| Literature DB >> 36078730 |
Nazira Calleja1, Cecilia Mota2.
Abstract
Worldwide lockdowns caused by the COVID-19 pandemic had one thing in common between different countries: they highly affected family life in different ways. However, the way they affected women with young children has not been well studied. With the purpose of evaluating the experience of lockdown in Mexico in mothers with and without a paid job carried out at home, 220 Mexican women between 24 and 55 years of age, with one or more children under 15 years of age and who lived with their partner, answered online questionnaires. The results show that, although most of the domestic tasks were carried out by the mothers, the partners of those who had a paid job significantly collaborated more with them. Information and communication technologies (ICTs) were frequently used in both groups, but mothers working from home used them to a greater extent. For these mothers, work overload and confinement were among the main problems caused by the lockdown measures, while the economic situation was the main issue for the group with no paid jobs. Both groups considered family coexistence and the lack of the need to hurry as the advantages of lockdown. To face it, the participants mainly carried out coexistence and entertainment activities. To explain these differences between mothers with and without teleworking, new studies will need to be carried out.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; coping strategies; domestic burden; mothers; teleworking
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36078730 PMCID: PMC9518464 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191711014
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants and proof of differences between mothers with and without a paid job.
| Sociodemographic Variables | Total N = 220 | Mothers with No Paid Job N = 110 | Mothers with a Paid Job N = 110 | Statistical Test | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (in years) | Mean (SD) | 37.90 (6.27) | 37.68 (6.10) | 38.13 (6.48) | t(218) = 0.526 n.s. |
| Level of education | Secondary, technical career or baccalaureate (%) | 27.7 | 33.6 | 21.8 | χ2(2) = 4.221 n.s. |
| Bachelor degree (%) | 56.8 | 53.6 | 60.0 | ||
| Postgraduate (%) | 15.5 | 12.7 | 18.2 | ||
| Number of children | Mean (SD)Range | 1.99 (0.86) | 2.08 (0.90) | 1.90 (0.81) | t(218) = 1.573 n.s. |
| With child(ren) whose age is… | Under 6 years of age (%) | 48.6 | 52.7 | 44.5 | χ2(3) = 0.906 n.s. |
| Ages 6 to 11 (%) | 59.1 | 57.3 | 60.9 | ||
| Ages 12 to 15 (%) | 32.7 | 34.5 | 30.9 | ||
| Ages 16 or older (%) | 16.8 | 16.4 | 17.3 | ||
| Partner with a paid job (%) | 76.4 | 71.8 | 80.9 | χ2(1) = 2.040 n.s. | |
| Pets | With pets (%) | 75.0 | 79.1 | 70.9 | χ2(1) = 1.552 n.s. |
| Mean (SD) | 1.78 (1.17) | 1.86 (1.31) | 1.69 (0.98) | t(218) = 0.931 n.s. | |
Figure 1Use of ICTs by mothers with and without paid work. * p ≤ 0.002.
People in the family who carry out domestic activities and differences between mothers with and without paid work.
| Domestic Activity | Mother with Paid Work | People who Carry Out Domestic Activities (%) * | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mother | Partner | Child(ren) | Employee | ||
| Groceries shopping | No | 62.7 | 60.0 | 3.6 | 2.7 |
| Yes | 68.2 | 70.9 | 0.9 | 1.8 | |
| χ2(1) ** | n.s. | n.s. | n.s. | n.s. | |
| Cooking | No | 93.6 | 23.6 | 10.0 | 5.5 |
| Yes | 82.7 | 40.0 | 8.2 | 7.3 | |
| χ2(1) | 5.278, | 6.055, | n.s. | n.s. | |
| Doing the dishes | No | 84.5 | 29.1 | 28.2 | 8.2 |
| Yes | 82.7 | 51.8 | 24.5 | 5.5 | |
| χ2(1) | n.s. | 10.869, | n.s. | n.s. | |
| Cleaning the kitchen | No | 89.1 | 23.6 | 11.8 | 11.9 |
| Yes | 83.6 | 44.5 | 15.5 | 9.1 | |
| χ2(1) | n.s. | 9.791, | n.s. | n.s. | |
| Cleaning the rooms | No | 97.3 | 31.8 | 38.2 | 9.1 |
| Yes | 96.4 | 50.9 | 37.3 | 5.5 | |
| χ2(1) | n.s. | 7.496, | n.s. | n.s. | |
| Cleaning the bathrooms | No | 78.2 | 16.4 | 16.4 | 13.6 |
| Yes | 74.5 | 35.5 | 10.9 | 11.8 | |
| χ2(1) | n.s. | 9.472, | n.s. | n.s. | |
| Laundry and ironing | No | 85.5 | 22.7 | 8.2 | 10.9 |
| Yes | 82.7 | 37.3 | 8.2 | 10.9 | |
| χ2(1) | n.s. | 4.87, | n.s. | n.s. | |
| Looking after the children (bathing, clothing, feeding) | No | 86.4 | 37.3 | 17.3 | 7.3 |
| Yes | 84.5 | 50.9 | 16.4 | 4.5 | |
| χ2(1) | n.s. | 4.149, | n.s. | n.s. | |
| Helping children with homework | No | 78.2 | 28.2 | 23.6 | 1.8 |
| Yes | 79.1 | 35.5 | 20.0 | 0.9 | |
| χ2(1) | n.s. | n.s. | n.s. | n.s. | |
| Caring for the pet(s) | No | 48.2 | 28.2 | 38.2 | 24.5 |
| Yes | 49.1 | 33.6 | 30.9 | 29.1 | |
| χ2(1) | n.s. | n.s. | n.s. | n.s. | |
* An activity can be carried out by more than one person. ** The contingency table for χ2 was 2 (with/without paid work), x 2 (does/does not do the activity).
Percentage distribution of the participants according to the biggest problem they said they faced during lockdown and the main perceived advantage.
| Biggest Problem Faced during Lockdown | Participants (%) | Main Perceived Advantage of Lockdown | Participants (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Activity overload * | 16.1 | Living with family; being present for children and/or the partner | 60.5 |
| Anxiety, irritability, impatience, uncertainty | 15.5 | No hurry/Rest | 13.6 |
| Confinement * | 12.6 | Chance to reflect and value | 5.9 |
| Homework, lessons and recreation with children | 11.5 | Doing enjoyable activities | 5.5 |
| Decrease or lack of income * | 10.1 | No advantages | 3.6 |
| Intensity of coexistence at home; overcrowding; difficulties in relationships | 9.0 | Savings | 3.6 |
| Fear of getting sick or that loved ones will get sick or die | 5.5 | Work from home (own and/or the partner) | 2.7 |
| Lack of coexistence with family and friends; isolation, loneliness | 6.0 | Self-care | 2.3 |
| Work stress | 2.5 | Other | 2.3 |
| Other | 11.2 | ||
| Total | 100.0 | Total | 100.0 |
* Significant differences between participants with and without paid work, p < 0.05.
Figure 2Coping strategies used by mothers during lockdown. Note: * Significant differences between participants with and without paid work, p < 0.05.