Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
MeretLütolf
TheBalancing
Act ofWorking
Mothers and
Caring Fathers
Impact ofFamily Policy
onEgalitarianism in Families in
Western Democracies
The Balancing Act of Working Mothers
and Caring Fathers
Meret Lütolf
The Balancing Act
of Working M others
and Caring Fathers
Impact of Family Policy on
Egalitarianism in Families in Western
Democracies
Meret Lütolf
Institute of Political Science
University of Bern
Bern, Switzerland
Inaugural dissertation submitted by Meret Anna Maria Lütolf in fulfillment of the require-
ments for the degree of Doctor rerum socialium (Dr. rer. soc.) at the Faculty of Business,
Economics and Social Sciences of the University of Bern, Switzerland. The faculty
accepted this work as dissertation on 23.05.2024 at the request of the two advisors
Prof. Dr. Isabelle Stadelmann-Steffen (University of Bern) and Prof. Dr. Daniel Oesch
(University of Lausanne), without wishing to take a position on the view presented
therein.
ISBN 978-3-658-47715-8 ISBN 978-3-658-47716-5 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5
The open access publication of this book has been published with the support of the Swiss National
Science Foundation.
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2025. This book is an open access publication
Open Access This book is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate
credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and
indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this book are included in the book’s Creative Commons
license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the
book’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or
exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt
from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained
herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with
regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer VS imprint is published by the registered company Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden
GmbH, part of Springer Nature.
The registered company address is: Abraham-Lincoln-Str. 46, 65189 Wiesbaden, Germany
If disposing of this product, please recycle the paper.
To my children Mio, Emilia and Lino
Acknowledgements
Call it a clan, call it a network, call it a tribe, call it a
family. Whatever you call it, whoever you are, you need
one.
— Jane Howard
Completing this dissertation has been a rewarding journey, and I am deeply grate-
ful to the individuals who have played pivotal roles in its realisation. This thesis is
part of the research project entitled The Elasticity of Family Models Revisited: Pol-
icy configurations and the gender-specific reconciliation of work and care, funded
by the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant number 10001A_188891).
I would like to express my sincere appreciation to my supervisor, Isabelle
Stadelmann-Steffen, for her expertise, guidance, and unwavering support through-
out this academic endeavour. Her insightful feedback and scholarly mentorship
have significantly enriched the quality and depth of this work. I am truly grateful
for her dedication to fostering academic excellence and her encouragement that
propelled me forward, especially during challenging phases. I extend my sincere
gratitude to my second supervisor, Daniel Oesch, for his thorough evaluation of
the thesis. His expert feedback and critical insights are highly appreciated.
Special thanks go to Pierre Lüssi and Dominique Oehrli, with whom I have
had the distinct pleasure of working closely on specific projects. Their excep-
tional commitment, expertise and collaborative spirit have left an lasting mark on
our joint endeavours. The synergies we have been able to achieve through our
focused collaboration not only enhanced the quality of our work, but also made
vii
viii Acknowledgements
the journey exceptionally fulfilling. I express my sincere appreciation to them for
their outstanding contributions.
I am grateful to Leandra Bias, Maximilian Filsinger, Manuela Liem, Rebeka
Sträter, Théoda Woeffray, Alina Z umbrunn and, especially, Jonas Schmid for their
specific help in completing my thesis. Their support, whether through insightful
conversations, constructive critiques, or encouragement, has been indispensable
and deeply appreciated. But I am grateful to you not only for having read parts
of my dissertation, but, in particular, also for the emotional and social support
you have given me. The past few years, and particularly the recent weeks, would
have been significantly more challenging without your help. Thank you all very
much. Your support has been invaluable to me.
To my exceptional current and former colleagues at the Institute of Political
Science at the University of Bern, I extend my deepest gratitude for the enrich-
ing collaborative experience we have shared. I thank Eva-Maria Affolter, Daniel
Auer, Gracia Brückmann, Reto Bürgisser, Walid El-Ajou, Julian Erhardt, Moira
Ettlin, Martina Flick Witzig, Rahel Freiburghaus, Karin Frick, Madleina Ganze-
boom, Valon Hasanaj, Nathalie Hofstetter, Kajsa Kupferschmid, Hannes Loretan,
Gabriela Malzacher, Kerstin Nebel, Sophie Ruprecht, Michael Schmid, Thess
Schönholzer, Isabel Schuler, Anna Storz, Steffen Wamsler and Ruth Wiedemann
for your camaraderie, stimulating discussions, and collaborative spirit, which have
been a source of inspiration and motivation.
Gratitude fills my heart as I express my deepest thanks to my family for
their unwavering support, understanding, and patience during the intense periods
of research and writing. I am especially grateful to my husband, Simon, whose
encouragement and belief in my abilities have been a constant source of strength.
Words fall short in conveying the depth of my appreciation and love for each
family member. Throughout this academic journey, their steadfast support has
been my foundation, and their sacrifices and encouragement during challenging
moments have inspired me. Their resilience and understanding have allowed me
to dedicate the necessary time and focus to this pursuit, for which I am truly
grateful. A special acknowledgement goes to my three children, Lino, Emilia,
and Mio, to whom I dedicate this work. They have been my greatest cheerleaders,
enriching my life with boundless love and joy. This achievement is as much yours
as it is mine, and I look forward to sharing many more milestones together.
Finally, I express my heartfelt gratitude to my parents, Cordula and Oliver,
my brother, Fabian, and my friends, Janina, Andrea, Annina, Chrigä, Eveline,
Flo, Grisli, Peter, Role and Till. Their support, particularly in matters of child-
care and their readiness to step in when life took an unplanned turn, played an
indispensable role in the successful completion of this dissertation. Though their
Acknowledgements ix
contribution was indirect, it was undeniably essential, highlighting the crucial
role that a supportive network plays in navigating the challenges of reconciling
work and family.
Bern
27.01.2025
Meret Lütolf
Contents
Part I Introduction
1Family, Work and Policies .................................... 3
1.1 Family Policy in the Context of Welfare State Research ..... 4
1.1.1 The Problem of Gendered Family Organisation ..... 4
1.1.2 Evolution of Gender Roles and Welfare Policies
in Western Democracies ......................... 6
1.1.3 The Scope of Family Policy ...................... 8
1.1.4 The Role of Parental L eave in Advancing
Egalitarian Family Dynamics ..................... 10
1.1.5 Family Policy Regimes in Western Democracies .... 11
1.1.6 The Overarching Research Question ............... 13
1.2 Connecting Egalitarian Family Models with Parental
Leave Policies .......................................... 14
1.2.1 The Egalitarianism of Parental Leave Policies ...... 15
1.2.2 Correlations between Leave Duration
and Gender Equality in Care ..................... 16
1.2.3 Correlations between Leave Policies
and Paternal Time Allocation ..................... 17
2Foreshadowing the Content of this Book ....................... 21
2.1 Research Plan .......................................... 21
2.2 Contributions ........................................... 24
2.3 Overview .............................................. 28
xi
xii Contents
Part II Theory
3 Family Models in Social Science Research ...................... 33
3.1 The Interdependence of Paid and Unpaid Work ............. 33
3.2 Family Models ......................................... 38
3.2.1 The Male Breadwinner Family Model ............. 39
3.2.2 The Modernised Male Breadwinner Family
Model ......................................... 40
3.2.3 The Female Breadwinner Family Model ........... 41
3.2.4 The Caregiver Parity Family Model ............... 43
3.2.5 The Universal Breadwinner Family Model ......... 45
3.2.6 The Universal Caregiver Family Model ............ 48
4 Reconciliation Policies and Gendered Division of Labour ........ 53
4.1 Family Policy and Female Labour Market Participation ...... 53
4.2 The Impact of Reconciliation Policies on Gendered
Work Patterns .......................................... 56
4.3 Egalitarian Families: Fathers Leading the Change
from Breadwinners to Caregivers ......................... 59
5 The Design of Parental Leave Policies .......................... 63
5.1 Parental Leave in its Essence ............................. 63
5.1.1 The Four Aspects of Parental Leave
Configurations .................................. 64
5.1.2 Blueprint for Equality: The Ideal Parental Leave
Policy ......................................... 70
5.2 Fathers on Paternal Leave ................................ 72
5.2.1 Paternal Leave Duration and Egalitarian
Parenting ....................................... 72
5.2.2 The Impact of Family Policy Regimes
on Paternal Leave ............................... 74
5.3 The Policy Potential of Paternal Leave on Egalitarian
Family Dynamics ....................................... 75
Part III Research Design
6 Case Selection ............................................... 81
6.1 Comparative Perspective on Family Policy Regimes ......... 81
6.2 Country Selection ....................................... 83
Contents xiii
7 Analysis Grid to Measure Egalitarianism of Parental Leave
Policies ...................................................... 89
7.1 Creating an Index to Operationalise Parental Leave
Policies ................................................ 89
7.2 The Policy Ideal and the Policy Implementation Index ....... 93
8 Data and Method ............................................ 97
8.1 Existing Data .......................................... 97
8.2 The Survey ............................................ 102
8.2.1 Sample ........................................ 102
8.2.2 Structure and Content of the Survey ............... 103
8.2.3 Allocation of Time Within Families ............... 105
8.2.4 The Conjoint Module ............................ 106
8.3 Regression Analysis: Paternal Leave Duration .............. 114
8.3.1 Measurement of Paternal Leave Duration
as the Independent Variable ...................... 115
8.3.2 Caregap as the Dependent Variable ................ 116
8.3.3 Further Variables and Method .................... 116
8.3.4 Addressing Endogeneity ......................... 117
Part IV Empirical Analysis
9Egalitarianism in Parental Leave Policies ....................... 123
9.1 Comparative Analysis of Current Parental Leave Policies .... 123
9.1.1 Switzerland ..................................... 127
9.1.2 Germany ....................................... 128
9.1.3 Finland ........................................ 130
9.1.4 Sweden ........................................ 132
9.1.5 The United States ............................... 133
9.2 Discussion on the Egalitarianism of Parental Leave
Policies ................................................ 134
9.3 Parental Leave Policies and the Lived Family Models ....... 137
10 Paternal Leave Duration ...................................... 143
10.1 Descriptive Results ...................................... 144
10.1.1 Caregap ........................................ 144
10.1.2 Paternal Leave Take-up .......................... 146
10.2 Results of the Regression Models ......................... 147
10.2.1 Main Models ................................... 148
10.2.2 Supplementary Analysis on the Type of Leave ...... 150
xiv Contents
10.2.3 Results by Country .............................. 153
10.2.4 Robustness Checks .............................. 155
10.3 Discussion on Paternal Leave Duration .................... 157
11 Effect of Parental Leave on Fathers ............................ 161
11.1 Results of the Conjoint Analysis .......................... 161
11.1.1 Full Model ..................................... 162
11.1.2 Models by Country .............................. 164
11.1.3 Supplementary Analyses of Subgroups
as Robustness Checks ........................... 166
11.2 Discussion of the Conjoint Results ........................ 172
11.2.1 Wage Replacement .............................. 172
11.2.2 The Complexity of Leave Impact Perception ........ 173
11.2.3 Family Policy Regimes .......................... 174
11.2.4 Variations in Potential Elasticity Among Fathers .... 176
Part V Conclusion
12 Summary and Discussion ..................................... 181
12.1 Summary of the Results ................................. 181
12.1.1 Egalitarian Form of Parental Leave ................ 181
12.1.2 Correlations Between Leave Duration
and Caregap .................................... 183
12.1.3 The Effects of Policy Design on Fathers ........... 185
12.2 Answering the Overarching Research Question ............. 187
13 Contributions and Limitations ................................ 193
13.1 Theoretical and Practical Contributions .................... 193
13.2 Limitations and Future Research .......................... 195
13.3 Concluding Thoughts .................................... 198
References ....................................................... 201
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 Structure of the research questions .................... 14
Figure 7.1 Value assignment for the duration of leave .............. 91
Figure 7.2 Value assignment for the wage replacement ............. 92
Figure 7.3 Value assignment for the full wage adjusted duration ..... 92
Figure 8.1 Sliders to measure intended time allocation ............. 106
Figure 8.2 Example of the conjoint module in the survey ........... 108
Figure 9.1 Lived family models ................................ 138
Figure 9.2 Lived family models by leave status ................... 140
Figure 10.1 Density of the caregap in hours per week by gender ..... 145
Figure 10.2 Duration of paternal leave uptake proportionally
within a country .................................... 146
Figure 10.3 Predicted probabilities of the caregap contingent
on leave take-up .................................... 148
Figure 10.4 Different types of leave .............................. 151
Figure 10.5 Predicted probabilities of the caregap contingent
on leave take-up and country ......................... 154
Figure 10.6 Predicted probabilities of the caregap contingent
on leave take-up interacted by gender attitudes .......... 156
Figure 10.7 Predicted probabilities of the caregap contingent
on leave take-up and wage compensation ............... 157
Figure 11.1 Conjoint model 1: Men’s time allocation for different
parental leave policies ............................... 163
Figure 11.2 Conjoint model 2: Men’s time allocation by country
of residence ....................................... 165
xv
xvi List of Figures
Figure 11.3 Conjoint model 3: Men’s time allocation
by employment .................................... 168
Figure 11.4 Conjoint model 4: Men’s time allocation by gender
attitudes .......................................... 170
Figure 11.5 Conjoint model 5: Men’s time allocation
by satisfaction with current average time allocation ...... 171
List of Tables
Table 3. 1 Overview of family models ........................... 39
Table 7. 1 Value assignments per policy aspect .................... 91
Table 8. 1 Overview of data on families and their organisation
of work and care .................................... 100
Table 8. 2 Survey structure ..................................... 103
Table 8. 3 Attributes and levels of the conjoint .................... 110
Table 9. 1 Parental leave policies per country ..................... 124
Table 9. 2 Gender quotient ..................................... 125
Table 9. 3 Conversion values for duration ........................ 126
Table 9. 4 Policy ideal and implementation indices ................ 127
Table 10.1 Linear regression models ............................. 149
Table 10.2 Distinct models for various types of leave ............... 152
xvii
Part I
Introduction
1
Family, Work and Policies
Families are a fundamental unit of social structure, consisting of “a group of peo-
ple who are related to each other, such as a mother, a father, and their children”
(Cambridge Dictionary, 2024a).1 Although the Cambridge Dictionary defines
father and mother solely in terms of sex, as “a male parent” (Cambridge Dictio-
nary 2024b) and “a female parent” (Cambridge Dictionary 2024c) respectively,
these two parental figures carry distinct connotations in Western democracies.
Gender-specific roles are deeply ingrained in society. For example, the constitu-
tion of Ireland still states today that “mothers shall not be obliged by economic
necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home” (Irish
Const. art. 41.2.2°).2
This book examines these gendered roles attributed to parents and their
implications for family policy. Gender equality is a recognised goal in Western
democracies. However, gender inequalities increase significantly when starting a
family (Gonalons-Pons 2023, p. 1745; Singley and Hynes 2005; Yavorsky et al.
2015) and the gendered allocation of work within families results in a variety
of negative effects, like economic and emotional well-being (refer to Subsec-
tion 1.1.1). Thus, family policy measures are crucial in promoting gender equality,
and it is important to identify effective policies to achieve this goal.
The introduction identifies research gaps, particularly in relation to fathers and
their role as caregivers, and shows that parental leave is considered to have the
greatest potential to influence paternal care within family policy. Therefore, this
book aims to identify ways for family policy, particularly parental leave policies,
1 This thesis underwent linguistic editing using ChatGPT 3.5, DeepL Translator, DeepL
Write Beta, and Textshuttle.
2 The referendum to amend this article of the constitution was rejected on the International
Women’s Day, 8 March 2024 (Specia 2024).
© The Author(s) 2025
M. Lütolf, The Balancing Act of Working Mothers and Caring Fathers,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5_1
3
4 1 Family, Work and Policies
to contribute to advancing an egalitarian distribution of paid and unpaid work.
As the focus of this work is on gender-specific differences and gendered patterns
between men and women, the elaborations are limited to heterosexual couples
and a narrow definition of family, which includes a mother, a father, and at least
one child. This approach aligns with states policies’ hetero-normative stance.
The established approach of studying families as a unit, i.e., household, will
be followed, with a specific focus on fathers. Additionally, this work will examine
the influence of family policy regimes on parents allocation of time. The anal-
ysis traces the development of the family policy ideal from the traditional male
breadwinner and female homemaker family model to one that strengthens not
only women’s gainful employment but also the caring role of fathers. In brief, I
shall analyse the balancing act of working mothers and caring fathers.
1.1 Family Policy in the Context of Welfare State
Research
Before discussing gender roles within families and the scope of family policy
in Western democracies, this thesis begins by addressing the overarching prob-
lem. To comprehend gender equality, as a societal objective, I will first identify
and elaborate on the issues and negative impacts resulting from gendered family
organisation.
This section establishes the main research question. This overarching ques-
tion is differentiated and divided into three more concrete subordinate research
questions in the following Section 1.2.
1.1.1 The Problem of Gendered Family Organisation
Families are a fundamental unit of social structure that have undergone significant
organisational changes towards greater gender equality in response to changing
economic, social, and cultural landscapes. Despite steps towards gender equality,
persistent disparities in family organisation and employment continue to shape
individuals’ lives in profound ways (see, e.g., Birkett and Forbes 2019; Chung and
van der Lippe 2018; Gonalons-Pons 2023; Reimer 2020). Traditionally defined
gender roles have undergone reevaluation, challenging conventional norms and
fostering more equitable divisions of work within households in Western democ-
racies (see, e.g., Altintas and Sullivan 2016; Domínguez-Folgueras et al. 2017;
Scarborough et al. 2019; Sullivan et al. 2018). Concurrently, the world of employ-
ment has experienced a paradigm shift, with women increasingly participating in
1.1 Family Policy in the Context of Welfare State Research 5
the workforce, altering predominance of the traditional male breadwinner model
(see, e.g., Ciccia and Bleijenbergh 2014; Ciccia and Verloo 2012; Müller et al.
2018).
The implications of gender differences in family organisation and employ-
ment extend far beyond the confines of the household and workplace. One of
the critical areas influenced by these dynamics is economic well-being. Dispar-
ities in earning potential, occupational segregation, and the persistence of the
gender wage gap contribute to variations in women’s shares of family income
(see, e.g., Auspurg et al. 2017a; He et al. 2019; Hook and Paek 2020; Lalive
et al. 2023; Moskos 2020; Musick et al. 2020; Weeden et al. 2016). These eco-
nomic differences, in turn, play a pivotal role in shaping the risk of poverty for
different gender groups (Corsi et al. 2016; Fins 2020). Moreover, the intricate
relationship between gender, family, and employment has profound implications
for mental health. The juggling of multiple roles within the family and workplace
may lead to heightened stress levels, particularly for women who bear the brunt
of caregiving responsibilities (see, e.g., Dean et al. 2022; Ruppanner et al. 2019).
In the context of gender-specific division of labour, both mothers and fathers
are subject to adverse consequences. While mothers struggle with labour mar-
ket segregation and the pressure of high workload especially through combining
care and labour, fathers encounter different challenges stemming from societal
expectations. Survey data reveal fathers expressing a request to reduce their
employment hours to enhance their involvement in family life (Stadelmann-
Steffen et al. 2024). However, employer resistance, coupled with structural
obstacles like a prevailing full-time norm in male-dominated workplaces and tra-
ditional masculinity ideals focused on the breadwinning role, obstruct the pursuit
of reduced labour hours, particularly in the form of part-time employment (see,
e.g., Borgkvist 2022; Burnett et al. 2013; Larsson and Björk 2017; Lott and
Klenner 2018). The existing structure thus continues to maintain a gender imbal-
ance, making it difficult for fathers to realise their desire for more involvement
in family life within the existing work environment.
The culmination of gender-specific distinctions frequently becomes pro-
nounced during family dissolution: The consequences of a divorce for a couple
with children often exhibit gender differences that manifest in various aspects
of family dynamics. Research suggests that mothers frequently bear a dispro-
portionate burden in terms of custodial responsibilities and emotional support
for the children post-divorce (see, e.g., Crosse and Millar 2019; Meyer et al.
2017). Mothers may experience an increased workload and emotional strain,
assuming the primary caregiving role, while fathers may contend with challenges
in maintaining consistent involvement in their children’s lives (see, e.g., Jurma
6 1 Family, Work and Policies
2015; Sodermans et al. 2015; van der Heijden et al. 2016). Economic disparities
may also emerge, with divorced mothers often facing a higher risk of financial
instability (see, e.g., Allen et al. 2011; Chanda 2023; Van Winkle and Leopold
2021). Additionally, the emotional well-being of children may be influenced
differently based on the gender of the custodial parent, as well as the quality
of the co-parenting relationship (see, e.g., Kalmijn 2015; King and Sobolewski
2006). Understanding and addressing these gender-specific consequences is cru-
cial for developing comprehensive support systems and interventions that foster
the well-being of all family members in the aftermath of divorce.
These examples illustrate the issues related to gender-specific differences and
their potential negative consequences. Within the discourse surrounding gender,
and more specifically, gender differences, prevalent societal norms exert consider-
able influence. It is crucial to emphasise that normative statements are unsuitable
for scientific discussions. However, these examples serve to illustrate that the pur-
suit of greater egalitarianism, although normative in nature, can be classified as a
societal and political aim and is to be conceptualised as a factor to tackle poverty,
increase economic equality and strengthen mental well-being, all of which, in
turn, lead to improved development conditions for children. Understanding the
impact of family policy is crucial because whether or not we have egalitarian
households impacts individuals, the economy but also the quality of an equal and
free society, which is the foundation of liberal democracy par excellence.
As I conclude this short exploration on outcome differences due to gender
within families, the upcoming section delves into the realm of family policy and
measures designed to shape and influence the division of work within house-
holds. By discussing different approaches and measures, I aim to understand how
policies not only affect the distribution of tasks within families, but also how
they may help to address and potentially reduce gender inequalities. In shifting
the focus from the microcosm of individual families to considering broader soci-
etal structures, the exploration reveals the interaction of family dynamics and the
broader political landscape. It starts with a brief look at historic development.
1.1.2 Evolution of Gender Roles and Welfare Policies
in Western Democracies
Over the past decades, extensive research within comparative welfare states
has been dedicated to understanding the profound influence of social policies
on gender relations and the associated roles of men and women (Lewis 1992;
1.1 Family Policy in the Context of Welfare State Research 7
O’Connor 1993; Orloff 1993; Pateman 2006; Sainsbury 1994a). A significant
revelation from this body of work is the historical reliance of modern welfare
systems on a male breadwinner model (Lewis 2001; Mahon 2002). This model
presupposes a “family wage” (Daly 2010, p. 140) sustained by male employment,
with social policy entitlements predominantly directed at securing the income of
the male breadwinner. Accordingly, women were traditionally assigned caregiving
responsibilities for dependent family members, particularly children and ageing
parents, and welfare state support was primarily mediated through husbands or
male relatives (Lewis 2001).
While the male breadwinner model had always imperfectly represented the
diversity of family structures, it aligned with prevailing gender roles in most
industrialised countries, particularly in the immediate postwar decades (Lewis
2001; Mahon 2002). However, given the substantial rise in women’s engage-
ment in the workforce, societal changes, such as shifts in women’s roles,
increased educational attainment, evolving family structures, and advancements
in women’s rights, have eroded the applicability of the traditional male bread-
winner/female homemaker model in recent decades (Lewis 2001; Mahon 2002;
Oláh 2011). These profound changes have been paralleled by the emerging of
policies designed to ease the reconciliation of family and work responsibilities.
Scholars have noted a transition “from a ‘maternalist’ policy model, under which
mothers were expected to stay home full-time with their children and eschew
employment” (Orloff 2006, p. 230), to a model promoting “employment for all”,
encouraging both men and women to participate in the labour force (see, e.g.,
Crompton 2001; Leitner 2003; Lewis 2001; Mahon 2002). This transition can be
summarised as a shift from the traditional male breadwinner family model to the
universal breadwinner model – primarily characterised by a focus on increased
female employment (refer to Section 3.2 for an elaborate discussion on various
family models).
However, Fraser (1994) took it a step further by proposing the universal care-
giver model as an ideal, advocating for both parents to engage in both gainful
employment and caregiving responsibilities. This model stands out as fundamen-
tally distinct, given that the shift from the traditional male breadwinner to the
universal breadwinner model primarily revolved around the increase in female
employment. Embracing this egalitarian universal caregiver family model, how-
ever, requires a substantial change in paternal behaviour. Compared to the classic
male breadwinner, a key difference is a significant increase in women’s par-
ticipation in the labour market, as is the case for the switch to the universal
breadwinner, but in addition (and this is not the case for the switch to the uni-
versal breadwinner) fathers reduce their working hours in favour of increased
involvement in care.
8 1 Family, Work and Policies
Fraser (1994)’s work, despite its age, continues to resonate with contem-
porary discussions, making it more pertinent than ever in current research.
Recent academic efforts are not limited to revisiting Fraser (1994)’s work, but
are also actively exploring ways of realising its ideas in the current socio-
political landscape (see, e.g., Ciccia 2017; Dobroti´c and Blum 2020; Lütolf and
Stadelmann-Steffen 2023; Müller et al. 2018; Rubery 2015).
1.1.3 The Scope of Family Policy
In summary, the design of the welfare state significantly influences families and
various family models are promoted through policies. Specifically, this refers to
family policy measures, which play a crucial role in addressing and reducing the
gender gap within households. By implementing supportive policies, societies can
empower individuals to balance family responsibilities more equitably.
The term family policy is used differently in the literature and can be defined
broadly “as including all social and economic policies that affect families as such”
(Eydal and Rostgaard 2018, p. 2) and more specifically as “policies that are aimed
at families, hence emphasising how the policy defines the nexus between state
and family and between family members” (Eydal and Rostgaard 2018, p. 2). In
its broad scope, family policy includes various governmental programs, schemes,
and caring responsibilities, encompassing financial support through taxes and
transfers, as well as laws directed at supporting and benefiting families (Gau-
thier and Koops 2018). In this book, the definition of family policy is more
narrowly focused, specifically encompassing policies aimed at reconciling fam-
ily and work, also referred to as reconciliation policy. Researchers subscribing
to this more limited perspective on family policy frequently emphasise the three
following policies: cash benefits, parental leave, and early childhood education
and care (ECEC) (see, e.g., Daly and Ferragina 2018; Nieuwenhuis et al. 2019).
Conversely, other research studies addressing the work-family balance prioritise
parental leave and ECEC, along with labour market conditions, instead of plac-
ing the same emphasis on cash benefits (see, e.g., Bünning and Hipp 2022). In
this manner, Gornick and Meyers (2003, p. 100) identify three key areas where
the state can intervene to define a country’s reconciliation strategy: family leave,
childcare policies, and the regulation of working time and place.
Transitioning from an exploration of diverse interpretations of family policy, the
subsequent discussion delves into the broader research landscape dedicated to
understanding the factors that shape the organisation of paid and unpaid work
1.1 Family Policy in the Context of Welfare State Research 9
for individuals or households. The role of work-family reconciliation policies in
fostering an equitable distribution of work within households has been thoroughly
examined in comparative welfare state research (see, e.g., Blofield and Martínez
Franzoni 2015; Gornick and Meyers 2003; Hagemann et al. 2011; Lewis 1992;
Mahon 2006; Sainsbury 1994a; Stadelmann-Steffen 2011).
Examining the evolution of research in understanding work-family dynamics
over recent decades, there has been a notable paradigm shift from a singular
focus on women to a more comprehensive examination of households or cou-
ples as a whole. Various studies have identified work-family policies, especially
public childcare provision and adequately compensated parental leave, as poten-
tial catalysts for enhancing women’s participation in the labour market (see, e.g.,
Asai 2015; Blofield and Martínez Franzoni 2015; Ferragina 2019; Gambaro et al.
2019; Geyer et al. 2015; Gornick and Meyers 2003; Hegewisch and Gornick
2011; Hook and Paek 2020; Mahon 2002; Nollenberger and Rodriguez-Planas
2015; Olivetti and Petrongolo 2017; Sainsbury 1994a; Stadelmann-Steffen 2011;
Vuri 2016). Expanding beyond maternal employment, scholars have advocated
for a more comprehensive examination of the interplay between various spheres
of paid and unpaid work, scrutinising the impact of specific policies and work
structures on gendered work patterns (see, e.g., Ciccia 2017; Finch 2021; Lütolf
and Stadelmann-Steffen 2023). Furthermore, an increasing number of research
is dedicated to analysing the determinants of unpaid work at home, highlighting
individual and household processes and considering the significance of national
context, including norms and policies (see, e.g., Dotti Sani 2014; Schober and
Zoch 2019; Tamilina and Tamilina 2014). While an area that is still developing,
certain studies have shed light on the role of fathers and how work-family policies
influence men’s engagement in unpaid work (see, e.g., Altintas and Sullivan 2017;
Bünning 2015; Bünning and Pollmann-Schult 2016; Hook 2006; Nepomnyaschy
and Waldfogel 2007). Moreover, research is increasingly shifting its focus from
individual mothers or fathers to viewing families or households as a whole
(see, e.g., Auspurg et al. 2017b; Gonalons-Pons 2023; Killewald and García-
Manglano 2016; Lütolf and Stadelmann-Steffen 2023; Schober 2013; Stertz et al.
2017). Instead of examining parents in isolation, there is a growing emphasis
on understanding the dynamics and interactions of couples as parents. This more
comprehensive approach recognises the significance of collectively studying fam-
ily units, acknowledging the shared responsibilities that couples have in dividing
tasks within their parenting roles.
Hence, the primary focus of this book will centre on families as a whole,
underscoring the significance of the central concept of family models (see
Section 3.2). Nevertheless, to comprehensively grasp and promote family mod-
els, it is essential to thoroughly understand their various components. Therefore,
10 1 Family, Work and Policies
individual relationships are highlighted and analysed in detail (refers to Part IV)
to achieve a holistic understanding in the end.
1.1.4 The Role of Parental Leave in Advancing Egalitarian
Family Dynamics
As explored in Subsection 1.1.2, contemporary research places a strong emphasis
on the pursuit of a universal caregiver family model. Fraser (1994) acknowledged
the challenges, deeming the concept a utopian fantasy. Even after three decades,
this model is far from becoming mainstream, necessitating the identification of
active measures to support its realisation. In the words of Rubery (2015, p. 535):
“We cannot expect to arrive at a gender-equal world without either knowing
what that world might look like or identifying policy agendas for welfare and
employment reform that might move us in that direction.” While the universal
caregiver model seeks to eliminate gender-specific distinctions, the current path
remains gendered due to prevailing welfare state systems grounded in the tradi-
tional male breadwinner model. Establishing egalitarian family forms demands
distinct developments for each gender, necessitating a gender-specific approach.
If we envision a future gender-independent state, policies supporting a universal
caregiver model may cease to differentiate by gender. However, in the present,
realising the universal caregiver model requires two primary changes: Promoting
men’s involvement in caregiving and facilitating the integration of women into
paid employment alongside their ongoing caregiving (Orloff 2002, p. 41).
Despite family models being inherently about households, research has pre-
dominantly focused on women and policies influencing their behaviour (see, e.g.,
Boeckmann et al. 2015; Cascio et al. 2015; Ferragina 2019; Korpi et al. 2013;
Orloff 2002; Schönberg and Ludsteck 2014). To advance, the focus must shift to
fathers, unravelling how to promote the transition from the universal breadwinner
to the universal caregiver paradigm. Yet, the understanding of policies shaping
fathers’ behaviour and actively supporting transformative changes, such as reduc-
ing gainful employment in favour of care work, remains limited. Parental leave
policies emerge as a pivotal factor, with studies indicating their unique design
as the sole recognised approach capable of influencing paternal care time: Initial
findings on paternal outcomes suggest that paternal leave leads to long-term posi-
tive effects, including increased emotional investment and improved relationships
with infants, greater paternal engagement in childcare and household responsi-
bilities, more equitable sharing of housework between parents, and a reduction
in fathers’ working hours (Almqvist and Duvander 2014; Arnalds et al. 2022;
1.1 Family Policy in the Context of Welfare State Research 11
Bünning 2015; Castro-García and Pazos-Moran 2016; Dearing 2016; Doucet
and McKay 2020; Huerta et al. 2014; Meil 2013; O’Brien 2009; Patnaik 2019;
Ray et al. 2010; Rubery 2015; Schober and Zoch 2019; Tamm 2019). More-
over, research continues to reveal additional effects. For instance, a recent study
demonstrated a reduction in sexist attitudes among fathers who took parental
leave (Tavits et al. 2024).
To advance egalitarianism in family organisation, the focus of this study is
specifically centred on parental leave, recognising its potential for inducing fun-
damental changes in behaviour. The existing one-sided emphasis on women and
mothers in research has left a gap in understanding the differentiated impacts of
parental and paternity leave on fathers’ behaviour. Hence, this study primarily
investigates the role of the fathers to address this gap.
1.1.5 Family Policy Regimes in Western Democracies
In order not to underestimate the complexity of the mechanisms involved, it is
pivotal to examine the broader context and, therefore, to take the family policy
regime into account, regardless of whether the research focus is on one specific
policy. After all, these policies do not emerge randomly, nor do their effects take
place in isolation (Daly and Ferragina 2018). In other words, diverse policy mea-
sures not only differ in their objectives and capacities to redefine work and family
relations based on their design, but their effects also depend on the larger pol-
icy context and the policy-mix within which they operate (see, e.g., Ciccia and
Bleijenbergh 2014; Leitner 2003; Michel and Mahon 2002; Pfau-Effinger 2005;
Sullivan and Gershuny 2001; Vuri 2016). Overall, the combinations of paid and
unpaid work, of men and women, and the broader welfare and national contexts
need to be considered (see, e.g., Hook and Paek 2020; Lütolf and Stadelmann-
Steffen 2023). Recognising that policies’ impact depend on their interaction and
the broader context of the welfare and labour market in which they are embedded,
considering differing national contexts when employing a comparative perspective
for systematic policy analysis is crucial (Thébaud 2010, p. 331). Customised to
specific strategies for reconciling work and family, reconciliation policies engage
with other policies, guided by assumptions about the role of the state and fam-
ily. Scholars have extensively explored the normative ideals underpinning various
reconciliation strategies, analysing resulting policy configurations and combina-
tions (see, e.g., Boje and Ejrnœs 2011; Crompton 2001; Gornick and Meyers
2003; Leitner 2003; Lewis 1992, 2001; Neilson and Stanfors 2014; Orloff 1993;
Sainsbury 1996).
12 1 Family, Work and Policies
These normative ideals and ideas about the role of the state, the market and
the family are not only specifically reflected in family policy, but more generally
in the organisation and characteristics of the welfare state. The recognition and
categorisation of these variations serve a crucial purpose in research, facilitating
a deeper understanding of the diverse models and their respective effects. The
classic typology undertakes a broad categorisation into liberal, social democratic,
and conservative regimes (Emmenegger et al. 2015). Applied to family policy,
the three types can be summarised as follows:
Liberal regimes prioritise individual responsibility, often offering means-tested
economic support to families in need. In contrast, social democratic regimes
emphasise equality, providing universal access to comprehensive family services
such as affordable childcare and parental leave. Conservative regimes, rooted in
traditional family values, may offer incentives for traditional gender roles and tax
benefits for married couples.
While this typology serves its purpose, it was originally designed for the
general categorisation of welfare states and exhibits certain weaknesses – most
notably, the oversight of the gender dimension, which is particularly significant
in the context of families and their organisation of work (Arts and Gelissen
2002; Bambra 2007a; Lewis 1992; O’Connor 1993, 1996; Orloff 2009; Sains-
bury 1994a). Especially two points can be found repeatedly in feminist criticism:
neglect of family as a welfare and care provider, and the impact of gendered
labour market attachment on welfare state outcomes (Gauthier and Koops 2018,
p. 13). Thus, Lewis (1992) underscores the significance of the nexus between
welfare and both paid and unpaid work, emphasising the incorporation of a
dimension focused on family and domestic circumstances. The effectiveness and
design of family policies are deeply influenced by the broader welfare state con-
text. The level of state intervention, the distribution of resources, and societal
norms all play pivotal roles in shaping family policy. As a consequence, there
have been various attempts to incorporate gender and family considerations into
welfare state typologies, recognising the wide-ranging variations in family policy
regimes – specifically, the set of principles and interventions governing the sup-
port provided to families – across different welfare states (see, e.g., Daly 1994;
Lewis 1997; Orloff 1993; Saxonberg 2013; Siaroff 1994). The differences in these
regimes underscore the intricate relationship between societal values, economic
structures, and the role of the state in shaping family life.
In summary, different family policy regimes vary in their consequences at the
individual and familial levels. They influence choices regarding work, caregiving
responsibilities, and the overall balance between family and employment (see,
e.g., Collins 2020; Lewis 1997). Additionally, family policy regimes contribute
1.1 Family Policy in the Context of Welfare State Research 13
to shaping gender roles within societies, impacting the degree of gender equality
in family and work dynamics (see, e.g., Lewis and Giullari 2005; Misra et al.
2007; Neilson and Stanfors 2014; Sainsbury 1996).
1.1.6 The Overarching Research Question
Taking into account these contextual variations and given the adverse effects of
gender disparities in family organisation discussed earlier (see Subsection 1.1.1),
it raises the question of how the family policy regime influences gender dif-
ferences within families. Lütolf and Stadelmann-Steffen (2023) combined the
household perspective with a comparative approach and empirically tested the
effects of family policy measures on lived family models. The aim of their paper
is to assess the relationship between patterns of family policies and the within-
household division of labour (i.e., the allocation of both partners to paid work,
care work, and housework) by combining existing observational data, namely
the ISSP 2012 and contextual family policy data (Ciccia 2017). However, due
to data limitations, they could only do this approximately, leaving the question
of causality and its direction largely unanswered. Similarly, their conclusions on
parental leave remain rather sparse, as the low variance in parental leave poli-
cies across the analysed countries makes it challenging to demonstrate significant
effects. Furthermore, given the absence of a country implementing a genuinely
“equality-promoting” policy design, they conclude “that based on the observed
policies in the European countries, we cannot really assess the full potential of
how leave schemes and related policy configurations affect the within-household
division of labour” (Lütolf and Stadelmann-Steffen 2023, p. 19). Hence, lingering
questions persist concerning parental leave, specifically regarding the design that
could more actively engage fathers in unpaid work, as well as concerning the
magnitude of potential policy effects. In essence, to address this research gap,
this book centres on the overarching research question:
How do parental leave policies that are embedded in country-specific family policy
regimes promote an egalitarian division of paid work and care work within families?
This inquiry delves into the specific mechanisms and interventions within family
policies that facilitate or hinder egalitarian dynamics in terms of work division
within familial structures. In this context, this thesis builds upon the research
conducted by Gornick and Meyers (2008), which extensively explored poten-
tial reforms to foster gender-egalitarian societies. Specifically, they advocate for
14 1 Family, Work and Policies
Fraser (1994)’s vision, referred to as an “earner–carer society – a social arrange-
ment in which women and men engage symmetrically in paid work and unpaid
caregiving, and where young children have ample time with their parents” (Gor-
nick and Meyers 2008, p. 313). Additionally, the thesis seeks to comprehend the
overarching impact of the broader family policy regime on shaping the overall
landscape of gender roles, caregiving responsibilities, and the pursuit of egalitar-
ian ideals within family units. Nevertheless, this inquiry remains quite broad and
requires further clarification and specificity.
1.2 Connecting Egalitarian Family Models
with Parental Leave Policies
As the question of how parental leave policies can promote egalitarianism within
families is quite broad, it requires further specification and clarification. To
achieve this objective, the question is divided into three sub-questions, which
are formulated in this section. Moreover, it is important to consider the impact
of a specific parental leave policy within the larger family policy regime. This
study repeatedly refers to these regimes and, thus, points to the specification in
the overarching research question including the embedding of leave policies in
country-specific family policy regimes. The diagram in Figure 1.1 presents an
overview on the structure and levels of the different research questions.
Figure 1.1 Structure of the research questions. (Note: RQ stands for research question, IV
for independent variable and DV for dependent variable. Source: Prepared by the author.)
1.2 Connecting Egalitarian Family Models with Parental Leave Policies 15
1.2.1 The Egalitarianism of Parental Leave Policies
The focus on parental leave within family policy, due to its significant impact on
fathers’ behaviour, has already been introduced in Subsection 1.1.4. Moreover,
parental leave is the ideal policy to examine the impact of family policy, as the
beginning of parenthood represents a pivotal moment in a couple’s life course
that has a significant impact on gender dynamics. Firstly, research consistently
underscores a pronounced escalation in gender differences following the birth of
the first child (Singley and Hynes 2005; Yavorsky et al. 2015). Traditional gender
roles tend to become more accentuated, with mothers often assuming a primary
caregiving role while fathers may experience heightened expectations related
to breadwinning responsibilities. This shift is influenced by societal norms and
expectations surrounding parenting roles, leading to a widening gap in domestic
and caregiving responsibilities between partners (Baxter et al. 2015; Killewald
and García-Manglano 2016). Secondly, the transition to parenthood stands out
as a decisive moment, shaping the future organisational dynamics of the couple,
since “behavior learned at the beginning of the parenthood experience tends to
stick in later years” (Patnaik 2019, p. 1013). The decisions and adjustments made
during this critical period play a decisive role in determining the distribution of
responsibilities within the household. Choices regarding the division of childcare,
domestic tasks, and career priorities are navigated, setting the tone for the evolv-
ing partnership (O’Brien and Wall 2017; Patnaik 2019; Rehel 2014; Schober and
Zoch 2019).
So overall, the birth of a child and the first period after it is discussed in
the literature as a critical time when a couple must find themselves in new roles
and the new tasks and responsibilities that arise are redistributed (Huerta et al.
2014; Schober and Zoch 2019; Tanaka and Waldfogel 2007). Since parental leave
falls precisely in this period, it can be reasonably assumed that such policies
have great potential to influence parental behaviour. In summary, it appears evi-
dent that taking parental leave has the potential to encourage increased paternal
involvement in caregiving even beyond the leave period. To maximise this effect,
it is crucial to explore policy designs that enhance fathers’ leave take-up, con-
sidering that research indicates a significant number of fathers either do not use
these policies or only use them partially (Jurado-Guerrero and Muñoz-Comet
2021; Reimer 2020; Rostgaard and Ejrnæs 2021; Saarikallio-Torp and Mietti-
nen, 2021). The detailed discussion of specific designs and individual aspects
of parental leave policies is essential in understanding and addressing this issue
(Castellanos-Serrano et al. 2024; Haas and Rostgaard 2011, p. 181). The ultimate
16 1 Family, Work and Policies
goal is to pinpoint the design of a parental leave policy that fosters genuine egal-
itarianism, encompassing both theoretical design and practical implementation.
The sub-research question guiding this exploration is:
How should a parental leave policy be designed to achieve maximal egalitarianism?
This central inquiry delves into the essential attributes required for maximising
fathers’ inclusion and evaluates the current state of egalitarianism of existing
parental leave policies. Furthermore, it seeks to understand the extent to which
current policies incentivise fathers to actively participate in caregiving.
1.2.2 Correlations between Leave Duration and Gender
Equality in Care
While there are already some research results, certain aspects of paternal
behaviour after parental leave has ended remain unclear. For instance, conflicting
views exist on the lasting impact on fathers’ working hours, with some stud-
ies confirming it and others, like Patnaik (2019), asserting that paternity leave
diminishes gender specialisation in the long term. Parental leave policies have
raised considerable attention in research, particularly in the context of fathers’
engagement in child-rearing responsibilities (see, e.g., Dearing 2016; Dobroti´c
and Blum 2020; Doucet and McKay 2020; Meil 2013; Rehel 2014). One signif-
icantly underdeveloped aspect of research is correlations of paternal behaviour
and the duration of leave, particularly because fathers often do not exhaust their
leave options, resulting in limited data variation. Several studies have identified
a positive relationship between fathers’ uptake of parental leave and their longer-
term childcare hours (Almqvist and Duvander 2014; Bünning 2015; Meil 2013;
Patnaik 2019; Tamm 2019). Moreover, indications suggest stronger effects on
fathers’ childcare involvement with longer paternal leave duration (Fernández-
Cornejo et al. 2016; Haas and Hwang 2008; Huerta et al. 2014; Nepomnyaschy
and Waldfogel 2007). While Fernández-Cornejo et al. (2016)’s analysis yields
clear results indicating increased paternal care involvement with longer leaves,
it is constrained by its focus on Spain, specifically the policy reform of 2007,
which limits the leave duration. Consequently, it raises the question of the poten-
tial effects of more extended paternity leaves. Furthermore, it remains largely
unclear to what extent the duration of paternal leave uptake and the subsequent
division of care between parents in the long run are associated with each other.
1.2 Connecting Egalitarian Family Models with Parental Leave Policies 17
This constitutes another focal point of this inquiry, seeking to address a gap
by closely scrutinising both the duration of parental leave and the distribution of
caregiving responsibilities between spouses. Investigating whether a correlation
exists between these two variables, spanning not just the immediate post-leave
period but also the long term, holds the potential to yield valuable insights into
the dynamics of family caregiving responsibilities and the influence of parental
leave policies on advancing gender equality. Therefore, the following second sub-
research question is posed:
Does a correlation exist between the length of parental leave taken by fathers upon
the birth of their first child and the egalitarianism of the long-term distribution of
caregiving responsibilities among parents?
1.2.3 Correlations between Leave Policies and Paternal
Time Allocation
The aforementioned inquiry raises a critical concern regarding the direction of
causality. Theoretically, one may assume that interactions exist, and causality
is not unidirectional. This aspect introduces a nuanced layer of complexity to
the analysis, suggesting that the relationship between macro-level family policy
measures and micro-level lived family models may involve reciprocal influences.
Endogeneity emerges as a persistent challenge in the examination of family pol-
icy measures (see, e.g., Lütolf and Stadelmann-Steffen 2023). Singular studies
often rely on natural experimental designs, exemplified by Mayer and Le Bour-
dais (2019), Patnaik (2019), and Wray (2020)’s investigation on the case of a
subnational parental leave reform in Quebec in Canada. These designs allow for
comparisons both before and after the implementation of policy measures within
a specific geographic region. However, these studies remain case-specific, and
while they provide valuable insights, the broader applicability of their findings to
diverse regimes may be limited.
A critical limitation further emerges concerning the practical implementation
of leave policies, as illuminated by Lütolf and Stadelmann-Steffen (2023)’s exam-
ination of macro data sourced from Ciccia (2017). Although there are some
differences between countries, Lütolf and Stadelmann-Steffen (2023)’s evalua-
tion indicates a remarkable overall homogeneity among existing leave policies,
revealing a lack of truly egalitarian designs across countries. The findings indi-
cate that, due to limited representation of countries scoring high on the parental
18 1 Family, Work and Policies
leave dimension in Ciccia (2017)’s fuzzy set analysis and even the most egalitar-
ian nations falling significantly short of the ideal, a genuinely egalitarian version
of parental leave policies had not been fully realised at the time of data collection
(Lütolf and Stadelmann-Steffen 2023, p. 15). This is evident for their results on
parental leave, which do not show any major effects. In-depth analyses reveal that
the impacts attributed to policy packages are caused by childcare policies rather
than parental leave policies (Lütolf and Stadelmann-Steffen 2023, pp. 18–19).
This limitation points to a more fundamental issue: The inadequacy of current
policy landscapes to fully unveil the potential of parental leave. A comprehensive
understanding of the impact of such policies necessitates the analysis of highly
developed, egalitarian policy-mixes, a level of policy evolution not yet realised in
any country today. The current state of leave policies, with their limited diversity
and lack of truly egalitarian models, imposes a barrier to elucidating the nuanced
dynamics that might unfold with more advanced and progressive policy frame-
works. This limitation underscores the necessity for a broader spectrum of policy
variations to truly unlock the latent potential and ramifications of parental leave
policies.
This problem is exacerbated, especially when analysing fathers, as the policy
differences tend to be small for them, and what is crucial for the policies to be
genuinely egalitarian is precisely the full involvement of fathers. This raises per-
tinent questions about the divisions of labour within families under ideal parental
leave policies and highlight the need for more detailed measures to conduct
comprehensive empirical investigations into the effectiveness and alignment of
parental leave policies with the theoretical ideals, particularly with a focus on
encouraging active paternal involvement in caregiving. The third sub-research
question, therefore, is:
Do specific parental leave policy designs have the potential to induce changes in pater-
nal behaviour, particularly in altering the distribution of paid and unpaid work time,
and what characteristics define these designs?
To tackle this question experimental data is necessary. The integration of such
data not only addresses the limitations posed by the rather homogeneous design
of existing leave policies but also opens avenues for exploring truly egalitar-
ian policy designs. In contrast to observational studies that often struggle with
endogeneity issues, experimental data provide a unique advantage. By increas-
ing variability and allowing for complexity, experiments enable the inclusion of
genuinely egalitarian leave policy designs in the analysis and also facilitate the
1.2 Connecting Egalitarian Family Models with Parental Leave Policies 19
determination of causality between these policies and family models. The abil-
ity to establish causality is a crucial advancement, as it helps disentangle the
complex web of relationships between family policy measures and lived family
models. By leveraging experimental methodologies, this study can move beyond
the constraints posed by endogeneity, offering a more robust understanding of
how specific policy interventions influence the dynamics of households.
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use,
sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you
give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s
Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If
material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use
is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
permission directly from the copyright holder.
2
Foreshadowing the Content of this
Book
In this chapter, I will present the comprehensive research plan of this book,
delving into various aspects that contribute to a nuanced understanding of the
allocation of paid and unpaid work within families. This includes outlining the
overarching contributions and presenting an overview of the structure of this
book.
2.1 Research Plan
In line with recent research trends, I examine families as cohesive units with a
specific focus on the gender gap. Rather than only isolating individual mothers
or fathers, the investigation acknowledges the importance of studying the parents
interactions within the familial context. This perspective recognises that family
dynamics are shaped not only by the roles of individual parents but also by the
intricate interplay between mothers and fathers. By concentrating on the gender
gap and considering families as a whole, this research aims to provide a nuanced
understanding of the factors influencing gender roles and relationships within
households.
To tackle the first sub-research question centred on the specific design of parental
leave policies,1 an analysis grid is developed to gauge the egalitarianism of these
policies. Previous scholars have sought to measure the egalitarian nature of vari-
ous parental leave policies (Castro-García and Pazos-Moran 2016; Dearing 2016;
Koslowski 2021; Ray et al. 2010). However, these studies often rely on outdated
1 How should a parental leave policy be designed to achieve maximal egalitarianism?
© The Author(s) 2025
M. Lütolf, The Balancing Act of Working Mothers and Caring Fathers,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5_2
21
22 2 Foreshadowing the Content of this Book
data, failing to capture the latest developments in the field. Notably, many poli-
cies under examination were first adopted in the 2000s, yet some reforms directly
impacting fathers have only taken place more recently. Given the multidimen-
sionality and complexity of parental leave policies, a qualitative, case-specific
assessment becomes essential to clarify the diverse incentive structures they
create.
In response, an analysis grid is introduced, focusing on assessing parental
leave policies based on their impact on fathers, mothers, and their role in pro-
moting the universal caregiver model. Two indices, the policy ideal index and the
policy implementation index, are devised. The former measures the legal design of
policies, while the latter indicates how families are likely to implement these poli-
cies. The crucial distinction between the two indices is pivotal, as any disparities
between policy design and implementation reveal potential gaps in the intention
of existing policies. This analysis grid serves to establish a connection to current
family policies and to evaluate Ciccia and Verloo (2012, p. 520)’s claim that the
universal caregiver model remains an ideal concept of equality policy due to its
limited implementation in practice.
The subsequent step involves applying this theoretically developed analytical
grid to different family policy settings. To account for variations in family policy
regimes, the analysis spans five distinct countries: Switzerland, Germany, Finland,
Sweden, and the United States. This diverse selection covers a range of Western
family policy regimes, facilitating a comprehensive examination of parental leave
policies in varying socio-political contexts.
To address the remaining two sub-research questions, a comprehensive analy-
sis is undertaken leveraging insights from a novel dataset (Stadelmann-Steffen
et al. 2022). This survey specifically focuses on individuals living with a partner
and children under 15 years, targeting those most profoundly influenced by rec-
onciliation policies. With a wide-ranging exploration of paid and unpaid labour
dynamics within households, the survey encompasses modules that delve into
household composition, organisation of family life, working conditions, attitudes
on equality and gender roles, leave take-up, and socio-demographic data.
A distinctive feature of this survey lies in its innovative methodology for
measuring time a llocation within families. Traditional surveys often encounter
challenges in accurately capturing the intricate dynamics of caregiving respon-
sibilities due to the complexity and overlap of tasks. In response, this survey
pioneers a novel approach using sliders in a 24-hour bar representation. Par-
ticipants are tasked with allocating their and their partner’s time across four
2.1 Research Plan 23
distinct “spheres of life”: gainful employment, care and housework, other activi-
ties (such as personal care activities and leisure), and sleep. By grouping care and
housework together and including sleep, along with a broader category for “other
activities”, this method seeks to provide a more realistic and nuanced depiction
of participants’ time allocation between paid and unpaid work.
To deepen the exploration of the correlation between the duration of pater-
nal leave uptake and care allocation within households, i.e., to tackle the second
sub-research question,2 regression models will be employed. Additionally, to fur-
ther illuminate the distribution of unpaid work among parents, the concept of the
caregap is introduced – a measurement summarising the difference between the
hours spent on unpaid work by mothers and fathers. These innovative analyti-
cal approaches set the stage for a comprehensive understanding of the intricate
dynamics within families and the impact of parental leave policies on caregiving
responsibilities.
To address the third sub-research question,3 I conduct conjoint analyses lever-
aging another key element of the survey: its experimental component, which
entails data on behavioural intentions under various potential policy designs.
Participants are presented with different scenarios, each containing distinct con-
ditions regarding supplementary childcare, the form of parental leave, and labour
market conditions. In response to these conditions, respondents articulate their
behavioural intentions concerning their workload, time spent on childcare, and
the workload and care time of their partner. This data is instrumental in mea-
suring the influence of various policy fields on the division of labour within
families. With the specified focus on leave policies mentioned earlier, the evalu-
ation of the conjoint analyses is also accordingly centred, and the other elements
of the conjoint will not be further discussed.
2 Does a correlation exist between the length of parental leave taken by fathers upon the
birth of their first child and the egalitarianism of the long-term distribution of caregiving
responsibilities among parents?
3 Do specific parental leave policy designs have the potential to induce changes in paternal
behaviour, particularly in altering the distribution of paid and unpaid work time, and what
characteristics define these designs?
24 2 Foreshadowing the Content of this Book
2.2 Contributions
The overall contribution of this research is to analyse and gather information
about whether and how the still “utopian” universal caregiver model proposed
by Fraser (1994) may become a real-world scenario. The thesis aims to address
the identified research gaps in the literature on reconciliation policy, work pat-
terns, and gender equality. It contributes by focusing on parental leave policy
and the allocation of caregiving responsibilities within families. Specifically, the
analysis aims to offer fresh insights into how diverse individuals and households
respond to various parental leave policy configurations. The theoretical analysis
grid of leave policies and regression models, incorporating the duration of leave
uptake, yield conclusions regarding the effectiveness of reconciliation policies.
This includes assessing whether they achieve their intended goals or, conversely,
if they lead to unintended or adverse effects in specific circumstances or for
particular groups. Lastly, employing conjoint analysis will extend the scope to
include parental leave policies beyond current implementations. This approach
aims to determine the potential of ideal policies and comprehensively present the
effects of parental leave on paternal behaviour. The present work bridges exist-
ing research gaps in reconciliation policy, work patterns, and gender equality,
with a specific focus on parental leave policy and the allocation of work within
households. The contributions of this book can be delineated into five key aspects:
1. Theoretical and conceptual contribution
To capture fathers’ care work in the household context, the analysis of the relation-
ship between leave duration and paternal caregiving behaviour goes beyond simply
looking at the number of hours of care provided by the father. Previous research
on leave duration has predominantly focused on fathers’ involvement in childcare
(Haas and Hwang 2008; Huerta et al. 2014; Nepomnyaschy and Waldfogel 2007). In
contrast, this analysis takes a more comprehensive approach by examining fathers
within the context of a household, specifically as members of a parenting couple.
To assess this, a new dependent variable is introduced – the caregap, defined as the
disparity in unpaid labour time between parents. The focus is on the distribution of
care between the parents, examining who assumes more caregiving responsibilities
and whether unpaid work is distributed in an egalitarian manner. Consequently, the
analysis not only considers fathers’ involvement but also simultaneously applies the
concept of gender equality (Bianchi et al. 2012).
2.2 Contributions 25
2. Analytical contribution
From an analytical standpoint, this research makes a significant contribution in
the realm of measuring the egalitarianism of parental leave policies. Existing
approaches, such as Ray et al. (2010)’s index, undervalue wage replacement, while
Castro-García and Pazos-Moran (2016)’s quotient oversimplifies the complex pol-
icy field with only two values. Koslowski (2021)’s focus on well-paid policies has
limitations, including a low 66-percent wage replacement threshold and exclusion
of recent policy developments in Finland and Switzerland. In response to these
limitations, I propose an innovative analysis grid drawing from recent literature
discussions. This grid not only introduces a comprehensive measurement to assess
parental leave schemes’ egalitarianism and their inclusion of fathers but also intro-
duces two new indices: the policy ideal index and the policy implementation index.
The strength of this thesis lies in providing a robust analytical framework to assess
parental leave policies, examining their impact on incentivising fathers, influencing
mothers, and ultimately promoting the universal caregiver model.
A more comprehensive picture can be developed of how parents ought to organ-
ise themselves under today’s parental leave policies, how they effectively organise
themselves, and what would be theoretically possible by integrating different meth-
ods – a theoretically supported analysis grid and empirical analyses through a
combination of the current state with conventional regressions, and policy potentials
derived from experiments using conjoint analysis. By scrutinising these aspects, I
seek a deeper comprehension of how policy intentions align with the everyday expe-
riences of families. This multifaceted analysis aims to contribute valuable insights
into the effectiveness and impact of parental leave policies in the studied countries.
3. Data and survey contributions
The introduction of a novel dataset, derived from an extensive survey across five
countries (Switzerland, Germany, Finland, Sweden, and the United States), marks
a crucial contribution to the literature. This dataset, focusing on individuals living
with a partner and children under 15 years, targets only those most p rofoundly
affected by reconciliation policies. Its significance lies in bridging a substantial gap
in existing data. Until now, no available data has presented such intricate insights
into the reconciliation of work and family for parents. Beyond filling this void, the
dataset offers a wealth of pertinent information. The survey, serving as a foundational
element, provides nuanced insights crucial for a profound understanding of these
interactions. The meticulous collection of this comprehensive dataset forms the
bedrock for in-depth analyses, offering valuable insights into the dynamics of work
distribution within households and the delicate balance between work and family
responsibilities.
26 2 Foreshadowing the Content of this Book
Notably, a new form of time measurement based on 24-hour sliders and the asso-
ciated information on intra-family work and time allocation is particularly beneficial
and enriching for future research ideas on the organisation of couples and house-
holds. The collected data, combining the sliders entailing the respondents and their
partners time allocation, offers a rich and detailed exploration of the current time
distribution within these households. This innovative measurement method not only
enhances the accuracy of reported time division but also addresses the limitations
observed in existing surveys, setting the stage for a more nuanced analysis of the
distribution of work within families and the impact of parental leave policies on
gender equality.
In addition, it offers in-depth insights into the uptake of parental leave, elevat-
ing the examination of fathers’ effective take-up to a more comprehensive level.
The detailed analysis encompasses various leave duration, surpassing the scope of
previous studies and providing a richer understanding of the dynamics surrounding
paternal leave uptake. By differentiating between various leave durations and differ-
ent type of leave (policy, holidays or unpaid extended leave) the analysis moreover
addresses the claim that “research should also more clearly distinguish between
levels and categories of paternity leave use (e.g., shorter vs. longer, statutory vs.
extended [...])” (Pizarro and Gartzia 2024, p. 11). Furthermore, with a detailed
analysis of the correlation between fathers’ leave duration and their subsequent
caregiving responsibilities, this study investigates the long-term impact on the divi-
sion of unpaid labour among parents. It extends beyond the scope of short-term
behaviours observed immediately after the leave period.
4. Conjoint Analysis contribution
The inclusion of modules for conjoint analysis in the survey makes significant
contributions to research in several ways. Firstly, it allows for the analysis of policies
that do not currently exist or are not implemented in a certain country. Moreover, it
facilitates the inclusion of a wide range of policy combinations, including designs
that are not currently found in any country.
Additionally, the application of this method provides a valuable methodological
contribution. While conjoint analysis has gained attention among political scien-
tists, its applications have primarily focused on choices related to policies, parties,
or individuals (see, e.g., Hainmueller et al. 2015; Horiuchi et al. 2018; Stadelmann-
Steffen and Dermont 2018). Applying this approach to measure policy effects on
behaviour remains rare but holds promise. Measuring behaviour in survey settings
is challenging, and using real-world behavioural data is often impractical. Although
conjoint analysis may not be a perfect solution, it brings researchers closer to real-
world decision situations, reducing social desirability problems (Auspurg et al. 2015;
2.2 Contributions 27
Hainmueller et al. 2014). Therefore, in the absence of “real” behavioural data, con-
joint analysis offers a valuable approximation to real-world behaviour (Hainmueller
et al. 2015).
Finally, conjoint analyses have a major advantage as they allow for the investi-
gation of causal relationships, unlike regressions which are limited to statements on
correlations. Thus, this analytical approach enables addressing the problem of endo-
geneity and through the various attributes, policies can be analysed in the context
of each other as policy packages.
5. Comparative approach contribution
This study adopts a comparative approach, running through all the chapters, rein-
forcing the above contributions. Although a comparative approach may not be
considered a contribution on its own, it can become one if accompanied by an
in-depth analysis. This is because analyses using a comparative approach often
come at the expense of in-depth analysis and specifications. This approach aims to
discern whether the gender-specific division of labour is inherently path-dependent,
deeply ingrained in a country’s norms and values (Pfau-Effinger 2004), or if there
is room for fl exibility, suggesting policies’ potential to induce change. This inquiry
primarily revolves around whether countries with conservative gender norms and
work patterns might transition toward more egalitarian models. Conversely, it con-
siders if households in countries with more extensive family policies could become
more “conservative” in less supportive policy contexts. The selection of five diverse
countries ensures a comprehensive coverage of family policy regimes, ranging from
the traditionally liberal approach in the United States (Bariola and Collins 2021)
to the liberal-conservative family policies of Switzerland (Häusermann and Bür-
gisser 2022), the historically conservative yet recently reformed family policies in
Germany (Schober and Zoch 2019), and the social democratic Scandinavian coun-
tries with generous family policies. Notably, Finland emphasises family care (Datta
Gupta et al. 2008), while Sweden prioritises universal employment (Hiilamo and
Kangas 2009). This diverse policy landscape allows for a nuanced analysis of their
impact on the correlation between paternal leave and the allocation of care within
households. It sheds light on whether this correlation is predominantly driven by
individual attitudes or the available opportunities within a given country.
In sum, this research aims to shed light on the interplay between family dynamics and
policy interventions, promoting a more equitable distribution of care between par-
ents. It examines patterns of caregiving responsibilities within families and assesses
the extent to which fathers utilise parental leave. This book offers a multifaceted
examination of parental leave policies, encompassing theoretical advancements,
28 2 Foreshadowing the Content of this Book
methodological innovations, and empirical insights. Through this comprehensive
approach, it significantly advances our understanding of the intricate dynamics
between family policies, caregiving responsibilities, and gender equality. In this
sense, it responds to the research gap identified by Pizarro and Gartzia (2024) in
their systematic review of paternity leave studies, which revealed significant frag-
mentation characterised by diverse methodological approaches, samples and topics
within the field, this thesis seeks to integrate various aspects of paternity leave
research by adopting an integrative approach. By combining various methodologi-
cal approaches and exploring different facets of paternity leave, and incorporating
samples from five different countries representing distinct family policy regimes, I
aim to establish a cohesive “common theoretical and empirical grounding” (Pizarro
and Gartzia 2024, p. 10).
2.3 Overview
This book is structured into five parts. The first part, the introduction, concludes
with this overview of the dissertation.
The second part focuses on conceptualisations and theories and consists of
three chapters. It begins with Chapter 3, which discusses family models in the
social sciences. The chapter first conceptualises paid and unpaid work, discusses
their interactions and dependencies, and then elaborates on the central family
models. Chapter 4 discusses family policy and the effects of reconciliation poli-
cies, with a focus on gender-specific impacts. This is particularly important given
the previously established gender-specific division of labour within family mod-
els. The chapter concludes by emphasising the important role of fathers and
policies, particularly parental leave policies, in promoting paternal caregiving
and moving away from the traditional breadwinner role. Chapter 5 is dedicated
to parental leave and to establishing an ideal policy design to support and pro-
mote fathers in their role as caregivers. A specific focus is placed on the duration
of paternity leave and correlations with the within household division of care
in different family policy regimes. Corresponding hypotheses are formulated.
To conclude, this chapter addresses and elaborates on the three sub-research
questions from Section 1.2, each in its respective part of Chapter 5.
The third part of this book focuses on the research design and is divided into
three chapters. Chapter 6 discusses case selection, advocating for a selection that
covers a broad range of family policy regimes within Western welfare states and
describes the family policy regimes in the five selected countries: Switzerland,
2.3 Overview 29
Germany, Finland, Sweden, and the United States. In Chapter 7 an analysis grid
for measuring the egalitarianism of parental leave policies is developed and the
two indices, the policy ideal index and the policy implementation index are intro-
duced. Chapter 8 focuses on data, beginning with a description of the data gap
in existing data and then providing a detailed account of the survey. The chapter
places special emphasis on the innovative measurement of parental time allocation
and the conjoint experiment. Section 8.3 discusses additional operationalisations,
in addition to those already covered in connection with the conjoint analysis.
The empirical analysis is presented in the fourth part, starting with Chapter 9.
In this chapter, the analysis grid is applied to the five countries to answer the first
sub-research question stated in Subsection 1.2.1. Chapter 10 examines the signif-
icance of paternity leave duration and includes regression analyses to investigate
its relationship with the caregap, addressing the second research question in Sub-
section 1.2.2. Chapter 11 presents the conjoint analyses and provides answers to
the sub-research question from Subsection 1.2.3.
The fifth and final part of this book offers a conclusion, which comprises
the last two chapters. Chapter 12 summarises the most important points from
the empirical findings, seeking to answer the hypotheses and research questions.
The subsequent Chapter 13 discusses the most important contributions and limi-
tations of this study and proposes ideas for future research. The thesis ends with
concluding thoughts.
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use,
sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you
give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s
Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If
material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use
is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
permission directly from the copyright holder.
Part II
Theory
3
Family Models in Social Science
Research
The Theory Part is divided into three chapters. The first chapter presents different
family models, the second discusses family policies and their impact on fam-
ily models, and the third explains the central role of parental leave, particularly
paternal leave, and derives the hypotheses.
This first conceptional chapter illuminates the complex relationship between
paid and unpaid work within families, a dynamic reflected in diverse family mod-
els. The specific allocation of tasks is examined, taking into account factors such
as job value, gender equality ideals, and the interplay between gainful employ-
ment and caregiving responsibilities. The thesis centres around the concept of
family models, with particular focus on the universal caregiver family model,
which is described as the egalitarian ideal and serves as the goal of family policy
in both the theoretical discussion and empirical analysis. Before exploring family
models, I first examine the different types of work and their interactions, setting
the stage for a comprehensive understanding of the complexities shaping familial
structures.
3.1 The Interdependence of Paid and Unpaid Work
While the concept of paid work is generally clear, the term unpaid work car-
ries varied interpretations depending on the context and requires clarification
(Madörin 2010). To be precise, unpaid work encompasses household tasks such
as laundry, shopping, cooking, cleaning, gardening, and minor repairs to every-
day objects, as well as the unpaid care and nursing of family members. Care is
commonly employed with various interpretations (Thomas 1993), yet its precise
definition remains elusive (Madörin 2010, p. 86). The concept of care encom-
passes tending, nurturing, educating, and nursing for individuals (Schilliger 2009,
© The Author(s) 2025
M. Lütolf, The Balancing Act of Working Mothers and Caring Fathers,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5_3
33
34 3 Family Models in Social Science Research
p. 99), including children, the elderly, and those with special needs, such as long-
term or chronically ill individuals (O’Connor 1996, p. 16). While caring for the
elderly and the unwell is inherent in the spectrum of care work, this book dis-
tinctly centres on childcare, excluding other forms of care from its primary focus.
However, it is worth noting that some elaborations may be applicable to other
caregiving concepts.
In the realm of childcare, the lines between childcare tasks and household
chores are often blurred. For instance, children might accompany parents during
shopping, require supervision during cooking, and as they grow older, actively
participate in, for example, tidying up. Furthermore, households with children
generally entail more housework, raising the question of whether housework for
children should be categorised as care work. This complexity makes it challeng-
ing to clearly differentiate between the two. Hence, in the following discussions,
the terms care and unpaid work are used interchangeably, including housework
due to their inherent overlap, making a distinct separation between care and
household tasks difficult.1
The imbalance between paid and unpaid work is often discussed in the context of
intra-family division of labour, where caregiving becomes economically depen-
dent on paid employment (O’Connor 1996, p. 14). In a traditional role division,
this means that a woman engaged in caregiving financially relies on her husband,
who shoulders financial responsibilities. However, the reciprocal nature of this
dependency is frequently overlooked, as gainful employment is equally depen-
dent on caregiving (O’Connor 1996, p. 14). As a result, a full interdependence
exists between these two forms of work. Recognising this, both the EU and the
OECD highlight the distribution of gainful employment and family work, advo-
cating for social and economic policies that encourage mothers to participate
in the labour market while enhancing the attractiveness of caregiving roles for
fathers (Daly 2010, p. 143).
The recognised value of these two types of work sharply contrasts. While
paid work is compensated and assigned a specific value, albeit with considerable
variation, the same consistency is not applied to care work. Generally, care work
is given a lower value in societal assessments (Belser 2010; Fraser 1994; Lewis
and Giullari 2005; Schilliger 2009).
There is also a linguistic distinction between the two categories of work. While
the term work, if not further specified, usually implies paid work, the term used in
1 Accordingly, these two types of work are jointly operationalised as unpaid work in the
empirical chapters (see Part IV), as further detailed in Section 8.2 covering the specifics of
the survey.
3.1 The Interdependence of Paid and Unpaid Work 35
connection with caring for children is childcare. This linguistic nuance is under-
scored by Brandth and Kvande (1998, p. 302), who emphasise the work aspect
more explicitly by using the term parental work.
Furthermore, the two categories of work also differ in terms of their organi-
sational forms. The form of organisation is crucial because care work cannot be
entirely outsourced from the family, and thus the issue of labour division always
arises (Lewis and Giullari 2005, p. 88). According to Schilliger (2009, p. 104),
care work can be categorised into the following organisational forms: unpaid in
households (non-market), state/community (decommodified, where the provision
is not solely based on market transactions (Lister 1997, p. 173) but supported by
the state), or as commercial services (commodified, subject to market transactions
(Lewis et al. 2008, p. 22)). The transition from informal, unpaid care work within
households to either of the other two formal organisational forms is crucial for
women’s participation in the labour market, as highlighted by Lewis and Giullari
(2005, p. 83). The concept of defamilialisation is also discussed in the literature
in this context, whereby this is defined as the process of diminishing the family’s
role in providing social security and welfare functions or as a measure to evaluate
individual economic independence from familial dependencies (Bambra 2007b,
p. 327). Commodification plays a significant role in the policy debate concerning
the reconciliation of care work (Lewis and Giullari 2005, p. 87). The focus is on
its interaction with women’s gainful employment, and this interaction is intended
to be achieved through the commodification of care services. However, compared
to other areas of the welfare state, policies in this regard are less developed
(Lewis and Giullari 2005, p. 88). Moreover, the relatively inadequate structuring
of the welfare state in family policy, particularly the scarcity of affordable child-
care facilities, has led to an increased demand for informal care solutions, either
among (female) friends or through relatives, with grandmothers playing a particu-
larly crucial role (Lewis and Giullari 2005; Lewis et al. 2008; Rupert and Zanella
2018). Described as reasonable and flexible, this support is utilised when formal
care work falls short, serving to bridge the gap between commodified, formal
care and family-provided care. Given the impossibility of commodifying all care
work, the question of division becomes increasingly important – between indi-
viduals and the community, as well as between women and men at the household
level (Lewis and Giullari 2005, p. 88).
Men, often confined to the role of providers, find their potential contributions to
caregiving tasks constrained, while women continue to be predominantly respon-
sible for the emotional and nurturing aspects of care (Gornick and Meyers 2009;
Grau Grau et al. 2022; Thébaud 2010). Historically, the realm of caregiving
36 3 Family Models in Social Science Research
responsibilities has borne a significant gender bias, with women and especially
mothers disproportionately carrying the burden. Despite substantial strides in
women’s participation in the labour market over the past few decades, the land-
scape of unpaid work remains overwhelmingly shouldered by women (Craig and
Churchill 2021; Craig and Powell 2012; Sullivan 2006; Yavorsky et al. 2015).
This persistence is a manifestation of deeply ingrained gender norms, as noted
by Craig and Mullan (2011). The gendered division of care work not only per-
petuates stereotypes but also sustains existing inequalities by limiting men’s
involvement in nurturing and emotional caregiving tasks. The prevailing belief
that women inherently possess nurturing qualities while men are primarily asso-
ciated with the provider role reinforces traditional gender norms (Gornick and
Meyers 2009; Ranson 2012). Consequently, this perpetuates a rigidly defined
gendered division of labour within families.2
Moreover, the gender-related division of work in caregiving is intricately
intertwined with the gender differences observed in the labour market (Aassve
et al. 2014). The lack of female representation in managerial positions poses
a persistent obstacle to achieving gender equality in leadership (Mandel and
Semyonov 2006). Despite significant progress in women’s education over the last
few decades, the gender gap in leadership positions persists. In Switzerland, for
example, women are now outperforming men in education (Oesch 2023, p. 81).
To tackle gender-related workforce issues, a closer examination of labour mar-
ket segregation is essential. This phenomenon involves the unequal distribution
of individuals across occupations and industries based on gender, manifesting
in both vertical and horizontal segregation. The former pertains to the under-
representation of women in top positions, while the latter focuses on gender
disparities between different occupations (Hook et al. 2023, p. 280). Despite
progress in promoting gender equality, labour market segregation remains a sig-
nificant challenge in contemporary society. Mandel and Semyonov (2006) explore
the impact of the welfare state on this issue, noting that developed welfare
states encourage women’s workforce participation but often fall short in leading
them into influential roles. In nations with progressive policies and a substantial
public service sector, there is a tendency for women to cluster in traditionally
female-dominated occupations. Consequently, this concentration results in almost
no women in leadership positions, further reinforcing the persistent barrier to
achieving gender equality in management (Mandel and Semyonov 2006).
2 These gender norms and role models, emphasising women as primary caregivers, are also
reflected in informal long-term care provided solely by daughters in mixed-siblings families
(Barigozzi et al. 2020).
3.1 The Interdependence of Paid and Unpaid Work 37
Despite progress in promoting gender equality, persistent gender imbalances
in certain occupations and industries perpetuate an ongoing cycle of inequality.
From a household perspective, the specific allocation of paid work along gender
lines, contributing to gender-based wage disparities, makes it economically ratio-
nal for women to take on unpaid care work (O’Connor 1996, p. 17). Rooted in
historical gender roles, occupational stereotypes restrict career choices, limiting
opportunities to break away from traditional expectations. Research highlights the
significant impact of gendered occupational stereotypes on vocational decisions,
revealing that individuals often align their career preferences with stereotypes
associated with their gender identity, thereby contributing to and perpetuating
labour market segregation (see, e.g., Gupta et al. 2009; He et al. 2019). This seg-
regation is further compounded by various reinforcing factors, such as wage gaps,
creating a cycle of inequality. In their comprehensive study on the gender wage
gap, Blau and Kahn (2017) concluded that the persistence of the unexplained
gap suggests ongoing labour-market discrimination, supported by experimental
evidence, particularly evident in high-skilled occupations where factors like work-
force interruptions and shorter hours play a significant role. They highlighted the
continued importance of gender differences in the labour market, specifically in
occupation and industry distribution, and identified traditional factors such as
gender roles, the division of labour, and motherhood penalties as still relevant in
understanding the dynamics of the gender pay gap. The enduring gender wage
gap serves as both a symptom and a cause, reflecting the undervaluation of work
associated with one gender and acting as a deterrent for individuals to enter
higher-paying fields.
Breaking free from these deeply embedded patterns necessitates profound
societal changes. Mere increases in women’s participation in the labour force,
as significant as they are, do not fundamentally alter these dynamics. Instead,
such shifts often translate into an additional burden on women (Craig and Mullan
2011), who must now juggle both professional and caregiving responsibilities and
the mental load that goes along with it (Dean et al. 2022). It becomes evident that
breaking the cycle of the gendered division of care work requires not just incre-
mental adjustments but a holistic reevaluation of societal expectations and gender
roles (Grau Grau et al. 2022). In conclusion, challenging the entrenched norms
surrounding caregiving responsibilities demands a comprehensive approach that
transcends conventional gender roles. Policy interventions in family matters can
influence these mechanisms. However, prior to delving into the field of reconcil-
iation policy in Chapter 4, an overview of the most common family models is
warranted in the next section.
38 3 Family Models in Social Science Research
3.2 Family Models
In order to deepen the understanding of the intricate interplay between care work
division and paid employment within family structures, an exploration into vari-
ous family models3 becomes essential. As highlighted by Fraser (1994), distinct
family models serve as crucial frameworks for comprehending the dynamics
at play. The responsibilities within a family can be systematically categorised
through the lens of different family models, taking into account not only the
intra-family division of tasks related to gainful employment and care work but
also considering additional dimensions such as the societal value ascribed to cer-
tain types of work and the pursuit of gender equality ideals. In this regard, these
models serve not only to categorise different forms of organisation by families
but also as a frame of reference for what is considered the norm in a particu-
lar society. They are also promoted by corresponding family policy measures. In
other words, the categorisation of family models also serves as a conceptualisa-
tion to classify different approaches of family policy regimes. Embedded in the
concept of the term ’model’ are the prevailing societal ideals, norms, and values
that delineate typical representations concerning the family and the integration of
women and men in society (Pfau-Effinger 2004, p. 382). These family models,
as elucidated by Ciccia and Bleijenbergh (2014, p. 55), encompass a spectrum
of features, including the allocation of tasks between genders with respect to
both gainful employment and caregiving duties, financial dependencies, and the
foundational ideal of gender equality. The complexity of family dynamics is
encapsulated within these models, providing a nuanced understanding of how
families navigate the balance between work and care.
While the concept of family models has been touched upon previously, it
is now opportune to delve into a more systematic and comprehensive presenta-
tion and discussion of these models. This exploration aims to shed light on the
diversity of family structures and the multifaceted nature of the roles played by
individuals within them. A concise overview of these family models and their
key features is presented in Table 3.1. This tabulation serves as a valuable ref-
erence point, encapsulating the nuances inherent in each family model, thereby
fostering a deeper appreciation for the intricacies of care work division and paid
employment within the family unit.
3 As stated in the introduction, this study examines the gendered divisions of labour between
parents and only discusses heterosexual couples. Therefore, only family models that assume
one father and one mother per family are included.
3.2 Family Models 39
Tab le 3.1 Overview of family models
Family models Paid work Care Responsibilities Value attribution
Male
Breadwinner
Father Mother Provider: Father
Care: Mother
Paid work > Care
Modernised
Male
Breadwinner
Father:
Full-time
Mother:
Part-time
Mother /
External
Provider: Father
Care: Mother
Paid work > Care
Female
Breadwinner
Mother –Provider: Mother
Care: –
Paid work > Care
Caregiver
Parity
Father Mother Provider: Father
Care: Mother
Paid work = Care
Universal
Breadwinner
Parents:
Full-time
External Provider: Parents
Care: Mother
Paid work > Care
Universal
Caregiver
Parents:
Part-time
Parents /
External
Provider: Parents
Care: Parents
Paid work = Care
Source: Prepared by the author.
3.2.1 The Male Breadwinner Family Model
The – already mentioned several times – classic traditional male breadwinner
model is rooted in “an ideology of separate gender roles” (Ciccia and Bleijen-
bergh 2014, p. 55). This model, often associated with traditional or patriarchal
family structures, represents a social and economic arrangement where the man
shoulders the primary responsibility of earning the family income, while the
woman’s primary role revolves around homemaking and caregiving.
In the male breadwinner model, men are expected to be the sole economic
providers, usually through full-time employment outside the home to ensure
financial stability and meet the family’s economic needs. Therefore, this model is
closely linked to the logic of a “family wage” (Fraser 1994, p. 591): emphasising
that the man’s income must be sufficiently high to support the entire family.
Women, on the other hand, are typically assigned the role of homemaker and
caregiver within this model. The mother’s responsibilities revolve around manag-
ing the household, raising children, and providing care to elderly family members.
Importantly, as she herself does not receive a wage for her work, she becomes
40 3 Family Models in Social Science Research
financially dependent on her husband’s income or on social benefits tied to her
status as wife or mother (Ciccia and Bleijenbergh 2014, p. 55). Through her
exclusion from the labour market and, therefore, from paid work, her subordina-
tion to her husband, also in terms of social security entitlements and tax benefits,
is reinforced and expecting her to undertake caregiving responsibilities “without
public support” (Lewis 1992, p. 162).
This family model also aligns with the “cultural construct of ‘motherhood’”,
where the mother’s primary duty is viewed as the care and upbringing of chil-
dren within the home (Pfau-Effinger 2004, p. 384). Consequently, fathers, while
expected to provide for their families, are generally not expected to take direct
responsibility for childcare, but rather assume the role of the occasionally helper
(Ciccia and Verloo 2012, p. 511).
It is crucial to note that the dominance of this model was not universal, and
historical variations existed (Pfau-Effinger 2004, p. 378). Since women have con-
sistently participated in the workforce, a pure male breadwinner model never
universally prevailed (Lewis 2001, p. 153). However, in specific historical peri-
ods and social classes, the male breadwinner model was more accurate, notably
in substantial segments of the middle and working classes in Western countries
after the second World War (Lewis 1992, 2001). In summary, the male bread-
winner model, although not universally dominant, has played a significant role in
shaping family dynamics, reinforcing distinct gender roles, and influencing the
economic and social structures within various historical and social contexts.
3.2.2 The Modernised Male Breadwinner Family Model
In more recent times, the predominant family model that defines the labour mar-
ket pattern in most European countries is the one-and-a-half earner model (Lewis
2001, p. 154). Often regarded as a modern version of the traditional male bread-
winner model, it is also referred to as the modernised male breadwinner model or
dual-earner/female-part-time-carer model (Ciccia and Bleijenbergh 2014; Cromp-
ton 1999). In this model, the father retains the role of the main provider, while
the mother is also involved in paid work, typically in a part-time capacity and
often at a low percentage rate.
If the mother is employed outside the home alongside the father, external
childcare becomes necessary during this period. External in this context, however,
3.2 Family Models 41
simply means outside the nuclear family and does not strictly imply institu-
tional solutions like childcare facilities; it could also involve support from friends,
neighbours, or grandparents. Grandparents, particularly grandmothers, play a cru-
cial role in this scenario (Lewis and Giullari 2005), as reflected in the employment
behaviour of grandmothers. For instance, in the United States, there is a notable
reduction in labour supply reported for working grandmothers at the birth of their
first grandchild (Rupert and Zanella 2018).
Countries that promote this family model do actively encourage and sup-
port women in pursuing careers and contributing to the family income, leading
to a more equitable distribution of financial responsibilities. However, men are
still traditionally viewed as the primary breadwinners and are, thus, expected
to mainly contribute to the family income. Despite the increasing prevalence of
modern couples with dual-career aspirations, where both partners pursue fulfilling
careers outside the home, the previous discussion on labour market segrega-
tion and wage differences in Section 3.1 underscores the lingering high financial
dependence of women on their male partners.
While men are encouraged to take a more active role in caregiving, the core
responsibilities persist. This is evident when examining specific childcare tasks,
as the time allocation gap between parents is smaller in “recreational4 or ‘fun’
child care” (Raley et al. 2012, p. 1437) compared to physical5 or routine care,
such as feeding children – tasks that are predominantly shouldered by mothers.
In this modernised version of the male breadwinner model, where mothers also
engage in gainful employment, it becomes evident that despite their involvement
in the workforce, the fundamental patterns and responsibilities remain largely
unchanged. Thus, there are no substantial alterations to the core structure of the
classic male breadwinner model.
3.2.3 The Female Breadwinner Family Model
The female breadwinner model is frequently overlooked in socio-political anal-
yses, although this model reflects the lifestyle of approximately five percent of
4 Recreational activities form a subset of engagements that involve playing with children,
engaging in arts and crafts, talking to them, and assisting them in activities unrelated to their
education (Raley et al. 2012, pp. 1433–1434).
5 Physical care activities encompass fundamental caregiving tasks undertaken by parents to
safeguard the physical well-being of children. These activities involve tasks like feeding,
dressing, and providing medical care to children (Raley et al. 2012, p. 1433).
42 3 Family Models in Social Science Research
households6 in Europe (Kowalewska and Vitali 2021); hence, it is important to
include it in the discussion of the most common and central family models. As
the name suggests, in this model, the woman serves as the primary provider.
Strictly speaking, one could distinguish between a pure female breadwinner
model, where the man is not employed, and a one-and-a-half female bread-
winner model, where the woman is employed full-time and the man is employed
part-time (Kowalewska and Vitali 2021).
This family structure is evolving (Kowalewska and Vitali 2021, p. 138), as the
gender equality movement is and could, therefore, be wrongly interpreted as a
shift reflecting changes in societal attitudes, economic dynamics, and an increased
emphasis on gender equality. Since in this model, women take on the role of the
primary income earners, while men may assume more active roles in caregiving
and household responsibilities, it seems to represent a departure from traditional
gender roles, challenging the historical norm where men have been the primary
earners in families. However, a more in-depth examination of female breadwin-
ner families reveals that this family structure is frequently not a voluntary choice.
Instead, the precarious economic situation, coupled with unemployment, often
leads to the adoption of such a model (Dotti Sani 2018; Kowalewska and Vitali
2021). Different studies have demonstrated a significantly high unemployment
rate among men in households with female breadwinners, where women often
take on the main provider role due to economic pressure, particularly in the con-
text of poorly qualified partners (Dotti Sani 2018; Kowalewska and Vitali 2021).
While some families align with the egalitarian image and deliberately construct
their family structure to adhere to gender equity norms, this represents only a
portion of the reality. A larger contingent of female breadwinners, emphasised
by Drago et al. (2005), emerges due to economic hardship. This group is likely
even larger than commonly assumed: Cross-sectional estimates of female bread-
winning can be misleading, as couples’ reliance on women’s earnings fluctuates
over time; persistent long-term female breadwinning is less prevalent, and tempo-
rary instances defy the typical portrayal of this phenomenon (Drago et al. 2005).
6 According to an analysis covering 20 European countries, over 5 percent of households
with two heterosexual cohabiting spouses/partners aged 18 to 65, have female breadwin-
ners, although this analysis includes not only parents but couples without children as well
(Kowalewska and Vitali 2021). Another study, utilising the same survey data as the empirical
analysis in this thesis, exclusively focuses on households with at least one pre-school-aged
child (Stadelmann-Steffen et al. 2024). It reveals that the occurrence of female breadwin-
ner households ranges from two (Germany) to six percent (the United States), varying by
country.
3.2 Family Models 43
This observation reinforces the argument that this family model is frequently not
a matter of choice but rather a (temporary) necessity.
The distinction between the two female breadwinner groups is further evident
in the employment patterns of men: women in one-and-a-half female breadwinner
couples not only possess a socioeconomic status surpassing that of women of pure
female breadwinner couples but also boast the highest average labour income
among women across all couple constellations (Kowalewska and Vitali 2021,
p. 137).
Given the diverse backgrounds leading to a female breadwinner model, clear
allocation of unpaid work and responsibilities across different forms of work, as
illustrated in Table 3.1, becomes challenging. In families actively selecting this
structure in line with egalitarian gender roles, fathers are expected to play an
active role in parenting, undertaking a substantial portion of unpaid work. Con-
versely, men from households facing economic insecurity may be less committed
to gender role reversal and participate less in childcare and housework, indicating
a potential desire for a return to the traditional male breadwinner family struc-
ture, but the economic circumstances of this group raise uncertainty about the
feasibility of such a shift due to labour market constraints (Drago et al. 2005).
The exploration of this family model is particularly intriguing as it underscores
the lasting impact of traditional male breadwinner norms in our society. The depth
of this ideal’s entrenchment becomes apparent in the life satisfaction of female
breadwinner couples. Those deviating from the traditional norm in work division
tend to have lower life satisfaction compared to those following more traditional
labour divisions, especially when the man is unemployed, and although variations
exist between countries, these distinctions are evident across Europe (Kowalewska
and Vitali 2023).
3.2.4 The Caregiver Parity Family Model
The caregiver parity model preserves traditional gender roles while assigning
them more equal value (Ciccia and Bleijenbergh 2014, p. 55). Despite women
continuing to bear the responsibility for childcare, the model acknowledges the
worth of their unpaid work through the provision of generous benefits, such
as substantial care allowances. Acknowledging the significance of childbirth,
child-rearing, and informal domestic tasks alongside formal employment aims
to guarantee similar levels of respect and well-being for both caregivers and
breadwinners (Fraser 1994, p. 606). The state compensations for women are tied
to their caring role, what aligns with the concept of maternalism (Ciccia 2017,
44 3 Family Models in Social Science Research
p. 2765) – elevating women’s nurturing roles and associated values to societal
ideals resulting in gendered policies that promote women as full-time caregivers
(Orloff 2006).
Moreover, this model is linked to the concept of familialism, which advocates
for family-led childcare. States that explicitly endorse parents taking care of their
children themselves by providing public funds contribute to the promotion of
a caregiver parity model (Javornik 2014, p. 242). So within this model “care-
givers receive subsidies to provide care at home” (Morgan 2009, p. 44). These
allowances should be substantial enough to adequately support a family, aligning
with a wage equivalent to that of a breadwinner (Fraser 1994).
Fraser (1994) initially formulated the caregiver parity family model7 as a con-
trasting counterpart to the traditional male breadwinner model – an ideal wherein
policies supporting this family structure would foster gender equality. This per-
spective aligns with the political approach of many Western European feminists
and social democrats, seeking to advance gender equality primarily through the
acknowledgement of unpaid care work (Fraser 1994, p. 605). “It treats caregiving
as intrinsically valuable, not as a mere obstacle to employment, thus challeng-
ing the view that only men’s traditional activities are fully human” (Fraser 1994,
p. 609). The goal is to make the gender difference costless8 (Littleton 1991) and
not to equalise gender by achieving parity between the lives of women with those
of men (Fraser 1994, p. 606).
Even if the valuation of care work increases, encouraging its dedicated pursuit,
and the acknowledgement of care intensifies, the equivalence of value between
care and paid work is questionable. Fraser (1994) echoes such reservations, noting
that while caregiving gains more respect in this model, the persistent association
of caregiving with femininity and breadwinning with masculinity, coupled with
economic disparities, makes achieving true parity between the two roles unlikely.
7 Fraser (1994) considers the possibility of caring women being part-time employed, empha-
sising the importance of flexibility in transitioning between caregiving and paid work, along
with opportunities for part-time employment. However, my definition of the caregiver parity
model is more narrow, excluding part-time employment. This narrower definition is justified
as I further discuss the modernised male breadwinner model, and a clear distinction between
these two models is crucial to avoid confusion. Many European welfare states support female
employment while also offering childcare allowances, which may seem to align with the
caregiver parity model. However, since this support does not alter the value attribution, and
caregiving remains less valued than paid work, it does not align with the ideal version of the
caregiver parity model discussed by Fraser (1994).
8 In the context of the United States, Littleton (1991, p. 49) suggests that the government
consider providing mothers with the same wages and benefits as those received by soldiers
to minimise the economic impact of gender differences.
3.2 Family Models 45
She argues that envisioning “separate but equal” gender roles is deemed insuffi-
cient for genuine equality. If gender equality is viewed as equal opportunities or
roles for both genders, this model results in a decrease in equality, as the recog-
nition of care creates negative incentives for women’s participation in the labour
market (Häusermann 2006, p. 6). While the caregiver parity model addresses
income inequality and the undervaluation of care work, its lack of concern about
the gendered distribution of labour further results in limited incentives for men to
engage in caregiving (Yamashita 2016, p. 436). Due to current cultural norms and
socialisation, men are less likely to opt for the caregiving track at the same rate as
women and prevailing labour market conditions make it more advantageous for
men to be the primary breadwinners in heterosexual couples, reinforcing tradi-
tional gender associations with the two employment tracks (Fraser 1994, p. 608).
Consequently, this model can exacerbate inequality, making it more challenging
for women in the labour market compared to the male breadwinner model, as
gender-related associations are reinforced. In essence, this family model “does
not value caregiving enough to demand that men do it too; it does not ask men
to change” (Fraser 1994, pp. 609–610).
3.2.5 The Universal Breadwinner Family Model
The universal breadwinner model is characterised by both parents engaging in
paid work full-time (Ciccia 2017; Fraser 1994). In the literature, it is also referred
to as the adult-worker model, assuming the full integration of all adults into the
labour market (Lewis 2001, p. 154). In this model, both men and women are fully
immersed in the workforce, a departure from the male breadwinner model. Unlike
the modernised male breadwinner model, where only part of the care needs to be
outsourced, the universal breadwinner model necessitates complete outsourcing
of care. Fraser (1994) describes this model next to the caregiver parity model as
replacement and proposed solutions to replace the traditional male breadwinner
and in their ideal forms as gender-equitable alternatives. In opposition to the
caregiver parity model, in the universal breadwinner model gender equality is
characterised by the equality or similarity between genders – “equal obligations
gender sameness” (Ciccia and Verloo 2012, p. 511).
It is precisely this gender egalitarian approach that makes this model not only
a theoretically discussed ideal (as in Fraser (1994), for example) but also a policy
ideal. The Scandinavian countries are frequently highlighted as a prime example,
where diverse family policies actively promote the universal breadwinner model,
contributing to its widespread adoption (Ellingsaeter 1999, pp. 41; Kowalewska
46 3 Family Models in Social Science Research
and Vitali 2021, p. 129). Merely encouraging women to enter the workforce,
such as through the provision of childcare facilities,9 falls short. As Fraser (1994)
emphasises, the success of these efforts hinges on an additional factor: the imple-
mentation of macroeconomic policies aimed at generating full-time, high-paying,
and secure employment for women. “These would have to be true breadwinner
jobs in the primary labour force, carrying full, first-class social-insurance enti-
tlements. Social insurance, finally, is central to universal breadwinner. The aim
here is to bring women up to parity with men in an institution that has tradi-
tionally disadvantaged them” (Fraser 1994, p. 602). In many places, women’s
employment has been promoted since Fraser (1994) wrote down her thoughts on
egalitarian family models, and has increased significantly. However, labour mar-
ket segregation in terms of gender is a prevalent problem, as discussed in the
previous section.
Another problem lies in the attribution of value. The idea that families should
be freed from care responsibilities leads to the undervaluation of care work and,
therefore, tasks relating to the household and children remain worthless in com-
parison to traditional gainful employment (Ciccia and Verloo 2012). Parental care
continues to be significantly undervalued, identified as a barrier to individuals’
complete engagement in the workforce. Consequently, the objective is not merely
to increase men’s involvement in unpaid labour but rather to reduce the burden on
women (Ciccia and Bleijenbergh 2014, p. 52). Thus, childcare must be delegated
to the realms of the state or market – transferred from the family environment
to formal institutions. However, this is accompanied by two further problems:
Firstly, care cannot be fully outsourced and secondly, the care responsibility
overwhelmingly stays with mothers. The subsequent section delves deeper into
elucidating these dual challenges.
9 The widespread assumption that women’s employment relies on public service availabil-
ity, and that public service provision reflects a “dual earner” gender ideology (Orloff 2002,
p. 12), does not capture an important distinction: In the context of international compar-
isons and the diverse contexts shaped by family policy regimes, there is another aspect to
be addressed within the framework of the universal breadwinner model: The differentia-
tion between societies characterised by a dual-earner/state-carer model and those featuring
a dual-earner/marketised-carer model (Crompton 1999). While both models show high rates
of maternal employment, the “state-caregiver” model, found in countries like state social-
ist nations during the 1980s, is characterised by robust public childcare systems, contrasting
with the “market-caregiver” model predominant in the United States, where mothers heavily
rely on private market care arrangements for their children (Gornick and Meyers 2009, p. 16).
Ciccia (2017) draws a similar distinction, categorising the universal breadwinner model into
“supported” and “unsupported”. In her analysis, Scandinavian countries, in particular, exhibit
elements of the supported model.
3.2 Family Models 47
In theory, the labour division in this family model is straightforward: both
parents are full-time involved in paid work, and external care is provided for the
children during this time – with childcare responsibilities primarily resting on the
state, while parents assume a limited role (Ciccia and Verloo 2012; Crompton,
1999). However, the reality of everyday family life is seldom so uncomplicated.
A prevalent practical challenge for working parents is the care of sick children,
a responsibility that falls predominantly on mothers rather than fathers (Boye
2015; Eriksson and Nermo 2010). This common example highlights a fundamen-
tal point – the burden of care responsibility persists with the mother (Gornick
and Meyers 2009, p. 17), even when she is fully employed. Fraser (1994) her-
self also admits that the model has its weaknesses, as “[s]ome things, such as
childbearing, attending to family emergencies, and much parenting work, cannot
be shifted” (Fraser 1994, p. 604) and other tasks that are eventually commodi-
fied do not vanish completely; instead, they generate new and time-consuming
coordination responsibilities. This further touches upon the previously mentioned
issue (at the end of Section 3.1) surrounding mental load. Lewis and Giullari
(2005, pp. 84–85) emphasise that care involves intricate personal and emotional
dimensions that resist easy commodification. They draw a distinction between
active and passive care, illustrating the latter as non-physical presence, such as
mothers concurrently contemplating their jobs while concerned about their chil-
dren’s well-being. Despite the growing availability of commodified care services,
the authors delve into the spatial and temporal fragmentation within family life.
This phenomenon, despite commodified options, introduces challenges in man-
aging caregiving responsibilities, especially for mothers. They conclude that the
demand for both organisational and personal aspects of care work remains high.
This underscores a persistent need for caregiving through parents, even with the
emergence of commodified care services.
The universal breadwinner model, by not challenging cultural norms that des-
ignate women with primary responsibility for unpaid work, may lead to women
bearing a dual burden due to conflicting expectations of being both a full-time
worker and a dedicated caregiver (Ciccia and Bleijenbergh 2014, p. 52). Without
significant shifts in how society values caregiving and social norms, and thus
without changes in the gendered distribution of care responsibilities, the work-
load for women is likely to increase substantially. In the context of the universal
breadwinner model, where women take on additional employment alongside their
caregiving duties – essentially working a second shift – this issue becomes
particularly pronounced (Fraser 1994). The concept of the second shift, coined
by Hochschild (1989), encapsulates the prevalent issue of gender imbalance
in domestic work, referring to the additional unpaid housework and caregiving
48 3 Family Models in Social Science Research
responsibilities often disproportionately shouldered by women after official work-
ing hours. Despite progress in gender equality within the professional sphere,
societal norms and cultural expectations persist in assigning women the primary
responsibility for household chores and childcare.
Consequently, many women navigate a dual role, managing professional com-
mitments during the day and undertaking a second shift of domestic duties upon
returning home. It’s worth noting that while time inequalities between the sexes
have evolved over time, a “new” inequality emerges, marked by disparities in
available leisure time (Sayer 2005).
In her strongly normative analysis, Fraser (1994) defines the universal breadwin-
ner and caregiver parity models very narrowly, describing them as “highly utopian
visions”. However, even in this highly idealised form, these models, as has now
been explained and also been recognised by Fraser (1994), do not result in com-
plete gender equality and exhibit negative aspects that warrant further exploration
and call for another – truly gender egalitarian – model.
3.2.6 The Universal Caregiver Family Model
To address the limitations of the previously discussed family models and advance
gender equity, Fraser (1994) proposes a genuinely egalitarian model. This model
goes beyond equalising gender roles, extending its egalitarian ethos to value
paid and unpaid work equally. Fraser (1994, p. 611) envisions “a postindus-
trial welfare state that combines the best of universal breadwinner with the best
of caregiver parity, while jettisoning the worst features of each”. According to
her, the achievement of gender equity entails making women’s current life pat-
terns – often involving both breadwinning and caregiving – the societal norm.
To realise this vision, the welfare state must actively prompt men to embrace
similar life patterns and reform institutions to mitigate challenges associated with
these dual roles. Her transformative approach seeks to dismantle the gendered
dichotomy between breadwinning and caregiving, integrating and destigmatising
these activities while fostering shared responsibilities across genders.
Although Fraser (1994) does not explicitly label this model, several feminist
welfare-state researchers, inspired by her concept, have named it universal care-
giver model (Ciccia and Bleijenbergh 2014; Ciccia and Verloo 2012), universal
carer/worker-worker/carer model (Lewis and Giullari 2005, p. 97), dual-earner/
dual-carer or dual-earner/dual-caregiver model (Crompton 1999; Gornick and
3.2 Family Models 49
Meyers 2003, 2009). While the universal caregiver model has replaced the uni-
versal breadwinner model as an ideal in social science research, it has not been
fully implemented in any welfare system’s family policies to date, remaining an
ideal (Ciccia and Verloo 2012, p. 520). Fraser (1994)’s concept left a profound
impact on the field as it introduced a novel perspective, shifting away from a
primary focus on women. Instead, it advocates for substantial change in men,
urging them “to become more like most women are now – that is, people who
do primary care work” (Fraser 1994, p. 611).
The universal caregiver model depicts part-time working parents who collabo-
ratively shoulder care responsibilities, thereby both engaging in caregiving (Ciccia
and Verloo 2012). This model fundamentally diverges from traditional male and
universal breadwinner models in two ways: firstly, as it entails a shift in paternal
behaviour and secondly, as it attributes equal value to care and paid work. Unlike
the female breadwinner model, economic pressure is not a primary driver in the
universal caregiver model; instead, it is rooted in fundamental gender egalitarian
values. The model aims at promoting gender equity through the promotion of an
egalitarian involvement in both paid and unpaid work among men and women
(Fraser 1994). Ciccia and Verloo (2012, p. 511) further characterise the model as
embodying “transformative gender sameness”, emphasising its capacity to bring
about substantial changes in gender roles both within and beyond the labour mar-
ket. This transformation extends beyond the workplace, as seen in the transfer of
caregiving responsibilities from mothers to fathers (Fraser 1994). Simultaneously,
within the workforce, the model advocates for the recognition of equal rights for
both parents, enabling them to reduce their paid work hours in favour of child-
care (Gornick and Meyers 2009, p. 17). As both men and women are expected
to equally participate in both work and caregiving, the responsibility for care
extends to both families and public entities such as the state and employers (Cic-
cia and Bleijenbergh 2014, p. 56). Nevertheless, the primary responsibility for the
care of very young children is predominantly assigned to the household setting
(Ciccia and Verloo 2012, p. 511). In this family model, the significance of care
is acknowledged, fostering various caregiving arrangements, both by parents and
non-parental figures, to enhance the well-being of children (Gornick and Meyers
2009, p. 17).
While the universal caregiver family model represents an ideal of shared care-
giving responsibilities, achieving it may face challenges rooted in cultural norms,
societal expectations and ingrained gender roles. As already mentioned, unlike
the universal breadwinner model, the universal caregiver model places a signifi-
cantly higher value on care. Hence, a fundamental re-conceptualisation of care is
imperative, recognising its importance “in terms of reproductive work and as a
50 3 Family Models in Social Science Research
source of personal fulfilment” (Ciccia and Verloo 2012, p. 509). This perspective
acknowledges that access to care should be equally available to both women and
men. In this context, Lewis and Giullari (2005) emphasise the value of providing
genuine choice between employment and caregiving. According to them, crafting
social policies that enable such choice is challenging yet crucial, as both employ-
ment and care are indispensable for human flourishing. Viewing care and work
as non-negotiable for human welfare, the choice between them is characterised
more by tragedy than opportunity. In that respect, addressing policies that shape
individuals’ choices becomes paramount (Lewis and Giullari 2005).
Building upon this perspective, I argue that the universal caregiver model – as
the only family model that truly promotes gender equity – meets the normative
ideals of liberal democracies; it champions freedom of choice, allowing families
to align with their unique norms and values. As concisely expressed by Gor-
nick and Meyers (2003, p. 92), it is “fundamentally gender egalitarian”. Policies
aiming at other family models endorse specific family structures and tend to be
strongly normative, being restrictive of individual freedom of choice and hinder-
ing alternative arrangements. Therefore, the focus is on family policies that create
conditions for each family to organise itself based on its preferences and needs.
Establishing structures facilitating both mothers and fathers engaging in gainful
employment and caregiving, as embodied by a universal caregiver model, enables
families to tailor arrangements to their individual needs within these possibilities.
To realise a genuine choice between paid work and care, specific policies
are necessary, encompassing “time to care, cash for care, care services, and
the regulation of working hours” (Lewis and Giullari 2005, p. 96). Lewis and
Giullari (2005, p. 97) describe affordable, available and high-quality care options
as well as financial support for care work as central components for any approach
to such a model, in addition to the provision of time for care work. High-quality
publicly funded childcare services universally accessible to all is also one key
aspect of the policy package conceptualised by Gornick and Meyers (2009). They
advocate for substantial paid leave for both mothers and fathers individually,
along with regulations on working hours to limit full-time work and improve
the accessibility and quality of part-time job opportunities. These labour mar-
ket characteristics go hand in hand with Fraser (1994)’s elaborations, where all
jobs acknowledge individuals also as caregivers. In her vision, every job would
entail a shorter work week compared to current full-time standards and include
services that facilitate employment. However, distinct from the universal bread-
winner model, Fraser (1994) argues against the assumption that all care work
should be shifted entirely to social services. Instead, she advocates for public
3.2 Family Models 51
support of certain informal care work, integrating it seamlessly “with paid work
in a single social-insurance system” (Fraser 1994, p. 612).
In delving deeper into the overarching policy framework of the social state,
Fraser (1994, p. 592) elucidates that conventional welfare state models, rooted in
presumptions of male-headed families and secure employment, no longer offer
effective protection against uncertainties. This underscores the imperative for a
paradigm shift towards a postindustrial welfare state, she states, tailored to the
modern intricacies of employment and reproduction. In the forthcoming chapter,
I delve into the landscape of family policy within postindustrial welfare states,
examining the complex interplay between specific reconciliation policies and the
dynamics of employment and care.
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use,
sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you
give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s
Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If
material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use
is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
permission directly from the copyright holder.
4
Reconciliation Policies and Gendered
Division of Labour
Having concluded in the previous chapter that the universal caregiver model is
the model that would genuinely foster gender equality, in this chapter, a literature
overview delves into the historical evolution of family policy research, tracing
its development. Focusing on contemporary studies within the realm of welfare
states, I explore the transformation from traditional male breadwinner models to
the modern-day emphasis on “employment for all”. Moving beyond conceptual
frameworks, I critically assess the influence of reconciliation policies, specifically
childcare services and parental leave schemes, on female labour market partic-
ipation and their broader impact on gendered work patterns within households.
As I navigate through the state of research, I discuss the nuanced effects of these
policies on childcare, maternal employment, and the evolving roles of fathers.
However, the debate on whether reconciliation policies lead to a truly egalitarian
family model persists, highlighting the need for ongoing research in this field.
4.1 Family Policy and Female Labour Market
Participation
Family policy research emerged in the early twentieth century, marked by the
initial cross-national studies that began comparing family policies across the
globe (Gauthier and Koops 2018, p. 11). Four distinct research lines, as outlined
by Gauthier and Koops (2018, p. 11), have since evolved: (1) early compar-
ative cross-national research with a descriptive focus, (2) subsequent studies on
regimes and typology development, (3) a quantitative perspective exploring deter-
minants of family policies, and (4) a recent literature expansion examining the
outcomes of family policies. Within this fourth strand of research lines, con-
temporary research on welfare states has extensively explored the influence of
© The Author(s) 2025
M. Lütolf, The Balancing Act of Working Mothers and Caring Fathers,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5_4
53
54 4 Reconciliation Policies and Gendered Division of Labour
social policies on gender relations, revealing that modern welfare systems have
historically relied on a male breadwinner model (see, e.g., Daly 2010; Lewis
1992, 2001; Mahon 2002; O’Connor 1993; Orloff 1993, 2010; Pateman 2006;
Sainsbury 1994b). Despite not reflecting the reality of all families, the post-war
decades saw a degree of convergence towards the male breadwinner model (Lewis
2001; Mahon 2002). But subsequent changes in women’s labour market participa-
tion, educational attainment and changing family structures have led to a gradual
departure from the traditional male breadwinner/female home-maker model in
many affluent welfare democracies (Oláh 2011), marking a shift towards “em-
ployment for all” (Orloff 2006, p. 230) as opposed to maternalist policies (see,
e.g., Crompton 2001; Leitner 2003; Lewis 2001; Mahon 2002).
In recent decades, substantial research has explored the influence of reconcilia-
tion policies, specifically childcare services and parental leave schemes, on female
labour market participation and the broader division of labour within households.
Regarding childcare policies, the literature consistently finds that the provision of
childcare is positively correlated with increased maternal employment (Ferragina
2019). Childcare policies play a pivotal role in reshaping traditional work-family
dynamics for mothers. By partially or fully relieving them of childcare respon-
sibilities, these policies open avenues for increased maternal employment. This
redistribution of caregiving to external institutions not only lightens individual
burdens but also signals societal acceptance of working mothers. Scholars such as
Blofield and Martínez Franzoni (2015), Gangl and Ziefle (2015), Hook and Paek
(2020), and Mahon (2002) have extensively examined the transformative impact
of childcare policies on work-family relationships. This shift challenges tradi-
tional norms, fostering an environment that embraces the dual roles of working
and motherhood. Cross-national studies suggest that the effectiveness of childcare
policies in enhancing maternal employment is intricately linked to policy design
factors. These factors include access to childcare services (Morrissey 2017),
affordability (Bütler 2007; Mahon 2011; Morrissey 2017; Vuri 2016), quality
(Hegewisch and Gornick 2011, p. 128), and the availability of extended time
slots (Iten et al. 2005). The probability of women remaining in the labour market
or taking up employment after childbirth is highest when childcare services are
available, affordable, of good quality, and cover extended time slots (Hegewisch
and Gornick 2011, p. 128).
In contrast to the straightforward impact of childcare services on maternal
employment, the ramifications of parental leave schemes on labour force par-
ticipation are more nuanced. While on one hand, “parental leave schemes have
4.1 Family Policy and Female Labour Market Participation 55
the potential to shore up women’s employment” (Ray et al. 2010, p. 198), pre-
venting their permanent exit from the labour market after childbirth and reducing
job turnover (Ray et al. 2010), on the other hand, there is a widespread scientific
consensus that these schemes may have adverse and potentially counterproductive
effects on maternal employment. The crux of this contradiction lies in the specific
policy design (more on specific parental leave policy design in Chapter 5). The
length of leave, monetary compensation, as well as opportunities and incentives
for leave distribution between parents vary widely across policies (Koslowski
et al. 2020). In this vein, various authors contend that choosing an extended period
of maternal leave decreases the chances of mothers engaging in employment,
given that prolonged leaves result in a decline of their human capital and render
them less appealing to potential employers (Datta Gupta et al. 2008; Gangl and
Ziefle 2015; Gornick and Meyers 2003; Jaumotte 2004; Lalive and Zweimüller
2009; Morgan and Zippel 2003). Contrarily, short to moderate maternal leaves,
coupled with provisions for paternity leave and monetary compensations, not only
increase the probability of mothers resuming the same employment after the leave
period but also mitigate the comparative disadvantage and wage penalty linked to
motherhood (Gornick and Meyers 2003). So, this comparative disadvantage can
partly be countered by making leaves shareable between mothers and fathers,
promoting paternal co-responsibility (Blofield and Martínez Franzoni 2015). To
encourage fathers to take leave, a combination of generous income-related bene-
fits and a father’s quota appears essential (Karu and Tremblay 2017). With regard
to monetary compensation, current research suggests that unpaid leave periods
reduce the employment probability of mothers, as women may quit work before
childbirth and, thus, not return to their job after the leave (see, e.g., Boushey
2008).
Furthermore, the effectiveness of diverse policy measures in reconciling work
and family relations is contingent upon their specific designs (Olivetti and Petron-
golo 2017; Stadelmann-Steffen 2011). The impact of these measures is not only
influenced by their design but also by the broader policy and cultural context
within which they operate. Various research highlights the contextual factors
shaping the outcomes of policy interventions (Boeckmann et al. 2015; Budig
et al. 2012; Ciccia and Bleijenbergh 2014; Cooke 2011; Daly and Ferragina
2018; Gangl and Ziefle 2015; Meyers et al. 1999; Michel and Mahon 2002;
Pfau-Effinger 2005; Vuri 2016). Moreover, numerous scholars have delved into
the normative ideals that underlie different reconciliation strategies, as well as the
resulting policy configurations and combinations. Ferragina (2019), Gornick and
Meyers (2003), Leitner (2003), Lewis (2001), and Olivetti and Petrongolo (2017)
56 4 Reconciliation Policies and Gendered Division of Labour
are among those who have contributed to discussions on the normative foun-
dations of diverse policy approaches aimed at facilitating the balance between
work and family responsibilities. Understanding these normative ideals is crucial
for evaluating the potential success and impact of policy measures in fostering
a more egalitarian distribution of work and family life. Thus, the effectiveness
of childcare and parental leave policies in shaping family models depends on
their alignment towards common goals. For example, generous childcare poli-
cies are most effective when accompanied by leave policies that promote father’s
involvement in childcare from the beginning (Ciccia and Bleijenbergh 2014).
Policy interactions and their alignment with broader policy regimes are crucial
considerations in understanding the impact of reconciliation policies on gendered
work patterns (Daly and Ferragina 2018).
4.2 The Impact of Reconciliation Policies
on Gendered Work Patterns
The previous section examined the impact of reconciliation policies on mothers’
employment. This section will expand the discussion to include unpaid work and
the division of work within the household. It will show that reconciliation policies
can influence gender norms, increase paternal involvement in care and household
duties, and thus promote egalitarian family models. However, the precise design
of the policy is crucial.
Summarising the literature, reconciliation policies are recognised as vital in
promoting female labour market participation, especially during children’s earli-
est years. However, the question of whether these policies contribute to a more
egalitarian division of labour beyond the labour market is debated. Some evidence
suggests that reconciliation policies may indeed influence gender-specific labour
patterns beyond the workforce, impacting childcare and household responsibilities
(Stadelmann-Steffen and Oehrli 2017). In other words, these policies may have
normative effects, not only shaping individuals’ attitudes toward gender roles but
also indirectly influencing their behaviour in terms of labour allocation (Hook
2006; Stadelmann-Steffen and Oehrli 2017).
The rationale, on the one hand, is that the resources and opportunities avail-
able to employed mothers grow, enhancing their bargaining power within the
household (Greenstein 2000; Hook 2010). In this context, Sullivan et al. (2009)
show that the allocation of time by fathers and mothers to childcare activities cor-
relates with the policy landscape in Norway, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.
Furthermore, Hook (2010) provides evidence suggesting that the increased labour
4.2 The Impact of Reconciliation Policies on Gendered Work Patterns 57
market engagement of women, likely stemming from the implementation of egali-
tarian family policies, is linked to reduced gender segregation in household tasks.
On the other hand, by facilitating mothers’ entry or sustained presence in the
workforce, reconciliation policies contribute to dismantling patriarchal norms
and cultural expectations regarding gendered labour allocation within house-
holds (Hook 2006). This aligns with evolving ideals of fatherhood, emphasising
increased paternal involvement in childcare and household duties (Brandth and
Kvande 1998; Wall and Arnold 2007).
The literature on fatherhood and masculinity highlights men’s changing role
in the within-household division of labour. Brandth and Kvande (1998, p. 294)
argue that the traditional image of a good father solely focused on generating
income has evolved into a “new-father image”, emphasising increased participa-
tion in childcare and household duties. Wall and Arnold (2007) anticipate that
childcare policies contribute to this shift by challenging traditional understand-
ings of women’s sole caregiving responsibility. Other scholars discuss paternal
leave as a key factor supporting this evolution (Bünning 2015; Ciccia and Ver-
loo 2012; Haas and Hwang 2008). Bünning (2015) demonstrates, based on panel
data, that even a short paternity leave prompts fathers to increase their child-
care activities. Fathers who take longer leaves, especially while their partners are
working, further increase their share of housework (Bünning 2015).
Taken together, this suggests that reconciliation policies play a role in fostering
more egalitarian behaviour patterns within households (Ciccia and Bleijenbergh
2014). Consequently, policies explicitly designed to promote egalitarian family
models are anticipated to influence how households allocate their time, resulting
in a more equitable division of labour between spouses. Moreover, it is reason-
able to expect that parents in different family policy regimes allocate both paid
and unpaid labour within households in accordance with the goals outlined in
respective reconciliation policies (Ciccia and Bleijenbergh 2014). In essence, the
varying family policy regimes are not confined to the labour market; they extend
to shaping distinct lived family models.
However, critics argue that the maintenance of women in the labour market
does not necessarily lead to fundamental changes in gender-specific work pat-
terns (see, e.g., Lewis 2001). Mothers, particularly those with infants, may often
find themselves in part-time positions with lower pay and limited advancement
prospects, in contrast to their fully employed male partners (see, e.g., Lewis
et al. 2008). While reconciliation policies have the potential to narrow the gen-
der gap in labour market participation, they also carry the risk of intensifying
gender-related labour market segregation (Korpi et al. 2013; Mandel and Semy-
onov 2006). Examinations of parental leave schemes across various nations, even
58 4 Reconciliation Policies and Gendered Division of Labour
those instituting father quotas, reveal a persistent imbalance, with women con-
tinuing to assume a substantial portion of the total leave (Datta Gupta et al.
2008; Morgan 2009; Morgan and Zippel 2003). While this phenomenon directly
impacts women’s prospects in the labour market, it also underscores the enduring
perception that the “responsibility for care still lies largely with women” (Morgan
2009, p. 45).
Moreover, studies indicate that the stronger integration of women into paid
labour does not necessarily translate into a more egalitarian division of labour
in other spheres of life. Women often continue to bear the larger share of
unpaid work at home, irrespective of their labour market involvement (Lewis
2001; Nitsche and Grunow 2016; Sayer 2005). Women in high-demand careers
may experience guilt due to their norm-deviant behaviour and overcompensate
in household activities (Greenstein 2000), while men may reinforce traditional
gender norms by avoiding unpaid work (Risman 1998). This persistent dynamic
challenges the notion of a significant shift in how men allocate their time across
various life spheres (see, e.g., Lewis 2001; Lewis et al. 2008). At the same
time, women facing time conflicts are inclined to reduce their working hours
in paid employment or leisure activities rather than diminishing their commit-
ments to childcare and household responsibilities (Craig 2007). This resistance to
reducing care time perpetuates the traditional gendered dynamics and hinders the
transformation of the female care domain into a more gender-egalitarian sphere.
Although reconciliation policies may modernise the male breadwinner model,
scholars argue that they might not directly lead to an egalitarian family model
(see, e.g., Crompton 2001; Gornick and Meyers 2003; Lewis 2001; Oehrli et al.
2024). While policies can impact women’s participation in the workforce, the
division of unpaid work within a family is ultimately shaped by the underly-
ing norms of a couple (Motiejunaite and Kravchenko 2008; Nitsche and Grunow
2016). Within this context, Nitsche and Grunow (2016) establish a distinct cor-
relation in their examination of panel data. Their findings highlight a strong
association between an egalitarian gender ideology of the partners and a more
equitable distribution of housework. Notably, their findings indicate that resources
do not emerge as a significant factor influencing this division. Additionally,
Motiejunaite and Kravchenko (2008) show that the assumption that varying fam-
ily policy contexts have consequences beyond the labour market and reflect in
varying lived family models is not self-evident as the “everyday” gender con-
tract may differ from the official one. Overall, the link between the policy
regime and the within-household division of work may be more complex and
additionally include group-specific differences, e.g., depend on gender-related
4.3 Egalitarian Families: Fathers Leading the Change … 59
norms or, for example, on educational level (Berghammer 2014; Pronzato 2009;
Stadelmann-Steffen 2011).
In conclusion, reconciliation policies play a pivotal role in shaping female
labour market participation and the division of labour within households. While
they contribute to evolving gender norms and paternal involvement, their effec-
tiveness in fostering egalitarian family models depends on careful policy design
and needs further research.
4.3 Egalitarian Families: Fathers Leading the Change
from Breadwinners to Caregivers
While previous research predominantly centred on female employment (Boeck-
mann et al. 2015; Cascio et al. 2015; Ferragina 2019; Korpi et al. 2013; Orloff
2002; Schönberg and Ludsteck 2014), I posit that the research focus should now
shift to fathers to comprehend how the transition from a universal breadwinner to
caregiver role could be promoted. Although more than thirty years have passed
since Fraser (1994) introduced the idea of a universal caregiver model, we are still
far from witnessing the widespread adoption of such a family model. Therefore,
it is increasingly crucial to outline measures that actively support its realisation.
As outlined in Chapter 3, fostering a universal caregiver model is key to egalitar-
ianism. Hence, two fundamental changes are imperative for transitioning towards
this model:
1. The promotion of women’s gainful employment.
2. The promotion of caregiving responsibilities for men.
Even if the universal caregiver model no longer encompasses gender-specific
distinctions, the trajectory toward this model is inherently gendered, given the
existing status quo. Orloff (2002, p. 41) outlines the intentional progression from
the current starting point, asserting, “encouraging men’s caregiving is essential,
as is encouraging women’s integration into paid employment while allowing their
continued caregiving”. It is through this gender-oriented approach that a conver-
gence of the two sexes becomes conceivable, paving the way for the development
of an egalitarian family structure. If we were to reach a future state devoid of
gender specificity, policies supporting a universal caregiver model would cease to
be differentiated by gender. Presently, however, the starting point is the traditional
or modernised male breadwinner model upon which most welfare state systems
are predicated.
60 4 Reconciliation Policies and Gendered Division of Labour
Taking a comprehensive approach, it becomes evident that analysing households
as a whole, considering the entire family and the dynamics between parents,
is crucial. The overarching question revolves around the extent to which cur-
rent family policy measures provide incentives for a universal caregiver model.
While the promotion of women’s employment and related policies has been exten-
sively researched (see Section 4.1), the transition to a universal caregiver model
poses greater complexity. This shift not only targets fathers but also necessi-
tates additional policy interventions. There is limited understanding of how this
transition, especially the reduction of paternal gainful employment in favour of
caregiving, can be actively supported by state measures. Despite family models
ultimately involving the entire household, my focus is, therefore, on fathers and
their behaviour.
Historically, the universal breadwinner model was perceived as the ideal
to aspire to, leading previous research to predominantly focus on women and
policies influencing their behaviour (see, e.g., Boeckmann et al. 2015; Cas-
cio et al. 2015; Ferragina 2019; Korpi et al. 2013; Schönberg and Ludsteck
2014). However, to advance the universal caregiver model, a pivotal determinant
is the transformation of fathers’ behaviour. Policies affecting mothers’ labour
participation do not significantly shift fathers from gainful employment to care-
giving. Conversely, parental leave policies are believed to have noteworthy effects
(Rubery 2015), differing from other policies “in the sense that they can actually
attract non-carers into care” (Ciccia and Verloo 2012, p. 508). Studies indicate
that, thus far, the specific design of parental leave policies stands as the sole
recognised approach with the capacity to influence the amount of time fathers
dedicate to caregiving (Arnalds et al. 2022; Bünning 2015; Castro-García and
Pazos-Moran 2016; Dearing 2016; Meil 2013; Patnaik 2019; Ray et al. 2010;
Rubery 2015). While limited research exists on this topic, some initial findings
on the long-term effects of parental leave uptake by fathers are visible, albeit with
contradictory findings in some cases: an increase in fathers’ emotional investment
and their relationship with the infant (O’Brien 2009), fathers are more engaged in
childcare (Arnalds et al. 2022; Meil 2013) and in addition to childcare, housework
is also shared more equally between the parents (Almqvist and Duvander 2014).
Nevertheless, conflicting outcomes emerge, as Gonalons-Pons (2023) uncovers
an accentuated gender-based segregation in unpaid work with the introduction of
paid leave policies. This involves a more substantial rise in caregiving respon-
sibilities for mothers compared to fathers, alongside an increase in household
chores for fathers, while mothers experience no such change.
There are also different results with regard to the effects on paternal employ-
ment: Bünning (2015), next to the additional involvement in childcare, also finds
4.3 Egalitarian Families: Fathers Leading the Change … 61
a decrease in fathers’ working hours. Although Tamm (2019) confirms the long-
term effects on childcare and housework, he does not find a lasting effect on
fathers’ working hours. In contrast, Patnaik (2019) states in her research on the
effect of a so-called daddy quota1 that “paternity leave reduces sex specializa-
tion long after the leave period” (Patnaik 2019, p. 1009). Specifically, she notes
that mothers spend more time at paid work, fathers spend more time at home,
as well as that fathers do more and mothers less housework compared to parents
who do not benefit from such a daddy quota. She underscores the importance of
specific labels such as “daddy-only” and financial compensation, as well as the
critical role of the initial parenthood period, emphasising the path-dependency of
parental behaviour (Patnaik 2019, p. 1013).
The birth of a child and the initial period afterwards are recognised as a
critical time during which a couple must navigate new roles, and the emerging
tasks and responsibilities are redistributed (Huerta et al. 2014; Schober and Zoch
2019; Tanaka and Waldfogel 2007). Since parenthood amplifies gender-specific
roles and the gendered allocation of tasks within couples, leading to a significant
transition in women’s focus towards unpaid labour, while men’s emphasis on paid
work remains unchanged, this is exactly where policies have the potential to make
a difference (Gonalons-Pons 2023, p. 1745). As parental leave aligns precisely
with this period, it is presumed that significant potential exists for shaping how
parents organise themselves and determining the lasting nature of their division
of responsibilities towards greater egalitarianism.
The mechanism behind this relationship can be explained in several ways: An
intense bond is formed between father and child during the leave, influencing
gender and parental identity (Schober and Zoch 2019). Patnaik (2019) describes
a similar identity effect for mothers, stating, “the wives of men who take leave
may enjoy the experience of committing to their careers while being supported
by a helpful spouse at home, and they may experience disutility from returning
to traditional gender roles” (Patnaik 2019, pp. 1020). Secondly, fathers’ childcare
skills are known to improve during this leave period (Schober and Zoch 2019).
The time devoted to caring for their children during the leave period allows
fathers to cultivate and enhance their skills in nurturing and addressing their
child’s needs. Moreover, during the leave, parents divide specific tasks, and each
parent enhances their skills in these designated areas. This specialisation makes
a later change in task-sharing costly and unattractive (Patnaik 2019, p. 1020).
To avoid unnecessary additional expenses, parents are more likely to stick with
their established division, even after the leave has ended. On the contrary, when a
1 Parental leave that is specifically granted to the father and is not transferable to the mother.
62 4 Reconciliation Policies and Gendered Division of Labour
father remains an active part of the workforce, his role at home often assumes the
position of a helper. However, opting to stay at home after childbirth and actively
engaging in parenting leads to a shift in tasks and roles. As stated by Rehel
(2014, p. 110): “This shift from a manager-helper dynamic to that of coparenting
creates the opportunity for the development of a more gender-equitable division
of labour.” This observation resonates seamlessly with identity theories and a role
occupancy perspective, proposing that a father’s identity undergoes a transforma-
tive process while he is on leave, reflective of his newfound experiences (Schober
and Scott 2012; Schober and Zoch 2019).
In conclusion, it is evident that taking parental leave has the potential to
encourage fathers to become more involved in caregiving even after the leave
concludes. The question at hand is how policy design can maximise this effect
and enhance fathers’ utilisation of leave. Research indicates that many fathers
either do not use these policies at all or only partially (Jurado-Guerrero and
Muñoz-Comet 2021; Reimer 2020; Rostgaard and Ejrnæs 2021; Saarikallio-Torp
and Miettinen 2021). The specific designs and individual aspects of parental leave
policies are central to this discussion and must be thoroughly examined (Haas
and Rostgaard 2011, p. 181). Therefore, the next chapter is dedicated entirely to
exploring parental leave policies.
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use,
sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you
give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s
Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If
material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use
is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
permission directly from the copyright holder.
5
The Design of Parental Leave Policies
This chapter explores the historical evolution and ongoing reforms of parental
leave, with emphasis on four key aspects: duration, sharing, monetary compensa-
tion, and flexibility. Section 5.1 introduces the diverse landscape of parental leave
policies and their impact on parental behaviour, culminating in a blueprint for an
ideal policy that challenges traditional gender roles, addresses economic barriers,
and fosters gender equality. Turning to fathers, Section 5.2 acknowledges their
evolving role in child-rearing, particularly examining the impact of the duration of
paternal leave on egalitarian parenting. To address the second sub-research ques-
tion, hypotheses 1 and 2 are developed. Section 5.3 explores causal relationships
and discusses the impact of egalitarian leave policies on fathers’ time allocation.
Thus, this section addresses the third sub-research question and outlines it in
hypotheses. Overall, this chapter lays the groundwork for a comprehensive anal-
ysis of paternal leave policies and their impact on achieving egalitarian family
dynamics. In brief, the objective is to address the question posed at the end of
the previous chapter: How can policy design encourage fathers to take parental
leave and play a more active role in parenting?
5.1 Parental Leave in its Essence
Parental leave refers to the period of time an employee takes off work to care
for a child, typically following childbirth or adoption. Historically, parental leave
policies primarily targeted mothers, providing them with a designated period for
postnatal recovery and infant care. In contrast, fathers often had limited access
to formal parental leave, which perpetuated traditional gender roles and hindered
their involvement in caregiving responsibilities (Haas and Rostgaard 2011). While
© The Author(s) 2025
M. Lütolf, The Balancing Act of Working Mothers and Caring Fathers,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5_5
63
64 5 The Design of Parental Leave Policies
the expansion of leave policies and the inclusion of fathers began in the Scandi-
navian countries in the 1970s, continental and Southern Europe followed suit in
the 1980s and 1990s with various reforms (Morgan 2009). However, these pro-
cesses are not yet complete, and new reforms for greater egalitarianism continue
to be implemented.
Parental leave policies are grounded in the principle that parents have the right
to take time off work after the birth of their child to care for their child without
risking their job. The specific structures of these policies are diverse and encom-
pass various aspects that warrant careful study, given their wide-ranging effects
on parental behaviour (Haas and Rostgaard 2011, p. 181). The configurations of
parental leave can be categorised into different aspects based on various litera-
ture (see, e.g., Blum et al. 2023; Ciccia and Verloo 2012; Kaufman et al. 2020;
Thévenon 2018). This facilitates a more nuanced discussion and brings struc-
ture to the various forms. The first aspect is the duration, determining how long
the leave lasts. The second aspect involves the entitlement of individuals to the
policy and the extent to which it can be divided between the parents – the shar-
ing aspect. The third aspect pertains to monetary compensation, specifying the
extent to which the loss of salary is compensated during this time off. The final
aspect addresses the flexibility of the care period, exploring whether it can be
divided or must be taken in one go. It also considers whether there are specified
time frames for the care period and whether employment is permitted during this
time and under what conditions. These four aspects are discussed in detail in the
subsequent Subsection 5.1.1.
5.1.1 The Four Aspects of Parental Leave Configurations
In the following, the current state of research on these individual aspects is dis-
cussed. From this, I conceptualise the ideal design of parental leave measures
which are subsequently empirically tested. I draw from existing research –
which has traditionally concentrated on the universal breadwinner model and
the behaviour of mothers – and translate its insights into the universal caregiver
model and therefore including the effects of various arrangements on fathers.
Duration
Today, the landscape of parental leave spans a broad spectrum, offering varying
durations ranging from no leave at all to extended periods of up to three years
(Addati et al. 2014). The relationship between maternal leave duration and work-
force participation reveals a curvilinear progression, with the optimal leave duration
5.1 Parental Leave in its Essence 65
for maximising maternal engagement in the workforce situated at a moderate dura-
tion (Ferragina 2019). Extensive studies point towards an optimal length of leave
of approximately one year for mothers (Boeckmann et al. 2015). Shorter periods
of leave may lead to a decline in mothers’ involvement in paid employment, while
longer leaves have been associated with increased gender inequality both at home
and in the workplace (Schönberg and Ludsteck 2014). Domestic gender dispari-
ties increase significantly when mothers take prolonged leaves from the workforce
(Gornick and Meyers 2003). Prolonged absences from the workforce may result in
decreased participation in the labour force for mothers for mainly two reasons: First,
prolonged leave decreases women’s participation in the labour market because they
loose touch with their profession and network, and second, employers anticipate
such prolonged breaks and thus preemptively do not hire women, particularly if
fathers are entitled to significantly shorter paternity leaves (Gloor et al. 2018).
As highlighted in the introduction (refer to Subsection 1.2.2), a noticeable
research gap concerning the impact of parental leave duration on fathers exists. This
gap stems from data limitations, as fathers often do not fully take-up their avail-
able leave options. A significant proportion either abstains from using their leave
entitlement altogether or only utilises a fraction of it (see, e.g., Jurado-Guerrero
and Muñoz-Comet 2021; Reimer 2020; Rostgaard and Ejrnæs 2021; Saarikallio-
Torp and Miettinen 2021). The scarcity of data variation on leave duration poses a
substantial challenge for a comprehensive analysis. Existing research on leave dura-
tion and its effects on fathers reveals the following trends: Essentially, the effects
observed in numerous studies indicate that fathers who take paternity leave tend to
do more unpaid work than those who do not take leave. These differences are further
amplified by a longer duration of the leave period (for a more detailed exploration,
see Section 5.2). However, in the categorisation of leave duration, Huerta et al.
(2014), as well as Nepomnyaschy and Waldfogel (2007), group together all fathers
who took leave for two weeks and longer, impeding meaningful predictions about
leave durations extending to several months. Taking a closer look at the study by
Haas and Hwang (2008) which examined 356 fathers in Sweden, 58% of whom
took leave lasting between 2 and 212 days (with an average of 47.56 days), a pattern
emerges: As the duration of leave increases, these fathers took on significantly more
childcare duties. This reveals a distinct trend of increased effects with longer leave
durations for Sweden. Yet, it remains to be determined whether there is a point of
reversal, similar to that observed for women where the effect diminishes again, or
if a plateau effect occurs. A plateau effect would imply that the impact stagnates
after a certain length of leave, no longer exhibiting an increase, but also avoiding
a decrease. Consequently, determining an ideal leave duration for fathers, at which
the maximum effect is achieved, remains an unresolved aspect of this research.
66 5 The Design of Parental Leave Policies
In line with these research findings, efforts have been made to identify an opti-
mal duration for both parents. While a sufficient length of leave is important, longer
maternal leaves can reinforce traditional gender roles, potentially limiting fathers’
involvement in caregiving responsibilities. Thus, the duration of parental leave
emerges as a crucial factor not only in shaping individual career trajectories but
also in influencing broader societal dynamics related to gender roles and equality.
Striking the right balance in parental leave not only ensures maternal workforce
participation but also plays a crucial role in fostering gender equality both at home
and in the professional sphere. Gornick and Meyers (2008) identify a range of six to
twelve months per parent for the most gender-equitable parental leave, with Kauf-
man et al. (2020) specifying this further and concluding that six months per parent
is the ideal duration.
Sharing
In numerous countries, parental leave policies include both individually allocated,
non-transferable leave shares for each parent, as well as leave entitlements that can
be freely divided between parents. Despite these options, empirical evidence consis-
tently highlights a stark pattern: The majority of such freely divisible entitlements
are predominantly utilised by mothers (Castellanos-Serrano et al. 2024; Haas and
Hwang 2019; Reimer 2020). Strikingly, fathers not only underutilised joint parental
leave but also make limited or no use of specific time slots designated for paternal
leave (Castro-García and Pazos-Moran 2016; Kaufman 2017; Saarikallio-Torp and
Miettinen 2021).
Numerous factors contribute to this, encompassing financial considerations,
expectations related to gender roles, resistance perceived within the work envi-
ronment, and policy restrictions (Kaufman 2017, p. 310). To illustrate, in a survey
experiment, Petts et al. (2022) confirm a negative association between taking leave
and perceived job commitment. However, an intriguing aspect emerges regarding
the labelling of these entitlements. O’Brien (2009) suggests that gender-neutral
parental leave forms may be too implicit, advocating for a “more explicit labeling
to legitimize paternal access to the care of infants” (O’Brien 2009, p. 199). The
signalling effect of such father-specific attribution is underscored by Meil (2013,
p. 568) and aligns with the perspective of Patnaik (2019), who sees a reduction in
stigma costs through a distinct label, such as a “daddy quota”. It sends a public
signal to promote paternal involvement and, above all, for fathers themselves: “The
non-transferable element sends a strong prescriptive and moral signal to fathers,
because at one point the legislator decided to give men an individual entitlement to
care for their new-born children, despite a long-lasting tradition of assigning care of
small children to women” (Jurado-Guerrero and Muñoz-Comet 2021, p. 597). This
5.1 Parental Leave in its Essence 67
is reinforced by a study on the extended Norwegian paternity quota (from 6 to 10
weeks), demonstrating an immediate and significant rise in paternity leave uptake
(Hart et al. 2022).
According to Patnaik (2019), the label of a father-specific quota establishes an
individual right for fathers to take leave, eliminating the need for negotiation with
their partners. It also “improves [their] bargaining position with employers and
coworkers, who may be more” supportive when leave is explicitly designated for
paternal use (Patnaik 2019, p. 1017). The significance of a father quota in encour-
aging paternal involvement is echoed in various studies (see also Castro-García and
Pazos-Moran 2016; Haas and Rostgaard 2011).
In addition, the duration of the non-transferable leave plays a role in how parents
divide the remaining transferable portion between them: In a quasi-experiment con-
ducted in Germany, Bünning and Hipp (2022) compared two policy designs. In the
first1 , parents had 12 months of parental leave, with a requirement of at least two
months for each partner; otherwise, those months would expire, resulting in a total
leave of 10 months. In the second scenario, partner months were twice as long, last-
ing four months. The results indicated that parents in the second scenario expressed
a significantly stronger preference for a more equal distribution of parental leave.
Consequently, an increase in partner months holds the potential to promote greater
gender equality (Bünning and Hipp 2022).
In order to advance egalitarianism in families through a universal caregiver
model, a non-transferable share specifically designated for fathers is crucial in the
formulation of parental leave policies. The distinct labelling not only addresses
societal expectations but also plays a pivotal role in overcoming practical barriers,
fostering a culture that promotes and supports fathers’ active involvement in parental
leave.
Monetary compensation
In crafting effective parental leave policies, the provision of a post-leave job
guarantee is a critical component. However, another indispensable aspect is the
implementation of wage replacement, a feature that varies significantly across dif-
ferent countries. While some states offer no financial compensation, others not only
differ in the duration of payout periods but also in the amount of the wage replace-
ment – often, though not always, set as a percentage of the preceding salary (Addati
et al. 2014). There are also variations as to whether there is a universal minimum
amount that is also paid to parents who are not working, for example, i.e., who have
1 This scenario corresponds to the current policy design implemented today in Germany.
68 5 The Design of Parental Leave Policies
no previous salary, and whether or how high the maximum amount paid out is, i.e.,
whether the amount is capped (Blum et al. 2023).
Numerous studies underscore the pivotal role that wage replacement, i.e., the
amount thereof, plays in shaping fathers’ utilisation of parental leave (Haas and
Rostgaard 2011; Kaufman 2017; Patnaik 2019; Ray et al. 2010). In addition to nor-
mative and gender role-related factors, there is a straightforward economic rationale
for this: In many families, fathers typically serve as the main provider, often working
longer hours and earning higher wages (refer to Section 3.2 for further details on the
gender wage gap). Consequently, economic considerations often deter fathers from
opting for parental leave, as the potential wage loss is disproportionately higher for
them than for mothers.
Various proposals exist for the specific amount of wage replacement. For
instance, O’Brien (2009) suggests a minimum of 50% earnings for a high income
replacement, while other researchers advocate for full wage replacement (Castro-
García and Pazos-Moran 2016; Ciccia and Verloo 2012). The elimination of
gender-specific deductions occurs only when the wage replacement fully reimburses
the current salary (for a more in-depth discussion on full wage replacement refer to
Section 9.2). The significance of full wage compensation is emphasised by Gornick
and Meyers (2003) who argue that there is a direct link between gender imbalance in
leave take-up and the amount of wage replacement and, moreover, that only at one
hundred percent wage compensation can a couple be truly “economically agnostic”
in deciding which partner takes leave (Gornick and Meyers 2003, p. 120).
However, variations exist between households in terms of parental leave uptake.
Fathers from higher-income groups experience a more substantial loss of earnings
compared to their counterparts in lower-income groups. Families in the latter group,
however, often face no choice but to forego leave due to an inability to afford a loss
of earnings. This observation aligns with the findings of Koslowski and Kadar-Satat
(2019), who, in their analysis of S cottish fathers, identify economic constraints as a
primary factor leading fathers to avoid taking leave, resulting in social stratification
in leave uptake. Their research indicates that fathers with greater socio-economic
resources are not only more inclined to take leave but also opt for longer durations
of leave. This correlation resonates with the assertion that “[f]inancial constraints
may thus be one restriction that prevents policies from unfolding their positive
effects” by Bünning and Hipp (2022, p. 193). This, further, echoes the conclusion
of the study conducted by Köppe (2023), highlighting that inadequate paternal leave
benefits contribute significantly to the disparities in fathers’ leave uptake, thereby
exacerbating class inequalities.
5.1 Parental Leave in its Essence 69
Lastly, in the context of a universal caregiver model, the significance of complete
continued pay cannot be overstated. Only when caregivers receive full wage com-
pensation does their care work attain equal valuation with paid work. Any lesser
percentage implies a devaluation of care work relative to paid work; for instance,
a fifty percent wage compensation suggests that paid work is considered twice as
valuable as care work.
In conclusion, the imperative for parental leave policies lies in the thoughtful con-
sideration and implementation of robust wage replacement mechanisms. Addressing
economic disparities and promoting an equitable valuation of care are pivotal steps
toward fostering a system that not only supports families but also recognises the
equal worth of caregiving responsibilities. The provision of full wage replacement
becomes a cornerstone in the design of parental leave in order to build a framework
that is consistent with gender equality.
Flexibility
The fourth aspect is flexibility. Implementation of this characteristic varies depend-
ing on the context (Blum et al. 2023). For instance, in some countries, parental leave
must be taken all at once without any flexibility. However, in some countries, par-
ents have the option to divide their parental leave into multiple blocks, ranging from
varying numbers of blocks to individual days. For instance, in Hungary and Japan,
paternal leave expires after two months from the child’s birth and can be split into
two parts (Blum et al. 2023, pp. 302, 345). In Portugal, however, fathers have the
option to divide their leave into multiple periods, each lasting a minimum of seven
days (Blum et al. 2023, p. 459). In Sweden, parental leave can even be divided into
one-eighth days, as an extreme form of flexibility (Koslowski et al. 2020, p. 559).
If parental leave is divided into such short periods, it is possible to combine it with
part-time employment. This flexibility is specifically provided in several countries,
allowing parents to stay connected to the job market while on leave. In the Nether-
lands, parental leave is even explicitly formulated as a right for part-time leave,
while full-time entitlement requires the employer’s consent (Plantenga et al. 2005,
p. 48).
Although flexibility and part-time leave options are often cited as important fac-
tors (Haas 2003; Haas and Rostgaard 2011; Plantenga et al. 2005; Weldon-Johns
2011), there is little empirical evidence on this issue. Recently, a link between part-
time parental leave and life satisfaction has been established in the Dutch model
(Dillenseger et al. 2023). Flexibility is also discussed as a means of making parental
leave more accessible and useful for parents (Craigs 1995; Weldon-Johns 2011).
Accordingly, very restrictive practices, such as those in Switzerland regarding mater-
nity leave, have been criticised (Steiger-Sackmann 2022). Currently, Swiss women
70 5 The Design of Parental Leave Policies
are unable to pursue gainful employment while on leave, as any remaining leave is
forfeited as soon as they engage in any paid work.
While research is inconclusive on the benefits of flexibility, Haas and Rostgaard
(2011, p. 187) describe it as an incentive that can encourage fathers to take parental
leave. This is because flexibility allows fathers to meet the needs of their employer,
making it easier to negotiate the uptake of leave (Haas and Rostgaard 2011, pp. 187,
193).
5.1.2 Blueprint for Equality: The Ideal Parental Leave
Policy
In essence, a comprehensive examination of existing literature underscores the
significance of specific conditions in shaping an effective and egalitarian parental
leave policy, particularly concerning fathers’ participation. Although flexibility is
undoubtedly important, the focus, consistent with other literature reviews, should
primarily be on implementing two pivotal conditions that can significantly impact
fathers’ uptake of parental leave and are thus essential for an egalitarian leave
policy: (1) a non-transferable period for fathers and (2) financial compensation
replacing a substantial portion of wages (Castro-García and Pazos-Moran 2016;
Ciccia and Verloo 2012; Gornick and Meyers 2003; Kaufman et al. 2020; O’Brien
2009; Patnaik 2019; Ray et al. 2010; Rostgaard and Ejrnæs 2021). Karu and
Tremblay (2017) underscore the significance of a combination of fathers’ quotas
and high benefit levels to incentivise the uptake of parental leave by fathers, as
do Jurado-Guerrero and Muñoz-Comet (2021).
The first critical condition is the establishment of a non-transferable period
exclusively designated for fathers. This implies a deliberate and unequivocal allo-
cation of leave that cannot be shared or transferred to the mother. By delineating
a specific time frame earmarked for paternal leave, policymakers signal a com-
mitment to encouraging fathers’ active involvement in caregiving responsibilities.
This non-transferable period not only challenges traditional gender roles but also
fosters an environment where both parents are recognised as equally responsible
for childcare.
The second indispensable condition revolves around financial compensation,
aiming to replace a substantial portion of fathers’ wages during their leave. Finan-
cial stability is a fundamental factor influencing individuals’ decisions to take
time off work, especially for fathers who still today often are the main breadwin-
ner of the family. To truly incentivise fathers to participate in caregiving without
5.1 Parental Leave in its Essence 71
the burden of economic strain, it is imperative to provide meaningful financial
support. Ensuring that a significant part of the father’s income is replaced during
the leave period, policymakers can mitigate potential financial barriers, making it
a more feasible and attractive option for fathers to actively engage in parenting
responsibilities.
Together, these two conditions form the cornerstone of a successful and egal-
itarian parental leave policy. The non-transferable period challenges traditional
norms and promotes shared responsibility, while financial compensation addresses
economic concerns, making paternal leave a viable choice for fathers. Policy-
makers, by incorporating these principles into their leave policies, are expected
to contribute substantially to reducing gender stereotypes, fostering a more bal-
anced distribution of caregiving responsibilities, and promoting a culture of true
gender equality both within the home and the workplace.
An egalitarian starting point set by the implementation of such a family policy
would not only provide incentives for fathers, but would also strengthen egali-
tarian gender norms in general, benefiting mothers as well. Finally, to promote
a universal caregiver family model, it is necessary to involve both parents and
strengthen them together in an egalitarian division of labour. As Schober and
Zoch (2019) put it, the ultimate goal is a specific policy design to prevent long
maternity leave over several years and encourage the take-up of caregiver leave
by fathers. According to Castellanos-Serrano et al. (2024), the three pivotal fac-
tors for the design of parental leave schemes are “fully paid, non-transferable,
and equal for men and women” (Castellanos-Serrano et al. 2024, p. 376). In line
with their recommendations, I further complement their proposal with flexibility
for an optimal gender-equitable starting point. I assert that an ideal policy should
ensure parental leave that meets the following criteria:
•Duration: Lasting between six and twelve months.
•Compensation: Providing one hundred percent of the taker’s regular wage.
•Flexibility: Allowing flexible usage, either on a full-time basis or in combi-
nation with part-time employment.
•Sharing: Extending this form of leave to each parent without transferability.
Delving into the practical implications of an egalitarian parental leave policy
prompts a more specific inquiry: How can such a policy be structured to max-
imise egalitarianism? Is there a measurable standard for assessing egalitarianism
in parental leave policies? These questions not only entail theoretical consider-
ations but also require a pragmatic assessment of the existing landscape. Does
the ideal parental leave, embodying true egalitarian principles, exist in prac-
tice? To what extent do current parental leave policies incorporate incentives for
72 5 The Design of Parental Leave Policies
fathers to actively engage in caregiving responsibilities? While various attempts
have been made to assess parental leave policies for their level of egalitari-
anism (Castro-García and Pazos-Moran 2016; Dearing 2016; Koslowski 2021;
Ray et al. 2010), existing findings often rely on outdated data, lacking insights
into recent developments. Recent years have witnessed significant reforms in
parental leave policies, especially those targeting fathers. Thus, a nuanced, case-
specific assessment becomes imperative to comprehend the incentives generated
by contemporary policies.
The theoretical ideal of a universal caregiver model, posited by Fraser (1994),
serves as a benchmark for egalitarian aspirations. Yet, Ciccia and Verloo (2012,
p. 520) suggests that it remains more of an ideal concept within equality policy,
given the absence of a practical example of such a model to date. This neces-
sitates a critical examination of whether the label “utopia” is still applicable in
the context of the latest developments. To address this and therefore also the
research question from the Introduction Subsection 1.2.1 How should a parental
leave policy be designed to achieve maximal egalitarianism?, in Chapter 7,an
analysis grid is developed to provide a structured means of measuring the effec-
tiveness of leave policies. Subsequently, this analysis grid is applied in Chapter 9
to scrutinise current parental leave policies in a thorough and systematic manner.
Through this analytical lens, the quest for understanding the real-world impact
of parental leave policies, particularly in incentivising fathers, takes on a more
nuanced and informed perspective.
5.2 Fathers on Paternal Leave
Following the theoretical derivation of an ideal leave to promote egalitarianism
for both parents, this section will narrow its focus to fathers. It will address
the second sub-research question and provide clarification on related assump-
tions. Hypotheses will then be developed to explore the relationship between the
duration of leave and the distribution of unpaid work between parents.
5.2.1 Paternal Leave Duration and Egalitarian Parenting
The active participation of fathers in parenting is increasingly acknowledged as
beneficial for both children’s well-being and the promotion of gender equal-
ity (Cabrera et al. 2007; Sarkadi et al. 2008). Several studies have observed a
favourable connection between fathers opting for parental leave and an increase
5.2 Fathers on Paternal Leave 73
in their extended childcare hours (Almqvist and Duvander 2014; Bünning 2015;
Meil 2013; Patnaik 2019; Tamm 2019). Additionally, there are indications in the
research suggesting more pronounced effects on fathers’ childcare involvement
with extended paternal leave durations (Fernández-Cornejo et al. 2016; Haas and
Hwang 2008; Huerta et al. 2014; Nepomnyaschy and Waldfogel 2007). However,
the extent of the association between the duration of paternal leave uptake and
the subsequent long-term division of caregiving responsibilities between parents
remains largely unclear. A thorough examination of both the duration of leave and
the allocation of caregiving responsibilities within the household is suggested and
aligns with the research question Does a correlation exist between the length of
parental leave taken by fathers upon the birth of their first child and the egalitar-
ianism of the long-term distribution of caregiving responsibilities among parents?
presented in the Introduction (see Subsection 1.2.2).
The impact of paternal leave on fathers’ involvement in caregiving and house-
hold responsibilities is particularly pronounced when the duration of paternal
leave is sufficient to acquire new skills, facilitates adaptation to new roles, fosters
identity development, and establishes patterns for the division of tasks. Support-
ing this perspective, Huerta et al. (2014) identify indications that not only the
mere presence of leave but also its duration plays a significant role. In their com-
parison across four OECD countries, distinctions based on leave lengths – less
than one week, one week, and two weeks or more – reveal more substantial
and significant effects for longer leave duration. Similar findings are reported
by the work of Nepomnyaschy and Waldfogel (2007), which categorises leave
duration into two periods – less than two weeks and two weeks or more – reveal-
ing distinctions based on the duration of paternity leave. Accordingly, Haas and
Hwang (2008) also confirm in their study that fathers take on more childcare tasks
the longer the leave they have previously taken. This aligns with the outcomes
observed by Fernández- Cornejo et al. (2016), who can affirm their hypothesis
“Taking longer childbirth leave favours greater subsequent involvement of the
father in childcare”. Despite their nuanced approach in measuring the duration
of leave uptake by day, their analysis falls short in providing comprehensive
insights into the temporal commitment to unpaid labour, i.e., they do not address
who invests how much time in care in detail. Their measurement involves deter-
mining which parent predominantly engages in diverse childcare activities (using
a 5-point scale ranging from “mostly” the mother to “mostly” the father). Never-
theless, the information provided by the parents regarding the nuances of terms
such as “mostly” is subject to individual interpretation, thereby introducing a
degree of ambiguity into their findings. Finally, their analysis is limited to Spain,
which leaves the transferability to other policy contexts unanswered.
74 5 The Design of Parental Leave Policies
Thus, drawing from the insights o f this research, it is hypothesised that fathers
who opt for an extended leave duration are likely to foster deeper connections
with their children. This prolonged leave period provides them with the oppor-
tunity to gain increased confidence in handling caregiving tasks, facilitating a
more profound engagement in their children’s lives. Additionally, an extended
leave duration enables fathers to actively contribute to household chores, foster-
ing a sense of shared responsibility. However, the extent to which this increased
involvement can be measured in terms of the actual time invested in unpaid work
remains an open question. Consequently, it is unanswered if this multifaceted
involvement contributes to a more egalitarian distribution of unpaid work within
the familial context. The assumption emerges that the extended leave not only
enhances the father-child relationship but also plays a pivotal role in disman-
tling traditional gender roles by promoting a more balanced sharing of caregiving
and domestic responsibilities between parents. Therefore, the first hypothesis is
formulated as follows:
H1: A more extended period of fathers’ parental leave uptake is positively
associated with a more egalitarian distribution of unpaid work within
households.
5.2.2 The Impact of Family Policy Regimes on Paternal
Leave
As previously discussed in the introduction (see Subsection 1.1.5), it is essential
to acknowledge that variations are anticipated depending on the family policy
regime. The specific country and its policies are expected to be pivotal fac-
tors in shaping the dynamics within households, i.e., in shaping the impact
of paternal leave on the distribution of unpaid work among parents. Generous
and highly developed family policies, especially those incorporating egalitarian
parental leave and offering extensive paternity leave options, are associated with
fostering more egalitarian household structures (Lütolf and Stadelmann-Steffen
2023).
As such, the family policy regime plays a dual role in influencing the allo-
cation of unpaid work within households: Firstly, the policy framework directly
shapes the potential effects of paternal leave, as fathers’ choices and opportunities
differ significantly based on the available parental leave policies in a given coun-
try (see, e.g., Blum et al. 2023; Ciccia and Verloo 2012). Secondly, the policy
regime exerts an indirect influence, contributing to the shaping of societal norms
5.3 The Policy Potential of Paternal Leave on Egalitarian Family Dynamics 75
regarding gender roles (see, e.g., Farré et al. 2023; Petts et al. 2022; Philipp et al.
2023). The broader policy effect on conceptions of equality and gender roles is
presumed to have an overarching impact beyond individual circumstances and
specific leave uptake. Recognising and understanding these contextual nuances is
crucial for a comprehensive analysis of the impact of paternal leave on the dis-
tribution of unpaid labour within households. Hence, the second hypothesis can
be formulated as follows:
H2: A generous policy regime, particularly through egalitarian parental leave
policies or substantial paternity leave, correlates with a more egalitarian
distribution of unpaid work within households.
5.3 The Policy Potential of Paternal Leave
on Egalitarian Family Dynamics
Lastly, I tackle the third specified research question on the potential of leave
policies to induce an alteration in the allocation of time to paid and unpaid work
by fathers. The problem of endogeneity is a recurring theme in family policy
research, and with it the question of causality (Lütolf and Stadelmann-Steffen
2023; Olivetti and Petrongolo 2017). Several attempts have been made to address
this issue. In particular, the natural experiments discussed earlier, such as studies
of policy changes in Quebec, Canada (Patnaik 2019; Wray 2020), provide strong
evidence that parental leave policies affect fathers’ behaviour and thus suggest an
effect mechanism in this direction. However, as such studies analyse one specific
policy reform at a time, they are necessarily limited to one country and one
policy context, which means that generalisations to other regimes remain difficult
to apply.
Drawing on the theory and research presented in the preceding chapters, a
parental leave policy that promotes an egalitarian division of work within the
family should incorporate specific provisions for fathers. These provisions should
be of sufficient length, offer adequate remuneration, and be flexible. In other
words, a comprehensive and well-developed leave policy, hereafter referred to
as generous leave, is required. Based on the results of Patnaik (2019) and Wray
(2020) and their conclusions about the direction of causality, on the one hand,
and the preceding discussion about generous leave, on the other hand, I formulate
the following hypothesis:
76 5 The Design of Parental Leave Policies
H3: Generous leave leads to a reduction in fathers’ employment hours and an
increase in unpaid care and domestic work hours.
Financial compensation during parental leave is essential because of deeply
ingrained gender norms that consider fathers as the primary breadwinners and
the fact that men still earn more on average than women, making them the main
provider in many families. Significant policy effects can therefore be expected,
particularly regarding wage replacement, and the following specification and
development of hypothesis 3 emerges:
H3a: The level of wage replacement is the policy attribute that most sig-
nificantly influences fathers’ behaviour, with a high level of wage
replacement increasing fathers’ care time at the expense of employment.
The issue of contextual influence also arises in the discussion of causal relation-
ships. As previously discussed in Subsection 5.2.2 and summarised in hypothesis
2, it is assumed that the broader family policy context, specifically the family
policy regime, has an impact on the individual division of labour. Fathers liv-
ing in an well-developed family policy system that encourages egalitarian family
arrangements may be less responsive to policy changes as their outlook is already
more egalitarian. Conversely, fathers in a regime with less developed family poli-
cies are more likely to reduce their working hours and increase their caring hours
if they have access to generous parental leave. This policy would provide them
with real opportunities that differ from the current situation. This leads to the
following hypothesis:
H4: The elasticity of fathers towards egalitarian family models depends on the
family policy regime of the respective country.
5.3 The Policy Potential of Paternal Leave on Egalitarian Family Dynamics 77
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use,
sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you
give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s
Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If
material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use
is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
permission directly from the copyright holder.
Part III
Research Design
6
Case Selection
As discussed in the Introduction 1.1.5, it is important to consider a specific fam-
ily policy and its potential impact within the broader welfare state, particularly
the family policy regime. Therefore, this chapter begins by briefly discussing
the importance of context and providing a broad classification of different fam-
ily policy regimes. It then presents the case selection in Section 6.2, followed
by a description of the family policies of these five countries and their unique
characteristics individually.
6.1 Comparative Perspective on Family Policy
Regimes
Current research highlights the varying effects of reconciliation policies resulting
from different policy designs and contexts. Policy measures vary in their objec-
tives and capacities to alter work and family relations depending on their design
(Olivetti and Petrongolo 2017). However, their impact also depends on the wider
policy context in which they operate. This has been demonstrated in various stud-
ies (see, e.g., Boeckmann et al. 2015; Budig et al. 2012; Ciccia and Bleijenbergh
2014; Cooke 2011; Daly and Ferragina 2018; Gangl and Ziefle 2015; Meyers
et al. 1999; Pfau-Effinger 2005; Vuri 2016).
Since social policies in Western democracies originate from supporting the
male breadwinner model (Lewis 1992), attempts to classify country-specific rec-
onciliation strategies use this traditional model as a conceptual starting point.
The general assumption is that Western democracies have been moving away
from supporting the male breadwinner model, although they have done so in
different ways and to varying degrees (von Gleichen and Seeleib-Kaiser 2018).
The advent of post-industrialisation has presented a significant challenge to this
© The Author(s) 2025
M. Lütolf, The Balancing Act of Working Mothers and Caring Fathers,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5_6
81
82 6 Case Selection
societal structure, as it assumed universal adult participation in the labour market
and shaped policies accordingly (Fleckenstein 2011; Lewis 2001). The Nordic
welfare states were pioneers in shifting away from the male breadwinner model
by implementing social policies that endorsed dual-earner families and facilitated
employment opportunities for women in the public sector, a paradigm shift often
linked to the combination of social democracy and organised women’s move-
ments in Northern Europe (Fleckenstein 2011; Korpi 2000; Korpi et al. 2013;
Orloff 2006). While there was no comparable policy expansion in the liberal
welfare states, in the United States, for example, anti-discrimination laws or tax
policies simplified women’s participation in the labour market, but also the fact
that immigration combined with labour market policies made cheap labour avail-
able, which facilitated the outsourcing of childcare and housework (Orloff 2006,
pp. 234–235). In conservative welfare states, the shift away from the traditional
male breadwinner model can be seen in its modernised version with a one-and-
a-half breadwinner model accompanied by a rather moderate policy expansion,
which can be observed, for example, in the important role that grandparents play
as a childcare resource in the absence of alternatives (Lewis et al. 2008).
Several authors have discussed the normative ideals that underlie different
strategies for reconciliation, as well as the resulting policy configurations and
combinations (see, e.g., Ferragina 2019; Gornick and Meyers 2003; Lewis 2001;
Olivetti and Petrongolo 2017). The country-level case selection is based on a
review of various typologies of family policy regimes from previous research
(see, e.g., Boje and Ejrnœs 2011; Ciccia and Verloo 2012; Crompton 2001; Fraser
1994; Gornick and Meyers 2003; Leitner 2003; Lewis 1992, 2001; Misra et al.
2007; Orloff 1993; Sainsbury 1996). It is important to note that these typologies
do not align entirely with the conventional welfare state literature, which distin-
guishes between social democratic, conservative, and liberal welfare regimes. As
discussed in Subsection 1.1.5, some scholars argue that this typology neglects
gender and household aspects and requires further specification when examining
gender relations (Mazur 2002; Pfau-Effinger 2000; Sainsbury 1994b).
Despite adjustments made to social security systems in industrialised countries
to accommodate the rise in women’s labour market participation, gender-related
issues persist, mainly related to the reconciliation of paid work and caregiving
responsibilities, which are addressed unevenly by welfare states (Orloff 2002,
p. 40). It is important to consider these differences in social security systems and
how they address the issue of reconciliation when selecting cases. The objective
is to select countries that exemplify specific family policy regimes, characterised
by a unique combination of policies and associated reconciliation strategies.
6.2 Country Selection 83
Therefore, it is crucial that the case selection encompasses various welfare
states within Western democracies, including diverse family policy regimes that
endorse different family models. This inclusion of different policy settings allows
for a more differentiated analysis of their relevance in shaping the impact of
specific family policies on the division of work within households. The next
section provides a detailed description of the selected countries and their family
policies, as well as the characteristics of their respective family policy regimes.
6.2 Country Selection
By selecting the following five countries, a wide range of family policy regimes
are encompassed. These range from the traditionally liberal stance observed in
the United States (Bariola and Collins 2021) to Switzerland’s liberal-conservative
family policies (Häusermann and Bürgisser 2022). Germany, with a historically
conservative background, has recently undergone reforms in its family policies
(Schober and Zoch 2019). The social democratic Scandinavian countries, known
for their generous family policies, exhibit distinct features, with Finland’s empha-
sis on family care (Datta Gupta et al. 2008) and Sweden’s focus on universal
employment (Hiilamo and Kangas 2009).1
Switzerland
Switzerland’s family policy expansion is strongly determined by the country’s
political context, which is characterised by direct democracy, strong federalism,
and subsidiarity (Valarino 2020). There is no uniform family policy observable
and must be prescribed in various policy sub-fields with correspondingly dif-
ferent aims and measures, combined with the problem of the distribution of
responsibilities. In this intricate network of objectives, conflicting interests, and
distribution of competencies, a somewhat paradoxical image of policy develop-
ment in Switzerland arises: Although there have been far-reaching reforms in
recent decades, state spending on family policy remains low in international com-
parison and the high net costs of supplementary childcare lead to a strong income
based stratification in its use (Häusermann and Bürgisser 2022).
1 In order to discuss the individual countries in detail, the number of cases was intention-
ally limited. For instance, Southern European countries, such as Italy or Spain, were omitted
due to their ‘familialist’ welfare systems, which emphasize traditional family roles. Includ-
ing these countries would have introduced a degree of political and cultural complexity that
goes beyond the primary focus on liberal, conservative, social democratic, and hybrid family
policy models analysed in this study.
84 6 Case Selection
Reconciling work and family life can be particularly challenging in inter-
national comparison due to the deeply ingrained traditional male breadwinner
norm in society and policy, which assumes this family model (Bonoli 2013,
p. 38; Combet and Oesch 2019, p. 335). The persistence of traditional gender
roles in Switzerland resembles the conservative family model, where the father
is employed full-time and the mother either stays at home or works part-time
(Oesch 2022). However, unlike conservative welfare states, Swiss family policies
remain limited. This is demonstrated by the absence of parental leave and limited
leave options for both mothers and, only recently, fathers (Koslowski et al. 2022;
Lanfranconi and Valarino 2014). Additionally, the cost of childcare – which is
no national competence – is high (Bornatici et al. 2020) and coverage rates for
young children are low (Bonoli 2013, p. 38). In combination with limited public
expenditures and modest policies, Switzerland’s reconciliation strategy presents
itself as a hybrid, a liberal-conservative family policy regime (Häusermann and
Bürgisser 2022).
Germany
Traditionally, Germany is classified as a conservative welfare state, reflected in its
institutions promoting family policy focusing on maternal care (Zoch and Heyne
2023).2 Reforms in the 1970s and 1980s led to modernisation, but not a departure
from the male breadwinner model, but a modification as “the gendered division
of paid and unpaid work continued to inform social policy-making” (Fleckenstein
2011, p. 550). So for decades, the prevailing approach in Germany was to encour-
age households with a parent staying at home, while welfare policies supported
the traditional one-income model, typically with the father as the breadwinner,
and emphasised the mother’s role as a caregiver and offered incentives for married
women to work fewer hours (Aisenbrey and Fasang 2017, p. 1453).
More recently, however, there has been a shift towards increasing support for
dual-earner arrangements, driven in part by government investments in early-age
childcare, although regional disparities in childcare availability persist (Bünning
and Hipp 2022). Additionally, the implementation of a paid, egalitarian and gen-
erous parental leave marked the departure from the traditionally conservative
welfare state with a strong male breadwinner model at policy level (Fleckenstein
2 However, it is important to consider the historical development of Germany after the Sec-
ond World War. The following remarks on the development prior to reunification primarily
concern West Germany. The division of Germany prior to reunification in 1989/1990 had
a significant impact on the institutional framework of family policies and labour markets,
resulting in shorter interruptions and higher full-time employment rates for East German
mothers compared to their West German counterparts (Zoch and Heyne 2023).
6.2 Country Selection 85
2011, pp. 543–545). These reforms transformed Germany’s reconciliation strategy
significantly: “Especially the most recent reforms provide financial incentives and
normative anchors for increased paternal involvement and maternal employment,
including shorter interruptions and increased working hours upon mothers’ labor
market return” (Zoch and Heyne 2023, p. 1074). However, this policy change is
not yet fully reflected in society, where the traditional model is deeply embedded,
reflected in gender-specific patterns of parental leave uptake, with fathers making
little use of the policy (Koslowski e t al. 2022).
Finland
Although the policy goal of promoting gender equality in childcare and paid
work applies in Finland, clear gender differences are still evident in the case
of unpaid work, despite the fact that there are comparatively high numbers of
(full-time) employed mothers (Otonkorpi-Lehtoranta et al. 2022). Finland offers
long and well-paid parental leaves, with a reform implemented in 2022 to expand
parental entitlements and make them more gender-neutral, abolishing previously
existing paternity leave and introducing high shares of non-transferable leave
(Blum et al. 2023). In addition to extended parental leave, every child is entitled
to daycare (Hiilamo and Kangas 2009). At first glance, Finland thus presents itself
as a typical example of a social democratic regime. Although universal childcare
provision in Finland is comparable to that of other Scandinavian countries, its
usage is much lower than in other Nordic countries and is more similar to that
of conservative countries like Germany (Krapf 2014). One of the reasons for the
low use of childcare services is “the introduction of a home care allowance in
the 1980s” (Krapf 2014, p. 29), a benefit after parental leave for parents who
do not make use of childcare services. During the debate over the introduction,
proponents stressed the freedom to choose between parental or external care,
while opponents argued that it would lead to a restriction and confine mothers to
their traditional role at home (Hiilamo and Kangas 2009). Indeed, around 90%
of all families now make use of the home care allowance, resulting in the mother
primarily staying at home (Österbacka and Räsänen 2022, p. 1075). Proponents,
however, viewed this allowance as a recognition of the value of care work at
home, a value that “the public authorities should recognise” (Hiilamo and Kangas
2009, p. 463), which aligns with the promotion of a caregiver parity family model.
In conclusion, although the Finnish reconciliation strategy supports a universal
breadwinner model, like other Scandinavian countries, with its “more family-
oriented” (Hiilamo and Kangas 2009, p. 470) framing, the male breadwinner
model is also promoted, “giving parents the freedom to choose the arrangement
they prefer” (Krapf 2014, p. 30). Like Switzerland, Finland thus positions itself
86 6 Case Selection
between different reconciliation strategies and can be classified as a hybrid –
a conservative-social-democratic family policy regime (Österbacka and Räsänen
2022).
Sweden
Gender equality in family policy is a priority throughout Scandinavia, with Swe-
den being the most developed example (Aidukaite and Telisauskaite-Cekanavice
2020; Haas and Rostgaard 2011; Hakovirta and Eydal 2020). For instance,
Swedish fathers were the first to have the option of paid parental leave as early
as 1974 (Aidukaite and Telisauskaite-Cekanavice 2020; Duvander and Viklund
2019). Policy makers have increasingly focused on promoting paternal involve-
ment in childcare through various reforms, with the introduction of the father
quota in 1995 being an important milestone, which led to a significant increase
in fathers’ leave uptake (Larsson and Björk 2017; Nygård and Duvander 2021).
Today, the parental leave policy has been expanded significantly, offering a
gender-equal and generously compensated package (Blum et al. 2023). Sweden
is often considered a prototype for a social democratic regime due to its greatly
expanded family policy services (Aidukaite and Telisauskaite-Cekanavice 2020;
Collins 2020). In addition to generous parental leave, Sweden offers a compre-
hensive range of childcare services. Childcare is affordable and of high quality
(Krapf 2014; Larsson and Björk 2017; Motiejunaite and Kravchenko 2008). Every
child over one year old who is not yet of school age is entitled to a place in child-
care – representing universal childcare (Aidukaite and Telisauskaite-Cekanavice
2020; Nygård and Duvander 2021). Sweden’s childcare policy aligns with the
concept of defamilialisation (Aidukaite and Telisauskaite-Cekanavice 2020). The
state acknowledges parents’ right to childcare time to a limited extent and takes
responsibility for childcare, which is reflected in comparatively high childcare
enrolment rates (Krapf 2014). Mothers who are fully engaged in the labour mar-
ket resemble the Swedish norm and correspond to dual-earner families (Collins
2020; Krapf 2014).
In summary, Sweden’s reconciliation strategy distinguishes itself through sig-
nificant public investments in external childcare services and generous parental
leave systems, emphasising the promotion of labour market participation for both
mothers and fathers (Ferragina 2019). This presents the Swedish family policy
regime as promoting the universal breadwinner family model.
The United States
The United States are generally considered to have a limited welfare state and
are classified as a liberal prototype, with an emphasis on individual responsi-
bility and market-based solutions for reconciliation (Gornick and Meyers 2008;
6.2 Country Selection 87
Korpi et al. 2013). Typically, liberal states show limited intervention in family life
and encourage employment for all, including both parents (Bariola and Collins
2021). As a result of the women’s movement, there are strong anti-discrimination
laws and employment equality policies that emphasise the promotion of women’s
participation in the labour market (Ferragina 2019; Orloff 2006).
The family policy regime of the United States is market-oriented due to the
absence of strong state intervention, leaving the market as the primary institution
for regulating resources (Korpi et al. 2013). Notably, the United States are the
only OECD country without a nationwide paid parental leave policy (Blum et al.
2023; Musick et al. 2020). The policy most similar to parental leave in the United
States is the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), which provides 12 weeks
of unpaid, job-protected leave, but not all employees are eligible for this benefit
due to certain requirements (Koslowski et al. 2022). The United States show the
“lowest level of national spending for family policy among OECD countries”
(Ferragina 2020, p. 1036). Limited financial aid is available for families living in
poverty, providing only a basic safety net for the most disadvantaged households
(Musick et al. 2020, p. 644).
Furthermore, the United States have one of the least developed public child-
care systems among industrialised nations (Gornick and Meyers 2008, p. 338).
Due to the lack of public support for caregiving, families are often forced to rely
on private resources, which can be both time-consuming and costly (Ferragina
2019; Musick et al. 2020, p. 643). Bariola and Collins (2021, p. 1684) describe
the United States as having the “most radical” liberal welfare system and being
“unique” in the sense, that it is the only OECD country lacking any national
policy supporting parents in their reconciliation of work and family. Despite the
fact that many mothers work full-time and that childcare is being commodified
by outsourcing it from the home to the market, a closer look reveals certain gen-
der inequalities and, above all, differences according to social class (Gornick and
Meyers 2008). Lower-educated and poorer mothers are often unable to enter the
labour market due to the lack of state-provided childcare solutions, while women
with greater socio-economic resources can afford private childcare options such
as nannies and therefore participate in the labour market (Kowalewska and Vitali
2021).
Considering these socio-economic differences, women are often perceived as
workers within the welfare state system of the United States. In the absence
of government assistance for care responsibilities, market-based solutions are
necessary. The reconciliation strategy of the United States, therefore, promotes
“a universal breadwinner welfare state with restricted government intervention”
(Aisenbrey and Fasang 2017, p. 1450).
88 6 Case Selection
The detailed country descriptions given above can be summarised as follows:
Sweden, Germany, and the United States embody traditional forms of welfare
regimes, corresponding to social democratic, conservative, and liberal welfare
models, respectively. Finland and Switzerland, on the other hand, exhibit hybrid
characteristics. Finland positions itself between Sweden and Germany, with cer-
tain policy areas aligning with the Scandinavian model, while others, such as
public childcare, are less developed, promoting care within the home (Hiilamo
and Kangas 2009). Ciccia (2017) classifies European countries’ reconciliation
policies using fuzzy-set ideal type analysis, considering parental leave and child-
care policies. In her analysis, Finland and Sweden are both hybrid types, falling
under the limited universal caregiver category. However, Finland also aligns
with the caregiver parity type, while Sweden aligns with the supported univer-
sal breadwinner type. This underscores the distinction: Finland supports childcare
within the family, while Sweden emphasises egalitarian breadwinning, prioritising
outsourced childcare institutions.
Switzerland, sharing comparable traditional attitudes and gender norms with
Germany, can be considered a hybrid of Germany and the United States, with
its liberal family policy characteristics stemming from limited state intervention
and spending (Häusermann and Zollinger 2014). So, all in all, the five countries
represent a broad spectrum of family policy regimes within Western democracies.
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use,
sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you
give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s
Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If
material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use
is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
permission directly from the copyright holder.
7
Analysis Grid to Measure
Egalitarianism of Parental Leave
Policies
In a first step, a more qualitative approach will analyse the independent vari-
able, i.e., the different design options for parental leave, in greater depth.1 This
will address the first sub-research question from the Subsection 1.2.1 in the
introduction: How should a parental leave policy be designed to achieve maxi-
mal egalitarianism? In the following section, an analysis grid will be created
basedonSection
5.1 to record parental leave policies and their level of egalitar-
ianism. Section 7.2 introduces two policy indices: the policy ideal index and the
policy implementation index. In Chapter 9, this grid will be used to analyse the
policies of the five selected countries. The purpose is to gain a comprehensive
understanding of the policies in place in each country, which will then inform
the subsequent analyses and results.
7.1 Creating an Index to Operationalise Parental
Leave Policies
To measure the egalitarianism of parental leave policies and the extent to which
they promote the universal caregiver family model an index is created – the policy
index. There are a number of indicators and formulae that are necessary for the
1 The methods and results presented in this chapter are grounded in a theoretical framework
analogous to that published in a separate article: Lütolf 2024. However, it should be noted
that the analytical framework employed in the former is a further development of the frame-
work presented in this book, adapted to apply it to a larger number of countries. In order to
accommodate this broader scope, the framework in the article is simplified and less informa-
tive. While the article applies the framework to a larger number of countries, the differences
in scope are significant: the analysis in this chapter provides far greater depth and insight into
the specific five countries discussed here.
© The Author(s) 2025
M. Lütolf, The Balancing Act of Working Mothers and Caring Fathers,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5_7
89
90 7 Analysis Grid to Measure Egalitarianism …
calculation of this index. The main formula is:
policy index = leave mother + leave father
2− leave mother
leave father + gender quotient
wherein the mother’s and the father’s leave indicators (named leave mother and
leave father in the main formula) are calculated as follows:
leave parent = duration + wage rep. + adjusted duration · 2 + flexibility
and the following equation produces the gender quotient:
gender quotient = non-transferable share for fathers
non-transferable share for mothers
As discussed in Section 4.3, the current status quo means that the path to a uni-
versal caregiver model is gendered. Moreover, mothers and fathers have access
to different leave policies. Therefore, it is essential to distinguish between the
effects policies produce on mothers and the impact they have on fathers. This is
done by using the aforementioned leave indicator for each parent. These indica-
tors incorporate the policy’s duration, wage replacement, and flexibility (Table 7.1
presents the values of these items). Leave duration and wage replacement influ-
ence each other. For example, an extensive leave that is hardly compensated or
not compensated at all is not very logical because the lack of compensation dis-
suades many parents from using it, not least because many families cannot afford
to do so. The measures of parental leave account for such scenarios through an
additional component. Like a full-time equivalent, the length of parental leave is
calculated with one hundred percent wage replacement – the full wage-adjusted
duration or short adjusted duration (see Table 7.1, and for the conversion values
of the exemplified countries see Table 9.3). The total paid compensation remains
at the same level as before. Including this fourth index in the calculation of the
parental leave indicator has the additional advantage of assigning greater weight
to the leave’s duration and financial compensation than to its flexibility. Flexi-
bility is a vital policy element; however, the duration of mothers’ leave and the
wage replacement that parents, especially fathers, receive are generally consid-
ered more important, so both aspects should be given twice as much weight. To
do so and to assign sufficient weight to the interaction between duration and wage
replacement, the adjusted duration is doubled.
7.1 Creating an Index to Operationalise Parental Leave Policies 91
Tab le 7.1 Value assignments per policy aspect
Policy aspects 1 point 0.5 point 0 point
Duration 6–12 months 3 months / 15months none /≥ 18 months
Wage rep. 100% 50% none
adj. Duration ≥ 6 months 3 months none
Flexibility split AND part time split OR part time all at once
Note: For all policy aspects with the exception of flexibility, any value between 0 and 1 is
possible (the specific value assignment is shown in Figures 7.1, 7.2,and 7.3).
Source: Prepared by the author.
How the individual components of the formula receive their specific values
is demonstrated in the following figures: Figure 7.1 shows how duration is cal-
culated, Figure 7.2 does the same for wage replacement, and Figure 7.3 shows
the scores for adjusted duration. As far as flexibility is concerned, the possibility
of taking single days off is an option for part-time work, because parents can
combine the latter with parental leave in any given week.
Figure 7.1 Value assignment for the duration of leave. (Source: Prepared by the author.)
92 7 Analysis Grid to Measure Egalitarianism …
Figure 7.2 Value assignment for the wage replacement. (Source: Prepared by the author.)
Figure 7.3 Value assignment for the full wage adjusted duration. (Source: Prepared by the
author.)
7.2 The Policy Ideal and the Policy Implementation Index 93
The main formula of the policy index is calculated by taking the average of the
two parents’ leave indicators. The quotient of the two indicators serves to opera-
tionalise sharing, i.e., the allocation of leave between the parents. Subtracting this
leave indicator quotient from the aforementioned average means that the fewer
points a policy receives, the more significant the difference between the parents is
and the less the policy covers fathers vis-à-vis mothers. Specifically, a change in
fathers’ time allocation is central to moving toward a universal caregiver model.
Therefore, their relative leave opportunities are crucial, and the leave indicator
quotient must factor strongly into the formula.
The main formula’s third and final component is the gender quotient, which is
derived by dividing the duration of fathers’ non-transferable leave by the duration
of mothers’ non-transferable leave. Its addition to the equation deducts points if
the policy disadvantages fathers vis-à-vis mothers, which allows to account for
the recent finding that the promotion of the universal caregiver model strongly
depends on the daddy quota and a share specifically reserved for fathers. As
empirical evidence has shown, a fixed proportion exclusively allotted to fathers is
essential to ensure that they use it (Haas and Rostgaard 2011; O’Brien 2009). One
of the most recent studies on daddy quotas examines Quebec’s current parental
leave policy, which, unlike Canada’s national policy, provides fathers with a well-
compensated reserved period of five weeks (Patnaik 2019). The introduction of
this new policy raised the number of fathers taking leave by 250%, which Patnaik
(2019) attributes to both the increase in fathers’ wage replacement and the label
“daddy only”.
Therefore, the detailed assessment of non-transferable shares measured by the
gender quotient is an essential element of the operationalisation of the policy.
7.2 The Policy Ideal and the Policy Implementation
Index
The policy index and its formula are still under development. To ensure a com-
prehensive analysis, it is important to consider the varying allocations allowed
by current policies, particularly in cases where transferable days between parents
are involved. This should not be given a fixed value if clear categorisation is
not possible due to the range of take-up options. To account for this, the main
formula for the policy index is applied twice: once to calculate the policy ideal
index and once to determine the policy implementation index.
94 7 Analysis Grid to Measure Egalitarianism …
To explain further and elaborate in more detail: Many policies offer flexibil-
ity in how parents share their parental leave, so various configurations of leave
take-up exist in practice. Only including non-transferable shares of leave in the
analysis grid could result in a distortion of the actual options parents have at their
disposal. Therefore, my calculations are based on an ideal egalitarian fifty-fifty
split to comply with the legal stipulation that both parents are entitled to joint
parental leave. This analysis focuses on policy, rather than on provisions’ practical
implementation and use, and this index is designed to measure the potential ideal
policy (policy ideal index), i.e., a policy’s inherent potential for egalitarianism.
Nonetheless, in practice, parents rarely divide their leave equally in a fifty-fifty
manner (Reimer 2020; Saarikallio-Torp and Miettinen 2021). Therefore, I also
calculate a second index (based on the same formula), which follows the very
traditional assumption that mothers take as much leave as possible and fathers
only take the amount of time that either is not transferable or would otherwise be
lost (policy implementation index). This policy implementation index is somewhat
arbitrary because alternative allocations between the parents are also possible.
However, I can make a convincing case for its calculation: On the one hand, a
second index allows for accounting for legal flexibility. On the other hand, the
extreme case of the mother taking all available leave captures the opposite of
an egalitarian split.2 Thus, the two indices represent the full range between a
traditional and an egalitarian allocation of leave. This range reflects the freedom
of choice that the policies afford parents – assigning a fixed value would make
the index too rigid and would prevent it from reflecting the full array of possible
options.
2 Theoretically, the father could use the maximum amount of leave and the mother could take
as little as possible, which would correspond to the most extreme form of the opposite divi-
sion. However, such splits occur very rarely (see, e.g., Blum et al. 2023), so their inclusion
makes no sense from an empirical or a legal perspective.
7.2 The Policy Ideal and the Policy Implementation Index 95
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use,
sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you
give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s
Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If
material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use
is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
permission directly from the copyright holder.
8
Data and Method
This chapter primarily focuses on data, beginning with an overview of existing
data sets, followed by a presentation of the survey data used in the analyses.
Section 8.1, therefore, discusses the current state of existing datasets. The lack of
a comprehensive dataset that would allow for in-depth analyses of the intra-family
division of paid and unpaid work, is explained based on Lütolf and Stadelmann-
Steffen (2023). Section 8.2 presents the new data collected from a comprehensive
survey. The section illustrates a newly developed method for measuring the allo-
cation of time within families and, furthermore, covers the experimental part of
the survey. It presents the specific conjoint module of the survey, briefly explains
the method more generally and discusses the concrete operationalisation of the
variables used in the conjoint analysis. Section 8.3 discusses the operationalisa-
tion used for the regression analyses that determine the correlation between the
duration of fathers’ leave and the intra-household distribution of unpaid work,
estimated in Chapter 10. The section describes the measurement of the duration
of leave and introduces the caregap – the variable to assess the equality of the
distribution of unpaid work within a couple.
8.1 Existing Data
Current data sets do not provide a comprehensive understanding of the dynamics
of households’ division of paid and unpaid work. As already established in a pre-
viously published paper (see Lütolf and Stadelmann-Steffen 2023), a systematic
Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material
available at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5_8.
© The Author(s) 2025
M. Lütolf, The Balancing Act of Working Mothers and Caring Fathers,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5_8
97
98 8 Data and Method
comparison reveals that no single data set encapsulates all necessary elements for
an ideal analysis of family work organisation. The lack of comprehensive data
presents a significant obstacle to conducting meaningful comparative analyses,
whether cross-sectional or longitudinal.
Lütolf and Stadelmann-Steffen (2023) have compiled a summary overview
to show the constraints of existing data. The comparison revolves around key
dimensions that play a crucial role in unravelling the intricacies of household
work dynamics. The dimensions, as shown in the data overview in Table 8.1,
include the following:
•Household Representation: Does the data set survey both partners of a
household, providing a holistic view of household dynamics?
•Panel Structure: Does the data set exhibit a panel structure, especially longer-
term panels that facilitate the study of changes before and after policy reforms?
•Temporal Context: What is the year under consideration, as the temporal
dimension is pivotal in understanding evolving trends?
•Paid Work Hours: Is the number of paid work hours for both partners
separately available, enabling a nuanced analysis of paid work contributions?
•Care Work Hours: Does the data set provide information on the number of
care work hours for each partner, shedding light on the distribution of unpaid
labour?
•Childcare Services: Is there information on individual or household use of
childcare services available, a critical aspect in understanding the support
structures in place?
•Parental Leave: Does the data set capture information on individual or
household use of parental leave, reflecting the policies influencing work-life
balance?
•Comparative Suitability: Is the dataset suitable for comparative analyses, i.e.,
does it enable comparisons across different countries and contexts?
Table 8.1 illustrates that each existing data set falls short in one or more dimen-
sions. For instance, the SOEP (Sozio-oekonomisches Panel), while potentially
serving as a basis for a more “causal” analysis, lacks continuity in certain
variables, making a seamless analysis over time impossible. Notably, the ISSP
(International Social Survey Programme) and EU-SILC (European Union Statis-
tics on Income and Living Conditions) emerge as front runners, encompassing
household data for a larger number of countries. The ISSP, especially in its 2012
module Family and Changing Gender Roles IV (ISSP 2016), stands out for its
detailed information on the attitudinal and normative dimensions of the gendered
8.1 Existing Data 99
division of labour, providing a unique advantage for researchers. In addition, it
contains questions on weekly hours on all three types of work (paid, care, and
housework) spent by the respondents as well as their partners. This dataset stands
as the sole source allowing to examine the work behaviour of two partners within
a household through a comparative lens, encompassing a diverse array of attitudi-
nal and norm-related variables. Consequently, the analyses previously mentioned
in Subsection 1.1.6 were conducted, relying on this data (for the detailed analysis
see Lütolf and Stadelmann-Steffen 2023). Nonetheless, while the findings of this
previously conducted study prove intriguing and beneficial, they are not without
distinct limitations rooted in the constraints of the available data.
One crucial point deserving emphasis pertains to specific limitations of the
ISSP data: A noteworthy discrepancy between self-reported participation in
care and housework and actual time allocation emerges (see also Lütolf and
Stadelmann-Steffen 2023). A significant observation is the presence of a sub-
stantial group of respondents reporting unrealistic total work hours (the sum of
hours spend on paid work, housework and childcare), exceeding the physically
possible 168 hours per week (24x7). This raises concerns about the accuracy
of self-reported figures, even more so, as it fails to account for a minimum
allowance of hours necessary for sleep, personal hygiene, and other essential
activities. Addressing these disparities in data collection is crucial to facilitate
the implementation of accurate analyses regarding the dynamics of work and
care within families.
In conclusion, the search for an all-encompassing dataset for analysing the
division of work within households remains unrealised, emphasising the need
for a effort to bridge these gaps and create comprehensive datasets that enable
nuanced, cross-cutting analyses. To address this constraint, an extensive survey
was conducted and the details of this data will be presented in the subsequent
section.
100 8 Data and Method
Tab le 8.1 Overview of data on families and their organisation of work and care
Data Household Panel Year Work1 Work 2 Care1 Care2 ECEC PL Comparative
ISSP No No 2012 Yes Ye s Ye s Ye s No No Ye s
ESS No No 2018 Yes Yes No No No No Ye s
WVS No No 2017–2020 (Yes) (Yes) No No No No Ye s
EU-SILC Yes No12010 Yes Ye s No No Yes No Yes
2019 Yes Yes No No Ye s No Yes
EU AKE/LFS2No No 2010 No No No No Yes Yes Ye s
2018 Yes No No No (Yes) Yes Yes
2020 Yes No Yes No (Yes) No Yes
SOEP Yes Yes 2000 Yes Yes Yes Yes Ye s No No (DE)
2018 Yes Yes No No Ye s No No (DE)
SHP Yes Yes 2018/2019 Yes Ye s No No Yes No No (CH)
2019/2020 Yes Yes Ye s3Yes Ye s No No (CH)
Underst. Soc. Ye s Ye s 2019–2021 Yes Yes No No Ye s Ye s No (UK)
(continued)
8.1 Existing Data 101
Tab le 8.1 (continued)
Data Household Panel Year Work1 Work 2 Care1 Care2 ECEC PL Comparative
pairfam Yes Yes 2018/2019 Yes Ye s No No Yes Yes No (DE)
ALLBUS No No 2018 Yes No No No No No No (DE)
Note: Work1 and Work2 refers to the hours parent 1 and 2 engage in gainful employment, where as Care1 and Care2 refers to the hours
parent 1 and 2 spend on care work. If the individual/household use of childcare outside the family is surveyed, this is noted in column
ECEC. Likewise, the individual/household use of parental leave is shown in column PL. If information is available for a certain item, but
the query is rather rough and therefore imprecise, a (Yes) is displayed.
1 Using a rotation panel, the same individuals are surveyed over a maximum of four years, which means that a quarter of the sample consists
of new households each year. This provides a certain panel structure, but only over short periods of time.
2 In the year 2010 and 2018 the EU AKE/LFS contained a Module on Reconciliation between work and family life and in the year 2020 a
Module on unpaid work.
3 The question on time spendoncare was added in the year 2019, where as older SHP-data lacks this information. The question corresponds
to the recording method in the ISSP, which results in the same problem of exaggerated hours and is, therefore, unsuitable for this form of
analysis.
Source: Based on Lütolf and Stadelmann-Steffen 2023 and slightly adapted by the author.
102 8 Data and Method
8.2 The Survey
This section introduces a novel dataset (Stadelmann-Steffen et al. 2022) derived
from a pre-registered online survey collected between October 2021 and March
2022 in five countries: Switzerland, Germany, Finland, Sweden, and the United
States. Participants dedicated approximately 20–25 minutes to the survey, and the
data collection was conducted in collaboration with SurveyEngine, a university
spin-off with expertise in conducting scientific experimental surveys. The survey
and planned analysis was pre-registered prior to data collection at Open Science
Framework (Stadelmann-Steffen and Lütolf 2021).1
8.2.1 Sample
The sample is limited to individuals living with a partner and having children in
their household who are younger than 15 years. These criteria were implemented
to focus on a group facing substantial considerations concerning the organisation
of both paid and unpaid work within their families. In essence, the sample is con-
centrated on those parts of the population most likely affected by reconciliation
policies.
For this thesis, in order to focus primarily on gender differences associated
with traditional family roles of women and men, only individuals living in a
hetero-normative family constellation were included. Given the specific character-
istics of the sample, the results may not be generalisable to all families; however,
the insights gained are particularly relevant for the traditional father-mother-child
family structure. Gender is measured using self-reporting, excluding non-binary
individuals in a first step and same-sex couples in a second step. The sample,
therefore, comprises a total of 8870 individuals (including 4525 men and 4345
women), with 1953 from Switzerland, 1753 from Germany, 1686 from Finland,
1724 from Sweden, and 1754 from the United States. In the following analyses,
various samples are used. To facilitate identification, each analysis will use a dis-
tinct sample with a unique name. All samples are derived from the full sample
described previously.
1 The survey was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Business Adminis-
tration, Economics and Social Sciences of the University of Bern (project serial number:
142020).
8.2 The Survey 103
The questionnaire was initially drafted in German and subsequently trans-
lated into various languages.2 It underwent multiple rounds of proofreading and
informal pretesting to guarantee that each language version incorporates perti-
nent country-specific conditions and concepts. These efforts aimed at maintaining
a high level of comparability while addressing specific characteristics such as
variations in available childcare institutions and types of leave.
8.2.2 Structure and Content of the Survey
In summary, the survey explores the dynamics of paid and unpaid labour dis-
tribution within households, encompassing socio-demographic inquiries, details
about the respondent’s household, and questions regarding parental leave and
gender attitudes as well as a conjoint experiment. Before delving into the two
unique core elements of this survey, i.e., the measurement of the allocation of
time (see Subsection 8.2.3) and the conjoint part (see Subsection 8.2.4), specifics
of each survey module are presented. Table 8.2 provides a concise overview of
the questionnaire’s structure.
Tab le 8.2 Survey structure
Modules Sample (filter settings)
A Screening/Household composition All
B Organisation of family life All
C Conjoint small children If youngest child is not yet in compulsory
school
D Conjoint school children If youngest child is in compulsory school
E Employment situation Most questions filtered based on employment
(of respondent or partner)
F Attitudes on equality and gender roles All
GLeave take-up All
Z Socio-demographic data All
Source: Based on Stadelmann-Steffen and Lütolf 2021 and slightly adapted by the author.
2 In Switzerland, the survey was administered in the three primary languages: German,
French, and Italian.
104 8 Data and Method
•A Household composition: This module comprises inquiries about the number
of individuals in the household, their ages, genders, and relationships to the
respondent. These questions serve the dual purpose of screening out respon-
dents who do not meet the selection criteria and determining which conjoint
module (C or D) will be presented to the respondent.
•B Organisation of family life: This module is designed to assess the current
family model of respondents, covering key aspects such as the organisation of
childcare, details about external childcare usage (type, frequency, and costs),
time allocation to various life spheres (for more details see Subsection 8.2.3),
the partner’s estimated time allocation, evaluations and satisfaction with task
division between the respondent and partner, assessments of employment sit-
uations and their reconciliation with care and housework, and the impact of
the Covid-19-pandemic on within-household work division and reconciliation
perceptions.
•C/D Conjoint: To examine the impact of policy configurations on the distribu-
tion of paid and unpaid labour within households, a conjoint experiment was
conducted. This experiment allows for the exploration of the factors influ-
encing households’ self-reported allocation of time to paid work, childcare,
and housework. Additional details about the concept and design of these two
experimental modules are documented in Subsection 8.2.4.
•E Employment situation: Given that, according to the literature, work condi-
tions significantly influence (female) employment and are likely crucial factors
in households’ decisions regarding time allocation for both partners, a ded-
icated module on work conditions was incorporated into the survey. This
module inquires about various aspects of work conditions, including the flex-
ibility of work hours and workplace for both the respondent and partner, and
explores how these conditions have been affected by Covid-19. Additionally,
the module covers questions related to prior unemployment, identifying which
partner has the higher salary, and examining the impact of childcare duties on
the respondent’s employment situation.
•F Attitudes on equality and gender roles: Within this module, multiple ques-
tions were posed to gauge respondents’ attitudes toward equality and gender
roles. Examining these aspects is crucial to understanding how such attitudes
and norms influence the distribution of work within households and whether
they act as moderators for policy effects.
•G Leave take-up: The literature underscores the significance of parental leave
schemes, emphasising not only their formal structure but particularly their
practical take-up (see Chapter 5). This module shifts its focus to the avail-
ability, duration, and conditions of various leave types for both the household
8.2 The Survey 105
in general and the respondent specifically at the time of their first child’s
birth. The inquiry extends to whether and how these leave options were taken
by both the respondent and their partner. The underlying assumption is that
the circumstances surrounding the birth of the first child and the household
organisation at that time have enduring consequences for the within-household
division of labour.
•Z Socio-demographic data: Finally, the survey incorporates diverse socio-
demographic information about individual respondents, coupled with inquiries
into their household conditions (e.g., socio-economic status, religious affil-
iation, nationality, marital status, and political orientation). These variables
facilitate an analysis of the correlation between potential policy effects and
individual characteristics, questioning the validity of the claim that distinct
societal groups respond differently to specific policy packages.
8.2.3 Allocation of Time Within Families
To examine the current distribution of work within households and to over-
come the shortcomings of previous surveys (elaborated in Section 8.1), a novel
approach to measuring the use of parental time was implemented.
While the most valid approach to collecting such information would typi-
cally involve gathering time-use data, it is not feasible in this context due to the
need for a different survey setting. Research confirms that time diaries are the
most accurate way to measure the time spent on different tasks (Yavorsky et al.
2015). However, time diaries cannot be combined with other elements, such as
the conjoint experiment, making this measurement method impractical for design
purposes. Therefore, a compromise had to be reached that accurately records
time allocation while still allowing for other survey elements. In order to reduce
overestimation, which is a common issue in other surveys such as the ISSP, a
measurement method has been developed that minimises such shortcomings.
Therefore, the survey used the following approach: Participants were requested
to allocate their own and their partner’s time across four distinct “spheres of life”:
gainful employment, care and housework, other activities (such as commuting and
leisure), and sleep. The measurement intentionally grouped care and housework
together, recognising the challenge of separating these tasks due to their frequent
overlap in daily life. For instance, taking care of children might happen during
grocery shopping or meal preparation. Although the main focus was on gainful
employment and care and housework, including sleep and the collective “other”
category aimed to make time management more realistic and improve the accu-
racy of reported time division. During a standard work week, respondents outlined
106 8 Data and Method
their daily routines using sliders on a 24-hour bar, representing the total hours for
five days. These sliders allowed participants to specify the number of hours spent
in each “spheres of life”. The same process was duplicated to represent a typical
week for the participant’s partner. An illustration of these sliders is presented in
Figure 8.1. The individual indicators for each “spheres of life” can be analysed
separately for a more detailed examination. Additionally, the combined data from
both sets of sliders offers comprehensive insights into the current time allocation
within these households.
Figure 8.1 Sliders to measure intended time allocation. (Notes: Print screen of the US-
version of the survey. Source: Stadelmann-Steffen and Lütolf (2021).)
8.2.4 The Conjoint Module
To assess the impact of different policy designs, the survey incorporates a conjoint
module. This experimental survey method is proven effective in political science
(Hainmueller et al. 2014, 2015), as well as specifically in welfare state research
(see, e.g., Auspurg et al. 2017a; Busemeyer and Goerres 2019; Gallego and Marx
2017; Häusermann et al. 2019) and even more specific in the field of family
policy (Oehrli et al. 2024). This approach is particularly suited to the crucial
argument that real-world decision-making involves considering multiple aspects,
such as configurations of policies and conditions (Auspurg and Hinz 2015, p. 10),
and employing conjoint analysis allows testing the combined effects of policy
treatments, overcoming the limitations associated with uni-dimensional stimuli
(Auspurg and Hinz 2015; Hainmueller et al. 2014). The rationale behind this
methodology and a detailed explanation of the design of the survey module are
8.2 The Survey 107
provided in the following. The conjoint experiment is used to answer the third
sub-research question from Subsection 1.2.33 and the corresponding hypotheses
from Section 5.3. The specific sample, the dependent variable, as well as further
specifications on the method and the analysis and results, which will follow in
Chapter 11, are also explained here.
The Set up of the Conjoint Experiment
Within the conjoint module, respondents are randomly assigned to various
hypothetical policy configurations, referred to as scenarios. This approach facil-
itates the generation of “counterfactual” observations, where the same individual
encounters different policy configurations. Moreover, this survey method offers
the added benefit of providing respondents with multiple reasons to justify a spe-
cific choice or rating, thereby holding the potential to mitigate social desirability
bias (Auspurg and Hinz 2015; Hainmueller et al. 2014). Despite an experiment’s
inherent limitations in mirroring real-world decisions and its emphasis on inter-
nal rather than external validity, using representative samples of the targeted
population can mitigate external validity concerns (Hainmueller et al. 2015).
Additionally, administering the identical experimental survey across five coun-
tries enhances external validity and facilitates the comparison of the impact of
policy configurations in diverse political and cultural settings.
In implementation, the conjoint analysis presents respondents with hypotheti-
cal scenarios related to family policy configurations, where they indicate how they
would, under the given conditions, organise the division of work in the house-
hold. The scenarios (for an example of the pretest of the survey see Figure 8.2)
are characterised by multiple attributes, with the specific values of these attributes
randomly varying among scenarios and respondents (Hainmueller et al. 2014).
Each respondent evaluates five scenarios, following standard practice (Bansak
et al. 2017), ensuring sufficient data for detailed analyses. While conjoint experi-
ments demonstrate robustness even with a large number of attributes, the number
is limited to eight – following the recommended practice (Bansak et al. 2017,
pp. 21–22). This limit is set to avoid potential cognitive overload, although Aus-
purg et al. (2017a) find no evidence of impaired results even when including 12
attributes, concluding that respondents can cope with the complexity.
3 Do specific parental leave policy designs have the potential to induce changes in paternal
behaviour, particularly in altering the distribution of paid and unpaid work time, and what
characteristics define these designs?
108 8 Data and Method
Figure 8.2 Example of the conjoint module in the survey. (Notes: Conjoint module with
parental leave attributes (version for families with younger children): Print screen of the US-
version of the pretest of the survey. Source: Stadelmann-Steffen and Lütolf (2021).)
To measure reactions to these configurations, respondents assess scenarios and
answer specific questions, i.e., the dependent variables. To capture the impact
of policies on the division of work within households, the same instrument
mentioned earlier is employed (see Subsection 8.2.3). Participants indicate how
they would allocate their time to the four “spheres of life” under the presented
conditions, as well as how their partner would allocate theirs. To facilitate partic-
ipants’ indication of time allocation given these scenarios, the survey calculates
the average time allocation per person based on the measurement of the cur-
rent time allocation (see Subsection 8.2.3). This “average day” is then displayed
directly in the conjoint, allowing individuals to make a direct comparison with
their current situation. As mentioned earlier, sleep and the collective category
“other” contribute to realistic time management, while gainful employment and
care and housework are the central dependent variables for both the respondent
and the partner, offering insights into the intended within-household division
of work. Furthermore, these variables can be analysed either alongside each
other or in various combinations, including the creation of an indicator depicting
changes compared to the actual division of time, i.e., a measurement capturing
the elasticity.
8.2 The Survey 109
The attributes are informed by both theoretical and empirical considerations.
Consequently, the scenarios encompass pertinent aspects related to external child-
care, worktime regulations, cash benefits, and, contingent on the youngest child’s
age, either parental leave policies or the organisation of school life.
Since a particular interest lies in the effects of different forms of parental
leave, this policy area is given a relatively large place in the conjoint. However,
parents with older children are no longer affected by this, whereas the school
system is of great importance for this group. Therefore, the sample is split based
on the age of the youngest child – the group with school-age children and the
group where the youngest child has not yet entered compulsory schooling. As this
thesis primarily focuses on parental leave, further discussion related to conjoint
analysis is limited to the sample with a child below school age. Consequently,
the conjoint analysis regarding the organisation of school life is not part of this
thesis. Furthermore, detailed discussion is restricted to parental leave attributes,
without elaborating on the other attributes in detail.
Parental Leave Configurations in the Conjoint
The attributes used for the conjoint analysis of parents with small children encom-
pass diverse situations related to extra-familial childcare, working conditions,
cash benefits such as child allowances, and various aspects of parental leave.
The specific attributes and their different levels are presented in Table 8.3.In
the experiment, the order of the attributes was partially randomised. The policy
areas, including labour market, cash benefits, ECEC, and parental leave, were
randomised, but the attributes for a specific policy area were always presented
together. Therefore, the two ECEC attributes and the four parental leave attributes
were each grouped as blocks.
To comprehensively analyse different policy designs of parental leave schemes,
four key attributes have been identified (as discussed and elaborated in the Theory
part II, specifically in Subsection 5.1.1), which are used as independent variables:
•Type of parental leave: This attribute involves diverse options for parents to
allocate and share their leave, considering various models of shared responsi-
bilities between both parents (referred to as sharing in Subsection 5.1.1).
•Duration: This attribute focuses on the specified time frame for parental leave.
It evaluates the length of time parents are entitled to take off from work to
fulfil their caregiving responsibilities.
110 8 Data and Method
Tab le 8.3 Attributes and levels of the conjoint
Attributes Levels
Cost of childcare Free of charge
Depends on income
Costs to be borne privately
Availability of childcare places There are enough childcare places
Childcare places are scarce
Work hours flexibility Strict presence obligation and rigid work hours
Possibility of working from home
Flexible work hours
Flexible work hours and possibility of working from
home
Monthly child allowance1None
$120 per child
$240 per child
$600 per child
Type of parental leave Parental leave freely divisible between both parents
Parental leave, at least 1/4 of which is to be allocated
to the father
Parental leave, 1/2 of which is to be allocated to the
father
Parental leave, if the father takes less than 1/3, the
total parental leave is to be cut in half
Duration of parental leave 6 months
9 months
12 months
24 months over the course of 6 years
Parental leave wage replacement No wage replacement
50% of the wage
80% of the wage
100% of the wage
Flexibility of parental leave Both parents have to use their share in one block and
are not allowed to work during their respective leaves
The division of the total amount of parental leave
between the two parents is entirely flexible
Note: 1 These cash amounts are determined based on the average cost of a child in the spe-
cific country. These amounts correspond to 10%, 20%, and 50% of the average costs and,
therefore, vary depending on the survey conducted in each country. A notification window
informed survey participants of the average expenses of raising a child in their respective
countries.
Source: Based on Stadelmann-Steffen and Lütolf (2021) and slightly adapted by the author.
8.2 The Survey 111
•Wage replacement: This attribute delves into the financial aspect of parental
leave by examining the level of wage replacement provided during the leave
period, acknowledging the economic support for parents during their time
away from professional responsibilities.
•Flexibility: This attribute refers to the flexibility in taking parental leave, dif-
ferentiating between rigid and highly flexible approaches. By reflecting the
degree of adaptability in parental leave usage, it considers the accommodation
to diverse family needs and work arrangements.
By considering these four attributes a holistic analysis of the different policy
designs and approaches to parental leave schemes can be achieved. This frame-
work allows for a comprehensive comparison and evaluation of the varied ways
in which parents may be supported in balancing their professional and family
responsibilities.
Sample-Restrictions for the Conjoint Analysis
The conjoint analysis addresses the research question posed in Subsection 1.2.3:
Do specific parental leave policy designs have the potential to induce changes in
paternal behaviour, particularly in altering the distribution of paid and unpaid
work time, and what characteristics define these designs? The focus is on fathers,
parental leave, and the elasticity of paternal time allocation due to the different
policy designs. Therefore, additional sample restrictions are necessary in addition
to those already known.4 By focusing on fathers, only potential changes in the
male sample are analysed, and as the independent variables include different
attributes of parental leave policies, only fathers with at least one child not yet
of school age are included (fathers with older children were presented with other
scenarios without parental leave attributes in the experiment part of the survey,
as described in Subsection 8.2.4). In addition, the elasticity of time allocation is
examined, i.e., how time spent on care and housework on the one hand and on
employment on the other hand changes under changing policy conditions. For
this reason, it is useful to restrict the sample to those who are potentially in
the labour force, from which retired people, people who are permanently ill or
disabled, people who are currently inactive for other reasons, and people who
4 The survey sample is restricted to people living in a household with their partner and a
child under the age of 15 and I further only included hetero-normative couples (see Subsec-
tion 8.2.1).
112 8 Data and Method
are currently doing military service are excluded. Conversely, this means that the
sample – referred to as conjoint sample – includes all men with one child under
school-age who are employed, currently on parental leave, unemployed, studying,
in training or an unpaid traineeship, and those who are mainly engaged in caring
and domestic work. As these men evaluated five5 different scenarios, the basis
of observation consists of 6075 data points (1704 from Switzerland, 1685 from
Germany, 1336 from Finland, 707 from Sweden and 643 from the United States).
The Dependent Variable of the Conjoint Analysis
The dependent variable is constructed in the following way: While respondents
indicate their potential time allocation under a given scenario using the 24-hour
slider (for more information on the conjoint module, see Subsection 8.2.4), I
calculate the difference in hours between this potential time allocation and the
respondent’s current time allocation (see Subsection 8.2.3). Thus, the focus is not
on the absolute number of hours spent working in labour or caring under a given
policy configuration, but on the change in time allocation, i.e., the potential elas-
ticity of fathers’ behaviour. Strictly speaking, there is not one but two dependent
variables, and accordingly separate models are run: one with the difference in
hours of paid work, and one with unpaid care work. However, the two models
are presented in one graph so that the changes in paid and unpaid work can be
read together in one figure.
The idea behind this conjoint analysis is to get an idea of whether and how
parental leave policies affect the time use of young fathers. The experiment’s
policy scenarios may be more generous due to the current parental leave policies
in the respective countries. If fathers demonstrate a potential change in behaviour
under these extended p arental leave options, this gives an indication of elasticity.
This elasticity is expected to involve a decrease in working hours and an increase
in time spent on care. These results must be interpreted with caution and cannot
be translated one-to-one into real changes in behaviour, as this is a hypothetical
situation in a survey context. However, if no policy effects are detected, it sug-
gests that current norms are deeply entrenched and other contextual structures
and capacities hinder changes in the distribution of paternal time. Therefore, in
the short term, significant shifts in time allocation would not be observed even if
policies were altered.
5 The number of observations per country are not evenly divisible by five as not all partici-
pants evaluated all five scenarios presented to them.
8.2 The Survey 113
Measures of Conjoint Analysis
In order to analyse which attributes influence the intended allocation of time
between paid work and work at home, two commonly used measures are com-
bined, following recent research (see, e.g., Rincon 2023; Stadelmann-Steffen et al.
2024): Marginal means and Average Marginal Component Effect (AMCE).6
In a first step, marginal means are computed. The advantage of marginal means
is that they do not depend on a reference category and, therefore, represent the
mean of an attribute without considering the other attribute levels (Leeper et al.
2020). This means that general statements can be made about potential elastic-
ities due to certain parental leave scenarios. This allows the marginal means of
different subgroups to be directly compared with each other (Leeper et al. 2020).
The estimation of marginal means is highly relevant for this analysis, as the main
interest lies in the different levels of the two dependent variables (i.e., the num-
ber of hours of employment and the number of hours of care and housework),
which are measured on the same scale and indeed on the same slider, but also in
the level differences between countries and between different groups of fathers.
The effect of the attributes on the allocation of time to paid and unpaid work is
directly illustrated by the use of marginal means.
In a second step, AMCEs are calculated, which refer to the average marginal
effect of a single attribute over the combined distribution of all other attributes
(Bansak et al. 2023; Hainmueller et al. 2014). The AMCEs, therefore, help to
determine the effect of individual attribute levels, taking into account that these
individual policies are embedded in policy configurations. Thus, the causal effect
of a particular parental leave design on the father’s time allocation can be iden-
tified (Hainmueller et al. 2014). It is interpreted as the elasticity of the time
distribution when a certain level of an attribute is present, with respect to a base-
line category established as the counterfactual level (Rincon 2023; Teele et al.
2018). This allows AMCEs to assess statistical significance between attribute
levels, specifically between an attribute level and the reference level.
Robustness Checks with Subgroup Analyses
Various subgroup analyses are of interest. Starting with country-specific models
for analysing differences between different family policy regimes, additional anal-
yses are carried out on the employment rate of fathers, their gender attitudes and
their satisfaction with their current time allocation. These additional subgroup
6 Statistical calculations, including conjoint analyses and regression models, were performed
using the R statistics program (R version 4.2.3 and RStudio version 2023.03.0). The code and
information on the packages used are available upon request.
114 8 Data and Method
analyses contain specifications with expected differences in elasticity potential
and are estimated to check for robustness.
The subgroups by employment were classified on the basis of average hours
worked per day into no or part-time, with all fathers working no hours or up
to five hours per day, high part-time with all fathers working an average of six
hours, full-time including seven to eight hours, and overtime, with all fathers
working nine hours or more per day. The subgroups based on gender attitudes
were determined using the following information. The respondents were required
to express their level of agreement with five statements7 using a Likert scale
ranging from 1 to 7. Based on their five responses, an index is developed and
divided into three categories: egalitarian, middle and traditional. Satisfaction with
current average time allocation was divided into three categories: fathers who
are completely satisfied, those who are somewhat satisfied and those who are
dissatisfied. As some of the fathers are currently on parental leave, a dummy
variable has been added to further investigate this subgroup. More information
on these variables and their operationalisation can be found in Table A.4 in the
Electronic Supplementary Material.
8.3 Regression Analysis: Paternal Leave Duration
Regression analyses are conducted to answer the sub-research question8 from
Subsection 1.2.2 on leave duration and address the corresponding hypotheses
from Section 5.2. As for the conjoint analysis, the data from the aforementioned
survey is also used for this analysis. However, the sample for the regressions is
restricted in a slightly different way. Unlike the conjoint analysis, which only
includes fathers with at least one younger child due to the two different conjoint
settings, this analysis includes all fathers from the survey, resulting in a sample
of 4525 men (DE 870, SE 874, FI 923, CH 1017, US 841) – referred to as
the regression sample. The variables are operationalised and explained in the
following subsections, and the corresponding results are presented in Chapter 10.
7 The statements read: 1. A working mother can establish just as warm and secure a relation-
ship with her children as a mother who does not work. 2. A pre-school child is likely to suffer
if his or her mother works. 3. Both the man and the woman should contribute to the house-
hold income. 4. A man’s job is to earn money; a woman’s job is to look after the home and
family. 5. A man who works part-time in order to care for his children is not a real man.
8 Does a correlation exist between the length of parental leave taken by fathers upon the
birth of their first child and the egalitarianism of the long-term distribution of caregiving
responsibilities among parents?
8.3 Regression Analysis: Paternal Leave Duration 115
8.3.1 Measurement of Paternal Leave Duration
as the Independent Variable
To measure job absenteeism after the birth of the first child, the survey includes
the following questions to cover the three possible types of leave:
•Parental leave: How much of the possible leave did you effectively take?
•Regular holiday entitlements: How much time off did you take after the
birth?
•Unpaid leave: How much unpaid leave did you take after the birth?
As a response option for all three questions, a numerical value could be selected
and the preferred unit between days, weeks and months, or optional Don’t know
could be selected.
The operationalisation of the independent variable paternity leave uptake is
based on the cumulative duration of this three distinct types of absences related
to childbirth. This choice is underpinned by two factors. Firstly, the analysis
concentrates on actual leave uptake, rather than solely on the existence of formal
provisions. Secondly, the inclusion of countries within the sample that do not
possess formal parental leave regulations but maybe regulations on sub-national
or company level supports this approach. As a result, the concept of overall leave
uptake serves as a variable encompassing all countries, enabling an assessment
of the presence of functional counterparts to public parental leave schemes.
For the main models, the following categorisations of the sum of the absence
after the birth of the first child were made:
•None: no leave was taken
•Very short: leave under two weeks
•Short: leave between two weeks and one month
•Middle: leave between one and two months
•Long: leave of more than two months
Nevertheless, to pinpoint potential distinctions among these various leave types,
supplementary models were computed for each individual type of leave and pre-
sented in Subsection 10.2.2. Regrettably, due to the limited number of cases in
certain groups, adopting identical leave duration classifications as those used for
the overall leave analysis proved infeasible. Therefore, the following categori-
sations were made for the leave subtypes (parental leave / holidays / unpaid
leave):
116 8 Data and Method
•None: no leave was taken
•Short: leave up to three weeks
•Long: leave of more than three weeks
8.3.2 Caregap as the Dependent Variable
In addition to the duration of parental leave, the regression analyses focus on the
division of unpaid work between parents. The analysis does not simply consider
the absolute change in care time spent by fathers, but rather the relative ratio
between parents.
The information provided by survey participants with the 24-hours-slider, as
explained in the Subsection 8.2.3 on time allocation, is used for this purpose.
The information provided by individuals about themselves is combined with the
information they provided about their partner. This combined measurement aims
to provide a more detailed understanding of the household by examining the
distribution of unpaid work between mothers and fathers as members of a par-
enting couple. The calculation involves determining the difference in unpaid work
between the parents, which is referred to as the caregap. Specifically, the caregap
is calculated by subtracting the father’s hours of unpaid work from his partner’s
hours of care and housework (or, for the female sample, the caregap is calculated
by subtracting her partner’s hours from her own hours).
Caregap =unpaid work hours mother −unpaid work hours father
A negative value indicates that the father takes on more care, while a pos-
itive value indicates that the mother takes on more unpaid work. A caregap
value of zero indicates that the unpaid work in the household is shared equally.
Subsection 10.1.1 contains empirical findings on the caregap.
8.3.3 Further Variables and Method
The models further include gender attitudes9 to account for the respondents
norms; the average hours per day in paid work;the number of children (under 15
years) living in the household and a dummy variable, whether the youngest child
9 The gender attitude operationalisation aligns with the description provided in Subsec-
tion 8.2.4 for the conjoint analysis.
8.3 Regression Analysis: Paternal Leave Duration 117
is already of school age or not. Further information and descriptions of these
variables and their operationalisations are given in Table A.3 in the Electronic
Supplementary Material.
To analyse the linkage between the caregap within the household and the
duration of the paternal absence from gainful employment after the birth of the
first child linear regression models are estimated. Different models are consid-
ered here including the above variables with one model taking these determinants
into account as added variables and another model considering interactions and
analysing thereby gender attitudes in more detail. Moreover, to account for
different country effects, I further calculated separate models for each country.
8.3.4 Addressing Endogeneity
A recurring central problem in studies of family policy is causality as well as
endogeneity. In this analysis, the relationship between the duration of paternity
leave and the subsequent division of unpaid work can be assessed. However,
the direction of this connection remains uncertain: Does leave duration impact
future behaviour, or do solely those fathers supporting a more equal division of
labour already opt for (lengthier) leaves? This question cannot be clarified con-
clusively due to the lack of suitable data. By conducting supplementary analyses,
I aim to gather additional information, fostering discussion on potential causal
relationships.
Preliminary indications can be discerned from interaction models involving gen-
der attitudes. It’s plausible that fathers holding highly traditional views likely
adhere to a correspondingly traditional division of labour, primarily relying on
mothers to handle unpaid work. For these fathers, aligning with their own values
means maintaining a traditional division of labour even if they opt for an extended
paternity leave. Conversely, should fathers with traditional gender attitudes show
an effect related to the duration of their leave, it becomes plausible to deduce that
the length of the leave affects subsequent behaviour – or, at the very least, that
causality exists in this direction. The same is true for egalitarian-minded men:
Since egalitarian attitudes argue for a corresponding division of work, it can be
assumed that individuals with egalitarian gender attitudes organise themselves
whenever possible in a way that divides care equally between the parents. The
duration of paternity leave should not have much impact in this group.
118 8 Data and Method
In a further step, financial compensation during leave is included to delve
deeper into the endogeneity issue. Scholars agree that the economic component
is one of the most important factors for the paternal take-up of parental leave
(Haas and Rostgaard 2011; Kaufman 2017; Patnaik 2019; Ray et al. 2010). Vari-
ous studies show that unpaid leave or leave with low wage compensation remains
mostly unused by fathers. Consequently, fathers opting for such leaves constitute
a distinct subset, p roactively participating in childcare without being incentivised
by policies. In this respect, it can be assumed that these fathers take on a relatively
large share of unpaid work and that the caregap is correspondingly small – inde-
pendent of leave duration. A detailed analysis, considering both leave duration
and wage compensation, provides insights into the potential impact of financial
remuneration. To better understand potential causality, an additional regression
is estimated similar to the main model but using a nuanced leave variable. This
new variable incorporates wage compensation, dividing it into two groups: leave
with compensation exceeding 70% of the previous wage (labelled as paid leave)
and leave with wage replacement ranging from 0% to 70% (labelled as unpaid
leave). By combining this categorisation with the previously introduced variable
for leave duration, a new variable emerges comprising nine distinct categories (for
additional information see Table A.3 in the Electronic Supplementary Material).10
10 The nine categories are: No leave, very short unpaid, short unpaid, middle unpaid, long
unpaid, very short paid, short paid, middle paid, long paid.
8.3 Regression Analysis: Paternal Leave Duration 119
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use,
sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you
give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s
Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If
material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use
is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
permission directly from the copyright holder.
Part IV
Empirical Analysis
9
Egalitarianism in Parental Leave
Policies
As outlined in Chapter 7, the first empirical step involves conducting a thor-
ough analysis of the parental leave policy designs in the five selected countries.
This chapter aims to empirically apply the first sub-research question, stating:
How should a parental leave policy be designed to achieve maximal egalitarian-
ism? Thus, this analysis examines the degree to which current policies promote
egalitarian family models, particularly the universal caregiver model.
The chapter is divided into three parts. Section 9.1 provides a detailed presen-
tation of the parental leave policies of each country. The policy indices for each
policy are calculated using the analysis grid introduced in Chapter 7. Section 9.2
discusses the results, including the differences between countries and the vari-
ance between the policy ideal index and the policy implementation index within
a country. Section 9.3 presents the proportion of family models actually lived,
grouped by country, using survey data. It further discusses the extent to which
the lived family models reflect the countries’ parental leave policies.
9.1 Comparative Analysis of Current Parental Leave
Policies
The following section empirically applies the two indices to assess the leave
policies of the selected five Western democracies. The analysis grid, described
in Chapter 7, is now being applied in practice. If a country offers parental leave
Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material
available at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5_9.
© The Author(s) 2025
M. Lütolf, The Balancing Act of Working Mothers and Caring Fathers,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5_9
123
124 9 Egalitarianism in Parental Leave Policies
Tab le 9.1 Parental leave policies per country
Countries Entitled person Duration Wage rep.1 Flexibility
Switzerland Mother 14 weeks 80% None
Father 2 weeks 80% Within 6 months, as
individual days
Germany Mother 2 months (3 years)2 65% Up to 3 blocks, as
individual days
Father 2 months (3 years) 65% Up to 3 blocks, as
individual days
Parents 10 months 65% Up to 3 blocks, as
individual days
Finland Mother 137 working days370%4None for the first 40
days (afterwards see
below)
Father 97 working days 70% Within 2 years, 8
blocks of at least 12
days
Parents 126 working days 70% Within 2 years, 8
blocks of at least 12
days
Sweden Mother 90 days 77.6% Within 12 years, as
days or even parts of
days
Father 90 days 77.6% Within 12 years, as
days or even parts of
days
Parents 300 days 77.6%5Within 12 years, as
days or even parts of
days
United States eligible workers 12 weeks –several blocks
Note: 1 All European countries set a ceiling for high incomes and except for Switzerland pay
a minimum amount.
2 The duration in parentheses corresponds to job security, the one in front to the period of
wage replacement.
3 Working days are from Monday to Saturday.
4 Wage replacement for the first 56 days for mothers and for the first 16 days for fathers is
at 90% of income (differentiated in the subsequent analysis).
5 The rate for the last 90 days is paid at a flat rate.
Source: Prepared by the author based on Blum et al. 2023, BMFSFJ 2020, BSV 2020,
Kaufman et al. 2020, Kela 2021, Kramer 2008 and Schubarth 2015.
9.1 Comparative Analysis of Current Parental Leave Policies 125
with transferable shares between parents, the implementation index is calculated in
addition to the policy ideal index. However, if a country only provides individual,
non-transferable policy entitlements, then only one index is calculated for this
policy, as the two indices would assume the same value. An ideal parental leave
policy assumes a maximal policy index value of 5. However, a parental leave
policy that is minimally developed and without pay may result in a policy index
of 0, which corresponds to the index value for a country without a parental leave
policy.
In the following, the current parental leave policies and latest reforms in the
five countries are discussed and analysed. This discussion only explicitly covers
the provisions for parental, maternity, and paternity leave in each country. Mater-
nity protection, i.e., any form of work bans around the birth that protects the
mother and her child, does not form an individual part of this analysis and is
only included if it falls within the maternity or parental leave.
Table 9.1 provides an overview of the policies, emphasising essential aspects.
Furthermore, the parental leave policies are now presented separately by country
in individual subsections, while the calculated indices are discussed simultane-
ously. The process of calculating the indices involved several intermediate steps
and the calculation of individual variables, as explained in Chapter 7’s formu-
las and explanations. As intermediate stages in calculating the indices, Table 9.2
displays additional information about parents’ non-transferable shares and the
resulting gender quotients. As countries define their policies in different time
units, the duration had to be standardised. To this end, Table 9.3 presents the
Tab le 9.2 Gender quotient
Country fix father fix mother Gender quotient
Switzerland 2 weeks 14 weeks 0.14
Germany 2 months 2 months 1
Finland 97 days 137 days 0.71
Sweden 90 days 90 days 1
United States 12 weeks 12 weeks 1
Note: Fix father stands for the non-transferable leave duration for fathers and fix mothers
stands for the one for mothers. The Gender quotient refers to the quotient of non-transferable
parental leave shares (non-transferable leave for fathers / non-transferable leave for mothers).
Source: Prepared by the author.
126 9 Egalitarianism in Parental Leave Policies
Tab le 9.3 Conversion values for duration
Country Leave allocation Policy in months adjusted
Switzerland mother 14 weeks 3.23 2.58
father 2 weeks 0.46 0.37
Germany equal sharing 7 months 74.55
max. mother 12 months 12 7.79
min. father 2 months 21.3
Finland equal PL, mothers total 200 working days 7.69 5.82
equal PL, fathers total 160 working days 6.15 4.43
max. mother 263 working days 10.12 7.51
min. father 97 working days 3.73 2.73
Sweden equal sharing 240 days 7.89 6.11
max. mother 390 days 12.82 9.94
min. father 90 days 2.96 2.29
United States eligible workers 12 weeks 2.77 –
Note:The leave allocation column describes under which allocation scheme each parent is
entitled to this specific leave period. In the Finnish case for equal a llocation, parental leave
(PL) is halved and then the personal days are added. The last column adjusted stands for
adjusted duration – the potential leave duration if the wage replacement was paid out at
one hundred percent. Since the policy duration in Finland is indicated in working days and
these include Monday to Saturday, a slightly different conversion rate applies here than for
Sweden.
Source: Prepared by the author.
conversion values for the duration, including the adjusted duration, which repre-
sents the duration of parental leave under constant absolute expenditure if existing
parental leave were compensated at full wage replacement. Finally, at the end of
this section, Table 9.4 presents the results, including the policy ideal index and
the policy implementation index for each country’s policy.
9.1 Comparative Analysis of Current Parental Leave Policies 127
Tab le 9.4 Policy ideal and implementation indices
Country Policy Index Parent D W aD FValu e GTotal
CH ideal/impl. Mother 0.54 0.8 0.43 02.2
Father 0.08 0.8 0.06 1 2
0.14 1.14
DE ideal Mother 00.65 0.76 13.17
Father 00.65 0.76 13.17
13.17
impl. Mother 00.65 1 1 3.65
Father 0.33 0.65 0.22 12.42
12.53
FI ideal Mother 10.7 0.97 14.64
Father 10.7 0.74 14.18
0.71 4.01
impl. Mother 10.7 1 1 4.7
Father 0.62 0.7 0.46 13.24
0.71 3.23
SE ideal Mother 10.78 1 1 4.78
Father 10.78 1 1 4.78
14.78
impl. Mother 0.93 0.78 1 1 4.71
Father 0.49 0.78 0.38 13.03
13.32
US ideal/impl. Mother 0.46 0 0 0.5 0.96
Father 0.46 0 0 0.5 0.96
10.96
Note: The abbreviations stand for Duration (D), Wage replacement (W), adjusted Duration
(aD), Flexibility (F) and Gender quotient (G).
Source: Prepared by the author.
9.1.1 Switzerland
Switzerland did not have any provisions for parental leave at the national level
for a long time and even today, it only allows for short periods of leave. For
decades, Switzerland has been engaged in a political discourse, marked by var-
ious popular votes regarding the implementation of maternity leave (Schubarth
128 9 Egalitarianism in Parental Leave Policies
2015). Consequently, the first national maternity insurance was introduced rela-
tively recently, in 2005, entitling mothers to a 14-week period with 80% wage
compensation from birth (Valarino and Nedi 2020). The financial remuneration
is calculated based on the average salary of the 12 months preceding birth and
is capped at a maximum of 196 Swiss francs per day (Schubarth 2015). Should
a mother return to work before the 14-week period concludes, her entitlement to
the remaining time lapses, irrespective of whether she resumes work on a full-
time or part-time basis (Schubarth 2015). Since its introduction, this policy has
undergone only minor adjustments.
The narrative takes a more recent turn concerning fathers, as a two-week
paternity leave has been in place since the beginning of 2021. Fathers receive 80%
salary compensation, adhering to the same principles outlined for mothers (BSV
2020). In contrast to mothers, fathers enjoy somewhat more flexible options, as
the two weeks can be taken within six months after birth, either consecutively or
spread over individual days (BSV 2020). As paternal leave can be divided into
individual days, it can be combined with part-time work, whereby no gainful
employment is pursued on the day when leave is taken.
Currently, there is no comprehensive national parental leave policy that
addresses both parents; although some additional policies exist at the sub-national
level and some entitlements are granted through companies in the private sec-
tor, the majority of individuals rely solely on these individual national measures
(Blum et al. 2023, p. 555).
Switzerland only mandates non-transferable leave, so the two policy indices are
identical.Theyare also relatively low at 1.14, because the overall policy package
does little to promote a universal caregiver model. The differences between the
parents’ leave indicators stem from the significant difference between the dura-
tions of mothers’ and fathers’ leaves and the great flexibility of fathers’ leaves.
The provisions envision a fixed, non-transferable share for fathers and provide
high financial compensation. Nevertheless, parents’ individual leave indicators
remain relatively low. The aforementioned difference in the time mothers and
father can take off work entails that the gender quotient is almost zero.
9.1.2 Germany
In Germany, a distinction is drawn between parental leave and parental allowance.
While the former defines the duration of the permitted birth-related absence from
work, the latter regulates the financial compensation for the duration of income
loss during this time. Parental leave ensures job security for each parent for up to
9.1 Comparative Analysis of Current Parental Leave Policies 129
three years (Blum et al. 2023).1 During this period, no salary is granted; however,
parents have the opportunity to engage in part-time work, up to 30 hours per week
(BMFSFJ 2020, p. 95). The flexible take-up possibilities of parental leave permits
individuals to take it in diverse manners, such as for individual months, weeks,
or days, as well as in a continuous stretch or divided into up to three segments
(BMFSFJ 2020, pp. 83). Moreover, both parents have the option to be on leave
simultaneously (Koslowski et al. 2020).
Parental allowance, in the form of basic parental allowance (Basiselterngeld),
provides financial compensation for a total of fourteen months.2 Parents have the
flexibility to allocate the 14 months of parental allowance between themselves and
can opt to take them simultaneously, with each parent being eligible to receive a
maximum of 12 out of the 14 months (BMFSFJ 2020, p. 19). To utilise the full 14
months of parental allowance, each parent must draw a minimum of two months,
which translates into two months of non-transferable leave for each parent and ten
flexible months (Blum et al. 2023; BMFSFJ 2020). During the period of receiving
parental allowance, only part-time work is permissible, restricting the respective
parent to no more than 30 hours per week (BMFSFJ 2020, p. 95). The amount of
the basic parental allowance falls within the range of 300 to 1800 euros per month
(BMFSFJ 2020, p. 30).3 The minimum amount is applicable even if the concerned
parent had no prior income, establishing 300 euros per month as an income-
independent baseline. If no work is undertaken after childbirth, the amount is
65% of the pre-birth net income. If parents opt for part-time employment, their
wage replacement is adjusted accordingly (BMFSFJ 2020, p. 32). The specific
1 It is worth noting that parental leave can also be taken after the child’s third birthday. How-
ever, as this requires employer consent (BMFSFJ 2020, p. 81) and is, therefore, no longer
universally available to all employees, further discussion on this matter is omitted here.
2 As part of the parental leave reform in 2015, parental allowance plus (ElterngeldPlus) was
introduced, maintaining the total amount of parental allowance while allowing for a doubling
of the payment duration compared to the basic model (BMFSFJ 2020, p. 33). This exten-
sion means that parental allowance can now be disbursed over 28 months, with the monthly
amount halved. However, the payment can be supplemented by part-time work up to the
equivalent of the basic parental allowance. Parents have the option to select between these
two benefit types, and they can also combine the two (Koslowski et al. 2020). An additional
enhancement resulting from the 2015 reform is the introduction of the partnership bonus
(Partnerschaftsbonus). This bonus can further extend the parental allowance plus period by
four months, contingent on both parents working between 25 and 30 hours per week during
this additional time (BMFSFJ 2020, p. 24).
3 Another element to mention is the sibling bonus (Geschwisterbonus), which provides an
additional increase in the allowance when there are siblings in the household (BMFSFJ 2020,
p. 39).
130 9 Egalitarianism in Parental Leave Policies
amount for the basic parental allowance is calculated based on the difference
between the net income before and after childbirth, with 65% of this difference
being disbursed (Schober et al. 2020). Consequently, engaging in part-time work
can augment the monthly budget while receiving parental allowance.
The classification within the analysis grid is somewhat more difficult, since
strictly speaking these are two different policies that do not directly depend on
each other. Although the duration of the leave differs from the duration of the
compensation, both periods are included in this analysis to ensure that the coun-
try comparison yields a reasonable picture. Therefore, based on the three years of
guaranteed job security, the duration value is set to zero in the policy ideal index.
To calculate the policy implementation index, it is assumed that two months go
to the fathers, because these two months of financially compensated leave would
otherwise be lost, as the duration of mothers’ compensated leave cannot exceed
twelve months. The wage replacement and the calculation of the leave’s dura-
tion at one hundred percent wage replacement are based on a total of fourteen
months, i.e., the duration of the financial compensation. The amount of parental
allowances, which exhibit considerable individual variations, are assumed to be
a maximum of 65% for simplification purposes. The policy ideal index of 3.17
does not significantly differ from the policy implementation index of 2.53, partly
because of the very extended leave, which negatively affects the policy ideal index.
Promoting father involvement by encouraging both parents to claim a minimum
of two months of the basic parental allowance somewhat supports the universal
caregiver model, albeit to a modest extent, as reflected in Germany’s low indices.
9.1.3 Finland
In August 2022, Finland introduced an updated leave scheme, building upon the
already generous options and notably further enhancing gender equality: The new
policy provides individual leave entitlements for the mother, known as pregnancy
leave, as well as parental leave with individual options for both parents and addi-
tional leave options for sharing (Kela 2023). Pregnancy leave4 lasts 40 working
days5 , is compensated at 90% of the previous salary and there is no flexibility in
use (Blum et al. 2023). The total duration of parental leave is 320 working days,
4 Maternity leave can start up to 30 days prior to the due date, but must begin at least two
weeks before the due date and be taken for a minimum of two weeks after the birth (Blum
et al. 2023, p. 251).
5 Working days are from Monday to Saturday, thus corresponding to a 6-day week.
9.1 Comparative Analysis of Current Parental Leave Policies 131
evenly distributed between the parents, with 97 non-transferable days per parent
and an additional 63 transferable days each (Kela 2023). For the first 16 days of
parental leave, both parents receive 90% of their earnings, same as for the preg-
nancy leave, and the remaining duration is compensated at a rate of 70% with
a minimum amount of 31.99 Euro per weekday and a ceiling for high incomes
(Blum et al. 2023).6
The take-up of parental leave is relatively flexible: Both parents can take a
maximum of 18 days simultaneously, and employed parents have the option to
divide their entitlement into four blocks, each with a minimum duration of 12
days within the child’s first two years. The policy allows for partial parental
leave, supporting part-time work during the leave period, provided that the daily
working time does not exceed five hours, with the allowance being half of the
full-time leave allowance (Blum et al. 2023).
The subsequent high policy ideal index of 4.01 reflects this policy expansion,
suggesting its potential to promote a universal caregiver model. Although more
traditional divisions are possible, the policy implementation index remains rather
high with 3.23 and reaffirms the egalitarian approach. The details of the provi-
sions in Table 9.1 show that Finland promotes this family model, which is further
confirmed by mothers’ high leave indicator7 and the tiny difference between the
two parents’ leave indicators for the policy ideal index. Nevertheless, the gen-
der quotient of 0.71 indicates some disparity between parents’ non-transferable
shares.
The policies listed in Table 9.1 do not provide a complete picture of all rel-
evant Finnish policies. After the parental leave, another, very similar, form of
leave exists: home-care leave (Blum et al. 2023). Incorporating the additional
leave time envisioned by this policy into the calculation results in an increased
total duration of mothers’ leave and they no longer reach the maximum value for
the duration. Parents can also take advantage of various childcare allowances after
their own allowances end. The latter generally take the form of financial subsi-
dies for external childcare; the exception is the child home-care allowance. This
6 The adjusted duration was precisely calculated, factoring in an initial compensation of 90%
wage replacement. In contrast, a simplified assumption of 70% was utilised for determining
the values for leave parent. As a result, the indices for Finland are rather conservative. Sup-
plementary calculations reveal only marginal increases in values when adjusting for higher
wage compensation. Notably, in the context of cross-country comparisons, even with an ele-
vated compensation rate, Finland consistently demonstrates lower values for both indices
compared to Sweden.
7 Although there is no flexibility during maternity leave, the more flexible options during
parental leave still allow mothers to receive total points.
132 9 Egalitarianism in Parental Leave Policies
allowance pays parents a specific sum for taking care of their children themselves
at home until the children turn three (Koslowski et al. 2020). I abstain from dis-
cussing these policies in greater detail because this analysis is limited to parental
leave.
9.1.4 Sweden
Sweden’s family policy goes further back than other countries’ provisions. Swe-
den first introduced a paid maternity leave of six months in 1963. It also was
the first country to establish paid parental leave for fathers in 1974 (Aidukaite
and Telisauskaite-Cekanavice 2020; Duvander and Viklund 2019). Currently, the
parental leave duration spans a total of 480 days, with each parent granted 90 days
of non-transferable leave (Försäkringskassan 2021). While parents are allowed to
take 30 days of leave together during the initial year following the birth, the non-
transferable days cannot be used for this purpose. Instead, all of these 90 days
per parent remain designated for individual use (Koslowski et al. 2020).
The policy explicitly allocates 240 days per parent, requiring the parent who
wishes to allocate some of their time to the other parent to complete a consent
form (Koslowski et al. 2020, p. 558). Precisely stated, there are also ten days
pappadagar available. This offer provides a supportive framework for the other
parent or caregiver to be present during delivery, attend to older siblings while
the mother is hospitalised, and actively contribute to childcare upon the mother’s
return home (Försäkringskassan 2023).
The wage replacement rate for the initial 390 days is 77.6%, subject to a cap,
while the final 90 days are compensated at a fixed rate of SEK 180 per day
(equivalent to 17.50 Euro) (Koslowski et al. 2020).8 Parents without income are
granted a basic allowance.
To ensure great flexibility, the leave is measured in days: “Parents can take
paid leave days full-time, part-time, quarter-time, or one-eighth time, with the
length of leave extended accordingly” (Koslowski et al. 2020, p. 559). Working
while on leave is not allowed, but the policy encourages part-time work alongside
leave, since individual leave periods can be limited to as little as one-eighth of
a work day. The leave may be taken all at once or in several blocks until the
child’s twelfth birthday; however, only 96 days of it are available to parents after
their child turns four.
8 Additional parental leave benefits are prevalent in both public and private sectors, with
many employees receiving 90% of their earnings (Koslowski et al. 2020, p. 560).
9.1 Comparative Analysis of Current Parental Leave Policies 133
With a policy ideal index of 4.78, Sweden almost reaches the index’s maximum
value. The wage replacement level is the only area with room for improvement.
The policy fits into Sweden’s general image of a progressive country with an
egalitarian family policy, but the policy implementation index of 3.32 is much
lower than the policy ideal index because parents’ leave shares are transferable.
Nevertheless, this value also is comparatively high and does exceed other coun-
tries’ values. Sweden ranks high on both indices, which indicates that the country
provides incentives for a universal caregiver model. However, in keeping with
Kaufman et al. (2020, p. 166)’s conclusion, there is still room for improvement.
9.1.5 The United States
The United States stand as the sole OECD country lacking any form of paid child-
care leave, consistently lagging behind in international comparisons (see, e.g.,
Daly and Ferragina 2018). Given its liberal background and a generally under-
developed welfare state, the United States lack a comprehensive family policy
observed in other nations. Notably, the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA),
implemented in 1993, provides for unpaid, job-protected leave of up to 12 weeks
within a one-year period (Kramer 2008). However, this leave is subject to spe-
cific conditions and is not universally available to all employees (Kaufman et al.
2020).9
While a few states have more extensive regulations with paid parental leave,
these remain a distinct minority, leaving the majority reliant on the national
solution, if covered at all. Approximately 58% of workers in private firms are
estimated to meet FMLA eligibility criteria, but only 16% have utilised it for
any covered reason, and within this subset, only 21% took leave related to a new
child (Kaufman et al. 2020).
In the absence of a comprehensive national solution in the United States covering
either the entire or at least the working population, the argument can be made that
there is no policy to analyse. Consequently, a value of zero may be assigned to the
policy index, given the absence of a universally applicable policy and measures
for a universal caregiver model. Nevertheless, the FMLA will be scrutinised in
more detail to gain a nuanced understanding, recognising that the final result
cannot be compared to the same extent as with other countries.
Concerning the egalitarianism of the FMLA, two issues arise: first, the leave
is limited to certain employees, posing a significant deficiency in promoting an
9 Further details can be found in U.S. Departement of Labour 2012.
134 9 Egalitarianism in Parental Leave Policies
egalitarian family model; second, within its limited scope, the policy is gender-
neutral, potentially allowing both parents eligibility, resulting in a gender quotient
of 1 and a policy index of 0.96 for the United States. However, due to its
restricted applicability, further distinctions, including the implementation index,
seem arbitrary. Even direct comparison of the policy index with other countries is
challenging. Varying job situations may lead to scenarios where only one parent is
eligible, making an in-depth analysis of individual values impractical. Given the
low country score and policy limitations, debating the policy’s goal as a universal
caregiver model appears somewhat obsolete.
9.2 Discussion on the Egalitarianism of Parental
Leave Policies
In summary, the countries in my sample obtain the following scores on the two
indices: Switzerland 1.14, Germany 2.53-3.17, Finland 3.23-4.01, Sweden 3.32-
4.78, and the United States 0.96. These results are not very surprising and align
with existing research on family policy. Clearly, though, none of these countries
has a policy package that seeks to involve fathers in a truly egalitarian fashion
because no country achieves a score of five on the policy implementation index.
Even though the Scandinavian countries obtain relatively high scores, they could
promote fathers’ inclusion more concertedly and explicitly. More specifically,
they could increase the level of wage replacement and fathers’ shares of non-
transferable leave. At the policy level, three of the five countries – Germany,
Sweden, and the United States10 – are gender-neutral, which is reflected in their
gender quotients of one. The policies described above apply regardless of gender,
i.e., they are equally available to mothers and fathers.
However, in reality, the policies are not applied equally, because mothers draw
significantly larger shares of leave (Blum et al. 2023). This flexibility between
the parents and the gendered starting point lead to significant differences between
the policy ideal and the policy implementation indices. These patterns promote the
universal breadwinner model rather than the universal caregiver paradigm. This
raises the question whether the decisive nuance lies in the fact that fathers take
on more responsibility, but this tends to result in higher employment among
10 Nonetheless, it’s important to remember that not all parents in the United States are eligible
for FMLA. However, it’s worth noting that the policy is gender-neutral as it is not linked to
a specific gender.
9.2 Discussion on the Egalitarianism of Parental Leave Policies 135
mothers and outsourcing childcare and is just not enough for fathers to reduce
their workload in favour of childcare.
A more detailed look at the Swedish case illustrates how the country promotes
the universal caregiver model: Sweden scores close to the maximum on the policy
ideal index, which indicates that it does champion this family model. It stipulates
fathers’ inclusion rather distinctly, by allowing each parent a total of 240 days of
leave. The basic assumption is that the parental leave is divided in half. However,
the policy implementation index is significantly lower, which once again raises
questions about the country’s promotion of egalitarianism. The non-transferable
portion is ninety days and its extreme form produces a ratio of 390:90 or mothers
taking leaves that are more than four times longer than fathers’ leaves. Although
data on leave take-ups are scarce and often incomplete, several cases indicate
that the transferable days are used almost exclusively by mothers (Castro-García
and Pazos-Moran 2016). In this respect, the evaluation of the policy ideal index
requires careful consideration, as this index reflects the policy’s potential but does
not speak about its implementation. In Sweden’s case, the ratio of 390:90 days
clearly shows that the policy’s scope is quite large and that the policy can promote
very different family models.
Castro-García and Pazos-Moran (2016, p. 68) also note that despite “the
progress [Sweden has] achieved, the length of transferable leave makes it dif-
ficult to progress toward full equality”. Thus, the current baseline suggests that
truly egalitarian policies do not have a transferable portion because, in practice,
the latter is unilaterally used by the mother and must be assigned to her accord-
ingly. At first glance, some countries appear more egalitarian, but a more in-depth
examination paints a different picture. This is why the policy implementation index
is so important – it establishes policies’ practical implications.
An ideal policy design would provide for hundred percent wage replacement.
This may still sound idealistic and utopian to many, although it is already the
case in a few countries like for example in Estonia, Norway and Spain (Blum
et al. 2023). Nevertheless, this would also be implementable in countries where it
is considered unrealistic today: Research has shown that some countries provide
leaves that are longer than empirically shown to be reasonable. Costs can be kept
constant if they raise the leave’s compensation while reducing its duration. The
full wage-adjusted duration of the two parents’ leaves (shown in Table 9.3) would
thus be 2.95 months in Switzerland (2.58 months for mothers and 0.37 months
for fathers), 9.1 months in Germany (4.55 months per parent), 10.25 months in
Finland (5.82 months for mothers and 4.43 months for fathers), and more than
one year in Sweden (6.11 months per parent). Indeed, such an arrangement does
not work equally well in all countries because the leave’s duration becomes very
short in some of them. Yet, these examples demonstrate that this idea is feasible.
136 9 Egalitarianism in Parental Leave Policies
Moreover, there are strong arguments in favour of higher compensation at the
expense of duration. Indeed, the amount of financial compensation is decisive for
leave take-up – more so for fathers than for mothers because many families still
are more dependent on the man’s income. In contrast, the full wage replacement
could also have a strong psychological effect, because it allows governments to
send a clear signal that parental leave is valued.
Nevertheless, the merits of such a policy design are not limited to gender
equality. It is a genuinely egalitarian design all around. Because of its relatively
high compensation, parental leave is available to all income groups and not only
to families that can afford it. Generally, low-income families only make use of
parental leave if they are guaranteed some financial security, which the current
policies in several countries fail to do. The parental leave policy originated within
the framework of social insurance, so similar solutions for financial compensation
do exist. However, ignoring the path-dependent nature of policy design allows us
to observe considerable differences between childcare policies and other welfare
benefits. For example, illness and unemployment merit for leaves of unpredictable
duration, while parental leaves can be determined ex ante and thus have a clearly
defined end. Furthermore, someone can become ill or unemployed repeatedly.
Even if parents could theoretically have several children – and there certainly are
outliers – the number of each couple’s children usually falls within a predictable
range, with 2.4 births per woman worldwide and an average of only 1.5 births
in Europe (World Bank 2021). This means that the number of parental leave
payments is also kept within a reasonable range.
How should a truly egalitarian parental leave policy be designed and how egal-
itarian are the current leave policies of the countries in the sample? The results
show the following:
1. A truly egalitarian parental leave policy offers each parent a flexible leave of
six to twelve months with full wage replacement.
2. Various policy packages promote the universal breadwinner model and there
is some tendency to promote a universal caregiver model, although there is
significant variation across countries.
3. The apparent differences between the policy ideal and the policy implementa-
tion indices show that most policies allow for substantial transferable shares,
which costs them a considerable share of their potential egalitarianism.
4. The financial compensation offered by the examined parental leave policies is
generally below the ideal.
9.3 Parental Leave Policies and the Lived Family Models 137
Thus, the specific shift to a universal caregiver model has not been translated into
an explicit policy goal. Even in Sweden, which is the most egalitarian of all of
the countries in my sample, the transferability of a substantial leave share lays
a weak starting point for egalitarian sharing. As Castro-García and Pazos-Moran
(2016, p. 68) point out, the ideal policy would have to allocate discrete periods of
leave to each parent: “If nontransferable and well-paid parental leave is the only
leave men will take, their balanced participation can only be promoted through
equal, nontransferable parental leave, compensated at 100 percent of salary.” In
this respect, Sweden has the potential to improve its policy ideal index by allowing
for less transferability and providing higher financial compensation.
The qualitative, case-specific assessment approach has proven effective in the
context of the multidimensional nature of the parental leave policy packages in
my sample. Not only did it make it possible to analyse and compare individ-
ual countries’ policy packages in a differentiated manner, but it also allowed
me to simultaneously identify specific approaches to increasing egalitarianism. In
particular, the distinction between the policy ideal index and the policy implemen-
tation index has proven to be an innovative and informative extension of previous
research.
So far, this chapter has provided a comprehensive and descriptive exploration
of parental leave policies in the studied countries, including a detailed analysis
of their design and potential impact. The following section aims to establish a
connection between the current leave policies and the family models that exist in
each respective country.
9.3 Parental Leave Policies and the Lived Family
Models
Before proceeding to the empirical analyses to test the hypotheses, this section
has a closer look on the lived family models in the selected countries. Following
the discussion of different family models in Chapter 3 and the elaboration on
the promotion of varying family models depending on the family policy regime
in Chapter 6, the question arises as to which family models are practised and
whether these differences between countries truly exist. Especially when assess-
ing the impact of parental leave policies on promoting egalitarianism and the
previous discussion on the different leave designs, it is worth considering if these
policies are reflected in the lived family models. However, it is important to
note that family models are influenced by a variety of factors beyond just leave
policies, and leave design is just one element of the larger picture.
138 9 Egalitarianism in Parental Leave Policies
Figure 9.1 presents the lived family models11 in the respective five countries
basedonthe full sample of the survey discussed in Section 8.2. The distribution
of family models varies by country. In Switzerland and Germany, the modernised
male breadwinner model is the most common, while in the other three countries,
the universal caregiver model is prevalent. The differences are particularly notice-
able when comparing the egalitarian models (i.e., the universal breadwinner and
caregiver model) to the models with the male breadwinner logic (i.e., the classic
and modernised male breadwinner model).
Figure 9.1 Lived family models. (Note: The abbreviations stand for female breadwinner
(FB), male breadwinner (MB), modernised male breadwinner (MMB), universal breadwin-
ner (UB) and universal caregiver (UC). This figure is derived from the full sample. Refer to
Table A.1 in the Electronic Supplementary Material for the operationalisation of the family
models. Source: Prepared by the author.)
11 The operationalisation of family models is based on working hours. The caregiver parity
model is missing in Figure 9.1, despite being included in Table 3.1 and Section 3.2.Asthis
model does not differ from the male breadwinner logic in terms of the effective division of
work time, it is not possible to differentiate between them.
9.3 Parental Leave Policies and the Lived Family Models 139
As the sample is limited to families with at least one child under the age of
15, it is important to note that some of the parents were on parental leave at the
time of the survey. During parental leave, parents may divide their work differ-
ently, resulting in a different family model. To incorporate this into the analysis,
Figure 9.2 distinguishes between two groups: The upper figure includes all fam-
ilies where at least one parent is currently on parental leave, while the lower
figure includes families where no parents are on parental leave. As anticipated,
there are significant differences between these two groups, with the traditional
male breadwinner model being prevalent in most families where the mother or
father is currently on parental leave. Approximately half of families on parental
leave adopt a male breadwinner model, whereby the mother takes full-time leave
while the father continues with his regular employment. This is a widespread
practice, although it varies slightly across countries.
Building on the previous discussion in Section 9.2, this section examines the
extent to which fathers take parental leave and any cross-country differences.
Families where the father is on full-time parental leave while the mother is in
paid employment are visible in Figure 9.2 as female breadwinner models. Com-
paredtothe full sample, it is evident that households with female breadwinners
are decreasing or disappearing entirely, depending on the country, except in Swe-
den, where the proportion is actually slightly increasing. While there were very
few families in Germany and Finland at the time of the survey, and none in
Switzerland and the United States where fathers alone took full parental leave,
there are slightly more in Sweden, but even here it only accounts for just over
10% of families. These country differences are clearly reflected in the results
of the policy ideal and implementation index. At the same time, they also show
the discrepancy between the intended ideal and the effective implementation by
the families, i.e., the difference shown by the two policy indices: For instance,
in Sweden, the policy is formulated in a gender-neutral manner and is designed
generously. However, it still has gendered implications. On one hand, the policy
implementation index is significantly lower. On the other hand, there is a notable
imbalance in male vs. female breadwinner households in Figure 9.2.Inalmost
four times as many families, the mother takes full-time parental leave compared
to the father, resulting in a gender-specific parental leave. Workplace conditions
and norms are among the factors that influence a family’s decision to take parental
leave, in addition to the specific leave policy. It is important to note that these
descriptive plots do not imply any causal relationships. However, it is impres-
sive how this representation of families on parental leave aligns with theoretical
considerations on country-specific policies.
140 9 Egalitarianism in Parental Leave Policies
Figure 9.2 Lived family models by leave status. (Note: The abbreviations stand for female
breadwinner (FB), male breadwinner (MB), modernised male breadwinner (MMB), univer-
sal breadwinner (UB) and universal caregiver (UC). The two figures collectively represent
the full sample. The upper figure includes only families where at least one parent is currently
on leave, while the lower figure includes families where neither parent is currently on leave.
Refer to Table A.1 in the Electronic Supplementary Material for the operationalisation of the
family models. Source: Prepared by the author.)
9.3 Parental Leave Policies and the Lived Family Models 141
When comparing the full sample (Figure 9.1) to the bottom illustration in
Figure 9.2, which represents families where no one is on parental leave, dis-
tinct differences between countries become apparent. The situation in Switzerland
remains largely unchanged, while in Germany, there are only minor shifts. Specif-
ically, the abolition of families on leave results in fewer male breadwinner
households. This reduction is also observed in the remaining countries. In Swe-
den and Finland, there are more families that follow an egalitarian model and
fewer that adhere to the traditional male breadwinner logic compared to the full
sample.
Following this in-depth examination of parental leave policies in the five selected
countries and consideration of country-specific differences in lived family mod-
els, the next chapter aims to provide not only descriptive illustrations but also
empirical measurements of correlations using quantitative methods. The following
chapter will assess the realisation of the egalitarian policy potential by examin-
ing variations in the intra-family division of work across countries. Additionally,
the relationship between the division of parental time and the take-up of parental
leave will be explored, shedding light on the interconnected dynamics that shape
family life and work responsibilities.
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use,
sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you
give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s
Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If
material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use
is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
permission directly from the copyright holder.
10
Paternal Leave Duration
Following the theoretically based policy considerations discussed in the previ-
ous chapter, this chapter analyses the duration of leave and the distribution of
unpaid work within households.1 It examines the effective leave of fathers in
more detail, based on the survey data presented in Section 8.2. By focusing
specifically on the duration of leave, this chapter seeks to address the second
sub-research question, which is: Does a correlation exist between the length of
parental leave taken by fathers upon the birth of their first child and the egalitar-
ianism of the long-term distribution of caregiving responsibilities among parents?
(introduced in Subsection 1.2.2).
The chapter is divided into three sections. It begins with a descriptive perspec-
tive on the caregap and the duration of parental leave of fathers, which are the
dependent and independent variables of the regression analyses that follow in the
next section. Section 10.2 presents the results of these regression models, includ-
ing group-specific models as robustness checks. These models are then discussed
in Section 10.3.
1 The analysis presented in this chapter closely aligns with a separate article, which will be
published under the title Paternal leave duration and the closure of the gendered family
work gap in Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State and Society (Lütolf,
forthcoming).
Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material
available at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5_10.
© The Author(s) 2025
M. Lütolf, The Balancing Act of Working Mothers and Caring Fathers,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5_10
143
144 10 Paternal Leave Duration
10.1 Descriptive Results
Descriptive analyses were conducted to gain a better understanding of the relevant
variables, providing a foundation for subsequent regression analyses. To assess
the equality of a couple’s unpaid work distribution, the caregap is constructed as
described in Subsection 8.3.2 (for comprehensive guidance on measuring unpaid
work, including detailed descriptions, refer to Subsection 8.2.3). In addition, to
gather more information on paternal leave up-take, the number of fathers taking
childbirth-related leave and the duration of this leave are illustrated.
10.1.1 Caregap
In the theoretical discussion in Section 5.2, the impact of fathers opting for
parental leave is discussed in detail. The assessment of their enduring behaviour
revolves around the concept of the caregap (introduced in Subsection 8.3.2),
which denotes the disparity in unpaid work within a couple.
Table A.2 in the Electronic Supplementary Material illustrates that women
undertake significantly more care work across all countries, while men spend
more time on average in paid work.2 To calculate the dependent variable, i.e.,
the caregap within couples, the information on unpaid work was utilised. This
involved subtracting the weekly hours dedicated to care and housework by the
male partner from those of the female partner. A positive value indicates a caregap
where the woman performs more unpaid work, whereas a negative value indicates
a caregap in favour of the man performing more unpaid work.
A closer look at the caregap reveals some gender-specific differences. In the
full sample (men and women together), the median is 5 (i.e., women do five
hours more unpaid work per week than their partners) and the mean is 10.3.
For comparison, in the male-only sample the median is 2 and the mean is 5.8,
while in the female-only sample, the median is 10 and the mean is almost 15.
2 However, Table A.2 in the Electronic Supplementary Material shows notable differences
between countries. For instance, men from the United States and Sweden perform less paid
work but, on average, more unpaid work than men in the conservative countries of Germany
and Switzerland. Finland falls in the middle. A comparison of women’s labour intensity
across countries reveals that Scandinavian countries tend to have higher rates, while the
United States and Germany have lower rates, and Switzerland has slightly lower rates. Swiss
women take on the most unpaid work, followed by those in the United States and Germany.
Finnish women take on the least care work, with a median of 28 hours per week, which is
only three hours more than their male counterparts.
10.1 Descriptive Results 145
A comparison of the reported values by gender (see also Figure 10.1) reveals
a clear discrepancy. The reported hours of unpaid work of oneself and one’s
partner and the resulting caregap differ greatly according to gender, which can
be explained by the different gender-specific reporting. This is in line with the
literature indicating that people report their time use differently depending on
gender (Kan 2008; Yavorsky et al. 2015).
Figure 10.1 Density of the caregap in hours per week by gender. (Note: If the unpaid work
within a household is distributed egalitarian, the caregap is zero, if the woman takes on more
than the man, the caregap is positive, if the man takes on more, the caregap assumes negative
values. Source: Prepared by the author.)
This gender-specific distinction is noteworthy since the subsequent analysis is
restricted to the male sample – the regression sample.Given theanalysis’sspe-
cific focus on fathers and their leave uptake, it requires information about their
post-birth behaviour following the arrival of their first child, which is unavail-
able in the women’s sample. However, as highlighted in the upcoming sections
(see Subsections 10.2.1, 10.2.3,and 10.2.4), notable effects emerge despite the
relatively modest caregap observed in the male sample.
146 10 Paternal Leave Duration
10.1.2 Paternal Leave Take-up
Prior to testing the hypothesis using regression models, descriptive analyses are
performed to examine the characteristics and features of the dataset.3 This is
especially important given the scarcity of data on actual paternal leave take-up,
particularly in an international comparative context. As mentioned in Subsec-
tion 8.3.1, the main analysis does not distinguish between paternity leave, parental
leave, holidays or unpaid leave, but all these forms of absence from work after
the birth of the first child are grouped together and referred to as leave.
Figure 10.2 shows how the different leave duration are distributed within a
country. While in Switzerland, Germany and the United States the largest group
of fathers took no leave at all, this group is significantly smaller in the Scan-
dinavian countries. In Switzerland, about 30% of fathers stayed at home for up
to one month (i.e., took “very short” or “short” leaves), while longer leaves are
Figure 10.2 Duration of paternal leave uptake proportionally within a country. (Note: The
percentage ratios are within a country, thus the sum of the leave categories of a country adds
up to one hundred percent. The categories of leave duration include no leave (none), less
than two weeks (very short), two weeks up to one month (short), one to two months (middle)
and more than two months (long). This figure is derived from the regression sample. Source:
Prepared by the author.)
3 All subsequent analyses in this chapter are based on the regression sample as introduced in
Section 8.3 on the operationalisation for the analysis concerning the duration of leave take-
up.
10.2 Results of the Regression Models 147
the exception. The picture is similar in the United States. In Germany, however,
typically only very few fathers chose such short leave options; if they took any
leave at all, it was of at least one month.
A strikingly large number of missing values are apparent across all coun-
tries, with the highest prevalence observed in Finland and Sweden. Upon closer
examination, a substantial proportion of these cases involves fathers who were on
parental leave during the survey period. Additionally, a higher number of young
men under the age of 35, each with a single child, falls into this category. It
is reasonable to assume that this group includes fathers who are not currently
on leave but are still within the time frame where they could potentially take
it. Consequently, they are not able to provide definitive answers regarding their
leave uptake after the birth of their first child. Given that Finland and Sweden
offer more extensive paternal leave options compared to the other three coun-
tries, coupled with an extended period for potential uptake, it is expected that a
large group of fathers in these countries have not yet completed their leave. This
explains the elevated prevalence of missing values in this context. In Sweden, the
“long” leaves of more than two months form the second largest group with more
than 20% of the fathers. In Finland, approximately 20% of fathers have not taken
any leave, and there is little variation in the rates of leave uptake across different
leave duration, with around 10% in each category.
This analysis reveals significant cross-country variations in paternal leave
uptake and a notable issue of missing data, particularly in Finland and Sweden,
underscoring the importance of understanding these country-specific policy-
induced nuances when examining leave patterns.
10.2 Results of the Regression Models
This section presents analyses based on the theoretical considerations outlined in
Section 5.2 and aim to assess the validity of the assumptions made in hypotheses
1 and 2.4 Information on the operationalisation of leave can be found in Subsec-
tion 8.3.1, while the regression sample used for subsequent analyses and relevant
variables are described in Section 8.3.
Further information on the operationalisation of different variables is shown in
Section 8.3 and specifically for the duration of parental leave in Subsection 8.3.1.
4 A more extended period of fathers’ parental leave uptake is positively associated with a
more egalitarian distribution of unpaid work within households (H1). A generous policy
regime, particularly through egalitarian parental leave policies or substantial paternity leave,
correlates with a more egalitarian distribution of unpaid work within households (H2).
148 10 Paternal Leave Duration
10.2.1 Main Models
Model 1 and 2 in Figure 10.3 show clear results in terms of leave duration:
The caregap in households where the father has not taken leave is slightly less
than eight hours and then decreases steadily with increasing leave duration, with
fathers on leave of more than two months doing just over six hours less unpaid
work than their partners. The two models diverge in that Model 2 incorporates
gender attitudes not only as a control but as an interaction variable. A detailed
comparison of these models can be found in Table 10.1.
Figure 10.3 Predicted probabilities of the caregap contingent on leave take-up. (Note: Pre-
dicted probabilities of the caregap contingent on the duration of paternal leave take-up.
Model 2 incorporates gender attitudes as an interaction variable, as opposed to Model 1,
where gender attitudes are merely added. The complete models can be found in Table 10.1.
Source: Prepared by the author.)
Model 1 clearly confirms the first hypothesis, asserting that longer paternal
leave take-up positively correlates with a smaller caregap. In Model 2, on the
other hand, the significance of leave take-up is no longer evident. This model
appears to be over-specified, as the number of cases within the individual inter-
action categories is to small. It remains noteworthy that the discernible pattern
persists.
A look at the other variables in Table 10.1 reveals a greater caregap the more
hours of paid work the father does, the more children live in the household and
also a clear difference exists if the youngest child is not yet in school compared
to households with older children.
10.2 Results of the Regression Models 149
Table 10.1 Linear regression models
Dependent variable: Caregap
Model 1 Model 2
Constant − 26.614∗∗∗
(1.502)
− 26.803∗∗∗
(1.658)
Leave (Ref: None)
Very short − 0.992
(0.695)
− 1.409
(2.244)
Short − 1.290
(0.814)
− 0.631
(2.256)
Middle − 1.465∗
(0.845)
− 1.134
(2.104)
Long − 2.065∗∗∗
(0.729)
− 1.731
(1.599)
Attitude (Ref: Egalitarian)
Middle 4.142∗∗∗
(0.703)
4.320∗∗∗
(1.062)
Traditional 3.806∗∗∗
(0.862)
3.962∗∗∗
(1.267)
Paid work 3.633∗∗∗
(0.115)
3.636∗∗∗
(0.116)
No. of children 0.907∗∗∗
(0.313)
0.909∗∗∗
(0.314)
Youngest child 4.613∗∗∗
(0.530)
4.623∗∗∗
(0.531)
Country (Ref: CH)
DE − 1.251∗
(0.711)
− 1.240∗
(0.713)
FI − 6.143∗∗∗
(0.772)
− 6.158∗∗∗
(0.774)
SE − 4.833∗∗∗
(0.826)
− 4.827∗∗∗
(0.832)
US − 4.462∗∗∗
(0.733)
− 4.461∗∗∗
(0.735)
(continued)
150 10 Paternal Leave Duration
Table 10.1 (continued)
Dependent variable: Caregap
Model 1 Model 2
Interactions
Leave VS: Att middle 0.551
(2.378)
Leave S: Att middle − 0.708
(2.434)
Leave M: Att middle − 0.498
(2.329)
Leave L: Att middle − 0.507
(1.782)
Leave VS: Att traditional 0.135
(2.687)
Leave S: Att traditional − 0.893
(2.905)
Leave M: Att traditional 0.089
(2.960)
Leave L: Att traditional 0.053
(2.406)
Observations 3,264 3,264
R20.310 0.310
Adjusted R20.307 0.306
Residual Std. Error 13.469 (df = 3250) 13.485 (df = 3242)
F Statistic 112.301∗∗∗ (df = 13; 3250) 69.382∗∗∗ (df = 21; 3242)
Note: ∗p<0.1; ∗∗p<0.05; ∗∗∗ p<0.01.
Source: Prepared by the author.
10.2.2 Supplementary Analysis on the Type of Leave
Figure 10.4 confirms the overarching trend identified in the main models, as this
trend persists even when considering various leave sub-types: Extended periods of
leave continue to correlate with a more equal distribution of unpaid work between
parents – providing additional support for hypothesis 1. Thus, even though more
nuanced analyses are not possible, and even in the versions presented here not
all correlations are significant due to low case numbers (see Table 10.2 for more
detailed information on these models), these additional analyses provide strong
10.2 Results of the Regression Models 151
evidence that postpartum job absence and longer-term behaviour are correlated,
regardless of leave type.
While the results presented in Figure 10.4 exemplify the calculation with the
categorisation presented in Subsection 8.3.1, supplementary analyses were under-
taken using alternative categorisations. Notably, a consistent pattern emerged
across all estimated models.
Figure 10.4 Different types of leave. (Note: Predicted probabilities of the caregap contin-
gent on leave take-up differentiated by types of leave: A encompasses all varieties of leave,
while subcategories of A are the following: B corresponds to Parental or Family Leave, C
represents Regular Holiday Entitlements, and D pertains to Unpaid Leave. Leave duration
is defined as follows: ‘None’ designates no leave taken, ‘Short’ characterises leave lasting
up to three weeks, and ‘Long’ signifies leave over three weeks. The comprehensive models,
encompassing details about their significance, are available in Table 10.2. Source: Prepared
by the author.)
152 10 Paternal Leave Duration
Table 10.2 Distinct models for various types of leave
Dependent variable: Caregap
Tot al leav e Parental leave Holiday Unpaid leave
Constant 8.891∗∗∗
(0.407)
7.242∗∗∗
(0.339)
6.556∗∗∗
(0.276)
6.125∗∗∗
(0.245)
Tota l le ave (Ref: None)
short − 2.150∗∗∗
(0.741)
long − 3.976∗∗∗
(0.646)
Parental leave (Ref: None)
short − 0.559
(0.755)
long − 1.696∗∗
(0.681)
Holidays (Ref: None)
short 0.752
(0.824)
long − 3.405∗∗∗
(0.931)
Unpaid leave (Ref: None)
short − 0.544
(1.450)
long − 1.655
(1.551)
Observations 3,267 3,495 3,964 4,195
R20.012 0.002 0.004 0.0003
Adjusted R20.011 0.001 0.003 − 0.0002
Residual Std. Error 16.094
(df = 3264)
15.926
(df = 3492)
15.713
(df = 3961)
15.463
(df = 4192)
F Statistic 19.263∗∗∗
(df = 2; 3264)
3.124∗∗
(df = 2; 3492)
7.504∗∗∗
(df = 2; 3961)
0.629
(df = 2; 4192)
Note: ∗p<0.1; ∗∗p<0.05; ∗∗∗ p<0.01.
Source: Prepared by the author.
10.2 Results of the Regression Models 153
10.2.3 Results by Country
Examining individual countries through separate models reveals some notable
differences, although none are statistically significant (see Figure 10.5).5 Nev-
ertheless, Switzerland serves as a particularly striking example of the pattern
revealed in the main model. While Germany and the United States do not exhibit
the pattern as distinctly, it is still discernible within these nations. Specifically,
when examining Germany and the United States in more detail, it becomes evi-
dent that there are comparatively few respondents in the deviating categories and
that the slightly outlying position could therefore be due to the small number of
cases.
However, the situation differs for Finland and Sweden. In the Scandinavian
countries, the pattern is not affirmed. In Finland, for instance, the caregap is at its
widest for individuals with long leave duration, which contradicts the assumption
outlined in hypothesis 1.
Furthermore, the different levels of the caregap are striking. Switzerland
and Germany exhibit significantly higher caregap values when compared to the
remaining three countries. This observation aligns with the more traditional
conceptualisation of gender roles prevalent in these nations. Conversely, the
Scandinavian countries are renowned for their egalitarian family policies, a char-
acteristic reflected in the comparatively lower caregap values observed in these
regions. The United States, while weaker in terms of family policy compared to
the Scandinavian countries, demonstrates comparable results owing to its liberal
and employment-oriented foundation. Individuals, within this framework char-
acterised by a more liberal perspective, are primarily regarded as workers. In
this context, the labour market assumes greater importance and the United States
exhibits relatively high labour market participation of mothers, which results in
more egalitarian employment patterns within families compared to other coun-
tries (Ferragina 2019). These more egalitarian patterns evident in paid work
(particularly when compared to Switzerland) are also manifested in the distri-
bution of unpaid work, ultimately resulting in a relatively smaller caregap for
the United States. In summary, the results of the European countries clearly con-
firm hypothesis 2, while the results of the United States contradict it. Thus, this
hypothesis – assuming that a generous policy regime is strongly associated with
5 In addition to estimating individual models with sub-samples for each country, I also
computed a model incorporating country interactions using the full regression sample.
Remarkably, the patterns observed in the interaction model closely align with those found
in the individual country models. This additional analysis underscores the robustness of the
country-specific models.
154 10 Paternal Leave Duration
Figure 10.5 Predicted probabilities of the caregap contingent on leave take-up and coun-
try. (Note: Predicted probabilities of the caregap contingent on the duration of paternal leave
take-up based on separate models for each country. Source: Prepared by the author.)
10.2 Results of the Regression Models 155
a more equal distribution of unpaid work among parents – can only be confirmed
partially.
Owing to the considerable disparities in the impact of leave duration across
different countries, the interpretation can be extended even further: The policy
context not only influences the allocation of unpaid work within a couple but
also has the capacity to render the potential benefits of leave inconsequential.
To put it differently, in countries characterised by a more conservative family
policy regime, such as Switzerland and Germany, the personal decision of fathers
to take parental leave is closely intertwined with the subsequent distribution of
care. In contrast, in countries like Finland or Sweden, where family policies are
well-developed and generous, individual decisions regarding leavetaking hold less
significance, and family dynamics are primarily shaped by the broader societal
context.
10.2.4 Robustness Checks
Interaction Effects on Gender Attitudes
Understanding the outcomes related to gender attitudes is somewhat intricate, given
that these attitudes may contribute to the model as a confounder variable: On the
one hand, these attitudes impact the caregap, while on the other hand, they also
affect whether a father decides to take parental leave and, if he does, the dura-
tion of that leave. Nevertheless, this should not pose an issue since making causal
assumptions is impractical, and consequently, no causative links are deliberated con-
cerning the norms. Instead, it embodies a purposeful emphasis on acknowledging
the heterogeneity within the sample in terms of their gender values.
Consistent with this notion, it is important to highlight that the leave refers
to the birth of the first child and is therefore rooted in the past, whereas gender
attitudes pertain to the present. Consequently, it is plausible that this correlation
has evolved over time, potentially leading to an amplification of one’s norms where
gender attitudes have become more pronounced due to the adopted family care
arrangements.
First of all, Figure 10.6 reveals different levels of the caregap in correspondence
with the respondents norms: As can be expected, the caregap is generally smaller
with egalitarian attitudes and correspondingly higher with traditional understanding
of gender roles. Figure 10.6 shows the well-known pattern of a decreasing caregap
with a longer leave take-up for intermediate attitudes (middle). As expected, the
pattern is less distinct for fathers with egalitarian and traditional gender attitudes.
However, even in the traditional group there is a difference in the caregap – if no leave
156 10 Paternal Leave Duration
is taken, the caregap is more than eight hours, whereas if paternity leave lasts more
than two months, the caregap is less than seven hours, although the standard deviation
is large and the difference between these two groups is therefore not significant. On
the other hand, for men with an egalitarian attitude the same discernible pattern
emerges, except for instances of very short leave duration, which appear slightly
irregular. In conclusion, even if the effects are weaker and less clear for pronounced
gender attitudes – egalitarian and traditional, the general pattern remains and the
duration of paternity leave does have an effect on the caregap.
Figure 10.6 Predicted probabilities of the caregap contingent on leave take-up interacted
by gender attitudes. (Note: Predicted probabilities of the caregap contingent on the duration
of paternal leave take-up and its interaction with the father’s gender attitudes. The complete
model can be found in Table 10.1. Source: Prepared by the author.)
Paid Paternal Leave
Apart from the prior regression models, the subsequent model also considers the
financial compensation during the leave. Contrary to the presumption in Subsec-
tion 8.3.4, Figure 10.7 demonstrates that the caregap does not exhibit systematic
differences based on whether the leave was compensated or not. Irrespective of wage
replacement, the caregap remains smaller when the father takes a leave, compared
to the reference group that abstained from taking any leave (though the differences
are not statistically significant).
When examining the predicted probabilities displayed in Figure 10.7,there is
no consistent pattern evident for unpaid (or low compensated) leave. The length of
the leave does not appear to play a pivotal role in this context, aligning with the
discussions in Subsection 8.3.4 concerning endogeneity. Fathers who opt for pater-
nity leave, even without substantial or any wage replacement, constitute a unique
10.3 Discussion on Paternal Leave Duration 157
Figure 10.7 Predicted probabilities of the caregap contingent on leave take-up and wage
compensation. (Note: Predicted probabilities of the caregap contingent on the duration of
paternal leave take-up including wage compensation. Source: Prepared by the author.)
subgroup marked by their proactive engagement and willingness to participate in
unpaid work, irrespective of the duration of the leave.
On the contrary, when it comes to (well) paid leave, the previous pattern of the
main model emerges: a longer duration of leave accompanies a decrease in the
caregap. This result might suggest that taking leave constitutes a form of shock – an
entirely novel and unfamiliar situation. This moment of novelty could potentially
exert an impact on subsequent behaviour. Although causality is not definitively
established, it is highly probable that the observed relationships are not solely a
result of self-selection. Instead, it is plausible that the duration of paternity leave
could exert an influence on the future behaviour of fathers.
10.3 Discussion on Paternal Leave Duration
Building upon previous research that hinted at a link between the duration of
paternal leave and the division of unpaid work between parents (Huerta et al.
2014; Nepomnyaschy and Waldfogel 2007), this chapter delves deeper into this
connection. The findings underscore a noteworthy association between the length
of paternal leave uptake (at the birth of the first child) and the allocation of unpaid
duties within a household. While, on average, women shoulder a notably higher
burden of unpaid work compared to their partners, the extent of this difference
diminishes as fathers’ leave following childbirth becomes longer.
158 10 Paternal Leave Duration
This has been confirmed in various models and holds true for the distinction
between different types of leave.
Examining the various country contexts, a consistent trend becomes evident:
The pattern manifests within the countries with more conservative or liberal
family policy regimes, whereas Scandinavian countries differ in this regard. Fur-
thermore, there are notable variations in the extent of the caregap. In Switzerland
and Germany, and to a lesser extent in the United States, women perform con-
siderably more unpaid work than their partners, while in Finland and Sweden,
the distribution is much more equal. In essence, the policy regime matters; it
influences both the correlation between the duration of paternity leave and the
caregap and the overall extent of the caregap.
In conclusion, empirical evidence suggests a positive correlation between the
duration of paternal leave and the equality of long-term division of care time
within families in countries characterised by relatively conservative, liberal, or
less egalitarian family policies. Prolonged paternal leave holds the potential to
promote enhanced gender equality in caregiving responsibilities and household
chores. These findings highlight the importance of designing effective parental
leave policies that encourage and support fathers’ active engagement in caregiv-
ing. This, ultimately, leads to a more equitable and balanced division of unpaid
work within families and, as is shown for Sweden and Finland, in such an
egalitarian context, even largely independent of individual paternal leave take-up.
Thanks to the comparative approach, a strength of this analysis, the descriptive
findings highlight distinct country differences. This provides compelling indica-
tions that parental leave policies strongly shape birth-related absenteeism from the
labour market. Although fathers might theoretically have the choice to take time
off around the birth of their child, such as using vacation days, leave schemes
serve two purposes: to encourage and empower families by providing the means
for households to manage these work-related absences financially.
As thoroughly discussed earlier, the issue of endogeneity is a concern. To
acknowledge this problem, I conducted several analyses to check the robustness
of the results – for example by including attitudes. The analyses demonstrate that
self-selection is a factor, as seen in individuals with egalitarian gender attitudes.
However, the findings also apply to traditionally minded fathers. Therefore, it can
be concluded that the effects are not solely due to reverse causality; the duration
of paternity leave does indeed influence later behaviour.
Regarding the data, it should be noted that the results are not transferable to
all families due to the restrictions of the sample. However, the results are likely
to be more conservative than they would be in reality for several reasons. First, in
countries like Sweden and Finland, a significant portion of fathers are currently
10.3 Discussion on Paternal Leave Duration 159
on parental leave and, thus, in particular the younger generation of fathers in
these countries is underrepresented in the analyses. Second, the caregap calcula-
tions are based on men’s data, and as shown, time estimates vary significantly by
gender. Since the caregap based on men’s data tends to be smaller on average,
it also leads to smaller effects in the regression models. Third, the models con-
trol only for selected control variables and, for example, lack differentiation by
income6 , potentially contributing to more conservative effects. Overall, there is
ample reason to believe that the effects could be even more pronounced in reality,
especially with more specified models.
In examining the distribution of unpaid labour within families and the extent
to which fathers take parental leave, this chapter underscores the necessity of
policy interventions aimed at promoting a more balanced sharing of caregiving
responsibilities between parents. Comprehensive family policies, including sub-
stantial and financially well-compensated paternity leave, encourage fathers to
play an active role in unpaid work, making a significant contribution to advanc-
ing gender equality. However, the next chapter will examine the accuracy of the
assumed causality that parental leave policies influence the subsequent behaviour
of fathers.
6 Because the survey questions pertain solely to current income and do not capture income
before the time of the first child’s birth, it is not feasible to incorporate income into this
analysis.
160 10 Paternal Leave Duration
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use,
sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you
give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s
Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If
material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use
is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
permission directly from the copyright holder.
11
Effect of Parental Leave on Fathers
Following the regression analyses with the caregap as the dependent variable,
which focused on unpaid work, the conjoint analysis will now broaden its scope
to include gainful employment and care. The dependent variable is the elasticity
in time allocation under a given policy setting, specifically the extent to which a
father adjusts the time he invests in paid and unpaid work. This chapter aims to
investigate causality and answer the third sub-question regarding the impact of
leave policies on fathers’ time allocation: Do specific parental leave policy designs
have the potential to induce changes in paternal behaviour, particularly in altering
the distribution of paid and unpaid work time, and what characteristics define these
designs?
As in the previous chapter, the following analysis is based on the survey
data described in Section 8.2, where a detailed description of the structure of
the survey can be found, and, in particular, in Subsection 8.2.4 on the conjoint
experiment and the specific sample restrictions that lead to the conjoint sample.
11.1 Results of the Conjoint Analysis
Prior to computing various conjoint models, the data was reviewed. Firstly, an
assessment was made to determine if the individual attribute levels were presented
equally within the scenarios or if certain levels were over- or underrepresented.
Figure A.1 in the Electronic Supplementary Material illustrates the frequency
Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material
available at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5_11.
© The Author(s) 2025
M. Lütolf, The Balancing Act of Working Mothers and Caring Fathers,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5_11
161
162 11 Effect of Parental Leave on Fathers
and demonstrates an even distribution. Secondly, in order to account for the com-
plexity of this part of the study, respondent exhaustion was assessed across the
different scenarios. Marginal means were calculated for each individual scenario.
Figure A.2 and A.3 in the Electronic Supplementary Material illustrate that the
marginal means of the individual scenarios (or tasks) do not significantly differ
from one another. This indicates that there was no fatigue experienced by the
interviewees during the experiment that could have distorted the results.
11.1.1 Full Model
Figure 11.1 shows the results of the full conjoint model, i.e., the elasticity of
men’s time allocation under different parental leave policy designs. As this anal-
ysis is centred on parental leave policy, this chapter solely presents the results
for the four attributes of parental leave. The complete conjoint model, which
includes additional attributes related to childcare, childcare benefits, and work-
ing time flexibility, can be found in Figure A.4 in the Electronic Supplementary
Material.
Figure 11.1 illustrates a high degree of elasticity. All attribute levels have a
significant impact on the distribution of employment and care hours. The marginal
means indicate that, under the given policy designs, fathers would perform less
paid work and more care work. In almost all scenarios, there would be an average
reduction of around 40 minutes in daily employment and an average increase
of over 20 minutes in daily care work (30 minutes is equivalent to 0.5 on the
x-axis scale). As the reduction in employment hours is greater than the increase
in care hours, the question arises as to what happens in the time that is freed up.
Additional analyses that include the two other “spheres of life” can be found in
the Electronic Supplementary Material in Figure A.6. While the number of hours
of sleep per week remains the same, the time for the “other” category increases
significantly. This indicates that the reduced employment hours would not only
be allocated to care work, but also to other activities.
The level “no wage replacement” of the economic attribute is the only excep-
tion where there is almost no change in time allocation. However, this attribute
level is the only level that clearly represents a poorly developed parental leave
design. This confirms hypothesis 31 : A more generous parental leave, as com-
pared to poorly developed parental leave with no wage replacement, leads to
1 Generous leave leads to a reduction in fathers’ employment hours and an increase in unpaid
care and domestic work hours (H3).
11.1 Results of the Conjoint Analysis 163
Figure 11.1 Conjoint model 1: Men’s time allocation for different parental leave policies.
(Note: Marginal means and AMCE with 95% confidence interval. PL stands for parental
leave. Source: Prepared by the author.)
164 11 Effect of Parental Leave on Fathers
a reduction in fathers’ employment hours and an increase in unpaid care and
domestic work hours. In contrast, there is no significant difference in paternal
behaviour based on different policy designs for the other attributes, such as type,
duration, and flexibility. This is reflected in the lack of significance of the corre-
sponding AMCEs.2 With the exception of wage replacement, there are no relevant
differences in how generous and egalitarian parental leave is structured.
The results for the wage replacement attribute differ from the other attributes
also concerning effect size. While the effect size for the other attributes is roughly
the same and the attribute levels do not play a role, wage replacement is a clear
exception. It seems that the allocation, duration, and flexibility of parental leave
have an impact on the outcome, but the specific design does not appear to be
significant. This is reflected in significant differences depending on the attribute
level, as confirmed by the AMCE calculations. The results indicate that full wage
replacement leads to a significant reduction in fathers’ paid work, by almost one
hour per day, and an increase in their care work hours, by almost 40 minutes.
Therefore, hypothesis 3a3 is supported. This policy response is already evident
in the case of partial financial compensation, albeit to a lesser extent. Figure 11.1
illustrates this phenomenon through both the marginal means and the AMCE
calculations, revealing a V-shaped pattern. If the findings show a V-shaped pat-
tern, it suggests that when there is a higher level of wage replacement, fathers
are inclined to reduce their paid working hours and increase the time devoted to
caregiving.
11.1.2 Models by Country
To test hypothesis 44 , additional country models were estimated. The results,
showninFigure
11.2, indicate significant country differences. The effects
observed in Switzerland and Germany are similar to those in the main model
2 AMCEs always refer to a baseline. If the effect size of an attribute level differs significantly
from the effect size of the baseline attribute, this is reflected in significant AMCE values for
that corresponding attribute level. As with the marginal means, 1 on the x-axis corresponds
to an hour. Therefore, if an attribute level has an AMCE value of 0.5, the effect sizes of that
attribute level differ by 30 minutes from the baseline level.
3 The level of wage replacement is the policy attribute that most significantly influences
fathers’ behaviour, with a high level of wage replacement i ncreasing fathers’ care time at the
expense of employment (H3a).
4 The elasticity of fathers towards egalitarian family models depends on the family policy
regime of the respective country (H4).
11.1 Results of the Conjoint Analysis 165
Figure 11.2 Conjoint model 2: Men’s time allocation by country of residence. (Note:
Marginal means and AMCE with 95% confidence interval. PL stands for parental leave.
Source: Prepared by the author.)
166 11 Effect of Parental Leave on Fathers
(see Figure 11.1). However, the time shifts reported by fathers from Finland
are significantly smaller and, in some cases, no longer significant. Furthermore,
fathers in Sweden in comparison to the main model no longer exhibit elasticity.
However, there is one exception to this finding: Providing full wage replacement
leads to a significant decrease in gainful employment, even among fathers in Swe-
den. This has been confirmed both in the calculation of marginal means and in
the calculation of AMCE. The results from the United States sample do not show
any significance, indicating that these fathers do not react to policy changes.
Hypothesis 4 stating that the elasticity of fathers towards egalitarian family
models depends on the family policy regime of the respective country is sup-
ported by this evidence and can be accepted. Consistent with the hypothesis,
fathers from Scandinavian countries exhibit significantly less elasticity due to the
generous parental leave policies offered in Finland and Sweden. In contrast, Swiss
fathers have limited leave options, and as a result, they demonstrate significant
elasticity when presented with more generous options. Although Germany offers
more extensive parental leave than Switzerland, it still falls significantly short of
Scandinavian policies. Furthermore, the family policy regime in Germany is sim-
ilar to that of Switzerland due to its conservative background, which is reflected
in the findings of the German sample. Although the United States does not offer
paid parental leave, this sample did not show any changes in potential pater-
nal behaviour. This aligns with the liberal welfare regime, where market-based
solutions are standard, rather than government policies.
11.1.3 Supplementary Analyses of Subgroups
as Robustness Checks
Additional group-specific analyses were conducted to provide more detailed
insights and confirm the robustness of the results.
An additional model was estimated to test whether the group of fathers cur-
rently on parental leave influences the results of the overall conjoint sample.
However, the corresponding models in Figure A.5 in the Electronic Supplemen-
tary Material show that due to the very low number of fathers currently on
parental leave, the results do not significantly change and this differentiation does
not need to be further investigated.
11.1 Results of the Conjoint Analysis 167
Accounting for Current Employment Hours
The elasticity of working hours may differ among fathers, depending on their cur-
rent workload. It is important to note that fathers who are currently unemployed,
for example, can hardly reduce their working hours – regardless of the policy set-
ting. Additionally, fathers who already work part-time are more likely to have less
elasticity than those who work full-time. Similar opportunities for elasticity, but in
reverse, can be assumed with regard to care and household hours. Fathers who work
full-time or more gainful employment have little time left for unpaid work on an
average working day, but they have the potential to increase it. In order to include
these different starting points in the analysis, a group-specific model is estimated
based on the current employment situation. The model is presented in Figure 11.3.
Although the findings are not that surprising, they yet produce relevant insight
for implications: Fathers who already work part-time, working an average of six
hours per day (high part-time), show no elasticity. As one central aim of providing
more generous leave opportunities for fathers is to increase their participation in
care tasks, it is important to note that fathers who are already working part-time
and taking on an active caring role may not have much potential for further
change. As a result, the elasticity of this group is limited.
The results for men in full-time employment and those working an average of
9 hours or more per day are comparable to the main model. However, the effects
for men working overtime are almost twice as large as for those in full-time
employment, as shown by the marginal means. This confirms the assumption that
the more hours worked, the greater the potential for a reduction in these hours.
Additionally, significant AMCEs are found in terms of financial compensation.
The – theoretically expected – V-shaped pattern is most evident in the over-
time group, where higher compensation is associated with a decrease in gainful
employment and an increase in care. This pattern is observed in Figure 11.3 in
both marginal means and AMCEs.
168 11 Effect of Parental Leave on Fathers
Figure 11.3 Conjoint model 3: Men’s time allocation by employment. (Note: Marginal
means and AMCE with 95% confidence interval. PL stands for parental leave. Source:
Prepared by the author.)
11.1 Results of the Conjoint Analysis 169
Respondents’ Gender Attitudes
As stated in Subsections 8.3.4 and 10.2.4, the respondents’ attitude can also have an
impact. Therefore, it is important to consider the influence of attitude as a robustness
check on the outcome. It can be assumed that men who hold egalitarian views may
already have a more equal division of labour and, therefore, may be less responsive
to policies. Conversely, it is reasonable to assume that men with a traditional under-
standing of gender roles are less responsive to policies because they have a clear
preference for a traditional division of labour. If these assumptions are confirmed,
men with a moderate mindset may show the strongest elasticities.
Figure 11.4 shows the results categorised by gender attitudes. The assump-
tions are not verified. The group-specific effects by gender attitudes do not differ
greatly from each other. The group with middle attitudes only distinguishes itself
from the other two groups by smaller confidence intervals, which is primarily
due to its larger size (as indicated in Table A.4 in the Electronic Supplementary
Material). Even men who hold traditional gender attitudes exhibit some elasticity.
Despite their traditional views, this subgroup exhibits significant marginal means
with an average reduction in employment of around 45 minutes and a correspond-
ing increase in unpaid work. While the elasticity for egalitarian men primarily
applies to labour market activity, it hardly applies to unpaid work. Additionally,
the pattern of wage replacement once again follows a V-shape for both marginal
means and AMCEs when specified by middle attitudes.
Considerations on Satisfaction with Current Time Allocation
To identify the group of men with the greatest potential for elasticity, a third specifi-
cation is based on their satisfaction with the current allocation of time. It is assumed
that men who are fully satisfied with the current situation would be unlikely to make
any adjustments even under changed policy conditions. However, a high degree of
elasticity is expected, particularly among men who are dissatisfied with their current
situation.
As expected and presented in Figure 11.5, there is little significant change in
the group who report being completely satisfied. However, the V-pattern in wage
replacement is partially significant.
The elasticities of men who are somewhat satisfied, depicted in the middle of
Figure 11.5, are similar to those in the main model for the entire conjoint sample
(shown in Figure 11.1), albeit with slightly smaller effect sizes.
170 11 Effect of Parental Leave on Fathers
Figure 11.4 Conjoint model 4: Men’s time allocation by gender attitudes. (Note: Marginal
means and AMCE with 95% confidence interval. PL stands for parental leave. Source: Pre-
pared by the author.)
11.1 Results of the Conjoint Analysis 171
Figure 11.5 Conjoint model 5: Men’s time allocation by satisfaction with current average
time allocation. (Note: Marginal means and AMCE with 95% confidence interval. PL stands
for parental leave. Source: Prepared by the author.)
172 11 Effect of Parental Leave on Fathers
It is noteworthy that the results for men who reported being dissatisfied with
their current situation do not align with expectations. Although certain policies may
result in a decrease in paid employment, any increase in unpaid work is likely to be
insignificant. However, the V-pattern is once again discernible in the case of wage
replacement.
11.2 Discussion of the Conjoint Results
Overall, fathers have demonstrated a willingness to reduce their employment
hours and increase their unpaid labour – they show elasticity towards more egal-
itarian work divisions. However, the impact of policy design on this behaviour is
only significant in exceptional cases, as reflected in the barely significant AMCE
estimations.
Although there is a decrease in the time spent on gainful employment and
an increase in the time spent on care, these shifts are not equal. It is impor-
tant to note that gainful employment time is not exclusively being reduced in
favour of care time, as employment hours are decreasing more than unpaid time
is increasing. As previously stated, the supplementary analyses (refer to Figure
A.6 in the Electronic Supplementary Material) reveal an increase in the amount
of time allocated to the residual category ‘other’. However, it is unclear whether
this additional time would be used for leisure activities, voluntary work, or other
purposes, as this fourth category is residual.
11.2.1 Wage Replacement
Across different models, wage replacement consistently results in significant
behavioural changes. If the results indicate a distinct V-shaped trend, this indi-
cates that as wage replacement becomes more generous, fathers tend to decrease
their paid work and increase their caregiving hours. Although not all figures dis-
play this pattern precisely, it remains recognisable across various models. The
recurring V-shaped pattern of this policy attribute indicates, firstly, that wage
replacement is essential (as opposed to no financial compensation) and, secondly,
that full wage replacement, in particular, can induce decisive behavioural adjust-
ments on top. For example, even among men in Sweden, who otherwise show
no elasticity, there is a significant reduction in working hours when the finan-
cial compensation is set at one hundred percent. Another example pertains to
11.2 Discussion of the Conjoint Results 173
men with traditional gender norms, who also exhibit a significant reduction in
working hours when receiving full pay. Fathers who report being fully satisfied
with the current division of labour demonstrate the same elasticity. To summarise,
significant reductions in employment hours still occur even in subgroups where
theoretically the smallest or no elasticity is expected, as long as there is one
hundred percent wage compensation.
There are three reasons why the attribute of financial compensation stands
out. The first reason relates to the financial aspect of this attribute. As previ-
ously stated, men are often the primary earners and many families depend on
the father’s income. Therefore, it is not surprising that the father’s behaviour is
particularly influenced by financial considerations. Secondly, estimating the con-
sequences of different levels of this attribute is relatively straightforward. It is
not difficult to predict the impact of wage reductions or determine their eco-
nomic feasibility for a family. Full wage replacement means no financial loss for
the family, making it affordable for any father to take parental leave. However,
the absence of wage replacement or a reduced income can pose challenges for
families, particularly during times of economic hardship. Fathers may choose not
to opt for parental leave if they believe they cannot afford to do so and, therefore,
they do not adjust their employment or caregiving hours. The third reason lies in
the design of the specific experiment. While this economic attribute clearly indi-
cates a negative level with ’no wage replacement’, the differences within the o ther
attributes are less distinct. For all levels of the leave division a ttribute, fathers have
the option to receive a significant portion of the leave, as the minimum amount is
primarily established and, therefore, varies. From the perspective of fathers, the
duration of leave does not make a significant difference since they often take only
a small proportion of it anyway. This attribute may be more relevant for moth-
ers. Concerning the fourth attribute, flexibility, it is worth considering whether
more flexible options have a significant impact on leave uptake and its outcomes.
While desirable, leave uptake and its outcomes do not necessarily depend on
these factors.
11.2.2 The Complexity of Leave Impact Perception
Conversely, this also provides clues as to why the other three attributes do not
exhibit significant differences in level. On the one hand, the level differences – as
discussed – hardly show any relevant variance, especially for fathers. In particular,
a level that provides a clear disincentive, i.e., a very minimalist policy design, is
missing.
174 11 Effect of Parental Leave on Fathers
On the other hand, a very important point is the complexity, not of the con-
joint as a method in itself, which has been tested and studied many times, but
specifically with regard to parental leave.5 Although the conjoint sample only
includes individuals with a child below school age, and, hence, this initial phase
with a newborn has not long been past, it is still difficult to estimate the long-term
effects of a longer break in employment and the associated intensified involve-
ment at home. Assuming that the beginning of parenthood, and thus the situation
at the birth of the first child, is particularly crucial for the organisation and distri-
bution of responsibilities within the household, the decisive moment for fathers
with multiple children may be further in the past. This makes it more challenging
to evaluate other leave options. As demonstrated in the subgroup analysis in the
Electronic Supplementary Material (see Figure A.5), only a small proportion of
fathers are currently on leave. The vast majority have settled into regular every-
day life, they are integrated into the workforce and family responsibilities are
distributed and familiarised. The conjoint scenarios presented are highly hypo-
thetical and require a great deal of imaginative thinking to adjust to potential
changes in time allocation.
In this respect, the results can rather be interpreted or at least understood as
an indication that fathers are willing to take on more caregiving responsibilities
at home and reduce gainful employment or have at least internalised that such
a reallocation of time might be desirable, be it due to changing social norms or
personal preferences.
11.2.3 Family Policy Regimes
The complexity and high level of effort in terms of imagination further matches
the results from the United States. It is noteworthy that this sample does not
exhibit any elasticity. In contrast to European fathers, most fathers in the United
States do not have access to paid parental leave, and family policies are generally
very limited. Without experience with some form of comparable policy, it is
almost impossible to estimate potential behaviour under different family policy
scenarios. But there are also cultural and social factors that are closely related to
the family policy regime in the United States. Workplace norms, characterised by
a strong commitment to employment, shape this (Petts 2023). It can be assumed
5 To address concerns that the experiment may have caused respondent fatigue, additional
analyses were conducted to account for this possibility. The models used for these analyses
are presented in Figures A.2 and A.3 in the Electronic Supplementary Material.
11.2 Discussion of the Conjoint Results 175
that, at least in the short term, even if parental leave were available, many parents,
especially fathers, would make little or no use of these policies, due to prejudice
and stigmatisation (Rudman and Mescher 2013; Sanzari et al. 2021; Weisshaar
2018). Therefore, no effects are expected even with hypothetical policies.
The results for Switzerland and Germany need to be discussed in light of
their family policy regimes. Despite Germany having a more extensive parental
leave program than Switzerland (as outlined in Chapter 9), the conjoint models
for both countries reveal very similar results. This demonstrates the similarity
between the two family policy regimes, despite their differing levels of parental
leave. It further highlights the conservative nature and traditional understanding
of gender roles in both countries. This impact of parental leave policies in these
two conservative family policy regimes suggests that expanding parental leave
can cause significant shifts in paternal time use. It is reasonable to assume that
more generous leave policies can move continental European countries with a
more traditional family policy background to promote more egalitarian family
models.
The different elasticities of Swedish and Finnish fathers confirm the distinc-
tions between the family policy regimes in these two countries. Despite both
being located in Scandinavia, known for their well-developed family policies,
Finland actively supports parental care. This is also reflected in the family mod-
els practised in both countries. In families where no one is currently on parental
leave, there are slightly fewer egalitarian organised families in Finland than in
Sweden, as shown at the bottom of Figure 9.2 in Section 9.3. Although the dif-
ferences in the conjoint results of the two countries shown in Figure 11.2 may
be small, they accurately reflect the nuances of the two social democratic-shaped
family policy regimes.
In general, country-specific models indicate that an expansion of parental leave
policies has varying effects on fathers and their time allocation, depending not
only on the specific features of the leave policies but also on the type of family
policy regime in which they live. Conservative regimes may see a potential pater-
nal reduction in paid work and an increase in care time, while this is not the case
in liberal states with a strong work ethic. In social democratic regimes with well-
developed family policies, only parental leave with full wage replacement has
a significant impact on fathers’ time allocation, while other leave policies have
little effect. Although these countries actively promote equality and support the
reconciliation of family and work through various measures, this policy design
could further promote the equal division of labour within families.
176 11 Effect of Parental Leave on Fathers
11.2.4 Variations in Potential Elasticity Among Fathers
In the subgroup analyses, the findings suggest that even men with traditional
attitudes are receptive to egalitarian divisions of labour, despite their conservative
role perceptions. The economic attribute has the greatest impact. Men who hold
traditional attitudes show the highest elasticity with the most radical policy design
of full wage replacement.
The elasticity of fathers’ time allocation, even among those who claim com-
plete satisfaction with their current time allocation, can be explained as follows:
All these families had to organise themselves, regardless of their possibilities or
policy conditions. They all had to find a form of organisation that works so far.
Although satisfaction levels with current time allocation may vary depending on
the situation and family, it is important to note that all arrangements are organ-
ised and established. It can be challenging to break out of this system or imagine
alternative possibilities under different conditions. Additionally, changing policy
conditions may – at least in some cases – “only” lead to a simplification of the
organisation. Such assumptions are consistent with research on highly educated
mothers that shows that they are willing to engage in the labour market and
organise childcare to enable them to work, regardless of existing policies (see,
e.g., Stadelmann-Steffen 2011).
Overall, there are indications of paternal elasticity and a willingness to reduce
gainful employment, particularly in the case of full wage replacement during
parental leave. However, these findings should not be expected to have any imme-
diate policy effects. The mechanisms involved in this process are intricate and
long-term, and they interact with various personal, social, and family policy fac-
tors. The results suggest that fathers may consider a more egalitarian distribution
of time desirable, but factors beyond parental leave prevent them from achieving
it. Other policy areas, such as the tax system or the labour market, may also
contribute to these factors. As previously discussed, prevailing cultural norms
and work ethic can play a central role, as seen in the United States for exam-
ple. In addition to specific policies, cultural norms and perceptions of values
play a crucial role in determining egalitarian time allocation and gendered work
arrangements; societal perception of gender roles in particular have a significant
impact.
11.2 Discussion of the Conjoint Results 177
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use,
sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you
give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s
Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If
material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use
is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
permission directly from the copyright holder.
Part V
Conclusion
12
Summary and Discussion
This chapter summarises the main results and brings the different parts and
chapters of this book together. Specifically, this section closes the circle by dis-
cussing and answering the questions posed in the introduction (specifically in the
Subsection 1.1.6 and Section 1.2).
12.1 Summary of the Results
To start with, this section successively addresses each of the three sub-research
questions. In addition, the corresponding hypotheses are also discussed. These
three strands are then brought together in the subsequent section to address and
finally answer the overarching research question.
12.1.1 Egalitarian Form of Parental Leave
The first sub-research question asks: How should a parental leave policy be
designed to achieve maximal egalitarianism? Subsection 5.1.2 outlined the policy
ideal for maximum egalitarianism based on a literature review and answers this
question as follows: Both parents should have a minimum of six months (and a
maximum of one year) of non-transferable parental leave with full wage replace-
ment. The leave can be taken flexibly and, if desired, in combination with part-time
employment.
Chapter 7 presented an analytical grid for measuring the egalitarianism of
parental leave policies. Two indices were introduced to account for the trans-
ferable portions of parental leave that many policies currently allow. The policy
ideal index reflects the legal component and considers an equal split between
© The Author(s) 2025
M. Lütolf, The Balancing Act of Working Mothers and Caring Fathers,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5_12
181
182 12 Summary and Discussion
parents. In contrast, the policy implementation index assumes one-sided take-up
of parental leave by mothers. The comparison of these two indices highlights the
untapped policy potential in the country.
In Chapter 9, the two indices were calculated for the five selected countries using
the analysis grid. The results are summarised as follows: The countries included
in this study span almost the entire range of the policy index, which ranges from 0
to 5, with scores ranging from 0.96 to 4.78. These results support the assumption
made in Chapter 6 on case selection that these five countries represent a broad
spectrum of family policy regimes.
The United States has a value of 0.96 due to the absence of paid leave, with
only an unpaid option that is not available to all parents. However, the policy is
egalitarian as there is no gender specification for the FMLA.
The policy index for Switzerland is only slightly higher at 1.14. There are no
transferable days between parents, as is the case in the United States. Therefore,
only one index is applicable since the policy ideal and implementation indices are
the same. Switzerland has the lowest gender quotient due to the significant dif-
ference between the length of leave periods for mothers and fathers. Switzerland
has the highest wage replacement rate, comparable to Scandinavian countries.
However, the duration of leave is generally very short, resulting in a low score
for the index.
Among the five countries analysed, Germany ranks in the middle based on its
indices. The low policy implementation index is attributed to the high proportion
of transferable days for parental leave. This results in leave lengths that are too
long for mothers and too short for fathers. Paid parental leave in Germany pro-
vides relatively low financial compensation and, in addition, offers long periods
of unpaid leave. In this regard, the policy in Germany could be more supportive
of egalitarian family models. This could be accomplished by reducing the dura-
tion of leave and increasing financial compensation. This could even be achieved
without increasing government expenditure, as the reduced length of leave would
result in cost savings.
In Finland and Sweden, leave policies are already relatively egalitarian. Swe-
den has slightly higher policy indices than Finland due to a slightly higher
wage replacement and a gender-neutral policy. However, policies in both coun-
tries could be further optimised and made more efficient by increasing wage
replacement and reducing transferable shares.
Although Sweden comes very close to achieving the ideal of egalitarian parental
leave described above, no country scores the maximum of 5 points on either
index. Additionally, although some countries not discussed here already have one
12.1 Summary of the Results 183
hundred percent wage replacement, none of the five countries analysed offer a full
wage replacement policy. Gender-neutral policies can become gender-sensitive
when the gender pay gap is taken into account: Fathers tend to lose more wages
than mothers, resulting in a greater impact on the family budget when the father
takes leave. This creates an indirect incentive for mothers to take leave over
fathers. Thus, the potential of leave policies to create incentives for fathers to
become more actively involved in childcare is not being fully utilised. None of the
leave policies in these five countries are genuinely gender-neutral and therefore
cannot fully correspond to an egalitarian leave policy.
This is evident in the descriptive figures of lived family models in Section 9.3.
The Scandinavian countries exhibit a higher proportion of egalitarian family
models, including both universal breadwinner and universal caregiver models.
However, even in these countries, there are still significantly more families adher-
ing to a male breadwinner model than those following a female breadwinner
model. Moreover, in families where at least one parent is on leave, there are
many more mothers on (full-time) leave than fathers. This result confirms that
there are significant gender-specific differences in the parental implementation of
leave policies.
12.1.2 Correlations Between Leave Duration and Caregap
The second sub-research question reads: Does a correlation exist between the
length of parental leave taken by fathers upon the birth of their first child and the
egalitarianism of the long-term distribution of caregiving responsibilities among
parents? The objective of this investigation is to closely examine the length of
leave as an important policy aspect and determine if there is a correlation between
the duration of a father’s leave uptake and the caregap within the household. The
analysis confirms the question, although differences exist depending on the family
policy regime.
The analysis of the caregap revealed a distinct gender disparity in perception.
The difference in hours spent in unpaid work between a couple is reported sig-
nificantly larger by women compared to men’s reports. The median for the full
sample was 5, while it was 2 for men’s statements about themselves and their
partners’ care hours, and 10 based on women’s statements. As subsequent analy-
ses and hypothesis tests rely solely on the regression sample and, therefore, men’s
statements, the effects found are assumed to be rather conservative. The correla-
tions with the duration of paternal leave take-up may be stronger if the actual care
184 12 Summary and Discussion
hours and caregap, derived from them, fall between men’s and women’s reported
hours.
Despite this reservation and a relatively small caregap in the regression sam-
ple, a clear pattern emerges in the regression models: The longer the father takes
parental leave after the birth of his child, the smaller the caregap. This means
that unpaid care work is shared more equally between parents when fathers take
longer leave. This confirms the first hypothesis: A more extended period of fathers’
parental leave uptake is positively associated with a more egalitarian distribution
of unpaid work within households (H1). This hypothesis is further supported by
models specific to different types of absence from the workplace after child-
birth, such as leave based on parental leave policy, vacation, or unpaid leave.
Additional regression models were used to conduct robustness checks, includ-
ing gender attitudes and payment of leave. These models demonstrated the same
recurring pattern.
To test hypothesis 2, which states that a generous policy regime, particularly
through egalitarian parental leave policies or substantial paternity leave, correlates
with a more egalitarian distribution of unpaid work within households (H2), individ-
ual country models were estimated. The pattern observed in the main regression
models is present in the model for Switzerland, albeit less pronounced in the
models for Germany and the United States, and absent in the models of the S can-
dinavian countries. However, there are significant differences in the extent of the
caregaps among the country models. The disparity in caregap values between
Switzerland and Germany, compared to other countries, reflects their more tra-
ditional gender roles. Switzerland, with its conservative family policies, exhibits
higher caregap values, while Scandinavian countries, known for their egalitar-
ian family policies, show lower caregap values. Despite having weaker family
policies, the United States demonstrates comparable results to the Scandinavian
countries due to its liberal and employment-focused approach, resulting in more
egalitarian patterns in both paid and unpaid work compared to Switzerland. While
the European countries confirm hypothesis 2 linking generous family policies to
a more e qual distribution of unpaid work, the results in the United States par-
tially contradict it. The correlation between leave duration and caregap varies
significantly across countries, indicating that the family policy regime not only
influences the distribution of unpaid work but also affects the significance of
individual decisions to take leave. In countries with conservative policies, such
as Switzerland and Germany, fathers’ choices regarding parental leave are crucial.
In contrast, in countries with generous policies, such as Finland and Sweden, the
broader societal context plays a more significant role in shaping family dynamics.
12.1 Summary of the Results 185
The research underscores the positive impact of prolonged paternal leave in pro-
moting gender equality in caregiving roles and household tasks. This correlation
is observed in countries with conservative, liberal, or less egalitarian family poli-
cies, suggesting that the duration of paternal leave is indeed a crucial factor in
shaping family dynamics and work responsibilities.
The analysis highlights Sweden and Finland as examples of countries where
a more egalitarian context exists, leading to a balanced division of unpaid work
within families. It is interesting to note that in these countries, gender equal-
ity is not dependent on individual paternal leave take-up. This suggests that
a broader societal context, shaped by effective family policies, plays a pivotal
role in fostering gender equality in caregiving responsibilities. Specifically, the
possibility of extended paternal leave has the potential to foster greater gender
equality in caregiving and household chores independent of individual leave take-
up. The findings emphasise the need for well-designed parental leave policies
that actively promote and support fathers’ involvement in caregiving, leading to
a more balanced distribution of unpaid work within families.
The comparative approach of the analysis complements the study by reveal-
ing distinct differences between countries. This comparison highlights the impact
of parental leave policies on birth-related absenteeism from the labour market.
Although fathers technically have the option to take time off using vacation days,
the analysis emphasises the dual purpose of leave schemes: To provide fathers
with the option to be present around the birth of their child and to support fami-
lies financially during work-related absences. In essence, the results underline the
multifaceted role of parental leave policies in shaping both gender roles within
families.
12.1.3 The Effects of Policy Design on Fathers
The third empirical analysis (see Chapter 11) serves to answer the third sub-
research question stating: Do specific parental leave policy designs have the
potential to induce changes in paternal behaviour, particularly in altering the distri-
bution of paid and unpaid work time, and what characteristics define these designs?
This analysis aims to broaden its perspective beyond paternal care behaviour and
include the employment behaviour of fathers. While it is evident that parental
leave policies have the potential to influence fathers’ allocation of time, the extent
of the potential change remains unclear. Fathers demonstrate a clear willingness
to work fewer hours and spend more time caring for their children, yet there
186 12 Summary and Discussion
are various reservations. Firstly, the decrease in working hours does not corre-
spond to the increase in caring hours. However, additional models have shown
that there is also an increase in the’other’ spheres of life category. This includes
more hours in leisure time, personal care activities, and other activities that are
not gainful employment, care, or housework. Secondly, the temporal shifts do not
significantly depend on specific policy designs. The trend of decreasing employ-
ment and increasing care is evident across almost all attribute levels. Thirdly,
this experiment presents a hypothetical situation. The measured elasticities can
be interpreted as indications of the potential for change, but not as real-world
policy effects.
However, hypothesis 3 is confirmed, which suggests that generous leave leads
to a reduction in fathers’ employment hours and an increase in unpaid care and
domestic work hours (H3). The same applies to the specified hypothesis on wage
replacement: The level of wage replacement is the policy attribute that most sig-
nificantly influences fathers’ behaviour, with a high level of wage replacement
increasing fathers’ care time at the expense of employment (H3a). The V-shaped
pattern confirms the hypothesis in all models and for almost all subgroups. It
indicates that as wage replacement increases, fathers decrease their paid work and
increase their caregiving hours. Predicting the potential changes in the allocation
of time is straightforward when estimating the consequences of different levels
of wage replacement. Full wage replacement enables any father to take parental
leave, while the absence or reduction of wage replacement discourages fathers
from doing so. Financial considerations have a particularly strong influence on
men’s decisions, as they are often the primary earners.
The final hypothesis stating that the elasticity of fathers towards egalitarian
family models depends on the family policy regime of the respective country (H4)
can be corroborated. Models on individual countries highlight the influence of
varying family policy regimes. In the United States, a liberal regime with lim-
ited parental leave access and cultural norms that prioritise employment, little
elasticity is observed. Even if parental leave were available, fathers would be
discouraged from taking it due to social stigma and workplace norms. When
comparing Switzerland and Germany, similar behavioural patterns emerge despite
differences in their parental leave programs. This indicates the influence of con-
servative family policy regimes and traditional gender roles. The findings suggest
that expanding parental leave could promote more egalitarian family models
in conservative regimes. In Scandinavia, the behaviour of Swedish and Finnish
fathers differs, reflecting the nuances of their respective family policy regimes.
However, fathers in these social democratic regimes indicate elasticity with full
wage replacement during their leave. Overall, country-specific models suggest
12.2 Answering the Overarching Research Question 187
that the impact of extending parental leave on fathers’ time allocation is affected
by policy characteristics and the type of family policy regime.
In summary, fathers who are likely to show greater elasticity towards an egal-
itarian time allocation tend to either live in conservative family policy regimes,
have workloads exceeding nine hours per day, hold moderate gender norms, or
are dissatisfied with their current time allocation. On the other hand, men who
hold egalitarian norms or are satisfied with their current arrangements are less
likely to increase their care time and decrease their employment hours. The same
is true for men living in liberal policy regimes or that are either unemployed or
working part-time. However, fathers’ elasticity of time allocation remains evident
even among men who hold traditional attitudes and norms, as well as those who
are satisfied with their current arrangements.
12.2 Answering the Overarching Research Question
After having gained insights from examining specific components throughout
this thesis and summarising and discussing the three sub-research questions in
the last section, I will now address the overarching question: How do parental
leave policies that are embedded in country-specific family policy regimes promote
an egalitarian division of paid work and care work within families? This section
integrates several findings that aim to address the complexities of the overarching
question and contribute to the broader discourse within the field of family policy
research.
In summary, my research has shown that family policy with egalitarian
parental leave can contribute to the pursuit of an egalitarian family model. For
parental leave to be truly advancing egalitarianism, it must provide equal benefits
for both parents and be non-transferable. To address the issue of low take-up of
parental leave by fathers, it is essential to provide full wage replacement for a
minimum of six months, up to a maximum of one year per parent. The low take-
up of parental leave by fathers is a complex issue that involves the economic
factor and the non-transferable entitlement policy attribution. By implementing
such an egalitarian parental leave policy, the state acknowledges and values
fathers as caregivers and treats parents equally as caregivers of their children,
without favouring mothers with additional benefits. The conjoint analyses have
demonstrated that fathers are open to reducing their paid work hours in order
to take on more caregiving responsibilities. However, the request for increased
care involvement at the expense of working time (see also Stadelmann-Steffen
et al. 2024) may not be feasible for many fathers under current conditions. The
188 12 Summary and Discussion
implementation of an egalitarian parental leave policy by the government could
send a clear signal and address this issue while supporting the potential of carers.
The research question is not specifically focused on fathers, but on families
as a whole. As explained in the introduction, the goal is to establish policies
to promote a universal caregiver family model where parents are joint providers
and carers. While many mothers already perform both roles and there are various
policies in place that support them (more or less), the focus and policy approach
must now be more strongly directed towards fathers. They are still primarily seen
as providers and receive little support in their role as caregivers.
As parental leave relates to the beginning of parenthood, a vulnerable time
when new roles and tasks must be taken on, it is important to note that the policy’s
effect extends beyond this initial period. The regression analyses in Chapter 10
demonstrate a clear connection between the duration of fathers’ leave and the
division of care between parents, even years later.
All three analyses and different models (see Part IV) have consistently shown
the crucial significance of wage replacement during the leave period. This eco-
nomic factor is particularly significant concerning fathers. The concept of the
male breadwinner is deeply ingrained in Western society’s norms and still reflects
the reality for many families today. Even if both parents are employed, the father
is often the main provider due to a higher salary or because the wife is employed
fewer hours. Therefore, the economic policy element is crucial in order to support
fathers and must be developed accordingly. As most families still depend on male
income more than on the mother’s income, full wage replacement is necessary.
Any reduction, no matter how generous the policy design, would indirectly lead
to gender specification, which would then contradict the goal of generous policy
design.
The discussion thus far has omitted the specification of the overarching research
question on the context, i.e., that these parental leave policies are embedded in a
country-specific family policy regime.
The case selection in Chapter 6 and the description of the family pol-
icy of individual countries describe the range of selected regimes. The United
States is a representative of a liberal family policy regime, Switzerland of
a liberal-conservative regime, Germany of a conservative regime, Finland of
a conservative-social democratic regime, and Sweden of a social democratic
regime. Throughout the analyses, these individual types also become apparent.
Switzerland is shown to be more conservative than liberal, and the results are
more comparable to those in Germany than the United States. Finland, the
second hybrid, does not fall in the middle of the political spectrum between
12.2 Answering the Overarching Research Question 189
conservative and social democratic representatives. Like Sweden, Finland can be
clearly assigned to the social democratic Scandinavian context, albeit with slight
deviations towards more conservative family policies.
The analysis of parental leave in Chapter 9 and the resulting policy indices
reflect precisely this range of different regimes, where the parental leave policies
in the respective countries correspond with their general family policy regime.
The index values achieved by Finland and Sweden are comparably high. How-
ever, Sweden has slightly higher values due to its more distinct promotion of
egalitarianism through gender-neutral policy design. Despite Finland’s support
for the caregiver role of fathers through generous parental leave that includes
non-transferable shares for fathers, the higher share of reserved time for mothers
still assigns them somewhat more caregiving responsibilities. In contrast, Ger-
many and Switzerland have clear policy differences regarding parental leave.
Switzerland offers comparatively little parental leave, while Germany has imple-
mented a number of reforms in recent decades and now offers extended parental
leave. However, it has become clear that the current policy for promoting egal-
itarian family models in Germany is too lengthy and the wage compensation
is too low. The policy could b e made more egalitarian by reducing the dura-
tion while increasing wage replacement. Comparing the results of the United
States to those of other countries is only possible to a limited extent due to the
absence of national parental leave. However, according to the descriptive analysis
in Chapter 10 (see Figure 10.2), most fathers in the United States take time off
from work around the time of childbirth.
Precisely because there are alternative ways of taking time off after child-
birth, in addition to national leave policies, the regression analysis also considers
vacation and unpaid leave. This analysis also highlights the differences between
family policy regimes. The results reveal significant caregaps in Switzerland and
Germany when compared to the other three countries. Both countries demonstrate
a similar pattern of effects. The conservative nature is apparent in both nations.
The Scandinavian countries also share similarities among themselves. Further, the
results for the United States are comparable to those of the Scandinavian coun-
tries. The caregap appears to depend heavily on the family policy regime and
is particularly pronounced in countries with conservative norms, where women
undertake significantly more unpaid work than men. Interestingly, parents share
unpaid work much more equally when there is either a strongly developed family
policy or virtually no state support. Under a liberal system, market-based solu-
tions can evolve to support families in achieving a more egalitarian division of
labour. Additionally, the relationship between leave duration and caregap (shown
in the main model in Figure 10.3) is no longer evident in these three countries.
190 12 Summary and Discussion
This suggests that in social democratic and liberal regimes, the caregap remains
relatively small regardless of the duration of leave. Conservative governments,
on the other hand, often provide family policies that support the traditional male
breadwinner model, while also implementing policies that aim for more egalitar-
ian support. For instance, in Germany, parental leave is available to both parents,
but the policy primarily targets mothers by providing long periods of partially
unpaid leave. In this context, the correlation between the duration of leave and
the caregap is evident.
The comparison of the main model with group-specific models by country
follows the same pattern for the conjoint analysis as described for the regression
analyses. The effects of the results for Switzerland and Germany align with those
of the main model, but are mostly absent in the models for Finland, Sweden,
and the United States. However, the Finnish family policy regime is positioned
somewhat further away from the social democratic prototype of Sweden. This
highlights the more conservative elements of Finnish family policy, with explicit
policy support for parental care. Overall, the results confirm that the potential
for parental leave to promote egalitarianism in families is highest in conservative
regimes. However, there is limited evidence of this in social democratic family
policy regimes, and no evidence in the liberal regime of the United States.
By combining the findings from the analysis grid in Chapter 9 with the results
on regime differences, particularly from the conjoint analysis, this study suggests
that a more egalitarian time allocation could be promoted. If parents in countries
with conservative family policy regimes have access to at least six months of
fully paid parental leave each, the number of egalitarian family models would
most likely increase. This interpretation may be applicable to Switzerland, as it
would represent a substantial expansion of current policy. In Germany, however,
the conjoint findings show that fathers also exhibit a high degree of elastic-
ity (see Figure 11.2), but parents already have 14 months of (more or less)
freely distributable leave at their disposal today. For the German case, a pol-
icy reform should be implemented to shorten the current leave duration, increase
wage replacement, and remove the transferability of the leave to assign it to the
respective parent. While in Finland a reduction in gender-specific policy differ-
ences could further promote egalitarianism, for both Scandinavian countries there
is potential for policy egalitarianism in wage replacement. The policy attributes
that could be further expanded to support egalitarianism in the respective coun-
tries, as revealed in the results in Chapter 9, are confirmed in the conjoint analyses
as policy attributes, where fathers actually indicate behavioural elasticities.
12.2 Answering the Overarching Research Question 191
Reforming parental leave policies may not have an immediate impact. Achiev-
ing a transformation towards universal caregiver models is a complex and
long-term process influenced by personal, social, and political factors that extend
beyond parental leave. These factors include, for example, childcare options,
labour market conditions, cultural norms, and gender roles. However, the present
analyses indicate that expanded and truly gender-neutral parental leave can effec-
tively promote the universal caregiver family model and could, therefore, play a
significant role in shaping such a development.
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use,
sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you
give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s
Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If
material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use
is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
permission directly from the copyright holder.
13
Contributions and Limitations
In this final chapter, I reflect on the overarching contributions and limitations
identified by this comprehensive exploration, offering critical insights and their
implications for future research and practice. Following up on Section 2.2,
the key contributions of this dissertation are summarised and synthesised (in
Section 13.1). In Section 13.2, the limitations of the analyses are critically consid-
ered and used as a basis for presenting implications for future research. Finally,
in Section 13.3, I conclude this thesis with some final thoughts.
13.1 Theoretical and Practical Contributions
This thesis makes several contributions to the existing literature and research.
Firstly, it introduces a novel analysis grid that measures the egalitarianism of
parental leave policies using two new indices. Furthermore, the grid is empirically
tested by analysing the current leave policies in five countries. Secondly, the
findings of the regression analysis contribute to the literature on the impact of
leave duration by demonstrating a clear connection between longer paternal leave
duration and a more equal distribution of unpaid work within the household.
Thirdly, the conjoint analysis findings show the potential elasticity for fathers to
decrease their workload and increase their care time.
The analyses revealed additional results to the main findings, including the
frequencies of actually lived family models, gendered reporting of the caregap,
various group specifications, and crucially, country differences representing cor-
responding family policy regimes and the overarching regime effects, which were
evident throughout the empirical analyses.
The combination of different methods and approaches is an important con-
tribution, resulting in a more comprehensive understanding on the topic. The
© The Author(s) 2025
M. Lütolf, The Balancing Act of Working Mothers and Caring Fathers,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5_13
193
194 13 Contributions and Limitations
multi-layered nature of the analysis provided valuable insights into the effective-
ness and impact of parental leave policies in the countries studied. By combining
the analysis grid from Section 9.1 with the descriptive illustrations based on sur-
veydatainSection
9.3, a link was established between political intentions and
their everyday realisation in family lives.
Another strength of this study is the generation and use of a novel dataset. The
dataset has various special features and innovations, including the measurement
of time allocation for different spheres of life using 24-hour sliders. This innova-
tion’s benefits were clearly evident in the application and evaluation. The survey
results provide data on the unpaid work performed by the respondents and their
partners, which can be used to calculate the caregap. The caregap is a successful
indicator to measure the egalitarian distribution of work within a household. The
survey also features an experimental section with conjoint scenarios, which is a
unique approach in social science research on family policy and reconciliation
policy issues.
In addition to its scientific contributions, the study has socio-political implica-
tions. The research analyses egalitarianism in the distribution of work within
families and identifies policy approaches to support families in reconciling work
and family life in an egalitarian manner. Reconciling work and family life is a
significant challenge for many families in today’s Western societies. However,
as the analysis has shown, these challenges are heavily dependent on the family
policy regime and vary greatly depending on it.
Policies aimed at promoting a universal caregiver model have broader soci-
etal implications beyond their impact on families. Gender-specific divisions of
labour have far reaching consequences and contribute to gender inequality in var-
ious areas (see Subsection 1.1.1). Inequalities and their negative effects have an
impact on society as a whole. Therefore, policies that promote more egalitarian
life pattern and reduce inequalities are highly relevant to society.
Lastly, two policy implications are evident: Firstly, a parental leave policy has
been developed based on scientific findings that promotes maximum egalitarian-
ism within families. Secondly, it has been demonstrated that the implementation
of such a policy is feasible, despite the policy idea appearing utopian at first
glance. The potential for policy optimisation relates primarily to wage replace-
ment, which occurs in all five countries examined. It is important to note that
in certain countries, full wage replacement could even be implemented without
13.2 Limitations and Future Research 195
any increase in the total cost of the policy.1 This indicates the existence of fea-
sible reforms that could substantially enhance the egalitarian potential of current
policies.
13.2 Limitations and Future Research
There are methodological limits that need to be considered. As discussed in Sub-
section 10.1.1 on the caregap, there are systematic gender differences in the
reporting of one’s own time allocation. The reasons for this phenomenon can-
not be conclusively clarified at this point, and social desirability probably plays
a role. Further research on gendered reporting could provide new insights. How-
ever, this survey used an innovative measuring instrument with a 24-hour slider
(presented in Subsection 8.2.3) to limit potential desirability distortions seen in
other surveys (discussed in Section 8.1). The slider encouraged participants to
record realistic values.
There is a limitation regarding causality in the regression analyses. The issue
of endogeneity is widely discussed in the context of this analysis (see Sub-
sections 8.3.4 and 10.2.4). To address this limitation and examine causality, a
conjoint analysis and the experimental section of the survey are incorporated as
the third method of analysis (presented in Subsection 8.2.4 and Chapter 11). One
aspect that could not be explored further in the course of this study is the use of
“additional time” of fathers in the conjoint. The decrease in employment hours
led to both more unpaid work and an increase in the residual category “other”.
Further research is needed to provide a more detailed breakdown of how fathers
would spend their newly available time.
In addition to these methodological limitations, there are also limitations at the
content and thematic level. The decision to limit the research to parental leave
is well-justified, as pointed out previously and confirmed by Ciccia and Verloo
(2012, p. 508), highlighting the special feature of parental leave policies to attract
1 The potential for increasing wage replacement exists primarily in Germany, but could also
be considered in Sweden and Finland at the cost of reducing the duration of leave. However,
Switzerland cannot make such an adjustment by decreasing the duration, as its existing leave
options are already significantly shorter than the ideal policy design. Similarly, the United
States cannot make such an adjustment as there is currently no provision for paid leave at
the national level. Implementing an ideal leave policy in Switzerland and the United States
would be more difficult and costly compared to the adjustments that could be achieved in the
other three countries. Significant expansion of existing regulations would be required, which
presents a challenging task.
196 13 Contributions and Limitations
individuals who are not currently caregivers to become caregivers. Parental leave
policies, with their unique ability to attract non-carers into caregiving roles, form
the bedrock of behavioural change within the context of family policies. While
parental leave is a crucial aspect of family policy, it is essential to acknowledge
its limitations in providing a comprehensive solution to the challenges faced by
families. It is important to recognise that the promotion of a universal caregiver
family model involves more than just parental leave. This section discusses the
inherent constraints of the research, emphasising the need for a broader per-
spective. A more comprehensive approach would need to include considerations
of labour market conditions that enable part-time work without disadvantages,
household income, tax systems, social security, and the associated risk of poverty
for families, but first of all, it would need to integrate childcare policies.
Childcare policies are important to the universal caregiver family model, seam-
lessly extending support beyond parental leave. They complement each other,
with childcare solutions stepping in as parental leave concludes. This symbi-
otic relationship ensures a smooth transition for working parents, emphasising
the importance of a continuous and comprehensive policy-mix to balance both
professional and family responsibilities. Childcare is indispensable in a universal
caregiver family model, catering to parents with overlapping work schedules.
Policies should ensure an adequate number of spots, maintain high quality,
be affordable, conveniently located, and offer extended hours to accommo-
date diverse work schedules (Ciccia and Bleijenbergh 2014; Oehrli et al. 2024;
Schober 2020; Stahl and Schober 2020).
Further, a more comprehensive family policy should take into account the pre-
vailing labour market conditions. This involves creating an environment that not
only supports caregiving responsibilities but also facilitates the participation of
both parents in the workforce. This may include policies that encourage flexi-
ble working arrangements and promote job-sharing opportunities. A key aspect
thereof is the promotion of part-time work without imposing disadvantages on
employees. This requires addressing issues such as wage gaps, career progression,
and access to benefits for part-time workers. Policies that incentivise employers to
provide equitable opportunities for part-time employees can help ensure that indi-
viduals can balance work commitments with caregiving responsibilities without
sacrificing their professional development. Ensuring that individuals can main-
tain a healthy work-life balance is crucial for the success of a universal caregiver
family model.
Tax systems shape family finances significantly, and a comprehensive family
policy-mix would require a careful examination and potential reform to ease the
economic burden on caregivers. Adapting tax systems with credits, deductions,
13.2 Limitations and Future Research 197
and progressive taxation is essential for creating a fairer economic environment
and reducing financial strain on families. Similarly, a comprehensive family pol-
icy addresses social security, ensuring caregiver-specific provisions to protect
individuals during caregiving periods. Additionally, recognising and addressing
the risk of poverty for families, especially those with caregiving responsibilities,
is vital. This involves targeted measures like income support, housing assis-
tance, and affordable healthcare to protect families from economic hardship and
contribute to their overall well-being.
In essence, a holistic family policy that would advance egalitarianism, encom-
passes various dimensions, including childcare, labour market conditions, and
economic support mechanisms. While parental leave addresses an important facet
of caregiving, considering these additional policy fields in research would pro-
vide a more realistic (but complex) perspective. Together, they could cultivate
a more supportive and equitable environment for caregivers, thereby advancing
the success of a universal caregiver family model. Further research is required
to establish connections between these policy areas, thoroughly examine their
interactions, and present new insights into these mechanisms.
The exclusive focus on national policies represents a further limitation. Examin-
ing sub-national distinctions and corporate-level provisions could yield additional
insights, particularly in federalist countries. Subsequent research should delve
into these nuances to refine comprehension of family policy effectiveness. Yet,
this constraint primarily resides in theoretical considerations and the application
of the analysis grid to the five countries in Chapter 9. The empirical assessment
of paternal leave duration in Chapter 10 scrutinises not solely national policy but
the actual uptake by fathers, encompassing sub-national policies and employer-
level solutions. This shows a degree of incongruence of levels of government
considered: The policy indices were measured using national policies only, while
the regression analyses included all levels of government, including the company
level. The analysis in Chapter 11 takes an experimental approach and does not
refer to existing policies, so there is no differentiation between national or sub-
national policies indicated either. Acknowledging that the theoretical discussion
and the analytical grid could benefit from a more thorough exploration, recogni-
tion of sub-national variations and company-level provisions could enhance the
comprehensiveness of the research and thus the validity and generalisability of
the results, particularly in countries with limited national solutions.
Moreover, descriptive findings (see Figure 10.2) have shown that even in coun-
tries without a national policy solution, the majority of fathers take employment
198 13 Contributions and Limitations
breaks in connection with the birth of their child. Further analysis could pro-
vide valuable insights into the different types of leave and available options in
such countries. Analyses and data collection on company-based leave could pro-
vide new insights into the extent of coverage of such policies, as well as the
relationship between company culture and policy use.
The final point concerns generalisability. The theoretical discussion and analy-
sis are limited to five countries, which raises concerns about its transferability
to other contexts. Nevertheless, the selection of cases includes countries that are
prototypical of family policy regimes, and the selected five countries cover a
wide range of these regimes. Therefore, it is possible to make assumptions for
countries that have similar policy regimes and contexts to those analysed. Cau-
tion must be exercised when generalising conclusions to other countries, as each
country’s unique socio-economic and cultural context influences the applicabil-
ity of findings to other nations. However, it is worth noting that the selected
cases are limited to Western democracies, and therefore only cover a specific
geographical region. As a result, generalisations about other political and cul-
tural contexts cannot be made. In this regard, research considerations that extend
beyond the European and North American contexts would significantly expand
current discussions.
In conclusion, this chapter has highlighted the thesis’ limitations, acknowl-
edging the importance of parental leave within the broader framework of family
policies. Recognising these limitations is crucial for understanding the scope and
applicability of the research findings to diverse caregiving contexts worldwide.
Furthermore, I have suggested several avenues for future research.
13.3 Concluding Thoughts
This research sheds light on the interplay between family dynamics and policies
that promote a more equitable distribution of work between parents. It examined
parental leave policies and its effects on patterns of caregiving within families
and fathers’ allocation of time. This thesis develops an ideal policy design to
promote egalitarianism in the division of work within families, while supple-
menting existing research findings on policy effects on women. It demonstrates
that policy design has an impact on fathers’ time allocation and further specifies
the functioning of this effect.
To end with, let me conduct a thought experiment and explore the possibility
of implementing this ideal parental leave policy. While this policy may appear
13.3 Concluding Thoughts 199
utopian in certain contexts, its consequences are broadly positive to combat
poverty, to sustain mental health and to support child development. Envisioning
such idealistic policies is essential progress towards a gender-equal world. This
aligns with the quote “We cannot expect to arrive at a gender-equal world without
either knowing what that world might look like or identifying policy agendas for
welfare and employment reform that might move us in that direction.” (Rubery
2015, p. 535), which has already been cited at the beginning of my thesis.
The underlying assumption entails that both parents have access to fully com-
pensated parental leave of at least six months, and that this policy is taken up
by both mothers and fathers. With this ideal parental leave policy, both parents
can take on a caring role from the very beginning. The responsibility for care is
shared between both parents. Due to their established role as caregivers, parents
retain this responsibility when they re-enter the labour market, as the division of
labour has been shown to be path-dependent. When returning to the labour mar-
ket, most parents will not want to reduce their carer roles to marginal hours, the
labour market will also need to adapt over time. In times of a shortage of skilled
workers, employers have an interest in remaining attractive to their employees and
are looking for ways to meet their needs. In this ideal world, part-time jobs are
available to parents and they can organise most of their working hours around
each other. Thus, time spans during which parents are unable to provide care
are typically limited. These instances can be supplemented by affordable, high-
quality childcare facilities or, alternatively, by grandparents or other caregivers,
depending on individual preferences and circumstances.
Over time, the labour market would adapt by reducing gender segregation in
the workforce. With the caregiver role becoming gender-neutral, employers no
longer differentiate based on gender. On the one hand, egalitarian parental leave
enables parents to take a baby break. On the other hand, both mothers and fathers
may need to take time off for sick children. Therefore, employers must anticipate
work absenteeism of both parents and can no longer assume gender differences
of availability.
Through the course of time, other gender-specific discrimination, such as the
wage gap, may also cease to exist. Birth-related absences from the labour market
are similar for both genders, and both parents have reduced their workload to take
on an active caring role, leading to the convergence of the life courses between
the genders. Mothers no longer unilaterally lose professional experience, allowing
for gender-neutral career development. This is reflected in the gender ratios of
management positions and the reduction of the gender wage gap. The role of the
provider is no longer gendered: Changes in the labour market and a narrowing
200 13 Contributions and Limitations
wage gap mean that women are at much lower risk of poverty than they used to
be.
In addition to economic changes, this egalitarian family organisation would
also have a psychological impact. By sharing responsibilities between parents,
the mental load is more evenly distributed and jointly borne, which in turn has a
positive effect on mental health. Through the active involvement of both parents
in their children’s upbringing, children benefit from strong relationships with both
parents, which strengthens their development.
By challenging current gender norms and implementing gender-neutral family
policies, gender-specific barriers are broken down. In this utopian fairy tale, both
girls and boys will be socialised without the need to consider the compatibility
of their career choices with family life, as it will be guaranteed for everyone.
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use,
sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you
give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s
Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If
material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use
is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
permission directly from the copyright holder.
References
Aassve, A., Fuochi, G., & Mencarini, L. (2014). Desperate Housework: Relative Resources,
Time Availability, Economic Dependency, and Gender Ideology Across Europe. Journal
of Family Issues, 35(8), 1000–1022. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X14522248
Addati, L., Cassirer, N., & Gilchrist, K. (2014). Maternity and paternity at work: Law and
practice across the world. International Labour Office.
Aidukaite, J., & Telisauskaite-Cekanavice, D. (2020). The father’s role in child care: Parental
leave policies in Lithuania and Sweden. Social Inclusion, 8(4), 81–91. https://doi.org/10.
17645/si.v8i4.2962
Aisenbrey, S., & Fasang, A. (2017). The interplay of work and family trajectories over the life
course: Germany and the United States in comparison. American Journal of Sociology,
122(5), 1448–1484. https://doi.org/10.1086/691128
Allen, B. D., Nunley, J. M., & Seals, A. (2011). The Effect of Joint-Child-Custody Legisla-
tion on the Child-Support Receipt of Single Mothers. Journal of Family and Economic
Issues, 32(1), 124–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-010-9193-4
Almqvist, A. L., & Duvander, A. Z. (2014). Changes in gender equality? Swedish fathers’
parental leave, division of childcare and housework. Journal of Family Studies, 20(1),
19–27. https://doi.org/10.5172/jfs.2014.20.1.19
Altintas, E., & Sullivan, O. (2016). Fifty years of change updated: Cross-national gender con-
vergence in housework. Demographic Research, 35(1), 455–470. https://doi.org/10.4054/
DemRes.2016.35.16
Altintas, E., & Sullivan, O. (2017). Trends in Fathers’ Contribution to Housework and Child-
care under Different Welfare Policy Regimes. Social Politics, 24(1), 81–108. https://doi.
org/10.1093/sp/jxw007
Arnalds, Á. A., Belope-Nguema, S., Eydal, G. B., & Fernández-Cornejo, J. A. (2022). Con-
structing fatherhood in the North and South: Paid parental leave, work and care in Ice-
land and Spain. Acta Sociologica, 65(1), 86–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/000169932110
08517
Arts, W., & Gelissen, J. (2002). Three worlds of welfare capitalism or more? A state-of-the-
art report. Journal of European Social Policy, 12(2), 137–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0952872002012002114
Asai, Y. (2015). Parental leave reforms and the employment of new mothers: Quasi-
experimental evidence from Japan. Labour Economics, 36, 72–83. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.labeco.2015.02.007
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2025
M. Lütolf, The Balancing Act of Working Mothers and Caring Fathers,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-47716-5
201
202 References
Auspurg, K., & Hinz, T. (2015). Factorial survey experiments. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/
9781483398075
Auspurg, K., Hinz, T., Liebig, S., & Sauer, C. (2015). The factorial survey as a method for
measuring sensitive issues. In U. Engel, B. Jann, P. Lynn, A. Scherpenzeel, & P. J. Sturgis
(Eds.), Improving survey methods. lessons from recent research (pp. 137– 149). Routledge.
Auspurg, K., Hinz, T., & Sauer, C. (2017a). Why Should Women Get Less? Evidence on the
Gender Pay Gap from Multifactorial Survey Experiments. American Sociological Review,
82(1), 179–210. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122416683393
Auspurg, K., Iacovou, M., & Nicoletti, C. (2017b). Housework share between partners:
Experimental evidence on gender-specific preferences. Social Science Research, 66, 118–
139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2017.01.003
Bambra, C. (2007a). Going beyond the three worlds of welfare capitalism: Regime theory
and public health research. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 61(12),
1098–1102. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2007.064295
Bambra, C. (2007b). Defamilisation and welfare state regimes: A cluster analysis. Interna-
tional Journal of Social Welfare, 16(4), 326–338. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2397.
2007.00486.x
Bansak, K., Hainmueller, J., Hopkins, D. J., & Yamamoto, T. (2017). Beyond the Breaking
Point? Survey Satisficing in Conjoint Experiments. Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Political Science Department. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2959146
Bansak, K., Hainmueller, J., Hopkins, D. J., & Yamamoto, T. (2023). Using Conjoint Exper-
iments to Analyze Election Outcomes: The Essential Role of the Average Marginal
Component Effect. Political Analysis, 31(4), 500–518. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.202
2.16
Barigozzi, F., Cremer, H., & Roeder, K. (2020). Caregivers in the family: Daughters, sons and
social norms. European Economic Review, 130, 103589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroec
orev.2020.103589
Bariola, N., & Collins, C. (2021). The Gendered Politics of Pandemic Relief: Labor and Fam-
ily Policies in Denmark, Germany, and the United States During COVID-19. American
Behavioral Scientist, 65(12), 1671–1697. https://doi.org/10.1177/000642211003140
Baxter, J., Buchler, S., Perales, F., & Western, M. (2015). A life-changing event: First births
and men’s and women’s attitudes to mothering and gender divisions of labor. Social
Forces, 93(3), 989–1014. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sou103
Belser, K. (2010). Anerkennung und Aufwertung der Care-Arbeit: Impulse aus Sicht der Gle-
ichstellung (tech. rep.). Eidgenössisches Büro für die Gleichstellung von Frau und Mann
EBG: Fachbereich Gleichstellung in der Familie. Bern.
Berghammer, C. (2014). The return of the male breadwinner model? Educational effects
on parents’ work arrangements in Austria, 1980–2009. Work, Employment and Society,
28(4), 611–632. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017013500115
Bianchi, S. M., Sayer, L. C., Milkie, M. A., & Robinson, J. P. (2012). Housework: Who did,
does or will do it, and how much does it matter? Social Forces, 91(1), 55–63. https://doi.
org/10.1093/sf/sos120
Birkett, H., & Forbes, S. (2019). Where’s dad? Exploring the low take-up of inclusive parent-
ing policies in the UK. Policy Studies, 40(2), 205–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.
2019.1581160
References 203
Blau, F. D., & Kahn, L. M. (2017). The Gender Wage Gap: Extent, Trends, and Explanations.
Journal of Economic Literature, 55(3), 789–865. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20160995
Blofield, M., & Martínez Franzoni, J. (2015). Maternalism, Co-responsibility, and Social
Equity: A Typology of Work – Family Policies. Social Politics: International Studies in
Gender, State & Society, 22(1), 38–59. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxu015
Blum, S., Dobroti´c, I., Kaufman, G., Koslowski, A., & Moss, P. (2023). 19th International
Review of Leave Policies and Related Research 2023 (tech. rep. No. September).
BMFSFJ. (2020). Elterngeld, ElterngeldPlus und Elternzeit (tech. rep.). Bundesministerium
für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend.
Boeckmann, I., Misra, J., & Budig, M. J. (2015). Cultural and institutional factors shaping
mothers’ employment and working hours in postindustrial countries. Social Forces, 93(4),
1301–1333. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sou119
Boje, T. P., & Ejrnœs, A. (2011). Family policy and welfare regimes. In H. M. Dahl, M.
Keränen, & A. Kovalainen (Eds.), Europeanization, care and gender: global complexities
(pp. 77–93). Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230321021_5
Bonoli, G. (2013). The Origins of Active Social Policy: Labour Market and Childcare Policies
in a Comparative Perspective. Oxford University Press.
Borgkvist, A. (2022). ‘It Would Be Silly to Stop Now and Go Part-Time’: Fathers and Flex-
ible Working Arrangements in Australia. In M. Grau Grau, M. las Heras Maestro, & H.
Riley Bowles (Eds.), Engaged fatherhood for men, families and gender equality: health-
care, social policy, and work perspectives (pp. 231–243). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/
10.1007/978-3-030-75645-1
Bornatici, C., Gauthier, J. A., & Le Goff, J. M. (2020). Changing Attitudes towards Gen-
der Equality in Switzerland (2000–2017): Period, Cohort and Life-Course Effects. Swiss
Journal of Sociology, 46(3), 559–585. https://doi.org/10.2478/sjs-2020-0027
Boushey, H. (2008). Family friendly policies: Helping mothers make ends meet. Review of
Social Economy, 66 (1), 51–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/00346760701668446
Boye, K. (2015). Can you stay home today? Parents’ occupations, relative resources and divi-
sion of care leave for sick children. Acta Sociologica, 58(4), 357–370. https://doi.org/10.
1177/0001699315605161
Brandth, B., & Kvande, E. (1998). Masculinity and child care: The reconstruction of father-
ing. Sociological Review, 46(2), 293–313. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-954X.00120
BSV. (2020). Vaterschaftsurlaub: die Vorlage im Detail (tech. rep.). Bundesamt für Sozialver-
sicherungen.
Budig, M. J., Misra, J., & Boeckmann, I. (2012). The motherhood penalty in cross-national
perspective: The importance of work-family policies and cultural attitudes. Social Poli-
tics, 19(2), 163–193. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxs006
Bünning, M. (2015). What Happens after the ‘Daddy Months’? Fathers’ Involvement in Paid
Work, Childcare, and Housework after Taking Parental Leave in Germany. European
Sociological Review, 31(6), 738–748. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcv072
Bünning, M., & Hipp, L. (2022). How can we become more equal? Public policies and par-
ents’ work–family preferences in Germany. Journal of European Social Policy, 32(2),
182–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/09589287211035701
Bünning, M., & Pollmann-Schult, M. (2016). Family policies and father’s working hours:
cross-national differences in the paternal labour supply. Work, Employment and Society,
30(2), 256–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017015578999
204 References
Burnett, S. B., Gatrell, C. J., Cooper, C. L., & Sparrow, P. (2013). Fathers at work: A ghost
in the organizational machine. Gender, Work and Organization, 20(6), 632–646. https://
doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12000
Busemeyer, M. R., & Goerres, A. (2019). Policy feedback in the local context: analysing fair-
ness perceptions of public childcare fees in a German town. Journal of Public Policy,
40(3), 513–533. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X18000491
Bütler, M. (2007). Arbeiten lohnt sich nicht – ein zweites Kind noch weniger. Zu den
Auswirkungen einkommensabhangiger Tarife auf das (Arbeitsmarkt-) Verhalten der
Frauen. Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, 8(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-
2516.2007.00227.x
Cabrera, N. J., Shannon, J. D., & Tamis-LeMonda, C. (2007). Fathers’ influence on their
children’s cognitive and emotional development: From toddlers to pre-K. Applied Devel-
opmental Science, 11(4), 208–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888690701762100
Cambridge Dictionary. (2024a). Family. Retrieved March 20, 2024, from https://dictionary.
cambridge.org/dictionary/english/family
Cambridge Dictionary. (2024b). Father. Retrieved March 20, 2024, from https://dictionary.
cambridge.org/dictionary/english/father
Cambridge Dictionary. (2024c). Mother. Retrieved March 20, 2024, from https://dictionary.
cambridge.org/dictionary/english/mother
Cascio, E. U., Haider, S. J., & Nielsen, H. S. (2015). The effectiveness of policies that pro-
mote labor force participation of women with children: A collection of national studies.
Labour Economics, 36, 64–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2015.08.002
Castellanos-Serrano, C., Escot, L., & Fernández-Cornejo, J. A. (2024). Parental leave sys-
tem design impacts on its gendered use: Paternity leave introduction in Spain. Family
Relations, 73(1), 359–378. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12875
Castro-García, C., & Pazos-Moran, M. (2016). Parental Leave Policy and Gender Equality in
Europe. Feminist Economics, 22(3), 51–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/13545701.2015.108
2033
Chanda, T. (2023). Economic Wellbeing and Labor Supply Patterns of Subsequently Divorc-
ing Mothers in Wisconsin. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 44(4), 821–835.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-022-09875-8
Chung, H., & van der Lippe, T. (2018). Flexible Working, Work–Life Balance, and Gender
Equality: Introduction. Social Indicators Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-
2025-x
Ciccia, R. (2017). A two-step approach for the analysis of hybrids in comparative social pol-
icy analysis: a nuanced typology of childcare between policies and regimes. Quality and
Quantity, 51(6), 2761–2780. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-016-04-1
Ciccia, R., & Bleijenbergh, I. (2014). After the Male Breadwinner Model? Childcare Ser-
vices and the Division of Labor in European Countries. Social Politics, 21(1), 50–79.
https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxu002
Ciccia, R., & Verloo, M. (2012). Parental leave regulations and the persistence of the male
breadwinner model: Using fuzzy-set ideal type analysis to assess gender equality in an
enlarged Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 22(5), 507–528. https://doi.org/10.
1177/0958928712456576
References 205
Collins, C. (2020). Who to Blame and How to Solve It: Mothers’ Perceptions of Work-
Family Conflict Across Western Policy Regimes. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(3),
849–874. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12643
Combet, B., & Oesch, D. (2019). The Gender Wage Gap Opens Long before Motherhood.
Panel Evidence on Early Careers in Switzerland. European Sociological Review, 35(3),
332–345. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcz009
Cooke, L. P. (2011). Gender-Class Equality in Political Economies. Routledge.
Corsi, M., Botti, F., & D’Ippoliti, C. (2016). The gendered nature of poverty in the EU:
Individualized versus collective poverty measures. Feminist Economics, 22(4), 82–100.
Craig, L. (2007). How Employed Mothers in Australia Find Time for Both Market Work and
Childcare. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 28(1), 69–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10834-006-9047-2
Craig, L., & Churchill, B. (2021). Dual-earner parent couples’ work and care during COVID-
19. Gender, Work and Organization, 28(S1), 66–79. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12497
Craig, L., & Mullan, K. (2011). How Mothers and Fathers Share Childcare: A Cross-National
Time-Use Comparison. American Sociological Review, 76(6), 834–861. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0003122411427673
Craig, L., & Powell, A. (2012). Dual-earner parents’ work-family time: The effects of atyp-
ical work patterns and non-parental childcare. Journal of Population Research, 29,
229–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12546-012-9086-5
Craigs, S. (1995). The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993: A survey of the Act’s history,
purposes, provisions, and social ramifications. Drake Law Review, 44(1), 51–80.
Crompton, R. (1999). Discussion and Conclusion. In R. Crompton (Ed.), Restructuring gen-
der relations and employment: the decline of the male breadwinner (pp. 201–214). Oxford
University Press.
Crompton, R. (2001). Gender Restructuring, Employment, and Caring. Social Politics, 8(3),
266–291. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/8.3.266
Crosse, R., & Millar, M. (2019). Off the hook: mutual absolution of responsibility by fathers
and the state, the experiences of separated and divorced Irish mothers. The Journal of
Poverty and Social Justice, 27(3), 369–388. https://doi.org/10.1332/175982719X15622
544227830
Daly, M. (1994). Comparing Welfare States: Towards a Gender Friendly Approach. In D.
Sainsbury (Ed.), Gendering welfare state (pp. 101–117). Sage Publications.
Daly, M. (2010). Families Versus State and Markets. In F. G. Castles, S. Leibfried, J. Lewis,
H. Obinger, & C. Pierson (Eds.), The oxford handbook of the welfare state (1st ed.,
pp. 137–151). Oxford University Press.
Daly, M., & Ferragina, E. (2018). Family policy in high-income countries: Five decades of
development. Journal of European Social Policy, 28(3), 255–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0958928717735060
Datta Gupta, N., Smith, N., & Verner, M. (2008). Perspective Article: The impact of Nordic
countries’ family friendly policies on employment, wages, and children. Review of Eco-
nomics of the Household , 6(1), 65–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11150-007-9023-0
Dean, L., Churchill, B., & Ruppanner, L. (2022). The mental load: building a deeper theoret-
ical understanding of how cognitive and emotional labor overload women and mothers.
Community, Work and Family, 25(1), 13–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2021.200
2813
206 References
Dearing, H. (2016). Gender equality in the division of work: How to assess European leave
policies regarding their compliance with an ideal leave model. Journal of European Social
Pol ic y, 26(3), 234–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928716642951
Dillenseger, L., Burger, M. J., & Munier, F. (2023). Part-time Parental Leave and Life Sat-
isfaction: Evidence from the Netherlands. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 18(6),
3019–3041. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-023-10218-4
Dobroti´c, I., & Blum, S. (2020). Inclusiveness of parental-leave benefits in Twenty-One
European countries: Measuring social and gender inequalities in leave eligibility. Social
Politics, 27(3), 588–614. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxz023
Domínguez-Folgueras, M., Jurado-Guerrero, T., Botía-Morillas, C., & Amigot-Leache, P.
(2017). ‘The house belongs to both’: Undoing the gendered division of housework. Com-
munity, Work and Family, 20(4), 424–443. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2016.119
2525
Dotti Sani, G. M. (2014). Men’s Employment Hours and Time on Domestic Chores in Euro-
pean Countries. Journal of Family Issues, 35(8), 1023–1047. https://doi.org/10.1177/019
2513X14522245
Dotti Sani, G. M. (2018). The economic crisis and changes in work–family arrangements in
six European countries. Journal of European Social Policy, 28(2), 177–193. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0958928717700566
Doucet, A., & McKay, L. (2020). Fathering, parental leave, impacts, and gender equality:
what/how are we measuring? International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 40(5–
6), 441–463. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSSP-04-2019-0086
Drago, R., Black, D., & Wooden, M. (2005). Female Breadwinner Families: Their Existence,
Persistence and Sources. Journal of Sociology, 41(4), 343–362. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1440783305058465
Duvander, A. Z., & Viklund, I. (2019). How long is a parental leave and for whom? An anal-
ysis of methodological and policy dimensions of leave length and division in Sweden.
International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 40(5–6), 479–494. https://doi.org/
10.1108/IJSSP-06-2019-0108
Ellingsaeter, A. L. (1999). Dual Breadwinners between State and Market. In R. Crompton
(Ed.), Restructuring gender relations and employment: the decline of the male breadwin-
ner (pp. 40–59). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198294696.
003.0003
Emmenegger, P., Kvist, J., Marx, P., & Petersen, K. (2015). Three Worlds of Welfare Capi-
talism: The making of a classic. Journal of European Social Policy, 25(1), 3–13. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0958928714556966
Eriksson, R., & Nermo, M. (2010). Care for sick children as a proxy for gender equality in
the family. Social Indicators Research, 97(3), 341–356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-
009-9505-y
Eydal, G. B., & Rostgaard, T. (2018). Introduction to the Handbook of Family Policy. In
G. B. Eydal & T. Rostgaard (Eds.), Handbook of family policy (pp. 2–9). Edward Elgar
Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784719340.00007
Farré, L., Felfe, C., González, L., & Schneider, P. (2023). Changing Gender Norms Across
Generations: Evidence from a Paternity Leave Reform, IZA – Institute of Labor Eco-
nomics. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4526266
References 207
Fernández-Cornejo, J. A., Escot, L., Del-Pozo, E., & Castellanos-Serrano, C. (2016). Do
Fathers Who Took Childbirth Leave Become More Involved in Their Children’s Care?
The Case of Spain. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 47 (2), 169–191.
Ferragina, E. (2019). Does Family Policy Influence Women’s Employment?: Reviewing the
Evidence in the Field. Political Studies Review, 17(1), 65–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/147
8929917736438
Ferragina, E. (2020). Family policy and women’s employment outcomes in 45 high-income
countries: A systematic qualitative review of 238 comparative and national studies. Social
Policy and Administration, 54(7), 1016–1066. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12584
Finch, N. (2021). Inclusive citizenship and degenderization: A comparison of state support
in 22 European countries. Social Policy and Administration, 55(7), 1224–1243. https://
doi.org/10.1111/spol.12716
Fins, A. (2020). National Snapshot: Poverty Among Women & Families (tech. rep.). National
Women’s Law Center. Washington D. C. Retrieved March 28, 2024, from https://nwlc.
org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/PovertySnapshot2020.pdf
Fleckenstein, T. (2011). The politics of ideas in welfare state transformation: Christian
democracy and the reform of family policy in Germany. Social Politics, 18(4), 543–571.
https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxr022
Försäkringskassan. (2021). Parental benefit. Retrieved January 24, 2021, from https://doi.
org/www.forsakringskassan.se/english/parents/when-the-child-is-born/parental-benefit
Försäkringskassan. (2023). 10-dagar vid barns födelse. Retrieved December 13, 2023, from
https://www.forsakringskassan.se/privatperson/foralder/10-dagar-vid-barns-fodelse
Fraser, N. (1994). After the Family Wage: Gender Equity and the Welfare State. Political
Theory, 22(4), 591–618. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591794022004003
Gallego, A., & Marx, P. (2017). Multi-dimensional preferences for labour market reforms: a
conjoint experiment. Journal of European Public Policy, 24(7), 1027–1047. https://doi.
org/10.1080/13501763.2016.1170191
Gambaro, L., Marcus, J., & Peter, F. (2019). School entry, afternoon care, and mothers’
labour supply. Empirical Economics, 57(3), 769–803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-
018-1462-3
Gangl, M., & Ziefle, A. (2015). The Making of a Good Woman: Extended Parental Leave
Entitlements and Mothers’ Work Commitment in Germany. American Journal of Sociol-
ogy, 121(2), 511–563. https://doi.org/10.1086/682419
Gauthier, A. H., & Koops, J. C. (2018). The history of family policy research. In G. B.
Eydal & T. Rostgaard (Eds.), Handbook of family policy (pp. 11–23). Edward Elgar
Publishing Limited.
Geyer, J., Haan, P., & Wrohlich, K. (2015). The effects of family policy on maternal labor
supply: Combining evidence from a structural model and a quasi-experimental approach.
Labour Economics, 36, 84–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2015.07.001.
Gloor, J. L., Li, X., Lim, S., & Feierabend, A. (2018). An inconvenient truth? Interpersonal
and career consequences of “maybe baby” expectations. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
104, 44–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2017.10.001
Gonalons-Pons, P. (2023). Differentiated Egalitarianism: The Impact of Paid Family Leave
Policy on Women’s and Men’s Paid and Unpaid Work. Social Forces, 101(4), 1744–1771.
https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soac081
208 References
Gornick, J., & Meyers, M. (2003). Families that work: Policies for Reconciling Parenthood
and Employment. Russell Sage Foundation.
Gornick, J., & Meyers, M. (2008). Creating gender egalitarian societies: An agenda for
reform. Politics and Society, 36(3), 313–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329208320562
Gornick, J., & Meyers, M. (2009). Institutions that Support Gender Equality in Parenthood
and Employment. In J. Gornick & M. Meyers (Eds.), Gender equality: transforming
family divisions of labor. Verso.
Grau Grau, M., las Heras Maestro, M., & Riley Bowles, H. (Eds.). (2022). Engaged Father-
hood for Men, Families and Gender Equality: Healthcare, Social Policy, and Work
Perspectives. Springer Nature.
Greenstein, T. N. (2000). Economic Dependence, Gender, and the Division of Labor in the
Home: A Replication and Extension. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(2), 322–335.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00322.x
Gupta, V. K., Turban, D. B., Wasti, S. A., & Sikdar, A. (2009). The Role of Gender
Stereotypes in Perceptions of Entrepreneurs and Intentions to Become an Entrepreneur.
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(2), 397–417. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-
6520.2009.00296.x
Haas, L. (2003). Parental leave and gender equality: Lessons from the European Union.
Review of Policy Research, 20(1), 89–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-1338.d01-6
Haas, L., & Hwang, C. P. (2008). The impact of taking parental leave on fathers’ participation
in childcare and relationships with children: Lessons from Sweden. Community, Work and
Fam il y, 11(1), 85–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668800701785346
Haas, L., & Hwang, C. P. (2019). Policy is not enough – the influence of the gendered work-
place on fathers’ use of parental leave in Sweden. Community, Work and Family, 22(1),
58–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2018.1495616
Haas, L., & Rostgaard, T. (2011). Fathers’ rights to paid parental leave in the Nordic coun-
tries: Consequences for the gendered division of leave. Community, Work and Family,
14(2), 177–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2011.571398
Hagemann, K., Jarausch, K. H., & Allemann-Ghionda, C. (2011). Children, Families, and
States: Time Policies of Childcare, Preschool, and Primary Education in Europe. Berghahn
Books.
Hainmueller, J., Hangartner, D., & Yamamoto, T. (2015). Validating vignette and conjoint
survey experiments a gainst real-world behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences of the United States of America, 112(8), 2395–4000. https://doi.org/10.1073/
pnas.1416587112
Hainmueller, J., Hopkins, D. J., & Yamamoto, T. (2014). Causal Inference in Conjoint
Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments.
Political Analysis, 22(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpt024
Hakovirta, M., & Eydal, G. B. (2020). Shared care and child maintenance policies in nordic
countries. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 34(1), 43–59. https://doi.
org/10.1093/lawfam/ebz016
Hart, R. K., Andersen, S. N., & Drange, N. (2022). Effects of extended paternity leave on
family dynamics. Journal of Marriage and Family, 84(3), 814–839. https://doi.org/10.
1111/jomf.12818
References 209
Häusermann, S. (2006). Different paths of family policy modernization in continental wel-
fare states: Changing dynamics of reform in German and Swiss family policies since the
mid-70s. Annual conference of the Swiss Political Science Association, Balsthal.
Häusermann, S., & Bürgisser, R. (2022). Familienpolitik. In Y. Papadopoulos, P. Sciarini,
A. Vatter, S. Häusermann, P. Emmenegger, & F. Fossati (Eds.), Handbuch der Schweizer
Politik (7th ed., pp. 931–954). NZZ Libro. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783748911784-295
Häusermann, S., Kurer, T., & Traber, D. (2019). The Politics of Trade-Offs: Studying the
Dynamics of Welfare State Reform With Conjoint Experiments. Comparative Political
Studies, 52(7), 1059–1095. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414018797943
Häusermann, S., & Zollinger, C. (2014). Public childcare, parental leave, and employment.
In P. Knoepfel, Y. Papadopoulos, P. Sciarini, A. Vatter, & S. Häusermann (Eds.), Gender
and welfare state regimes. NZZ Verlag.
He, J. C., Kang, S. K., Tse, K., & Toh, S. M. (2019). Stereotypes at work: Occupational
stereotypes predict race and gender segregation in the workforce. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 115(May 2018), 103318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2019.103318
Hegewisch, A., & Gornick, J. (2011). The impact of work-family policies on women’s
employment: a review of research from OECD countries. Community, Work and Family,
14(2), 119–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2011.571395
Hiilamo, H., & Kangas, O. (2009). Trap for women or freedom to choose? The struggle over
cash for child care schemes in Finland and Sweden. Journal of Social Policy, 38(3), 457–
475. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279409003067
Hochschild, A. R. (1989). The Second Shift: Working parents and the revolution at home.
Avons Book.
Hook, J. L. (2006). Care in Context: Men’s Unpaid Work in 20 Countries, 1965–2003.
American Sociological Review, 71, 639–660. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122407100406
Hook, J. L. (2010). Gender inequality in the welfare state: Sex segregation in housework,
1965–2003. American Journal of Sociology, 115(5), 1480–1523. https://doi.org/10.1086/
651384
Hook, J. L., Li, M., Paek, E., & Cotter, B. (2023). National work-family policies and the
occupational segregation of women and mothers in European countries, 1999- 2016.
European Sociological Review, 39(2), 280–300. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcac046
Hook, J. L., & Paek, E. (2020). National Family Policies and Mothers’ Employment: How
Earnings Inequality Shapes Policy Effects across and within Countries. American Socio-
logical Review, 85(3), 381–416. https://doi.org/10.1177/00031224209225.
Horiuchi, Y., Smith, D. M., & Yamamoto, T. (2018). Measuring Voters’ Multidimensional
Policy Preferences with Conjoint Analysis: Application to Japan’s 2014 Election. Politi-
cal Analysis, 26(2), 190–209. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2018.2
Huerta, M. C., Adema, W., Baxter, J., Han, W. J., Lausten, M., Lee, R., & Waldfogel, J.
(2014). Fathers’ Leave and Fathers’ Involvement: Evidence from Four OECD Countries.
European Journal of Social Security, 16(4), 308–346. https://doi.org/10.1177/138826271
401600403
ISSP. (2016). International Social Survey Programme: Family and Changing Gender Roles
IV — ISSP 2012, GESIS Data Archive, Cologne (Version 4.0.0). http://dx.doi.org/10.
4232/1.12661
Iten, R., Stern, S., Menegale, S., Filippini, M., Banfi, S., Pioro, D., Farsi, M., Tassinari,
S., & Schrottmann, R. (2005). Familienergänzende Kinderbetreuung in der Schweiz:
210 References
Aktuelle und zukünftige Nachfragepotenziale (tech. rep.). Tassinari Beratungen, Univer-
sita Svizzera Italiana, INFRAS. Turgi, Lugano, Zürich.
Jaumotte, F. (2004). Labour Force Participation of Women: Empirical Evidence on The Role
of Policy and Other Determinants in OECD Countries. OECD Economic Studies, 2003(2).
https://doi.org/10.1787/eco_studies-v2003-art9-en
Javornik, J. (2014). Measuring state de-familialism: Contesting post-socialist exceptional-
ism. Journal of European Social Policy, 24(3), 240–257. https://doi.org/10.1177/095892
8714525815
Jurado-Guerrero, T., & Muñoz-Comet, J. (2021). Design Matters Most: Changing Social
Gaps in the Use of Fathers’ Leave in Spain. Population Research and Policy Review,
40(3), 589–615. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-020-09592-w
Jurma, A. M. (2015). Impact of divorce and mother’s psychological well-being on chil-
dren’s emotional, behavioral, and social competences. Revista de Cercetare si Interventie
Sociala, 48, 69–82.
Kalmijn, M. (2015). How Childhood Circumstances Moderate the Long-Term Impact of
Divorce on Father-Child Relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family, 77(4), 921–938.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12202
Kan, M. Y. (2008). Measuring housework participation: The gap between “stylized” ques-
tionnaire estimates and diary-based estimates. Social Indicators Research, 86 (3), 381–
400. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-007-9184-5
Karu, M., & Tremblay, D.-G. (2017). Fathers on parental leave: an analysis of rights and
take-up in 29 countries. Community, Work and Family, 21(3), 344–362. https://doi.org/
10.1080/13668803.2017.1346586
Kaufman, G. (2017). Barriers to equality: why British fathers do not use parental leave. Com-
munity, Work and Family, 21(3), 310–325. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2017.130
7806
Kaufman, G., Gatenio Gabel, S., Engeman, C., & Petts, R. J. (2020). United States country
note (A. Koslowski, S. Blum, I. Dobroti´c, G. Kaufman, & P. Moss, Eds.; tech. rep.).
International Network on Leave Policies and Research. Retrieved June 9, 2022, from
https://www.leavenetwork.org/fileadmin/user%7B%5C_%7Dupload/k%7B%5C_%7Dl
eavenetwork/country%7B%5C_%7Dnotes/2020/PMedited.United%7B%5C_%7DS
tates.with%7B%5C_%7Dsupplement.1sept2020.pdf
Kela. (2021). Maternity, paternity and parental allowances. Retrieved January 24, 2021, from
https://www.kela.fi/web/en/parental-allowances
Kela. (2023). Daily allowances for parents. Retrieved December 13, 2023, from https://www.
kela.fi/daily-allowances-for-parents
Killewald, A., & García-Manglano, J. (2016). Tethered lives: A couple-based perspective
on the consequences of parenthood for time use, occupation, and wages. Social Science
Research, 60, 266–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.03.00.
King, V., & Sobolewski, J. M. (2006). Nonresident fathers’ contributions to adolescent well-
being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68(3), 537–557. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-
3737.2006.00274.x
Köppe, S. (2023). Ireland’s paternity leave: sluggish benefit take-up and occupational
inequalities. Journal of Family Studies, 29(6), 2524–2539. https://doi.org/10.1080/132
29400.2023.2179527
References 211
Korpi, W. (2000). Faces of Inequality: Gender, Class, and Patterns of Inequalities in Different
Types of Welfare States. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society,
7(2), 127–191. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/7.2.127
Korpi, W., Ferrarini, T., & Englund, S. (2013). Women’s Opportunities under Different Fam-
ily Policy Constellations: Gender, Class, and Inequality Tradeoffs in Western Countries
Re-examined. Social Politics, 20(1), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxs028
Koslowski, A. (2021). Capturing the gender gap in the scope of parenting related leave
policies across nations. Social Inclusion, 9(2), 250–261. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v9i2.
3852
Koslowski, A., Blum, S., Dobroti´c, I., Kaufman, G., & Moss, P. (2020). 16th International
Review of Leave Policies and Related Research 2020 (tech. rep.). International Network
on Leave Policies & Research. Retrieved January 31, 2021, from https://www.leavenetw
ork.org/annual-review-reports/review-2019/
Koslowski, A., Blum, S., Dobroti´c, I., Kaufman, G., & Moss, P. (2022). 18th Interna-
tional Review of Leave Policies and Related Research 2022 (tech. rep.). Interna-
tional Network on Leave Policies & Research. Retrieved April 13, 2023, from https://w
ww.leavenetwork.org/annual-review-reports/review-2019/
Koslowski, A., & Kadar-Satat, G. (2019). Fathers at work: explaining the gaps between enti-
tlement to leave policies and uptake. Community, Work and Family, 22(2), 129–145.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2018.1428174
Kowalewska, H., & Vitali, A. (2021). Breadwinning or on the breadline? Female bread-
winners’ economic characteristics across 20 welfare states. Journal of European Social
Pol ic y, 31(2), 125–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928720971094
Kowalewska, H., & Vitali, A. (2023). The female-breadwinner well-being ‘penalty’: dif-
ferences by men’s (un)employment and country. European Sociological Review, 1–16.
https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcad034
Kramer, A. (2008). Unions as facilitators of employment rights: An analysis of individu-
als’ awareness of parental leave in the national longitudinal survey of youth. Industrial
Relations, 47 (4), 651–658. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-232X.2008.00539.x
Krapf, S. (2014). Who uses public childcare for 2-year-old children? Coherent family poli-
cies and usage patterns in Sweden, Finland and Western Germany. International Journal
of Social Welfare, 23(1), 25–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsw.12031
Lalive, R., Oesch, D., & Pellizzari, M. (2023). How Personal Relationships Affect Employ-
ment Outcomes: On the Role of Social Networks and Family Obligations. In D. Spini &
E. Widmer (Eds.), Withstanding vulnerability throughout adult life: dynamics of stres-
sors, resources, and reserves (pp. 49–66). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-981-19-4567-0_4
Lalive, R., & Zweimüller, J. (2009). How Does Parental Leave Affect Fertility and Return to
Work? Evidence from Two Natural Experiments. The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
124(3), 1363–1402. https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.200124.3.1363
Lanfranconi, L. M., & Valarino, I. (2014). Gender equality and parental leave policies in
Switzerland: A discursive and feminist perspective. Critical Social Policy, 34(4), 538–
560. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261018314536132
Larsson, J., & Björk, S. (2017). Swedish fathers choosing part-time work. Community, Work
and Family, 20(2), 142–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2015.1089
212 References
Leeper, T. J., Hobolt, S. B., & Tilley, J. (2020). Measuring Subgroup Preferences in Conjoint
Experiments. Political Analysis, 28(2), 207–221. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2019.30
Leitner, S. (2003). Varieties of familialism: The caring function of the family in compara-
tive perspective. European Societies, 5(4), 353–375. https://doi.org/10.1080/146166903
2000127642
Lewis, J. (1992). Gender and the Development of Welfare Regimes. Journal of European
Social Policy, 2(3), 159–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/095892879200200301
Lewis, J. (1997). Gender and Welfare Regimes: Further Thoughts. Social Politics: Interna-
tional Studies in Gender, State & Society, 4(2), 160–177. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/4.
2.160
Lewis, J. (2001). The Decline of the Male Breadwinner Model: Implications for Work and
Care. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 8(2), 152–169.
https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/8.2.152
Lewis, J., Campbell, M., & Huerta, C. (2008). Patterns of paid and unpaid work in Western
Europe: gender, commodification, preferences and the implications for policy. Journal of
European Social Policy, 18(1), 21–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928707084450
Lewis, J., & Giullari, S. (2005). The adult worker model family, gender equality and care:
the search for new policy principles and the possibilities and problems of a capabilities
approach. Economy and Society, 34(1), 76–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/030851404200
0329342
Lister, R. (1997). Citizenship: Feminist Perspectives. Macmillan International Higher Edu-
cation.
Littleton, C. A. (1991). Reconstructing Sexual Equality. In K. T. Bartlett & R. Kennedy
(Eds.), Feminist legal theory: readings in law and gender (pp. 35–56). Westview Press.
Lott, Y., & Klenner, C. (2018). Are the ideal worker and ideal parent norms about to change?
The acceptance of part-time and parental leave at German workplaces. Community, Work
and Family, 21(5), 564–580. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2018.1526775
Lütolf, M. (2024). Caring breadwinners? a comparative analysis of parental leave policies to
promote fathers’ care work. Swiss Political Science Review, 30(4), 385–406. https://doi.
org/10.1111/spsr.12629
Lütolf, M. (forthcoming). Paternal leave duration and the closure of the gendered family
work gap. Social Politics.
Lütolf, M., & Stadelmann-Steffen, I. (2023). Do households live the family model they pre-
fer? Household’s work patterns across European policy regimes. Socio-Economic Review,
21(3), 1421–1443. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwac023
Madörin, M. (2010). Care Ökonomie – eine Herausforderung für die Wirtschaftswis-
senschaften. In C. Bauhardt & G. Ça ˘glar (Eds.), Gender and Economics: Feministische
Kritik der politischen Ökonomie (pp. 81–104). VS Verlag für Sozialwis- senschaften.
Mahon, R. (2002). Gender and Welfare State Restructuring: Through the Lens of Child Care.
In S. Michel & R. Mahon (Eds.), Child care policy at the crossroads: gender and welfare
state restructuring (pp. 1–27). Routledge.
Mahon, R. (2006). The OECD and the work/family reconciliation agenda: competing frames.
In J. Lewis (Ed.), Children, changing families and welfare states (pp. 173–197). Edward
Elgar Publishing.
References 213
Mahon, R. (2011). Child Care Policy: A Comparative Perspective. https://www.child-enc
yclopedia.com/pdf/expert/child-care-early-childhood-education-and-care/according-exp
erts/child-care-policy-comparative
Mandel, H., & Semyonov, M. (2006). A Welfare State Paradox: State Interventions and
Women’s Employment Opportunities in 22 Countries. American Journal of Sociology,
111(6), 1910–1949. https://doi.org/10.1086/499912
Mayer, M., & Le Bourdais, C. (2019). Sharing Parental Leave Among Dual-Earner Couples
in Canada: Does Reserved Paternity Leave Make a Difference? Population Research and
Policy Review, 38(2), 215–239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-018-9497-x
Mazur, A. G. (2002). Theorizing feminist policy. Oxford University Press.
Meil, G. (2013). European Men’s Use of Parental Leave and Their Involvement in Child Care
and Housework. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 44(5), 557–570. https://doi.org/
10.3138/jcfs.44.5.557
Meyer, D. R., Cancian, M., & Cook, S. T. (2017). The Growth in Shared Custody in the
United States: Patterns and Implications. Family Court Review, 55(4), 500–512. https://
doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12300
Meyers, M. K., Gornick, J. C., & Ross, K. E. (1999). Public childcare, parental leave, and
employment. In D. Sainsbury (Ed.), Gender and welfare state regimes (pp. 117–146).
Oxford University Press.
Michel, S., & Mahon, R. (2002). Child Care Policy at the Crossroads: Gender and Welfare
State Restructuring. Routledge.
Misra, J., Budig, M. J., & Moller, S. (2007). Reconciliation policies and the effects of moth-
erhood on employment, earnings and poverty. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis:
Research and Practice, 9(2), 135–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/13876980701311588
Morgan, K. J. (2009). Caring time policies in western Europe: Trends and implications.
Comparative European Politics, 7(1), 37–55. https://doi.org/10.1057/cep.2008.4
Morgan, K. J., & Zippel, K. (2003). Paid to Care: The Origins and Effects of Care Leave Poli-
cies in Western Europe. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society,
10(1), 49–85. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxg004
Morrissey, T. W. (2017). Child care and parent labor force participation: a review of the
research literature. Review of Economics of the Household, 15(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11150-016-9331-3
Moskos, M. (2020). Why is the gender revolution uneven and stalled? Gender essentialism
and men’s movement into ‘women’s work’. Gender, Work and Organization, 27(4), 527–
544. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12406
Motiejunaite, A., & Kravchenko, Z. (2008). Family policy, employment and gender-role atti-
tudes: A comparative analysis of Russia and Sweden. Journal of European Social Policy,
18(1), 38–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928707084453
Müller, K. U., Neumann, M., & Wrohlich, K. (2018). The family working-time model:
Towards more gender equality in work and care. Journal of European Social Policy, 28(5),
471–486. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928717753581
Musick, K., Bea, M. D., & Gonalons-Pons, P. (2020). His and Her Earnings Following Par-
enthood in the United States, Germany, and the United Kingdom. American Sociological
Review, 85(4), 639–674. https://doi.org/10.1177/00031224209344
214 References
Neilson, J., & Stanfors, M. (2014). It’s About Time! Gender, Parenthood, and Household
Divisions of Labor Under Different Welfare Regimes. Journal of Family Issues, 35(8),
1066–1088. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X14522240
Nepomnyaschy, L., & Waldfogel, J. (2007). Paternity leave and fathers’ involvement with
their young children. Community, Work and Family, 10(4), 427–453. https://doi.org/10.
1080/13668800701575077
Nieuwenhuis, R., Need, A., & van der Kolk, H. (2019). Family policy as an institutional con-
text of economic inequality. Acta Sociologica, 62(1), 64–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/000
1699318760125
Nitsche, N., & Grunow, D. (2016). Housework over the course of relationships: Gender ideol-
ogy, resources, and the division of housework from a growth curve perspective. Advances
in Life Course Research, 29, 80–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alcr.2016.02.001
Nollenberger, N., & Rodriguez-Planas, N. (2015). Full-time universal childcare in a context
of low maternal employment: Quasi-experimental evidence from Spain. Labour Eco-
nomics, 36, 124–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2015.02.008
Nygård, M., & Duvander, A. Z. (2021). Social inclusion or gender equality? Political dis-
courses on parental leave in Finland and Sweden. Social Inclusion, 9(2), 300–312. https://
doi.org/10.17645/si.v9i2.3844
O’Brien, M. (2009). Fathers, parental leave policies, and infant quality of life: International
perspectives and policy impact. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social
Science, 624(1), 190–213. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716209334349
O’Brien, M., & Wall, K. (2017). Comparative perspectives on work-life balance and gender
equality: Fathers on leave alone (Vol. 6). Springer Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
319-42970-0
O’Connor, J. S. (1993). Gender, Class and Citizenship in the Comparative Analysis of Wel-
fare State Regimes: Theoretical and Methodological Issues. British Journal of Sociology,
44(3), 501–518. https://doi.org/10.2307/591814
O’Connor, J. S. (1996). From women in the welfare state to gendering welfare state regimes.
Current Sociology, 44(2), 1–130.
Oehrli, D., Stadelmann-Steffen, I., & Lütolf, M. (2024). How Does the Provision of Child-
care Services Affect Mothers’ Employment Intentions? Empirical Evidence from a Con-
joint Experiment. Journal of Social Policy, 53(2), 450–469. https://doi.org/10.1017/S00
47279422000423
Oesch, D. (2022). Wirtschafts- und Sozialstruktur der Schweiz. In Y. Papadopoulos, P. Scia-
rini, A. Vatter, S. Häusermann, P. Emmenegger, & F. Fossati (Eds.), Handbuch der
Schweizer Politik (7th, pp. 61–83). NZZ Libro.
Oesch, D. (2023). The Structural Shifts in Switzerland’s Economy and Society, 2000–2020.
In P. Emmenegger, F. Fossati, S. Häusermann, Y. Papadopoulos, P. Sciarini, & A. Vat-
ter (Eds.), The oxford handbook of swiss politics (pp. 73–93). Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780192871787.001.0001
Oláh, L. S. (2011). Family Policies and Birth Rates. Childbearing, Female Work, and the
Time Policy of Early Childhood Education in Postwar Europe. In K. Hagemann, K. H.
Jarausch, & C. Allemann-Ghionda (Eds.), Children, families, and states: time policies of
childcare, preschool, and primary education in europe (pp. 113–131). Berghahn Books.
References 215
Olivetti, C., & Petrongolo, B. (2017). The Economic Consequences of Family Policies:
Lessons from a Century of Legislation in High-Income Countries. Journal of Economic
Perspectives, 31(1), 205–230. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.31.1.205
Orloff, A. S. (1993). Gender and the Social Rights of Citizenship: The Comparative Analysis
of Gender Relations and Welfare States. American Sociological Review, 58(3), 303–328.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2095903
Orloff, A. S. (2002). Women’s Employment and Welfare Regimes: Globalization, Export Ori-
entation and Social Policy in Europe and North America (tech. rep.). United Nations
Research Institute for Social Development.
Orloff, A. S. (2006). From Maternalism to “Employment for All”: State Policies to Promote
Women’s Employment across the Affluent Democracies. In J. D. Levy (Ed.), The state
after statism: new state activities in the age of liberalization (pp. 230– 268). Harvard
University Press.
Orloff, A. S. (2009). Gendering the comparative analysis of welfare states: An unfin-
ished agenda. Sociological Theory, 27(3), 317–343. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-95
58.2009.01350.x
Orloff, A. S. (2010). Gender in the Welfare State. In M. L. Krook & S. Childs (Eds.), Wom en,
gender, and politics: a reader (pp. 305–311, Vol. 22). Oxford University Press. https://
doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.22.1.51
Österbacka, E., & Räsänen, T. (2022). Back to work or stay at home? Family policies and
maternal employment in Finland. Journal of Population Economics, 35(3), 1071–1101.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-021-00843-4
Otonkorpi-Lehtoranta, K., Salin, M., Hakovirta, M., & Kaittila, A. (2022). Gendering bound-
ary work: Experiences of work–family practices among Finnish working parents during
COVID-19 lockdown. Gender, Work and Organization, 29(6), 1952–1968. https://doi.org/
10.1111/gwao.12773
Pateman, C. (2006). The Patriarchal Welfare State. In C. Pierson & F. G. Castles (Eds.), The
welfare state reader (2nd ed, pp. 134–151). Polity.
Patnaik, A. (2019). Reserving time for daddy: The consequences of fathers’ quotas. Journal
of Labor Economics, 37 (4), 1009–1059. https://doi.org/10.1086/703115
Petts, R. J. (2023). Father Involvement and Gender Equality in the United States: Contem-
porary Norms and Barriers. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003229315
Petts, R. J., Mize, T. D., & Kaufman, G. (2022). Organizational policies, workplace culture,
and perceived job commitment of mothers and fathers who take parental leave. Social
Science Research, 103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2021.102651
Pfau-Effinger, B. (2000). Kultur und Frauenerwerbstätigkeit in Europa. Theorie und Empirie
des internationalen Vergleichs. Leske und Budrich.
Pfau-Effinger, B. (2004). Socio-historical paths of the male breadwinner model – An expla-
nation of cross-national differences. British Journal of Sociology, 55(3), 377–399. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-4446.2004.00025.x
Pfau-Effinger, B. (2005). Welfare State Policies and the Development of Care Arrangements.
European Societies, 7(2), 321–347. https://doi.org/10.1080/146166905083592
Philipp, M.-F., Büchau, S., Schober, P., & Spiess, C. K. (2023). Parental Leave Policies,
Usage Consequences, and Changing Normative Beliefs: Evidence From a Survey Experi-
ment. Gender and Society, 37(4), 493–523. https://doi.org/10.1177/08912432231176084
216 References
Pizarro, J., & Gartzia, L. (2024). Paternity leave: A systematic review and directions for
research. Human Resource Management Review, 34(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.
2023.101001
Plantenga, J., Remery, C., & Helming, P. (2005). Reconciliation of work and private life: A
comparative review of thirty European countries. Office for Official Publications of the
European Communities.
Pronzato, C. D. (2009). Return to work after childbirth: Does parental leave matter in
Europe? Review of Economics of the Household, 7(4), 341–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11150-009-9059-4
Raley, S., Bianchi, S. M., & Wang, W. (2012). When Do Fathers Care? Mothers’ Economic
Contribution and Fathers’ Involvement in Child Care. American Journal of Sociology,
117(5), 1422–1459. https://doi.org/10.1086/663354
Ranson, G. (2012). Men, Paid Employment and Family Responsibilities: Conceptualizing the
’Working Father’. Gender, Work and Organization, 19(6), 741–761. https://doi.org/10.
1111/j.1468-0432.2011.00549.x
Ray, R., Gornick, J. C., & Schmitt, J. (2010). Who cares? assessing generosity and gender
equality in parental leave policy designs in 21 countries. Journal of European Social
Pol ic y, 20(3), 196–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928710364434
Rehel, E. M. (2014). When Dad Stays Home Too: Paternity Leave, Gender, and Parenting.
Gender and Society, 28(1), 110–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243213503900
Reimer, T. (2020). Why fathers don’t take more parental leave in Germany: comparing mech-
anisms in different work organizations. Community, Work and Family, 23(4), 419–438.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2019.1608157
Rincon, L. (2023). A Robin Hood for all: a conjoint experiment on support for basic income.
Journal of European Public Policy, 30(2), 375–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.
2021.2007983
Risman, B. J. (1998). Gender vertigo: American families in transition. Yale University Press.
Rostgaard, T., & Ejrnæs, A. (2021). How different parental leave schemes create different
take-up patterns: Denmark in nordic comparison. Social Inclusion, 9(2), 313–324. https://
doi.org/10.17645/si.v9i2.3870
Rubery, J. (2015). Regulating for Gender Equality: A Policy Framework to Support the
Universal Caregiver Vision. Social Politics, 22(4), 513–538. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/
jxv036
Rudman, L. A., & Mescher, K. (2013). Penalizing men who request a family leave: Is flex-
ibility stigma a femininity stigma? Journal of Social Issues, 69(2), 322–340. https://doi.
org/10.1111/josi.12017
Rupert, P., & Zanella, G. (2018). Grandchildren and their grandparents’ labor supply. Journal
of Public Economics, 159, 89–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2017.12.013
Ruppanner, L., Perales, F., & Baxter, J. (2019). Harried and unhealthy? Parenthood, time
pressure, and mental health. Journal of Marriage and Family, 81(2), 308–326. https://
doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12531
Saarikallio-Torp, M., & Miettinen, A. (2021). Family leaves for fathers: Non-users as a test
for parental leave reforms. Journal of European Social Policy, 31(2), 161–174. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0958928721996650
Sainsbury, D. (1994a). Gendering Welfare States. Sage Publications.
References 217
Sainsbury, D. (1994b). Introduction. In D. Sainsbury (Ed.), Gendering welfare state (pp. 1–
7). Sage Publications.
Sainsbury, D. (1996). Gender, equality and welfare states. Cambridge University Press.
Sanzari, C. M., Dennis, A., & Moss-Racusin, C. A. (2021). Should I stay or should I go?:
Penalties for briefly de-prioritizing work or childcare. Journal of Applied Social Psychol-
ogy, 51(4), 334–349. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12738
Sarkadi, A., Kristiansson, R., Oberklaid, F., & Bremberg, S. (2008). Fathers’ involvement
and children’s developmental outcomes: A systematic review of longitudinal studies.
Acta Paediatrica, International Journal of Paediatrics, 97(2), 153–158. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1651-2227.2007.00572.x
Saxonberg, S. (2013). From Defamilialization to Degenderization: Toward a New Welfare
Typology. Social Policy and Administration, 47 (1), 26–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
9515.2012.00836.x
Sayer, L. C. (2005). Gender, Time and Inequality: Trends in Women’s and Men’s Paid Work,
Unpaid Work and Free Time. Social Forces, 84(1), 285–303. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.
2005.0126
Scarborough, W. J., Sin, R., & Risman, B. (2019). Attitudes and the Stalled Gender Revolu-
tion: Egalitarianism, Traditionalism, and Ambivalence from 1977 through 2016. Gender
and Society, 33(2), 173–200. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243218809604
Schilliger, S. (2009). Who cares? Care-Arbeit im neoliberalen Geschlechterregime. Wide r-
spruch, 56, 93–106.
Schober, P. (2013). The parenthood effect on gender inequality: Explaining the change in
paid and domestic work when British couples become parents. European Sociological
Review, 29(1), 74–85. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcr041
Schober, P. (2020). Going Regional: Local Childcare Provision and Parental Work–Care
Choices in Germany. In R. Nieuwenhuis & W. Van Lancker (Eds.), The palgrave hand-
book of family policy (pp. 485–509). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
030-54618-2_19
Schober, P., Blum, S., Erler, D., & Reimer, T. (2020). Germany country note (A. Koslowski,
S. Blum, I. Dobroti´c, G. Kaufman, & P. Moss, Eds.; tech. rep.). International Network
on Leave Policies and Research. Retrieved June 9, 2022, from https://www.leavenetw
ork.org/fileadmin/user%7B%5C_%7Dupload/k%7B%5C_%7Dleavenetwork/country%
7B%5C_%7Dnotes/2020/PMedited.Germany.with%7B%5C_%7Dsupplement.31aug2
020.pdf
Schober, P., & Scott, J. (2012). Maternal employment and gender role attitudes: Dissonance
among British men and women in the transition to parenthood. Work, Employment and
Society, 26(3), 514–530. https://doi.org/10.1177/09500170124385
Schober, P., & Zoch, G. (2019). Change in the gender division of domestic work after moth-
ers or fathers took leave: exploring alternative explanations. European Societies, 21(1),
158–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2018.1465989
Schönberg, U., & Ludsteck, J. (2014). Expansions in Maternity Leave Coverage and Moth-
ers’ Labor Market Outcomes after Childbirth. Journal of Labor Economics, 32(3),
469–505. https://doi.org/10.1086/675078
Schubarth, K. (2015). Zehn Jahre Mutterschaftsentschädigung. Soziale Sicherheit CHSS, 3,
159–162.
218 References
Siaroff, A. (1994). Work, Welfare and Gender Equality: A New Typology. In D. Sainsbury
(Ed.), Gendering welfare state (pp. 82–100). Sage Publications.
Singley, S. G., & Hynes, K. (2005). Transitions to parenthood: work-family policies, gender,
and the couple context. Gender and Society, 19(3), 376–397. https://doi.org/10.1177/089
1243204271515
Sodermans, A. K., Botterman, S., Havermans, N., & Matthijs, K. (2015). Involved Fathers,
Liberated Mothers? Joint Physical Custody and the Subjective Well-being of Divorced
Parents. Social Indicators Research, 122(1), 257–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-
014-0676-9
Specia, M. (2024, March). Ireland Rejects Constitution Changes, Keeping ‘Women in the
Home’ Language. Retrieved March 18, 2024, from https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/
09/world/europe/ireland-constitution-referendums-women-home.html
Stadelmann-Steffen, I. (2011). Dimensions of Family Policy and Female Labor Market
Participation: Analyzing Group-Specific Policy Effects. Governance, 24(2), 331–357.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2011.01521.x
Stadelmann-Steffen, I., & Dermont, C. (2018). The unpopularity of incentive-based instru-
ments: what improves the cost–benefit ratio? Public Choice, 175(1–2), 37–62. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11127-018-0513-9
Stadelmann-Steffen, I., & Lütolf, M. (2021). Pre-Analysis Plan. https://doi.org/10.17605/
OSF.IO/2FXG4
Stadelmann-Steffen, I., Lütolf, M., & Oehrli, D. (2022). Elasticity of Family Models: Survey
Data of five countries. [Dataset].
Stadelmann-Steffen, I., Lütolf, M., & Oehrli, D. (2024). Policy configurations and the
gender-specific reconciliation of paid and unpaid work – Analyzing the elasticity of fam-
ily models using comparative conjoint analyses. Annual Meeting of the Swiss Political
Science Association, Panel “Political Economy and Social Policy”, 1–43.
Stadelmann-Steffen, I., & Oehrli, D. (2017). Perceiving Reconciliation: Child Care Policies
and Gendered Time Conflicts. Gender and Society, 31(5), 597–623. https://doi.org/10.
1177/0891243217727719
Stahl, J. F., & Schober, P. (2020). Early education and care quality: Does it matter for mater-
nal working hours? Social Science Research, 86, 102378. https://www.sciencedirect.com/
science/article/abs/pii/S0049089X18309244?via%3Dihub
Steiger-Sackmann, S. (2022). Verlust der Mutterschaftsentschädigung wegen Ausübung
eines Parlamentsmandates. Sui Generis, 63–70. https://doi.org/10.21257/sg.205
Stertz, A. M., Grether, T., & Wiese, B. S. (2017). Gender-role attitudes and parental work
decisions after childbirth: A longitudinal dyadic perspective with dual-earner couples.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 101(April 2016), 104–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.
2017.05.005
Sullivan, O. (2006). Changing Gender Relations, Changing Families: Tracing the Pace of
Change Over Time. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Incorporated.
Sullivan, O., Coltrane, S., McAnnally, L., & Altintas, E. (2009). Father-friendly policies and
time-use data in a cross-national context: Potential and prospects for future research. The
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 624(1), 234–254. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0002716209335138
References 219
Sullivan, O., & Gershuny, J. (2001). Cross-national changes in time-use: Some sociological
(hi)stories re-examined. British Journal of Sociology, 52(2), 331–347. https://doi.org/10.
1080/00071310120045015
Sullivan, O., Gershuny, J., & Robinson, J. P. (2018). Stalled or Uneven Gender Revolution?
A Long-Term Processual Framework for Understanding Why Change Is Slow. Journal of
Family Theory and Review, 10(1), 263–279. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12248
Tamilina, L., & Tamilina, N. (2014). The Impact of Welfare States on the Division of House-
work in the Family: A New Comprehensive Theoretical and Empirical Framework of
Analysis. Journal of Family Issues, 35(356), 825–850. https://doi.org/10.1177/019251
3X13480340
Tamm, M. (2019). Fathers’ parental leave-taking, childcare involvement and labor market
participation. Labour Economics, 59(April), 184–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.
2019.04.007
Tanaka, S., & Waldfogel, J. (2007). Effects of parental leave and work hours on fathers’
involvement with their babies. Community, Work and Family, 10(4), 409–426. https://doi.
org/10.1080/13668800701575069
Tavits, M., Schleiter, P., Homola, J., & Ward, D. (2024). Fathers’ Leave Reduces Sexist Atti-
tudes. American Political Science Review, 118(1), 488–494. https://doi.org/10.1017/S00
03055423000369
Teele, D. L., Kalla, J., & Rosenbluth, F. (2018). The ties that double bind: Social roles and
women’s underrepresentation in politics. American Political Science Review, 112(3), 525–
541. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055418000217
Thébaud, S. (2010). Masculinity, bargaining, and breadwinning: Understanding men’s
housework in the cultural context of paid work. Gender and Society, 24(3), 330–354
https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243210369105
Thévenon, O. (2018). Leave policies for parents in a cross-national perspective: Various paths
along the same course? In G. B. Eydal & T. Rostgaard (Eds.), Handbook of family pol-
icy (pp. 124–138). Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.4337/978178471
9340.00018
Thomas, C. (1993). De-constructing concepts of care. Sociology, 27(4), 649–669. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0038038593027004006
U.S. Departement of Labour. (2012). Fact Sheet #28: The Family and Medical Leave Act
(tech. rep. No. Revised). U.S. Department of Labor: Wage and Hour Division. Washing-
ton D. C.
Valarino, I. (2020). Familienpolitik. In J.-M. Bonvin, V. Hugentobler, C. Knöpfel, P.
Maeder, & U. Tecklenburg (Eds.), Wörterbuch der Schweizer Sozialpolitik (pp. 162–165).
Seismo Verlag, Sozialwissenschaften und Gesellschaftsfragen AG.
Valarino, I., & Nedi, R. A. (2020). Switzerland country note (A. Koslowski, S. Blum, I.
Dobroti´c, G. Kaufman, & P. Moss, Eds.; tech. rep.). International Network on Leave
Policies and Research. Retrieved June 9, 2022, from https://www.leavenetwork.org/fil
eadmin/user%7B%5C_%7Dupload/k%7B%5C_%7Dleavenetwork/country%7B%5C_
%7Dnotes/2020/PMedited.Switzeralnd.with%7B%5C_%7Dsupplement.1sept2020.pdf
van der Heijden, F., Poortman, A. R., & van der Lippe, T. (2016). Children’s Postdivorce
Residence Arrangements and Parental Experienced Time Pressure. Journal of Marriage
and Family, 78(2), 468–481. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12283
220 References
Van Winkle, Z., & Leopold, T. (2021). Family size and economic wellbeing following
divorce: The United States in comparative perspective. Social Science Research, 96,
102541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2021.102541
von Gleichen, R. D., & Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (2018). Family policies and the weakening of
the male-breadwinner model. In S. Shaver (Ed.), Handbook on gender and social pol-
icy (pp. 153–178). Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.4337/978178536
7168.00015
Vuri, D. (2016). Do childcare policies increase maternal employment? (Tech. rep.). https://
doi.org/10.15185/izawol.241
Wall, G., & Arnold, S. (2007). How involved is involved fathering? An exploration of the
contemporary culture of fatherhood. Gender and Society, 21(4), 508–527. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0891243207304973
Weeden, K. A., Cha, Y., & Bucca, M. (2016). Long work hours, part-time work, and trends in
the gender gap in pay, the motherhood wage penalty, and the fatherhood wage premium.
RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 2(4), 71–102. https://
doi.org/10.7758/rsf.2016.2.4.03
Weisshaar, K. (2018). From Opt Out to Blocked Out: The Challenges for Labor Market
Reentry after Family-Related Employment Lapses. American Sociological Review, 83(1),
34–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122417752355
Weldon-Johns, M. (2011). The Additional Paternity Leave Regulations 2010: A new dawn or
more ‘sound-bite’ legislation? Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 33(1), 25–38.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2011.571468
World Bank. (2021). Fertility rate, total (births per woman). Retrieved January 31, 2022,
from https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN?end=2019%7B%5C&%
7Dname%7B%5C_%7Ddesc=false%7B%5C&%7Dstart=1960
Wray, D. (2020). Paternity Leave and Fathers’ Responsibility: Evidence From a Natural
Experiment in Canada. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(2), 534–549. https://doi.org/
10.1111/jomf.12661
Yamashita, J. (2016). A Vision for Postmaternalism: Institutionalising Fathers’ Engagement
with Care. Australian Feminist Studies, 31(90), 432–447. https://doi.org/10.1080/081
64649.2016.1278157
Yavorsky, J. E., Kamp Dush, C. M., & Schoppe-Sullivan, S. J. (2015). The Production of
Inequality: The Gender Division of Labor Across the Transition to Parenthood. Journal
of Marriage and Family, 77 (3), 662–679. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12189
Zoch, G., & Heyne, S. (2023). The evolution of family policies and couples’ housework divi-
sion after childbirth in Germany, 1994–2019. Journal of Marriage and Family, 85(5),
1067–1086. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12938
