Work—Family Policies and Poverty for Partnered and Single Women in Europe and North America

Abstract

Work-family policy strategies reflect gendered assumptions about the roles of men and women within families and therefore may lead to significantly different outcomes, particularly for families headed by single mothers. The authors argue that welfare states have adopted strategies based on different assumptions about women's and men's roles in society, which then affect women's chances of living in poverty cross-nationally. The authors examine how various strategies are associated with poverty rates across groups of women and also examine more directly the effects of specific work-family policies on poverty rates. They find that while family benefits and child care for young children unequivocally lower poverty rates, particularly for families headed by a single mother, long parental leaves have more ambivalent effects. The findings suggest that it is critical to examine the gendered assumptions underlying work-family policies rather than viewing all work-family policies as the same.

Unemployment scarring by gender: Human capital depreciation or stigmatization? Longitudinal evidence from the Netherlands, 1980–2000

“…Specifically, the study finds that the older the children, the higher the hourly wage penalty experienced by the mother, because of foregone human capital accumulation. The motherhood wage penalty is also highly present in the Netherlands where the penalty reaches almost 20 percent and is among the highest in Western societies (Misra et al, 2007). In this study, we extend this evidence by asking whether the combination of being unemployed and a mother exacerbates existing gender inequalities even further.…”

His and Hers: Economic Factors and Relationship Quality in Germany

“…Both Germany's family-centered social welfare policies and gender ideology promote a male-breadwinner model (Alwin, Braun, & Scott, 1992;, however, in which women face greater economic risk from divorce and single parenthood than men do. To the extent that these policies discourage divorce in Germany (Misra et al, 2007), we may be able to see declines in relationship quality following economic events, in contrast to other countries, where such fluctuations would likely be followed by a divorce or separation.…”

“…Pro-family tax codes and social policies in Germany provide financial incentives for a male-breadwinner family structure . These policies have been referred to as carer strategies (i.e., women are treated primarily as carers and secondly as earners) and include encouragement of wives' part-time employment, caregiver allowances, and generous parental leaves but limited state provision of child care and flex time (Cook & Gash, 2010;Misra et al, 2007). Public opinion in Germany supports the male-breadwinner model to a greater degree than in the United States and several other Western nations (Alwin et al, 1992; Drobnič, Blossfeld, & Rohwer, 1999).…”

“…Both Germany's family-centered social welfare policies and gender ideology promote a male-breadwinner model (Alwin, Braun, & Scott, 1992;, however, in which women face greater economic risk from divorce and single parenthood than men do. To the extent that these policies discourage divorce in Germany (Misra et al, 2007), we may be able to see declines in relationship quality following economic events, in contrast to other countries, where such fluctuations would likely be followed by a divorce or separation.This study addresses gaps in the literature because we used two waves of the Panel Analysis of Intimate Relationships and Family Dynamics (PAIRFAM; http://www.pairfam.de/en/ study.html) data set to examine the association between economic well-being and hardship and cohabiting and married couples' relationship satisfaction in Germany. PAIRFAM data include comprehensive information on household and partners' income and employment statuses (Huinink et al, 2011).…”

Targeting, Universalism, and Single-Mother Poverty: A Multilevel Analysis Across 18 Affluent Democracies

“…because many recent studies demonstrate the centrality of the welfare state to cross-national variation in children's, women's, single mother, and overall poverty (e.g., Brady 2009; Heuveline and Weinshenker 2008;Huber et al 2009;Misra et al 2007;Moller et al 2003;Rainwater and Smeeding 2004). Despite the welfare state's centrality in previous studies, we know little about the relative effects of targeted and universal social policy for poverty.…”