Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Gendered associations between household labour force participation and mental health using 17 waves of Australian cohort data

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

There is some evidence that employed women report more time pressure and work-life penalties than employed men and other women; however little is known about whether this exerts a mental health effect. This analysis examined associations between household labour force arrangements (household-employment configuration) and the mental health of men and women.

Methods

Seventeen waves of data from the Household Income and Labour Dynamics Survey (2001–2017) were used. Mental health was measured using the Mental Health Inventory (MHI-5). A six-category measure of household-employment configuration was derived: dual full-time employed, male-breadwinner, female-breadwinner, shared part-time employment (both part-time), male full-time/female part-time (modified male-breadwinner, MMBW), and female full-time/male part-time. Using fixed-effects regression methods, we examined the within-person effects of household-employment configuration on mental health after controlling for time-varying confounders.

Results

For men, being in the female-breadwinner configuration was associated with poorer mental health compared to being in the MMBW configuration (β-1.98, 95% CI − 3.36, − 0.61). The mental health of women was poorer when in the male-breadwinner configuration, compared to when in the MMBW arrangement (β-0.89, 95% CI − 1.56, − 0.22).

Conclusion

These results suggest that the mental health of both men and women is poorer when not in the labour force, either as a man in the female-breadwinner arrangement, or as a woman in the male-breadwinner arrangement. These results are particularly noteworthy for women, because they pertain to a sizeable proportion of the population who are not in paid work, and highlight the need for policy reform to support women’s labour force participation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

Data from the HILDA Survey are available to researchers living in Australia or overseas. The data are available through the National Centre for Longitudinal Data, and from the Australian Data Archives (ADA) Dataverse (https://dataverse.ada.edu.au/).

References

  1. Plantenga J, Remery C, Figueiredo H et al (2009) Towards a European Union gender equality index. J Eur Soc Policy 19:19–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. World Economic Forum (2020) Global gender gap report 2020: insight report. Geneva, Switzerland, www.weforum.org. Accessed 19 April 2020

  3. OECD (2019) Employment: labour force participation rate: OECD data. Paris, https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=LFS_SEXAGE_I_R

  4. Goldin C (2014) A grand gender convergence: its last chapter. Am Econ Rev 104:1091–1119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2019) Employment trends. Canberra, https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-welfare/employment-trends

  6. Rubery J, Smith M, Fagan C (1999) Women’s employment in Europe. Routledge, London, UK. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203402252

  7. Esping-Anderson G (2009) The incomplete revolution: adapting to women’s new roles. Polity Press, Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  8. Goldin C (2006) The quiet revolution that transformed women’s employment, education, and family. Am Econ Rev 96:1–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chalmers J, Campbell I, Charlesworth S (2013) Part-time work and caring responsibilities in Australia: towards an assessment of job quality. Labour Ind J Soc Econ Relat Work 15:41–66

    Google Scholar 

  10. Pocock B, Skinner N, Ichii R (2009) Work, life and workplace flexibility: the Australian work and life index 2009. Centre for Work + Life, University of South Australia

  11. Pocock B (2005) Work/care regimes: institutions, culture and behaviour and the Australian case. Gend Work Organ 12:32–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Van Gellecum Y, Baxter J, Western M (2008) Neoliberalism, gender inequality and the Australian labour market. J Sociol 44:45–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chalmers J, Hill T (2007) Marginalising woman in the labour market: ‘wage scarring’ effects of part-time work. Aust Bull Labour 33:180–201

    Google Scholar 

  14. Pocock B, Charlesworth S, Chapman J (2013) Work-family and work-life pressures in Australia: advancing gender equality in ‘good times’? Int J Sociol Soc Policy 33:594–612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Probert B (2002) ‘Grateful Slaves’ or ‘Self-made Women’: A matter of choice or policy? Aust Fem Stud 17:7–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Pocock B (2005) Work-life ‘balance’ in Australia: limited progress, dim prospects. Asia Pacific J Hum Resour 43:198–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Rose J, Hewitt B, Baxter J (2013) Women and part-time employment. J Sociol 49:41–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. King T, Shields M, Byars S, et al (2020) Breadwinners and losers: does the mental health of mothers, fathers and children vary by household employment arrangements? Evidence from seven waves of data from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children. Am J Epidemiol. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwaa138

  19. Department of Social Services; Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research (2018) The household, income and labour dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey, GENERAL RELEASE 17 (Waves 1–17), V2. https://doi.org/10.26193/PTKLYP

  20. Watson N, Wooden M (2012) The HILDA Survey: A Case Study in the Design and Development of a Successful Household Panel Study. Longitudinal and Life Course Studies 3:368-381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Wilkins R (2013) Families, incomes and jobs, Volume 8: a statistical report on Waves 1 to 10 of the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia. Melbourne, Australia: Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne

  22. Summerfield M, Bright S, Hahn M, La N, Macalalad N, Watson N, Wilkins R, Wooden M (2019). HILDA User Manual – Release 18. Melbourne Institute: Applied Economic and Social Research, University of Melbourne

  23. Cuijpers P, Smits N, Donker T et al (2009) Screening for mood and anxiety disorders with the five-item, the three-item, and the two-item Mental Health Inventory. Psychiatry Res 168:250–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Rumpf H-J, Meyer C, Hapke U et al (2001) Screening for mental health: validity of the MHI-5 using DSM-IV axis I psychiatric disorders as gold standard. Psychiatr Res 105:243–253

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Yamazaki S, Fukuhara S, Green J (2005) Usefulness of five-item and three-item Mental Health Inventories to screen for depressive symptoms in the general population of Japan. Health Qual Life Outcomes 3:48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kelly MJ, Dunstan FD, Lloyd K et al (2008) Evaluating cutpoints for the MHI-5 and MCS using the GHQ-12: a comparison of five different methods. BMC Psychiatry 8:10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hoeymans N, Garssen AA, Westert GP et al (2004) Measuring mental health of the Dutch population: a comparison of the GHQ-12 and the MHI-5. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2:23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Perenboom R, Oudshoorn K, van Herten L et al (2000) Life-expectancy in good mental health: establishing cut-off points for the MHI-5 and GHQ-12 (in Dutch). TNO-report PG, Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  29. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2019) Household income and wealth, Australia, 2017–18. Cat. No. 6523.0. Canberra

  30. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2013) 1220.0—ANZSCO—Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations, Version 1.3, https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/1220.0Contents02013, Version 1.3?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=1220.0&issue=2013, Version 1.3&num=&view=. Accessed 14 March 2020

  31. Rose G (2001) Sick individuals and sick populations. Int J Epidemiol 30:427–432

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Modini M, Joyce S, Mykletun A et al (2016) The mental health benefits of employment: results of a systematic meta-review. Australas Psychiatry 24:331–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Mastekaasa A (1996) Unemployment and health: selection effects. J Commun Appl Soc Psychol 6:189–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Danziger SK, Carlson MJ, Henly JR (2001) Post-welfare employment and psychological well-being. Women Health 32:47–78

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Baxter J (2018) Stay-at-home fathers in Australia. (Research Report). Australian Institute of Family Studies, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  36. Borrell C, Palència L, Muntaner C et al (2014) Influence of macrosocial policies on women’s health and gender inequalities in health. Epidemiol Rev 36:31–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Schwab K (2016) The fourth industrial revolution. World Economic Forum, Geneva

  38. Howcroft D, Rubery J (2019) ‘Bias in, Bias out’: gender equality and the future of work debate. Labour Ind 29(2):213–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Fraser N (1997) Justice interruptus : critical reflections on the ‘postsocialist’ condition. Routledge, New York

  40. Rubery J (2015) Regulating for gender equality: a policy framework to support the universal caregiver vision. Soc Polit 22:513–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Wood D, Griffiths K, Emslie O (2020) Cheaper Childcare: A practical plan to boost female workforce participation. Grattan Institute, Melbourne

  42. Gunasekara FI, Richardson K, Carter K et al (2014) Fixed effects analysis of repeated measures data. Int J Epidemiol 43:264–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by an Australian Research Council Linkage Project—Gender equality in Australia: impact on social, economic and health outcomes (LP 180100035). TLK is supported by a University of Melbourne Early Career Researcher Grant (1858815) and an ARC DECRA Fellowship (DE200100607).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Bouverie St, Carlton, VIC, 3010, Australia

    Tania L. King, Yamna Taouk, Humaira Maheen & Anne M. Kavanagh

  2. Institute for Health Transformation and School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Burwood, 3125, Australia

    Anthony D. LaMontagne

Authors
  1. Tania L. King
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yamna Taouk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anthony D. LaMontagne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Humaira Maheen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Anne M. Kavanagh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

TLK conceived the study. YT conducted the analysis. All authors interpreted results. TLK wrote the manuscript. All authors contributed to drafts and approved the final version.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tania L. King.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The HILDA Survey is conducted by the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research at the University of Melbourne on behalf of the Australian Commonwealth Government Department of Social Services (DSS). The study was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee at the University of Melbourne and conformed to the principles embodied in the Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent to participate

All respondents consented to participate in the HILDA Survey, and parental consent was also obtained for those aged 15–18 years.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 15 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

King, T.L., Taouk, Y., LaMontagne, A.D. et al. Gendered associations between household labour force participation and mental health using 17 waves of Australian cohort data. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 56, 1035–1047 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-020-01970-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-020-01970-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation