Career preferences and the work-family balance in medicine: gender differences among medical specialists
In this article career preferences of medical specialists in the Netherlands are analysed, based on a survey among the members of medical associations of five specialties. Four different career preferences were offered, each of which implied a possible variation in working hours. A questionnaire was sent to a random selected group of working specialists in general practice, internal medicine, anaesthesiology, ophthalmology and psychiatry. Logistic regressions were used to predict career preferences. Besides individual characteristics, work and home domain characteristics were taken into the analysis. Not surprisingly, the preference for career change in respect of working hours is higher among full-time MDs, especially women, than among part-time workers. In contradiction to what was expected, home domain characteristics did not predict a part-time preference for female, but for male MDs. One home domain characteristic, children's age, did predict the male part-time preference. Further gender differences were found in respect of the fit between actual and preferred working hours (A/P-fit). The majority of male MDs with a full-time preference had achieved an A/P-fit, whereas significantly less female MDs achieved their preferences. It was found that hospital-bound specialists are less positive towards part-time careers than other specialists. Furthermore, the change of working hours would imply a reduction in FTE for all specialties, if all preferences were met. Especially in hospital-bound specialisms it was not confirmed that the reduction in FTE would be low; this was found only in respect of interns. It may be concluded that individual preferences in career paths are very diverse. Personnel policy in medical specialties, especially in hospitals, will have to cope with changes in traditional vertical and age-related career paths. Flexible careers related to home domain determinants or other activities will reinforce a life cycle approach, in which the centrality of work is decreasing.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 50 (2000)
Issue (Month): 9 (May)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:50:y:2000:i:9:p:1235-1246. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Shamier, Wendy)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.