gender and family work one parent houselods.pdf

7/23/2019 gender and family work one parent houselods.pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gender-and-family-work-one-parent-houselodspdf 1/9

National Council on Family Relations is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of

Marriage and Family.

http://www.jstor.org

Gender and Family Work in One-Parent HouseholdsAuthor(s): Leslie D. Hall, Alexis J. Walker and Alan C. AcockSource: Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 57, No. 3 (Aug., 1995), pp. 685-692Published by: National Council on Family RelationsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/353923Accessed: 29-05-2015 17:09 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/

info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of contentin a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Fri, 29 May 2015 17:09:32 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ncfr

http://www.jstor.org/stable/353923

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp






http://www.jstor.org/stable/353923

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ncfr

http://www.jstor.org/



LESLIE .

HALL,

ALEXIS .

WALKER,

NDALANC. ACOCK

Oregon

State

University

Gender

and

Family

Work

in One-ParentHouseholds

We

compared

mothers

(n

=

1,433)

and

fathers

(n

=

128)

in

one-parent families from

the

1987-88 National

Survey of

Families

and House-

holds on time

spent

with children

and

in house-

hold work.

Using gender

and

microstructural

the-

ories,

we

hypothesized

that,

compared

with

moth-

ers,

fathers

would

spend

less time

in

private

talks

and more time

in

play

with

children,

and less

time

in

"feminine"

and more time

in "masculine"

household

tasks.

We

analyzed

the data

using

lin-

ear

regression

models,

controlling for

sociode-

mographic

covariates.

Our

findings

support

our

hypotheses and are consistent with gender and

microstructural theories

indicating

that

parenting

behavior

is

gendered.

One-parent

families,

headed

by

an unmarried res-

idential mother or father who lives with one or

more children under the

age

of

18,

are

increasing-

ly

common

(Bumpass

&

Sweet,

1989;

U.S.

Bu-

reau of

the

Census,

1993).

Much as been written

about these

families,

but there has been little em-

pirical

attention to how

they

handle

household

work. Single parenting might be particularlydiffi-

cult

for fathers who are unaccustomed

to the

full

burden

of

family

labor

(Fassinger,

1989).

In

mar-

ried-couple

families,

mothers do the bulk

of

fami-

ly

work,

in

terms

of

both care of children and

Human

Development

and

Family

Sciences,

322

Milam

Hall,

Oregon

State

University,

Corvallis,

OR

97331-5102.

Key

Words:

fathers,

gender,

household

labor,

mothers,

one-

parentfamilies,

parenting, single-parentfamilies.

household tasks

(Acock

&

Demo,

1994).

Who

does that work when the father is the

only

adult in

the

household? Do

single

fathers assume

all re-

sponsibility

for

children themselves?

Do

single

fathers

do the same household tasks that

single

mothers do?

THEORETICAL

ERSPECTIVES

No

matter what

the

family

structure,

there are so-

cially

constructed

expectations

for each

family

member.

Gender

theory suggests

that

gender

is

the primary predictor of individual behavior in

families,

because families

and

other social struc-

tures transmit

advantages according

to

gender

(Ferree,

1990).

As

women

and

men

are

catego-

rized and

stratified,

and

their

similarities down-

played,

roles and behaviors

are

given "gendered

meanings"

(Ferree,

1990,

p.

105).

The

power

that

men have over women

in

society

is reflected at

home,

which is

why

women do more

family

work

than

men,

and

why

women

do

more menial tasks

and

men do more

interesting

ones.

Family

work is

also

seen

as a

way

for

women,

but

not

men,

to ex-

press love. In part, women and men "do gender"

through

the

way they conceptualize family

work,

responding

to

their

own and

societal

expectations

(West

&

Zimmerman,

1987).

Societal

expectations

are relevant

in

one-par-

ent

households,

too. We

may

expect

single

moth-

ers to

keep

a cleaner house than

single

fathers,

and

single

fathers who

keep

a

clean house

may

be

applauded

for

it in

a

way

that

single

mothers

are

not. Gender

theory,

however,

does not

suggest

Journal of

Marriage

and

the

Family

57

(August

1995):

685-692 685






Journal

of

Marriage

and the

Family

that

single

fathers will be unable to meet

their

children's

needs.

Instead,

it

argues

that

they

will

parent

in a

gendered way;

that

is,

single

fathers

will meet their children's needs, but they will do

so

differently

than

single

mothers.

Because

of the

low

status

of

family

work

and

its

identification

with

women,

fathers

will

probably

do

less

than

mothers,

and fathers will do different kinds of

family

work than

mothers do.

Additionally,

fol-

lowing gender

theory,

fathers will

emphasize

play

over

caregiving

activities

when

interacting

with

children,

but

mothers

will

do

the

reverse

(Fassinger,

1993; Lamb,

1986).

A

variation on

gender theory

is

microstruc-

turalism

(Risman, 1987).

Although many

individ-

ualist theories attribute

gendered

parenting

behav-

ior to

personality

differences between

mothers

and

fathers,

microstructural

heory suggests

varia-

tions in

parenting may

be

explained by

other vari-

ables such as

social

class. Risman

(1987)

noted

that "microstructural

theory

in

its most

extreme

manifestation

would

suggest

that

identical behav-

ioral

expectations

and identical

socially

structured

opportunities

would

produce

identical behaviors

in men

and

women"

(pp.

8-9).

Therefore,

mi-

crostructuralism

would

predict

that

single

moth-

ers and single fathers would not differ in meeting

the demands of

caring

for

children,

if

they

were

similar

in

other

ways.

FAMILY

WORK

What is

known about

family

work in

one-parent

families comes

primarily

from

studies

of

small,

voluntary samples,

with

most

information

based

on

data from

single

mothers. A

review of

studies

on

single

fathers with

custody

found

that

fathers

had warm

relationships

with their

children

and

had some knowledge of their development

(Guttman,

1989).

Risman and

Park

(1988)

found

that

single

fathers

centered their

home

lives

around

their

children. On

average,

fathers did

household tasks

with

them,

were

involved

with

them in

leisure

and

play,

took them

on

outings,

and

played

sports

with

them.

Fathers

felt affec-

tionate toward

their

children

and

reported

that

their

children

disclosed their

feelings

to

them,

re-

flecting private

talks.

Thus,

fathers

were

involved

with

their

children

and cared

for them.

This

study,

too,

was

based

on a

nonrepresentative

sample.

A

great

deal of what is known about

family

work

comes

from

studies of

two-parent

families.

This

literature

may

suggest potential

differences

between

single

mothers

and

single

fathers. In

two-parent

households,

mothers

spend

much

more time with

children than fathers

do

(e.g.,

see

Coverman &

Sheley,

1986).

Mothers

spend

a

greater proportion of their time meeting chil-

dren's

practical

needs,

and fathers

spend

a

greater

proportion

of their time

playing

with

children

(Lamb,

1986).

Fathers meet their children's

needs

when mothers are

unavailable, however,

as

would

be

posited

by

microstructural

theory.

For

exam-

ple,

when mothers

are

working

for

pay

in

the

evening,

fathers are at home

taking

care of

their

children

(Nock

&

Kingston,

1988; Presser,

1986,

1988).

For both wives

and

husbands,

the

greater

the

number

of

hours

spent

in

paid

work,

the

smaller

the number of hours

spent

in

family

work

(Cover-

man &

Sheley,

1986).

Regardless

of

employment

hours,

however,

women still do

considerably

more

family

work than men

(Kamo, 1988).

They

also assume

major responsibility

for

"feminine"

tasks-that

is,

tasks that are done

repeatedly

and

at

specific

times,

such as

cooking

and

laundry.

Men do more

"masculine"

tasks-that

is,

tasks

usually

done

at one's convenience and often

in-

volving

some

leisure,

such as household

repairs

and car

washing

(Berk, 1985).

Consistent

with

gender theory, we expect that single mothers will

spend

more

time

than

single

fathers in

feminine

tasks,

and

that fathers will

spend

more time than

mothers in masculine tasks. In

other

words,

in

one-parent

families,

fathers

will

spend

consider-

able time in

household

labor,

but

less

time

than

mothers.

COVARIATES

One-parent

families

vary by gender,

race, income,

and other

demographic

variables.

Most of

these

families are headed by women; no more than 4%

of

African

American,

Hispanic,

and

non-Hispanic

White

families are headed

by

men

(U.S.

Bureau

of the

Census,

1993).

In

comparison

with

single

mothers,

single

fathers have smaller

families and

older

children

(Norton

&

Glick,

1986).

Mothers

are less

likely

than fathers

to have

boys

only

and

more

likely

to

have

girls

only (Meyer

&

Garasky,

1993),

and,

on

average,

mothers have

less

educa-

tion and

are

younger

than

fathers

(Norton

&

Glick,

1986).

As

well,

mothers have

approximate-

ly

half

the

median

family

income of

fathers

(Nor-

ton &

Glick,

1986).

To

address

our research

questions,

we em-

ployed

linear

regression

covariance

models

with

parents' gender

as the

grouping

variable.

Because

686






Gender

and

Family

Work

income,

employment

hours,

race or

ethnicity, age,

and education level

of

parents,

and

age,

gender,

and

number

of

children,

differ in

single-mother

and single-father families, and may be related to

time

spent

in

family

work,

we controlled

for

these

variables

in

our

analyses.

METHODS

Sample

We used

data

from the

National

Survey

of Fami-

lies and Households

(NSFH),

a

probability

sam-

ple

of

13,017

adults

aged

19

and older in the

United States who were

interviewed

in

person

in

1987-88. People in a number of categories were

double-sampled;

these included those

in

one-par-

ent

families,

African

Americans,

Puerto

Rican

Americans,

and

Mexican Americans.

The

re-

sponse

rate

was 74%

(Sweet,

Bumpass,

&

Call,

1988).

To

take

advantage

of

the

oversampling

of

one-parent

families,

we used

unweighted

data in

our

analyses.

We included

as

covariates,

how-

ever,

the

variables used

in the

oversample

design.

The

sample

consisted of

1,561

one-parent

families

in

which

the

respondent completed

the

main interview

and

was

(a)

separated,

divorced,

widowed,

or never

married,

(b)

currently living

with at least one child

aged

5

to

18

years

for a

minimum of 26 weeks in the last 12 months, and

(c)

not

currently residing

with a

spouse

or sexual

partner.

We eliminated

respondents

in households

whenever all children

were under

age

5 because

questions

pertaining

to interaction with children

were

different

in

this

subsample,

and

because

so

few

fathers

had

only

coresidential children

under

age

5 that

analyses

with them

and

comparable

mothers

would have been

inappropriate.

As ex-

pected,

most

(92%)

parents

were

mothers. Table

1

describes the marital

status,

race or

ethnicity,

employment

status,

and

other

characteristics

of

the parents in the

sample.

Table 2 describes char-

acteristics

of the

respondents'

children.

Mothers

were

younger

and

slightly

less

edu-

cated

than

fathers

(see

Table

1).

Mothers

reported

less

income

than

fathers-approximately

50%

or

less within each racial or

ethnic

group-whether

examined

by

mean or median

difference

tests.

Mothers

were more

likely

to have

been continu-

ously single

than

fathers,

and fathers were more

likely

to

have been

widowed. Mothers

and fathers

differed

by

race or

ethnicity.

More

mothers than

TABLE

1.

CHARACTERISTICSOF SINGLE MOTHERS AND

SINGLE

FATHERS

Mothers

Fathers

Mean or Mean or

t

ratio or

Variable

Percentage

n

Percentage

n

%2

Age

34.2

(8.4)

1,433

40.0

(8.2)

128 7.60***

Education

n

years

12.1

(2.4)

1,348

12.9

(2.8)

128

3.40***

Household

ncome

($1,000s)

13.0

(13.1)

1,431

29.2

(20.2)

128

12.68***

African

American 10.6

(9.9)

513 18.6

(9.5)

15

3.09**

White

15.6

(15.0)

749

31.6

(21.6)

102

9.48***

All

othersa

9.4

(9.6)

162

21.6

(8.8)

11

4.10***

Employment

hours

23.2

(21.0) 1,348

40.1

(19.2)

128 8.76***

Number n household 3.3 (1.3) 1,433 2.8 (0.9) 128 -4.25***

Maritalstatus

58.46***

Separated

20%

287 16% 20

Divorced

46%

653 61%

78

Widowed

7%

95 20% 25

Never married

28%

398 4% 5

Race/ethnicity

37.13***

Non-Hispanic

White

52%

749 80%

102

African

American

36%

515 12%

15

All

othersa

11%

162 9% 11

Employment

48.16***

Not

employed

40% 577

12%

15

Employed

part-timeb

8%

117

6% 7

Employed

full-timec

51%

732

83%

106

Note:

Standarddeviations are

shown

in

parentheses

ollowing

means.

aAll

others

ncludes

Hispanic

Americans,

American

Indians,

and

Asian Americans.

bl

to 29

hours

per

week.

C30

or more

hours

per

week.

*p<.05.

**p<.Ol.

***p<.001.

687






Journal

of Marriage

and the

Family

TABLE 2. CHARACTERISTICSOF CHILDREN IN SINGLE-MOTHER AND SINGLE-FATHER

FAMILIES

Mothers

Fathers

Variable

Percentage

n

Percentage

n

x2

Age

of

children

Any

child

< 5

37 530

13 17

29.16***

Any

child 5-11

52 743

40

51 6.78*

Any

child

12-18 48

694

61 78 7.35*

Gender

composition

6.09*

Boy(s)

only

33 372

44

42

Boy(s)/girl(s)

37 419 26

25

Girl(s)

only

30 335

30 28

Relationship

o

parenta

32.17**

Biological

99

1,417

92

118

Otherb

1 16

8

10

aDataabout

one residentialchild in

respondent's

amily

chosen

alphabetically.

bStep-,adopted, oster,

or

former

partner's

hildren.

*p < .05.

**p<.01.

***p

<

.001.

fathers

were African

American,

and more

fathers

than mothers were

non-Hispanic

White.

Mothers

were less

likely

than

fathers to be

employed,

and

they

worked

fewer

paid

hours

per

week

(M

=

23.2,

SD

=

21.0)

than

fathers

(M

=

40.1,

SD

=

19.2).

The

households

of mothers were

larger

than

those of fathers

(M

=

1.9

children,

SD

=

1

com-

pared

with M

=

1.5,

SD

=

0.7),

and their children

were

younger

(M

=

7.3

years,

SD

=

5.2

compared

with M

=

10,

SD

=

4.5).

More mothers

(37%)

than fathers

(13%)

had

a

residential child

aged

0

to

4

years.

Fathers were more

likely

to have

all

sons

than

mothers,

but mothers were more

likely

to have both

daughters

and

sons,

due

in

part

to fa-

thers

being

more

likely

to

have

only

one

child

(see

Table

2).

Nearly

all

had

biological

children.

Measures

of Dependent

Variables

The first set of dependent variables focused on

time

spent

with

children. The second set of de-

pendent

variables

focused

on

time

in

household

tasks.

Time with

children. Time with

children was

as-

sessed

using

four

self-report

items that asked

"How

often do

you

spend

time with

the children

in

the

following

activities?"

The

four items were:

(a)

in

leisure activities

away

from home

(picnics,

movies,

sports, etc.),

(b)

at home

working

on a

project

or

playing together,

(c)

having private

talks, or (d) helping with reading or homework.

Marsiglio

(1991)

defined

parents

in the first two

instances

as

being

in

a

playmate

role,

and

parents

in

the

second two

instances

as

participating

in ac-

tivities

that were less

play-like.

Answers

ranged

from never

or

rarely

(1)

to

almost

every

day

(6).

These

questions

were asked in homes of

respon-

dents with

at least

one

child

aged

5 to

18,

but

par-

ticipants

responded regarding

all of their

children.

Time with children was also assessed

by

two ad-

ditional

questions:

"How

many days

last

week

did

you

eat

breakfast

[dinner]

with at

least one

of

your

children?"

(Responses

were 0 to 7

days per

week.)

Time in household labor.

Time in

housework was

measured

by

a self-administered

questionnaire

in

which

respondents

estimated the

number

of hours

per

week

they normally

spent

in

household tasks.

The

nine

tasks

were

preparing

meals,

washing

dishes,

cleaning

house,

outdoor

tasks,

shopping,

washing

and

ironing

clothes,

auto

maintenance,

paying bills,

and

driving.

These nine

tasks

were

summed, yielding

the

total number

of

hours in

household tasks per week. In addition, hours in

feminine tasks

(preparing

meals,

washing

dishes,

cleaning

house,

and

washing/ironing),

masculine

tasks

(outdoor

tasks and auto

maintenance),

and

neutral

tasks

(shopping, paying bills,

and

driving)

were

summed;

the latter are not

consistently

asso-

ciated

with either women or

men

(e.g.,

Berk,

1985).

Respondents

with

missing

data

on all

tasks

were

omitted.

We

considered

two

ways

of

dealing

with

missing

data

for the

remaining

respondents.

In the first

approach,

we assumed

that

respondents

with missing data on any particular task did not

spend

any

time on that task.

In

the second

ap-

proach,

we

assigned

them the

average

time on that

task

by

gender.

The

first

approach may

underesti-

688






Gender and

Family

Work

mate,

and the second

approach may

overestimate,

the true time

spent.

The

correlations between the

two

approaches

were over

.90

for

feminine,

mas-

culine, neutral, and total household tasks. The re-

sults of the

regression analyses

were consistent

in

both

approaches.

Here,

for the sums of

feminine,

masculine, neutral,

and

total

tasks,

we

report

the

results

using

the second

approach;

that

is,

partici-

pants

who

responded

for

at least one

task within a

category,

but with

missing

data on one or

more

tasks,

were

given

the mean number

of hours on

that

task,

derived

separately by gender.

Some

respondents'

mean

family

work hours

were

improbably

high.

For

instance,

one

parent

reported

183 hours in household tasks

per

week,

an

average

of 26.1 hours each day. Such estimates

may represent

the

dovetailing

of household

tasks;

that

is,

more

than one task is

performed

simulta-

neously

(see

Berheide,

1984).

Other estimates

may

be due to inflated

reports.

To counteract

po-

tential

problems

due to

overestimates,

all

reports

beyond

2 standard deviations above the mean

were recoded to the mean number of hours

by

gender,

plus

2

standarddeviations.

Measures

of Independent

Variables

In

one-parent

families,

characteristics of the chil-

dren and

of

the

parent may

influence the amount

of time a

parent

spends

with children

and

in

household tasks. These variables were controlled

in

the

analyses.

The total number

of

children

aged

0 to 18 was

entered,

as well as the

presence

of

a

child

under the

age

of

5

(yes

=

1,

no

=

0).

Gender,

age,

and education

(in

years)

of

parent

were also

controlled. Race or

ethnicity

was measured with

two

dummy

variables,

one for

African Americans

and

the other for

Hispanics

and other

non-Whites;

non-Hispanic

White

parents

served

as

the

refer-

ence

group.

Preliminary analyses

show that

gen-

der composition, reflecting the presence of

daughters

and/or

sons in

each

family,

had

no in-

fluence,

so it was

dropped

from the final

analyses.

Number

of

employment

hours was measured con-

tinuously,

as

was

total

household

income,

includ-

ing

investments and dividends. Those

with

miss-

ing

data

on income were

assigned

the median in-

come for their

gender

and

employment

status: not

employed,

part-time

(1

to 29 hours

per

week),

or

full-time

(30

or

more

hours

per

week).

Analyses

We

wanted

to

estimate,

separately

for mothers

and

fathers,

the mean

value for

each of the

depen-

dent variables

of time

with

children

and time

in

household

labor. From the

SAS

general

linear

model

(GLM)

procedure,

we used the least

squares

means statement. In this

way,

we

could

test

for differences between the means

by gender

of

parent,

while

controlling

for other

important

variables

such as number of

children,

household

income,

and

children's

age.

The

GLM

procedure

provides estimates of the means for both mothers

and

fathers as if

they

were

equal

on all

eight

con-

trol variables.

In

this

way,

the

expected

value for

parents

of

each

gender

would be

the

estimated

mean

where the mother or father is

statistically

average

on

all

control variables

(Acock

&

Demo,

1994).

The first GLM series assessed the amount

of time mothers and fathers

spent

with

children

in

designated

activities;

the second assessed the

amount

of time mothers and fathers

spent

in

housework.

TABLE 3. TIME SPENT WITH CHILDREN BY SINGLE MOTHERS AND SINGLE FATHERS

Mothers

Fathers

Variable

Adjusted

Mean n

Adjusted

Mean

n

Time with

childrena

Leisure

away

from home

3.7

1,102

4.0* 111

Projects/play

n

home 4.4

1,103

4.4 111

Private

alks 4.7

1,066

4.3** 111

Help

with homework

4.4

1,103

4.2

111

Meals with

childrenb

Numberof breakfasts

3.5

1,044

3.8

107

Numberof dinners

5.5

1,034

5.2

105

Note: Least

squares

means

estimate the

adjusted

means

for

single

fathers and

single

mothers when

controlling

for the

numberof

children and the

presence

of

a

preschool

child

and

for

the

gender,

age,

education

evel,

household

income, race,

and

employment

statusof the

parent.

aMeasured n

a scale from

never

or

rarely

(1)

to almost

every day

(6).

bNumber

f

days

per

week.

*p<.05.

**p<.01.

689






Journal

of Marriage

and the

Family

TABLE 4. WEEKLY

HOUSEWORK HOURS

BY SINGLE MOTHERS

AND

SINGLE FATHERS

Mothers

Fathers

Variable

Adjusted

Mean n

Adjusted

Mean

n

Feminine tasks

Preparing

meals 10.5

1,283

8.4** 120

Washing

dishes 6.5

1,232

5.3*

115

Cleaning

house 8.2

1,252

5.6***

119

Laundry

4.4

1,271

3.1***

117

Total 29.8

1,306

22.5***

129

Masculine tasks

Outdoor

work 1.8

1,221

3.1*** 118

Maintaining

auto

0.5

1,250

1.3*** 122

Total 2.3

1,298

4.5***

123

Neutral asks

Shopping

3.4

1,279

3.2

124

Paying

bills 2.2

1,272

2.3

120

Driving 2.4 1,275 1.6* 122

Total

8.1

1,325

7.1

124

Total housework 40.3

1,341

34.2** 124

Note: Least

squares

means estimate the

adjusted

means

for

single

mothers and fathers when

controlling

for number

of

childrenand

presence

of

a

preschool

child and for

parent'sgender,

age,

education, ncome, race,

and

employment

hours.

*p<.05.

**p<.01.

***p

<.

001.

RESULTS

Mothers and fathers did not differ

in

the number

of breakfasts or dinners

per

week

they

ate with at

least one of their children.

Mothers and fathers

spent similar amounts of time with children in

other activities. Table

3 shows little difference be-

tween

mothers

and

fathers

in

mean time

spent

with

children when

controlling

for number of

children and the

presence

of a

preschool

child,

and for

parent's gender,

age,

employment

hours,

race, income,

and

education. There were

no

dif-

ferences between mothers and

fathers

on time

spent playing

and

in

home

projects

with

children,

or on time

spent helping

with homework or

read-

ing.

Fathers, however,

spent slightly

more

time

than mothers in

leisure activities

with children

away

from

home,

and mothers

spent slightly

more

time in

private

talks

with children.

Controlling

for

the

eight demographic

vari-

ables,

mothers and

fathers differed in

the time

spent

in

housework,

as

shown

in

Table 4. Moth-

ers

spent

more

time

than fathers in

each feminine

task,

and in

total feminine

tasks. On

average,

mothers

spent

29.8

hours and

fathers

spent

22.5

hours

per

week on feminine

tasks,

a difference of

more than 7

hours

per

week.

Fathers

spent

more time

than mothers in out-

door tasks, maintainingautos, and total masculine

tasks. On

average,

fathers

spent

4.5

hours and

mothers

spent

2.3 hours

per

week

on

masculine

tasks,

a

difference

of

2.2

hours.

Mothers,

howev-

er,

spent

more hours

driving

(adjusted

M

=

2.4)

than fathers

(adjusted

M

=

1.6).

There were

no

differences

between mothers and

fathers

on

time

spent shopping,

or

paying

bills,

or on the sum of

neutral tasks

(see

Table

4).

Overall,

mothers

(ad-

justed

M =

40.3

hours)

spent

6

more hours

per

week in housework than fathers

(adjusted

M =

34.2

hours).

DISCUSSION

Our

findings

are consistent with

gender

theory.

Women

spend

more time with

children,

compared

with

men,

in

ways

consistent with

mothering

(e.g.,

private

interaction)

and in feminine

house-

hold

tasks,

and men

spend

more time with chil-

dren in

ways

consistent

with

fathering

(e.g., play)

and in masculine household tasks. Family work in

one-parent

households,

like

family

work in

two-

parent

households,

is

gendered

(Acock

&

Demo,

1994;

Fassinger,

1993;

Lamb, 1986;

Marsiglio,

1991).

Mothers in

two-parent

families make vast-

ly greater

contributions to child

care

and

house-

work

than their

spouses,

in

part

because the sta-

tuses of

mothers and

fathers in

two-parent

fami-

lies

have

very

different

expectations.

From

microstructural

theory,

we

have

argued

that the roles

of

mothers and

fathers

in

one-parent

families have

similar

expectations,

as do those

of

mothers and fathers in two-parent families when

mothers are not

available.

Regardless

of

family

structure,

fathers do more

family

work when

mothers are not

around.

Nock

and

Kingston

690






Gender and

Family

Work

(1988),

as well

as

Presser

(1986, 1988),

demon-

strated this for

two-parent

families;

our data

demonstrate

this for

one-parent

families.

Togeth-

er, these studies suggest that the less mothers are

available,

the more

fathers

do.

Thus,

our

finding

that

single-parent

mothers and

fathers

are more

similar than the literature

reports

for

two-parent

mothers

and fathers is critical.

Spending

less time in

family

work

may

not

have

implications

for the

well-being

of children

or for

parent-child

relationships.

From our find-

ings,

we

may

conclude neither that

mothers

spend

too much time

doing family

work,

nor that fathers

spend

too little time.

We

may

conclude

only

that

the

meaning

and value

of

family

work are tied to

gender.

Erickson

(1993)

and others

(e.g.,

Hochschild, 1989;

West &

Zimmerman,

1987)

have

argued

that

being

the

caretaker of

family

members

is seen

by

women,

and more

broadly by

society,

as

something

women are

rather than

as

something

they

do.

Conversely,

caretaking

is

something

that

fathers,

even

single

fathers,

do

rather than

something

that

they

are. The

meaning

of the

activity

differs

by

virtue of the

gender

of

the

actor.

Consequently,

the

family

labor of

women and

men

both

shapes

and is

shaped by

so-

cial constructions of gender.

We draw attention to the fact that other

vari-

ables besides

gender

of

parent

influence time

spent

with children and in housework. Our

analy-

ses

control for a

large

number

of

these variables.

Younger

parents,

those

employed

fewer

hours,

and those with

younger

children

spend

more time

with

children. These attributes are more

descrip-

tive of

single

mothers than

single

fathers. Parents

with more

children,

those

with

younger

children,

and those

employed

fewer hours

spend

more time

in

housework.

Again,

these are attributes of

single

mothers. In general, then, by controlling for de-

mographic

variables,

we underestimate the time

that most

single

mothers

spend,

and overestimate

the time that most

single

fathers

spend,

both with

children

and

in

housework.

This

study

is limited

by

the use

of

relatively

narrow measures of

interaction with

children,

and

by

the exclusion

of measures of

responsibility

from

the assessments of

household labor.

These

limitations

are

offset

by

our

use

of

data from a

large-scale,

nationally representative survey.

A

further

advantage

of our

study

is that mothers

and

fathers

reported

on their own activities.

In

conclusion,

unlike

mothers

and

fathers in

two-parent

households,

mothers and fathers in

one-parent

households do

not differ

greatly

in

their interaction with children.

As in

two-parent

families, however,

household

work in

one-parent

families

is

highly

gendered.

NOTE

The

National

Survey

of Families and Households

was

funded

by

CPR-NICHHD Grant HD21009. NSFH was

designed

and carried out

by

the Center for

Demography

and

Ecology

at

the

University

of Wisconsin-Madison

under the direction

of

Larry Bumpass

and James Sweet.

We thank

Aphra

Katzev,

David

Allison,

Leslie

Richards,

and Sarah Satre

for their contributions to this

article.

Correspondence

concerning

this article

should

be

addressed

to Alexis Walker.

REFERENCES

Acock,

A.

C.,

&

Demo,

D. H.

(1994).

Family

diver-

sity

and

well-being. Newbury

Park,

CA:

Sage.

Berheide,

C. W.

(1984).

Women's work in

the

home: Seems

like old times.

In B. B.

Hess &

M. B.

Sussman

(Eds.),

Women and the

family:

Two decades

of

change

(pp.

37-55).

New

York:

Haworth

Press.

Berk,

S. F.

(1985).

The

gender

factory:

The

appor-

tionment

of

work in American households.

New York:

Plenum Press.

Bumpass,

L.

L.,

&

Sweet,

J. A.

(1989).

National

esti-

mates

of cohabitation.

Demography,

26,

615-625.

Coverman,

S.,

&

Sheley,

J. F.

(1986).

Change

in

men's housework and childcare time, 1965-1975. Jour-

nal

of Marriage

and the

Family,

48,

413-422.

Erickson,

R.

J.

(1993).

Reconceptualizing

family

work:

The

effect

of

emotion

work on

perceptions

of

marital

quality.

Journal

of Marriage

and

the

Family,

55,

888-900.

Fassinger,

P. A.

(1989).

The

impact

of

gender

and

past

marital

experiences

on

heading

a household alone.

In B.

J.

Risman & P. Schwartz

(Eds.),

Gender

in

inti-

mate

relationships:

A

microstructural

approach

(pp.

165-180).

Belmont,

CA: Wadsworth.

Fassinger,

P. A.

(1993).

Meanings

of

housework for

single

fathers

and mothers:

Insights

into

gender inequal-

ity.

In J.

C. Hood

(Ed.),

Men, work,

andfamily

(pp.

195-

216). Newbury Park,

CA:

Sage.

Ferree,

M. M.

(1990).

Beyond separate

spheres:

Feminism and

family

research. Journal

of

Marriage

and

the

Family,

52,

866-884.

Guttman,

J.

(1989).

The

divorced

father: A review

of

the issues and the research. Journal

of Comparative

Family

Studies,

22,

247-261.

Hochschild,

A.

R.,

with

Machung,

A.

(1989).

The

second

shift.

New

York:

Viking.

Kamo,

Y.

(1988).

Determinants of

household divi-

sion of labor:

Resources,

power,

and

ideology.

Journal

of Family

Issues, 9,

177-200.

Lamb,

M.

E.

(1986).

The

changing

roles of

fathers.

In M.

E.

Lamb

(Ed.),

The

father's

role:

Applied per-

spectives

(pp.

3-27).

New York:

Wiley

& Sons.

Marsiglio, W. (1991). Paternalengagement activities

with

minor children. Journal

of

Marriage

and

the Fami-

ly,

53,

973-986.

691






Journal

of

Marriage

and the

Family

Meyer,

D.

R.,

&

Garasky,

S.

(1993).

Custodial

fa-

thers:

Myths,

realities,

and

child

support policy.

Journal

of Marriage

and the

Family,

55,

73-89.

Nock,

S.

L.,

&

Kingston,

P. W.

(1988).

Time

with

children: The

impact

of couples' work-time commit-

ment. Social

Forces,

67,

59-85.

Norton,

A.

J.,

&

Glick,

P. C.

(1986).

One-parent

families: A

social

and economic

profile.

Family

Rela-

tions,

35,

9-17.

Presser,

H. B.

(1986).

Shift

work

among

American

women and child care. Journal

of

Marriage

and

the

Family,

48,

551-563.

Presser,

H. B.

(1988).

Shift work and child care

among

young

dual-earner American

parents.

Journal

of

Marriage

and the

Family,

50,

133-148.

Risman,

B.

J.

(1987).

Intimate

relationships

from

a

microstructural

perspective:

Men who mother.

Gender

and

Society,

1,

6-32.

Risman,

B.

J.,

&

Park,

K.

(1988).

Just the two

of us:

Parent-childrelationships in one-parent homes. Journal

of

Marriage

and

the

Family,

50,

1049-1062.

Sweet, J.,

Bumpass,

L.,

&

Call,

V.

(1988).

The

de-

sign

and content

of

the National

Survey of

Families

and

Households

(Working Paper

NFSH-1).

Madison:

Uni-

versity

of

Wisconsin,

Center for

Demography

and

Ecol-

ogy.

West, C.,

&

Zimmerman,

D.

H.

(1987).

Doing

gen-

der. Gender and

Society,

1,

125-151.

U.S.

Bureau

of the Census.

(1993).

Statistical

ab-

stracts

of

the United States:

1993

(113th

ed.).

Washing-

ton,

DC:

Government

Printing

Office.

FAMILY LIFE EDUCATION

CURRICULUM

GUIDELINES

REVISED

AND

EXPANDED

Offers

guidelines

for

developing

or

assessing

family

life

education

programs

over

the

life

span.

A

must-have

for

anyone

involved in

family

life education

program

development

or

assessment.

Editor

David

J.

Bredehoft,

Ph.D.,

has

revised

and

expanded

the

contents

of

the

NCFR

Family

Life

Education

Curriculum

Guidelines

to include

a

number

of

excellent resources for

anyone

working

in

family

life

education.

Contents include:

University

and

College

Curriculum

Guidelines,

A

Framework

for

Life-Span Family Life Education, a

K-12

sexuality

curriculum

guide,

an

evaluation

guide,

a

parent

education

program

guide,

and

family

life education

references and

resources.

Price

to

be

announced.

Contact

the

NCFR

office

for

ordering

information.

National

Council on

Family

Relations

3989 Central

Ave.

N.E.,

#550

Minneapolis, MN 55421

(612)

781-9331

*

FAX

(612)

781-9348

E-mail:

[email protected]

Y o u

a n

H a v e

t A l l

W i t h

u d i o

T a p e s

Individual

Tapes

Only

$8.50

Take full advantage of the 1994 NCFR 56th

Annual

Conference

"Families and

Justice:

From

Neighborhoods

to Nations"

-

Nov. 8-

13,

1994,

Minneapolis,

MN.

Plenaries,

workshops,

Research

Updates

for

Practitioners,

Special

Panel on

Native

American

Families,

symposia

and

paper

sessions are

available on

high-quality

audio

cassettes.

Choose from over 80

recorded

sessions.

For

a

complete

listing

contact:

Custom

Audio

Tapes

888 Corporation Street

Bridgeport,

IL

62417

1-800-798-0986

I __ _ __ _

692

r I ?L 4v?

ii AI)Tr

III

This content downloaded from 132 248 9 8 on Fri 29 May 2015 17:09:32 UTC

gender and family work one parent houselods.pdf

Documents

Transcript of gender and family work one parent houselods.pdf