Excluding the Involved Father: Having a Child During the COVID Pandemic in Iceland

ABSTRACT

Iceland has prioritized the importance of active fatherhood through the implementation of public policies that encourage men to be actively involved in caregiving. However, during the COVID-19 pandemic, fathers in Iceland were excluded from various aspects of maternity care as a measure to reduce the spread of the virus. In order to explore how parents experienced these strict COVID-19 restrictions, which prevented fathers from being present at community healthcare clinic visits, screening scans during pregnancy, and sometimes limited their participation in the birth of their child, the study conducted focus group interviews with 27 parents who had a child in 2021. The participants in the focus groups perceived pregnancy and birth as a shared experience that both parents were equally invested in. Consequently, most of them took proactive measures to ensure that fathers could be present despite the restrictions. The findings indicate that the global pandemic, with its imminent threat and crisis, led to a setback in promoting involved fatherhood. This highlights the tensions between the maternity care services driven by experts and the public’s perspectives on the needs of parents and children.

KEYWORDS:

• Fatherhood
• maternity services
• parenting
• gender equality
• COVID-19

Introduction

During the past decades, it has become routine that fathers participate in the process of birth and maternity care, which signifies the emergence of new forms of fatherhood. The “new father” is emotionally involved and actively participates in infant care (Duckworth & Buzzanell, 2009; T. Johansson, 2011). However, during the COVID-19 pandemic, fathers were excluded from many aspects of maternity care to reduce escalating transmission rates. Iceland, a small Nordic nation in the North-Atlantic, was no exception. The spread of COVID-19 in March 2020 led to significant changes in the prenatal care guidelines in Iceland, which underwent frequent modifications in response to the fluctuating infection rate. Consequently, the majority of expectant mothers in 2021 were not permitted to have their partners accompany them during antenatal visits and screening scans. The primary objective behind excluding partners from ultrasound examinations was to safeguard the specialized staff members (Lalor et al., 2021). By use of focus group interviews with Icelandic parents who had a child in 2021, the study aims to further understanding of how parents experienced and reacted to the strict COVID-related restrictions that prevented fathers from being present at visits to community healthcare clinics during pregnancy, screening scans, and sometimes limited their participation in the birth of their child.

Iceland’s emphasis on active fatherhood makes the country a compelling case for investigating parent’s experiences and reactions to fathers’ exclusion from maternity care and birth. Iceland is a Nordic dual-earner/dual-carer society, in which men and women are active in the labour market and in caregiving (Á. Arnalds & Duvander, 2023; Á. A. Arnalds et al., 2022). As in most Western countries, the seventies and eighties marked the emergence of fathers into the delivery room, and most fathers in Iceland who have had children during the past decades have witnessed, and actively participated in the birth of their children (Gíslason & Símonardóttir, 2018). The emphasis on active fatherhood in Iceland’s social policies strongly indicates that fathers’ involvement in care of their children is thought to be an integral part of the goal towards gender equality. For example, the governments’ action plan on gender equality from 1997 stated that those working in the health care system should be educated on the importance of fathers being active participants during pregnancy, birth, and infant care (Gíslason & Símonardóttir, 2018). Thus, the restrictions placed on fathers’ participation in maternity care and birth, during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, should be viewed as a setback when it comes to involved fatherhood in Iceland.

By investigating parents’ experiences and reactions, the paper will reveal important cracks in the façade of shared parenting ideologies in Iceland, a country that has consistently been labelled the most gender-equal country in the world (World Economic Forum, 2022). The results contest the strong preferences of both parents’ involvement in infant care, set forth by state policies, and present a culture of ambivalence towards father’s role during pregnancy and early childhood. Thereby, the results highlight the need for implementing policies that facilitate inclusion for fathers as important and active participants in their own right.

Involved Fatherhood

The gender revolution could be said to consist of two parts. The first involved women’s entry into the labour market, while the second part involves men taking on the role of active fathers (Goldscheider et al., 2014). Since the beginning of the 1990s, a number of studies have indicated the emergence of the “new father” who is emotionally involved and takes an active part in childrearing (Duckworth & Buzzanell, 2009; T. Johansson, 2011). Research shows that “new father” norms have taken roots, as today’s fathers spend more time with their children than previous generations (Bianchi et al., 2006; Maume, 2011; Sayer et al., 2004; Sullivan, 2010). With increased cultural expectations towards fathers’ involvement in care, there has been a shift away from associating masculinity with power and control (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005) towards the development of caring masculinities, which embrace values such as positive emotion, interdependence, and relationality (Elliott, 2016). There are however country variations in the emergence of the “new father” with Nordic fathers consistently being found to spend more time with their children than fathers elsewhere across the globe (Á. A. Arnalds et al., 2022; Craig & Mullan, 2011; Hook & Wolfe, 2012).

In the Nordic countries the construction of the nurturing father is supported by family-friendly welfare policies, aimed at building the “dual earner/dual carer” society, where men and women are active in the labour market and in caregiving (Ellingsæter & Leira, 2006; Eydal et al., 2018). Fathers’ individual rights to paid parental leave is a vivid example of such policies. An earmarked parental leave quota is seen to be a vital incentive for fathers to take leave from work and is a tool to create a caring and participating father (Kvande & Brandth, 2017). In Iceland, the setting of our study, emphasis has been placed encouraging men to take an active part in caregiving through the introduction of public policies such as a paid parental leave. One aim of the Icelandic paid parental leave scheme, from the year 2000, is to ensure children care from both parents. The Icelandic scheme has achieved much international attention for being the first to provide both parents with equal quota rights and the well-paid four-and-a-half-month father’s quota is among the longest universal non-transferable leave for fathers in the world (Koslowski et al., 2021).

As is the case in the other Nordic countries, fathers in Iceland have steadily increased their participation in care of their children during the past two decades, and a recent survey found that three years after the birth of their first child, 80% of coupled parents report that they divide the care of their child equally (Á. Arnalds et al., 2021). The increase of shared care is also evident among separated and lone parents, which can for example be seen in the popularity of shared custody after divorce or dissolved cohabitation, and in non-residential fathers’ increased care participation during the past decades (Lárusdóttir et al., 2022). Qualitative research show that young men distance themselves from older generations of men and becoming an involved father is now a part of their masculine identity (Jóhannsdóttir & Gíslason, 2017).

In addition to the encouragement of fathers’ leave use, found in public policy, one manifestation of the “new father” is fathers’ presence at birth. Fathers’ participation in birth has been described as the signifier of the emergence of emotionally engaged forms of fatherhood (Dermott, 2008). In Iceland, as well as in many other Western societies, it has become routine that fathers are present during the birth of their children. Birth represents the moment that fathers often experience the reality of fatherhood, an event they ultimately consider to be life changing (Erlandsson & Lindgren, 2009; M. Johansson et al., 2013). Father’s presence and participation in birth coincides with emerging ideals on the importance of fathers’ involvement for their child’s development (Sarkadi et al., 2008). During the past decades a growing body of research has been devoted to investigating fathers’ experiences with birth and the effect it has on their own emotional well-being (for ex. M. Johansson et al., 2015; Mprah et al., 2023; Premberg et al., 2011). Fathers commonly find being present, at the time of birth, to be a positive experience (Nystedt & Hildingsson, 2018) and believe that it strengthens their relationship with their new child (M. Johansson et al., 2015).

However, research on parenthood from Iceland, as well as from the Nordic countries, show that current discourses on caring fathers both provoke traditional gendered norms, but also reveal challenges in many areas of equal parenthood. Prominent expert discourses still promote motherhood over fatherhood, particularly in the period of pregnancy and during the time of infant care, often citing biological reasons In Iceland, fathers are, for example, almost absent in expert material on pregnancy, birth, and nurturing, where mothers are presented as being the ideal and natural parent responsible for early childcare—while men are constructed as valuable assistants (Símonardóttir, 2016). Research from Sweden has also revealed a discrepancy between how fathers view their role during labour and childbirth and how they feel they are treated by healthcare professionals (Brunstad et al., 2020) and several studies indicate that fathers often feel excluded from the process (Baldwin & Bick, 2018; Leahy-Warren et al., 2023; Steen et al., 2012).

Study Background: COVID-19 and Maternity Care in Iceland

The first case of COVID-19 in Iceland was confirmed on NaN Invalid Date NaN. To address the pandemic, Icelandic health authorities prioritized early detection, contact tracing, and social distancing measures such as limiting gatherings to no more than 20 people. Restrictions were adjusted throughout the pandemic in response to the infection rate, resulting in variations of the gathering ban ranging from 20 to 200 people. While upper secondary schools and universities were closed, Iceland did not implement a full lockdown, and primary schools and kindergartens remained open with certain restrictions but after‐school care for children remained closed, as well as sports and other extra curriculum activities (The Directorate of Health & The Department of Civil Protection and Emergency Management, 2020). People also had to ensure that they kept a distance of at least two metres between individuals, and this entailed the closing of swimming pools, gyms, pubs, and museums. Due to these actions, those who possibly could work from home were encouraged to do so. The government of Iceland retorted to various measures to mitigate the economic and societal effects of the coronavirus outbreak, for example by guaranteeing wages during quarantine and income loss subsidies (Government of Iceland, n.d.).

In Iceland, all expecting mothers who have legally resided in the country for at least six months are entitled to receive maternity care through the Icelandic healthcare system. The system is based on a midwife-led model that emphasizes the belief that pregnancy and birth are normal life events, and that the care provided should prioritize the woman’s needs and preferences (Sandall et al., 2016). Throughout their pregnancies, women receive care from midwives at community healthcare clinics, with additional appointments available with general practitioners or obstetricians if required. Antenatal visits typically last about 30 minutes and partners, or relatives and close friends, are encouraged to attend. The majority of births in Iceland occur at the University Hospital, with the remaining births taking place in smaller maternity units across the country. Midwives perform most deliveries, with or without the involvement of doctors (Olafsdottir et al., 2018). Following childbirth, all women, except those who have experienced severe complications, are offered postnatal visits with a midwife and are typically discharged within 36 hours.

Prenatal care guidelines in Iceland changed dramatically as COVID-19 spread through the population in March of 2020. The policies changed rapidly based on the fluctuations of the infection rate, so for most expectant mothers in 2021, partners were not allowed to accompany them to antenatal visits and screening scans. The exclusion of partners from the ultrasound examination was intended to protect staff with specialized skills (Lalor et al., 2021). For some prospective parents, the birth itself was also subject to extreme COVID-related measures, including partners not being able to be present until the mother was in active labour, having to use face masks in the delivery room, and partners having to leave the hospital once the baby was born (Landspítali, 2020). In 2020, 2.7% of all births in Iceland were homebirths, but the percentage of home births has consistently been below 2% in recent years. The increase observed in 2020 May have been related to quarantine restrictions related to the COVID-19 outbreak (Kvenna-og barnasvið Landspitali, n.d.) but unfortunately, the figures for 2021 have not been made available.

Methods

Qualitative research methods take the view that reality is formed in the consciousness of individuals, where people actively construct reality in their interaction with the external world, and social processes are understood in context (Esterberg, 2001). The philosophy that underpins this research, its epistemology, is social constructionism, which assumes that understanding and meaning are not developed separately within the individual, but in coordination with other human beings, where the use of language is the most significant system in the construction of reality (Crotty, 1998). The study utilizes focus group interviews as a research method to investigate the experiences of parents who had a child during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in Iceland. Focus group interviews are deemed particularly appropriate for research endeavours seeking to gain a comprehensive understanding of the perceptions and significance individuals attribute to specific phenomena, as well as their behaviours and experiences (Morgan et al., 1998). The study was advertised on various social media and through snowball sampling. The criteria for participation targeted parents, living in Iceland, who had a child in the year 2021. The study focuses on the birthyear of 2021 as that will include parents who decided to have a child during the pandemic. A self-selected sample of participants who responded to the call, in total, 22 mothers, and five fathers, took part in the study. The study participants were aged 21–44, the average age being 32. The educational level of the participants was rather high, as the majority of the participants held a university degree. All, but one, were married or cohabiting and in heterosexual relationships, while one participant was recently separated. Out of the 27 participants, 14 had had their first child in 2021 and 13 participants had their second or third child. Both authors conducted the five focus group interviews, between November and December 2022. The interviews, which ranged from 79 to 94 minutes all took place in a conference room in the authors’ place of work. All the interviews were audio recorded with the participants’ consent and later professionally transcribed. The interview guide consisted of questions regarding the parents’ experiences of having a child during COVID, including questions on timing, decision-making and specific challenges and/or opportunities related to the pandemic for the participants and their families. The authors discussed and then refined and revised questions after each focus group interview to see which were working and which were not during the interview process.

The study was positively reviewed by the Research Ethics Committee for Public Higher Education Institutions in Iceland and no further ethical approval was needed. Written informed consent was obtained from all interviewees, and the purpose of the study was explained to all participants by letter and in person. Consequently, certain identifiable details have been intentionally omitted to eliminate any potential risk of identification. Additionally, as a token of gratitude for their involvement in the study, all participants received a gift certificate valued at approximately 30 Euros.

The focus group interviews were transcribed verbatim and subsequently analysed by both authors utilizing thematic analysis methods (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The analysis process involved a systematic approach, beginning with a close reading of all the interview data, during which notes were taken and preliminary patterns were established. Once a comprehensive understanding of the dataset was achieved, ATLAS.ti, a qualitative data analysis programme, was employed to organize and process the identified themes and patterns. Despite the broad context of the overall study and the topics raised during the focus group interviews, fathers’ participation soon emerged as a prominent topic in all the group discussions and was constructed by most, if not all of the participants, as the most challenging aspect of having a child during the COVID pandemic. We have organized the analysis into two overarching themes: Missing out on important milestones and Working the cracks—finding ways to involve fathers. All the quotes included in this paper were translated into English by the authors, and all names of participants are pseudonyms.

Findings

The focus group interviews highlight two milestones in the pregnancy and birthing process that are perceived to be important. Besides the act of birth, which in recent times has been constructed as a “couple event”, in which the involvement of fathers/partners has been actively encouraged, the ultrasound screening tests were seen as an important milestone for fathers’ involvement. Typically, ultrasound screening takes place twice, at 12 and 20 weeks of pregnancy. Ultrasound screening tests are crucial for ensuring a healthy pregnancy and identifying any potential complications. In Iceland, fathers and other partners play a vital role both in supporting their partner and participating in the process as a means to bond with their unborn child and be better informed about their child’s health. Screening scans can also reveal serious complications with the pregnancy which may require the partner’s support and involvement in decision-making. The focus group participants all share this understanding. Ultrasound screening, and the birth itself, were described as extremely important events, that neither parent should miss out on. During such significant milestones, fathers were found to play an important supporting role, as described by a mother from Group 2 who had an older child:

He was the one who actually brought my older daughter into the world, just by being my complete support. He had the massage balls, and all that, and I didn’t even get a single Paracetamol tablet, you know. He was the only one who got me through it. (Group 2 – Mother)

The study participants not only described the importance of fathers’ participation for the mothers’ well-being, but also emphasized the significance of these milestones for the father-child relationship. One mother had experienced her husband not being present, when she gave birth to a child before the pandemic hit.

My husband moved [abroad] for work, so he misses out on all this. It just had a huge effect after the baby was born. You know the bonding [between father and child] just wasn’t as it should have been for little over a year. You know it was quite difficult. So, for me it is really important. (Group 5 – Mother)

Thus, in Iceland, pregnancy and birth are constructed as a shared experience that both parents are equally invested in, and the presence of both parents during ultrasound screening and birth are defined as important milestones in the path towards co-parenting.

Missing Out on Important Milestones

Most of our participants had experienced some form of partner exclusion during either pregnancy or birth, due to the COVID-19 restrictions, and described how missing out made them feel. Their narratives clearly showcase the common understanding that significant milestones such as screening scans and birth are rare life-events that both parents should experience together, but the constant changes in the COVID-related restrictions for birthing partners resulted in high anxiety and stress:

I was thankful that we weren’t having our first child, that at least he would have experienced this before. I found it very comforting that it was our second child. Naturally I was trying to comfort myself … . But he thought it was terrible. (Group 2 – Mother)

Yes, mine too, he once sat outside crying in the car. (Group 2 – Mother)

This image of the father waiting in the car in the hospital parking lot was repeated by several of the study participants. One father describes his reaction to being left in the car for this important milestone:

The rules at the hospital were such that when we went for the 12-week scan, I was not allowed to go, which was terrible. And as I say, we had been waiting for 5 years to have a child and then somehow not being able to take part in this key moment was just a very bad life experience – sitting outside in the parking lot crying on messenger with this just happening on the phone. (Group 5 – Father)

When reflecting upon their experiences with screening scans or birth, the study participants either used the term “lucky” or “unlucky”, depending on whether the restrictions were severe or lax, at the time. A mother from Group 4 was one of the lucky ones and was able to give birth without the pandemic having any effect:

But luckily, he was allowed to be there, be unmasked, everyone was unmasked, my mother was allowed to be there, she took pictures, she was there the whole time, and it was just like, there was just some kind of “bubble” for a month where there was this normal life and then suddenly everything was locked up again. (Group 4 – Mother)

Other parents were not as fortunate, and many interviewees described the COVID-related rules and restrictions as overly stringent and even arbitrary. Given that the participants felt that both parents should share the experience of pregnancy and birth, they contested and challenged the measures taken by the Icelandic health care officials that resulted in fathers being excluded:

We are raising these children. Even though I carried it inside me, this is also his child and I just felt, I’m not an expert on this, you know, but I just felt, I had a really hard time understanding this. And I think it’s incredibly unfair. (Group 2 – Mother)

The unfairness of the rules was commonly reiterated, but they were also often described as being both arbitrary and going against common sense. This lack of common sense was experienced by a couple who participated in the study, who describe their experiences of the father having to wait in the car while the mother went to the 20-week screening scan:

It’s just dreadful, you know. So, she can be there, but I can’t be there, but still, I’m with her in the car and what’s the difference between me sitting next to her. Kind of hard you know … (Group 3 – Father)

We live in the same home. (Group 3 – Mother)

You just say yes and Amen to things like that, that you think are ridiculous. (Group 3 – Father)

The parents all describe how they followed the rules even though they sometimes thought they were ridiculous and unfair, as there was simply “so much at stake” (Group 5 – Mother). Some felt that health care professionals were unnecessarily strict and unyielding in their interpretation of the rules, as was the case for a mother who took part in Group 2. This mother had experienced complications at birth and was left alone in the maternity ward, bleeding heavily, while her partner took their child to the recovery room:

But I sat there crying after he left with the baby and I begged the midwife and the doctors to call my mum because I couldn’t imagine being alone, you know… And they just said no. (Group 2 – Mother)

Some parents were also prohibited from using video chat apps, such as Facetime, as a way to include fathers during their 20-week screening scans and for the couple from Group 3 this was seen as an unnecessary interpretation of the rules:

You had heard that it was forbidden, but then you had also heard that it was different depending on who was performing the scan. (Group 3 – Father)

Yes, and she was just, she was just a bit annoyed, was just a bit aggressive with me and said that this was just completely not ok. (Group 3 – Mother)

But I was feeling very small and sad in the car, just looking at the screen. I felt that it was very distressing. (Group 3 – Father)

According to the mother, the midwife’s justification for being opposed to the video chat was that “this is a research hospital”, indicating that the health of the mother and her unborn child was of greater importance than involving the father in the scanning procedure. Such experiences demonstrate a conflict between the expert driven maternity care and views towards the importance of fathers’ involvement during pregnancy.

Many felt that the distress and worry associated with the fathers’ exclusion could have been avoided by relatively simple measures, such as testing fathers for COVID before access to the maternity ward and arranging waiting rooms for screening scans in a way that limited exposure for health care professionals and other expectant parents.

Working the Cracks—Finding Ways to Involve Fathers

Most of the focus group participants describe wanting to actively plan and organize ways in which to maximize the chance of fathers being able to fully participate in the birth of their child. This planning was constructed by the participants as a means to “just have some control over the situation” (Group 5 – Mother) but was nevertheless sometimes problematic due to the cyclical nature of the pandemic and the COVID-related restrictions that were based on the infection rate at any given time. This resulted in uncertainty for parents as the guidelines and restrictions could change very rapidly, sometimes even to the point that it was unclear what the current guidelines were as they could change overnight. The 12 and 20-week scans, and the birth itself, are constructed as the two most important events and our interviewees describe various ways in which they tried to make sure that fathers would not miss out. This was done by taking pre-emptive measures to enhance their success in making sure that the fathers could be present. These measures ranged from shielding themselves for several days or weeks before birth, like a mother who took part in Group 5, who describes how “the last four weeks it was just the two of us and we saw no one and we didn’t leave the house”. Another way utilized by many participants was paying for extra screening scans, or tests, provided by private health care clinics so that the father could participate:

It just had a huge impact on me, because I have experienced getting bad news in the 12-week scan, in the Nuchal translucency test. I was extremely nervous even though it had been seven years since that happened. It just brought it back, you know, I paid 100,000 Kroner for some genetic testing, so I would have received the results of the blood test before I went for the ultrasound [alone], so I knew there wasn’t a chromosomal defect before I attended this ultrasound. (Group 1 – Mother)

Some interviewees made a choice to forgo the University Hospital and give birth in smaller birth centres that had less strict restrictions in place. One participant describes how she thought about staying at home for as long as she possibly could, with the hope of not making it to the hospital in time, in order to make sure that she was not alone and without her partner:

The previous birth went really well, and I really thought that if it happened that he couldn’t attend [birth], I was just going to wait at home for a really long time because the contractions are very short-lived and then I just have the baby. I’m just going to drag it out as much as I can, to leave, and then maybe it just happens at home. (Group 4 – Mother)

Others opted for pre-planned homebirths to manage and alleviate stress surrounding the birth. When asked if the decision for a planned homebirth was directly related to COVID-19 restrictions a mother from Group 1 replied:

Yeah, you know that was why the initial decision was taken. I don’t think I would have even considered it, you know, it never crossed my mind with the other kids. (Group 1- Mother)

For some participants these plans never came to fruition as their partners were able to take an active part in the birth, but almost all participants describe actively thinking about ways in which to enhance the probability of full participation.

Discussion

The study’s aim was to explore how parents in Iceland, who had a child in 2021, experienced and reacted to the COVID restrictions that prevented fathers, and other partners, from being present during ultrasound screening and birth. The Icelandic setting presents a strength due to its progressive social policy regarding shared parental leave and its position as a global leader in gender parity. There are limitations in this study that could be addressed in future research, as the participants of the study are mostly middle class and well educated (although not exclusively) and therefore may be seen to reflect normative discourses of parenting that have been especially tailored to their demographic (Símonardóttir et al., 2021). The immigrant population in Iceland has grown considerably in recent decades and currently 16% of the population are immigrants (Statistics Iceland, 2022) and despite the authors’ attempts to involve parents of foreign origin in the study, these efforts were not successful. This outcome presents a limitation since the experiences of these individuals with the healthcare system and their access to information would undoubtedly differ from those born in Iceland.

Findings from focus groups with parents reveal that the most impactful part of the COVID-19 pandemic on their pregnancies and birthing experiences was the exclusion of fathers from the process. Fathers were physically and emotionally excluded from prenatal care and sometimes even during the birth of their child. This is consistent with studies from other cultural contexts that has demonstrated how fathers’ exclusion was thought to have negatively impacted the entire family (Wells et al., 2022), caused feelings of isolation and heightened psychological distress (Vasilevski et al., 2022), and how fathers were repositioned as spectators, rather than participants (Menzel, 2022). The exclusion of fathers from ultrasound screening and birth, were thought to be unfair and arbitrary, and not necessarily serve the common good of preventing the spread of the virus. The focus groups participants all construct pregnancy and birth as a shared experience that they are equally invested in. Therefore, most of them took some pre-emptive measures to enhance their success in making sure that the fathers could be present, for example by booking extra screening scans provided by private healthcare clinics, planning homebirths, or giving birth in birth centres that were less stringent and shielding themselves for several days or even weeks before birth. Hence, the parents challenge the measures taken by the Icelandic health care officials that resulted in fathers being excluded.

The process of labour and childbirth is a significant life event for both parents. While the findings clearly emphasize how pregnancy and the act of giving birth has been constructed as a “couple event”, in which fathers and other partners have a supporting role and start to form a bond with their child, they also reveal obstacles to involved fatherhood in Iceland. While shared parenting has been constructed as the proper model, pregnancy and the early stages of parenting are in many ways still preserved for mothers. Research from the other Nordic countries demonstrates how fathers see themselves as partners and parents, whereas their experience of the maternity services is routinely one of exclusion from the process (Baldwin & Bick, 2018; Steen et al., 2012). The COVID-19 pandemic can therefore be seen to exacerbate and bring to light this exclusion. During the pandemic, fathers were excluded from participating in the primary relationship between mother and child and thereby discursively excluded from meaningful parenthood. Our findings thus suggest that the imminent threat and crisis of a global pandemic caused a meaningful setback when it comes to involved fatherhood, which demonstrates how fragile the role of the involved father really is. The findings therefore reveal tensions between the expert driven maternity care services and public views on the needs of parents and children. While shared parenting is highly valued, and encouraged through public family policy, maternity care services’ primary focus is on mothers. Interestingly, while the state has actively attempted to involve fathers in parenting, the general discourse equates motherhood with parenthood and emphasizes women’s innate character as primary nurturers (Símonardóttir, 2016; Símonardottir & Gíslason, 2018). This demonstrates how the narrative of “the equal Nordic countries” can disguise other aspects that do not fit as well into that particular narrative. The Icelandic inclination to portray themselves as a gender-equal utopia (Einarsdóttir, 2020) prompts questions regarding the evolving narrative of fatherhood. Essentially, when faced with significant events such as the COVID lockdowns, it is important to observe the vulnerability of these narratives and how fragile the status of the involved father essentially is.

Research has consistently shown that those with higher social status have better health and make different health-related choices (Demakakos et al., 2008; Lindbladh & Lyttkens, 2002; Mirowsky, 2017). Class differences become meaningful when we think about who has the opportunity to “work the cracks” and find ways for fathers to participate. Who has the option to shield themselves for weeks and even months prior to birth? Who has access to the relevant information and funds needed to book scans through private clinics and eschew hospital settings for more intimate birth centres? These questions become pertinent in light of our findings that suggest that the participants resorted to various measures to enhance their success in making sure that the fathers could be present. As has been documented from various cultural contexts, the COVID-19 pandemic has brought the historically rooted inequities of our society to the forefront (Laster Pirtle & Wright, 2021) and in some cases deepened pre-existing gender inequalities (Yavorsky et al., 2021). In a similar vein we propose that the exclusion of fathers during the COVID-19 pandemic, although constructed as necessary by government authorities around the world to reduce transmission and protect staff, reveal the fragility of our investment in true equality in the parental role and a cultural ambivalence towards father’s role during pregnancy and early childhood. The implications of our findings for policy and practice strongly suggest the need for implementing policies that facilitate inclusion and create environments that accommodate all parents, both fathers and the mothers. Not merely in roles limited to supporting the mother, but as important and active participants in their own right.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This study, grant no. 228294, was supported by the Icelandic Research Fund.

Notes on contributors

Sunna Símonardóttir

Sunna Símonardóttir is a postdoctoral researcher and adjunct in sociology at the University of Iceland. Her research focuses on parenthood, gender, and fertility rates. She has published her work in journals such as Social Science & Medicine, Feminism & Psychology and The Sociological Review. She is currently joint PI of the research project Fertility Intentions and Behaviour in Iceland: The Role of Policies and Parenting Culture.

Ásdís Arnalds

Ásdís Arnalds is the director of the Social Science Research Institute at the University of Iceland. Her research focuses on family policies and gendered family practices. She has published her work in journals such as Acta Sociologic, Journal of Family Studies, Journal of Comparative Family Studies, and Journal of Family Research. She is currently a joint PI of the research project Fertility Intentions and Behaviour in Iceland: The Role of Policies and Parenting Culture.