More

Working Moms: Women With Three Children Less Likely To Have Jobs Than Those With Two, Study Says

Womenthreechildren

First Posted: 07/12/11 11:42 AM ET Updated: 09/11/11 06:12 AM ET

While balancing a family and career is difficult for any woman -- whether she has one child or five -- recent Australian research suggests that women with three or more children are over 10 percent less likely to be a part of the workforce than mothers with one or two children.

Presenting a paper on her findings at the Australian Social Policy conference at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) Friday, social scientist Anna Zhu said that women with three or more kids are less likely to go back to work after having children -- even after their children reach their teenage years and adulthood.

According to the paper, titled "Fertility and Labour Market Participation," an analysis of Australian Bureau of Statistics Census data for 13,000 women revealed that while 68 percent of mothers with two children are employed, only 55 percent of moms with three or more kids have a job.

The disparity was largest among women under 30: In that demographic, only 21 percent of mothers of three were working, compared to 41 percent of moms with two children. The trend continued for older women as well: for women between 45 and 49, 81 percent of moms of two worked while 70 percent of mothers of three worked.

According to The Australian, Zhu, who wrote the paper with fellow UNSW Ph.D. candidate Catherine Brogan, was surprised by this last bit of data:

"You would probably expect a gap when the children are at younger ages because of the high costs of childcare and just trying to manage it all... But when the children get older you'd think those mothers with three children would be looking to get back into the workforce to be helping with things like school fees or university fees that might be coming up, yet it's still the case they are less likely to be in the workforce."

But is having three children the kiss of career death outside Australia, too?

American researchers also see having children negatively affect women's career longevity, but earlier in the growth of the family.

"We have always seen that the second child is the tipping point for when women begin to feel overwhelmed and are less likely to stay in [the workforce] or go back to work," Katherine Sumberg, Senior Vice President at the Center for Work-Life Policy (CWLP), told The Huffington Post. According to Sumberg, a mother who was ready to leap back into work after having her first child is significantly more hesitant after having her second. Although the CWLP does not collect data regarding three-child families, she believes that having more than two children only makes it more difficult to reenter the workforce.

A now famous 2005 CWLP study titled "Off-Ramps and On-Ramps: Keeping Talented Women on the Road to Success," found that, although most mothers intended to go back to work, their "exits" often were not temporary. A 2010 follow-up study indicated that 31 percent of mothers take an "off-ramp" that lasts approximately 2.7 years. But of the 89 percent of mothers who took a break to raise children and said that they wanted to return to work, only 40 percent actually did.

There are probably reasons for this phenomenon. Some women can't find work after having children. "Off-Ramps and On-Ramps Revisited" showed that 73 percent of women who intend to rejoin the workforce after choosing to take time off for childcare have difficulty finding another job.

Other women who could probably find jobs are wary of the way they will be perceived in the workplace.

Co-workers and bosses often view and treat women with children differently from those without families, Sumberg said. "[Employers] might say that a woman with many children might not want to travel or work late or take on more tasks," she noted. "It's not meant to be malicious; in fact, the intent is usually [to be] helpful, but it often takes away from what drives a woman's positive experiences at work."

Women with children might also be reluctant to rejoin the workforce due to a lack of confidence, Zhu told The Australian. For example, she said, women who take time off to raise their children might not be aware of evolving technologies relevant to their fields, thus making them less desirable to prospective employers.

Since the Australian government grants tax incentives, also known as baby bonuses, to women who reproduce (in 2004, Australian Treasurer Peter Costello even suggested that having three kids specifically -- "one for your husband and one for your wife and one for the country" -- was a sign of patriotism), Zhu suggested that there should also be programs in place to train women in the skills they need to rejoin the workforce after having children.

And then there's the money issue. While many women simply can't afford not to go back to work, some find their earning potential after successive children so dramatically reduced that returning isn't their best option.

"Off-Ramps and On-Ramps Revisited" found that women who are able to return to work rarely make it back to the status and salary of their previous positions. Over 25 percent have decreased management responsibilities, 22 percent must accept a lower job title and 16 percent reported suffering a pay cut.

Jane Waldfogel, a professor of social work at Columbia University whose research focuses on women's employment, told The Huffington Post that this issue deserves our attention even more than how often women with one versus two versus three children return to work.

"What I find more concerning is that women who have more children also earn lower wages, even when they are working, because they are more likely to have had breaks in employment and because they are more likely to be in part-time low-paid jobs," Waldfogel said. "This is a tremendous waste of human capital and also unfair."

A 2005 Cornell study found that women in the United States suffer from a wage penalty of approximately 5 percent per child. And in 2010, Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner, executive director of MomsRising.org, told Good Morning America, "Women without children make 90 cents to a man's dollar, while women with children make only 73 cents to a man's dollar."

"Making employment for mothers more possible, and at a decent wage, is the gender equity challenge for our time," Waldfogel said.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST WOMEN

While balancing a family and career is difficult for any woman -- whether she has one child or five -- recent Australian research suggests that women with three or more children are over 10 percent le...
While balancing a family and career is difficult for any woman -- whether she has one child or five -- recent Australian research suggests that women with three or more children are over 10 percent le...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 128
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Margaret Heffernan
CEO and Author
01:02 PM on 07/15/2011
Once kids outnumber parents, you are in big trouble.
02:00 PM on 07/14/2011
An interesting article - however, I'd like to hear more about and from the 55% of moms referenced who have have 3 or more kids and are still working. We need to hear more positive stories from women who are managing to combine both.

I'm currently writing my second book on women who achieved greater career success after starting their families. If anyone has a story they would like to share you can learn more about the project at: www.themomshift.com or find me on Twitter @RevaSeth
07:02 AM on 07/13/2011
The key to having 3 kids and the career is good childcare.Don't over complicate the arrangements and remember it's an investment - enabling you to increase your earnings potential.
08:59 AM on 07/13/2011
Is it impossible to log-in here?
Sorry to glom-on to this important comment but it is the only way that I can comment.
This study/article is littered with errors.
Starting-with the main problem.
Mothers of three or more ARE EMPLOYED!
10:44 PM on 07/12/2011
I am going to say something controversial. It's more important most women have children than it is to devote their life to rising to the top of their respective professions. Of course every women does not have to do this. The fact is most of us end up being average middle income workers and women giving up their families for a care for lousy career often isn't worth it. We don't all have glamours careers worth sacrificing our families for even if we care deeply about our personal contribution in them.

Being a mother is really the most important job whether or not it makes you rich or gets respect. The gap between societies rewards structure and what it needs to sustain itself is often quite wide. We struggle with moral issues when we can't put a monetary reward behind doing the right thing or punishment to discourage doing wrong. If women as a group decided to stop having children it would be societal suicide. We need children for our country and culture to survive. Young people to grow into adults that produce more young people. How much time is spent too much time focusing on impressing our neighbors and being competent employees rather than focusing on developing the next generation.

This article sees the family as a career obstacle. I it's time we need to reflect on the long term implications of these attitudes. We will need young the to care for us when we are old.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dede Eagleburger
well behaved women rarely make History...
11:05 AM on 07/13/2011
as a mother, and a working one, I couldn't agree with you more :)
And I couldn't disagree with the article more, a total waste of space, of course women with 3 kids will be less employed than 2. Women with 4 kids less than women with 3. I'm bad at math but I can even figure out this one :)
11:53 AM on 07/13/2011
"If women as a group decided to stop having children it would be societal suicide."

Please explain. If society REQUIRES women to perform this service, why is all the financial sacrifice expected to fall on the individual?
12:20 PM on 07/13/2011
The child tax credit along with a enormous network of support for the children is what American society offers which is a lot. You have to go some place that does not offer child healthcare or free education to see how valuable it is. I would estimate the government invest $10,000 - $20,000 per child per year if not more, depending on where you live.

Perpetuating your own gene pool is kind of why you were born so expecting the government to pay you to doesn't make much sense. Our culture should not encourage adults to be so selfish and dismissive of the need to have children it's a evolutionary and morally bankrupt attitude.
10:19 PM on 07/12/2011
What I am not seeing in this article are the details of the lives of those "children" and the mothers who've raised them. The mom, with the three children-- has one child with a baby of her own who needs grandma's care; her middle child, well, his general mood and attention deficit issues are under control now, but she needs to stay right on him day after day or he will not take his meds and she will lose him again; and the baby--he is in and out of her house, and in and out of rehab--but she prays for him and works the hours she can so she can take care of the grandbaby and be there for the one on the way, and care for her mother, and be there for her family. Now, what were we talking about again--? How the number of children a woman has affects her career?
03:59 PM on 07/12/2011
I know a woman who has four kids.

The cost of child care eats up 80% of her after-tax income.

She also gets very little quality time with them.

My bet is that she will quit and actually raise the kids.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Montana 123
Mama to Three Little Monkeys
01:38 PM on 07/13/2011
I have three (7, 5 and 3) and I am looking to go back to work after being home for 5 1/2 years. Childcare costs are going to eat up 80% or more of my paycheck. That is even with two oldest in school. I have to pay before and after care. My 5 year old has special needs. I have no idea what I am going to do with her when school is off. She has to be taken care of and I can't find drop in care with a nurse.
03:32 PM on 07/12/2011
Laura, darling!

This has already been detailed on luminous news programs, and I still disapprove of the disposable way you treat men in anything you write, however you've at least stepped up your content to include more than just a few paragraphs and the usual Cosmopolitan-style out-put. It looks like you've got a better editor, a feminist editor to be sure, but at least a better one. Yet the fluff factor is in full force once again. You must be able to have something to say without just holding up an arrow and pointing to the obvious. In your world 'Parents' never have problems, only 'women'. A good idea for an article? How about which states REQUIRE women to reproduce as much as they possibly can? Surely we can find something or someone to blame
05:03 PM on 07/12/2011
You do realize that you are reading HuffPo Women? If you would like to read articles that are predominantly concerned with men, you can go to any other section of the site.

Calling a woman "darling" is patronizing and insulting. I suggest you refrain from doing so in the future.
10:45 PM on 07/12/2011
No there is no other section try again. Men don't have a section and the other articles are not focused on men's issues.
11:46 PM on 07/12/2011
Darling for sure! So very Darling i love ladies whom look Darling and she is so Darling thats for sure! Bye Darling.
05:47 PM on 07/13/2011
A very good and precise point. The issue brought up in this article is valid only when single-moms are taken into account. But there are single-dads as well. And families with 3+ children, which puts some extra pressure not only on woman, but on the the man, too. So before arriving at any bold feminist conclusions, more diverse and inclusive researches would be needed...
11:02 PM on 07/14/2011
Thank you!
02:14 PM on 07/12/2011
Having three kids is having one too many. We need to restrict family sizes. We don't want a country of Octomoms.
photo
laaambchop
Cheerfulness is a sign of wisdom
03:47 PM on 07/12/2011
who are you to decide?
04:46 PM on 07/12/2011
Why should I pay the societal cost of other people's crotch droppings? Children are the last thing this planet needs more of.

It's the ultimate "tragedy of the commons" scenario, the breeder's bad actions more than offset the good actions of those who choose to curtail or forgo breeding.

It's not all about taxes either, those crotch droppings will demand a better quality of life and children of their own when they get older, thus forcing societies to peruse the failed policy of unlimited economic growth.
10:38 PM on 07/12/2011
With seven billion people on the planet, we really do not need any more hyperbreeders and we need to get rid of the idea that a woman should have as many children as she wants. In this day of gross overpopulation, three children per woman is too many. The planet cannot absorb all this overabundance of resource-consuming humans.
03:58 PM on 07/12/2011
That's not your call spoonbill.

Such arrogance.
02:12 PM on 07/12/2011
You mean they had to write a paper on something common sense would tell us immediately? Yo, if you have three or four kids it isn't going to pay to go to work due to child care expenses. Also, those kids you produce need some love. If mom is out working 40 or 50 hours a week that love isn't going to be felt.
This seems like a waste of a story.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
juicybrisket
dont start none, wont be none
01:15 PM on 07/12/2011
kudos to people who can afford to raise 3 kids in today's economy.

im worried about raising even just 1.
photo
caroleann926
Less exploitation and more empowerment to women
11:07 PM on 07/12/2011
Shame on those who have more than two. Replace yourselves, not add to overpopulation.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
juicybrisket
dont start none, wont be none
11:19 PM on 07/12/2011
yeah i hate these people like the duggars because there is no possible way you can devote yourself to that many kids...the older ones just raise the younger ones. its not fair to them.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
BannedFromCommenting
♼ ♼ PLEASE RECYCLE TROLLS ♼ ♼
01:11 PM on 07/12/2011
Uh, DUH?? We needed a study to figure out why?? I am sure those with 4 have less jobs than those with 3 and so on.
02:14 PM on 07/12/2011
I know. A we needed a study to find this out?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
MIMom
I snark, therefore I am.
01:06 PM on 07/12/2011
What, is this the big "DUH!" headline today? I've got three and I work, but theoretically, the more children you have the more you are needed at home.
photo
scottishboy
Born in the USA!
12:52 PM on 07/12/2011
They have a job, it's called raising their kids and God bless them for doing so.
been2there
Facts have a liberal bias.
12:35 PM on 07/12/2011
Moms with more children work fewer paid hours--they sure as heck don't work less!
photo
scottishboy
Born in the USA!
12:53 PM on 07/12/2011
How true.
12:35 PM on 07/12/2011
Did this conclusion seriously warrant a study? I mean really. Stop wasting time and cure cancer already.