Whether couples agree on having a(nother) child is crucial for both individuals and society. While fertility research has long focused on women, recent studies emphasize the need to incorporate both partners’ perspectives. However, analyses that jointly consider men’s and women’s fertility intentions remain scarce. This focus on women has been partly driven by homogamy—the tendency for individuals to select partners with similar traits and values. Given that couples with mixed backgrounds have higher dissolution rates, they may also be less likely to share family-related beliefs. This study examines how agreement on fertility intentions varies among mixed and homogamous couples in Sweden. Using the 2021 Swedish Generation and Gender Survey (GGS) and stratifying by respondents’ gender, we find that most couples agree not to have a(nother) child, reflecting recent fertility declines. Couples where both partners are migrants exhibit the highest agreement, while mixed couples show the most disagreement and the strongest gender asymmetries in reported intentions. However, these differences are small and vary by the gender of the reporting partner. The higher disagreement among mixed couples aligns with broader research on their elevated dissolution risks. However, reverse causality is possible—value differences may be linked to other stressors, making childbearing less desirable. By highlighting the role of couple composition in fertility decision-making, our findings contribute to understanding how family formation dynamics vary across different couple types.

Background  Parental leave generosity is protective for mothers’ mental health in the postpartum period and beyond. Strong work requirements exist for parents in Sweden to receive more generous benefits which might penalise individuals who, due to poor health, have a weak labour market attachment. The aim of the study was to examine whether mothers with poor health prior to pregnancy are less likely to be eligible for more generous benefits in Sweden.

Methods  We used total population registers to study first-time mothers, aged 25–45 years, who were resident in Sweden and gave birth between 1 January 2009 and 30 September 2013 (n = 151,452). We used logistic regression to examine the association between health one and two consecutive years prior to pregnancy (to assess chronicity) and eligibility for earnings-related parental leave benefits.

Results  Mothers who were admitted to hospital or received specialist outpatient care for any health condition in the year prior to pregnancy were less likely to be eligible for earnings-related benefits (OR 0·79, 95%CI 0·76–0·83) compared to healthy mothers, particularly those with chronic health issues (OR 0·64, 95%CI 0·62–0·68). Findings were driven by mothers with mental disorders (OR 0·22, 95%CI 0·20–0·23 for the year before pregnancy), and associations were stronger for those with chronic health issues and for Swedish-born mothers.

Conclusion  Mothers with prior health conditions, particularly mental disorders, are less likely to benefit from the protective health effect of parental leave as they may not meet the eligibility requirements for more generous remunerations. This study highlights how the strong work requirement for accessing generous parental leave benefits could unintentionally exacerbate socioeconomic inequalities between mothers with and without poor mental health. Easing work requirements for eligibility to more generous parental leave remuneration could help reduce these inequalities and thus promote better mental health for all, particularly among more disadvantaged groups. As such, our findings empirically support the need for adopting the Health in All Policies framework when designing parental leave policies in order to minimise health inequalities.

The COVID-19 pandemic generated major health, social, and economic concerns that also influenced individuals’ childbearing decisions. Migrants have been disproportionately affected compared to natives, experiencing higher mortality rates, greater job losses, and more severe financial hardships. In Sweden, these disparities are reflected in a sharper decline in birth rates among migrants relative to Swedish natives in 2021, likely due to the pandemic’s more adverse effects on migrant communities. Drawing on data from the 2021 Swedish Gender and Generation Survey, this study employs Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression models to examine how pandemic-related concerns—and the perceived impact of the pandemic across various domains (work and financial conditions, relationship quality, and wellbeing)—are associated with short-term fertility intentions across different migrant groups (Swedish natives, European migrants, and migrants from elsewhere). Our findings reveal distinct patterns by both migrant background and domain. Among all migrant groups, deteriorating work conditions were linked to a reduced desire to have children. Financial concerns further discouraged childbearing among European migrants. In contrast, Swedish natives’ fertility plans were more strongly influenced by personal wellbeing and relationship quality than by economic factors. Notably, improved financial or employment conditions were associated with a decreased desire to have children among European migrants, possibly reflecting a prioritization of career over family among this highly educated group during the crisis. Conversely, for migrants from elsewhere, concerns about future pandemics were linked to a higher short-term fertility desire, suggesting a ‘now or never’ mindset, akin to fertility responses observed after natural disasters.

Separation often leads to worse economic consequences for women than for men. However, little is known about how economic consequences of separation play out for different groups of women. Women who are younger than their male partner are generally assumed to have lesser agency, but evidence mostly comes from contexts with low gender equality. Here, we examine women's benefit recipiency as a function of the partner age gap of their dissolved union. Using register data from Sweden, we examine whether women from man-older unions suffer greater economic disadvantage after separation, and whether patterns differ for ancestral Swedes and women with migrant background. Results from logistic regression models suggest that, post-separation, the uptake of social and housing benefits increases for nearly all groups of women. However, these data do not show any consistent disadvantages of women from man-older unions. Among ancestral Swedes, patterns differed by benefit type, and among women of African/Middle Eastern origin, benefit recipiency increases were inversely U-shaped to the age gap. Social norms do not appear to explain economic costs of separation, but may explain why the risk of separation itself differed between ancestral Swedish women and women with migrant background.

Introduction The native-born children of migrants represent one of the fastest-growing and most diverse young populations in the world today. A growing body of research highlights an elevated young adult mortality risk in this ‘second generation’ (G2) relative to the majority population at the same ages. Previous studies have tried to understand this increased risk by examining its association with inequality in the adult socioeconomic background (SEB) of the G2. Here, we instead analyse the association of second-generation status with childhood SEB.

Methods We use administrative register data from Sweden to fit multistate, competing-risk, flexible parametric survival models on a data set of 13404 deaths in 2.35million young adults. We examine mortality from all causes and specific causes of death at the generational level and by parental region of birth, both before and after having adjusted for childhood SEB.

Results The G2 have higher all-cause mortality hazard rates (HR=1.29 (95% CIs=1.23 to 1.34)) than the majority population before adjusting for childhood SEB. Following adjustment, the size of the hazard rate is smaller, but remains higher than the majority population (aHR=1.16 (95% CIs=1.11 to 1.21)). The G2 additionally experience persistent and higher hazard rates of mortality from suicide (aHR=1.29 (95% CIs=1.20 to 1.39)), substance misuse (aHR=1.41 (95% CIs=1.26 to 1.58)) and assault (aHR=2.54 (95% CIs=2.02 to 3.20)). By parental origins, similar patterns to those described are documented among G2 that have at least one parent born in Finland, the other Nordic countries, former Yugoslavia, the rest of Europe, sub-Saharan Africa, Northern Africa, and Iran and Iraq. However, higher all-cause (aHR=1.42 (95% CIs=1.33 to 1.51)) and external-cause hazard rates of mortality (aHR=1.59 (95% CIs=1.48 to 1.72)) only persist among G2 with parent(s) born in Finland.

Conclusions G2 with various parental origins have higher mortality rates than the majority population do, and this difference is partly explained by their childhood SEB.

Background: Explanations for the disproportional COVID-19 burden among immigrants relative to host-country natives include differential exposure to the virus and susceptibility due to poor health conditions. Prior to the pandemic, immigrants displayed deteriorating health with duration of residence that may be associated with increased susceptibility over time. The aim of this study was to compare immigrant–native COVID-19 mortality by immigrants’ duration of residence to examine the role of differential susceptibility. Methods: A population-based cohort study was conducted with individuals between 18 and 100 years old registered in Sweden between 1 January 2015 and 15 June 2022. Cox regression models were run to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Inequalities in COVID-19 mortality between immigrants and the Swedish-born population in the working-age group were concentrated among those of non-Western origins and from Finland with more than 15 years in Sweden, while for those of retirement age, these groups showed higher COVID-19 mortality HRs regardless of duration of residence. Both age groups of immigrants from Africa and the Middle East showed consistently higher COVID-19 mortality HRs. For the working-age population: Africa: HR<15: 2.46, 95%CI: 1.78, 3.38; HR≥15: 1.49, 95%CI: 1.01, 2.19; and from the Middle East: HR<15: 1.20, 95%CI: 0.90, 1.60; HR≥15: 1.65, 95%CI: 1.32, 2.05. For the retirement-age population: Africa: HR<15: 3.94, 95%CI: 2.85, 5.44; HR≥15: 1.66, 95%CI: 1.32, 2.09; Middle East: HR<15: 3.27, 95%CI: 2.70, 3.97; HR≥15: 2.12, 95%CI: 1.91, 2.34. Conclusions: Differential exposure, as opposed to differential susceptibility, likely accounted for the higher COVID-19 mortality observed among those origins who were disproportionately affected by the pandemic in Sweden.

Background: The number of confirmed COVID-19 deaths differed across countries and across waves of the pandemic. Patterns also differed between groups within a country.

Objective: We combine data on excess mortality with data on cause-of-death-specific mortality in the case of Sweden to identify which groups had excess mortality beyond what can be captured by analyses of COVID-19-specific deaths. We also explore the possibility that some groups may have benefited in terms of reduced all-cause mortality, potentially due to home-centered living conditions during the pandemic.

Methods: We produced and compared three sets of group-specific incidence rates: deaths from (1) any cause in 2020, (2) any cause in 2019, (3) any cause excluding COVID-19 in 2020. We compared rates across different socioeconomic profiles based on combinations of sex, age, marital status, education, and country of birth.

Contribution: We show that many of those who died during 2020 would not have done so in the absence of the pandemic. We find some evidence of COVID-19 mortality underestimation, mainly among individuals with a migration background. We also found groups for which mortality decreased during the pandemic, even when including COVID-19 mortality. Progression across the first and second waves of the pandemic shows that more groups appeared to become protected over time and that there was less underestimation of COVID-19 mortality in the second part of 2020.

Background: Denmark and Sweden index their statutory retirement ages to life expectancy. When lifespan increases, so does retirement age. This policy does not consider demographic heterogeneity in life expectancy, e.g., between migrants and non-migrants, posing possible issues for pension policies that index retirement age to life expectancy.

Objective: To understand how mortality inequalities between migrants and non-migrants interact with the indexation of statutory retirement age in Denmark and Sweden.

Methods: We used Danish and Swedish registry data from 1988–2018, and included individuals aged 50+. Migrants were classified as European-born or non-European-born. We calculated the probability of dying before retirement age, remaining life expectancy at retirement age, lifespan inequalities after retirement age, and the likelihood that a non-migrant would outlive a migrant. We also classified the Danish-born population into four income levels and compared them to migrant groups.

Results: Non-European-born migrants had the survival advantage in both countries, but equal or higher lifespan inequality at retirement. Sweden had a proportionally larger migrant population, but Denmark’s was more diverse. The probability that a non-migrant would outsurvive a migrant was 40%–50% in both countries.

Conclusions: The healthy migrant effect was observed in both Denmark and Sweden. Despite mortality advantages, migrants do not contribute to increasing life expectancy in Denmark or Sweden.

Contribution: This study contributes to the literature on mortality differences between migrants and non-migrants in Scandinavia. The novel contributions of this paper are the consideration of the socioeconomic status of non-migrants in Denmark, and the calculation of probabilities that migrants will outsurvive non-migrants, all within the context of pension policy.

Studies on immigrant fertility typically compare immigrants and natives or different migrant groups at the same destination but rarely immigrants of the same origins in different destination countries. In this paper, we look at immigrants from multiple origins in multiple destination countries simultaneously, using the European Union Labour Force Survey to compare female immigrants from ten areas of origin in eight destination countries in Europe. Our results indicate a strong origin effect. However, they also suggest that when women migrate to a context where the fertility norm is different from that in their origin, they adjust their behaviors accordingly, which indicates that policy and normative context play an important role in shaping migrants’ fertility. From a policy perspective, this is important because it suggests that the fertility of immigrant women, who are exposed to different norms and normative contexts, can resemble that of native women at the destination. Our findings contribute to strengthening the role of destination in shaping fertility behavior and highlighting the importance of looking at all the possible combinations of immigrants coming from and going to different fertility regimes. 

The growing necessity for evidence-based policy built on rigorous research has never been greater. However, the ability of researchers to provide such evidence is invariably tied to the availability of high-quality data. Bias stemming from over-coverage in official population registers, i.e. resident individuals whose death or emigration is not registered, can lead to serious implications for policymaking and research. Using Swedish Population registers and the statistical framework of multiple systems estimation, we estimate the extent of over-coverage among foreign-born individuals’ resident in Sweden for the period 2003–2016. Our study reveals that, although over-coverage is low during this period in Sweden, we observed a distinct heterogeneity in over-coverage across various sub-populations, suggesting significant variations among them. We also evaluated the implications of omitting each of the considered registers on real data and simulated data, and highlight the potential bias introduced when the omitted register interacts with the included registers. Our paper underscores the broad applicability of multiple systems estimation in addressing and mitigating bias from over-coverage in scenarios involving incomplete but overlapping population registers.