Although gender gaps in parenting time endure for parents of young children, and in physical and developmental care, men’s changing attitudes toward egalitarian gender roles suggest that gender disparities in parenting time may have closed in some contexts: particularly, in other shared activities with children, when children are school aged or older, and among higher educated parents. We investigate these possibilities using weekday time diary data from a nationally representative survey of parents participating in the American Time Use Survey (2003-2014; N = 28,698). In contrast to our expectations, we find that the gender gap in parents’ time with children persists when children are older, and even grow for some activities; extend to several other forms of shared parent–child time; and is often largest for higher educated parents. At the same time, there are notable contexts in which the gaps disappear, although they encompass the most pleasant activities, and least intensive stages of parenting.

Maternal education differences in children’s academic skills have been strongly linked to parental investment behaviors. This study extended this line of research to investigate whether these same maternal education patterns in parenting are observed among a set of parenting behaviors that are linked to young children’s health. Drawing on data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth Cohort (n = 5,000) and longitudinal models incorporating random effects, the authors found that higher levels of maternal education were associated with more advantageous health investment behaviors at each phase of early development (9 months, 2 years, 4 years, 5 years). Moreover, these disparities were typically largest at the developmental stage when it was potentially most sensitive for children’s long-term health and development. These findings provide further evidence of a developmental gradient associated with mothers’ education and new insight into the salience of mothers’ education for the short- and long-term health and well-being of their children.

Background: New Zealand's Immunisation Programme is an important pillar in the war against COVID-19, making high vaccine uptake essential. This study sought to: (1) identify potential vaccine uptake rates among New Zealanders prior to programme rollout; (2) understand reasons for unlikelihood/likelihood of vaccine uptake; and, (3) explore sociodemographic differences in risk of and reasons for vaccine hesitancy. Methods: Data were collected in March 2021 ( n = 1,284) via a web-based survey. Respondents were a diverse sample of New Zealanders who were part of a large, pre-existing social research sampling frame. Multinomial and logit regressions were estimated to examine sociodemographic predictors of vaccine hesitancy and reasons for likelihood/hesitancy. Findings: Overall, 70% reported they would likely take the vaccine once available (i.e., very likely or somewhat likely). Being younger and less educated were correlated with greater vaccine hesitancy risk (i.e., very unlikely, somewhat likely, or unsure). Women were more likely than men to say they were unsure ( Relative Risk Ratio = 1.60) vs. either likely or unlikely and to identify concerns regarding personal health, such as potential side effects, as a reason. Men identified concerns surrounding trust in vaccines and the perceived exaggerated risk of COVID-19 to them and the population. Interpretation: Although a majority intend to take the COVID-19 vaccine once available, a sizeable minority who were more likely to be young, female, and less educated, were unsure about or unlikely to get the vaccine, primarily due to perceptions of unknown future side effects. Ethnicity was not statistically associated with vaccine hesitancy, suggesting that public health effort s aimed at increasing vaccine acceptance among M āori and Pacific peoples-subgroups most at-risk of COVID-19 infection and morbidity-should focus on inequities in health care access to increase uptake.

Objectives. We investigated how state-level firearms legislation is associated with firearm ownership and storage among families with preschool-aged children. Methods. Using 2005 nationally representative data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Birth Cohort (n = 8100), we conducted multinomial regression models to examine the associations between state-level firearms legislation generally, child access prevention (CAP) firearms legislation specifically, and parental firearm ownership and storage safety practices. Results. Overall, 8% of families with children aged 4 years living in states with stronger firearm laws and CAP laws owned firearms compared with 24% of families in states with weaker firearm laws and no CAP laws. Storage behaviors of firearm owners differed minimally across legislative contexts. When we controlled for family- and state-level characteristics, we found that firearm legislation and CAP laws interacted to predict ownership and storage behaviors, with unsafe storage least likely among families in states with both CAP laws and stronger firearm legislation. Conclusions. Broader firearm legislation is linked with the efficacy of child-specific legislation in promoting responsible firearm ownership.

Public debate on same-sex marriage often focuses on the disadvantages that children raised by same-sex couples may face. On one hand, little evidence suggests any difference in the outcomes of children raised by same-sex parents and different-sex parents. On the other hand, most studies are limited by problems of sample selection and size, and few directly measure the parenting practices thought to influence child development. This research note demonstrates how the 2003–2013 American Time Use Survey (n = 44,188) may help to address these limitations. Two-tier Cragg’s Tobit alternative models estimated the amount of time that parents in different-sex and same-sex couples engaged in child-focused time. Women in same-sex couples were more likely than either women or men in different-sex couples to spend such time with children. Overall, women (regardless of the gender of their partners) and men coupled with other men spent significantly more time with children than men coupled with women, conditional on spending any child-focused time. These results support prior research that different-sex couples do not invest in children at appreciably different levels than same-sex couples. We highlight the potential for existing nationally representative data sets to provide preliminary insights into the developmental experiences of children in nontraditional families.