Click here to download

The gender gap in the division of childcare and the work-family balance
Journal Title: PSICOLOGIA DELLA SALUTE 
Author/s: Diego Lasio, Daniela Putzu, Francesco Serri, Silvia De Simone 
Year:  2017 Issue: Language: Italian 
Pages:  23 Pg. 21-43 FullText PDF:  267 KB
DOI:  10.3280/PDS2017-002002
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 


The gender gap in the division of childcare in heterosexual couples is at the origin of women’s difficulties in balancing paid work with family responsibilities. The work aimed at analysing the expectations of couples living the transition to parenthood with the purpose of disclosing the discursive practices related to the work-family balance. In order to identify the expectations over the division of childcare and the plans for balancing paid work and family responsibilities, twenty couples were interviewed during the third trimester of pregnancy. Results revealed that couples referred to an essentialist view of gender according to which women are the main responsible for childcare; for some couples, this view runs counter the expectation of an egalitarian division of childcare. When the mother is responsible for childcare, she is the sole responsible for the work-family balance. Results highlighted the need for interventions aimed at deconstructing discourses that reproduce gender asymmetries in the division of childcare.
Keywords: Childcare, paid work-family balance, gender gap.

  1. Aliaga C. (2006). How Is the Time of Women and Men Distributed in Europe? Statistics in Focus. Population and Social Conditions, 4: 1-12.
  2. Artazcoz L., Cortès I., Puig-Barrachina V., Benavides F.G., Escribà-Agüir V. and Borrell C. (2014). Combining employment and family in Europe: the role of family policies in health. European Journal of Public Health, 24 (4): 649-655.
  3. Balbo L. (1978). La doppia presenza. Inchiesta, 32: 3-6.
  4. Barnett R.C. (2004). Women and work: where are we, where did we come from and where are we going? Journal of Social Issues, 60 (4): 667-674.
  5. Billig M. (1987). Arguing and Thinking. A Rhetorical Approach to Social Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  6. Billig M., Condor S., Edwards D., Gane M, Middleton D. and Radley R. (1988). Ideological Dilemmas: A Social Psychology of Everyday Thinking. London: Sage.
  7. Blain J. (1994). Discourses of Agency and Domestic Labor: Family Discourse and Gendered Practice in Dual-Earner Families. Journal of Family Issues, 15: 515-549., 10.1177/01925139401500400DOI: 10.1177/01925139401500400
  8. Brines J. (1994). Economic Dependency, Gender and the Division of Labor at Home. American Journal of Sociology, 100 (3): 652-688., 10.1086/23057DOI: 10.1086/23057
  9. Burr V. (1998). Gender and Social Psychology. London: Routledge.
  10. Butler J. (1993). Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of Sex. London: Routledge.
  11. Butler J. (2004). Undoing Gender. New York and London: Routledge.
  12. Canal T. (2012). Paternità e cura familiare. Osservatorio Isfol, II: 95-111.
  13. Cassibba R., Balenzano C., Settanni A.S. (2010). La depressione materna nella transizione alla genitorialità: attaccamento, problematiche psicopatologiche ed eventi di vita stressanti come fattori di rischio. Psicologia della Salute, 2: 73-94., 10.3280/PDS2010-00200DOI: 10.3280/PDS2010-00200
  14. Cheung F.M., Halpern D.F. (2010). Women at the Top. Powerful Leaders Define Success as Work + Family in a Culture of Gender. American Psychologist, 65: 182-193.
  15. CNEL (2012). Stati generali sul lavoro delle donne in Italia. --Retrieved from: http://www.cnel.it/Cnel/view_groups/download?file_path = /shadow_documento_attachment/file_allegatos/000/000/010/Convegno_20Stati_20Generali_20Donne.pdf
  16. CNEL (2014). Rapporto sul mercato del lavoro 2013-2014. --Retrieved from: http://www.cnel.it/application/xmanager/projects/cnel/attachments/rapporti_mdl/files/000/000/008/CNEL_Rapporto_MDL_2013-2014.pdf
  17. Coltrane S. (2000). Research on Household Labor: Modeling and Measuring the Social Em-beddedness of Routine Family Work. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62: 1208-1233.
  18. Corbetta P. (1999). Metodologia e tecniche della ricerca sociale. Bologna: Il Mulino.
  19. Davis S., Greenstein T.N. (2004). Cross-National Variations in the Division of House-hold Labor. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66: 1260-1271.
  20. De Simone S., Lampis J., Lasio D., Serri F., Cicotto G., Putzu D. (2014). Influences of Work-Family Interface on Job and Life Satisfaction. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 9 (4): 831-861.
  21. De Vita L. (2013). Donne in percorsi non tradizionali. Tra nuove opportunità e vecchi limiti. In: La Rosa M., Pallareti U., a cura di, Lavoro e ricerca sociologica. Un confronto tra giovani ricercatori italiani. Milano: Franco Angeli, pp. 115-131.
  22. Dixon J., Wetherell M. (2004). On Discourse and Dirty Nappies Gender, the Division of Household Labour and the Social Psychology of Distributive Justice. Theory and Psychology, 14: 167-189., 10.1177/095935430404201DOI: 10.1177/095935430404201
  23. Dovigo F. (2007). Strategie di sopravvivenza. Donne tra famiglia, professione e cura di sé. Milano: Mondadori.
  24. Edley N. and Wetherell M. (1999). Imagined Futures: Young Men’s Talk About Fatherhood and Domestic Life. British Journal of Social Psychology, 38: 181-194., 10.1348/01446669916411DOI: 10.1348/01446669916411
  25. Eurostat (2011). Employment and Unemployment. Labour Force Survey. Eurostat. --Retrieved from: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-NK-06-004/EN/KS-NK-06-004-EN.PDF
  26. Finn M., Henwood K. (2009). Exploring Masculinities Within Men’s Identificatory Imaginings of First-Time Fatherhood. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48: 547-562., 10.1348/014466608X38609DOI: 10.1348/014466608X38609
  27. Gherardi S. e Poggio B. (2003). Pratiche di conciliazione: tra fluidità del lavoro e trappole di genere. In: WOA (eds.). Atti di: Convegno nazionale ed europeo CIRSDe: che genere di conciliazione. Torino 28-29 maggio (paper online).
  28. Greenhaus J.H. and Powell G.N. (2006). When Work and Family are Allies: A Theory of Work-Family Enrichment. Academy of Management Review, 31: 72-92, 10.5465/AMR.2006.1937962DOI: 10.5465/AMR.2006.1937962
  29. Greenstein T.N. (1996). Husbands’ Participation in Domestic Labor: Interactive Effects of Wives’ and Husbands’ Gender Ideologies. Journal of Marriage and Family, 58: 585-595, 10.2307/35371DOI: 10.2307/35371
  30. Gregory G. and Milner S. (2011). What is “New” About Fatherhood? The Social Construction of Fatherhood in France and the UK. Men and Masculinities, 14: 588-606., 10.1177/1097184X1141294DOI: 10.1177/1097184X1141294
  31. Hays S. (1996). The Cultural Contradictions of Motherhood. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  32. Istat (2012). Rapporto annuale: la situazione nel Paese 2011. --Retrieved from: http://www3. istat.it/dati/catalogo/20110523_00/rapporto_2011.pdf
  33. Istat (2015) Annuario statistico italiano 2015. --Retrieved from: http://www.istat.it/it/archivio/171864
  34. IWPR (2012). The gender Wage Gap by Occupation. --Retrieved from: http://www.iwpr.org/ publications/pubs/the-gender-wage-gap-by-occupation-1
  35. Katz-Wise S.L., Priess H.A. and Hyde J.S. (2010). Gender-Role Attitudes and Behavior Across the Transition to Parenthood. Developmental Psychology, 46 (1): 18-28.
  36. King E.B., Botsford W.E. and Huffman A.H. (2009). Work, Family and Organizational Advancement: Does Balance Support the Perceived Advancement of Mothers? Sex Roles, 61: 879-891.
  37. Lachance-Grzela M. and Bouchard G. (2010). Why Do Women Do the Lion’s Share of Housework? A Decade of Research. Sex Roles, 63: 767-780.
  38. Lasio D. (2011). Differenze di genere e distribuzione del carico familiare nelle famiglie eterosessuali. Ricerca Psicoanalitica, 2: 69-82., 10.3280/RPR2011-00200DOI: 10.3280/RPR2011-00200
  39. Lasio D., Serri F., De Simone S. e Putzu D. (2013). Il genere e il carico familiare. Il contributo della psicologia discorsiva per una ricerca «rilevante». Psicologia Sociale, 1: 81-102., 10.1482/7313DOI: 10.1482/7313
  40. Lazar M.M. (2007). Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis: Articulating a Feminist Discourse Praxis. Critical Discourse Studies, 4: 141-164., 10.1080/1740590070146481DOI: 10.1080/1740590070146481
  41. Lothaller H., Mikula G. and Schoebi D. (2009). What Contributes to the (Im)Balanced Division of Family Work Between the Sexes? Swiss Journal of Psychology, 68: 143-152., 10.1024/1421-0185.68.3.14DOI: 10.1024/1421-0185.68.3.14
  42. Lucchini M., Saraceno C. e Schizzerotto A. (2007). Dual earner and dual career couples in contemporary Italy. Zeitschrift für Familienforschung, 19: 289-309.
  43. Luciano A. (2008). Modelli di organizzazione del lavoro e politiche di parità. Rassegna Italiana di Sociologia, 2: 245-275., 10.1423/2703DOI: 10.1423/2703
  44. Miller T. (2007). “Is This What Motherhood Is All About?” Weaving Experiences and Dis-course Through Transition To First-Time Motherhood. Gender & Society, 21: 337-358., 10.1177/089124320730056DOI: 10.1177/089124320730056
  45. Missler M.A., Stroebe M.S. and van der Laan G. (2013). The Work-Home Interface: The Role of Home-Based Predictors of Burnout Among Mothers. Family Science, 4: 148-160., 10.1080/19424620.2013.87174DOI: 10.1080/19424620.2013.87174
  46. Molgora S., Saita E. e Fenaroli V. (2010). Genitorialità: dai fattori critici ai percorsi di transizione. Orientarsi nella ricerca. Rivista di Psicologia Clinica, 2: 197-208.
  47. Nentwich J. (2008). New Fathers and Mothers as Gender Troublemakers? Exploring Discursive Constructions of Heterosexual Parenthood and their Subversive Potential. Feminism & Psychology, 18: 207-230., 10.1177/095935350708859DOI: 10.1177/095935350708859
  48. Nentwich J. and Hoyer P. (2013). Part-time Work as Practising Resistance: The Power of Counter-arguments. British Journal of Management, 24: 557-570.
  49. Nicklin J.M. and McNall L.A. (2013). Work-family enrichment, support and satisfaction: A test of mediation. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22 (1): 67-77., 10.1080/1359432X.2011.61665DOI: 10.1080/1359432X.2011.61665
  50. OECD (2014). Promoting uptake of parental and paternity leave among fathers in the European Union; OECD, Family database.
  51. Paff Ogle J., Tyner K.E. and Schofield-Tomschin S. (2011). Watching Over Baby: Expectant Parenthood and the Duty to Be Well. Sociological Inquiry, 81: 285-309.
  52. Panzeri P. e Viale V. (2016). Europa e conciliazione. Una proposta di sistema per rilanciare l’occupazione femminile. Osservatorio Isfol, 1-2: 101-117.
  53. Petrassi D. (2012). ‘For Me, the Children Come First’: A Discursive Psychological Analysis of How Mothers Construct Fathers’ Roles in Childrearing and Childcare. Feminism & Psychology, 22: 518-527., 10.1177/095935351244292DOI: 10.1177/095935351244292
  54. Pinto K.M. and Coltrane S. (2009). Divisions of Labor in Mexican Origin and Anglo Families: Structure and Culture. Sex Roles, 60: 482-495.
  55. Potter J. (1999). Beyond Cognitivism. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 32: 119-127., 10.1080/08351813.1999.968361DOI: 10.1080/08351813.1999.968361
  56. Potter J. and Wetherell M. (1987). Discourse and Psychology: Beyond Attitudes and Behaviours. London: Sage.
  57. Raffagnino R., Mater C., Fabbrizzi M., Pennatini A. e Puddu L. (2015). Condivisione del tempo libero e soddisfazione di coppia. Psicologia della Salute, 3: 87-110., 10.3280/PDS2015-00300DOI: 10.3280/PDS2015-00300
  58. Rantanen J. (2008) Work-Family Interface and Psychological Well-Being: A Personality and Longitudinal Perspective. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylä University Printing House.
  59. Ricotta S., Ghislieri C., Colombo L. e Piccardo C. (2013). Il conflitto lavoro-famiglia e il sense of entitlement: una ricerca in un’azienda svedese. Psicologia della Salute. 1: 71-88., 10.3280/PDS2013-00100DOI: 10.3280/PDS2013-00100
  60. Rizza R. e Sansavini M. (2010). Donne e lavoro: rappresentazioni del femminile e conseguenze in termini di politiche di «work-life balance». Rassegna Italiana di Sociologia, 1: 5-30., 10.1423/3172DOI: 10.1423/3172
  61. Romano M.C., Mencarini L. e Tanturri M.L., a cura di (2012). Uso del tempo e ruoli di genere. Roma: Istat.
  62. Rosnati R. e Ranieri S. (2000). La relazione coniugale nelle famiglie giovani: uno studio cross-sectional. Ricerche di Psicologia, 24: 39-55.
  63. Ruspini E. (2003). Le ideologie di genere. Roma: Carocci.
  64. Sabbadini L.L. (2015). Indagine conoscitiva sull’impatto in termini di genere della normativa previdenziale e sulle disparità esistenti in materia di trattamenti pensionistici tra uomini e donne. Roma: Archivio ISTAT. --Retrieved from: http://www.istat.it/it/archivio/170065
  65. Sunderland J. (2000). Baby Entertainer, Bumbling Assistant and Line Manager: Discourses of Fatherhood in Parentcraft Texts. Discourse & Society, 11: 249-74., 10.1177/095792650001100200DOI: 10.1177/095792650001100200
  66. Testoni I. (2012). Essenzialismo tra psicologia sociale e studi di genere: paradossi italiani intorno alla differenza. Psicologia Sociale, 2: 285-298., 10.1482/3769DOI: 10.1482/3769
  67. Valentine G. (1999). Doing Household Research: Interviewing Couples Together and Apart. Area, 31: 67-74.
  68. Viale V. e Zucaro R. (2015). I congedi a tutela della genitorialità nell’Unione europea. Un quadro comparato per rileggere il Jobs Act. Working Paper ADAPT, 175: 2-29.
  69. West C. and Zimmerman D.H. (1987). Doing Gender. Gender & Society, 1: 125-151., 10.1177/089124328700100200DOI: 10.1177/089124328700100200
  70. Wetherell M.S., Stiven H. and Potter J. (1987). Unequal Egalitarianism: A Preliminary Study of Discourses Concerning Gender and Employment Opportunities. British Journal of Social Psychology, 26: 59-71.
  71. Zajczyk F. e Borlini B. (2007). La resistibile ascesa delle donne in Italia: Stereotipi di genere e costruzione di nuove identità. Milano: Il Saggiatore.

Diego Lasio, Daniela Putzu, Francesco Serri, Silvia De Simone, The gender gap in the division of childcare and the work-family balance in "PSICOLOGIA DELLA SALUTE" 2/2017, pp. 21-43, DOI:10.3280/PDS2017-002002

   

FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content