Parentalization, or becoming a parent and being legally and socially recognized as such, has long been constrained for sexual minorities. Although many studies have examined the outcomes of children of same-sex couples, relatively less attention has been paid to researching parents in same-sex unions themselves. In Sweden, changing policy and social contexts have successively eased many disparities in access to parenthood for sexual minorities. Analyzing 27 years of Swedish administrative register data starting from the legal recognition of same-sex unions in 1995, we examined time trends in the prevalence of parenthood (coresidence with children under 18) and the sociodemographic characteristics of people with versus without coresident children in same- versus different-sex legal unions. We expected to document considerable changes over time as policy contexts, parentalization disparities, and minority stressors evolved. Results show that parenting increased over time within same-sex legal unions, with women becoming much more likely to parent while parenting remained rare in male-male legal unions. Mothers in same-sex legal unions became more similar over time to mothers in different-sex marriages, whereas fathers in same-sex legal unions were a highly selected group relative to fathers in different-sex marriages, mothers in same- and different-sex legal unions, and people without coresident children in same-sex legal unions. Sex, parenthood, and especially their interaction are important for understanding the characteristics and family formation experiences of people in same-sex legal unions.

The Nordic countries are known as family-friendly welfare states, yet gendered work-care divisions remain. We use a case study approach focusing on the key differences in work-family policy packages in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. Using population registers, we compare the earnings trajectories of same- and different-sex couples for the three years before and five years after a first birth. The findings match theoretical arguments linking cash-for-care policies to familialistic outcomes: They show that in Finland, the institutional framework leads to unequal divisions of paid work and care, resulting in large earnings penalties affecting the birth mother in both same-sex and different-sex couples. In egalitarian Denmark and Sweden, but also in supposedly more familialistic Norway, these penalties are considerably smaller for same-sex couples. This exemplifies how inequalities decrease when policies stimulate equality, and as a result can reduce the influence of heterosexual gender dynamics.

Unequal divisions of paid work and care among new parents contribute to increasing inequalities. One explanation for this is joint utility maximization and the benefits of partners (temporarily) specializing in paid work and care. This paper examines the (dis)advantages of specializing compared to dividing tasks more equally by studying whether differences in specialization between same-sex and different-sex couples lead to differences in household earnings after entering parenthood. Using register data from Norway, Finland, Denmark, and Sweden and examining first-time parents, we show that female couples have a more equal within-couple income development during the transition to parenthood than different-sex couples do. However, we find no differences in household income (including or excluding social transfers) between the two types of couples. Although a more equal task division may be preferred from an individual perspective, our results show no evidence of a “best strategy” when it comes to maximizing household income.

Introduction This study analyses the division of parental leave and the income development in gay father families through surrogacy in Sweden, seen as one of the most family-friendly and egalitarian countries in the world.

Methods Based on longitudinal population register data, descriptive and bivariate regression models are estimated to analyse the parental leave uptake and income development of married partners becoming (first-time) parents in 2006–2015 (in total 53 couples). Retrospective in-depth interviews with 23 gay men in 12 couples, conducted in 2010 and 2018 are analysed thematically to study how fathers discussed and decided how to divide the leave.

Results The process of establishing legal parenthood delays the fathers’ access to reimbursed parental leave. Despite this, the fathers’ earnings were not considerably affected by the addition of a child to the family. Once the fathers had access to reimbursed leave, they generally shared this equally, with a tendency for the genetic father to take leave first and for a slightly longer period.

Conclusions The fathers becoming parents via surrogacy arrangements are a well-off group, able to counter the negative financial consequences of becoming parents. Swedish family policies enable parents to share the leave equally. Less impacted by gender and parenthood norms creating difference between parents, gay father families are in a better position to realise ideals of shared care and sameness.

Policy Implications The delayed access to reimbursed parental leave structures the ability of gay couples to become parents and contributes to class inequalities in the transition to parenthood.

This chapter discusses theories and research on social stratification by gender, focusing on wage and earnings inequalities. The first part describes changes over time in gendered economic inequalities and discusses the various theories used to account for the gender pay gap from demand-side and supply-side perspectives. The division of paid and unpaid work changes considerably when couples have children. The second part of the chapter discusses research on the earnings gap and the theories aimed at explaining why the majority of women, and rarely men, take the parental leave and reduce their work hours when children are young. Finally, the chapter teases out the relevance of these theories by comparing how the transition to parenthood links to relative income development in female same-sex and different-sex couples in the Nordic countries. Findings suggest that the doing of gender and identity formation may be the most important factors explaining birth mothers’ relative earnings development.

This article presents an analysis of how lesbian couples in Sweden negotiate birth motherhood in a context where equality is thought to be achieved by being and doing the same [Gullestad, M. (2002). Invisible fences: Egalitarianism, nationalism and racism. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 8(1), 45-63. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9655.00098]. We do so by studying narratives of how 20 couples arrived at the decision of who will be the (first) birth mother, a decision unique to a small group of parents with theoretical implications for motherhood norms, kinship and within-couple decision-making extending beyond the couples themselves. Most couples interviewed planned to have two children and take turns carrying, a plan that to some extent solves the challenge of equality and sameness. Genetic links were downplayed and instead, the embodied and often desired experience of pregnancy was foregrounded. In deciding who would be the (first) birth mother, the couples' reasoning centred on age and desire, both presented as harmless and 'natural' determinants that defused a potentially disruptive decision.

Objective: The purpose of the study is to contribute to an understanding of the cultural and normative meaning of birth motherhood and how lesbian couples decide who carries the child.

Background: The decision of who carries the child is central in lesbian family-making, carrying consequences for life after birth. Even so, it has been relatively overlooked in research. Drawing from the sociology of personal life and Park's (2013) conceptualization of monomaternalism, we study how informants consider and decide birth motherhood.

Method: Semistructured interviews with both partners in 21 pregnant lesbian couples in the Netherlands were thematically analyzed.

Results: The meaning of birth motherhood was ambivalent, linked to femininity, socially recognized motherhood, and biogenetic imaginaries. In couples where both wanted to carry, age, which carried different symbolic meanings, was a powerful tiebreaker.

Conclusion: Our study shows how the monomaternalist norm shapes conceptualizations of birth motherhood. Desires to experience pregnancy are strong for many. Referring to age can be a way for couples to defuse tension, but it can also be a resource drawn upon to close further negotiations.

Implications: Our study carries implications for policy makers, health care workers, and mothers-to-be. Scholarly, it illuminates the ways in which motherhood, in its various forms, is perceived and recognized.

The division of labor between household partners is a core topic in family sociology. Although rising divorce rates, closing gender gaps in education, family policies for fathers, and increases in female labor force participation have levelled the playing field for men and women, we observe consistent and stubborn patterns of unequal divisions of labor within heterosexual couples across the globe. In fact, this is an example of a well-established empirical regularity that rigorous sociology aims to explain (see Jackson’s chapter on sociology as a population science in this Handbook on such regu-larities as well as the chapter by Raub, De Graaf & Gërxhani on rigorous sociology for a more general discussion). When it comes to achieving gender equality between male and female household partners, progress has been painstakingly slow. Women’s finan-cial independence is hindered when they specialize in household duties. They still spend considerably more time on unpaid labor, and men spend more time in the labor market throughout the world (Fuwa 2004; McMunn et al. 2020). Minimal differences at the onset of a relationship may, over time, lead to strong divisions between partners (Grunow et al. 2012; Rothstein 2012; Vink 2020). Unpaid labor comprises both domes-tic duties and childcare. For domestic duties such as cleaning and washing, patterns have been much more stubborn than for childcare (Treas & Drobnič 2010). Fathers increased their time in childcare significantly over the last few decades, but mothers hardly decreased theirs (Craig et al. 2014). Women on average have less leisure time than men, and their total combined work hours often exceed those of men. Due to their further responsibilities and associated time pressure, women also tend to experience a lower quality of leisure than men (Henderson & Gibson 2013; Yerkes et al. 2020, but see Bittman & Wajcman 2000 for a different perspective).

In this chapter, we provide an overview of the explanations that have been offered to understand the unequal division of labor; that is, the differences not in total time, but in time spent in paid and unpaid labor. We start with an overview of the three main theo-retical mechanisms, and empirical findings on the micro-level in the section on micro-level explanations, before we turn to the contextual level in the section on contextual explana-tions. We pay particular attention to different key mechanisms that could be driving the division of labor, and how contextual level influences relate to these mechanisms. In doing so, we adopt the general perspective on micro-macro links in rigorous sociology.Despite a huge amount of research on these topics, however, we seem only marginally closer to understanding the division of labor. In the section on new directions we there-fore discuss recent theoretical and empirical progress that has been made by studying atypical heterosexual couples and same-sex couples. Analyzing these couples may provide a new perspective and better insight in mechanisms underlying the division of labor overall. Finally, we consider pressing open questions in relation to understanding the division of labor as well as avenues for future rigorous research.

This article ties together key findings from a 12-year cross-national qualitative collaboration that involved researchers from nine European countries. Our comparative analysis draws on longitudinal heterosexual couple data, in which both partners were interviewed first, during pregnancy, and second, between six months and two-and-a-half years after childbirth. We tackle the relational ties that shape family practices from a lifecourse perspective, emphasising the interdependent construction of motherhood and fatherhood identities, couples' institutional embeddedness and linked lives. Analysing the data by combining the relationality and lifecourse perspectives brings forth how women and men enact agency in a constrained environment while making consequential decisions about their own, their partners' and children's futures. Whereas the gender culture provides parents with arguments and discourses to motivate their work-care plans, the policy context limits how new parents interact as they seek to escape or cope with institutionally prescribed gender divisions of work and care.