Procreative responsibilities and the parental obligation objection

This essay presents a challenge to the parental obligation objection. This objection is usually made by abortion opponents who argue that because child support laws hold men postnatally responsible for children they helped bring into existence (even when they did not intend to become parents), women too have prenatal parental responsibilities that should prevent them from ending pregnancies through abortions. My essay draws on recent publications in bioethics that distinguish procreative from parental responsibilities. This distinction was originally developed to clarify the duties of third-party participants in assisted reproduction. However, the distinction inadvertently poses a problem for the parental obligation objection, for it raises questions about whether women who do not wish to carry a child to term have parental rather than procreative responsibilities. It does not necessarily follow that the objection must be wrong. But rather, that there is an explanatory gap in it. If abortion violates procreative responsibilities, then drastic changes must be made to fertility medicine. Conversely, there does not appear to be non-question-begging criteria that would explain why pregnant women must have parental responsibilities, in addition to procreative ones, whereas third-party participants in assisted reproduction, such as fertility doctors, embryologists, gamete donors, and surrogates, have only procreative responsibilities.

The impact of changes in job security on mental health across gender and family responsibility: evidence from the UK Household Longitudinal Study

PURPOSE

While there is strong evidence that job insecurity leads to mental distress, little is known about how gender and parental responsibilities may exacerbate this relationship. Examining their contribution as potential effect modifiers may provide insights into gender inequalities in mental health and inform gender-sensitive labour policies to ameliorate the negative effects of job insecurity. Our study addresses this gap by examining the longitudinal association between job insecurity and mental health across different configurations of gender and parental responsibilities.

METHODS

Our sample includes 34,772 employed participants over the period of 2010-2018. A gender-stratified fixed-effect regression was used to model the within-person change over time in mental health associated with loss of job security, and effect modification by parent-partner status (e.g. childfree men, partnered father, etc.).

RESULTS

Loss of job security was associated with a moderate decrease in mental health functioning for partnered fathers, partnered mothers, and childfree men and women ranging between a reduction in MCS-12 by 1.00 to 2.27 points (p < 0.05). Lone fathers who lose their job security experienced a higher decrease in mental health functioning at - 7.69 (95% CI - 12.69 to - 2.70), while lone mothers did not experience any change.

CONCLUSION

The effects of job insecurity on mental health is consistent across gender and parent-partner status with the exception of lone fathers and lone mothers. Future studies should investigate the effects of policies that may reduce mental distress in the face of the threat of job loss such as reducing wait time for payment of unemployment benefits.