Before 1990, Germany was divided for more than 40 years. While divided, significant mortality disparities between the populations of East and West Germany emerged. In the years following reunification, East German mortality improved considerably, eventually converging with West German levels. In this study, we explore changes in the gender differences in health at ages 20–59 across the eastern and western regions of Germany using data from the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) for the 1990–2013 period. We apply random-effects linear regressions to the SOEP data to identify trends in health, measured as self-assessed health satisfaction, after German reunification.The findings indicate that women were substantially less satisfied with their health than men in both West and East Germany, but that the gender gap was larger in East Germany than in West Germany. Furthermore, the results show that respondents’ satisfaction with their health decreased over time, and that the decline was steeper among men – and particularly among East German men – than among women. Thus, the initial male advantage in health in East and West Germany in the years immediately after reunification diminished over time, and even reversed to become a female advantage in East Germany. One interpretation of this finding is that stress-inducing post-reunification changes in the political and social landscape of East Germany had lasting damaging consequences for men’s health.Ongoing risky health behaviors and high levels of economic insecurity due to unemployment could have had long-lasting effects on the health of the working-aged population. A partial explanation for our finding that health declined more sharply among East German men than among their female counterparts could be that women have better compensatory mechanisms than men for dealing with psychosocial stress.

As in many other countries affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, the German federal and state governments responded to increasing numbers of cases of COVID-19 and deaths by taking drastic public health measures intended to slow down the rate of transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. During the pandemic's first wave, large parts of public life were shut down from March 22, 2020, for the next 3 months. To keep intensive care beds available, the German government ordered hospitals to postpone non-emergency procedures and surgeries. First comparisons of hospitalizations during the pandemic (March 16 to April 5, 2020) and pre-pandemic (corresponding dates in 2019) periods, based on data from one of the largest insurance companies in Germany, indicate a decrease of 16% in pregnancies, births, or postpartum-related hospitalizations and a decrease of 14% in hospitalizations related to diseases of the fetus or the newborn. 1 Scholars expressed concerns from the early stages of the pandemic that the COVID-19 measures might disrupt the delivery of

This study investigates mental health inequalities by family type and gender during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. Using data from the German Family Panel, we compared three dimensions of mental health (i.e., self-reported stress, exhaustion, and loneliness) one year before the pandemic and in spring 2020. First, two-parent families emerged as a vulnerable group, as the levels of stress and exhaustion they reported during the pandemic converged with those experienced by single parents. Second, a gender gap emerged during this global health crisis, with women, and particularly mothers, reporting significantly worse mental health compared to men in the same family type. Our findings underline the substantive value of studying mental health inequality from a multidimensional perspective and over time. Based on these findings, we urge policy makers to consider more seriously the disproportionate burdens that families, and women in particular, have been carrying due to the pandemic both directly and indirectly.

No abstract

Working papers of the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research receive only limited review. Views or opinions expressed in working papers are attributable to the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Institute.