Fathers’ experiences with domestic labor during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted family life as traditional institutions (e.g., work, schools, childcare) were altered to address public health safety. These changes required families to adapt to new work and childcare routines. Much of the research on domestic labor during the pandemic has rightly focused on mothering and relied on quantitative methods. Less is known about the experiences of fathers who participated in domestic labor during the pandemic. The current qualitative study focused on fathers’ (n = 24) experience with domestic labor during the pandemic. Data collection included demographic surveys and in-depth interviews. Phenomenological analysis was implemented, and four themes were identified: (a) Resource availability, (b) Communication and negotiation, (c) Work-life adaptations, and (d) Caring for children’s needs.

KEYWORDS:

• Pandemic
• Domestic labor
• Men
• Fathers
• Qualitative
• COVID-19

1. Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic was declared a national emergency in the United States in March 2020 and continued to be designated as such until May 2023 (The White House, 2023). From the onset of the pandemic, families experienced a variety of shifts in family life as stay-at-home orders required many parents and their children to complete their work and schooling from home (Prime et al., 2020). This disruption affected fathers and mothers’ employment and domestic labor (i.e., household labor and childcare) contributions. Most research indicates that mothers’ work and domestic labor experiences were disproportionally impacted when compared to fathers’ during the pandemic (Carli, 2020; Collins et al., 2021). Although, fathers in mixed-gender relationships in the U.S. reported increases in their domestic labor contributions during the COVID-19 pandemic (Carlson et al., 2022; Petts et al., 2023).

Most research on gendered labor during the pandemic has been quantitative and focused on the quantity of time spent on such labor (Carlson et al., 2022; Leap et al., 2023). Expansion of qualitative work on domestic labor could move beyond the focus of quantity of time spent on domestic labor and allow for a better understanding of “the particulars of who does what work, how that work gets done, and the full meanings of that work” (Leap et al., 2023, p. 189) and the potential ways families navigated and adapted domestic labor responsibilities during a global crisis. While “mothers and mothering have rightly received substantial” research attention regarding gendered labor and COVID-19, research is needed regarding other individuals providing gendered labor, including fathers (Leap et al., 2023, p. 187). The current qualitative study involved interviewing fathers (n = 24) to understand their experiences with domestic labor during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. The study was guided by this research question: What were fathers’ experiences with domestic labor (i.e., household tasks, childcare) during the COVID-19 pandemic?

1.1. Perspectives on the division of domestic labor

Stafford et al. (1977) proposed three hypotheses to explain the gendered division of domestic labor, and these have been used to frame quantitative research during the pandemic (Carlson & Petts, 2022). The relative resource hypothesis argues that the power/resources that individuals have in their partnerships determine the division of domestic labor (Blood & Wolfe, 1960; Coverman, 1985; Stafford et al., 1977). If a partner had more power in terms of earnings or occupational status, they would be likely to do less domestic labor. The gender ideology hypothesis implies that decisions regarding division of domestic labor are based on partners’ perspectives on gendered behavior. For example, if partners hold more egalitarian beliefs, they may have more equal distribution of domestic labor, and if they have more traditional beliefs, much of the labor would rest on women in mixed-gender relationships. The time-availability hypothesis assumes “that husbands and wives allocate [domestic] tasks in response to the availability of time” (Stafford et al., 1977, pp. 46–47), and “partners who spend more time in the labor force have less available time to complete domestic tasks and therefore do less housework and childcare” (Carlson & Petts, 2022, p. 2395). During the early pandemic, research largely supported the time availability hypothesis because the fathers and mothers who spent more time at home, or worked fewer hours than their partner, took on more domestic labor (Carlson & Petts, 2022). The current qualitative study aimed to inductively explore fathers’ experiences with domestic labor during the pandemic and then consider the results in relation to Stafford et al.’s (1977) hypotheses about domestic labor divisions.

1.2. Division of domestic labor in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic

Conceptualizations of fatherhood have evolved over time (Dermott, 2014; Petts, 2023), and “fathers have become more visible figures on the parenting landscape as contemporary ideas of fatherhood have shifted” (Dermott & Miller, 2015, p. 183). Cannito (2020) concluded that “... fathers report very different practices and ways of experiencing fatherhood, which makes it difficult to recognize only one type of fatherhood” (p. 674). Contemporary fathers vary and include men who prioritize a breadwinning role at the expense of time with family, some who make small adaptions to employment to better integrate their work-life responsibilities, and those who prioritize family responsibilities by actively changing their work lives (Kaufman, 2013). As an example of the latter type of father, some men (with higher education and income) are actively choosing to work part-time to be more present with their children and perceive that this decision makes them more evolved than their own fathers were and facilitates a stronger father-child relationship than full-time employed men achieve with their children (Mercier et al., 2022).

While some men report espousing newer values (e.g., authenticity and self-realization, emotional expressivity, and holistic self-awareness) that challenge traditional masculinity and increase father-child interactions (Offer & Kaplan, 2021), traditional masculinity still encourages men to prioritize the role of breadwinner in their families (Iztayeva, 2021). Offer and Kaplan (2021) reported that men who adhered less to traditional masculinity (i.e., status, toughness, and anti-femininity) reported being more responsive to their children’s emotional needs, but they did not report more engagement in children’s routine care. Despite deviation from the values of traditional masculinity, these men also indicated being the breadwinner for the family had continued importance.

In line with the gender ideology hypothesis (Stafford et al., 1977), Collins (2019) explained that traditional ideology and public policy in the United States reinforce the expectation that women should fulfill housework and childcare responsibilities while men prioritize their roles in the paid workforce. Although, between 1977 and 2016, the egalitarian perspectives of people in the United States increased by 47% to include nearly 70% of the voting population (Scarborough et al., 2019). Despite people’s shift in ideology and men’s increased involvement in the division of domestic labor in the United States, mothers have continued to do the lion’s share around the house (Collins, 2019), even throughout the pandemic (Carlson et al., 2022).

During the pandemic, most research on domestic labor has been quantitative and focused on time spent completing these tasks (Carlson & Petts, 2022; Carlson et al., 2022, Lyttelton et al., 2023; Petts et al., 2023). Carlson et al. (2022) surveyed mothers and fathers in mixed-gender relationships in April 2020 about changes in domestic labor (childcare, housework). While mothers continued to do more of this work, there was a general increase in egalitarian divisions in this household labor as men increased their participation. Petts et al. (2023) also reported an increase in fathers’ domestic labor during this time, and in turn, an increase in mothers’ satisfaction with the division of labor in their relationships.

Fathers have reported a desire to spend more time with their children (Milkie et al., 2019). In a qualitative study conducted in March 2020, fathers explained that during the pandemic they spent more time with their children (Vaterlaus et al., 2021). Some fathers also stated the pandemic helped them feel closer to their children. Adler (2023) reported that prior to the pandemic:

Between 50 and 90% of US fathers provide numerous care activities for their children every day, including tasks usually attributed to mothers, such as routine physical care. This reflects a gradual erosion of the boundaries between father-typed and mother-typed caregiving.

This provides support for the time-availability hypothesis in the division of domestic labor during the pandemic (Carlson & Petts, 2022)—fathers made further progress in their domestic contributions because stay-at-home orders and telecommuting allowed for flexibility and increased presence in the home.

The type of parental employment can also influence management of domestic labor (Yavorsky et al., 2021). For example, single custodial fathers during the pandemic with low-skill jobs did not have the resources to pay for the preferred formal childcare and instead had to rely on extended family (Iztayeva, 2021). While women were overrepresented in high-contact employment deemed essential during the pandemic (e.g., nursing) and men were overrepresented in white-collar jobs (jobs that provide high-quality benefits and often flexibility), some research suggests women were more likely to telecommute than men during the COVID-19 pandemic (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2020; Yavorsky et al., 2021). Working from home may have helped parents navigate childcare arrangements. Telecommuting “may have [also] created unique challenges for parents, particularly mothers” because it “blurs the boundaries between work and home life,” which makes it difficult for parents to focus their attention on either (Yavorsky et al., 2021, p. 6).

Dunatchik et al. (2021) reported increases in domestic labor participation among fathers during the pandemic, but they stated that the results for gender equity were more nuanced based on employment. They reported that when both fathers and mothers worked at home, they increased their domestic labor. However, “increases” are not equivalent to equal, as women were doing more domestic labor before the pandemic and continued to do more during the pandemic (Carlson et al., 2022).

Supporting the gender ideology hypothesis (Stafford et al., 1977), gender gaps in domestic labor divisions reportedly increased when a mother worked at home or neither parent worked at home as “mothers became the stopgap who absorbed most of the additional caring and schooling of children” (Dunatchik et al., 2021, p. 203). Results from a qualitative study also indicated, “The pandemic exacerbated the established disadvantages of workplace flexibility and revealed a new one—when a partner had a flexible job, the other partner’s perception of that flexibility contributed to an unfair division of labor in the home” (Martucci, 2023, p. 308). When women did not have flexibility in their jobs, they were more likely to negotiate turn-taking with their partners to cover childcare responsibilities during pandemic lockdowns.

While studies early in the pandemic highlighted a move toward more father participation in domestic labor (Carlson et al., 2022; Petts et al., 2023), few studies have examined the maintenance of these gains. As the pandemic progressed into November 2020, some evidence indicated that fathers decreased in household task completion but continued to spend more time than was typical in providing childcare (Carlson & Petts, 2022).

2. Methods

2.1. Participants

The sample included 24 men between the ages of 25 and 59 (m_age = 40.58, sd = 7.97). All fathers reported their race as White, and most (n = 22) had earned bachelor’s degrees or higher. In terms of employment, participants were employed full-time (n = 21), part-time (n = 1), or stay-at-home parents (n = 2). Household income was reported as under $50,000 (n = 2), $60,000 and $99,999 (n = 3), $100,000–$149,999 (n = 16), and over $150,000 (n = 3). Participants were from five U.S. states (i.e., Idaho, Montana, Ohio, South Carolina, and Utah). Participants reported having one to five children (m = 2.17, sd = 1.20) between the ages of six months and 19 (m_age = 7.52, sd = 4.61). Further, 23 of the fathers had married partners, and one reported being single. All partners were identified as women between the ages 24 and 53 (m_age = 38.48, sd = 6.51), and they had been married between three to 23 years (m = 12.00, sd = 5.12). Most of the wives (n = 22) were reported to have earned a bachelor’s degree or higher, and the wives were employed full-time (n = 11), part-time (n = 5), stay-at-home-parents (n = 6), or were currently a graduate student (n = 1).

2.2. Procedures

Study procedures were approved by the University Institutional Review Board. Participants were recruited through posts on social media, online community boards, and through snowball sampling. The posts included email addresses, linking interested participants to the researchers. Eligibility criteria included identifying as a man, being 18 or older, and living with one or more children during the COVID-19 pandemic. After interested participants emailed a researcher, they were directed to an online survey through Qualtrics (see www.qualtrics.com) to determine eligibility, report demographic data, and schedule a one-on-one interview. Participants completed 45–60-minute interviews via Zoom (see www.zoom.us) between October and December of 2021. Participants received a $20 online gift card for their time. Recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim.

2.3. Interview guide

A semi-structured interview guide was developed based on existing literature (e.g., Carli, 2020; Hochschild, 1989; Vaterlaus et al., 2021). Three scholars with expertise in research methodology and work-life integration conducted an expert review of the interview guide (Kallio et al., 2016). The refined interview guide was then field tested on two fathers who met the study eligibility criteria. These processes led to the addition, removal, and revision of items on the interview guide to increase focus on the research question and clarity for the interviewees. Key topical areas in the interview guide asked about the typical roles they and their partner (if partnered) took on in household labor and childcare in non-pandemic times, how their family generally adapted to the pandemic, whether household labor and childcare responsibilities changed during the pandemic, and items asked them to evaluate their experience with household labor and childcare during the pandemic.

2.4. Data analysis

A phenomenological qualitative approach was selected for this study as the approach focuses on identifying the lived experience of people who are all experiencing the same newer phenomenon (van Manen, 1990). This study focused on men’s lived experiences with household labor and childcare during the global pandemic using Dew et al. (2017) approach to phenomenological qualitative analysis. First, three researchers immersed themselves in the data looking for keywords and ideas that were reflective of the lived experience. The researchers then met together to identify commonalities and four themes emerged. A coding scheme and rules were developed. Two researchers then coded two transcripts together to examine the utility of the coding scheme and make refinements. The two researchers then coded the remaining transcripts independently. A basic percentage of agreement between coders is appropriate in qualitative research and an acceptable level of agreement was reached (80%) (Creswell, 2013). Disagreements were resolved through consulting the raw data and discussion. To increase the trustworthiness of the results, member checking was implemented (Creswell, 2013). The complete results section was emailed to all participants, and they were asked to consider whether the results represented their own/their peers’ experiences and if they had any recommendations for revisions. Participants indicated that the results were representative of their own and their peers’ experiences.

3. Results

Four themes were identified through phenomenological qualitative analysis: (a) Resource availability, (b) Communication and negotiation, (c) Work-life adaptations, (d) Caring for children’s needs. Participants were assigned pseudonyms, which were included when direct quotes were shared (see Table 1). Table 1 also provides demographic information to provide context for each participant.

Table 1. Participant pseudonyms and contextual information.

Participant Pseudonym	Age	Employment	Marital Status	Spouse Employment	Number of Children
Aaron	34	Full-Time	Married	SHP	3
Adam	41	Full-Time	Married	SHP	5
Brian	42	Full-Time	Married	SHP	4
Carl	34	Full-Time	Married	Full-Time	1
Charlie	41	Part-Time	Married	Full-Time	2
Dale	37	Full-Time	Married	Full-Time	2
Dan	34	Full-Time	Married	Part-Time	2
David	54	Full-Time	Married	Full-Time	1
Doug	35	Full-Time	Married	SHP	3
Gary	59	Full-Time	Married	Full-Time	1
Jack	38	Full-Time	Married	Full-Time	2
Jerry	37	Full-Time	Married	Part-Time	3
Joe	40	Full-Time	Married	Part-Time	3
John	34	SHP*	Married	Full-Time	1
Keith	40	Full-Time	Married	SHP	4
Ken	55	SHP**	Single		1
Kevin	35	Full-Time	Married	SHP	4
Larry	51	Full-Time	Married	Full-Time	1
Richard	44	Full-Time	Married	Student	1
Rob	43	Full-Time	Married	Full-Time	2
Russell	35	Full-Time	Married	Part-Time	2
Thomas	38	Full-Time	Married	Part-Time	2
Todd	25	Full-Time	Married	Full-Time	1
Will	48	Full-Time	Married	Full-Time	1

Stay-at-home parent is abbreviated as SHP. Snowball sampling procedures were used in this study, and presenting comprehensive individualized demographic information could allow participants to identify each other. Thus, comprehensive demographic information is not provided in the table to maintain participant confidentiality. Complete summative demographic information is provided in the Methods section.

*John was employed at the beginning of the pandemic, but he quit his job to take care of his child and prioritize his wife’s employment.

**Ken was self-employed and identified as a SHP because he stopped working for a time during the pandemic to care for his child.

3.1. Theme 1: Resource availability

Participants (n = 24) addressed the resource availability that impacted their experience with domestic labor during the pandemic. They discussed these resources in three subthemes (1) employment flexibility and public resources, (2) formal and familial childcare support, and (3) social resources and mental health.

3.1.1. Employment flexibility and public resources

Most participants (n = 18) reported that they experienced “flexibility” in their employment as a resource during the pandemic (e.g., work location flexibility, time/schedule flexibility), which allowed them to increase their efforts in childcare. Most of the men in the sample were White, educated, and reported high incomes, which meant many of them were in privileged workplace situations that made flexibility possible. Some participants specifically stated that their employer had family-friendly practices (e.g., parental leave, flexibility for family scheduling). Elucidating this point, participants shared, “My boss is really good with working with me to flex that one hour. So, instead of working that one hour in the morning, I would work from 4:30 to 5:30” (Jerry) and “I’ve been very lucky to have a pretty flexible job that understands, sometimes you have to leave at 1:30 on a Tuesday to go deal with a child” (Joe). Employers who allowed work-life integration served as a resource to families as they addressed the increased needs of their children during the pandemic. Charlie expressed the benefits of workplace flexibility:

My wife works in healthcare, and so she is inundated every day with COVID related issues. It has just never stopped, like the changes at work. So, as being an essential worker, she’s still going in. I’ve been working from home since the start of the pandemic .... My job offered more flexibility for childcare while working, I was at home and she couldn’t cancel patients ... so, my work and my tasks were more flexible.

As Charlie shared, the employment flexibility and family friendly practices were especially important for seven (i.e., Carl, Charlie, Dale, David, Joe, John, and Todd) of the participants whose wives’ jobs were not flexible because they were “essential workers” or had to “go into the office.”

Three fathers experienced less flexibility in employment and significantly reduced hours (n = 1; Gary) or took on the role of stay-at-home parents (n = 2; John and Ken). Gary reduced his hours because his wife worked full-time, and someone needed to be with their school-aged son, and he took the financial decrease because “there’s no way I’m just going to walk away from that responsibility [of caring for my son].” Ken, who was “self-employed” explained, “[My] childcare was public school. So, that was taken out. So, I ... I haven’t really been able to work at all.”

There were government policies/programs that also provided support for participant (n = 5; Aaron, David, Ken, Keith, and Thomas) households during the pandemic during a time of employment challenges. Centering on fathers’ traditional primary breadwinning roles, all the programs mentioned focused on income maintenance or meeting family resource-related needs (e.g., school meals). Specific policies included Paycheck Protection Program, expanded unemployment and business grants, and universal school meals.

3.1.2. Formal and familial childcare support

Participants (n = 14) discussed whether their childcare needs were met by professionals and/or family members during the pandemic. After the initial stay-at-home orders were lifted, some (n = 2; Dale and Richard) had consistent center-based childcare or had a nanny (n = 1; Larry). These participants felt gratitude for their childcare providers (e.g., “I think the people that run daycares are saints” [Dale]) and explained how reliable childcare allowed their families to have dual incomes, which they felt was necessary for the cost-of-living in their community. Although two (Doug and Will) participants explained that they needed center-based/outside childcare, it was unavailable in their community (e.g., “... 30 some percent of childcare needs can’t be met in [our] County” [Will]).

Six of the participants (i.e., Dale, David, Jerry, John, Larry, and Will), whose wives were all employed, relied on grandparents (i.e., parents or parents-in-law) to provide childcare at different points during the pandemic. Initially, there were some concerns early in the pandemic about grandparent vulnerability to COVID-19, but after stay-at-home orders lifted, they welcomed the support. For instance, Will reported:

We have my wife’s parents here in town that are retired. They take care of my little guy, so we don’t have to deal with the typical daycare scenario that others do .... One of the grandparents got Covid and almost died. So, that was bad. But that was kind of a blip.

As Will indicated, grandparent risk for COVID-19 continued after stay-at-home orders lifted. Some families were reliant on grandparents for childcare despite the risk and used language that implied a minimization of risk and consequences for grandparents. Although, four participants (i.e., Adam, Jack, Russell, and Todd) expressed that they would have liked support from grandparents with childcare, the grandparents either did not live close or were at too high of a risk for contracting COVID-19. Jack reasoned:

If it was normal times, we would have had a lot more babysitting help, a lot more of that help ... that’s been a stressor this entire time, seeing that we would have had more family help, but not feeling it was worth the risk.

As Jack stated, for some fathers, adapting to less external childcare support was viewed as a necessary consequence to protect the health of extended family members.

3.1.3. Mental health resources

Participants generally explained that the pandemic brought feelings of “isolation” from friends, co-workers, extended family, and community, which came from physical distancing and working at home. Higher stress was also reported with integrating home-life and work along with the added uncertainties of the pandemic. The heightened emotional experience during the pandemic led to a need for mental health resources, and five participants (i.e., Charlie, Doug, Gary, Kevin, and Thomas) shared that their families relied on mental health professionals with varying degrees of success. Doug explained that he had a less positive experience with counseling during the pandemic. He disclosed:

The pandemic also opened up some boxes of depression for myself .... Lots of instances of impostor syndrome, lots of instances of feeling worthless, friendless, and that in turn impacted my family. We have not yet found any sort of solution to my sense of value being tied directly to my work. I sought out counseling once and didn’t love the person that I met up with. And so, I’m still on the look for the next person, but haven’t yet pulled any sort of strings to make that happen yet.

Thomas also reported elevated mental health symptoms during the pandemic, but in contrast to Doug’s experience, he described a more positive experience with counseling. Thomas shared:

Yeah, [my wife and I] both had increased anxiety [during the pandemic] which has had repercussions on our relationship and our relationship with our kids. So, that was the tough part [for our family] .... [My wife and I] both ended up going to therapy ... [which] gave us advice or perspective to help during the pandemic to organize those things and tools to deal with the heightened ups and downs.

Mental health challenges were thought to be elevated during the pandemic, and “the lack of understanding for men’s mental health is really detrimental to men being fathers ... and [that] needs to be talked about more” (Aaron). Although there were mixed outcomes, mental health services were perceived to be a needed resource for fathers.

3.2. Theme 2: Communication and negotiation

Most participants used words like “unknown,” “hard,” and “unsettling” when describing their lives during the pandemic, which made them focus on “taking it day by day.” Dan elaborated, “We were staying safe, and just trying to keep calm, because it was a pretty terrifying time.” While this was a fearful experience, participants explained that the pandemic increased time spent with their partners and children. For some, this led to “more family bonding” and “closer relationships,” and others explained it was “too much time together.”

Participants (n = 19) reported that “communication” with their partners and children was essential to navigating their lives and routines during the pandemic. For instance, Joe explained that they started “having some of these conversations” about what a pandemic may mean with their children before stay-at-home orders were in place in their state, detailing that “some of their friends would not be accessible [during the pandemic] and stuff like that ... so, it wasn’t a big surprise to them when they got to do school over Zoom.” Being proactive in having conversations with children was perceived to help children better adapt to the atypical routines associated with the pandemic. Continued conversations were necessary as the pandemic progressed. David expressed that family discussions were essential for navigating the bombardment of information and misinformation during the pandemic:

We feel like we debated [the available pandemic-related information], and we decided, so this is what we’re going to believe in [regarding the pandemic] ... we know our kids and we are going to make sure that they are getting what they need. [during the pandemic].

Participants shared that there was a lot of misinformation during the pandemic, and this required discussion and decisions about what they would believe and do as a family.

Most of the conversations during the pandemic were centered on how to navigate childcare, household tasks, and employment responsibilities—“We talked about this kinda stuff a lot” (Aaron). Prior to the pandemic, participants did feel like there was ongoing communication about household labor responsibilities and this continued during the pandemic. Highlighting this perspective, Rob shared that his wife and him had open communication about domestic labor before and during the pandemic: “I think when it comes to how we’re managing our house, the things that we want to do, the things that we need to do, [my wife and I] are pretty good at communicating those things.” Although, during the pandemic there “were extra negotiations, mostly in terms of doing schoolwork with our child and dividing up work schedules” (Larry) and fathers shared that there were more conversations about domestic responsibilities than during non-pandemic times.

During the pandemic, communication challenges emerged when negotiating and planning around household labor because of the unpredictability of employment, school, health, and public health policies. The inability to make or be consistent with plans reportedly led to relational tension. Thirteen participants shared that tension increased in their marital relationships during the pandemic. Among these, eight (i.e., Charlie, Dale, Gary, Jack, Jerry, Larry, Rob, and Thomas) were in relationships where both partners were employed (full-time or part-time) and five (i.e., Adam, Brian, Doug, Keith, and Kevin) were fathers working full-time and their wives were stay-at-home parents. Seven of these fathers were working at home, while the remaining adjusted work hours to be home more (n = 4; Doug, Gary, Jack, and Keith) or worked outside the home (n = 2; Dale and Thomas). Charlie detailed how the relational tension emerged. He shared that he would make plans with his partner that would not always work:

[I’d tell my wife] I’m happy to [make plans regarding childcare] but realize that the assumptions that go into making all of those plans will change on a weekly basis [during the pandemic] ... and so that [inability to make and keep plans] led to a lot of tension between us.

Although there was increased tension, participants explained that they grew in their relationships through managing the tension. For instance, Keith stated:

[F]or our nuclear family, just us here, it’s tightened the bond between us because we’ve learned to be self-sufficient with each other quite a bit, we’ve learned how to argue out loud instead of keeping it in and letting it explode. So, [the pandemic experience] improved that process.

Participants explained that navigating the pandemic allowed them to learn how to work through relational tension and ultimately strengthen their communication.

3.3. Theme 3: Work-life adaptations

Participants (n = 24) described their experiences adapting to the different work-life circumstances and demands during the COVID-19 pandemic. As there were various stages of the pandemic, there was “certainly shifting of schedules.” In total, 16 participants were able to work remotely at some point during the pandemic. Working at home made it easier for some fathers to make domestic labor contributions, but it also made it more difficult to “separate home and work,” which has “given me a flavor for what my wife does.” Elucidating the general experience, Jerry shared:

You have that flexibility with work when I’m home, as opposed to not physically being here if I were to be at the office ... with me being home, my wife can now run different errands without dragging or taking all of the kids with her .... It’s provided a lot more flexibility .... I’m home, it’s easier for me to take a five-minute break and put some dishes away from lunch or to get the load of laundry started.

However, Jerry explained the challenge of separating from work while working remotely and how this could impede his contributions to domestic responsibilities. He continued:

I could hear the bing of a meeting or a chat and ... I have a hard time letting things go untouched, and so my wife will often get frustrated that I’m not off work on time, or that I keep going back to work, periodically .... The end of the [work] day can be a little bit more difficult because it’s what my wife refers to the “witching hour,” because the kids are going crazy, she’s trying to get dinner cooked. And that’s when she really likes my help [and I’m not separating from work].

Working from home made it difficult to have clear boundaries between employment and domestic labor duties, which was reported to be frustrating for wives.

Specifically, 11 fathers (i.e., Adam, Brian, Charlie, Doug, Gary, Jerry, John, Keith, Ken, Kevin, and Richard) explained that they took on more household (e.g., “making lunch,” “washing dishes”) and childcare tasks (e.g., bedtime routines, meals, playing) during the pandemic than was typical. Seven of these fathers were working at home, while two had made changes to employment to be at home (i.e., John quit job to be a stay-at-home-parent, Keith reduced work hours). Fathers explained that they would adjust their working time by taking “breaks,” working “after the kids went to bed,” or “get[ing] up early” to create more time for these added responsibilities. Richard elaborated on the experience of making adaptations to meet the demands or work and home life during the pandemic:

[My wife’s school and my work] hours were not reduced, it just meant doing more in the day [during the pandemic] ... it’s a lot of late evenings or early mornings to try to get to all of that stuff done. [In adapting to the pandemic] I think we were both just clear about where we had outside responsibilities and how we could share things, so knowing that these are my fixed meetings or classes, I’m not available at these times, but here are the spaces where I can block out.

Participants indicated that the “sheer amount of workload” across work-life responsibilities and stress increased for them and their partners during the pandemic.

To successfully navigate increased workloads, participants described the importance of adjusting their “expectations” for household labor. This meant “simplifying household expectations” by identifying “the things that aren’t as necessary” and “lowering our expectations of what ‘good enough’ is.” Illustrating this point, Keith described simplifying his expectations surrounding meal preparation—“We’re not going to have as wide ranges of [food in] meals ... we don’t need to have a different type of meal every day. How can we make meals that will provide the leftovers?” Expectation adjustments also happened with employment. For example, Jack said:

From the pandemic perspective, we’ve maintained our work responsibilities. From a productivity standpoint, maybe not. But we have [met employment expectations] from an actual, “What are we getting paid for? What is our job role? What is our number of hours a week we’re expected to do? [standpoint].”

Through discussion with partners, participants determined what realistic expectations for their work meant in the context of the pandemic.

3.4. Theme 4: Caring for children’s needs

Participants (n = 24) in this study had a mix school age children (ages 5–11) and young children (ages 0–4) (n = 9), exclusively school age children (n = 6), exclusively young children (n = 5), exclusively adolescents (ages 12–18) (n = 3), or adolescents and school age children (n = 1) in their households during the pandemic. Those with young children explained that “people weren’t necessarily comfortable taking kids to daycare” during the pandemic. These children were typically cared for in the home by their parents. John, who cared for an infant during the pandemic, reported:

[B]abies don’t really do much, so as long as I could have my desk and the baby was next to me almost at all times or napping, so I just developed a pretty good routine for him, and I had a schedule working from home.

Those with infants perceived low difficulty in integrating childcare routines and work. In contrast, those with toddlers had trouble trying to navigate work and childcare needs. For example, Todd shared his experience providing care for a toddler during the pandemic:

I think certainly in those first few months with [my wife and I] trying to work from home with a one-and-a-half-year-old running around [was tough] ... but I also didn’t realize [the impacts on our child] ... every time we open up our laptops, now he just assumes that we’ve got a Zoom meeting. That’s the world he knows.

Todd’s observation of his child’s perception of laptops and virtual meetings underscored the common belief that young children had formed long-lasting expectations concerning their parents’ work routines while at home. There was some concern among participants that “too much screen time” was used to keep their children occupied during the pandemic and they worried about the long-term consequences of this increased screen time.

For older school-attending children, participants discussed the transition to remote learning during the pandemic. More (n = 11; Aaron, Adam, Brian, Dan, David, Gary, Jerry, Keith, Ken, Larry and Thomas) of the participants described this transition as challenging or a “train wreck” than those (n = 3; Brian, Rob, and Will) who believed it was a smooth transition. Rob shared that his family experienced an unproblematic switch to remote learning:

We really didn’t experience much in the way of having to actively instruct our kids or in terms of trying to nag or follow up with them on making sure that their schoolwork was getting done .... They enjoyed not having the drama of high school but getting the academic benefit.

Those fathers who felt the transition to remote learning was smooth had exclusively adolescents in their homes and attributed their children’s self-sufficiency as helpful.

In terms of responsibility for supporting their children’s learning, participants reported that they shared the responsibility with their wives (n = 8; Aaron, Adam, Dale, David, Jerry, Joe, Keith, Kevin and Larry), and that they “kinda split [schooling tasks] based off of [their] strengths.” Some of these fathers acknowledged that they were more of assistants and their partner did most of the labor—“[My wife is] trained as a teacher. So, it’s kinda right in her wheelhouse .... But she is probably 90% the teacher, and I’m just that fun aide teaching at home” (Joe). Although, some participants reported that their wives (n = 3; Brian, Doug, and Thomas) or they were solely responsible (n = 3; Dan, Gary, and Russell) for supporting their children’s at-home learning. Keith explained how he and his wife managed their children’s remote learning during the pandemic:

It was [my wife’s] responsibility during the time that I was working to make sure that they were doing their schoolwork as well as trying to keep up the house, that was probably the worst time overall during the pandemic.

Taking sole responsibility for remote learning was related to their partners’ inability to be home or accessible during the day.

Ken, who was a single father, explained that remote learning was a challenge for him because although his adolescent daughter was self-sufficient, he could not fulfill all her relational needs. He stated:

[Before the pandemic] I saw my daughter blossoming and participating, making friends, getting involved with extracurriculars .... And then we had the lockdown and [a] teacher, who was such a crucial force [in her life], essentially a partner [for my daughter, was no longer available]. I felt like in the household [during the pandemic those supports were] just ... gone. And so, we went into the pandemic going, “Okay, we’ll make the best of this.” And it proceeded where my daughter was sitting on the couch all day, doing online, or not even really attempting online school.

In the absence of in-person education, fathers recognized that schools offered opportunities to address a range of needs (e.g., social, mentorship), in addition to educational ones.

It was common for participants to use words like “challenging,” “struggled,” “wasn’t patient,” and “not my strength” as they described working with their children on remote schooling. Younger children needed more coaching on how to use technology, there were concerns about helping older children with school content that was out of parents’ scope of knowledge, and parents had difficulty integrating their employment with their children’s schooling needs. Participants indicated worry about their children “falling behind” in academic and “social skills” and increased strain on the parent-child relationship. Kevin illustrated how this strain developed while navigating remote learning with his children:

[transitioning to remote learning was a] trying time for us as well, because we were trying to play this role of let’s educate, but also trying to balance that with, we need to be kind and gentle and not overly frustrated with our kids. And they didn’t necessarily see us as that teacher figure all the time, and so, yeah, it definitely created additional strain when we took on that responsibility.

Participants explained that they had to “adapt expectations” and communicate these to their children’s teachers. Although, a few participants shared that the transition to remote learning was “not bad” because they had worked remotely prior to the pandemic and their children adapted quickly to online learning. In general, fathers appreciated the time they had to be more “involved” in their children’s lives and felt that the experience had drawn them “closer.”

4. Discussion

The current study explored fathers’ experiences with domestic labor during the COVID-19 pandemic. During the pandemic, men explained that they had conversations and negotiations about domestic labor, adaptations to domestic labor were essential, there were some helpful public and private resources, and some felt like additional resources were needed. Most of the participants had high educational achievement and income, which should be considered in interpreting the results. The results will be discussed in line with Stafford et al. (1977) hypotheses about gendered division of domestic labor.

4.1. Domestic labor adaptations during the COVID-19 pandemic

Prime et al. (2020) posited that during the COVID-19 pandemic, families were “walking uncharted territory” as they had to “negotiate family rules, rituals, and routines” during a time of uncertainty and fear (p. 640). Supporting this, men in the current study acknowledged that they and their family members did experience fear, disruption, communication, negotiation, and transitions in roles and routines. Women more often manage the domain of family affairs (Collins, 2019). However, like father reports in previous pandemic research (Vaterlaus et al., 2021), men in this study reported taking an active role in communicating with their children about the transitions that would be required to adhere to public health mitigation strategies and to navigate misinformation by coming to consensus as a family on what they would believe. Supporting the time availability hypothesis (Stafford et al., 1977), fathers were able to take on more of this responsibility because they spent more time at home with their families during pandemic stay-at-home orders.

Consistent with early pandemic research (Carlson et al., 2022; Dunatchik et al., 2021; Petts et al., 2023), some of the men in the sample reported that they had taken on more domestic labor during the pandemic than they had done pre-pandemic. Unique to this study are men’s perceptions of how the division of labor occurred. In line with the time availability hypothesis (Stafford et al., 1977) and quantitative domestic labor pandemic research (Carlson & Petts, 2022), men explained that they had open and frequent conversations with their partners about what needed to be done and based their division of labor on who had flexibility in their schedule. During the pandemic, the term “essential workers” emerged, which included care-related professions (e.g., nursing) that are disproportionately represented by women (Folbre et al., 2021). Further, the school closures and unsynchronized reopening disrupted daily living (especially for mothers) as families navigated distance learning (Collins et al., 2021). Seven of the men in this study reported that their partners were essential workers or in occupations that did not allow flexibility, but that their jobs allowed for telecommuting or time flexibility. In these instances, men took on more domestic labor than they had done prior to the pandemic because of their flexibility. Just under half of the men explained that transitioning their children to remote learning was difficult. Some wives took full responsibility for supervising remote learning, but this was reportedly decided on time availability. Additionally, child age mattered in perceptions of integrating work and childcare, with fewer challenges reported among men who had infants or those with adolescent children who navigated online schooling more smoothly. Pre-pandemic, fathers reported a desire to spend more time with children (Milkie et al., 2019), and the men in this study indicated that the pandemic allowed them to do so.

Before the pandemic, mothers in the U.S. reported they often felt like they had to ask their partners for help with domestic labor, and because the men often did not know how to complete the task, they had to give explicit instructions and “train” their partners (Collins, 2019). These same women also had high expectations for “keeping a nice home and taking good care of one’s children” because these are “central to the American understanding of good mothering” (p. 216). In the current pandemic study, men reported that in their conversations with their partners, they had to negotiate, adjust expectations, and simplify when it came to domestic labor and their employment. Negotiation may have been key because of deep gendered expectations for the perceived expected standard of domestic labor in America, but with only the men’s voices it is unclear whether the division of domestic labor, or the negotiations themselves, met women’s expectations.

Fathers did report experiencing increased relational tension around scheduling and dividing responsibilities during the pandemic. These negotiations about domestic labor could relate to the relative resource hypothesis (Carlson & Petts, 2022; Stafford et al., 1977), in which power is central in dividing responsibilities. In a patriarchal society, fathers may expect negotiations to simplify domestic labor to decrease their potential contribution or to maintain the unequal division of domestic labor. For example, while men in this study expressed negotiations in division of domestic labor occurred, previous research has highlighted that women did more domestic labor than men during the pandemic (Carlson et al., 2022; Petts et al., 2023). It is possible that women continued to take on more of these tasks to navigate a power imbalance in their relationship—it “was easier to just do it themselves” instead of asking or “training” to meet their own expected standards for domestic labor (Collins, 2019, p. 216). Results in this study do align with pandemic research highlighting that women with inflexible jobs did negotiate childcare turn-taking with their partners during lockdowns (Martucci, 2023). More qualitative research with both partners’ perspectives is needed.

Kaufman (2013) stated that some contemporary fathers prioritize family responsibilities by actively making changes to their work lives. Some of the men in the sample left the workforce or decreased hours to care for children. The relative resource hypothesis (Stafford et al., 1977) was supported by two fathers who became stay-at-home parents because they felt their partners’ jobs took precedence. Another father, who was single and self-employed, had to decrease his work hours due to inconsistent supervision for his child during the pandemic. While much of the pandemic domestic labor research has rightfully focused on mothering (Leap et al., 2023), this single father expressed great challenges and more research on the collective experience of single fathers’ experiences during the pandemic is warranted.

4.2. Domestic labor and resources during the pandemic

In interviews with women in the U.S. before the pandemic, a woman stated that she wished her husband could stay home for a year to “fully experience the labor involved” with running a household and caring for children (Collins, 2019, p. 226). The pandemic possibly provided more insight for men into the different aspects of domestic labor they had previously not experienced for a continuous amount of time, and fathers in this study acknowledged this happened. Men in this study recognized the importance of resources outside of the household to support them. The focus on financial resources may provide support for the gender ideology hypothesis (Stafford et al., 1977) with gendered expectations for men to financially provide (Collins, 2019), men did appreciate the value of pandemic-era policies or temporary extension of policy to support income and employment (e.g., Paycheck Protection Program, federal business grants). Consistent with mothers’ reports (Vaterlaus et al., 2023), men also saw universal school meals as an important resource for their families during the pandemic.

Because of childcare center closures (Petts et al., 2021) and heightened risks for older adults who contracted COVID-19 (Shahid et al., 2020), men reported that access to childcare resources was challenging. After stay-at-home orders lifted, some of the men expressed appreciation for the availability of center-based childcare and grandparent care for their children, while some still desired more childcare resources.

Collins (2019) concluded that the U.S. does not have federal policies that readily support work-life integration, and because of this, American women view employer flexibility as an important resource to manage paid and unpaid labor responsibilities. Similarly, men in this study viewed employers’ willingness to be flexible as a resource that helped their families navigate childcare responsibilities during the pandemic. Consistent with the time availability hypothesis (Stafford et al., 1977), this allowed men to take on more care when their partners could not. Other Western countries have modeled nationwide family policy that promotes better work-life integration and supports more gender equity in workforce and domestic labor (Collins, 2019). With dramatic changes in family and work-life during the pandemic, this period of pandemic recovery should be a time to revisit and/or propose new policy related to federal paid family leave.

While men in this study generally explained that they enjoyed spending more time with their children and families during the pandemic, they also experienced increased relational tension with their partners and isolation. Consistent with Yavorsky et al. (2021) supposition, fathers reported that working from home was challenging for them and their partners as it blurred work-life responsibilities. Many of the fathers experienced employment flexibility leading to more division of labor based on time availability (Stafford et al., 1977), but this likely created some disequilibrium related to “one’s bargaining position” (Carlson & Petts, 2022, p. 2395) related to domestic labor responsibilities and deeply engrained traditional masculinity expectations for men to focus on breadwinning (Iztayeva, 2021). Specifically, some felt instability in their career identities as they navigated work-life integration during the pandemic. To manage these personal and relational challenges, access to mental health professionals was helpful for some, but in line with research (Covello, 2020; McKenzie et al., 2022), it was acknowledged a stigma exists for men who seek professional mental health support. Some strategies that may empower men to engage in help-seeking are peer support, exposure to positive mental-health messaging, and reframing help-seeking—seeing their need to be helped as “responsible, independent and rational” (McKenzie et al., 2022, p. 11). The shared lived experience of the COVID-19 pandemic as a global phenomenon may be a great entry point for men to start developing more peer support. Launching ad campaigns targeted at reducing stigma surrounding men’s mental health and normalizing men having stronger support networks could be especially impactful during the pandemic recovery process.

5. Limitations

The study did have limitations. The sample was homogenous in terms of race, education, income, and marital status (mixed gender). While all people experienced the global pandemic, the pandemic has disproportionately impacted marginalized racial groups and people with lower incomes (Leap et al., 2023). Compared to fathers with lower socioeconomic statuses (SES), fathers with higher SES tend to be more involved in their children’s lives (Henz, 2019). During the pandemic, men with high-skill jobs had more opportunities to negotiate additional flexibility or switch jobs/career paths compared to men with blue-collar or low-skilled jobs (Iztayeva, 2021). Most of the fathers in this study had completed undergraduate and graduate education and reported high incomes. Better-paying jobs often have other privileges such as working from home, being granted flexibility by an employer, having the ability for one parent to stay home with children, and having access to resources (e.g., childcare, mental health, services). The majority of participants in this study reported having these advantages. Further, all but one of the participants were married. Early in the pandemic, single custodial fathers experienced increased work-life challenges as they did not have a partner in their home to navigate childcare arrangements and many had to rely on extended family (Iztayeva, 2021).

There is a need in future pandemic research to explore the experiences of domestic labor with samples including more diversity (race, class) (Leap et al., 2023). Sampling should also consider recruiting same-gender couples, single parents, and other guardians (e.g., grandparents caring for grandchildren). The current cross-sectional study intentionally focused on fathers, but women in relationships with these men may have had different experiences. Longitudinal qualitative dyadic studies are needed.

6. Conclusions

The current study answered the call to qualitatively explore fathers’ domestic labor experiences during the pandemic (Leap et al., 2023). Largely providing support for the time availability hypothesis (Carlson & Petts, 2022; Stafford et al., 1977), fathers primarily indicated that flexibility in employment was paramount to how domestic labor was divided during the pandemic. Unique to this qualitative study, fathers reported that the actual process of dividing domestic labor during the pandemic involved discussion and negotiation in partner relationships, while simplifying to more realistic expectations for work and domestic labor. Fathers indicated that there was increased relational tension as these negotiations were made. In general, fathers reported enjoying more time with their families, but also highlighted external resources that helped them navigate their more challenging experiences during the pandemic.

The majority of domestic labor responsibilities continue to rest on women in the United States (Collins, 2019), and gender inequalities have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic (Petts, 2023). Petts (2023) has argued that fathers could play an integral role in reducing gender inequality, but their experiences and barriers to participation in domestic life have received less empirical attention. The global pandemic shifted family life and as indicated in the current study, provided many fathers with new perspectives and experiences with domestic labor. Giving voice to fathers’ experiences in research can provide support for policies that could promote higher father engagement in the domestic realm. For example, fathers in this study reported that employment flexibility was a valued resource that allowed fathers to balance the demands of their partners’ employment and to be more engaged with their children. The pandemic highlighted that employment flexibility is possible and companies should consider their policies in order to be competitive in recruitment and to promote better work-life integration for employees (Petts, 2023).

While there was initially more father involvement in domestic labor at the onset of the pandemic, eight months later fathers had already decreased their contributions to household tasks but maintained more childcare than was typical (Carlson & Petts, 2022). Fathers in the current study (data collected in 2021) had different experiences at the onset of the pandemic and at later points as the pandemic progressed. While the immediacy of the global COVID-19 pandemic has become more muted, it is possible that some of the consequences for families have yet to manifest and will need to be addressed in the recovery process (Vaterlaus et al., 2023). Based on findings in the current study, research during the pandemic recovery process specific to fathers’ experiences with domestic labor (e.g., time spent with children, maintenance/decline of increased contributions, navigating work-life integration as communities return to more typical life), employment (e.g., did employer flexibility continue?), relational health (e.g., what were the outcomes of greater relational tension?), and mental health is warranted.

Disclosure statement

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

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported by the Montana State University Undergraduate Scholars Program [2021].