One-Parent Families and Vulnerability Network
Lead Research Organisation:
Glasgow Caledonian University
Department Name: Glasgow School for Business and Society
Abstract
Over the past decades the number of one-parent families has continually risen. Figures vary considerably by country. In 2016 the OECD noted that this family profile was more commonly found in predominantly white, anglophone countries. For example, in 2021, 15.4% of children in the UK were raised by lone parents (Office of National Statistics), in Ireland the rate is 25.4% (OneFamily), while in Australia and New Zealand the rates were 14.2% (Australian Bureau of Statistics -ABS) and 30%, respectively (OECD). The vast majority of one-parent families have always been, and continue to be, female-headed: in the UK the rate is 90% (Gingerbread), in Ireland it is 86.4% (One Family), while in Australia and New Zealand the rates are 79.9% (ABS) and 83% (StatsNZ), respectively.
Female-headed families have always been economically, socially, and medically vulnerable. They are more likely to live in poverty and have poorer health and educational outcomes than two-parent families. Despite changing social attitudes, they continue to be subjected to social and political stigma. The contemporary organisations dedicated to supporting one-parent families, in particular single mothers and their children, have stemmed from the voluntary groups which previously cared for unwed mothers.
This network brings together leading historians, archivists, and key organisations in the field. These organisations are linked through imperial connections and historical relationships of cooperation, with a long history of advocating for one-parent families: Gingerbread (England), One Parent Families Scotland, One Family Ireland, Birthright (New Zealand) and Single Mother Families and the Council of Single Mothers and their Children (Australia). The aim is to provide fresh insights into particular periods, organisations and case studies, share archival and research material and expertise, and to explore the potential of comparative perspectives to raising greater contemporary awareness and informing policy.
Key Questions:
1. How has the notion of vulnerability associated with single motherhood changed in these countries since the nineteenth century?
2. Who has defined what makes a pregnant woman and later a single parent 'vulnerable' and how has this changed across time and place?
3. How does class, gender, race, and religion intersect in the one-parent family?
4. Why are the majority of one-parent families headed by women and how has this changed over time and place?
5. How far have voluntary organisations working with one-parent families met their objectives and what shaped or prevented success?
6. What relationship have these organisations had with politics and the public in their locales?
7. What does the changing nature of these organisations and the services they provide tell historians about the history of one-parent families, policy priorities/needs, health and welfare?
8. Has the late twentieth-century refocusing of voluntary organisations to support and advocate for all one-parent families, as opposed to female-headed ones, changed the public perception of these organisations and one-parent families?
9. Has this broadening of focus resulted in different campaigns and/or altered policy objectives of these organisations?
10. How can one-parent family organisations' experiences of adapting to evolving health and welfare legislation and social norms and values inform historians about activism and processes of change?
11. How can historical perspectives shape future strategies and trajectories for voluntary organisations working with one-parent families?
This network addresses these issues at a time of transition worldwide as the numbers of children born to single and/or unmarried parents increases, posing new challenges for voluntary organisations, families and governments. It creates an interface between history, archives and the contemporary context, to test to what degree history can inform/shape future strategy and policy.
Female-headed families have always been economically, socially, and medically vulnerable. They are more likely to live in poverty and have poorer health and educational outcomes than two-parent families. Despite changing social attitudes, they continue to be subjected to social and political stigma. The contemporary organisations dedicated to supporting one-parent families, in particular single mothers and their children, have stemmed from the voluntary groups which previously cared for unwed mothers.
This network brings together leading historians, archivists, and key organisations in the field. These organisations are linked through imperial connections and historical relationships of cooperation, with a long history of advocating for one-parent families: Gingerbread (England), One Parent Families Scotland, One Family Ireland, Birthright (New Zealand) and Single Mother Families and the Council of Single Mothers and their Children (Australia). The aim is to provide fresh insights into particular periods, organisations and case studies, share archival and research material and expertise, and to explore the potential of comparative perspectives to raising greater contemporary awareness and informing policy.
Key Questions:
1. How has the notion of vulnerability associated with single motherhood changed in these countries since the nineteenth century?
2. Who has defined what makes a pregnant woman and later a single parent 'vulnerable' and how has this changed across time and place?
3. How does class, gender, race, and religion intersect in the one-parent family?
4. Why are the majority of one-parent families headed by women and how has this changed over time and place?
5. How far have voluntary organisations working with one-parent families met their objectives and what shaped or prevented success?
6. What relationship have these organisations had with politics and the public in their locales?
7. What does the changing nature of these organisations and the services they provide tell historians about the history of one-parent families, policy priorities/needs, health and welfare?
8. Has the late twentieth-century refocusing of voluntary organisations to support and advocate for all one-parent families, as opposed to female-headed ones, changed the public perception of these organisations and one-parent families?
9. Has this broadening of focus resulted in different campaigns and/or altered policy objectives of these organisations?
10. How can one-parent family organisations' experiences of adapting to evolving health and welfare legislation and social norms and values inform historians about activism and processes of change?
11. How can historical perspectives shape future strategies and trajectories for voluntary organisations working with one-parent families?
This network addresses these issues at a time of transition worldwide as the numbers of children born to single and/or unmarried parents increases, posing new challenges for voluntary organisations, families and governments. It creates an interface between history, archives and the contemporary context, to test to what degree history can inform/shape future strategy and policy.
