Abstract
This study explores the qualitative aspects of a mixed-methods research project on managing work and family roles in pandemic-related working from home (WFH). It aims to examine how WFH influences family roles and family-work integration. Data was collected from 231 parents through an online survey responding to COVID-19 restrictions. The study introduces Intersectionality Theory in the WFH context, emphasizing how the intricate interplay of gender roles, work, and individual factors shapes the WFH preferences. The findings showed that 60.2% of participants were reluctant to continue WFH after the pandemic, highlighting WFH’s benefits and challenges for working parents. While it enabled some families to manage childcare better and reinforced family connections, persistent gender roles remained apparent. Even though men increased collaborative caregiving, women still shouldered the most family responsibilities. The study also highlighted that blurring boundaries between work and family domains resulted in significant role confusion, especially for women. Although WFH contributed to enhanced productivity for some, others struggled with productivity challenges, particularly in the educational field, due to the absence of in-person interaction. While WFH promoted a more flexible lifestyle, issues such as disorganization and social isolation were notable challenges. The results highlight the importance of implementing gender-neutral workplace practices, developing profession-specific WFH policies that accommodate individual preferences, and establishing clear boundaries between family and work to promote sustainable and equitable WFH environments.
Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic significantly disrupted societal norms and practices, particularly concerning global work modalities. In response to unprecedented challenges, governments and organizations were necessitated to implement new measures. Among the most consequential was the rapid and widespread transition to working from home (WFH), which many countries undertook with little prior experience (Kaya et al. 2022). This abrupt shift required employees, organizations, and institutions to swiftly adapt to remote work, often amidst inadequate infrastructure and preparation.
In Turkiye, the initial case of COVID-19 was confirmed on March 11, 2020, followed by the introduction of WFH regulations on March 22, 2020. This action formed part of broader measures to minimize physical interactions in public domains (Official Gazette of the Republic of Turkiye 2020a). Although this practice was suspended on June 1, 2020, it was reinstated on August 26, 2020, and remained effective until July 1, 2021, considering escalating infection rates (Official Gazette of the Republic of Turkiye 2020b; 2020c; 2021). As a result, WFH arrangements were in effect in Turkiye for more than a year. In contrast to several European Union nations, where WFH had been utilized by approximately 5% to 6% of the workforce over the preceding decade (Eurostat 2021), Turkiye had minimal experience with this working model. While WFH had been acknowledged as a flexible working arrangement within Turkiye’s labor law since 2016, it was only during the pandemic that it gained widespread adoption (Ministry of Labour and Social Security 2021).
Remote work options, such as WFH, offer a competitive advantage in promoting family-work balance (Felstead and Henseke 2017). However, research presents conflicting outcomes regarding this assertion. Some studies have documented concerns that WFH complicates the maintenance of boundaries between family and work life, consequently diminishing family-work balance (Batt and Valcour 2003; Hill et al. 1998; Kossek et al. 2006). Other research indicates that WFH may enhance family-work balance by affording employees greater control over their schedules (Hill et al. 2003; Sullivan 2012). The global transition to WFH due to COVID-19 has yielded diverse findings regarding its effects on family and work lives. While several studies emphasize the advantages of flexibility, improved family-work balance, and reduced conflict (Scottish Government Central Analysis Division 2022; Pirzadeh and Lingard 2021), others highlight the blurring of boundaries between work and home life, which disrupts family dynamics and engenders conflict between these two spheres (Bernhardt et al. 2023; Stankevičiūtė and Kunskaja 2022; Vitória et al. 2022). Consequently, the impact of WFH on family-work balance remains an area of inquiry.
Moreover, evidence indicates that WFH reinforced existing gender roles and caregiving norms exacerbated by pandemic-related adaptations, disproportionately affecting women. For example, UN DESA and UN Women (2022) data revealed that women accounted for 512 billion of the 672 billion additional hours of unpaid childcare necessitated by school closures during the pandemic. The inequitable distribution of domestic labor during the pandemic left many working mothers grappling with the dual pressures of paid employment and unpaid caregiving (OECD 2021a; UN Women 2021, 2022). Similarly, Aguiar et al. (2021) noted that parents, particularly mothers, faced heightened family demands that compounded stress and adversely impacted their labor market performance.
This study aims to investigate the experiences of working parents in Turkiye during the WFH period related to COVID-19, specifically focusing on how they managed family roles and family-work integration under these extraordinary circumstances. The research will explore the following questions:
1. In what ways did parents’ family responsibilities, such as childcare and housework, change during the WFH period?
2. Are parents inclined to continue WFH after the conclusion of the COVID-19 pandemic?
3. What motivations may drive parents to sustain or discontinue WFH arrangements post-pandemic?
Given that the large-scale adoption of WFH in Turkiye transpired during the pandemic, this study presents a significant opportunity to evaluate its repercussions on working parents. It contributes to understanding the complexities and challenges associated with WFH, particularly concerning gender dynamics. The findings will serve as an essential resource for policymakers and employers tasked with designing inclusive and effective WFH frameworks that cater to the diverse needs of employees.
Literature review
The COVID-19 pandemic forced a widespread shift to WFH, offering a distinctive framework for examining the interplay of family-work integration and WFH arrangements. While WFH provides flexibility and the potential for a more balanced family and work life, it also highlights sex-based inequalities in household labor. This review synthesizes existing literature on the division of domestic labor by sex and the implications of WFH on family-work dynamics.
The division of labor within households has historically been characterized by gender, with women bearing a disproportionate share of unpaid domestic and caregiving duties. Early scholarship, such as that by Oakley, 2018 (1974), posited that the gendered division of labor is a sociocultural construct rooted in patriarchal systems. Traditionally, women have been assigned the roles of home managers, caregivers, and child-rearers, while men have primarily assumed the role of economic providers. Despite notable increases in women’s participation in the workforce, the household labor division has remained inequitable, with women continuing to shoulder a significant portion of domestic and caregiving responsibilities. Hochschild and Machung (1989/2012) have described this pattern as the “second shift,” referring to the unpaid domestic work that women do after their paid employment.
Numerous studies have documented this persistent imbalance, emphasizing the continued influence of gender roles within the domestic sphere, even amid evolving female labor market participation. Bianchi et al. (2000) noted that women’s workplace equality advancements have not been mirrored at home. Bittman et al. (2003) further highlighted that, in dual-income households, women still allocate more time to household chores and childcare than men. Goldscheider et al. (2015) also demonstrated that although female workforce participation has increased, men have tended to engage less in housework, even in households where women are employed full-time.
The COVID-19 pandemic intensified existing gender roles, with many women encountering heightened domestic responsibilities alongside their work commitments, including childcare, remote education, and household tasks (Craig and Churchill 2021). Shockley et al., (2021) study showed that despite WFH’s flexibility, women took on more intensive, unexpected, and ongoing care responsibilities as they grappled with simultaneous professional obligations. Chauhan (2022) asserted that WFH arrangements perpetuated gender roles, with women shouldering greater domestic responsibilities alongside work duties, whereas men were less likely to encounter similar pressures.
Conversely, some studies have suggested that WFH could facilitate a more equitable redistribution of domestic labor. Augustine et al., (2024) study provided suggestive evidence that WFH was associated with more active caregiving time for mothers and fathers, thereby challenging gendered labor divisions. Similarly, Sánchez et al. (2021) noted that in some instances, men increased their participation in household duties while WFH contributed to a more equitable distribution of domestic responsibilities. Dunatchik et al. (2021) also found that the gender disparity in domestic work decreased as fathers became more engaged during WFH. Nonetheless, Vaterlaus et al. (2023) cautioned that such progress was not steady; as the pandemic progressed into November 2020, some evidence indicated that fathers decreased in household task completion (Carlson and Petts 2022), suggesting that the gendered division of labor has been firmly embedded in long-standing societal structures that WFH alone may not easily change.
Workplace policies are crucial in shaping how WFH affects gendered domestic labor. Hill et al. (2008) posited that flexible work arrangements paired with supportive workplace policies—such as paid family leave and flexible scheduling—can mitigate work-family conflict while promoting more equitable engagement in both work and family roles. Conversely, the absence of such policies can exacerbate gender disparities. Ochsner et al. (2020) highlighted the importance of implementing gender-neutral policies within organizations. Strategies that primarily focus on assisting women in balancing work and family responsibilities are unlikely to promote an equitable division of labor at home. This implies that household tasks can become more balanced when women and men access the same organizational resources, even within the context of WFH.
This study aims to contribute to existing literature by examining two key aspects. First, it explores changes in family responsibilities before and during the WFH period, offering insights into how the pandemic reshaped familial roles and gendered labor dynamics. Unlike many studies focusing solely on post-pandemic family configurations, this research captures the transition in responsibilities, providing a comprehensive view of gendered labor impacts. Second, it uses a qualitative methodology to gather insights from parents about their lived experiences, allowing them to express their challenges and perspectives. This approach reveals the complexities of balancing work and family responsibilities and emphasizes the individual nuances often overlooked in quantitative research.
Method
Research metodology
Transcendental phenomenology was utilized in this research. This approach plays a pivotal role in qualitative research, drawing on the foundational principles established by Husserl (1931, as cited in Moerer-Urdahl and Creswell 2004) and further developed by Moustakas (1994). Transcendental phenomenology emphasizes a deep exploration of individual experiences, aiming to uncover the meanings participants attribute to various phenomena. By focusing on the essence of these experiences, transcendental phenomenology allows researchers to gain a deeper understanding of participants’ perspectives, facilitating rich insights into the complexities of human experience. This methodology is particularly effective in qualitative studies where grasping the subjective experiences of individuals is essential (Moustakas 1994) (please see Appendix 1 for more).
By employing this methodology, the research aims to avoid the limitations typically associated with empirical methods, which may overlook the intricacies of human experiences. Instead, transcendental phenomenology offers a robust framework for understanding and interpreting the meanings individuals ascribe to their lived experiences. This focus on phenomenological insights enriches the research findings and contributes to the broader discourse within the field by highlighting the depth and significance of subjective human experiences.
Participants and procedure
The study employed convenience sampling, which involves selecting individuals from the target population using practical criteria such as ease of access, geographical closeness, availability at a specific time, and the participant's willingness to engage in the study (Dörnyei 2007). This sampling technique was particularly suitable for the present study due to the unique circumstances created by the COVID-19 pandemic, which significantly impacted how traditional data collection methods were conducted.
The target population for this research consisted of working parents who transitioned to remote work arrangements as a direct result of the pandemic. This demographic was essential to the study as their experiences and challenges during this time provided critical insights into the effects of remote work on family and work balance. A total of 231 parents participated voluntarily, with data collected online to comply with the necessary COVID-19 health restrictions and ensure the safety of all participants.
Instrument
The study used an online questionnaire divided into three sections. The first section gathered demographic information about participants, including their sex, age, education level, and occupation. The second section included four questions to evaluate changes in family responsibilities related to childcare and household tasks during the WFH period. For instance, one question asked, “What was the arrangement for housework responsibilities in your family before WFH?” The third section consisted of two questions that explored participants’ interest in continuing to WFH after COVID-19 and the motivations for their preferences. The first question was: “Do you wish to continue WFH after COVID-19?” The follow-up question encouraged participants to elaborate on their reasoning.
Data analyses
The study analyzed changes in parents’ family responsibilities before and during the WFH period, presenting these shifts as percentages through visual figures. This approach enhanced the understanding of WFH’s influence on family dynamics. Additionally, it facilitated comparisons across sexes, which is essential for investigating the shifts in responsibilities among male and female participants during WFH.
A content analysis was conducted to systematically examine the responses to an open-ended question, focusing on identifying recurring themes within the narratives. Through this analysis, the author established four main themes: work, family, the intersection of work and family, and individual. Specific codes accompanied each theme to enhance the categorization of the responses.
To ensure a deeper understanding of each theme’s significance, the author quantitatively assessed the prevalence of these themes utilizing frequency tables. This method illustrated how often each theme appeared in the participants’ responses, offering clearer insights into the collective experiences and narratives. To maintain participant confidentiality, the presented examples of responses included the participants’ sex (indicated as “W” for women and “M” for men) along with a unique questionnaire number (e.g., Participant W48, Participant M54). This approach ensures that individual identities remain protected while still providing valuable insights into shared perspectives.
Results
Characteristics of participants
The study involved 231 participants, of whom 63.6% were female and 36.4% were male, with a mean age of 39.32 years (SD = 7.05). The 7.4% of participants had completed high school or less, while another 7.4% attended community college, 58.4% were undergraduate, and 26.8% held graduate degrees. Regarding occupation, the largest group was teachers (42.8%), followed by administrative support workers (18.2%), architects/engineers (9.1%), faculty members (16.1%), bank workers (3.9%), healthcare professionals (3.5%), sales associates (2.6%), and others (13.8%) such as lawyers, insurance agents, work safety specialists, accountants, labor inspectors, consultants. Additionally, 82.3% reported that their spouse was employed full-time. Participants had a mean of 1.64 children (SD = 0.71), with the youngest averaging 6.61 years (SD = 4.94) (Table 1).
Table 1 Demographics of participants.
Full size table
Changes in child-related responsibilities with WFH
In addressing the initial research question, the study investigated the changes in child-related responsibilities attributable to WFH and underscored the distinctions between men and women. Among the women, there was a notable decline of 8.1% in “sitter in charge,” accompanied by a 7.5% increase in the shared responsibility “my spouse and myself almost equally in charge.” Furthermore, there was a slight increase in “mostly my spouse in charge,” with a 2.0% rise, while “mostly myself in charge” decreased by 2.3%. Despite these fluctuations, “mostly myself in charge” continued to dominate, standing at 49.9% before WFH and decreasing to 47.6% during the WFH (Fig. 1). From the women’s perspective, the share of child-related duties before and during the WFH period was continually larger.
Fig. 1
figure 1
Changes in child-related responsibilities with WFH (working from home) for women.
Full size image
Among the men, the most notable changes observed during this period were a 10.8% decrease in “mostly my spouse in charge” and a 10.7% increase in “my spouse and myself almost equally in charge.” Minor adjustments were noted in “sitter in charge,” with a 5.9% decline, and “mostly myself in charge,” showing a transition from no representation to 6%, reflecting a 6% increase. Across both timeframes, “my spouse and myself almost equally in charge” emerged as the predominant arrangement, accounting for 53.6% before the WFH period and rising to 64.3% during WFH (Fig. 2). From the men’s experience, there was continuity in the equitable distribution of child-related responsibilities with their spouses both before and during the WFH period.
Fig. 2
figure 2
Changes in child-related responsibilities with WFH (working from home) for men.
Full size image
Changes in housework responsibilities with WFH
Housework, including cooking, cleaning, and ironing, was another family responsibility addressed in the study, and changes in household duties among men and women before and after WFH were analyzed. Notable shifts for women included an 8.9% increase in “my spouse and myself almost equally in charge” alongside a 6.8% decrease in “housemaid in charge.” There were also minor adjustments seen in “mostly my spouse in charge” (which decreased from 0.7% to none) and “mostly myself in charge” (a decrease of 1.4%). Throughout both periods, most women indicated they were the primary caregivers, with “mostly myself in charge” accounting for 62.6% before and 61.2% during WFH (Fig. 3). According to the women, they consistently took on greater housework responsibilities, both before and during the WFH period.
Fig. 3
figure 3
Changes in housework responsibilities with WFH (working from home) for women.
Full size image
Among the men, notable shifts in household responsibilities were observed during the transition to WFH. The category reflecting shared responsibilities, “my spouse and myself almost equally in charge,” saw an increase of 9.5%. Conversely, “mostly my spouse is in charge” experienced a decrease of 8.3%. Minor changes were recorded in “mostly myself in charge,” which increased by 1.2%, and “housemaid in charge,” which decreased by 2.4%. Throughout both periods analyzed, the category of “mostly my spouse in charge” remained predominant, with rates of 57.1% prior to WFH and 48.8% during WFH (Fig. 4). These findings suggest that from the perspective of the men, wives had assumed a higher share of household responsibilities both before and during the WFH period.
Fig. 4
figure 4
Changes in housework responsibilities with WFH (working from home) for men.
Full size image
Experiences influencing preferences for or against WFH post-COVID-19
Participants were asked about their desire for WFH after the COVID-19 pandemic. Following their initial responses, they were invited to elaborate on their reasons. The reasons provided by the participants were analyzed and categorized into thematic groups through a Content Analysis. This process yielded four primary themes: family, work, family and work, and individual. Each theme was assigned specific codes to enhance the effectiveness of the response categorization. Subsequently, these codes were quantified separately for male and female participants, allowing for a comparative analysis of responses.
Reasons for reluctance to engage in WFH
A substantial proportion of participants, precisely 60.2%, expressed a preference against continuing to WFH following the COVID-19 pandemic. Notably, a significant percentage of males, 66.7%, indicated a strong desire to return to the traditional office setting. In parallel, 56.5% of females conveyed a similar inclination towards resuming on-site work.
Family theme
The predominant concern highlighted by participants was the “negative impact on family relationships” (Table 2). Participants felt frustrated because family members did not recognize and respect their professional roles, which led to conflicts. Women articulated their experiences with statements such as: “Being at home often leads to the household expecting everything from you. Family members must acknowledge the woman’s work role, which is only feasible if she has a job outside the home” (Participant W121).Footnote 1 Similarly, men shared their perspectives on the detrimental effects of WFH on family dynamics, stating: “My family life is deteriorating” (Participant M259). Footnote 2
Table 2 Reasons for not wanting to continue WFH (working from home) after COVID-19 by sex.
Full size table
The family theme also highlighted the challenges related to “child and housework-related responsibilities,” which were primarily noted by women (Table 2). Several women expressed how managing their roles at home while working became increasingly overwhelming. One participant stated, “Working from home is very challenging in households with young children” (Participant W169). Another shared, “Balancing the demands of my child and husband while handling housework makes each day feel exhausting” (Participant W231).Footnote 3
Work theme
The work theme emerged as the most significant among the participants who did not want WFH to continue after the pandemic. The predominant reason shared by participants was a “decline in productivity.” It was also the most commonly mentioned reason among men and women (Table 2). Some remarks from participants include: “Decrease in efficiency” (M79), “Face-to-face education is more efficient” (Participant W5), “Working from home is not very productive” (Participant W145), “I do not think it is efficient enough for students” (W139), and “Being face-to-face with students will increase efficiency” (Participant M28).Footnote 4
In the work theme, the “incompatible type of profession” issue with WFH ranked as the second most stated reason for participants’ reluctance to continue WFH (Table 2). A female participant, identified as W36, who is a teacher, articulated her perspective: “Teaching is a profession that necessitates direct, in-person interaction with students within the classroom environment. While distance education offers certain advantages, it is fundamentally challenging to monitor an entire class simultaneously, particularly when students have their cameras disabled, which inhibits eye contact.”Footnote 5 These statements illustrate the inherent incompatibility of certain professions with WFH.
“Loss of motivation and concentration” and “lacking work discipline” were additional factors contributing to participants’ reluctance to continue WFH, as identified in the work theme (Table 2). For instance, one participant noted, “I believe working from home reduces work motivation” (Participant M56), while another noted, “It creates concentration problems” (Participant W109). A participant highlighted the difficulty in adjusting individual habits, stating, “Habits do not change easily. My motivation at work was better than now” (Participant M155).Footnote 6 Additionally, some participants expressed their reluctance to continue WFH due to the issue of “working outside of working hours,” which was the final concern noted within the work theme (Table 3). Participant W90 articulated this sentiment: “I do not want the working from home system to continue because it requires extra work outside working hours. Work hours must be clear and implemented outside the home environment.”
Table 3 Reasons for wanting to continue WFH (working from home) after COVID-19 by sex.
Full size table
Family and work theme
This theme identified the reluctance to continue WFH as stemming from the “necessity of boundaries.” The dissatisfaction from blurred lines between family and work life during WFH was particularly pronounced. Women expressed considerable concern regarding this issue (Table 2). One participant articulated, “During the period of working from home, the roles of mother, wife, and employee become intertwined, leading to an inability to fulfill any of them fully (Participant W145), while another emphasized, “Family life belongs at home, while work life belongs at work. Everything should be in its rightful place” (Participant W117).Footnote 7 Men also reflected on these experiences, stating, “My roles as father and engineer get mixed up while working from home. It is a more logical option for me to separate these two roles by separating the spaces” (Participant M189).Footnote 8
Individual theme
In this theme, participants expressed a predominant concern regarding the ongoing WFH arrangements, identifying the “planless and disorganized life” WFH imposed on their routines (Table 2). Due to this work arrangement, various participants articulated their struggles with planning and organizing their schedules. For instance, one participant stated, “I do not have a planned life” (Participant W19), while another mentioned, “Working from home makes it difficult for me to plan my life” (Participant M53). Several participants noted that traditional office work offered a sense of structure, as indicated by comments such as, “Working at the workplace provides order” (Participant W59) and “Although working from home is comfortable, going to work has many advantages. Before, our lives were more organized” (Participant W226). Footnote 9
Another concern raised by participants in this theme was the “inability to socialize,” a challenge linked to the absence of a social environment that WFH promoted. Notably, nearly all participants expressing dissatisfaction regarding social interaction were women (Table 2). Comments such as “You cannot socialize” (Participant W121) and “This new working arrangement eliminates socialization between people, which I think is very necessary. Going to work also means human interaction for me” (Participant W169) illustrated the perceived deficiency in interpersonal interactions.
Within the individual theme, participants expressed concerns about a “decline in physical activity” due to WFH, attributed to the extended indoor hours (Table 2). One participant noted, “I think it fosters a sense of laziness, making people less active” (Participant M176). Footnote 10 Lastly, participants expressed that WFH was “tiring” (Table 2). It was encapsulated in statements such as, “I am getting more tired” (Participant W51) and “It is tiring” (Participant M167), highlighting the exhaustion associated with WFH.
Reasons for embracing WFH
Among the surveyed participants, 39.8% indicated a sustained interest in maintaining WFH arrangements following the pandemic. Sex-based analysis revealed that 43.5% of females preferred continued WFH, compared to 33.3% of males.
Family theme:
In the family theme, the predominant reason expressed by participants desiring to continue WFH was to “spend more time with family.” This sentiment was notably more pronounced among males, as illustrated in Table 3. Representative statements include: “I think I spent more time with my family during the pandemic” (Participant M43) and “I want to spend more time with my family” (Participant M107). Footnote 11
The second most common reason was the increased opportunity to “spend more time with children and handling child-related responsibilities.” This rationale was exclusively articulated by females (Table 3), with statements such as: “I can spend more time with my child” (Participant W192), “I can pay more attention to my children” (Participant W78), and “For my dependent children” (Participant W156).Footnote 12 Third, one male participant highlighted the “positive impacts on family relationships” as a reason for preferring to continue WFH. He noted, “Our worn-out family ties have become stronger, and we have become happier than before” (Participant M181).
Work theme
In this theme, the most frequently cited reason for desiring to continue WFH was an “increase in productivity.” While both males and females acknowledged this benefit, women predominantly emphasized it (Table 3). Participants remarked, “When the pros and cons of both situations are taken into consideration, working from home increases productivity” (Participant M158) and I work more efficiently” (Participant W2).Footnote 13
The second most mentioned reason was “eliminating commuting.” Participants of both sexes highlighted the reduction of traffic-related stress resulting from WFH (Table 3), with comments such as: “Working from home eliminates the time lost in commuting to and from work, traffic stress, and fatigue” (Participant W268) and “Road stress has reduced” (Participant W57).Footnote 14
Further, some participants preferred WFH due to the absence of a “toxic work environment,” a sentiment notably more prevalent among females (Table 3). Many shared their positive experiences regarding WFH, particularly those who faced challenges at their workplace due to their managers or coworkers. Comments included: “I no longer have to encounter some faces at work that I find difficult to tolerate” (Participant M215) and “The absence of circumstances that lead to stress and pressure from management or coworkers in the workplace” (Participant W263).Footnote 15
Several participants noted that WFH provided a “stress-free, comfortable workspace,” particularly emphasized by females (Table 3). This sentiment was captured in statements such as: “A more stress-free working environment” (Participant W62) and “Being able to work with less stress” (Participant W75).Footnote 16
Family and work theme
The desire for WFH to continue was linked to the enhancement of “family-work balance,” as articulated by a male participant who stated, “I can manage my work and family life in a more balanced and healthy way” (Participant M24).
Individual theme
This theme became the most prominent among participants advocating for the continuation of WFH after the pandemic. A key reason highlighted within this theme was the desire for a “relaxed, stress-free life,” primarily expressed by females (Table 3). Examples of this perspective included remarks such as, “I think there is less stress than before” (Participant W40), “I am more relaxed and happier” (Participant W80), and “Reduction in intensity and stress” (Participant M17).Footnote 17 The second most articulated reason was “time-saving,” with female participants primarily asserting this advantage (Table 3). Examples of participant statements include: “It saves time” (Participant W54), “Working from home can be an important part of efficiently utilizing time” (Participant M45), and “It is time-saving” (Participant W89).
Moreover, many participants noted that WFH allowed them “spare time for self,” a benefit predominantly expressed by females (Table 3). Statements such as “To have more time for myself” (Participant M23)” and “For our individual needs” (Participant W168) exemplify this sentiment.Footnote 18 Finally, the “economic advantages” of WFH emerged as the last reason to continue this arrangement, with equal representation from both sexes acknowledging the financial benefits of this arrangement (Table 3). Notable statements include: “Financial difficulties” (Participant M8) and “Economic reasons” (Participant W9), which highlight the economic advantages of WFH.
Discussion
The study explored the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on parents’ family responsibilities and family-work integration during the period of WFH that many experienced as a result of public health measures. It focused on whether these responsibilities shifted during this time and aimed to understand parents’ preferences regarding continuing WFH arrangements after the immediate crisis subsided.
Key to this investigation was the perspective of gender roles, as these roles often dictate the distribution of household tasks and parenting responsibilities. The study analyzed how gender roles were affected by the necessity of WFH, observing changes in how mothers and fathers managed their duties at home with their children. Furthermore, it identified variations in parents’ preferences for continuing WFH options following the pandemic, focusing on the influence of gender roles. It investigated the underlying motivations for these preferences, exploring the factors contributing to the desire for WFH arrangements and those that deter parents from wishing to retain such options.
Changes in child-related responsibilities with WFH
The analysis of child-related responsibilities before and during WFH provides valuable insights into the impact of WFH arrangements on distributing parental duties between women and men. Despite distinct perceptions of parenting roles between sexes, the results indicate a notable change in sharing duties. Nevertheless, while there were advancements in pursuing balanced parenting, the ongoing presence of gender norms signals that continued progress is needed to achieve equitable partnerships in child-rearing fully.
For women, the 7.5% increase in the shared responsibility designation of “my spouse and myself almost equally in charge” may indicate progress toward achieving a more equitable division in child-related duties. However, this gain was accompanied by an 8.1% decline in the “sitter in charge,” indicating that couples were likelier to share the sitter’s duties instead of men genuinely assuming more childcare responsibilities belonged to women. The dominance of the “mostly myself in charge” remained virtually unchanged, at nearly half (49.9% pre-WFH and 47.6% during WFH), underscores the persistent nature of gender roles in parenting, even amidst the changes brought on by the pandemic. Supporting this, OECD’s (2021b) Risk That Matter (RTM) 2020 survey found during the pandemic, that when schools and preschools were closed due to the pandemic, a higher proportion (61.5%) of mothers took on most or all the childcare duties for children under age 12 in contrast to fathers. This dynamic aligns with various studies conducted during the pandemic, consistently documenting women’s predominant roles in parenting (Craig and Churchill 2021; Crosbie and Moore 2004; Evans et al. 2020; Manzo and Minello 2020; Fuller and Qian 2020), raising questions about the long-term implications of these dynamics for sex equity in both domestic and professional spheres.
Men notably moved towards a more egalitarian approach to parenting responsibilities. The 10.8% fall in “mostly my spouse in charge,” coupled with a 10.7% rise in shared responsibility, indicate a transition towards an equitable distribution of caregiving tasks despite a 5.9% decline in the sitter’s share. Notably, the emergence of “my spouse and myself almost equally in charge” as the predominant arrangement for men increased from 53.6% to 64.3% during WFH. This trend of men taking on roles held by women suggests a potential cultural shift that could lead to more equitable partnerships in parenting. Such changes may mirror broader societal shifts in perceptions of parental roles, particularly as work environments evolve.
Nevertheless, it is essential to interpret these findings cautiously, particularly considering the persistent elements of gendered labor dynamics. Although men demonstrated a greater propensity for sharing caregiving responsibilities, the minimal changes in women’s roles highlight the need for more profound structural transformations that challenge entrenched gender roles. Moreover, although modest, the 6% increase in the “mostly myself in charge” category among men suggests that some males may still prefer to maintain a primary role in childcare, even with the broader trend towards shared responsibilities. Additionally, this outcome may be influenced by the context of mothers’ work during the pandemic. Given that data were collected during this period, the work demands of mothers in the healthcare sector, for instance, could significantly affect their childcare responsibilities, as they often worked extended hours and were frequently away from home, creating a disparity in the distribution of labor within the household. This aspect must be considered in the overall landscape of childcare responsibilities and the pursuit of sex equality.
Research has identified various factors that shape the degree of paternal involvement in childcare during the pandemic-related WFH. These include the number and ages of children, the frequency of working from home, the specific industry of employment, work demands, and the WFH status of the father’s partner. These studies illustrate that factors such as family structure and work conditions significantly impact how fathers engage in childcare during this unprecedented period (Del Boca et al. 2020; Margaria 2021; Schieman et al. 2021).
The study results revealed that the practice of pandemic-related WFH increased paternal involvement in childcare responsibilities. However, it did not transform the pre-existing inequitable distribution of caregiving duties into an egalitarian framework, suggesting that while collaboration in caretaking roles appears to grow, sustainable change will likely require concerted efforts to challenge and reshape entrenched gender roles and create environments that support equitable sharing of child-related responsibilities.
Changes in housework responsibilities with WFH
The analysis of household tasks before and after the transition to the WFH indicates that despite some positive developments in the sharing of housework responsibilities between men and women during the pandemic, these shifts appear to be more surface-level adjustments than substantive changes toward sex equality. It is also important to mention that the contextual factors related to the pandemic complicated the interpretation of these changes. Unlike child-related responsibilities, both sexes agreed that women were mainly responsible for housework.
For women, the observed increase of 8.9% in shared responsibilities in “my spouse and myself almost equally in charge” might initially seem like a positive development toward achieving a more equitable division of labor. However, this improvement coincided with a 6.8% decrease in the reliance on external help, as captured by the diminishing representation of “housemaid in charge,” suggesting that couples were more likely to split the housemaid’s share rather than men genuinely taking over some of the workloads that typically had fallen to women. The consistency in responses indicating “mostly myself in charge,” which remained at 62.6% before WFH and fell slightly to 61.2% during, emphasizes that women continued to bear a disproportionate burden of household chores. These findings imply that while there was some progress in shared responsibilities, it may be a temporary adjustment due to pandemic-related circumstances, such as limited access to housemaids, rather than a genuine shift towards equality.
Conversely, men showed a notable increase in their involvement with household duties. The 9.5% uptick in shared duties, along with an 8.3% decrease in “mostly my spouse is in charge,” in “mostly my spouse is in charge” by 8.3% rather than a 2.4% drop in housemaid assistance, reflects a significant transition in men’s attitudes toward domestic responsibility. However, despite these shifts, the continued prevalence of men identifying with “mostly my spouse in charge” (57.1% pre-WFH to 48.8% during), a sentiment also echoed by women, suggests that gender norms remain a barrier to a fair distribution of household duties.
Crosbie and Moore (2004) posited that WFH reinforces gender roles. Similarly, Lott and Chung (2016) argued that WFH maintains existing familial responsibilities and may exacerbate them against women. Research conducted in countries with relatively higher levels of sex equality than Turkiye, including England, Canada, Australia, Italy, and the United States (UNDP 2022), highlighted that the COVID-19 pandemic made sex inequalities within the household more pronounced (Andrew et al. 2020; Carlson et al. 2020; Collins et al. 2021; Craig and Churchill 2021; Evans et al. 2020; Manzo and Minello 2020; Fuller and Qian 2020).
Comparative studies on the distribution of household responsibilities by sex during the COVID-19 pandemic showed that parents experienced increased time pressures relative to the pre-pandemic period. Nevertheless, evidence indicates that mothers allocated less time to paid work and more time to domestic responsibilities compared to fathers (Andrew et al. 2020; Carlson et al. 2020; Collins et al. 2021; Craig and Churchill 2021; Del Boca et al. 2020; Evans et al. 2020; Fuller and Qian 2020; Manzo and Minello 2020; Margaria 2021). According to UN Women (2020), the inequitable distribution of household responsibilities intensified during the pandemic, with women shouldering the burdens of housework, cleaning, childcare, and care for older adults at a rate three times higher than that of men. In response to this disparity, the organization launched the #HeForSheAtHome campaign, raising awareness of women’s unequal burdens and encouraging men to share domestic responsibilities actively (UN Women 2020).
Considering WFH after COVID-19
Most participants (60.2%) preferred to stop WFH after the pandemic, while the rest (39.8%) expressed their desire for it. Among women, 56.5% prefer returning to the office, while 66.7% of men share this preference. The motivations for these preferences encompass family considerations, work-related factors, an intersection of family and work, and individual reasons.
Reasons for reluctance to engage in WFH
Family
Two significant issues contributed to the reluctance to continue WFH after the pandemic: the detrimental effects on family relationships and the increased responsibilities associated with childcare and household duties. Only women reported that their childcare and household responsibilities influenced their desire to cease WFH, while both women and men acknowledged the negative impact of WFH on family dynamics. In line with this, Del Boca et al. (2020) revealed that working mothers, particularly those with young children, face increased challenges in managing domestic responsibilities with WFH.
An analysis of the data revealed that most women who desired to discontinue WFH due to childcare and household responsibilities were predominantly responsible for these tasks before and during the WFH period. For others, there was a notable shift in their responsibilities from a status of “almost equally in charge with spouse” to being “mostly in charge.” The heightened responsibilities at home and the challenges of performing work tasks in a home environment likely contributed to their discontent with continuing WFH.
Conversely, for those women who reported that WFH adversely impacted family relationships, their domestic responsibilities decreased during the WFH period. Specifically, these women experienced a transition from being “mostly in charge” to sharing responsibilities “almost equally” with their spouses. This shift can be challenging, as it often requires open communication and negotiation, which some couples may find hard to navigate. The potential for misunderstandings around responsibilities could ultimately strain family relationships.
Men’s concerns about the negative impact of WFH on family relationships can also be linked to the responsibilities they share at home, like those of women. In many of these men’s families, the division of both childcare and household duties either remained the same—where wives were “mostly in charge”—or shifted in a way that increased the burden on wives. For instance, the housework-related responsibilities transitioned from a nearly equal partnership to where the responsibility largely fell on their spouses, giving them all the right to complain. Consequently, it is unsurprising that these men perceive WFH as detrimental to their family relations, particularly with their wives, since they found themselves at home but primarily left domestic tasks to their wives or relinquished the responsibilities they had previously managed before the pandemic.
Work
Work-related factors primarily drove participants to oppose post-pandemic WFH arrangements, with productivity being the primary concern, especially among teachers. They expressed their frustrations regarding efficiency within a home setting, highlighting difficulties such as distractions and the absence of an optimal workspace. Supporting this viewpoint, Inoue et al. (2023) reported an average 4.2% decline in productivity among 10000 Japanese during the pandemic’s WFH phase. Similarly, Morikawa (2020) found that 42.6% of 3324 surveyed Japanese employees, primarily from the teaching sector, experienced reduced productivity. Kitagawa et al. (2021) also confirmed these findings among 23265 manufacturing employees, indicating that WFH during the pandemic negatively impacted productivity.
Concerns about remote teaching extended beyond individual productivity, particularly among educators worried about its impact on student learning. Many believe that face-to-face interactions are crucial for engagement and effective education, leading to a consensus that traditional classrooms yield better outcomes due to the interaction and communication they foster.
Participants also highlighted issues with motivation, focus, and work discipline during WFH. Many felt their motivation diminished compared to when they were in the office, and some were concerned that WFH blurred the lines between work and family time, leading to expectations of working beyond traditional hours. This feedback emphasized the complexities and challenges of WFH and the strong desire for more structured work arrangements.
The findings pointed to the limitations of virtual work in specific professions, particularly in education and technical fields, which rely heavily on in-person interactions and hands-on activities. For instance, educators struggle to engage with students remotely, while jobs in laboratory settings or electronic design depend on the physical presence of professionals and specialized equipment. These insights suggest that WFH is not universally applicable and that specific jobs require in-person collaboration to maintain productivity and engagement.
Family and work
The findings highlight a critical concern among participants regarding the blurred boundaries between work and family that emerged during WFH arrangements instigated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Many participants strongly desired to re-establish a clear demarcation between their professional responsibilities and family roles, reflecting a broader need for structure and balance.
Women, in particular, expressed significant dissatisfaction with the intermingling of their roles. The quotes underscore their struggle to fulfill multiple responsibilities simultaneously. One participant’s statement about the difficulties of being a mother, wife, and employee simultaneously resonates deeply with the challenges many women encounter, particularly in balancing work obligations with domestic duties. This sentiment is further echoed by those who believe that home and work must exist in separate domains to maintain functionality and well-being. This necessity for boundaries extends beyond sex, as men also articulated frustrations related to role confusion. Their comments reflect an understanding of the importance of physical and psychological separation of work and family spaces to preserve a sense of order in their lives. The emphasis on having things “beautiful in their place” embodies a desire for an organized structure where each role can be performed without overlap, highlighting a shared yearning for clarity and focus.
This collective feedback indicates that establishing boundaries is essential for effectively juggling these responsibilities. Clark (2000) identified physical, temporal, and psychological boundaries between work and family. The current study supports that clearly defined boundaries are crucial for overall functionality. Additionally, research by Öztürk et al. (2020) found that during the pandemic, the merging of work and home responsibilities negatively impacted women more significantly due to their primary domestic roles.
Individual
Participants highlighted several noteworthy concerns regarding WFH arrangements. A prominent issue was the planless and disorganized life. Participants articulated that WFH disrupted their routines and negatively affected their time management and life organization. This sentiment underscores a broader struggle many face when WFH, where the lack of separation between work and family can lead to chaos rather than the traditionally structured environment in an office setting.
Social isolation was notably more pronounced among women, highlighting a significant need for human interaction. This disparity suggests that workplace socialization may be particularly vital for women, possibly due to restrictive gender roles that limit social opportunities outside of work. Another concern involves decreased physical activity due to extended indoor hours, indicating that WFH could contribute to a sedentary lifestyle with potential long-term health implications.
The findings on fatigue emphasize the emotional challenges of WFH. Increased tiredness may arise from blurred boundaries between home and work, leading to an "always on" mentality as homes function as workplaces, schools, and family spaces. Distractions from chores and family members can hinder productivity, exacerbating feelings of exhaustion for working parents who struggle to compartmentalize their roles.
These factors collectively illustrate a strong preference among participants for returning to traditional office settings, driven by a desire for structure, social interaction, physical activity, and a balanced lifestyle.
Reasons for embracing WFH
Family
Participants cited various family-oriented motivations to continue WFH, such as increasing time spent with children and family, managing child-related responsibilities, and strengthening family relationships. Women strongly desire WFH to dedicate more time to their children and take on child-related tasks, particularly those with preschoolers, toddlers, or infants. On the other hand, men tended to focus more on the overall desire to spend additional time with their families and strengthen family relationships. In line with this, various studies have highlighted the positive effects of WFH on family life. For instance, research by Akbaş Tuna and Türkmendağ (2020) found that participants experienced working alongside caregiving not as an interference but as an opportunity to spend more quality time with loved ones, which was particularly satisfying for mothers. Similarly, Inoue et al. (2023) showed that WFH increased family engagement.
The reasons for continuing to WFH highlight a gap in responsibilities and relationships along sex lines. Many participants desired to spend more time with family, but this desire differed based on the sex of the participants. Women with young children primarily concentrate on managing childcare and fulfilling specific parenting responsibilities, which reflect gender roles that position them as primary caregivers. Given that their children were young or in preschool, they often felt a sense of guilt about balancing maternal employment with office work. Leaving their little ones with a sitter or at daycare could lead to feelings of guilt throughout the day, making WFH an appealing option that allows them to be with their children.
On the other hand, men focused more on overall family engagement rather than focusing on daily caregiving tasks. Before the shift to WFH, many men may have experienced a sense of distance from their families due to demanding work schedules. This shift to WFH likely gave them a valuable chance to spend quality time with their families, fostering more profound connections. This distinction suggests that while men and women value family time, their motivations stem from different sources—women often from a sense of obligation due to gender roles and men from a desire for connection. Addressing these differing perspectives and promoting shared responsibilities in family life is essential to fostering genuine relationships.
Work
Participants who preferred to continue WFH cited increased productivity, elimination of commuting, a non-toxic work environment, and a stress-free workspace as key benefits. Women predominantly highlighted these factors, particularly productivity, the most common advantage noted by both sexes. Those from fields outside education, such as administrative support and engineering, reported significantly improved productivity, with tasks typically requiring eight hours in the office completed more efficiently at home. Research by Choudhury et al. (2021) found a 4% productivity increase among patent office employees in the U.S. during the pandemic. Similarly, Mehdi and Morissette (2021) reported that 90% of Canadian workers were equally or more productive while WFH. Additionally, Akbaş Tuna and Türkmendağ (2020) confirmed increased productivity among 58 white-collar employees during this period.
The elimination of commuting was a significant factor for both men and women, as participants noted how reduced travel stress positively affected their psychological and physical well-being. The time and energy saved from commuting could be used for more fulfilling activities. Supporting this, Barrero et al. (2020) indicated that WFH during COVID-19 saved over 9 billion hours of commuting time in the U.S., with one-third of this time redirected to job responsibilities and two-thirds to childcare, leisure, and secondary work.
Moreover, the recognition of toxic work environments highlighted the emotional challenges participants faced in traditional workplaces, particularly women. Many expressed relief from avoiding interpersonal conflicts, while WFH showcased its protective benefits. Finally, the stress-free, comfortable workspace reinforces the idea that WFH contributed positively to well-being, particularly for women. Statements reflecting a preference for a less stressful work environment illustrate the potential for increased job satisfaction and overall happiness when work can be conducted in a more personalized, manageable setting. Akbaş Tuna and Türkmendağ (2020) reinforced these findings, emphasizing WFH's role in reducing work-related stress and creating a flexible workspace.
Family and work
Among all participants, only one male expressed a family and work-related reason to continue WHF, emphasizing a balance achieved between work and family life. This insight points to the potential advantages of WFH for those seeking greater flexibility. However, it prompts intriguing questions regarding the lack of similar sentiments voiced by women in the conversation. The lack of input from them could suggest several underlying dynamics. Firstly, it highlights the need for a deeper understanding of how different gender roles and responsibilities shape perceptions of family-work balance. Women often juggle multiple responsibilities, including family and caregiving roles, which may lead to different experiences and expectations regarding WFH.
Additionally, the male participant’s perspective might reflect an individual case rather than a broader consensus. If only one male participant articulated this wish, it could suggest that his situation might not represent all men, let alone women. This highlights the importance of inclusive discussions that bring forth diverse perspectives to capture a more comprehensive picture of the family-work balance dynamics.
Individual
The desire to continue WFH post-pandemic largely stems from individual preferences, particularly women, revealed a significant shift in priorities. Central to this shift was the desire for a relaxed, stress-free life. This sentiment reflects a broader recognition that WFH can mitigate stress and enhance well-being. For instance, comments like “I think there is less stress than before” and “I am more relaxed and happier” highlight the emotional benefits that WFH can provide, particularly in contrast to the pre-pandemic work environment, which many found to be more intense and taxing. Relatedly, Kahn (2022) suggested that having the flexibility to work from a chosen location can benefit physical and mental well-being. Furthermore, a study by Daud et al. (2021) conducted in Malaysia highlighted the health benefits associated with WFH, noting lower stress levels and an overall enhancement in the well-being of employees during the pandemic.
Time-saving emerged as another key factor supporting the continuation of WFH. The emphasis on efficient time management—expressed through statements like “It saves time” and “Working from home can be an important part of efficiently utilizing time”—underlines its efficiency, which allows for greater productivity and opens space for individual activities and responsibilities that may have been sidelined in a traditional office setting.
Moreover, spare time for self highlights how WFH enabled participants to prioritize individual needs and self-care. Women notably expressed this sentiment, indicating a desire for time allocated to individual pursuits, family, or relaxation. This indicates a value shift, where individual well-being is becoming just as significant, if not more so, than professional obligations.
Economic advantages also contributed to the desire for WFH, with participants from both sexes recognizing its financial benefits, which might arise from eliminating commuting and potentially reducing daily expenses. A similar study by Akbaş Tuna and Türkmendağ (2020) among Turkish workers found that WFH led to financial savings. Participants’ comments on their financial worries also highlight how the post-pandemic economic environment shapes their work preferences. In this context, WFH offers a solution to supporting individual well-being while addressing economic considerations.
Overall, the individual reasons advocated for WFH illustrate a significant transformation in work-related values, where mental health, time efficiency, individual fulfillment, and economic viability come to the forefront. This evolution underscores the importance of accommodating individual preferences in future workplace policies, promoting a more flexible and supportive work environment that addresses the diverse preferences of employees.
Conclusion
This study highlights the interplay between family dynamics, work commitments, the intersection of both, and individual factors within WFH setups during the COVID-19 pandemic. WFH offered some families a chance to reevaluate and redistribute household responsibilities. However, gender roles continued to be deeply rooted. Despite modest improvements in shared responsibilities, women still carried a disproportionate share of childcare and housework. On the other hand, men’s views reflected a more noticeable shift toward collaborative caregiving, even as they acknowledged that housework predominantly fell to women. Unless men’s increased involvement in caregiving was a temporary response to the pandemic, it could signal a lasting change in perceptions of parenting roles. Such a shift may reshape societal expectations regarding parental responsibilities, fostering stronger family bonds, improving parent-child relationships, and creating a more equitable home environment that benefits both children and parents.
The preferences for post-pandemic WFH arrangements reveal a nuanced landscape where many participants desire to return to traditional office settings. Family-related motivations for continuing WFH are shaped by the appealing benefits of flexibility and the challenges of family dynamics. Many participants desired WFH for family-related reasons, but the motivations behind these revealed profound sex-based differences that reflect traditional caregiving roles. While both men and women appreciated the opportunity to enhance family engagement, only women, particularly with young children, valued WFH because of its facilitating aspect in handling their parental duties as primary caregivers, often alleviating the guilt associated with being away from home to work because of gender roles. On the other hand, men often pursued increased family bonding, likely driven by a desire to strengthen connections after previously demanding work schedules rather than caregiving obligations. Recognizing these differences is crucial for fostering equitable shared responsibilities in family life, ultimately leading to healthier family dynamics and relationships.
Similarly, family-related reasons against WFH are also shaped by gender roles. While men and women recognized WFH's strain on family relationships, only women were against WFH because of the child and housework-related duties. This disparity often increased their responsibilities, resulting in a strong desire to discontinue WFH. Men's concern regarding the adverse effect of WFH on family relationships stemmed from their tendency to maintain or revert to traditional divisions of labor, which compounded their frustrations with the situation. The family-related findings illustrate how gender roles significantly influence preferences for work arrangements, emphasizing the crucial need for equitable shared responsibilities in family life to foster healthier family dynamics in a WFH context.
The desire to end WFH post-pandemic largely stems from work-related concerns, primarily productivity and the effectiveness of WFH. Many participants, regardless of sex, expressed frustrations regarding their efficiency at home, highlighting distractions, lack of an optimal workspace, and incompatible types of professions as significant challenges. Educators notably voiced concerns about the adverse effects of remote teaching on student engagement, emphasizing that in-person interactions are critical for effective learning. In contrast, other participants from professions outside education largely supported the continuation of WFH, citing increased productivity. Another concern against WFH was the pressure to work beyond designated hours, leading to extended working hours. The desire to continue WFH is driven by various benefits that significantly enhance the overall work experience for participants. Increased productivity, the elimination of commuting, and a non-toxic work environment stand out as the key factors contributing to a more satisfactory and efficient work life. The insights highlight a shift in how work can be approached, with many individuals finding they can accomplish tasks more effectively in the comfort of their own homes. Reducing travel stress saves time and improves mental health and work-life balance, reinforcing the notion that a supportive and personalized workspace is crucial to employee well-being. Furthermore, avoiding toxic workplace dynamics allows for a more focused and less stressful approach to work, which is particularly impactful for women navigating complex interpersonal relationships. Overall, the preference for WFH reflects a significant transformation in workplace culture, suggesting that flexible work arrangements may lead to higher job satisfaction and a more fulfilling work experience. The contrasting work-related desires surrounding WFH reveal a nuanced landscape in which the appropriateness of WFH varies significantly by profession, underscoring the need for flexible work models that accommodate the unique demands of different jobs while also considering employee preferences.
The family and work-related findings reveal significant concerns regarding the blurred boundaries between work and family life during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly among women. Many expressed a need to re-establish clear distinctions between their work and family roles, reflecting a universal desire for structure and balance. Women reported dissatisfaction with overlapping obligations as mothers, wives, and employees, highlighting their struggle to manage these responsibilities effectively. Men also noted frustrations with role confusion, illustrating a shared need for clear boundaries. Although one male participant reported positive experiences with WFH, such sentiments were less common among women, raising important questions about sex-based dynamics in family-work balance. This disparity indicates a need for more inclusive discussions to understand the diverse challenges each sex faces in managing family and work responsibilities. Overall, the feedback emphasizes that establishing boundaries is essential for navigating the complexities of multiple roles.
The individual preferences for WFH arrangements highlight various motivations. The individual benefits of WFH emerged as the primary reasons for desiring WFH. Many sought a more relaxed and stress-free lifestyle. The emotional benefits of reduced stress and the advantages of spare time, likely from time-savings, underscore the importance of individual needs in today’s fast-paced environment. This shift indicates a growing recognition that mental health and individual needs should be prioritized alongside professional obligations. The economic advantages of reduced commuting costs and daily expenses were also appealing. However, concerns regarding disorganization, social isolation, and fatigue drove the reluctance to engage in WFH. The absence of a clear separation between work and family roles often leads to chaos, contrasting sharply with the structured environment of a traditional office. The constant feeling of being “always on” because of the multiple functions of home taking on various functions, such as workplace, school, and living space, led to exhaustion and created an emotional labor juggling multiple roles. Social isolation was primarily women’s concern resulting from WFH, which eliminated opportunities for workplace interaction. This underscores how vital social engagement was for them. Recognizing both the positives and negatives is essential for developing a sustainable future for WFH setups.
The diagram (Fig. 5) mapping out the themes derived from experiences sheds light on the challenges and advantages of WFH that families faced during the pandemic. Collectively, these insights demonstrate a nuanced interaction between the difficulties and benefits of WFH and reveal the intricate dynamics of family, work, and the intersection of both and individual factors. Within this dynamic, the longing for structure and connection often conflicts with the appeal of flexibility and comfort.
Fig. 5
figure 5
Challenges and benefits of WFH (working from home) arrangements.
Full size image
Theoretical and practical implications
The study introduces Intersectionality Theory in the WFH context and suggests that the complex intersections of gender roles, work, and individual factors shape WFH preferences. In the study, the family-related factors, either against or for WFH, reflected gender roles. Among those reluctant to WFH, while men and women recognized WFH’s strain on family relationships, only women opposed WFH because of the added pressures of childcare and housework, which they typically shouldered due to traditional gender expectations. Among those embracing WFH, while both sexes appreciated WFH’s benefits in strengthening family connections, only women emphasized its role in easing childcare demands. Conversely, men only concentrated on WFH’s adverse effects on family relationships due to their tendency to cling to traditional labor divisions. While some instances of more collaborative caregiving emerged, these were insufficient to shift the entrenched gendered division of labor. The family and work-related reason against WFH was also gendered. The merging of work and family life also posed challenges for primarily women to separate their family and work roles, resulting in constant role confusion. Therefore, gender roles significantly shaped WFH preferences.
Work-related factors were instrumental in WFH preferences. A personalized workspace and professions suited for remote work generally allowed working parents to enjoy increased productivity while WFH. In contrast, workspace distractions and professions that necessitate physical presence posed significant productivity challenges. Finally, individual factors were also essential in shaping WFH preferences, reflecting the diverse needs and desires regarding WFH. Some preferred WFH for a more relaxed lifestyle and economic advantages, while some resisted it for disorganization and feelings of social isolation. Consequently, this theory posits that WFH preferences cannot be fully understood without acknowledging these intersecting factors.
The study results distinctly outline the practical implications:
-Organizations should encourage fair distribution of domestic labor by providing resources, education, and workshops to promote collaboration among family members. Collecting data on employees’ WFH experiences can help tailor policies.
-Clear policies should define work and family boundaries, including designated work hours and hybrid models, to reduce role confusion and emotional fatigue.
-Providing resources for ergonomic home office and training on managing distractions and maintaining boundaries can support employees’ productivity during WFH.
-Policies must address the specific needs of different professions, such as unique training for educators on remote teaching challenges.
-Employers must address the emotional challenges of social isolation by providing mental health support, including counseling and regular workload check-ins to prevent overburdening.
Limitations and future research
The findings of this study should be interpreted with caution, as the unique circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic significantly shaped the experiences of WFH for participants. During this period, homes simultaneously functioned as workplaces, schools, and childcare centers, with parents working remotely and children receiving education from home. Additionally, the closure of schools and daycare facilities and limited access to external childcare or domestic support created a highly unusual environment that may not reflect typical WFH conditions. These extraordinary circumstances may have amplified the challenges and influenced participants’ perceptions of WFH. As a result, the findings may not fully capture the true potential of WFH in more typical settings. Future research should explore WFH experiences in non-crisis contexts, where external support systems such as schools, daycares, and domestic help are fully operational. This would provide a clearer understanding of WFH’s benefits and challenges under more typical conditions.
Another limitation is the study’s focus on short-term WFH experiences during the pandemic. Longitudinal studies could provide valuable insights into how families adjust to WFH as it becomes more established, along with the evolving societal and organizational practices. It could shed light on its long-term effects on gender roles and family-work balance. Moreover, while this study highlights parents’ perspectives, it does not account for children’s experiences, which are also profoundly affected by changes in family dynamics. Including children’s viewpoints in future research would provide a more holistic understanding of how WFH influences family life.
The study did not capture the WFH experiences according to the life cycle of families at different stages, such as those with young children, adolescents, or adult dependents. These stages likely influence how families perceive the challenges and opportunities of WFH. Future research should investigate how family life-cycle stages shape the WFH experience, particularly regarding caregiving responsibilities, stress levels, and work-family balance. Such research could provide more nuanced insights into how WFH policies can be adapted to meet the specific needs of families at different points in their life cycle.
Finally, the study has identified the conflicting effects of WFH on work productivity; however, it does not fully explore these impacts across various industries and professions. The lack of comprehensive analysis means the findings may not effectively highlight which sectors benefit most from WFH arrangements to achieve work-family balance. Analyzing WFH impacts across different industries and professions would help identify which sectors are more conducive to achieving work-family balance through WFH.
By addressing these gaps, future research can develop a more nuanced understanding of WFH’s diverse and multifaceted effects on families, which will inform policy and practice in this area.
Data availability
The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to privacy issues but are available from the author upon reasonable request.
Notes
“Changing my work schedule harms family relationships and our lives in general” (Participant W118).
“Working from home was very nice at first, but over time, I realized that I do not like it, and it has become overwhelming. Just because I am home does not mean I do not have work. However, my wife does not understand this” (Participant M259).
Another participant voiced, “I am drained from being at home and trying to manage all my duties: cooking, cleaning, working, and looking after two little ones” (Participant W135). Additionally, one woman noted, “Compared to the past, the responsibilities of housework and childcare have become significantly more demanding while working from home” (Participant W244).
“Because I do not have the required productive working environment at home” (Participant M81), “Working from home reduces the efficiency of my work” (Participant W118), “I cannot work efficiently” (Participant M123), “I cannot actively fulfill the requirements of my job” (Participant W193).
Furthermore, a male participant, M82, emphasized, “My profession is not conducive to a work-from-home arrangement.” Another male participant, M207, employed in a laboratory setting, highlighted his viewpoint by stating, “My role in electronic design requires my presence in the laboratory.”
Several participants highlighted the impact of home environments on their motivation and discipline, with one participant mentioning, “I miss the work discipline mobility. I cannot get motivated at home” (Participant M128), and another shared the struggle, “I cannot maintain work discipline” (Participant W244). Additional comments included:“Maintaining work discipline at home is tough, especially in homes with small children” (Participant W169). Similarly, another participant suggested, “I think work discipline is lacking in working from home” (Participant M253), while yet another stated, “I cannot work concentratedly at home” (Participant M216).
Further comments included, “Home is not a workplace” (Participant W121), “Work and family get mixed up a lot” (Participant W84), “Home and work need to be separate” (Participant W102),“I want to keep my home and work separately” (Participant W41).
Another male participant noted, “Everything is beautiful in its place and time” (Participant M4), suggesting a preference for clearly defined boundaries between work and family realms.
Additionally, a participant highlighted that the office environment provided more cohesive organization for family life: “Prior to working from home, the entire family enjoyed a more organized routine (e.g., school, bus schedules, classroom activities, meal planning” (Participant W48). The challenges of WFH were highlighted by remarks like, “It is not possible to plan and implement home and social life in the home working system” (Participant W49). In line with these, several participants experienced struggles with efficient time management while working from home. Comments such as “There is insufficient time during working from home” (Participant M18) and “Waste of time” (Participant M65) reflect frustrations associated with this arrangement.
“Although it is productive for the family, it is not very good for my physical activity” (Participant W32), I think my physical activity and social circle have decreased” (Participant W238).
"Being able to spend time with family" (Participant M17), "...so that I can spend more time with my family" (Participant M23), "I can spare more time for my family" (Participant W35), “To spend more time with my family” (Participant W57), and “…being able to spend time with family” (Participant W13).
“To spend more time with my children” (Participant W57), “I can spare time for children and home” (Participant W146), “My family needs me more, my children are young” (Participant W140), “Continuing like this for a while longer and seeing my baby grow” (Participant W184), “I can spend more time with my child” (Participant W95).
“I can work faster and more effectively using my time efficiently” (Participant M258), *“I think eight hours of work is unnecessary; it is a waste of too much time”(*Participant W164), “Eight hours of work is a huge waste of time” (Participant W172),“I think I have done my job more effectively during the pandemic period” (Participant M43).
“By working from home, we eliminate the psychological discomfort of being in traffic on the way to and from work. In particular, we can save extraordinary time. I think the advantages of working from home outweigh the disadvantages” (Participant M74), “A serene setting that allows you to avoid the frustrations of traffic” (Participant W105), “I would like to work from home due to the elimination of transportation and stress” (Participant W113).
“To distance myself from the office gossip culture” (Participant M254), “Refraining from confronting managers” (Participant W150), “There are people at work I do not like. Fortunately, I do not see them since I am working from home” (Participant M79*), “………………...to not be exposed to unnecessary conversations with people”* (Participant W233).
“I think there is less stress than before” (Participant W40), “Because I am more comfortable at home” (Participant W42), “Because it has created a more comfortable working environment” (Participant M94), “I can work in comfortable clothes at home without the pressure of being stressed by my supervisor” (Participant M79), “Reduces stress” (Participant M210).
“I feel more relaxed at home” (Participant W42), “Being able to wake up 5 minutes earlier and get to work” (Participant, W95), “I do not feel tired anymore while working from home" (Participant W185), “I wish I had such an opportunity before; I work very relaxed, and I have rejuvenated” (Participant W214), “Rest and stress away” (Participant W240), “Comfort and convenience” (Participant W129), “I am less tired” (Participant M213).
“Working from home even one day a week helps me relax and motivate me better” (Participant W190), “I have become healthier; I can now spare time for sports” (Participant W185).
References
Aguiar J, Matias M, Braz AC, César F, Coimbra S, Gaspar MF, Fontaine AM (2021) Parental Burnout and the COVID-19 Pandemic: How Portuguese Parents Experienced Lockdown Measures. Fam. Relat. 70(4):927–938. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12558
ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Akbaş Tuna A, Türkmendağ Z (2020) Remote working practices and the factors affecting work motivation during the Covid19 pandemic period. J. Bus. Res.-Turk. 12(3):3246–3260. https://doi.org/10.20491/isarder.2020.1037
ArticleGoogle Scholar
Andrew A, Cattan S, Dias MC, Farquharson C, Kraftman L, Krutikova S (2020) How are mothers and fathers balancing work and family under lockdown? The Institute for Fiscal Studies. https://ifs.org.uk/publications/how-are-mothers-and-fathers-balancing-work-and-family-under-lockdown
Augustine JM, Kim J, Lee M (2024) Parents’ access to flexible work arrangements and time in active caregiving activities. J. Fam. Issues 45(4):992–1018
MATHGoogle Scholar
Barrero JM, Bloom N, Davis SJ (2020) 60 million fewer commuting hours per day: How Americans use time saved by working from home. Becker Friedman Institute for Economics (Working Paper No. 2020-132). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3695188
Batt R, Valcour PM (2003) Human resources practices as predictors of work-family outcomes and employee turnover. Ind. Relat.: A J. Econ. Soc. 42:189–220. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-232X.00287
ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
Bernhardt J, Recksiedler C, Linberg A (2023) Work from home and parenting: Examining the role of work-family conflict and gender during the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Soc. Issues 79(3):935–970. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12509
ArticleGoogle Scholar
Bianchi SM, Milkie MA, Sayer LC, Robinson JP (2000) Is anyone doing the housework? Trends in the gender division of household labor. Soc. Forces 79(1):191–228. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/79.1.191
ArticleGoogle Scholar
Bittman M, England P, Sayer L, Folbre N, Matheson G (2003) When does gender trump money? Bargaining and time in household work. Am. Sociol Rev. 68(2):224–247
MATHGoogle Scholar
Carlson DL, Petts R, Pepin JR (2020) US couples’ divisions of housework and childcare during COVID-19 pandemic (Working Paper). Center for Open Science. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/jy8fn
Carlson DL, Petts RJ (2022) US parents’ domestic labor during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Popul. Res. Policy Rev. 41(6):2393–2418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-022-09735-1
ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralMATHGoogle Scholar
Chauhan P (2022) “I Have No Room of My Own”: COVID-19 pandemic and work-from-home through a gender lens. Gend. Issues 39:507–533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-022-09302-0
ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
Choudhury P, Foroughi C, Larso B (2021) Work-from-anywhere: The productivity effects of geographic flexibility. Acad. Manag. J. 24(4):655–683. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3251
ArticleGoogle Scholar
Clark SC (2000) Work-family border theory: A new theory of work-family balance. Hum. Relat. 53(6):747–770. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726700536001
ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
Collins C, Landivar LC, Ruppanner L, Scarborough WJ (2021) COVID-19 and the gender gap in working hours. Gend., Work Organ. 28(S1):101–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12506
ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Craig L, Churchill B (2021) Dual-earner parent couples’ work and care during COVID-19. Gend., Work Organ. 28(S1):66–79. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12497
ArticlePubMedMATHGoogle Scholar
Crosbie T, Moore J (2004) Work–life balance and working from home. Soc. Policy Soc. 3(3):223–233. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746404001733
ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
Daud KM, Turiman S, Rahmat NH, Kasi PM (2021) Working from home in the new normal: Perceived benefits and challenges. International Virtual Symposium: Research, Industry & Community Engagement (RICE 2021). Paper ID 31. https://oia.ugm.ac.id/2021/03/24/international-virtual-symposium-on-research-industry-and-community-engagement-2021/
Del Boca D, Oggero N, Profeta P, Rossi MC (2020) Women’s work, housework and childcare, before and during COVID-19. IZA Institute of Labor Economics. Discussion Paper Series. ZA DP No. 13409. https://docs.iza.org/dp13409.pdf
Dörnyei Z (2007) Research methods in applied linguistics. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methodologies. New York: Oxford University Press
Dunatchik A, Gerson K, Glass J, Jacobs JA, Stritzel H (2021) Gender, parenting, and the rise of remote work during the pandemic: Implications for domestic inequality in the United States. Gend. Soc. 35(2):194–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/08912432211001301
ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Eurostat (2021) Working from home across EU regions in 2020. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/ddn-20210923-1
Evans S, Mikocka-Walus A, Klas A, Olive L, Sciberras E, Karantzas G, Westrupp EM (2020) From “it has stopped our lives” to “spending more time together” has strengthened bonds: The varied experiences of Australian families during COVID-19. Front. Psychol. 11:588667. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.588667
ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Felstead A, Henseke G (2017) Assessing the growth of remote working and its consequences for effort, well-being and work-life balance. N. Technol., Work Employ. 32(3):195–212. https://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12097
ArticleGoogle Scholar
Fuller S, Qian Y (2020) COVID-19 and the gender employment gap among parents of young children. Can. Public Policy 46(2):89–101. https://doi.org/10.3138/cpp.2020-077
ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
Goldscheider F, Bernhardt E, Lappegård T (2015) The Gender revolution: A framework for understanding changing family and demographic behavior. Popul. Dev. Rev. 41(2):207–239. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2015.00045.x
ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
Hill EJ, Miller BC, Weiner SP, Colihan J (1998) Influences of the virtual office on aspects of work and work/life balance. Pers. Psychol. 51(13):667–683. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1998.tb00256.x
ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
Hill EJ, Ferris M, Märtinson V (2003) Does it matter where you work? A comparison of how three work venues (traditional office, virtual office, and home office) influence aspects of work and personal/family life. J. Vocational Behav. 63(2):220–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(03)00042-3
ArticleGoogle Scholar
Hill EJ, Grzywacz JG, Allen SM, Blanchard VL, Matz-Costa C, Shulkin S, Pitt-Catsouphes M (2008) Defining and conceptualizing workplace flexibility. Community, Work Fam. 11:149–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668800802024678
ArticleGoogle Scholar
Hochschild AR, Machung A (2012) The second shift: Working families and the revolution at home (Updated edition). New York: Penguin Books (1989)
Inoue C, Ishihata Y, Yamaguchi S (2023) Working from home leads to more family-oriented men. Review of Economics of the Household. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11150-023-09682-6
Kahn M (2022) Going Remote. University of California Press
Kaya ŞD, İleri YY, Kara B (2022) Benefits of flexible working system during COVID-19 pandemic: A Field study in Turkey. Ege Academic Rev. 22(3):253–270. https://doi.org/10.21121/eab.987090
ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
Kitagawa R, Kuroda S, Okudaira H, Owan H (2021) Working from home and productivity under the COVID-19 pandemic: Using survey data of four manufacturing firms. PLoS ONE 16(12):e0261761. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261761
ArticleCASPubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Kossek EE, Lautsch BA, Eaton SC (2006) Telecommuting, control, and boundary management: Correlates of policy use and practice, job control, and work-family effectiveness. J. Vocational Behav. 68(2):347–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2005.07.002
ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
Lott Y, Chung H (2016) Gender discrepancies in the outcomes of schedule control on overtime hours and income in Germany. Eur. Sociol Rev. 32(6):752–765. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcw032
ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
Manzo LKC, Minello A (2020) Mothers, childcare duties, and remote working under COVID-19 lockdown in Italy: Cultivating communities of care. Dialogues Hum. Geogr. 10(2):120–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/2043820620934268
ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
Margaria A (2021) Fathers, childcare and COVID-19. Feminist Leg. Stud. 29(1):133–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-021-09454-6
ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Labour and Social Security (2021) Remote working regulation. No: 31419. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2021/03/20210310-2.htm
Mehdi T, Morissette R (2021) Working from home: Productivity and preferences. StatCan COVID19: Data to Insights for a Better Canada. No. 00012. Statistics Canada Catalogue No. 45-28-0001. Ottawa: Statistics Canada
Moerer-Urdahl T, Creswell JW (2004) Using transcendental phenomenology to explore the “rip-ple effect” in a leadership mentoring program. Int. J. Qualitative Methods 3(2):19–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690400300202
ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
Morikawa M (2020) Productivity of working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from an employee survey. Research Institute of Economy Trade and Industry (RIETI) Discussion papers 20073. https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/20e073.pdf
Moustakas C (1994) Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412995658
Oakley A (2018) The sociology of housework (updated edition). Bristol: Policy Press (1974)
Ochsner M, Szalma I, Takács J (2020) Division of labour, work-life conflict and family policy: Conclusions and reflections. Soc. Incl. 8(4):103–109. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v8i4.3620
ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
OECD (2021a) Caregiving in crisis: Gender inequality in paid and unpaid work during COVID-19. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/view/?ref=1122_1122019-pxf57r6v6k&title=Caregiving-in-crisis-Gender-inequality-in-paid-and-unpaid-work-during-COVID-19
OECD (2021b) Risks that matter 2020: The long reach of COVID-19. OECD Policy Responses to Coronavirus (COVID-19). OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/44932654-en
Official Gazette of the Republic of Turkiye (2020a) Circular order 2020/4. Additional measures for public employees within the scope of COVID-19. No: 31076. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2020/03/20200322M1-1.pdf
Official Gazette of the Republic of Turkiye (2020b) Circular order 2020/8. Normalization and measures to be taken in public institutions and organizations within the scope of COVID-19. No: 31139. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2020/05/20200529M1-1.pdf
Official Gazette of the Republic of Turkiye (2020c) Circular order 2020/11. Precautions for public employees within the scope of COVID-19. No: 31225. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2020/08/20200826-5.pdf
Official Gazette of the Republic of Turkiye (2021) Circular order 2021/13. Normalization and measures to be taken in public institutions and organizations within the scope of COVID-19. No: 31527. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2021/06/20210630-14.pdf
Öztürk Y, Üstünalan D, Metin B (2020) Women’s experiences and emotions of staying at home during the pandemic. Feminist Tahayyül 1(2):185–225. https://doi.org/10.57193/FeminTa.2020.185
ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
Pirzadeh P, Lingard H (2021) Working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic: Health andwell-being of project-based construction workers. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 147(6):04021048. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0002102
ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
Schieman PJB, Milkie MA, Bierman A (2021) Work-life conflict during the COVID-19 pandemic. Socius: Sociol Res. a Dyn. World 7:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023120982856
ArticleGoogle Scholar
Sánchez AR, Fasang AE, Harkness S (2021) Gender division of housework during the COVID-19 pandemic: Temporary shocks or durable change? Demographic Res. 45:1297–1316. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48640814
MATHGoogle Scholar
Scottish Government Central Analysis Division (2022) Working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic: benefits, challenges and considerations for future ways of working. Director-General Strategy and External Affairs. https://www.gov.scot/publications/working-home-during-covid-19-pandemic-benefits-challenges-considerations-future-ways-working/pages/4/
Shockley KM, Clark MA, Dodd H, King EB (2021) Work-family strategies during COVID-19: Examining gender dynamics among dual-earner couples with young children. J. Appl. Psychol. 106(1):15–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000857
ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Stankevičiūtė Ž, Kunskaja S (2022) Strengthening of work-life balance while working remotely in the context of COVID-19 pandemic. Hum. Syst. Manag. 41(2):221–235. https://doi.org/10.3233/HSM-211511
ArticleGoogle Scholar
Sullivan C (2012) Remote working and work-life balance. In: Reilly N, Sirgy M, Gorman C (eds) Work and quality of life. International handbooks of quality-of-life. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4059-4_15
UN DESA, UN Women (2022) Progress on the sustainable development goals the gender snapshot 2022. https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/2022-09/Progress-on-the-sustainable-development-goals-the-gender-snapshot-2022-en_0.pdf
UNDP (2022) The 2021/2022 human development report. Uncertain times, unsettled lives: Shaping our future in a transforming world. https://hdr.undp.org/system/files/documents/global-report-document/hdr2021-22pdf_1.pdf
UN Women (2020) HeForShe launches #HeForSheAtHome campaign. https://www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2020/4/news-heforshe-launches-heforsheathome-campaign
UN Women (2021) Women and girls left behind: Glaring gaps in pandemic Responses. https://data.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/documents/Publications/glaring-gaps-response-RGA.pdf
UN Women (2022) Emergency preparedness requires gender-aware responses to reduce burdens of care, violence and economic insecurity on women: UN Women and UNDP tracker report. https://www.unwomen.org/en/news-stories/press-release/2022/06/emergency-preparedness-requires-gender-aware-responses-to-reduce-burdens-of-care-violence-and-economic-insecurity-on-women-un-women-and-undp-tracker-report
Vaterlaus JM, Sullivan S, Sage M (2023) Fathers’ experiences with domestic labor during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. The Social Science Journal: 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/03623319.2023.2286708
Vitória BD, Ribeiro MT, Carvalho VS (2022) The work-family interface and the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review. Front. Psychol. 13:914474. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.914474
ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Download references
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Department of Family and Consumer Sciences, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey
Selda Coşkuner Aktaş
Authors
Selda Coşkuner Aktaş
View author publications
You can also search for this author inPubMedGoogle Scholar
Contributions
A sole researcher authored the article.
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Selda Coşkuner Aktaş.
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The author declares no competing interest.
Ethical approval
This study was approved by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Ethics Board of the Hacettepe University on 9 February 2021 (approval number: E-90955707-200-00001417875). The procedures used in this study were in accordance with the provisions of the Declaration of Helsinki.
Informed consent
Before the survey, all respondents received comprehensive written information detailing the study's aims and objectives. Anonymity was rigorously guaranteed to ensure that all collected data would be used solely for academic research purposes and that participation involved no foreseeable risks or ethical compromises. Furthermore, participants were explicitly informed that the study had received ethical approval from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Ethics Board of Hacettepe University, underscoring the study's adherence to stringent ethical guidelines. In addition, participants were clearly advised before their engagement that their participation was entirely voluntary and that they possessed the unequivocal right to withdraw from the survey at any point without consequence or prejudice.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Appendix 1
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
Reprints and permissions
About this article
Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark
Cite this article
Coşkuner Aktaş, S. Was COVID-19-related working from home (WFH) a chance for change? Gender-based experiences of parents. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 12, 465 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04773-4
Download citation
Received:08 June 2024
Accepted:17 March 2025
Published:02 April 2025
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04773-4
Share this article
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Get shareable link
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Copy to clipboard
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative