Promoting Father Involvement through National Policies: Assessing What Matters Scott Coltrane University of Oregon

1. Father Involvement Research Conference Toronto, Canada October 24, 2008 Promoting Father Involvement through National Policies: Assessing What MattersScott ColtraneUniversity of Oregon

2. Oriel Sullivan Ben Gurion University Israel Evrim Altintas Nuffield College, Oxford University England Linda McAnnally University of California, Riverside USA

3. Fatherhood Ideals Household Head/Equal Partner Good Provider/Co-Provider Moral Leader/Mother’s Helper Disciplinarian/Playmate Patriarch/New Father Fathering Practices Availability Interaction Responsibility Provisioning Family Labor

4. Trends in Men’s Family Involvement 30 years of research = most changes for women Increased levels of employment for mothers Increased rates of non-marital birth Housework studies = men changed little Common Claim The amount of change has not been meaningful Typical Punchline Men not picking up the slack at home

5. How much Change has Occurred? How much change can be expected since 1970s? Can slow change overcome existing structures? Is the glass half empty or half full? Glass half empty = Focus on the fact that women still perform the bulk of domestic labor and child care Glass half full = Focus on evidence for a gradual progressive change in men’s lives

6. How to treat Gender in Household Labor Studies? • Patterns differ by Gender & Marital Status • When men marry, they do less • When women marry, they do more • Patterns differ by Gender of Child • Men spend more time with sons than daughters • Families rely on daughters for domestic work • Patterns differ by Education & Ethnicity • More education correlated with more sharing • Mixed patterns by race/ethnicity; structure

7. Why do Divisions of Domestic Labor Change? • Patterns differ by Relative Earnings and Work Time • When men work or earn relatively more, they do less • When women work or earn relatively more, they do less • Men’s contributions go up the longer women work • Couple level comparative measures work best • Using large-scale time use data and a longer perspective: • Although women still do more housework and child care, • There is a definite convergence of work-family • balancing for men & women

8. Time Use Summaries National time-use diary studies from 1965-2003 show U.S men’s contribution to housework doubled, from about 15 to over 30 percent of the total (Robinson & Godbey 1999; Fisher et al 2006; Sullivan 2006) U.S men’s time spent in child care tripled, And U.S. women’s time in child care doubled (Bianchi, Robinson and Milkie 2005; Fisher et al 2006)

9. Time Use Summaries Similar trends in Europe & UK, 1965-2003 Men's proportional contribution to family work (housework, child care and shopping) went up From under 20% to almost 35% (Hook, 2006) Men’s weekly hours spent in all three tasks rose Women’s routine housework decreased (Sullivan and Gershuny 2004).

10. Family Work in National Context • Broadly-defined public policy regimes(Esping Andersen) • Typologies based on socio-political context • limited application to family work allocation • Gender-family policy classifications are more sensitive • ‘care regimes’ (Lewis 1992, Sainsbury 1994) • ‘family policy regime’ (Haintrais 2004) • ‘gender regimes’ (Pfau-Effinger 2004) • ‘dual-earner/dual caregiver societies’ (Gornick & Meyers 2003) • ‘maternalism vs. women’s employment’ (Orloff 2006) • ‘fatherhood obligations and rights’ (Hobson & Morgan 2002) • ‘father-care sensitive parental leave regimes’ • (Haas 2005, O'Brien 2008)

11. ‘Father-care sensitive parental leave regimes' (O'Brien 2008) United Kingdom = Regime 3 Short/minimalist father-care leave with low/no income replacement Norway and Sweden = Regime 1 Extended father-care leave with high income replacement Nordic comparison across specific strategies/policies regarding leave, child care provision and employment

12. Multinational Time Use Study (MTUS) harmonized data set: USA 1965/66, 1975/76, 1985, 1992/94, 1995, 1998-2001, 2003 Canada 1971/72, 1981, 1986, 1992, 1998 Australia 1987, 1974, 1992, 1997 Denmark 1964,1987, 2000 Finland 1979, 1987/88, 1999 France 1966, 1974, 1985, 1998 The Netherlands 1975, 1980, 1985, 1990, 1995, 2000 Norway 1971, 1981, 1990/91, 2000 Sweden 1990/91, 2000 UK 1961, 1974/75, 1983, 1987, 1995, 2000/01 Harmonized European Time Use Study (HETUS) coordinated by EUROSTAT for studies around 2000 Includes more detailed household data, age of child etc.

13. Multinational Time Use Study (MTUS) • Archived at the Centre for Time Use Research at University of Oxford, England • Sample items… • Time in paid work • Time in paid work at home • Time in paid work, second job • Time in school, classes • Time in travel to/from work • Time cooking, washing up • Time spent doing housework • Time spent doing odd jobs • Time spent gardening • Time spent shopping • Time spent in childcare

14. Test cases: Sweden, Norway, UK Leave Policy Variables Length of maternity, parental and paternity leave Is parental leave a family or individual entitlement Compensation Flexibility of parental leave Availability of part-time leave Fractioning of leave Eligibility conditions 5. Public awareness campaigns for leaves 6. Take up rates for leaves

15. Initial Questions Is it possible to see changes in men’s child care and housework as resulting from “father-friendly” policies like paternity leave or daddy-days? Is it possible to define and isolate broadly similar policies across diverse national political, economic and cultural contexts?

16. How much “lag time” would be required to see significant changes in aggregate levels of men’s time spent in family work? Should similar policies be expected to have similar influences on men’s behaviors, especially when they are nested in different policy regimes? Could father-friendly policy changes result from changes in men’s behaviors rather than the reverse?

17. FAMILY POLICIES Paternity Leave (eligibility, length, pay replacement) Parental/Family Leave (eligibility, length, pay replacement) Child Care Provision Father Promotion Campaigns Custody & Support Laws/Guidelines Work Week/Vacation Regulations Wage Regulations Tax Policies

18. SOCIAL ECONOMIC CONTEXT Marriage & Divorce Rates Fertility Rates Age at Marriage/Birth Levels and Gender Differences in Wages Part-time Work Unemployment Gender Ideals (egalitarianism)

19. COUPLE/INDIVIDUAL FACTORS Division of Labor Housework Child Care Employment/Occupation Income (couple & individual) Paid Work Schedules Education Number/Age of Children

20. Use Multi-level Modeling to Isolate Relationships Among Father-Friendly Policies Social/Economic Context Individual/Couple Factors Use MTUS time diary data Track changes over time Allow for multiple causal pathways

21. A case study: Fathering strategies in Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom Small-scale surveys of individuals and couples about take-up of leave and parenting behavior. Policy effects found in Scandinavian countries with the world's most developed parental leave policies. Take up of policies increased after Daddy Days instituted. Haas and Hwang (2008) surveyed 356 employed Swedish fathers: the number of paternal leave days taken had a significant impact on father's participation in childcare. .

22. Sample = Co-resident employed men and women with children under the age of 5 years. Parents who have the right to take parental leave in order to care for their young children and most likely to seek public child care services where available. Married (or cohabiting) individuals representing the largest population group with children under five. Permits comparison between men and women in the same family situation, who balance parental leave and work hours with partner to care for young children.

23. Table 1: Men’s Time Spent in Child Care per Day (minutes)

24. Table 2: Men’s Time in Different types of Child Care per day Men employed full time

25. Table 3a: Men’s time in child care per day Man and woman both full-time employed

26. Table 3b: Men’s time in child care per day Man full-time employed, Woman part-time employed

27. Table 4a: Mother’s Time in Child Care per day Woman and Man employed full-time

28. Table 4b: Mother’s Time Spent in Child Care per day Woman employed part-time, man employed full-time

29. Table 5: Women’s time in child care per day by paid help Men and women in different employment statuses * Information not available for Norway

30. Sweden & Norway: Reciprocal relationship between labor market attachment and take-up of parental leave Monthly payment during parental leave is based on income prior to birth = strong incentive for men and women to be well established in the labor market. Swedish parental leave for fathers in 2002 was promoted as enabling women to return to the labor market sooner.

31. Support in Norway and Sweden for combining parenting with full-time employment for both men and women. Observed differences between Norway and Sweden reveal a question of emphasis rather than a clear distinction. UK data present a clearer contrast: UK men lowest. Long working hours for men in the UK (compared to EU) limit men’s availability for and involvement with children. Compared to fathers from Sweden and Norway, British full-time employed fathers with children < 5 spent fewer hours in child care and report the least amount of primary child care (when not main activity).

32. British women with young children = less likely to be employed and more likely to work part time. Parental leave in the UK = less generous and came late (2001) Lower percentage of full-time employed British fathers take leave than in Sweden or Norway. Part time employment for British mothers is the main parenting strategy when children are under 5. Women compensate for men’s longer working hours by working around their husbands’ schedules.

33. FINDINGS FOR FULL-TIME EMPLOYED Norway & UK – Fathers employed full-time married to Mothers employed full-time do less child care than those married to Mothers employed part-time . In Norway, extensive public child care provision can easily explain the difference. In UK, no formal public child care provision until age 3. Adding men’s and women’s child care in UK = 25% lower than in Norway or Sweden. Lack of family policy reinforces male breadwinner/female carer model.

34. A time use/policy research database Case Study shows how time use data on child care are related to national policies affecting child care practices. Now need new research combining detailed indicators of social and family policies with good comparable measures of the time spent in family work. Need to take into account interrelationships between the employment structure for both men and women, fiscal policies relating to child care costs and taxation, wider variables reflecting gender ideologies, and combine these with time use data and associated individual-level socio-economic/ demographic variables. .

37. References for Appendix 1 Brandth and Kvande 2007 Chronholm, Haas and Hwang 2007 Deven and Moss 2002 EC 1994; 1996 Ellingsæter and Leira 2006 Gauthier 2003 Germeten 2000 Gornick and Meyers 2003 Gornick, Meyers and Ross 1997 Haas 1992 Haas and Hwang 1999 Leira 1995 Leira 1992 Maternity and Parental Leave Regulations 1999 Moss and Deven 1999 Moss and O'Brien 2006 O'Brien and Moss 2007 OECD 1990; 1992; 1995; 2006; 2007 Statistics Sweden 2006

39. Database will contain data on 10-20 countries 1960-2000 + Changes in paid labor, household labor, child care, and leisure Related to “family-friendly” policies (parental leave, sick leave, wage replacement, job security, child support, child care provision, joint custody statutes). How are changes in men’s child care and housework related to changes in social and economic indicators at the national level (e.g., job growth or decline, women’s labor force participation rate, minimum wage levels) and at the level of the characteristics of families and individuals (e.g., family status, age of children, and individual employment, income, and education). ..

40. Need to study direct effects of policies And how policies moderate the impact of individual- and couple-level characteristics. Consider how policies may interact: Child care policies = no strong direct/moderating effects. But availability, cost, and quality of child care shape parents decisions to utilize leave or work time policies. Parents don’t experience policies individually, but make decisions in a context influenced by a package of policies. .

41. Enable researchers to answer questions about how the enactment and utilization of work-family policy is related to the use of time within and across households. Assess the conditions under which policy innovations like paid paternity leave and daddy-days might be expected to achieve their intended objectives. Document how rewards and incentives directed toward fathers, mothers and children interact to influence couple-level decisions about the allocation of paid and unpaid work.

42. A continuing PUZZLE TheUnited States and the United Kingdom (with meager financial promotion of father involvement) show greater proportionate increase in men’s family labor than countries with more father-friendly policy regimes. Appropriate expectations for change in different contexts? Symbolic uses of policy to affirm shared cultural values about father involvement, male breadwinning, or gender equity. Cultural commitments may prove as important as the incremental behavioral changes they are intended to promote.