Money Management and Gender Equality: An Analysis of Dual‐Earner Couples in Western Europe

Objective To explore the conditions under which couples use different money management systems. Background Both joint and individualized money management systems are associated more with gender egalitarian values than with the traditional “breadwinner” system. However, prior research has not fully e...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	Family relations 2020-10, Vol.69 (4), p.803-819
Main Author:	Çineli, Beyda
Format:	Article
Language:	eng
Subjects:	Age differences Counseling Couple therapy Couples Decision making Dual career couples Dual earner couples Egalitarianism Equality Families & family life Family income Family roles family sociology gender arrangements Gender differences Gender equity gender inequalities Gender inequality Homogamy household financial organization Households Income Income inequality Individualized intimate relationships Management Marriage Men Money Personal relationships Policy making Poverty Power Sex roles Social exchange theory Social norms Social values Values Women
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	Objective To explore the conditions under which couples use different money management systems. Background Both joint and individualized money management systems are associated more with gender egalitarian values than with the traditional “breadwinner” system. However, prior research has not fully examined the differences between these systems in terms of power relation attributes amongst couples, such as couples' relative income, age difference, and the associations with gender egalitarian values. Method The International Social Survey Program “Family and Changing Gender Roles” 2012 module (N = 2,520) was used to estimate multinomial logistic regression models predicting the likelihood of using different money management systems. Results The probability of using individualized or joint money management systems was much higher than traditional system for those who have more gender egalitarian beliefs. This probability was significantly higher for the individualized system. For a couple with income homogamy, the probability of using either the joint or the individualized system was higher. For relationships in which the males were older or earned significantly more money than their partners, the likelihood of using nontraditional systems (joint/individualized) was lower. Conclusion Couples who appeared relatively more traditional on characteristics such as individual gender role attitudes, relative income, and age difference are also more likely to use more traditional strategy. The individualized system, which is a newer method couples use to manage their money, is the most closely associated with gender egalitarian values. Implications Policymakers who focus on poverty and income inequalities should avoid treating the household as a single unit but rather take into consideration within‐household inequalities and gender differences. Furthermore, couple education and couple therapy–oriented policies can incorporate sessions about household money management into counselling programs for couples.
ISSN:	0197-6664 1741-3729