You Can’t Eat a Gift Card
By Prudence Granger | 5 December 2023
Carer research plays an important role in informing policy and influencing governmental perspectives on informal caregiving, but without carer participation, this vital research would not be possible. Vital though it is, this participation is often ‘appreciated’ (in the form of gift cards) rather than ‘valued’ (in the form of fair renumeration). This blog post unpacks the difference between appreciation and value of carers’ time and why this is problematic.
***
Value is worth, worth for someone’s time and contribution. Carers are already time poor and are not financially compensated in a way that accurately recognises the services they provide for their loved ones. They are a group of people who are already going above and beyond, for very little in return. Then they are asked to offer that time to research, to potentially help their future and the future of other carers, with very little return or understanding of what giving their time means.
When a carer gives their valuable time to a project, they must sacrifice time with the loved one they are caring for, or, sacrifice the very little time they have to themselves. This also comes with the organisational load of ensuring who they care for is being appropriately looked after while they are participating in this research. All this, in exchange for a gift card. A gift card does not value an individual’s time and effort.
As Associate Professor Sarah Wayland, from the University of New England, stated in our 2023 Research Incubator; ‘You cannot eat a gift card’. This isn’t a real monetary exchange; gift vouchers are not equivalent to cash. The amount on the gift card doesn’t often match the spend that has occurred just for the individual to be there, and what that implies to me, is the individual’s time isn’t valued. Further, an individual’s needs may not be met by a gift card, as this exchange is a limiting one, which binds spending to one predetermined, one-size-fits-all area, when that individual may need relief on specific bills, such as rent or utilities.
***
I have personally participated in research, in exchange for gift cards, and what I have found in my experience is that the upfront time expectation was overshot, but, the value on the gift card didn’t change. What was initially predicted regarding travel or time expectation was not met and scheduling wasn’t easy. I found myself out of pocket after travel costs and was given a gift card with limited places to spend, which didn’t suit my needs.
As much as I want to contribute to see change, it is hard to continually contribute at the expense of your own day to day autonomy and financial stability. I come to this with a certain amount of privilege as well, as I have this job as the Carer In Residence and other income sources. This means that I can now contribute my time to research, without it impacting me, if I am not properly reimbursed. However, there are others in this community, whose time is extremely precious and needs to be spent earning to provide. In not providing proper reimbursement for time and only offering a gift card, it marginalises the participation of certain groups, which in turn makes the research narrow and not a true reflection of the carer experience.
***
Perhaps this limitation comes from the top down and a practice that has been accepted as reasonable continues.
I recently read a commentary from researchers at the University of Sydney that spoke to reimbursement regarding research participation. This commentary spoke specifically of participation in drug and alcohol research, however carried the same sentiments I am questioning here. There are many blocks to research integrity if proper reimbursement is not offered:
‘… payments afford a means to acknowledge participant value in advancing scientific knowledge, while recognising the time, inconvenience and expenses incurred. Furthermore, payments are considered scientifically and ethically valid, can facilitate the recruitment of hidden or priority populations, and may increase retention in studies that require follow-up.’
However… ‘Cash…can pose real and important challenges for administering institutions, in terms of both financial administration and, potentially, staff security.’
~ Daniel T. Winter, PhD Candidate, University of Sydney.
The administrative issues around cash payments for research participation is an issue that needs further attention and needs to be championed by researchers to make change, if they want to work with valuable cross-sections when it comes to participation.
Where to from here?
As it stands, to have the capacity to participate in research as a carer is a privilege. You need to have the time, resources, and financial stability to give your time freely to research, especially projects which have a more long-standing participation. If participants aren’t truly valued for their contribution, the pool of willing participants is narrow, so it is in the best interest of researchers to champion appropriate channels of compensation to further their research integrity.
Greater discussion by both academics and participants needs to be had, to recognise what is valuable to those participating. Perhaps conversations need to be had with those who aren’t willing to contribute, with curiosity. Ask genuinely what their block from participating is. Whether it be financial or logistical, what elements will break down the barriers to showing up and making a difference. I believe all carers want to be heard, but they are exhausted and do not necessarily have the time, how can we give them time back through support and valuable reimbursement?