Paid Worker Role and Health 447relative to the husband’s income. Although
men are still more likely than women to be
the sole wage earner or to earn more money
than women, it is no longer unusual for
women to make more money than men. In
the year 2000, 11% of wives were the primary
income providers, 27% made equal contri-
butions to family incomes, and 60% con-
tributed less than 40% to the family income
(Winslow-Bowe, 2009). Among dual-earner
couples in 2008, 26% of women and 60% of
men earned more than 10% more than their
spouses (Galinsky et al., 2009). Women are
less likely to be major contributors to family
income when there are children in the home.
These figures largely characterize White
women, as African American women are
more likely to be primary income providers
or co-providers. The race differences stem
in part from the fact that African American
women have a longer history of participating
in the paid labor force and in part from the
fact that African American men face great
difficulties entering the paid labor force.
What is the effect of women’s rise in
relative income on family relationships? One
study showed that the changes in income dis-
parity between husband and wife over a two-
year period had no implications for wives’
marital satisfaction but strong implications
for husbands’ marital satisfaction (Brennan,
Barnett, & Gareis, 2001). A decrease in the
disparity in income (men’s higher than wom-
en’s) was associated with a decrease in men’s
marital satisfaction, especially among men
who said they valued the monetary aspects
of their jobs. Thus an increase in women’s
relative income compared to that of men may
be most problematic for men who have tra-
ditional gender-role attitudes and define the
male role as the breadwinner.
Another feature of women’s paid work
that has implications for the family is howthe wife’s family demands, the husband will
be more distressed and the wife will be less
distressed—because family demands are associ-
ated with increased distress. To the extent that
wife’s employment decreases the husband’s rel-
ative income and increases the wife’s relative in-
come, the husband will be more distressed and
the wife will be less distressed—because relative
income is associated with reduced distress.
To test the theoretical model shown in
Figure 12.4, Rosenfield (1992) examined psy-
chological distress in 172 married couples.
Women were more distressed than men. There
were no differences in the distress levels of hus-
bands whose wives worked versus husbands
whose wives did not work. Thus, wives’ em-
ployment per se did not affect men’s distress.
However, to the extent that wives’ employment
decreased husbands’ relative income, men’s
distress levels increased. Men’s distress levels
also increased if they shared household chores.
The effect of family demands was greater than
the effect of reduced relative income on men’s
distress. Thus, wives’ employment alone did
not influence husbands’ distress, but husbands’
distress increased to the extent that wives’ em-
ployment decreased husbands’ relative income
and increased husbands’ family demands.
Rosenfield also noted that relative income and
household demands were inversely related,
meaning that those who had more power
(i.e., higher relative income) probably used
that power to avoid household tasks. Another
study supported the relative income aspect of
the model: An increase in women’s relative in-
come over time was associated with an increase
in women’s psychological well-being, but a
decrease in men’s psychological well-being
(Rogers & DeBoer, 2001).
Thus, one feature of women’s employ-
ment that has implications for the family
just as it had implications for women’s and
men’s health is the wife’s income—especiallyM12_HELG0185_04_SE_C12.indd 447 6/21/11 9:16 AM