Constraints and choices in mothers' employment careers: a consideration of Hakim's Preference Theory.

This paper provides an empirical examination of women's work histories following a first birth, their sex-role attitudes, and the relationship between attitudes and work history. In the light of these analyses, the aptness of Preference Theory as an explanation for the position of women in the British labour market is considered. Addressed in particular is Hakim's argument that the main determinant of women's heterogeneous employment patterns and work histories is heterogeneity in their preferences for differing combinations of family work and paid employment. Although support is found for Hakim's argument that employment careers are centrally important for only a minority of women, little evidence is adduced that it is preferences that distinguish the minority from the majority. The existence of a continuum of work-family preferences means that women with similar preferences (but differing capacities for overcoming constraints) will have very different labour market careers. Analysis of longitudinal data fails to support the central argument of Preference Theory that women in Britain and North America (countries where women live 'in the new scenario') have genuine, unconstrained choices about how they wish to live their lives. Instead, it is argued that a complete explanation of women's labour market choices after childbirth, and of the outcomes of those choices, depends as much on understanding the constraints that differentially affect women as it does on understanding their personal preferences.