Voluntary childlessness, also described by some as being childfree, is the voluntary choice to not have children.
In most societies and for most of human history, choosing not to
have children was both difficult and undesirable. The availability of
reliable contraception along with support provided in old age
by one's government rather than one's family has made childlessness an
option for people in some, though they may be looked down upon in
certain communities.
The usage of the term "childfree" to describe people who choose not to have children was coined in the English language late in the 20th century.
The meaning of the term "childfree" extends to encompass the children
of others (in addition to one's own children) and this distinguishes it
further from the more usual term "childless", which is traditionally
used to express the idea of having no children, whether by choice or by
circumstance.
The term 'child free' has been cited in Australian literature to refer
to parents who are without children at the current time. This may be due
to them living elsewhere on a permanent basis or a short-term solution
such as childcare (Australian Institute of Family Studies, 2011).
Commonly shared beliefs
Supporters of living childfree (e.g. Corinne Maier, French author of "No Kids: 40 Reasons For Not Having Children") cite various reasons for their view:
competing familial or social obligations, such as the role of primary caregiver for a disabled spouse, sibling(s) or parent(s)
concerns over the effects pregnancy has on the woman's body (weight
gain, stretch marks, drooping breasts, hyperpigmentation on the face,
looser pelvic muscles leading to reduced sexual pleasure for both the
woman and her partner, haemorrhoids, urinary incontinence, death, etc.)
economic insufficiency
lack of access to support networks and resources
personal well-being
existing or possible health problems, including genetic disorders
reluctance to replicate the genes of one's own parents in cases of child abuse
fear that sexual activity may decline
various fears (for example, of being trapped or disappointed) as well as fears for the child
damage to relationships or difficulties with them
fear and/or revulsion towards the physical condition of pregnancy, the childbirth experience, and recovery (for example the erosion of physical desirability)
belief that one can make a greater contribution to humanity through one's work than through having children
perceived or actual incapacity to be a responsible and patient parent
the view that the wish to reproduce oneself is a form of narcissism
the absence of a partner with which one deems fit to sexually reproduce
belief that it is wrong to intentionally have a child when there are so many children available for adoption
concern regarding environmental impacts such as overpopulation, pollution, resource scarcity and the resulting effects on the global climate and the welfare of existing children
antinatalism:
the belief that it is inherently immoral to bring people into the
world. That is, one may generally wish to spare a potential child from
the suffering of life. Moreover, the parent can never get the consent of
the unborn child, therefore a decision to procreate would be an
imposition of life
belief in a negative, declining condition of the world and culture
and in the need to avoid subjecting a child to those negative
conditions. This includes concerns that calamitous events (e.g., global warming effects, war, or famine) might be likely to occur within the lifetime of one's children and cause their suffering and/or death
belief that people tend to have children for the wrong reasons (e.g. fear, social pressures from cultural norms)
adherence to the principles of a religious organization which rejects having children or the rejection of procreative religious beliefs imposed by one's family and/or community
dislike of children
uncertainty over the stability of the parenting relationship
lack of the so-called maternal or paternal instinct
belief that one is too old or too young to have children
career orientation
simply not wanting to have children
Statistics and research
According to economist David Foot of the University of Toronto, the level of a woman's education is the most important factor in determining whether she will reproduce:
the higher her level of education, the less likely she is to bear
children (or if she does, the fewer children she is likely to have).
Overall, researchers have observed childless couples to be more educated, and it is perhaps because of this that they are more likely to be employed in professional and management occupations, more likely for both spouses to earn relatively high incomes, and to live in urban areas. They are also less likely to be religious, subscribe to traditional gender roles, or subscribe to conventional roles.
Being a childfree, American adult was considered unusual in the 1950s.
However, the proportion of childless adults in the population has
increased significantly since then. The proportion of childlessness
among women aged 40–44 was 10% in 1976, reached a high of 20% in 2005,
then declined to 15% in 2014. In Europe, childlessness among women aged 40–44 is most common in Austria, Spain and the United Kingdom (in 2010-2011). Among surveyed countries, childlessness was least common across Eastern European countries, although one child families are very common there.
From 2007 to 2011 the fertility rate in the U.S. declined 9%, the Pew Research Center
reporting in 2010 that the birth rate was the lowest in U.S. history
and that childfreeness rose across all racial and ethnic groups to about
1 in 5 versus 1 in 10 in the 1970s. The CDC
released statistics in the first quarter of 2016 confirming that the
U.S. fertility rate had fallen to its lowest point since record keeping
started in 1909: 59.8 births per 1,000 women, half its high of 122.9 in
1957. Even taking the falling fertility rate into account, the U.S. Census Bureau still projected that the U.S. population would increase from 319 million (2014) to 400 million by 2051.
The National Center of Health Statistics confirms that the
percentage of American women of childbearing age who define themselves
as childfree (or voluntarily childless) rose sharply in the 1990s—from
2.4 percent in 1982 to 4.3 percent in 1990 to 6.6 percent in 1995.
Factors involved in voluntary childlessness
In 2010, updated information on childlessness, based on a 2008 US Census Population Survey, was analyzed by Pew Research.
Age
While younger
women are more likely to be childless, older women are more likely to
state that they intend to remain childless in the future.
Marriage and relationships
Being
unmarried is one of the strongest predictors of childlessness. It has
also been suggested through research that married individuals who were
concerned about the stability of their marriages were more likely to
remain childless.
Socioeconomic status/labor force participation
Most
studies on this subject find that higher income predicted
childlessness. However, some women report that lack of financial
resources was a reason why they decided to remain childless. Childless
women in the developed world often express the view that women
ultimately have to make a choice between motherhood and having a career. The 2004 Census Bureau data showed nearly half of women with annual incomes over $100,000 are childless.
Education
Among women aged 35–44, the chance of being childless was far greater
for never-married (82.5%) than for married women (12.9%). When the
same group is analyzed by education level, increasing education
correlates with increasing childlessness: non-H.S. graduate (13.5%),
H.S. graduate (14.3%), Some College no degree (24.7%), Associate Degree
(11.4%), Bachelor's degree (18.2%) and Graduate or Professional degree
(27.6%).
Educational differences in childlessness among women 40-44 yrs old in the U.S, 2004
Social attitudes to remaining childfree
Most
societies place a high value on parenthood in adult life, so that
people who remain childfree are sometimes stereotyped as being
"individualistic" people who avoid social responsibility and are less
prepared to commit themselves to helping others.
However, certain groups believe that being childfree is beneficial.
With the advent of environmentalism and concerns for stewardship, those
choosing to not have children are also sometimes recognized as helping
reduce our impact, such as members of the voluntary human extinction movement. Some childfree are sometimes lauded on moral grounds, such as members of philosophical or religious groups, like the Shakers.
There are three broad areas of criticism regarding childfreeness,
based upon socio-political, feminist or religious reasons. There are
also considerations relating to personal philosophy and social roles.
Feminism
Feminist
author Daphne DeMarneffe links larger feminist issues to both the
devaluation of motherhood in contemporary society, as well as the
delegitimization of "maternal desire" and pleasure in motherhood. In third-wave handbook Manifesta: Young Women, Feminism, and the Future, authors Jennifer Baumgardner and Amy Richards explore the concept of third-wave feminists reclaiming "girlie" culture, along with reasons why women of Baby Boomer and Generation X
ages may reject motherhood because, at a young and impressionable age,
they witnessed their own mothers being devalued by society and family.
On the other hand, in "The Bust Guide to the New Girl Order" and in Utne Reader magazine, third-wave feminist writer Tiffany Lee Brown
described the joys and freedoms of childfree living, freedoms such as
travel previously associated with males in Western culture. In
"Motherhood Lite," she celebrates being an aunt, co-parent, or family
friend over the idea of being a mother.
Overpopulation
Reduction of one's carbon footprint for various actions.
Some believe that overpopulation is a serious problem and some
question the fairness of what they feel amount to subsidies for having
children, such as the Earned Income Tax Credit (US), free K–12 education paid for by all taxpayers, family medical leave, and other such programs.
Others, however, do not believe overpopulation to be a problem in
itself; regarding such problems as overcrowding, global warming, and
straining food supplies to be problems of public policy and/or
technology.
Some have argued that this sort of conscientiousness
is self-eliminating (assuming it is heritable), so by avoiding
reproduction for ethical reasons the childfree will only aid
deterioration of concern for the environment and future generations.
Government and taxes
Some
regard governmental or employer-based incentives offered only to
parents—such as a per-child income tax credit, preferential absence
planning, employment legislation, or special facilities—as intrinsically
discriminatory, arguing for their removal, reduction, or the formation
of a corresponding system of matching incentives for other categories of
social relationships. Childfree advocates argue that other forms of
caregiving have historically not been considered equal—that "only babies
count"—and that this is an outdated idea that is in need of revision.
Caring for sick, disabled, or elderly
dependents entails significant financial and emotional costs but is not
currently subsidized in the same manner. This commitment has
traditionally and increasingly fallen largely on women, contributing to
the feminization of poverty in the U.S.
The focus on personal acceptance is mirrored in much of the
literature surrounding choosing not to reproduce. Many early books were
grounded in feminist
theory and largely sought to dispel the idea that womanhood and
motherhood were necessarily the same thing, arguing, for example, that
childfree people face not only social discrimination but political
discrimination as well.
Religion
Abrahamic religions such as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, as well as Hinduism
place a high value on children and their central place in marriage.
In numerous works, including an Apostolic letter written in 1988, Pope John Paul II has set forth the Roman Catholic emphasis on the role of children in family life. However, the Catholic Church also stresses the value of chastity in the non-married state of life and so approves of nominally childfree ways of life for the single.
There are, however, some debates within religious groups about
whether a childfree lifestyle is acceptable. Another view, for example,
is that the biblical text Gen. 1:28 "Be fruitful and multiply",
is really not a command but a blessing formula and that while there are
many factors to consider as far as people's motives for remaining
childless, there are many valid reasons, including dedicating one's time
to demanding but good causes, why Christians may choose to remain
childless for a short time or a lifetime.
Matthew 19:12 describes Jesus as listing three types of eunuchs
including one type who chooses it intentionally, noting that whoever is
willing to become one, should.
Ethical reasons
Brian
Tomasik cites ethical reasons for people to remain childfree. Also,
they will have more time to focus on themselves, which will allow for
greater creativity and the exploration of personal ambitions. In this
way, they may benefit themselves and society more than if they had a
child.
The "selfish" issue
Some opponents of the childfree choice consider such a choice to be selfish.
The rationale of this position is the assertion that raising children
is a very important activity and so not engaging in this activity must
therefore mean living one's life in service to one's self. The value
judgment behind this idea is that individuals should endeavor to make
some kind of meaningful contribution to the world, but also that the
best way to make such a contribution is to have children. For some
people, one or both of these assumptions may be true, but others prefer
to direct their time, energy, and talents elsewhere, in many cases
toward improving the world that today's children occupy (and that future
generations will inherit).
Proponents of childfreedom posit that choosing not to have
children is no more or less selfish than choosing to have children.
Choosing to have children may be the more selfish choice, especially
when poor parenting risks creating many long term problems for both the
children themselves and society at large. As philosopher David Benatar
explains, at the heart of the decision to bring a child into the world
often lies the parents' own desires (to enjoy child-rearing or
perpetuate one's legacy/genes), rather than the potential person's
interests. At the very least, Benatar believes this illustrates why a
childfree person may be just as altruistic as any parent.
There is also the question as to whether having children really
is such a positive contribution to the world in an age when there are
many concerns about overpopulation, pollution and depletion of non-renewable resources.
Some critics counter that such analyses of having children may
understate its potential benefits to society (e.g. a greater labor
force, which may provide greater opportunity to solve social problems)
and overstate the costs. That is, there is often a need for a non-zero birth rate.
Organizations and political activism
Childfree
individuals do not necessarily share a unified political or economic
philosophy, and most prominent childfree organizations tend to be social
in nature. Childfree social groups first emerged in the 1970s and
1980s, most notable among them the National Alliance for Optional Parenthood and No Kidding!
in North America where numerous books have been written about childfree
people and where a range of social positions related to childfree
interests have developed along with political and social activism in
support of these interests. The term "childfree" was used in a July 3,
1972 Time article on the creation of the National Organization for Non-Parents. It was revived in the 1990s when Leslie Lafayette formed a later childfree group, the Childfree Network.
The National Organization for Non-Parents (N.O.N.) was begun in Palo Alto, CA by Ellen Peck
and Shirley Radl in 1972. N.O.N. was formed to advance the notion that
men and women could choose not to have children—to be childfree.
Changing its name to the National Alliance for Optional Parenthood,
it continued into the early 1980s both as a support group for those
making the decision to be childfree and an advocacy group fighting
pronatalism (attitudes/advertising/etc. promoting or glorifying
parenthood). According to its bylaws, the purpose of the National
Alliance for Optional Parenthood was to educate the public on
non-parenthood as a valid lifestyle option, support those who choose not
to have children, promote awareness of the overpopulation problem, and
assist other groups that advanced the goals of the organization.
N.O.N.'s offices were located in Reisterstown, MD; then Baltimore, MD;
and, ultimately, in Washington, D.C. N.O.N. designated August 1 as
Non-Parents' Day. Just as people with children come from all shades of
the political spectrum and temper their beliefs accordingly, so do the
childfree. For example, while some childfree people think of government
welfare to parents as "lifestyle subsidies," others accept the need to
assist such individuals but think that their lifestyle should be equally
compensated. Still others accept the need to help out such individuals
and also do not ask for subsidies of their own.
There are suggestions of an emergence of political cohesion, for
example an Australian Childfree Party (ACFP) proposed in Australia as a
childfree political party, promoting the childfree lifestyle as opposed
to the family lifestyle. Increasing politicization and media
interest has led to the emergence of a second wave of childfree
organizations that are openly political in their raisons d'ĂȘtre, with a
number of attempts to mobilize political pressure groups in the U.S.
The first organization to emerge was British, known as Kidding Aside. The childfree movement has not had significant political impact.
Parental leave, or family leave, is an employee benefit available in almost all countries. The term "parental leave" may include maternity, paternity, and adoption
leave; or may be used distinctively from "maternity leave" and
"paternity leave" to describe separate family leave available to either
parent to care for small children.
In some countries and jurisdictions, "family leave" also includes leave
provided to care for ill family members. Often, the minimum benefits
and eligibility requirements are stipulated by law.
Unpaid parental or family leave is provided when an employer is
required to hold an employee's job while that employee is taking leave.
Paid parental or family leave provides paid time off
work to care for or make arrangements for the welfare of a child or
dependent family member. The three most common models of funding are
social insurance/social security (where employees, employers, or
taxpayers in general contribute to a specific public fund), employer
liability (where the employer must pay the employee for the length of
leave), and mixed policies that combine both social security and
employer liability.
Parental leave has been available as a legal right and/or governmental program for many years, in one form or another. In 2014, the International Labour Organization reviewed parental leave policies in 185 countries and territories, and found that all countries except Papua New Guinea have laws mandating some form of parental leave.
A different study showed that of 186 countries examined, 96% offered
some pay to mothers during leave, but only 44% of those countries
offered the same for fathers. The United States, Suriname, Papua New Guinea, and a few island countries in the Pacific Ocean are the only countries in the United Nations that do not require employers to provide paid time off for new parents.
Private employers sometimes provide either or both unpaid and
paid parental leave outside of or in addition to any legal mandate.
Economic models
Benefits of universal, paid parental leave
Capabilities approach
Jeremiah Carter and Martha Nussbaum have developed a political model known as the capabilities approach, where basic freedoms and opportunities are included in economic assessments of a country's well-being, in addition to GDP. Nussbaum proposed 11 central capabilities
as the minimum requirement for a decent society. In Nussbaum's model,
states should provide the resources and freedoms to ensure people have
the opportunity to achieve a minimum threshold of each central
capability. Universal, paid parental leave is an example resource states
can provide so people have the option of starting a family while also
working; for instance, under capacity 10 (control of one's environment), the state has a responsibility to ensure all people have "the right to seek employment on an equal basis with others."
Income and workforce
Paid parental leave incentivizes labor market attachment for women both before and after birth, affecting GDP and national productivity, as the workforce is larger. Parental leave increases income at the household level as well by supporting dual-earner families.
Paid parental leave incentivizes
childbirth, which affects the future workforce. It is thus argued that
paid parental leave, in contrast to unpaid parental leave, is harmful to
children's welfare because in countries with an aging workforce or countries with sub-replacement fertility,
children are born not because the parents want the child and can meet
the child's needs but because children are expected to support their
parents. Some see children as responsible for supporting all those in
older generations in the society (not just the child's specific
parents); their earnings are expected not to be saved for the children's
own old age, but to be spent on the earlier generations' demand for social security and pensions for which there was inadequate savings.
Challenges to universal, paid leave
Statistical discrimination
The neoclassical model of labor markets
predicts that, if the cost of hiring women of child-bearing years is
anticipated to increase (either because the employer is mandated to pay
for maternity leave or because she will be absent from work on public
leave), then the "demand" for women in the labor market will decrease.
While gender discrimination is illegal, without some kind of remedy the
neoclassical model would predict "statistical discrimination" against
hiring women of child-bearing years.
To counteract this, some countries have introduced policies to increase
rates of paternity leave to spread the cost impact more evenly across
the labor market.
Occupational sex segregation
If
women take long parental leaves, the neoclassical model would predict
that their lifetime earnings and opportunities for promotion will be
less than their male or childfree counterparts—the "motherhood penalty". Women may seek out employment sectors that are "family-friendly" (i.e., with generous parental leave policies), resulting in occupational sex segregation. Nielsen, Simonsen, and Verner examine what the different outcomes for women in Denmark are between the "family-friendly" and the "non-family-friendly" sector. In Denmark, the public sector
is "family-friendly" because of its generous leave and employee
benefits; workers decide which sector to work in based on their
preferences and opportunities. The study found that, while in the
"family-friendly" sector there was basically no wage loss related to
taking parental leave, women did have consistent earnings loss in the
"non-family-friendly" private sector for one year's leave.
Cost
Universal, paid parental leave can be privately funded (i.e., corporations are mandated to absorb the cost of paid parental time off as part of employee benefits) or publicly funded (i.e., transferred directly to workers on leave, like unemployment insurance).
Concerns about private funding include the statistical discrimination
described above as well as the costs to smaller businesses. Datta Gupta,
Smith, & Verneer found in 2008 that, while publicly funded parental
leave has benefits, it is very expensive to fund and question if it is
the most cost-effective use of funds.
Criticism of the 'Father Quota'
The father's quota is a policy implemented by some countries or
companies that reserves a part of the parental leave or other types of
family leave for the father. If the father does not take this reserved
part of leave, the family loses that leave period—that is, it cannot be
transferred to the mother.
Given the high rates of women's participation in the formal labor force
in many parts of the world, there is increasing interest among social
scientists and policymakers in supporting a more equal division of labor
between partners. Some critics question whether such policies are
evidence-based and express concern that they are "a social experiment,
the effects of which are unknown".
However, other studies have shown that paternity leave improves bonds
between fathers and children and also helps mitigate the wage gap women
face after taking maternity leave.
Other psychological perspectives summarise evidence and find that the
role of a father in child development is very similar to that of a
mother, counteracting the concern that greater paternal involvement in
childcare could lead to unforeseen negative consequences.
Criticism is often less concerned about the idea of paternity leave
itself, but condemns the fact that father's quota policies do not allow
that time to be allocated to the mother instead. Critics argue that the
quota harms mothers, depriving them of much needed leave, trivializes
biological realities, and is an example of discrimination against
mothers.
Comparison between countries
Comparison between countries in term of employee benefits
to leave for parents are often attempted, but these are very difficult
to make because of the complexity of types of leave available and
because terms such as maternity leave, paternity leave, pre-natal leave,
post-natal leave, parental leave, family leave and home-care leave,
have different meanings in different jurisdictions. Such terms may often
be used incorrectly. Comparing the length of maternity leave
(which is common in international rankings) may say very little about
the situation of a family in a specific country. A country for example
may have a long maternity leave but a short (or non existent) parental
or family leave, or vice versa. In the European Union,
each country has its own policies, which vary significantly, but all
the EU members must abide by the minimum standards of the Pregnant Workers Directive and Parental Leave Directive.
Sometimes there is a distortion in how maternity leave is
reported and delimitated from other types of leave, especially in
jurisdictions where there is no clear legal term of "maternity leave",
and such term is used informally to denote either the minimum or the
maximum period of parental leave reserved by quota to the mother.
Some countries may be listed artificially as having more or less
generous benefits. Sweden is sometimes listed in international
statistics as having 480 days' "maternity leave", although these days include parental leave.
As such, Sweden is often quoted as having an exceptionally long leave,
although there are several countries with significantly longer leave,
when maternity leave and other leaves are added, where a parent may take
leave until a child is 3 years of age.
Effects of parental leave
Typically,
the effects of parental leave are improvements in prenatal and
postnatal care, including a decrease in infant mortality.
The effects of parental leave on the labor market include an increase
in employment, changes in wages, and fluctuations in the rate of
employees returning to work. Leave legislation can also impact fertility
rates.
Effects on the labor market
A study in Germany found that wages decreased by 18 percent for every year an employee spends on parental leave.
However, after the initial decrease in wages, the employee's salary
rebounds faster than the salary of someone not offered parental leave.
A study of California's leave policy, the first state in the U.S. to
require employers to offer paid parental leave, showed that wages did
increase.
Parental leave can lead to greater job security.
Studies differ in how this helps return to work after taking time off.
Some studies show that if a parent is gone for more than a year after
the birth of a child, it decreases the possibility that he or she will
return.
Other studies of shorter leave periods show that parents no longer need
to quit their jobs in order to care for their children, so employment
return increases.
It does not appear that parental leave policies have had a
significant effect on the gender wage gap, which has remained relatively
steady since the late 1980s, despite increasing adoption of parental
leave policies.
Maternity leave and its effects
In the U.S., while the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993
(FMLA) allows for unpaid parental leave, parents often do not utilize
this eligibility to its fullest extent as it is unaffordable. As a
result, some studies show that the FMLA has had a limited impact on how
much leave new parents take.
Though specific amounts can vary, having a child (including the cost of
high-quality childcare) costs families approximately $11,000 in the
first year.
These high costs contribute to new mothers in the United States
returning to work quicker than new mothers in European countries;
approximately one third of women in the United States return to work
within three months of giving birth, compared to approximately five per
cent in the U.K., Germany, and Sweden, and just over half of mothers in the United States with a child under the age of one work.
There is some evidence that legislation for parental leave raises
the likelihood of women returning to their previous jobs as opposed to
finding a new job. This rise is thought to fall to between 10% and 17%.
Simultaneously, there is a decrease in the percentage of women who find
new jobs, which falls between 6% and 11%. Thus, such legislation appears
to increase how many women return to work post-childbirth by around 3%
or 4%.
Additionally, it appears that parental leave policies do allow
women to stay home longer before returning to work as the probability of
returning to an old job falls in the second month after childbirth
before dramatically rising in the third month. Although this legislation
thus appears to have minimal effect on women choosing to take leave, it
does appear to increase the time women take in leave.
Maternity leave legislation could pose benefits or harm to
employers. The main potential drawback of mandated leave is its
potential to disrupt productive activities by raising rates of employee
absenteeism. With mandated leave for a certain period of time and facing
prolonged absence of the mothers in the workplace, firms will be faced
with two options: hire a temp (which could involve training costs) or
function with a missing employee. Alternatively, these policies could be
positive for employers who previously did not offer leave because they
were worried about attracting employees who were disproportionately
likely to use maternity leave. Thus, there is potential for these
policies to correct market failures.
A drawback of rising leave at the societal level, however, is the
resulting decrease in female labor supply. In countries with a high
demand for labor, including many present-day countries with aging
populations, a smaller labor supply is unfavorable.
Something important to note for all the research cited above is
that the results typically depend on how leave coverage is defined, and
whether the policies are for unpaid or paid leave. Policies guaranteeing
paid leave are considered by some to be dramatically more effective
than unpaid-leave policies.
For women individually, long breaks in employment, as would come
from parental leave, negatively affects their careers. Longer gaps are
associated with reduced lifetime earnings and lower pension
disbursements as well as worsened career prospects and reduced earnings.
Due to these drawbacks, some countries, notably Norway, have expanded
family policy initiatives to increase the father's quota and expand
childcare in an effort to work towards greater gender equality.
According to a 2016 study, the expansion of government-funded
maternity leave in Norway from 18 to 35 weeks led mothers to spend more
time at home without a reduction in family income.
Father spending time with daughter
Paternity leave and its effects
Although parental leave is increasingly granted to fathers, mothers continue to take the majority of guaranteed parental leave. When guaranteed leave is unpaid, research indicates that men's leave usage is unaffected.
In Germany, where parental leave is guaranteed for both parents, the
financial incentive, alone, was not enough to encourage fathers to take
paternal leave.
While uncommon on a world scale, some countries do reserve parts of the
paid leave for the father, meaning it can't be transferred to the
mother and lapses unless he uses it. Among the earliest countries to
actively push for increased usage of paternity leave are the Nordic
welfare states, starting with Sweden making parental leave gender
neutral in 1974 and soon followed by Iceland, Denmark, Norway and
Finland. These countries lack a unified concept of paternity leave, each
imposing different conditions, ratios and timescales, but are regarded
as among the most generous in the world.
Partly in an initiative to combat the "Motherhood penalty," Norway in 1993 initiated a policy change to incentivize paternal leave, the so-called "father's quota",
and Sweden followed suit in 1995. This means a certain number of
parental leave-days can only be used by the father, and are otherwise
lost. In countries in which leave entitlements include a father's quota,
there has been a pronounced impact, with the quota being credited for
increasing paternal involvement and challenging gender roles within the
family, promoting a more equal division of labor.
To evaluate this change, RĂžnsen & KitterĂžd looked at the rate and
timing of women's return to work after giving birth, and the effect on
this of the new parental leave policy. In their 2015 study, RĂžnsen &
KitterĂžd found women in Norway returned to work significantly faster after the policy change. However, public or subsidized daycare was greatly expanded at the same time, so RĂžnsen & KitterĂžd did not find that the "father's quota" was solely responsible for the timing of work entry. But it can be understood to have an effect on division of household labor by gender when both parents can take time to care for a new baby.
Another impact from fathers taking more leave is that in Norway
it has been shown to have the potential to either decrease or increase
the time women take, depending on whether the mother's and father's
childcare are seen as substitutes or complements.
If substitute goods, mothers are able to return to work sooner as
fathers take some of the childcare responsibility. Research has
suggested a class element is at play: middle class fathers consider
themselves a suitable alternative to the mother as primary caregiver,
while working class men may see themselves more as supporters of their
partner during her leave. Consequently, middle class fathers may be more
likely to use their allotment of leave right after the mother returns
to work, while working class fathers may opt to take their leave during
the mother's leave. In some cases, longer leave for fathers can motivate mothers to also stay home.
Fathers tend to use less parental leave than mothers in the
United States as well as in other countries where paid leave is
available, and this difference may have factors other than the financial constraints which impact both parents. Bygren and Duvander,
looking at the use of parental leave by fathers in Sweden, concluded
that fathers' workplace characteristics (including the size of the
workplace, whether there were more men or women in the workplace, and
whether the workplace was part of the private or public sector)
influenced the length of parental leave for fathers, as did the presence
of other men who had taken parental leave at an earlier point in time.
As of 2016 paternity leave accounts for 25% of paid parental leave in
Sweden.
Length of leave
Family policy during World War II when women were recruited into the workplace
Rasmussen analyzed a similar natural experiment in Denmark with a policy change in 1984 where parental leave increased from 14 to 20 weeks.
Rasmussen found the increased length of parental leave had no negative
effect on women's wages or employment and in the short run (i.e., 12
months) it had a positive effect on women's wages, compared to the
shorter leave. There was no difference on children's long-term
educational outcomes before and after the policy change.
Effects on health and development
A Harvard report cited research showing paid maternity leave "facilitates breastfeeding and reduces risk of infection" but is not associated with changes in immunization rate. This research also found that countries with parental leave had lower infant mortality rates. Returning to work within 12 weeks was also associated with fewer regular medical checkups.
Data from 16 European countries during the period 1969–1994 revealed
that the decrease of infant mortality rates varied based on length of
leave. A 10-week leave was associated with a 1–2% decrease; a 20-week
leave with 2–4%; and 30 weeks with 7–9%.
The United States, which does not have a paid parental leave law,
ranked 56th in the world in 2014 in terms of infant mortality rates,
with 6.17 deaths per every 1,000 children born. The research did not find any infant health benefits in countries with unpaid parental leave.
Paid leave, particularly when available prior to childbirth, had a
significant effect on birth weight. The frequency of low birth rate
decreases under these policies, which likely contributes to the decrease
in infant mortality rates as low birth weight is strongly correlated
with infant death. However, careful analysis reveals that increased
birth weight is not the sole reason for the decreased mortality rate.
According to a 2016 study, the expansion of government-funded
maternity leave in Norway from 18 to 35 weeks had little effect on
children's schooling.
However, when infants bond and have their needs met quickly by
caregivers (mothers, fathers, etc.) they will become confident and be
prepared to have healthy relationships throughout their life.
Children whose mothers worked in the first 9 months were found to
be less ready for school at the age of 3 years. The effects of mothers'
employment appeared to be the most detrimental when employment started
between the sixth and ninth month of life. The reasons for this were
uncertain, but there is conjecture that there was something unusual for
the group of mothers who returned to work in this time period as they
represented only 5% of all families studied. Negative impacts in terms
of school-readiness were most pronounced when the mother worked at least
30 hours per week. These findings were complicated by many factors,
including race, poverty, and how sensitive the mother was considered.
The effects were also greater in boys, which is explained by the fact
that many analysts consider boys more vulnerable to stress in early
life.
The same Harvard report also linked paid parental leave and a
child's psychological health. It found that parents with paid parental
leave had closer bonds with their children.
Based on research of heterosexual couples, better immersion of the
father in the process of raising a child can lead to improved
development outcomes for the child and a better relationship between the
parents.
In recent years, various OECD countries drew attention to the topic,
especially to the time of the parental leave taken by fathers, and
concluded that short-term paternal leaves still lead to positive
outcomes for the child's development. Families do take into account
relative income levels of each parent when planning for parental leave;
the partner earning a lower wage may be more likely to take parental
leave.
There is also often workplace pressure on men not to take paternity
leave, or to take less than the maximum time allowed. To counteract
these pressures and encourage paternity leave, some countries have
experimented with making paternity leave mandatory or otherwise
incentivizing it.
There are also observable improvements in the mental health of
mothers when they are able to return to work later. While the
probability of experiencing postpartum depression had no significant
statistical change, longer leave (leave over 10 weeks) was associated
with decreased severity of depression and decreased number of
experienced symptoms. This reduction was, on average, between 5% and
10%.
Studies looking for a connection between paid parental leave have
shown conflicting results. Some research looked at women 25–34 years
old, who are more likely to be affected by leave legislation. Fertility
rates peaked for those between 25–29 and 30–34 across European
countries.
Conversely, however, research in Spain found that after the
introduction of two weeks of paid paternity leave, fertility rates fell,
suggesting that when fathers are more engaged in raising children, they
may become more aware of the challenges; their priorities may shift to
quality over quantity of children; and/or that mothers are better able
to remain connected to the workforce.
A study of a 2012 law in Sweden that allowed fathers to take up
to 30 days of paid family leave in the first year after the birth of the
child at the same time as the mother was on leave led to substantial
improvements in the mental and physical health of mothers.
Effects on economy
The
economic consequences of parental leave policies are subject to
controversy. According to a 2016 study, the expansion of
government-funded maternity leave in Norway from 18 to 35 weeks had net
costs that amounted to 0.25% of GDP, negative redistribution properties
and implied a considerable increase in taxes at a cost to economic
efficiency. In the U.S., paid family leave tends to lead to a higher employee retention rate and higher incomes for families.
Evidence from selected countries in Western Europe suggests that
moderate levels of parental leave can encourage mothers to reenter the
work force after having children, promoting national economic
development.
Effects on gender equality
Symbol for gender equality
Parental leave policies have an impact on gender equality as it relates to parenting and are therefore used by various countries as a tool to promote gender equality.
Many countries/regions have implemented paid parental leave policies
for both parents, which promotes gender equality, while a minority of
countries, like the United States, only have unpaid maternity leave.
As more women have joined the formal labor force, the lack of
men's participation in parenting has been called out as a key example of
gender inequality. Various studies highlight the importance of
egalitarian parental leave policies in achieving equal distribution of
childcare between parents.
Moreover, when discussing parental leave policies, the focus is often
on comparing improvements in maternity leave policies to what was
available in the past, rather than comparing the impact of diverse
policies around the world that distribute parental leave differently
between both parents.
Statistics show a positive correlation between maternity leave
policies and women's employment, but the causation relationship cannot
be firmly established. While many believe that maternity leave policies encourage women's participation in the labor force, Anita Nyberg
suggests that it is the other way around: that development of maternity
leave policies was a response to women's participation in the labor
force.
Economist Christopher Ruhm argues that men's involvement in
childcare at the same level as women is essential for eliminating
differences in gender roles. Thus, an increase in the use of parental
leave by women (and lack thereof by men) will have a negative impact on
gender equality. Inversely, an increase in the use of leave by men will
have a positive impact.
Transferable leave policies appear to be fair and equal in theory,
since they do not specifically allocate leave focused on childcare to
women and even allow the family to choose. In practice, however, it
leads to the majority of available parental leave being used by women. The Norwegian Association for Women's Rights,
summarizing different studies, states that there is only limited
evidence to support a relationship between the father's quota and gender
equality; the few relevant studies point in different directions; the association's former President, psychologist and former Chairman of UNICEF Torild Skard, argues that psychological research does not support the assertion that mothers can be replaced by fathers in the first year.
Through examination of leave policies in twenty-one European
countries by describing the existing policy schemes' duration, payment,
and transferability, Carmen Castro-Garcia created the Parental Leave
Equality Index (PLEI), which can predict the participation of each
parent in raising their children based on their gender and the existing
policy regarding parental leave.
His model shows that a policy that provides equal, nontransferable, and
well-paid leave for each parent (which no country has at the moment)
will best encourage men's and women's equal participation in childcare.
European Union
The European Union recognizes the ability for countries to utilize varying parental leave policies to affect labor force participation, the labor market, maternal health, the work–life balance of parents, and the physical and emotional development of children.
And by affecting the work-life balance of parents, it may reduce the
barriers to participation of both parents in parenting. More
specifically, paternity and parental leave policies are key to
encouraging fathers' involvement in parenting the child.
European Union flag
In 2014, the European Parliament
concluded that, by promoting the uptake of parental leave and paternity
leave by fathers, governments can aim to facilitate a more gender-equal
distribution of care work, support mothers' return to the labor market,
equalize the circumstances in which women and men enter the labor
market, and improve the work–life balance of families.
Findings by the European Parliament in 2015 found that 18 of the
EU-28 countries offer paternity leave, and that the EU-average length is
12.5 days, ranging from one day in Italy to 64 working days in Slovenia.
For 23 EU member states, on average only 10 percent of fathers take
parental leave, ranging from 0.02 percent in Greece to 44 per cent in Sweden.
The gender difference in the employment rate is representative of
the gender employment gap; filling this gap is an important objective
in promoting gender equality and is a part of the Europe 2020 target of an employment rate of 75 per cent for both men and women. The uptake of leave by fathers can reduce the motherhood penalty
by enabling mothers to return to the labor market, as illustrated by
studies that have shown that the involvement of fathers in childcare has
a positive effect on mothers' full-time employment.
Reduction of the gender pay gap
(GPG) is also an important goal for the EU. In 2014 the GPG in the
EU-28 was 16.1 percent, which means that for every euro men got paid in
the EU, women got paid 83.9 cents. (The GPG exists equally after correction for occupation and education level.)
An study done on the gender pension gap estimates the gap to be around
40 percent, which is more than twice the gender pay gap.
Increased leave uptake by fathers can reduce the length of career
interruptions for women, reduce part-time work by women and potentially
reduce the GPG, all of which are leading causes of the gender pension
gap.
Nordic countries
The advancement of gender equality has also been on the political agenda of Nordic countries
for decades. Although all Nordic countries have extended the total
leave period, their policies towards father's quota are different.
In Iceland, each parent receives paid leaves, and an additional three months can be divided between them however they like.
In Norway, parents are offered 49 weeks of (combined) paid parental
leave with their full salary or 59 weeks with 80 per cent salary, but
only 15 of those weeks can be used by the father (up from 10 weeks prior
to 2018). In Sweden,
90 days cannot be transferred from one parent to the other—i.e. each
parent gets at least 90 days of parental leave, thus the quota applies
equally to both parents and is not specifically fathers. The only Nordic country that does not provide fathers with a quota is Denmark.
However, the dual earner/dual care model seems to be the direction of
all the Nordic countries are moving in the construction of their
parental leave systems.
A study done in Norway found that when parental leave is granted
for both parents, there is still gender inequality observed in the form
of mothers being more likely to have part-time jobs compared to their
partners.
Since then, the government has provided child care support for parents
who want them in order to encourage mothers to return to full-time jobs
earlier, and it is effective to a certain extent.
Germany
Mother spending time with her child
In Germany, original laws tackling gender inequality with respect to parenting date back to 1986 in both Eastern and Western Germany, where one parent could take up to two years of leave after the birth of the child with a maximum allowance. According to a study done in 2006, 97% of the people who took the leave were mothers.
In 2007, declining birth rates
and demographic change led to a new law, the "Parenting Benefits and
Parental Leave Law" (Bundeselterngeld- und Elternzeit-Gesetz).
This change in family policy had mainly two aims: to reduce parents'
financial loss in the first year after childbirth, and to encourage
fathers to actively participate in childcare by taking parental leave.
With this shift in paradigm, a better work-life balance and less
support for the male breadwinner model was targeted. This was part of a
"sustainable family policy" promoted by German unification and European
integration with the underlying objective to raise birth rates by
providing financial incentive.
The law's impact was mainly perceived positively with men
reporting high motivation to take leave. So far this has not been
reflected in official statistics, but Susanne Vogl concludes that if
there is a general willingness of men to participate in parental leave
the new Parenting Benefits regulations will help facilitate the actual
decision to take a leave.
United States
Even though, according to a survey conducted by WorldatWork
and Mercer in 2017, 93% of Americans agree that mothers should receive
paid parental leave and 85% agree that fathers should receive paid
parental leave, as of October 2018 the United States does not have nationwide laws that guarantee paid parental leave to its workforce; however, certain states have passed laws providing paid workers with such rights. As of July 2019, eight states (California, New Jersey, Rhode Island, New York, Washington, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Oregon) and the District of Columbia
have enacted laws that grant parental leave as part of state paid
family and medical leave insurance laws, with 4 being effective
currently. In states without such laws, a proportion of companies do
provide paid parental leave.
According to Eileen Appelbaum, the lack of parental leave
policies results in many low-income families struggling to support
themselves financially if both parents are off work. As a result, many
mothers leave work to take care of their children while the father
remains at work to financially support the family. This reinforces gender roles and gender inequality.
Australia
The Australian government provides paid parental leave for both parents, but more for the mother compared to the father. Michael Bittman stated that the reason they provide parental leave is unique in that they view children as "public goods" and, therefore, the state is responsible to provide and support the child.
But like most places around the world, studies done in Australia show
that the inequality still persists within the family, and that women
spend more time doing unpaid work (like parenting) compared to men.
China
According to a study done by Nan Jia, during the Maoist era,
women's full participation in the labor force played a key role in the
Chinese government's efforts to advance women's position in society. To
facilitate women's labor force participation, the Chinese government
initiated a series of measures to mitigate the work–family conflict that
women face during pregnancy and childbirth. These measures included an entitlement to 56 days of paid maternity leave.
In the post-reform era, a series of new regulations have been
introduced to protect women's employment and reproductive rights in the
new market economy. The Labor Law
adopted in 1995 ensured that women and men have equal employment rights
and that employers will not lay off women employees or lower their
wages for reasons of marriage, pregnancy, maternity leave, or
breastfeeding.
The Labor Contract Law enacted in 2008 introduced the provision that
prohibits employers from unilaterally terminating labor contracts with
women employees who are pregnant, give birth, and care for a baby
postpartum. Thus, under the Labor Law and Labor Contract Law, women
employees are entitled to job-protected maternity leave.
The post-reform era saw further improvements in maternity
benefits. The length of paid maternity leave was extended from fifty-six
days prior to reform, to ninety days in 1988, and to 98 days in 2012.
Most recently in 2016, paid maternity leave was extended to a minimum
of 128 days after the long-standing one-child policy was replaced with a
policy that encourages each couple to have two children. This latest
extension of paid leave aims to increase fertility rates and slow the
population aging process.
None of the policies directly aim to tackle gender roles and gender
inequality, but rather to solve immediate problems the country is facing
at the time.
Effect on relationships
A 2020 study in the Economic Journal
found that reforms in Iceland that incentivized fathers to take
parental leave reduced the likelihood of parents separating. The
strongest impact was on relationships where the mother was more educated
than or equally educated as the father.
Private parental leave
Some businesses adopt policies that are favorable to workers and public opinion. In their study of maternity leave policies in the United States, Kelly and Dobbin found that public policy surrounding pregnancy as a temporary disability (for instance, California's Family Temporary Disability Insurance program) gave rise to business practices that included maternity leave as a benefit.
Companies are starting to offer paid parental leave as a benefit
to some American workers, seeing a profitable aspect of doing so,
including: reduced turnover costs, increased productivity from workers, and increased rates of retention
among women after childbirth. Some see the increase in paid parental
leave as indicative of companies reaching out to women, as more women
are working and returning to work after having children, and by doing so
these companies generate positive publicity as employers with
family-friendly workplaces. Working Mother
magazine publishes a list of the 100 Best Companies for working mothers
each year, a list which is noted not only by the readership of the
magazine, but also by corporate America and increasingly by researchers
and policy institutes as well. The Institute for Women's Policy Research issued a report in 2009 encouraging Congress to give federal workers four weeks of paid parental leave. The report cited statistics from the Working Mother
100 Best Company list, using private sector corporations as examples of
substantial increase in the retention of new mothers after instituting a
longer maternity leave policy. The report also noted that it would take
newer workers four years to accrue enough paid leave (sick leave and
annual leave) to equal the 12 weeks of unpaid parental leave provided
under the FMLA, and that private sector companies that offer paid
parental leave have a significant advantage over the federal government
in the recruitment and retention of younger workers who may wish to have
children.
As of February 2018, multinational companies such as Deloitte, TIAA and Cisco were providing parental leave regardless of the parent's gender.
By country
Countries were mothers are and are not guaranteed an equivalent position after maternity leave as of 2017.
National laws vary widely according to the politics of each
jurisdiction. As of 2012, only three countries do not mandate paid time
off for new parents: Papua New Guinea, Lesotho, and the United States.
Unless otherwise specified, the information in the tables below is gathered from the most recent International Labour Organization
reports. Maternity leave refers to the legal protection given to the
mother immediately after she gives birth (but may also include a period
before the birth), paternity leave to legal protection given to the
father immediately after the mother gives birth, and parental leave to
protected time for childcare (usually for either parent) either after
the maternity/paternity leave or immediately after birth (for example
when the parent is not eligible for maternity/paternity leave, and/or
where the time is calculated until the child is a specific age—therefore
excluding maternity/paternity leave—usually such jurisdictions protect
the job until the child reaches a specific age.)
Others allow the parental leave to be transferred into part-time work
time. Parental leave is generally available to either parent, except
where specified. Leave marked "Unpaid" indicates the job is protected
for the duration of the leave. Different countries have different rules
regarding eligibility for leave and how long a parent has to have worked
at their place of employment prior to giving birth before they are
eligible for paid leave. In the European Union,
the policies vary significantly by country—with regard to length, to
payment, and to how parental leave relates to prior maternity leave—but
the EU members must abide by the minimum standards of the Pregnant Workers Directive and Parental Leave Directive.
.png)
.jpg)
