Sex Roles

, Volume 77, Issue 9–10, pp 663–675 | Cite as

Does Parenthood Change Attitudes to Fathering? Evidence from Australia and Britain

Original Article
  • 450 Downloads

Abstract

A wealth of research has established that the transition to parenthood can shift men’s and women’s attitudes to motherhood. We add to this knowledge base by examining how attitudes to fatherhood change across the transition to parenthood. This is important within a historical period in which definitions of what it means to be a good father are changing to emphasise hands-on involvement in childcare, yet there has been little institutional change to support this. Our empirical analyses rely on long-running, panel data from Britain and Australia, and fixed-effect panel regression models. We find that attitudes to fatherhood change significantly after the birth of a first child. For most of the measures considered, parenthood results in men’s attitudes to fatherhood becoming comparatively more egalitarian than women’s. While both Australian and British men become more enthusiastic towards being involved in the care and upbringing of their children after experiencing parenthood, Australian women become less likely to agree that fathers should do so. These findings provide a partial explanation for why couples engage in more traditional gender divisions of labour after parenthood. They suggest that men’s involvement in childcare is not only constrained at the institutional and employment levels, but also by their female partners becoming more reluctant to support an active fathering role. More broadly, our research adds to growing evidence demonstrating that first births are an important life-course marker, and parenthood has the capacity to shift how men and women perceive their familial roles and their broader roles in society.

Keywords

Gender attitudes Fatherhood Parenthood Longitudinal Australia Britain 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The present research was supported by the Australian Research Council (ARC) Centre of Excellence for Children and Families over the Life Course (project number CE140100027) and the European Research Council under the European Union's 7th Framework Programme (FP/2007-2013) / ERC Grant Agreement n. 263651. This paper uses unit record data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey. The HILDA Project was initiated and is funded by the Australian Government Department of Social Services (DSS) and is managed by the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research (Melbourne Institute). The findings and views reported in this paper, however, are those of the authors and should not be attributed to either DSS or the Melbourne Institute.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

The authors confirm that the manuscript has not been submitted to more than one journal for simultaneous consideration.

Funding

Francisco Perales and Janeen Baxter are supported by the Australian Research Council (ARC) Centre of Excellence for Children and Families over the Life Course (project number CE140100027).

Conflict of Interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Allison, P. D. (2009). Fixed effects regression models. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Australian Government. (2015). Paid parental leave: Dad and partner pay. Minister’s foreword. Retrieved from https://www.dss.gov.au/our-responsibilities/families-and-children/programs-services/paid-parental-leave-scheme/paid-parental-leave-dad-and-partner-pay.
  3. Australian Human Rights Commission. (2014). Supporting working parents: Pregnancy and return to work national review – report. Retrieved from https://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/sex-discrimination.
  4. Baird, M., & O’Brien, M. (2015). Dynamics of parental leave in Anglophone countries: The paradox of state expansion in liberal welfare regimes. Community, Work and Family, 18(2), 198–217. doi: 10.1080/13668803.2015.1021755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barclay, L., & Lupton, D. (1999). The experiences of new fatherhood: A socio-cultural analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 29(4), 1013–1020. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1999.00978.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Baxter, J., Hewitt, B., & Haynes, M. (2008). Life course transitions and housework: Marriage, parenthood, and time on housework. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70(2), 259–272. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00479.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baxter, J., Buchler, S., Perales, F., & Western, M. (2015). A life-changing event: First births and men's and women's attitudes to mothering and gender divisions of labor. Social Forces, 3(93), 989–1014. doi: 10.1093/sf/sou103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bengtson, V. L., & Allen, K. R. (2009). The life course perspective applied to families over time. In W. J. Doherty, P. G. Boss, R. LaRossa, W. R. Schumm, & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Sourcebook of family theories and methods (pp. 469–504). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  9. Berghammer, C. (2013). No time for children? Changes in parent’s child care time in Germany and Austria. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 42(1), 52–73. doi: 10.1515/zfsoz-2013-0105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Berrington, A., Hu, Y. J., Smith, P. W. F., & Sturgis, P. (2008). A graphical chain model for reciprocal relationships between women's gender role attitudes and labour force participation. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series a-Statistics in Society, 171, 89–108. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2007.00510.x.Google Scholar
  11. Brewster, K. L., & Padavic, I. (2000). Change in gender-ideology, 1977–1996: The contributions of intracohort change and population turnover. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(2), 477–487. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00477.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Budig, M. J., & England, P. (2001). The wage penalty for motherhood. American Sociological Review, 66(2), 204–225. doi: 10.2307/2657415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Budig, M. J., Misra, J., & Boeckmann, I. (2012). The motherhood penalty in cross-national perspective: The importance of work-family policies and cultural attitudes. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State and Society, 19(2), 163–193. doi: 10.1093/sp/jxs006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bynner, J. (2016). Institutionalization of life course studies. In M. J. Shanahan, J. T. Mortimer, & M. Kirkpatrick Johnson (Eds.), Handbook of the life course: Volume II (pp. 27–58). Cham: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  16. Coltrane, S. (1996). Family man. Fatherhood, housework and gender equity. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Cooke, L. P., & Baxter, J. (2010). “Families” in international context: Comparing institutional effects across western societies. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 516–536. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00716.x.
  18. Craig, L., Powell, A., & Smyth, C. (2014). Towards intensive parenting? Changes in the composition and determinants of mothers' and fathers' time with children 1992-2006. British Journal of Sociology, 65(3), 555–579. doi: 10.1111/1468-4446.12035.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Cunningham, M. (2008). Changing attitudes towards the male breadwinner, female homemaker family model: Influences of women's employment and education over the lifecourse. Social Forces, 87(1), 299–323. doi: 10.1353/sof.0.0097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cunningham, M., & Thornton, A. (2005). The influence of union transitions on white adults' attitudes toward cohabitation. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(3), 710–720. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00164.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cunningham, M., Beutel, A., Barber, J., & Thornton, A. (2005). Reciprocal relationships between attitudes about gender and social contexts during young adulthood. Social Science Research, 34(4), 862–892. doi: 10.1086/386270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Davis, S. N., & Greenstein, T. N. (2009). Gender ideology: Components, predictors, and consequences. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 87–105. doi: 10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-115920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Duckworth, J. D., & Buzzanell, P. M. (2009). Constructing work-life balance and fatherhood: Men's framing of the meanings of both work and family. Communication Studies, 60(5), 558–573. doi: 10.1080/10510970903260392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Edin, K., & Nelson, T. J. (2013). Doing the best I can: Fatherhood in the inner city. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  25. Elder Jr., G. H. (1995). The life course paradigm: Social change and individual development. In P. Moen, G. H. Elder Jr., & K. Lüscher (Eds.), Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development (pp. 101–139). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. England, P. (2005). Gender inequality in labor markets: The role of motherhood and segregation. Social Policy, 12(2), 264–288. doi: 10.1093/sp/jxi014.Google Scholar
  27. Esping-Andersen, G. (2013). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  28. Evertsson, M. (2013). The importance of work: Changing work commitment following the transition to motherhood. Acta Sociologica, 56(2), 139–153. doi: 10.1177/0001699312466177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fan, P. L., & Marini, M. M. (2000). Influences on gender-role attitudes during the transition to adulthood. Social Science Research, 29(2), 258–283. doi: 10.1006/ssre.1999.0669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Featherstone, B. (2009). Contemporary fathering: Theory, policy and practice. Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
  31. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Gangl, M., & Ziefle, A. (2009). Motherhood, labor force behavior, and women’s careers: An empirical assessment of the wage penalty for motherhood in Britain, Germany, and the United States. Demography, 46(2), 341–369. doi: 10.1353/dem.0.0056.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Gauthier, A. H., Smeeding, T. M., & Furstenberg, F. F. (2004). Are parents investing less time in children? Trends in selected industrialized countries. Population and Development Review, 30(4), 647–672. doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2004.00036.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gerson, K. (1993). No man’s land: Men’s changing commitments to work and family. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  35. Gornick, J. C., & Meyers, M. K. (2003). Families that work: Policies for reconciling parenthood and employment. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  36. Greenstein, T. N. (2009). National context, family satisfaction, and fairness in the division of household labor. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71(4), 1039–1051. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00651.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hook, J. L. (2006). Care in context: Men's unpaid work in 20 countries, 1965–2003. American Sociological Review, 71(4), 639–660. doi: 10.1177/000312240607100406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hosking, A., Whitehouse, G., & Baxter, J. (2010). Duration of leave and resident fathers' involvement in infant care in Australia. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(5), 1301–1316. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00766.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jarallah, Y., Perales, F., & Baxter, J. (2016). Parenthood and men’s and women’s gender-role attitudes: Does child’s gender matter? LCC Working Papers, 2016–2012. Retrieved from http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:390471.
  40. Johansson, T. (2011). Fatherhood in transition: Paternity leave and changing masculinities. Journal of Family Communication, 11(3), 165–180. doi: 10.1080/15267431.2011.561137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Johnstone, M., Lucke, J., & Lee, C. (2011). Influences of marriage, motherhood, and other life events on Australian women's employment aspirations. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35(2), 267–281. doi: 10.1177/0361684310388502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kan, M. Y., & Gershuny, J. (2010). Gender segregation and bargaining in domestic labour: Evidence from longitudinal time-use data. In J. Scott, R. Crompton, & C. Lyonette (Eds.), Gender inequalities in the 21st century: New barriers and continuing constraints (pp. 153–173). United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  43. Kane, E. W. (1995). Education and beliefs about gender inequality. Social Problems, 42(1), 74–90. doi: 10.2307/3097006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Katz-Wise, S. L., Priess, H. A., & Hyde, J. S. (2010). Gender-role attitudes and behavior across the transition to parenthood. Developmental Psychology, 46(1), 18–28. doi: 10.1037/a0017820.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. Kitterod, R. H. (2006). Making up for mothers' employed working hours?: Housework and childcare among Norwegian fathers. Work, Employment and Society, 20(3), 473–492. doi: 10.1177/0950017006066997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kroska, A., & Elman, C. (2009). Change in attitudes about employed mothers: Exposure, interests, and gender ideology discrepancies. Social Science Research, 38(2), 366–382. doi: 10.1016/2008.12.004.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Lamb, M. E. (2000). The history of research on father involvement: An overview. Marriage & Family Review, 29(2/3), 23–42. doi: 10.1300/J002v29n02_03.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Marsiglio, W., Amato, P., Day, R. D., & Lamb, M. E. (2000). Scholarship on fatherhood in the 1990s and beyond. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(4), 1173–1191. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.01173.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Mikołajczak, M., & Pietrzak, J. (2014). Ambivalent sexism and religion: Connected through values. Sex Roles, 70(9), 387–399. doi: 10.1007/s11199-014-0379-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. Moors, G. (2003). Estimating the reciprocal effect of gender role attitudes and family formation: A log-linear path model with latent variables. European Journal of Population-Revue Europeenne De Demographie, 19(2), 199–221. doi: 10.1023/A:1023347023126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Morgan, D. H. J. (2004). Men in families and households. In J. Scott, J. Treas, & M. Richards (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to the sociology of families (pp. 306–321). Malden: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  52. O’Brien, M. (2009). Fathers, parental leave policies and infant quality of life: International perspectives and policy impact. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 624, 190–213. doi: 10.1177/0002716209334349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. OECD. (2016). Family database: Key characteristics of parental leave systems. Retrieved fromhttp://www.oecd.org/social/family/database.htm.
  54. Perales, F., del Pozo-Cruz, J., & del Pozo-Cruz, B. (2015a). Long-term dynamics in physical activity behaviour across the transition to parenthood. International Journal of Public Health, 60(3), 301–308. doi: 10.1007/s00038-015-0653-3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Perales, F., Baxter, J., & Tai, T. (2015b). Gender, justice and work: A distributive approach to perceptions of housework fairness. Social Science Research, 51, 51–63. doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2014.12.010.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Preston, A., & Jefferson, T. (2007). Trends in Australia's gender-wage ratio. Labour and Industry, 18(2), 69–84. doi: 10.1080/10301763.2007.10669368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rehel, E. M. (2014). When dad stays home too: Paternity leave, gender, and parenting. Gender and Society, 28(1), 110–132. doi: 10.1177/0891243213503900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sandberg, J. F., & Hofferth, S. (2001). Changes in children's time with parents: United States, 1981-1997. Demography, 38(8), 423–436. doi: 10.1353/dem.2001.0031.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Schober, P., & Scott, J. (2012). Maternal employment and gender role attitudes: Dissonance among British men and women in the transition to parenthood. Work, Employment and Society, 26(3), 514–530. doi: 10.1177/0950017012438577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Scott, J., Alwin, D. F., & Braun, M. (1996). Generational changes in gender-role attitudes: Britain in a cross-national perspective. Sociology, 30(3), 471–492. doi: 10.1177/0038038596030003004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Statistisches Bundesamt. (2015). Rund 80% der Väter in Elternzeit beziehen Elterngeld für 2 Monate [Roughly 80% of fathers take parental leave for 2 months]. Pressemitteilung Nr. 109 vom 25.03.2015. Retrieved from https://www.destatis.de/DE/PresseService/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2015/03/PD15_109_22922.html.
  62. Sullivan, O. (2000). The division of domestic labour: Twenty years of change? Sociology, 34(3), 437–456. doi: 10.1177/S0038038500000286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Summerfield, M., Freidin, S., Hahn, M., Ittak, P., Li, N., Macalalad, N., et al. (2012). HILDA user manual - release 11. Melbourne: Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
  64. Taylor, M. F., Brice, J., Buck, N., & Prentice-Lane, E. (2010). British household panel survey user manual volume A: Introduction, technical report and appendices. Colchester: University of Essex.Google Scholar
  65. Tichenor, V., McQuillan, J., Greil, A. L., Contreras, R., & Shreffler, K. M. (2011). The importance of fatherhood to u.S. married and cohabiting men. Fathering: A Journal of Theory, Research and Practice about Men as Fathers, 9(3), 232–251. doi: 10.3149/fth.0903.232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Whitehouse, G., Diamond, C., & Baird, M. (2007). Fathers' use of leave in Australia. Community, Work and Family, 10, 387–407. doi: 10.1080/13668800701575002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of SociologyGoethe-University Frankfurt am MainFrankfurt am MainGermany
  2. 2.Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Children and Families over the Life Course, Institute for Social Science ResearchThe University of QueenslandQLDAustralia

Personalised recommendations