to interfere with her freedom. Diane stated:

He [LAT partner] was also divorced. He also had to get his head together from the relationship he was in which was a lot more dramatic than mine was. He had a whole lot to deal with. I didn't have that sh** to deal with, but I didn't want to deal with his, either. Sorry, but I didn't want to deal with that.

The responses by Dawn and Diane suggested that LAT after divorce may reveal an underlying enjoyment for having freedom to fulfill their role as a LAT partner. In addition, the comments highlight decisions to engage or disregard “drama” surrounding divorce in participants roles as a LAT partner. Furthermore, personal and LAT partner biographies were described as influential factors that affect participants’ roles as LAT partners. Specifically, participants reflected on past partnerships where freedom and self-governance were minimized. Alicia (59, divorced twice, lives with adult daughter) reported:

First and foremost, my commitment to me is [that] I'm not going to allow myself to be in relationship with somebody where my freedom, my ability to come and go as I please, and make decisions is going to be compromised. I don't ever want to compromise that again. We can be friends. We can be companions. We can date. We can travel. But you're going to have to maintain your own residence… That is my opinion with anybody who might meander into my life, at this point. I don't want that again.

Participants also described roles surrounding their experience or personal biographies as explanations for why they engaged in LAT partnerships. Specifically, participants discussed both positive and negative relationship histories. For example, Linda (64, divorced, lives alone) stated:

In his previous marriage he was much more of a 24/7 kind of guy. He and his did everything together, and my ex- and I did a lot together, but we didn't do everything together. I had things I wanted to do by myself, for myself and my ex-husband did the same thing. We each had a life together and a life separate kind of thing. The guy [current LAT Partner] now, he would be more of a 24/7 kind of guy. And I'm not. I learned that we must be comfortable, not only with our own independence but with the independence of their partner as well.

Other participant discussed similar experiences but emphasized uncertainty in previous relationships. Marina (66, married, lives with adult son and family) reported:

Me as a partner has changed overtime because he [second husband] was never willing to get professional help for his drug problem. The one time, when we were in limbo, we attempted marital counseling… With that, he never went back. I stayed in individual counseling off and on, so I could deal with it [uncertainty of relationship] … I wasn’t going back down that [uncertainty in relationship] road again.

22

Marina’s comments suggested that LAT minimizes the want or need to reconcile as marriage or living together promotes the need to reconcile differences. Additionally, Marina identified what she is not willing to endure in current and future relationships. Amy (59, divorced four times, lives with adult son), reported that her role as a LAT partner relates to her want to avoid dating and marital roles. When probed to provide information about conversations that prompted living separately, Amy mentioned:

There really was not a conversation about it [LAT roles]. Normally, it’s [living together] normal when you’re going to get married. The way I lived life and dated, everybody that I got married to, I moved in with them. This time, I just didn’t move in before I got married…

Amy attributed this belief to her religious upbringing. Amy stated:

When I was younger, I always tested the water while dating. But now that I am older, the Bible said that, when I was a child, I spoke like a child, and when I became a man or woman, I put away childish things [unmarried and cohabitating].

Amy’s comments suggested that marriage and living together are interrelated, where living apart only occurs when an individual is not? married. For Amy, her response also implied that she changed the way that she approached relationships. Living apart until marriage was among the strategies. Although the previous comments were largely influenced by substance and “drama,” in other examples participants described positive past dating and marital experiences that influence their roles as LAT partners. For example, Nikki reflected on experiences of companionship and compatibility with her now deceased husband. For example, Nikki mentioned, “He [deceased husband] was it, everything made sense… we were just real compatible. My husband and I used to go to Essence [Festival] every year, and we had a good time.” Nikki compared her now LAT partner to her deceased husband. and stated:

But my partner now, he would never do that… Well, and even with my [LAT] partner, sometimes I feel like I just tolerate him just so I have the company on occasion because we clearly aren't compatible in some areas. It's kind of like, well, I'm just settling for whatever for now kind of thing, which I probably shouldn't… My role is to be a partner.

The comment by Nikki suggested that, while people have positive marital histories, these past experiences influence future decisions regarding relationships. This comment also implied that LAT may be used as a strategy to gain companionship but remain connected to previous positive dating/marital experiences. For Nikki, it appears that memories from positive marital histories played a key role in pursuing her current LAT partnership.

Theme 2: Flexible Obligations in Partnership Maintenance

Flexibility in LAT relationship maintenance was the next theme that addressed the first research question of this study. Since LAT partners live in separate homes and sometimes even

23 separate states, roles in maintaining the partnership were variable. Responses focused on common or daily relationship dynamics (e.g., spending time together and communication) and considerations for blending families. These sub-themes assist in explaining relationship dynamics in later life and how LAT partnerships differ from the experiences of partners who live together.

Spending Time

Participants reported information about spending time with their LAT partner. Participants highlighted how they value spending time with their LAT partner due to busy lifestyles. For example, when prompted to explain her weekly routine while LAT, Janay (64, married, lives with adult daughter) reported:

I go to church on Sunday. I go to dance on Tuesday. I work my a** off during the week for too many hours. My commute back and forth from my home is at least an hour. He's [LAT partner] retired. He's got things to fill his days. And we enjoy the time that we can spend together. We wouldn't consider spending that time together with anybody else whenever we get it.

Other participants shared different experiences regarding flexibility in spending time with LAT partners. Specifically, some participants described being able to come and go as they pleased while also staying overnight. According to Brenda:

Sometimes, I might go over and, because I live in an apartment, he has the house, so I might go there more, and I might stay a day or a couple of days… So, I go over and come home in the morning sometimes, or I would leave and go to work from there. Sometimes I'd end up back at my house.

Participants also described experiences about spending time with a LAT partner that focused on hobbies. Marina reported:

He's [LAT Partner] real handy in terms of fixing stuff around the house, which is very helpful to me. Because I have such a large yard, he has three small garden plots in my yard. That's probably why I'm not interested in being on a farm. He likes to, when he does come out, he likes to tinker with that [small garden] and he likes to cut my backyard and edge it. He does that for me even though I didn't mind doing it. So, we'll often do that to spend time together.

Marina described other ways that she spends time with her LAT partner and mentioned how family might interfere with spending time with one another:

He doesn't work Monday, Wednesday, Friday. So now, generally, we might see each other. We might do lunch. He'll hang around until 5:00 or 6:00 and then he'll head home. Usually, my mom is in the mix with us as well. That's pretty much what it's like right now.

24 Overall, no participant reported spending time daily with their LAT partner. At minimum, participants discussed seeing their LAT partners every four months, while other participants reported seeing their LAT partners solely on the weekends or two to three times throughout the week. For example, Linda (64, divorced, lives alone) stated, “We see each other. We try to see each other about every three weeks, no more than four weeks apart.” Nikki reported having in- person communication with her LAT partner a couple of times a week or maybe about three times a week. Dawn mentioned having face-to-face interactions with her LAT partner every four months. While Amy stated, “On the weekend, we have a little bit more time [to spend time together].”

Communication

When prompted to describe their day-to-day experiences, many participants described unstructured communication patterns. According to Diane, “We communicate when we communicate. Sometimes he'll send me a text in the middle of the day… Sometimes I'll send him a text. It just is what it is.” When prompted to describe weekly communication patterns, Diane mentioned, “That depends on the week. I mean, sometimes, it might be every day for a week, then it might not be anything for a week.” Another participant’s description supported Diane’s response; Brenda reported:

Sometimes, we'll say good morning to each other by text, sometimes we won't. Basically, out of sight, out of mind. But I just live my life and he lives his life and we'd talk at the end of the day, maybe we won't.

Other participants, like Dawn, also shared similar responses when describing day-to-day experiences in LAT. Dawn said, “We are trying to figure it out…we are just trying to figure out the reasonable aspects.” The participant’s descriptions of unstructured communication patterns suggest a relaxed or casual nature of LAT partnerships where communication is not forced or frequently expected. However, not all participants reported having unstructured communication patterns. Some participants reported having more structured communication between their LAT partners daily, sometimes starting as early as 6:30 AM. Monica (66, divorced, lives with adult son) said:

He [ LAT partner] calls in the morning, he talks to me all week. I'm on the road at 6:00 AM, because I have to be here [work] at 6:30 AM. He talks to me until my [boss] gets here at 7:30 [AM]. Sometimes, we just talk on the phone, but sometimes he'll FaceTime me. And we'll be talking in the morning. Then he'll stop, and he might call me an hour later. Then we talk for another hour. And sometimes we're on the phone for two hours, because I can be working on my computer. In that case, he's on speakerphone.

Monica goes on to explain communication patterns throughout the day in further detail:

And then I have lunch, then we'll text each other a couple little things. And then on my way home, we'll talk again. And then that evening I talk to him as he leaves the office going home. I say we talk seven times a day. And he [LAT partner] tries not to call me too much at night because he wants me to get my rest.

25

When Dawn and her LAT partner are not together, daily communication occurs using either social media or text messages as well. Dawn described daily communication via “messaging on Facebook, texting, calling pretty much every day.” Linda shared a similar experience of structured communication patterns as well as the use of technology:

He always texts first thing in the morning and say[s] good morning and how's your day. He always says that first thing in the morning and then we'll generally talk a couple of times during the day and always check in by phone… We always check in just before I'm getting ready to go to bed. We generally are in touch three or four times during the day depending on what's going on. We will try to make sure we're doing some facetime, where we have the visual connection as much as possible.

These comments suggested that not all LAT partners experience loosely structured communication in LAT partnerships. Although, the want or need for structure may not be “out of sight, or out of mind,” participants found their communication pattern to be of great benefit for them and their LAT partner at the time. Face-to-face communication was also reported among participants. When prompted to describe communication between LAT partners, participants reflected on the importance of minimizing negative communication when LAT partners have face to face or in-person interactions. Linda stated:

You miss the other person a little bit, and when you do to see them, it's even better because you built up that anticipation to see them. I think … us living apart eliminates some of the pettiness. If you know you're only going to be with somebody three or four days at a time, we don't have the luxury of getting bogged down in a lot of petty stuff. We spend our time enjoying each other, doing things together and not get distracted by some of the pettiness that can come up in relationships.

Linda went on to explained feeling safe in communicating while LAT:

Communicating is the easy part. The easy part is... this goes back to, not having the drama that I can communicate pretty much what I feel like I need to say. We [Participant and LAT Partner] have common interest. Uh, so generally if I bring up how about how we do this, he's like, okay. And vice versa. So, it just makes it easy. We don't have a lot of negotiating around communicating.

Another participant shared similar descriptions regarding communicating. Nikki mentioned, “We don’t have a lot of time to spend together. So, let’s make each minute count kind of thing.”

A participant discussed communication when attending social gatherings separately. According to Janay:

So, he plays cards on Tuesday night. I go to hand dancing on Tuesday night. He has a standing thing with the fellas on Wednesday night that I'm welcome to come if I want to, but that's their thing that they've been doing. I don't have a need to be there. I've been,

26 and everything is cool. He even calls me when he's at that. But if he were not to have called me, you know, for a day, two days, whatever, then I need to have the capability and I would… and was to call him and not get an answer, right? And I need to have the capability to go check on him.

Considerations for Blending Families

Some participants reported having close relations with their LAT partner’s immediate family, while most struggled to blend families. When asked about experiences with managing relationships with one another’s family, Janay reported:

Together. Always. I'm either with him [LAT partner] and his kids, he's with me and my kids, or all of us are together. We do a whole lot of things together because of the melting pot. We're blended. Because our children were only children [one per LAT partner]. Now, they actually call each other sisters because it's just two daughters.

The majority of participants described spending less time with their LAT partner’s family. Karen identified spending time with her LAT partner’s family as separate from the LAT relationship, and said, “I don’t spend time with his [LAT partner] family; that’s not a part of my [LAT] relationship.” Another participant (Monica) shared a similar experience. Monica stated, “When I have kids there [participant’s home]. He [LAT partner] will sit there and say, "I can't hog you.” So, he lets me have Sundays, after I got to church, to spend time with my family only.” Moreover, participants described division between families during the holidays. Dawn reported, “I generally spend the holidays with my family and, from time to time, he'll spend the holiday with me and my family.” Linda’s comments provided further descriptions about spending family time separately in LAT partnerships. Linda stated:

We generally spend holidays with our families. For example, Thanksgiving and Christmas, we each spend with our respective families. Fourth of July? We were together. We’ll, we may be together Labor Day, I'm not sure. I can't remember if we've got something planned or not, but the more traditional holidays, Christmas, Thanksgiving, we spend with our families, and we've talked about doing something different. So, this year, we may spend Thanksgiving together.

These comments suggested that individuals who are in LAT partnerships may not always view interacting with their LAT partner’s family as a necessary role compared to couples who live together, as family interactions might be more frequent. The comment also implied that LAT partners may be cautious of removing one another from opportunities to interact with their respective families. Thus, the division of family may be an act of respect as opposed to distancing one’s self from their LAT partner’s families. Linda further explained her reasoning for spending time away from her LAT partner and their respective family:

We'll probably spend Christmas with our families because my family is shrinking considerably. My mother passed last year. Particularly this past holiday season, I spent with my family because my mother had just passed. I wanted to spend the holidays with

27 my brother and sister. But this coming holiday season, we'll probably spend Thanksgiving together and then we'll be apart for Christmas. But we do plan time together right around the holidays. So, like last year, we didn't spend Christmas together, but New Year's we were together.

Linda’s comments suggested that, although LAT partners have a history of spending holidays separately, opportunities to balance the way in which LAT partners interact with family may be important. Overall, participants’ responses in this section on LAT experiences regarding family interactions may be a result of LAT partner’s preference. Additionally, these quotes highlight LAT partners fitting into other lifestyles as LAT partners did not want to “hog” the participant.

Theme 3: Caregiving Roles Influence on Preserving One’s Lifestyle

The theme, caregiving roles influence on lifestyle, addresses research question three of this study, and seeks to describe caregiving expectations of older Black women in LAT partnerships. Participants’ descriptions of their caregiving expectations highlighted circumstances that may influence ways in which LAT partner’s plan to, or plan not to, deliver emotional, financial, and physical care. Particularly, this section highlights participants’ expectations to willingly or unwillingly provide care with boundaries (e.g., physical health challenges, changes in lifestyle). Participant responses included lifestyle changes (e.g., work schedule), physical health regarding care intensity, and healthy relationship pattern (e.g., acts of appreciation, ) For most participants, the issue of boundaries around caregiving were identified when asked about potentially providing care for a LAT partner. Caregiving can be demanding for older couples living together (Miller, 2011). However, for LAT partners, boundaries regarding what participants will or will not do related to caregiving are rigid, defined, and prioritized. A description of caregiving boundaries regarding compromising one’s physical health can be observed in multiple participants’ responses. According to Diane, “It depends on how well my health is.” Another participant, Nikki, provided an example of where providing care depended on compromising the participant’s health. Nikki said:

I want to be helpful, but I don't want to get myself down. So, I guess that's where the limitations would come in. Part of me kind of thinks, "Well, it depends." Because my partner just got over a bout with shingles, and he was breaking out and kind of felt like it was something he had gotten into poison ivy. And I was like, "Well, let me see. What are you talking about?" So, he was reluctant, but then he showed me. And I said, "You need to go to the doctor." So, if I had had to put ointment or something on him, I would have, but when he found out it was shingles, he kind of said, "Well, it's contagious so... You haven't caught it yet, so I'm not going to come around until I'm okay, that quarantine period is ended." So, I was like, "Yeah, okay. Not a problem." So that's what happened with that.

Nikki also discussed physical limitations regarding lifting. Nikki reported:

28 Beyond making sure somebody is cleaned, I don't know if I have the strength to turn somebody if I need to or... You know what I mean? I'm okay doing whatever it is so long as I don't have to pick somebody up, with the heaviness and the weight thing.

Nikki’s response was echoed by another participant who did not want to compromise her health to care for a LAT partner. Lorie described, “I feel okay about it [providing care]. I just don’t want to have to do it [provide care] continuously where it [caregiving] would make myself down and have no one to take care of me.” Although some participants did not mind providing physical support, a few were adamant about not compromising their current lifestyles when assisting with care. When prompted to provide an explanation for the previous comment, Alicia reported:

If I can incorporate their [LAT Partner] care, with what I have going on. Because, like I said, I'm just not willing to stop doing what I'm doing to provide a hundred percent care to that person. Either I would help implement caregivers, schedules, times and things when I'm not available, or can’t be available due to my lifestyle.

Alicia further described boundaries and limits of caregiving as:

I'm the founder and owner and operator of two schools. I have a lot of kids [students], parents, and staff to supervise, and to keep this program going. So, it's not like I'm sitting at home doing nothing. I'm not just a retired person that sits at home knitting or something. I have a life and I'm not able to be the nurse on a full-time basis, indefinitely.

Other participants’ descriptions supported Alicia’s comments. However, one participant expects not to assist with finances or physical care for her LAT partner. As Tonya (75, divorced, lives alone) reflected on a memory where a wife did not provide care for a spouse but collected a spouse’s retirement, pension, and social security checks, Tonya stated, “Some [LAT partners] are looking for a nurse [physical assistance] and purse [financial assistance,] and I am no one’s purse or nurse.” When participants were asked about potentially providing care for a LAT partner, defined caregiving boundaries were also reported regarding short-term or long-term diagnosis (e.g. dementia vs. influenza). Participants did not plan to provide long-term care assistance without the help of others or outside sources. When asked if she would provide care Marina responded, “Probably would, or if he needed nursing care, I would arrange for trying to find a nursing home for him.”

When prompted to elaborate, Marina stated that, although she would not provide financial support, she would arrange care if needed. According to Marina, she plans to coordinate care and ensure that her partner is comfortable. However, it is clear that she would not over extend herself regarding additional care or visits.

I would make sure that whatever his financial resources would pay for would make sure he gets it. But if he's in a nursing home, I would do what I could to make sure he was taken care of, but I wouldn't necessarily go out of my way to visit or check... I mean that's hard for me to respond to right now. But I would do what I felt like was required of me,

29 human being to human being. But I wouldn't go out of my way. I would make sure he was comfortable. I would make sure he had what he needed, but I wouldn't be going to the nursing home to see him every day. Probably not even every week, so.

Karen also describe similar expectations regarding chronic health conditions:

If it's not ongoing, if it's not something like dementia or something like that, where a 24/7 ongoing you have to live with the person kind of thing. If it's not that, maybe. I wouldn't be able to do that.

Additionally, participants expected each LAT partner’s adult children to be involved in caregiving decisions. When asked who would provide care for her, Diane responded, “I see my son and his wife, who actually is a nurse, being the ones to make all whatever care decisions have to be made for me.” Another participant who preferred not provide care support to a LAT partner, described how her partners family would fill care support roles, Karen explained:

His [LAT partner] family would take over. He [LAT partner] has five grown children, then somebody would work. They're very close to it, so they would handle that. And would I go see him all the time? Yes. Wherever he would be. But I can't imagine anything other than that. Now, let's see, if he came down with the flu, that's a different story…He's in his own house and he's in bed with the flu, then certainly after work, I'd go over there and take him food, rub his back, his feet, that kind of thing. I would take care of him that kind of way.

In a situation where LAT partner’s level of care is beyond the participant’s preference for freedom and physical limits, participants stated they would assist in identifying other resources to assist in partner’s care. According to Dawn, “If he [LAT partner] became ill in any capacity, where he could not take care of himself…I would make provisions if I couldn't personally do it myself; I would make provisions for him. I’d do whatever I can, yeah.” This suggests that participants were willing to assist in arranging care support services if they were able or willing to fulfil that care support need. Beyond arranging care support services, Janay also noted strategies to avoid the need for family members to provide care assistance.

I don't really know that I have many other options. That's why I said I try really hard to eat right and stay healthy and exercise, so nobody has to be burdened with making those decisions for me. But I do have a living will and a healthcare power of attorney. So, he [LAT Partner] knows what his responsibilities would be in the case that something like that happened.

This response suggests that, not only do participants expect not to fill care roles in LAT but are living a lifestyle to minimize the need to receive caregiving support from family and LAT partners. Participants also discussed the concept of health relationship history in the LAT partnership and how health plays a role in their decisions to provide care support for a partner. For example, Marina reflected on what caregiving may look like for her.

30

Marina: The only factor that would be there is him [LAT partner] showing appreciation for what I do.

Interviewer: That will be the deal breaker?

Marina: That would be a deal breaker.

Interviewer: And is he aware of that?

Marina: He [LAT partner] is because we talked about a friend of ours and her husband had a stroke. He [friend’s husband] had to have open heart surgery and she[friend] took care of him. She [participant’s friend] has done this for about 10 years now. And I just mentioned in conversation that she's a good one because he [friend’s husband] cheated on her and he did drugs, you know, he did a lot of things. She had to leave because he wasn't right; she has a special needs child like we do. But she's caring for him. But in the meanwhile, her health has started to fail because of her having to care of the two people instead of one. And I've told him, I said, we need to keep you in good health because if you're not treating me right, I wouldn't want to have to go through that. And I don't know if I could.

Additional Findings

Although the overall goal of this study was to explore how older Black woman who are LAT partnerships prioritize multiple roles, participants also provided information beyond the scope of this study. Participants discussed their experiences with live in family members, perspectives on growing older, and defining LAT.

Considerations for Live-In Family

For participants living with children and aging parents, participants roles as mother, caregiver, and or daughter were considered before LAT. For example, in trying to describe their roles family while LAT, Janay stated:

We [LAT Couple] had conversations about if anyone wanted to [LAT]. My daughter is expecting her first child, and so, at some point, they’re going to move out. I am going to redo my house, and then I am going to gift it to them. I might move in with my partner, or I might find myself a senior home or facility.

Janay’s comment suggested that stable living arrangements for current live-in family members must be in place first when deciding to live apart or relocate. Whereas, Brenda described the cause of LAT as, “Originally, we were going to wait until I was done raising kids. But, it just works better with us not living together.” Nikki described, “I was living with my mother. I became her caretaker. So that was one reason to LAT. I wasn’t going to leave my mother.”

31 Brenda’s and Nicki’s comments suggested that preexisting? caregiving roles contributed to their reasoning to live apart from their LAT partner. Some participants also considered the potential effects engaging in multiple LAT partnerships may have on their live-in children. According to Diane:

I’ve raised two young men. I had a certain responsibility to them as their mother. When you’re raising boys, you have to be careful with how you conduct yourself as a woman. You cannot be bringing men home. You don’t want to do those things in front of your sons, because they’re going to lose respect for you. That was a part of the reason why we [participant and LAT partner] live apart.

Diane’s comments reflected the considerations she has for live-in family, particularly the impression Diane’s LAT dating life would have on her sons. Furthermore, Diane’s comment highlighted how cohabitation with multiple men might lead to children losing respect for parents. Moreover, Diane’s statement implied that she believed that her children may have preconceived negative presumptions about living apart which might later be expressed in acts of disrespect toward the participant.

Perspectives on Growing Older

Perspectives on growing older represented descriptions of what the participants thought later life currently is or what it should be. The following are a few descriptions from participants. Many of the participants in this study perceived their health to be excellent. Some participants perceive aging to be influenced by having a positive outlook on life. In terms of thoughts regarding age, Amy explained:

I don't really see myself as old. I enjoy, I actually enjoy life. I really do. I mean, every day is exciting, every day is bubbly. You know, most people would be saying, girl, you never have bad days, you know, so I don't know how to bond with people when they always down and out. I don't know nothing about that.

Also, some participants reported that growing older is about perspective, participation in religious activities, support networks, and isolation. Amy explained,

When you think old, you act old, you know? Oh, I'm sick. I can’t do that. And then I think it has to do with your relationship with your church family. Those that have good relationships with their families and stuff, they, they tend to do better because they got other people looking out for them. And sometimes, when people are by themselves, they don’t feel like that they’re loved or cared for…

Some participants described growing older as a privilege in opposition to death. Dawn reported:

I hope I don't sound like I'm being funny or anything, but you're either going to die young, or you're going to grow older. You have no choice in the matter. I think it's a privilege, the privilege to grow older, because that means you've had the opportunity to learn some things, to make some mistakes, to become wiser and better at whatever you're

32 doing. It also gives you the opportunity to mentor those that come after you. I think it's a situation, too, where you can look at your own mortality and recognize that we have come here to stay, as a lot of the older people used to say to me.

Dawn went on to explain the privilege of growing older in greater detail but emphasized the importance of care for oneself. Dawn stated:

We come here for a little while, and you come here to stay, but if you're going to grow older, you want to grow older with grace. That means you need to take care of yourself as best you can, because certainly I'm going to prevent growing older. That's the way I look at growing older. I think it's a privilege. I think it's something to celebrate, but I also think we have a responsibility to take as much care of yourself as you possibly can as the process continues.

Participants also discussed physical and mental health maintenance in early life stages. Monica’s response is as follows:

When you get in your 60s, you might think you feel good until you go visit that doctor. Then you get like, "Are you kidding me? For real?" A lot of things that develop it is true, take care of yourself when you young. Because when you start getting older, all that stuff surfaces up. Everything, your mental state, your emotional state and your physical state. One hand is a blessing, the other hand, girl, I don't know. I mean, I'm a sister and trying to maintain this weight just gets on you. I mean, you can look at food and you just go to the scale and be like, where did that ten pounds come from? I'm just saying.

Defining Living-Apart-Together

In addition to perspectives on growing older, participants discussed ways in which they define LAT relationships. Some of the older Black women provided literal descriptions of LAT. Dawn (72, divorced, living alone) stated:

… I hope I'm not being too simplistic. Living apart means you live in one address and I live in another address. I'm not with you. I'm not sharing a space with you, and you're not sharing one with me. All of our resources are separate.

Marina (66, divorced, lives with adult son and family) describes a similar definition of LAT, but also emphasized companionship in her description:

He's [LAT partner] got his own address, and I got my own address… [LAT couple] been agreeing to at least date and be each other's companion, but maintain separate residences, that would have been my living apart together definition. He [LAT partner] would still be somebody, if I wanted to go to the movies, wanted to go to dinner, would be who I would expect to do those things with, probably exclusively at this point in my life, but I would maintain my residence and he could maintain his.

33 Although the following quote was also included in previous theme, Diane also emphasizes the importance of freedom when defining LAT. Additionally, Diane compares LAT to the effects of cohabitation:

Interviewer: How might you define living apart together?

Diane: How would I define it? I think that certain people need a certain amount of freedom. When you're living in the same place as another person, you have to have certain kind of considerations for them, in regard to your comings and goings and how much noise you make, whether you pick up your socks. I mean, it's a lot to consider when you're living with another human being… Whether it's in a relationship or just a roommate, but even more to consider when you're in a relationship, because you have to worry about whether your behavior is something that you’re doing is going affect them. I don't want all of that. I just don't want all of that.

A few participants were not as descriptive in their responses compared to the aforementioned definitions. These responses included descriptions of . When asked how she might define LAT, Lorie (67, married, lives alone) reported, “Happiness, for me”. When asked to provide additional information on her response, Lorie stated that being understanding and having the right type of communication are key components to successfully live apart.

34 Chapter 5: Discussion

This study highlights the experiences of older Black women who are in LAT relationships, the way in which they prioritize multiple roles, and their expectations for assuming partner caregiving roles. The findings from this study revealed that older Black women perceive their roles in LAT relationships as being self-defined and non-traditional, where self-governance and family interactions are prioritized. Additionally, this study suggests that roles can be unstructured in managing LAT partnerships. Last, results from this study suggest that older Black women are hesitant to participate in partner caregiving as this role may cause physical harm or require major lifestyle adjustments. In this section, the researcher discusses the overall meaning of this study’s major findings, its limitations, future directions for research, and overall conclusions.

Role Theory

The findings from this study suggest that older Black women in LAT partnerships currently assume self-defined, loosely structured roles, where they do not subscribe to traditional partner roles. Literature on partnerships among older Black women suggests that they often embody independence, strength, and perseverance where there is a sense of self-reliance in handling responsibilities and completing tasks (Nelson, Cardemil, & Adeoye, 2016; Robinson, 1983). Participants in this study expressed an interest in prioritizing independence over providing care for a LAT partner. Even participants who were married expressed how their independence came before a LAT partner’s needs. In prioritizing independence, it appears the women of this study were committed to having a relaxed and committed partnership that did not disrupt their autonomy. Future studies should consider exploring additional ways in which autonomy can be promoted in partnerships among older adults. More specifically, these findings suggest that the strong Black woman archetype, where Black women often over extend themselves, may be applied to better understand if self-reliance impacts roles assumed by participants (Baker et al., 2015; Jackson, 2011). Using the strong Black woman archetype as a theoretical approach to understanding self-reliance may also help to explain if there are more nuanced ways older Black women engage in LAT relationships, maintain partnerships, and plan or not plan to assist in caregiving for a LAT partner. The most compelling evidence from this study suggests that role theory does not help to explain participants’ expectations for assuming caregiving roles. The results of this study do not support Biddle’s role theory in that partners prefer to perform certain tasks based on title (Biddle, 1986). Specifically, caregiving tasks would not necessarily be done without boundaries in place, according to participants. Boundaries with respect to participants’ reluctance to assist LAT partners in caregiving highlight certain components of role theory, particularly role strain. Literature suggests that Black women often ignore their emotional and physical needs due to caring for others (Baker et al., 2015; Jackson, 2011). In this study, participants were strategic in not experiencing role strain by not wanting to provide care to LAT partners as care roles may jeopardize their current lifestyle or physical health. Additionally, findings from this study suggested that participants are aware of the possible overextension in which assisting a LAT partner with care might cause. Moreover, findings from this study also suggested that older Black women were aware of their emotional, financial, and physical capabilities and how they would be challenged in a caregiving role. Therefore, participants might avoid caregiving roles in

35 LAT to circumvent potential caregiver burden, distress, or role strain. Because of how providing care might affect their current lifestyle, participants suggested that LAT partners heavily rely on adult children or close family to assist with care needs. As can be seen, although this study applied role theory to understand older Black women’s perspectives in LAT partner roles this study also benefits from the life course theory regarding participants’ previous dating histories and its influence on this LAT experience. Generally, life-course theory suggests that individuals can grow and change over time (Elder, Johnson, & Crosnoe, 2003). Participants dating behaviors and decisions were perceived to mature overtime. Some older Black women engaged in LAT to cope with widowhood, while others described difficulties regarding divorce. In greater detail, many participants described negative dating histories, where LAT can be used to avoid risks of financial and emotional struggles of divorce or endings of partnerships. In line with previous research (De Jong Gierveld, 2004; Levin, 2004), participants mainly described the changes to be influenced by their dating and martial histories. In particular, participants emphasized negative experiences and how they would not put themselves in similar positions moving forward. It appears that the preference to be in LAT relationships moving forward has changed over time as majority of participants report that their current partnerships were their first LAT experience at the time of this study.

Freedom and Self-governance

The findings from this study did not support the use of role theory because participants descriptions highlighted themes of self-governance and freedom as reasons to be in LAT relationships. According to participants, autonomy was prioritized over cooking, cleaning, and nurturing. The descriptions participants gave suggest that there is not a unidimensional approach to labeling roles in LAT relationships. To demonstrate, freedom and self-governance were described differently across responses. Responses about maximizing freedom according to some participants included being free of traditional roles. Whereas, other participants mentioned a lack of obligation to report whereabouts to their LAT partner. These findings are not surprising in that labeling and defining LAT partnerships lacks specific terminology (Benson, 2013; Benson & Coleman, 2016a), leaving room to define the role as one may see fit. Moreover, older Black women who are in LAT partnerships emphasized the importance of self-governance as reasons to engage in LAT. Even participants who previously had positive dating histories expressed the preference for self-governance in LAT partnerships. This finding is supported by previous literature where older adults who pursued LAT partnerships prioritized autonomy (Benson & Coleman, 2016b; Duncan, 2015; Funk & Kobayshi, 2014; Levin, 2004). When participants described the role that self-governance played in LAT, self-governance was prioritized over traditional partner roles. Participants reported enjoyment in doing exactly what they wanted to do and when they wanted to do something. This expression of self-governance was described to be limited if participants were to cohabitate with their partner. Although many of the participants were aware of benefits associated with LAT (e.g., independence), LAT appears to be the best balance for self-governance and companionship.

36 Familial Roles and Obligations

A majority of participants served in mothering and caregiving roles in addition to their role as LAT partners. Previous literature suggests that LAT partnerships are nuanced among minority race groups as Chinese and Israeli women varied in their reasons for engaging in LAT partnerships due to familial roles and obligations (Or, 2013; Qiu, 2019). In this study, it appears that older Black women’s LAT experience are similar in that familial roles were prioritized over LAT partner roles. Participants were concerned about how cohabitating with a partner would negatively impact live-in family, as well as children’s perspectives on dating in later life. However, in terms of prioritizing self-governance, participants were similar to majority race older LAT couple experiences in the United States (Benson & Coleman, 2016b). This similarity could be explained by the lack of normalization for LAT in the United States among older adults. In like manner, participants in this study who provided care or support to family members were concerned about the negative effect cohabiting with a partner might have on family members’ perceptions of the participant. Family members’ perceptions contribute to role theory in that participants’ adult children reinforced socially constructed expectations associated with parenthood, women’s sexuality, and dating styles. Some participants expressed concerns about maintaining a certain image in which their children believed fit participants’ social roles. As a result of their adult children’s concerns, participants pursued LAT partnerships to minimize the number of partners in which the children might have observed had the participant decided to cohabitate with a partner. Participants did not want their children to view them differently for pursuing non-traditional relationships. Also, participants reported that their children might lose respect for them as a parent if they were to live with multiple partners. For participants, LAT partnerships may be the most convenient relationship type that allows them to keep their roles as a parent or grandparent separate from their roles as a LAT partners. Ultimately, findings on the prioritization of multiple roles among older Black women who are in LAT partnerships suggested that participants prioritized their familial roles as a provider, caretaker, and or parent over their role as a LAT partner. Particularly, participants expressed considerations for family members who live in the home. Previous literature supports this finding in that LAT would minimize the need to decide between roles as parent, caregiver, or a LAT partner. In addition, cohabitating with adult children or older adult parents were among the reasons to pursue LAT relationships (Levin, 2004). While an older adult may want to pursue LAT partnerships, participants did not want their roles to compete with one another. Participants expressed a preference to maintain their current living arrangements with live-in family members and keep their partnership separate. Thus, participants were purposeful about not interrupting current living arrangements to engage in a LAT partnership.

Flexibility in LAT Partnership Maintenance

In this study, some LAT participants reported not having frequent or daily communication with their LAT partner, while some participants described communicating daily. These findings agreed with previous research (Bowman, 2018) where there is flexibility in communication among older adult LAT couples. The majority of participants did not report being dissatisfied with their current communication patterns and appreciated the flexibility. As a result, regarding communication when LAT, participants communicate in ways that work for them and their lifestyles.

37 Beyond communication, variation was also found in how often time can be spent with LAT partners living geographically distant from one another. When LAT partners are separated by multiple states, participants reported having to be flexible in coordinating trips to spend time with one another. For example, spending time with LAT partners meant traveling to a destination once or twice a year (Bowman, 2018). For participants who live relatively close or within driving distance of their LAT partner, they also described having flexibility in spending time together. In alignment with Bowman (2018), participants spent time together by watching television or doing hobbies (e.g., gardening). Participants reported sometimes coming and going at their leisure, while also going weeks without spending time together. This finding supported previous research discussing the value of spending time together in LAT but recognized the flexibility in when spending time can occur (Funk & Kobayashi, 2016). Therefore, regarding spending time together, for older adult Black women who are in LAT partnerships in this study it is evident that there is no one way to approach spending time with a partner when LAT. Comparatively, participants also described flexibility in considerations for blending families. Living-apart-together partners try to spend time with their partner’s family when they could (Bowman, 2018). This study’s findings do not fully support Bowman’s (2018) claim as participants’ descriptions on blending families ranged. Several older Black women who are in LAT partnerships reported having blended families where LAT partners spent holidays and family gatherings together. However, interestingly, the majority of the participants reported not spending time with their LAT partner’s family and considered it to be separate from the LAT relationship. In these situations, LAT partners often spent holidays separately from one another. With this information, it is evident that the importance to blend families is more so based on the preferences of LAT partners.

Affording LAT

Interestingly, it is important to highlight the ability to afford the role of a LAT partner. In this study over 75% of older Black women reported being financially able to meet their needs. Although studies exist on the many benefits (e.g., assets protection and independence in making financial decisions) of having separate finances when LAT (Upton-Davis & Carroll, 2017) research is limited on LAT among persons who are not financially stable. Although this study did not specifically seek to address this gap, it is important to acknowledge how LAT may be inaccessible to those who cannot afford to live separately from partners. Additionally, the preference to LAT may not be a choice for some older adult groups.

Partner Caregiving and Life Adjustments

Moreover, the women in this study provided descriptions to inform the way that the social positioning of Black women in America relates to LAT experiences. As described in Chapter 2 of this study, expectations for family caregiving varies across race and gender groups. Particularly for Black women, the need to explore LAT partnerships was warranted as informal caregiving has been embedded in African culture where caregiving is the responsibility of the family and not long-term care services and supports. Although some participants provided support, to grandchildren, adult children, and aging parents, the findings do not support previous statements on the social positioning of Black women (Baker et al., 2015). Participants were not willing to assist in LAT partner’s care and would prefer long-term services and supports

38 assistance if needed. Thus, the social positioning of Black women regarding care assistance to LAT partners was not supported by the findings. It appears that caregiving is reserved for family and not LAT partners. Throughout the interviews, it became evident that the lack of planning for long-term care or the identification of informal care supports influenced participants’ expectations for caregiving while in LAT partnerships. The researcher learned that little to no conversations were held between LAT partners about each other’s roles in assisting with care needs. Discussing feelings and plans regarding long term care with LAT partners was not of great priority. This was evident by participant responses where some reported, “We haven’t discussed that” or “I never really thought about it.” Moreover, it may be difficult for participants to envision themselves providing care as the majority of participants reported not having considered the possibility of providing care prior to this study. These findings are not surprising as couples in general do not willingly discuss long-term care plans (Edland, Lufkin, & Franklin, 2003; Moorman & Inoue, 2013). Indeed, in line with previous studies (Rae, 1992; National Alliance for Caregiving, 2020a; 2020b) it appears that long-term care plans are the responsibility of family and close friends, as participants reported expectations for contacting their partner’s family, partner’s close friends, or hiring assistance to assist LAT partners with care needs. Thus, future research should explore how LAT partners care arrangements might change if there is no family or close friend to assist in care support. Additionally, future research may also consider why conversations about long-term care plans are avoided among participants.

Limitations of the Study and Future Directions

This study gives an understanding of older Black women in LAT partnerships. Partners of the participants were not interviewed, and, as a result, only one perspective of the LAT partnership was described. Additional studies describing the perspectives of both LAT partners are needed to understand similarities or differences in LAT perceptions and experiences. Additionally, this study described participants’ expectations for providing caregiving support to LAT partners. Few participants had reservations and communicated some discomfort when asked to describe their expectations for providing care. It became evident that caregiving for a partner in later life was thought to be an unwanted experience among a few of the participants where they could not fathom the thought; or reservations could have been expressed because it could be challenging to speak about providing care. When asked to describe their reservations about answering the question, participants did not want to wish or “speak into existence” complications with health in later-life. As a result, participants avoided negative talk and wished to focus on the current experience of their LAT partnership. Participants preferred to speak positively about the future of their LAT partnership regarding health, and the researcher honored that preference. Therefore, future studies with LAT partners who are and are not providing caregiving assistance are needed. Moreover, the researcher cannot overlook the role of sexual orientation regarding LAT in later life. Among the study’s participants, it is possible that sexual orientation identity may play a role in how LAT may be experienced. However, when screening participants, information on their sexual orientation or the gender of their LAT partner was not explored. By not obtaining this information, opportunities to explore experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgendered (LGBT) LAT partners remain unexplored. Future studies should explore LAT experiences among older adults who identify as LGBT.

39 Beyond the need to explore the relationship between LAT and sexual orientation, findings reiterate the need to increase both quantitative and qualitative inquiries on LAT partnerships as concepts from this study have yet to be explored. Quantitatively, statistics on dating histories, the pursuit of LAT, and parenting. This is because over 85% of this study’s sample experienced divorce, while nine participants shared a household with their adult children, grandchildren, and/or aging parents. In regard to qualitative research on LAT, Findings from this study warrant a need for LAT scholars to explore living-apart-together partnerships among older adults living with a physical disability or chronic illnesses, as it is unclear who will provide care for this group. Last, findings from this study can only be attributed to the experiences of the older Black women who participated. The purpose of this study was to describe the experiences of older Black women who are in LAT partnerships, the prioritization of their multiple roles, and their expectations for caregiving. The findings of this study were not intended to represent all older adult Black female groups who are in LAT partnerships. The sample size of this study is appropriate for a qualitative descriptive study to develop knowledge on unexplored topics. Future studies could continue to explore LAT partnerships among older Black women as additional perspectives could assist in understanding LAT partnerships among this subgroup generally.

Implications for Policy

Findings from this study have direct implications for policy. Specifically, the findings support the need to obtain additional and accurate demographic survey data specific to LAT experiences. Currently, most data on LAT partnerships are overlooked in regard to how couples exist when living separately. This oversight results in LAT partners being mis-categorized as single. For example, LAT partnerships are ignored in the Census and somewhat addressed in the General Social Survey (Strohm et al., 2009). Instead, assessments on being in relationships, even if one is not married, are often followed by questions on cohabitating. With this information, policy makers and researchers exploring contemporary partnerships and families can understand how LAT partners use services in either public or private industries (Duncan et al., 2013a). The findings among this study’s participants suggested that LAT partners are expected to seek assistance with care outside of the LAT partnership. However, For LAT partners who expect to provide care, policies should be implemented to raise awareness of ways this group might assist in medical care decisions, if designated as the medical power of attorney. This is especially important because some older adults who are in LAT partnerships may not have a living will. In these circumstances, it would be unclear who would make medically related decisions on the LAT partner’s behalf. If policy makers establish policies to include non- residential partnerships, LAT partners may have more autonomy in deciding who can make medically related care decisions. Thus, policies are necessary to help establish and protect the rights of LAT couples in making medical decisions, as this change in policy would enhance the overall well-being of LAT partners who want partners involved. Therefore, researchers might explore LAT partnerships where a partner receives assistance from long-term services and supports, as this group may identify as a primary caregiver and/or act as a medical power of attorney.

40 Conclusion

This study set out to examine the roles of older Black women who are in LAT relationships and their expectations for partner caregiving. Moreover, this study is among the first to qualitatively explore LAT partnerships among older Black women. Using role theory to guide this study, the findings suggest that traditional partner roles are rejected among participants. In addition, older Black women of this study preferred not to engage in partner caregiving roles to avoid issues with physical health and also to maintain their current lifestyles. This study contributes to our knowledge on LAT relationships in later life as it revealed nuances in how LAT is experienced among Black women. The participants in this study discussed an ongoing need and preference to have a LAT partnership that not only allows for opportunities to self-govern, but a partnership that does not neglect their familial roles as mothers, caregivers, or career women. Older Black women LAT partners want to have it all (family, career, and companionship) but on their own conditions with self-governance at the core of their life. LAT is a partnership so that older adults can have, in the words of one participant, “a carefree way of life.”

41 References

Abrams, J. A., Javier, S. J., Maxwell, M. L., Belgrave, F. Z., & Nguyen, B. A. (2016). Distant but relative: Similarities and differences in gender role beliefs among African American and Vietnamese American women. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 22, 256–267. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000038 Armstrong, K., McMurphy, S., Dean, L. T., Micco, E., Putt, M., Halbert, C. H., ... & Shea, J. A. (2008). Differences in the patterns of health care system distrust between blacks and whites. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 23(6), 827-833. Baker, T. A., Buchanan, N. T., Mingo, C. A., Roker, R., & Brown, C. S. (2015). Reconceptualizing successful aging among black women and the relevance of the strong black woman archetype. The Gerontologist, 55(1), 51-57. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnu105 Beale, F. M. (2008). Double jeopardy: To be Black and female. Meridians, 8(2), 166-176. Beale, F. (1970). Double jeopardy: To be Black and female. In The Black Woman, Cade, T. (Ed.), The Black woman: An anthology (pp. 90–100). New York, NY: New American Library. Beauboeuf-Lafontant, T. (2007). You have to show strength: An exploration of gender, race, and depression. Gender & Society, 21(1), 28-51. http://doi.org/10.1177/0891243206294108 Benson, J. J. (2013). From living apart, to living-apart-together (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://mospace.umsystem.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10355/44653/research pdf?sequence=1 Benson, J. J., & Coleman, M. (2016a). Older adult descriptions of living apart together. Family Relations, 65(3), 439-449. http://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12203 Benson, J. J., & Coleman, M. (2016b). Older adults developing a preference for living apart together. Journal of Marriage and Family, 78(3), 797-812. Biddle, B. J. (1986). Recent developments in role theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 12(1), 67- 92. Binion, V. J. (1990). Psychological androgyny: A Black female perspective. Sex Roles, 22, 487– 507. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00288166 Birks, M., Chapman, Y., & Francis, K. (2008). Memoing in qualitative research: Probing data and processes. Journal of Research in Nursing, 13(1), 68-75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1744987107081254 Bowman, C. G. (2019). Living apart together as a ‘family form among persons of retirement age: The appropriate family law response. Family Law Quarterly, 52, 1-25. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. Brown, S. L., & Shinohara, S. K. (2013). Dating relationships in older adulthood: A national portrait. Journal of Marriage and Family, 75(5), 1194-1202. http://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12065 Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (4th ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Calasanti, T., & Bowen, M. E. (2006). Spousal caregiving and crossing gender boundaries: Maintaining gendered identities. Journal of Aging Studies, 20(3), 253-263. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2005.08.001

42 Connidis, I. A., Borell, K., & Karlsson, S. G. (2017). Ambivalence and living apart together in later life: A critical research proposal. Journal of Marriage and Family, 79(5), 1404- 1418. http://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12417 Corbie-Smith, G., Thomas, S. B., & George, D. M. M. S. (2002). Distrust, race, and research. Archives of Internal Medicine, 162(21), 2458-2463. Creswell, J. W. (2017). Research design: Qualitative and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Creswell, J., Hanson, W., Clark-Plano, V., Morales, A. (2007). Qualitative research designs: Selection and implementation. The Counseling Psychologist, 35(2), 236-264. Dade, L. R., & Sloan, L. R. (2000). An investigation of sex-role stereotypes in African Americans. Journal of Black Studies, 30, 676–690. http://dx .doi.org/10.1177/002193470003000503 Davis, M. E., & Waites, C. (2008). Intergenerational caregiving: Family and long-term care. Social work practice with African-American families: An intergenerational perspective, 143-168. De Jong Gierveld, J. (2015). Intra-couple caregiving of older adults living apart together: Commitment and independence. Canadian Journal on Aging, 34(3), 356-365. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0714980815000264 De Jong Gierveld, J. (2004). , unmarried cohabitation, living apart together: Partner relationships following bereavement or divorce. Journal of marriage and family, 66(1), 236-243. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-2445.2004.00015.x Dey, J. (1999). Grounding grounded theory: Guidelines for qualitative inquiry. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. De Kleijn, R., & Van Leeuwen, A. (2018). Reflections and review on the audit procedure: Guidelines for more transparency. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17(1), 1609406918763214. Duncan, S., Phillips, M., Roseneil, S., Carter, J., & Stoilova, M. (2013a). Living Apart Together: uncoupling intimacy and co-residence. The Sociology Teacher, 3(1), 04-11. Duncan, S. (2015). Women's agency in living apart together: constraint, strategy and vulnerability. The Sociological Review, 63(3), 589-607. http://doi.org/10.1111/1467- 954X.12184 Edmond, S. N., Graves, P. E., Whiting, S. E., & Karlson, C. W. (2016). Emotional distress and burden among caregivers of children with oncological/hematological disorders. Families, Systems, & Health, 34(2), 166-171. http://doi.org/10.1037/fsh0000181 Elder, G. H., Johnson, K.,. Crosnoe, R. (2003) The Emergence and Development of Life Course Theory. In Mortimer, J.,; Shanahan, M., (Eds.), Handbook of the Life Course (pp. 3-22). New York: Plenum. Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80 – 92. Ferraro, K. F. (1987). Double jeopardy to health for black older adults? Journal of Gerontology, 42(5), 528-533. Ferraro, K. F., & Farmer, M. M. (1996). Double jeopardy to health hypothesis for African Americans: Analysis and critique. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 37(1), 27-43.

43 Fredriksen-Goldsen, K. I., & Farwell, N. (2005). Dual responsibilities among Black, Hispanic, Asian, and White employed caregivers. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 43(4), 25-44. http://doi.org/10.1300/J083v43n04_03 Fusch, P. I., & Ness, L. R. (2015). Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 20(9), 1408-1416. Funk, L. M., & Kobayashi, K. M. (2016). From motivations to accounts: An interpretive analysis of “Living Apart Together” relationships in mid-to later-life couples. Journal of Family Issues, 37, 1101-1122. http://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X14529432 Goode, W. J. (1960). A theory of role strain. American Sociological Review, 25, 483-496. Hadi, M. A., & Closs, S. J. (2016). Ensuring rigor and trustworthiness of qualitative research in clinical pharmacy. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, 38(3), 641-646. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-015-0237-6 Jackson, O. (2011). From strong Black women to womanist: An Afrocentric approach to understanding perspectives of strengths, life experiences, and coping mechanisms of single, African American custodial grandmothers (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertation and Theses database. Kahlke, R. M. (2014). Generic qualitative approaches: Pitfalls and benefits of methodological mixology. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13(1), 37-52. Karlsson, S. G., & Borell, K. (2002). Intimacy and autonomy, gender and ageing: Living apart together. Ageing International, 27(4), 11-26. Karlsson, S. G., Johansson, S., Gerdner, A., & Borell, K. (2007). Caring while living apart. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 49(4), 3-27. http://doi.org/10.1300/J083v49n04_02 Kim, H., Sefcik, J. S., & Bradway, C. (2017). Characteristics of qualitative descriptive studies: A systematic review. Research in Nursing & Health, 40(1), 23-42. http://doi.org/10.1002/nur.21768 Lee, Y., & Tang, F. (2015). More caregiving, less working: Caregiving roles and gender difference. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 34(4), 465-483. Levin, I. (2004). Living apart together: A new family form. Current sociology, 52(2), 223-240. http://doi.org/10.1177/0011392104041809 Litzelman, K., Skinner, H. G., Gangnon, R. E., Nieto, F. J., Malecki, K., & Witt, W. P. (2015). The relationship among caregiving characteristics, caregiver strain, and health-related quality of life: Evidence from the Survey of the Health of Wisconsin. Quality of Life Research, 24(6), 1397-1406. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0874-6 Matteson, S. M., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2009). Using multiple interviewers in qualitative research studies: The influence of ethic of care behaviors in research interview settings. Qualitative Inquiry, 15(4), 659-674. http://doi.org/10.1177/1077800408330233 Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (3rd ed). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Moorman, S. M., & Inoue, M. (2013). Persistent problems in end-of-life planning among young- and middle-aged American couples. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 68(1), 97-106. National Alliance for Caregiving/American Association of Retired Persons (2020a). Caregiving in the US Report. Available online at: https://www.caregiving.org/wp- content/uploads/2020/05/AARP1316_CGProfile_AfricanAmerican_May7v8.pdf

44 National Alliance for Caregiving/American Association of Retired Persons (2020b). The traditional African American Caregiver. Available online at: https://www.caregiving.org/wp- content/uploads/2020/05/AARP1316_CGProfile_AfricanAmerican_May7v8.pdf Nelson, T., Cardemil, E. V., & Adeoye, C. T. (2016). Rethinking strength: Black women’s perceptions of the “Strong Black Woman” role. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(4), 551-563. http://doi.org/10.1177/0361684316646716 Or, O. (2013). Midlife women in second partnerships choosing living apart together: An Israeli case study. Israel Studies Review, 28(2), 41-60. Qiu, S. (2019). Chinese ‘Study Mothers’ in Living Apart Together (LAT) Relationships: Educational Migration, Family Practices, and Gender Roles. Sociological Research Online, 1360780419871574. Rae, H. M. (1992). Fictive kin as a component of the social networks of older people. Research on Aging, 14(2), 226-247. Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., Nicholls, C. M., & Ormston, R. (Eds.). (2013). Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. London, UK, Sage Publications. Robinson, C. R. (1983). Black women: A tradition of self-reliant strength. Women & Therapy, 2(2-3), 135-144. Romero, R. E. (2000). The icon of the strong Black woman: The paradox of strength. In L. C. Jackson & B. Greene (Eds.), Psychotherapy with African American women: Innovations in psychodynamic perspectives and practice (pp. 225-238). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Sandelowski, M. (2010). What's in a name? Qualitative description revisited. Research in Nursing & Health, 33(1), 77-84. http://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20362 Sieber, S. D. (1974). Toward a theory of role accumulation. American Sociological Review, 567- 578. Strohm, C. Q., Seltzer, J. A., Cochran, S. D., & Mays, V. M. (2009). “Living apart together” relationships in the United States. Demographic Research, 21, 177-214. Thorne, S., Kirkham, S. R., & MacDonald‐Emes, J. (1997). Interpretive description: a noncategorical qualitative alternative for developing nursing knowledge. Research in Nursing & Health, 20(2), 169-177. Tuval-Mashiach, R. (2017). Raising the curtain: The importance of transparency in qualitative research. Qualitative Psychology, 4(2), 126. Upton-Davis, K. (2012). Living apart together relationships (LAT): Severing intimacy from obligation. Gender Issues, 29(1-4), 25-38. http://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-012-9110-2 Upton-Davis, K. (2015). Subverting gendered norms of cohabitation: Living apart together for women over 45. Journal of Gender Studies, 24(1), 104-116. Upton-Davis, K., & Carroll, R. (2017). Living Apart Together: is it an effective form of asset protection on relationship breakdown? Journal of Family Studies, 26(1), 92-105. Wu, H. (2019). Living apart together (LAT) in older adulthood (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://etd.ohiolink.edu/. (bgsu1566408515111424)

45 Appendices

Appendix A: IRB Approval

46 Appendix B: IRB Addendum

47 Appendix C: Informed Consent Form

Research Consent Information: Living-Apart-Together: Exploring Perspectives from Older Black women

You are invited to participate in a research project being conducted by Nytasia Hicks from Miami University. The purpose of this research is to examine the experience of older Black women in living-apart-together (LAT) partnerships.

You will be asked to complete two interviews. Each interview should take no longer than 60 minutes. Your participation is voluntary, and you may skip any questions you do not want to answer. Also, you may stop at any time. Notes accompanying this interview will not include information about your identity. With your permission, I will digitally record this interview to ensure accuracy. Audio files will be deleted once transcription is completed and verified. If you inadvertently include identifying information, such information will be removed from the transcript. Only the research team will have access to individual responses. Results of the research will be presented publicly only as aggregate summaries.

The benefits of participating in the research include that it will help researchers to understand LAT relationships in later life. However, a potential risk of the research is discussion on current or previous relationships may be upsetting.

If you have any questions about this research or you feel you need more information to determine whether you would like to volunteer, you can contact me at (419)3714978 or [email protected]. If you have questions or concerns about the rights of research subjects, you may contact our reviewing body: Research Ethics and Integrity Office at Miami University at (513) 529-3600 or [email protected].

Please keep a copy of this information for future reference.

Participant Name:______

Participant Signature: Date:______

Contact Information (email) if you would like a summary of the results ______

48 Appendix D: Recruitment Flier

49 Appendix E: Participant Demographic Information Form

(Completed by researcher)

1. Name:______Date of Interview ______

2. City:______State:______Zip______

3. Phone Number______

4. Email______

5. Date of Birth: _ _/ _ _/ _ _

6. Marital Status: ____Partnered ____Married

Preciously: #___Divorced #____Separated #____Widowed

7. Current Employment Status:

___Full-time employment ___Part-time employment ___Retired ____Unemployed

a. If employed, what is your occupation? ______

8. Highest Level of Education:

___Less than high school ____High school diploma/GED

___Some college/2-year degree ____Bachelor’s degree ____Master’s degree or higher

9. Financial Stability: I cannot meet my financially needs ______I can somewhat meet my financial needs ______I can meet my financially needs ______10. Current Health Status: ___Excellent ____Very Good ____Good ____Fair ____Poor

11. LAT Relationship duration: ______Years and ______months

12. Cohabitating? With who?______

13. Distance between LAT partners? ______

50 Appendix F: Interview Guide Part 1

1. Tell me a little bit about yourself. a. How was your childhood? How is your adult life? What makes you the person you are today? 2. What are your views on growing older? Is it what you expected it to be? 3. Can you tell me how you came to live apart from your partner? a. What were your expectations at the time? b. Whose decision was it to live apart? c. What role did commitment play LAT? Independence? Religion? 4. What roles do you subscribe in your partnership? how are multiple roles prioritized in LAT partnerships? 5. What are older Black women’s expectations for assuming partner caregiving roles in LAT partnerships? 6. Describe your role in the partnership? Roles outside of the partnership? a. How are these roles prioritized? 7. What is it like to live apart from your partner? a. (Probe for benefits and costs of living apart, role of age, role of gender, how long they’ve been in this LAT partnership, etc.) 8. Tell me about a typical day with your partner? a. (Ask more about the details about weekly visits, meal preparation, overnight visits) 9. What is your life like now that you are in a committed relationship but live separate from your partner? a. How have you adapted? 10. What would you do different if you and your partner lived in one household? 11. What is the most difficult aspect about living separate from your partner? emotions? 12. What do you enjoy most about living separate from your partner? 13. What additional information can you would like to add? a. Is there anything that I missed? Any concepts that you would like to revisit?

51 Appendix G: Interview Guide Part 2

1. Is there anything from the first interview that you might have thoughts about? Is there any additional information that you might want to reflect on that was discussed in the first interview? 2. How do you foresee yourself providing care assistance for your spouse in the future? What role would you play if any? Primary caregiver? a) What care responsibilities would you provide for your partner? b) How might this responsibility change had you and your partner lived together? 3. How involved are you in the care of your partner? 4. What do you expect your partner’s responsibilities to be in caring for you? 5. How do you feel about your ability to care for yourself in later-life? Who do you expect to provide care for you? 6. How do you foresee the future of living separately and caregiving for you and your partner? 7. How would you feel if you had to take on the caregiving role of your spouse unforeseen? What about if your partner was in poor or critical health? a) Explain some of the knowledge you have in providing care for your partner? If no knowledge, maybe an experience? b) What additional difficulties would you experience if you had to care for your partner? Would you have any difficulties with caregiving tasks such as (e.g. bathing, dressing, grooming, etc.)? c) What help, or support would you need, if any? 8. How do others view you and your abilities as a potential caregiver for your partner? 9. What else would you like to share about your LAT experience and caregiving expectations? Is there any subject that you would like to discuss in further detail? Is there anything that I might have overlooked?

52