Näytä aineistokuvailu.

FSD3037 Welfare and Services in Finland 2013

Aineisto on käytettävissä (D) vain luovuttajan luvalla.

Lataa aineisto täältä

Muunkieliset kuvailuversiot

Aineistoon liittyvät tiedostot

Tekijät

  • Moisio, Pasi (National Institute for Health and Welfare)

Asiasanat

family policy, health, health policy, health services, housing, informal care, living conditions, quality of life, satisfaction, social and welfare policy, social networks, social security, social security benefits, social services, social welfare, standard of living, well-being (health)

Sisällön kuvaus

Welfare and Services in Finland is a panel survey that combines telephone and face-to-face interviews, postal surveys and register data. The aim of the study is to offer up-to-date, reliable and extensive research data on Finnish welfare and the use of welfare services. In 2013, the survey was conducted through telephone interviews. Main topics included well-being, financial circumstances, housing, inclusion and participation, health, use of and satisfaction with social services, informal care, quality of life, attitudes, and social trust.

Well-being was charted with questions focusing on the standard of living and housing. The respondents were asked, among others, whether they were able to pay their housing costs and other expenses, whether they had mortgage and other loans, whether the household could afford certain things (e.g. buy new clothes rather than used ones), whether the household had received financial aid from others, and how satisfied they were with different aspects of their neighbourhood of residence.

Relating to inclusion and participation, the questions presented charted feelings of loneliness, participation in the activities of a club or association and voting in the previous parliamentary elections. Relating to health and health services, questions were asked about health status, limiting long-term illnesses or disabilities and their impact on daily life, stress, pregnancies, and visits to a doctor or nurse in the previous 12 months. Further questions probed whether certain things (e.g. lack of money) had prevented the respondents from receiving treatment, whether they had had to wait unreasonably long for treatment (e.g. to get a doctor's appointment in a health centre), and whether they had refrained from buying medicine for lack of money. Perceptions of the quality of public and private health services used were surveyed.

Use of social services was investigated with questions surveying contacts with the social services in the previous 12 months, sufficiency of the service, opinions on the fee and waiting time for the service. Further questions probed whether certain things (e.g. lack of money, distance to services) had prevented the respondents from receiving the service, whether they had ever applied for social assistance and when, whether the social assistance received had been sufficient, and whether they had had to wait unreasonably long to receive the assistance. Use of and satisfaction with private social services were surveyed.

Questions concerning informal care studied whether the respondents assisted an aged, disabled or sick friend or relative, whether they were the primary caregiver of the person they cared for, how often they helped this person, how satisfied they were with public and private services the person they helped had received, and whether they had made an informal care agreement with the municipality.

Perceptions of quality of life were charted as well as satisfaction with health, ability to do things in the previous two weeks (in terms of money and energy), and satisfaction with various things in life (e.g. neighbourhood of residence).

Attitudes were investigated by asking the respondents whether they thought there was discrimination against certain groups in Finland, who should hold the main responsibility for elderly care in Finland, whether the elderly should spend more of their own savings on their treatment, whether the level of social security in Finland was too high or low, and what their expectations for the financial circumstances of the household and their personal situation were. Further topics covered, among others, the gap between the rich and poor in Finland and the relationship between taxation level and social security.

Finally, trust in other people and the public administration was charted as well as satisfaction with own life, leisure time and work.

Background variables included, among others, the size of the household and number of children in the household as well as the respondent's gender, level of education, age, marital status, economic activity, occupational status, type of employment contract, region (NUTS3), major region (NUTS2), disposable income of the household, and hospital district.

Pysyvä linkki tähän aineistoon:

Suora linkki tähän välilehteen:

Aineiston kuvailu koneluettavassa DDI 2.0 -formaatissa

Aineiston kuvailu on lisensoitu CC BY 4.0 -lisenssin mukaisesti.