Diversity or disadvantage? Families and employment of immigrants’ children in the UK

Immigrants to Europe from countries which are culturally dissimilar are more likely to marry and have children than the native populations in the destination countries. They also face disadvantage in the labour market, due to factors such as language skills and not having recognised qualifications – but also discrimination. But what happens to their children who are born and educated in the destination countries?

Whether they come with their parents (1.5 generation) or are born in the country the family moves to (second generation), there are three main theories on what their partnership and employment patterns would look like:

• assimilation – their patterns of finding partners and having children converges to those of the native population (UK-born individuals with UK-born parents), and they should not face disadvantages in the job market. This tends to be true of children of immigrants from geographically close and culturally similar countries to the destination countries. In the UK, for example, it’s true of those with European and Western backgrounds, and to some extent Caribbean backgrounds.
• minority subculture – while some groups adapt to the norms and behaviours of the majority population, others’ norms and behaviours are more similar to those in their parents’ country of origin. In the UK, children of immigrants from India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, for example, are more likely to marry, less likely to live together unmarried, and more likely to have children than the native population.
• minority-group status – some groups face discrimination, which may influence work/family experiences. For example, women with fewer job opportunities may opt for motherhood. Studies consistently show labour market disadvantage among the second generation, but we cannot be certain whether this is due to prejudice or preferences.

Previous research in this area has tended to look at two-way links: between either partnership and fertility or fertility and employment. We examined the interplay between partnership, childbearing, and employment to understand the life course trajectories of immigrants’ children. We also studied gender differences in these trajectories to explore whether the ‘motherhood penalty’ (the economic disadvantage women experience due to becoming a mother) found among native populations also holds among the children of immigrants.

Using the data

We looked at 10,634 women and 8,005 men in the first nine waves of Understanding Society (2009-19), following people from age 16 to 35. We compared the experiences of natives with those of the children of immigrants from:

• Europe and other Western countries (Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the USA)
• India
• Pakistan and Bangladesh
• the Caribbean region
• African countries.

Our findings

We found that women followed one of five trajectories:

• Early family, not working or part-time employment – 28% of the female sample. In this group, almost all women were in a long-term relationship by 25, and all had had a child by 30. Most had a second child, and 20% had three or more. By the age of 27, over 40% were economically inactive. Children of Caribbean immigrants were less likely to be in this group than natives.
• Late family formation, education/full-time employment – 24% of the female sample. These women were in a relationship by 30, and 80% became mothers by 35. Most had one or two children, with only 10% having three or more. They tended to work full- or part-time until they had children, and to work part-time or be economically inactive after that. Children of African immigrants were more likely to follow this trajectory than native women.
• Late heterogeneous partnerships, full-time employment – 23% of the female sample. In this group, 80% had formed a relationship by 35, and only 20% had one or two children. At 35, 60% were in full-time employment. Women of European/Western and Caribbean descent were more likely than native women to belong to this group, and those of Pakistani and Bangladeshi origin less likely.
• Early heterogeneous families, inactivity/part-time employment – 14% of the female sample. These women start forming relationships and having children when young. At around 18, 60% are employed full-time, but this falls to 40% by 35. Caribbean descendants are the most likely to experience this trajectory, while women of Indian, Pakistani, and Bangladeshi origin are less likely to experience this trajectory than natives.
• Large families, inactivity/part-time employment – 12% of the female sample. These women tend to marry, have families, and move to part-time or no work even earlier than women in the first group. By 35, all have at least three children, and 30% are working full-time. Indian and especially Pakistani and Bangladeshi descendants are particularly likely to belong to this cluster, whereas Caribbean descendants are the least likely to do so.

Men also follow one of five patterns:

• Late family formation, full-time employment – 31% of the male sample. Almost all are married by age 30 and 80% have at least one child by 35. Indian, Pakistani, and Bangladeshi descendants are over-represented in this group. Caribbean descendants are less likely to follow this trajectory than native men.
• Early large families, full-time employment – 27% of the male sample. Most are married at age 35, but cohabitation and separation are also prevalent. By 30, all men have at least one child and the majority have a second or third. Men in this group have the largest families of all groups, and they tend to be in full-time employment from a young age. Indian and African descendants are less likely than native men to be in this group.
• No family, full-time employment – 17% of the male sample. At 35, 40% are in a relationship and 20% have one or two children. Most of these men work full-time. Men of Caribbean descent are the most likely, whereas those with Indian or Pakistani and Bangladeshi background are the least likely to belong to this group.
• Late family formation, self-employment – 13% of the male sample. At the age of 35, 20% are never partnered, 15% are separated, 65% are in a relationship (mainly marriage), and 60% have at least one child. Most work full-time and later become self-employed. Men from all origin groups are as likely as native men to follow this trajectory.
• Late, varied partnerships, full-time employment – 12% of the male sample. Most of these men live with their unmarried partners, and many relationships dissolve. They do not have children before their 30s, but by 35 around 40% have at least one child. Their employment trajectories are similar to men in the first group. Men with Pakistani or Bangladeshi origin are less likely than native men to be in this group.

What the results mean

Children of immigrants from culturally similar countries have similar partnership, fertility, and employment trajectories to natives – but women whose parents immigrated from European/Western countries were more likely than native women to work full-time and to form partnerships and families later. Caribbean women, although they may have different partnership and childbearing experiences, were also more likely to work full-time than native women.

Our findings support the assimilation/integration theory: children of European, Western, and Caribbean immigrants seem well integrated in terms of their partnership, childbearing, and employment trajectories. However, because Caribbean women are more often single mothers than natives and other second generation groups, they may not be able to work part-time.

There is also evidence for the minority subculture hypothesis: we found differences in family, partnership, and work patterns of culturally dissimilar groups compared to the native population such as those with Indian, Pakistani, and Bangladeshi backgrounds. These patterns are linked to disadvantage in the labour market, especially for women, who tend to leave work or work part-time after having children, especially among those with Indian, Pakistani, and Bangladeshi backgrounds. However, we don’t know if they stop working full-time due to preferences, norms, reduced job opportunities, and/or discrimination. (Male Indian, Pakistani, and Bangladeshi descendants all typically marry and have children, but also work full-time.)

Policy implications

We found that family, partnership, and work are especially interrelated among the (female) children of immigrants from culturally dissimilar and geographically distant countries. This is less true among those whose country of origin is more similar to the UK. However, we cannot say whether these differences are due to cultural norms and preferences or discrimination.

Given that native women also tend not to be in full-time work after having children, it may be that the lack of affordable childcare combines with conservative family values to reduce employment, especially among South Asian women. Gender is likely to play an important role because most men (natives and children of immigrants alike, apart from one group who tended to be self-employed) work full-time.

It may be that family-friendly policies could support both native women and the female children of immigrants, and that a lack of support for families helps to perpetuate conservative gender roles – but policies such as affordable, accessible, high-quality childcare could help to erode conservative gender roles over time.

Gendered patterns of partnership, family formation, and work are likely to have serious long-term implications for the (financial) wellbeing of the female children of immigrants. A lack of economic independence, wealth, or pensions will generate further gender inequalities over time. The problem is not differences in partnership and family formation, but that these patterns co-exist with unequal job opportunities for women.

Read the research

Authors