The Filipino family dynamics have evolved because of globalization and migration. This has changed the traditional family norms in the Philippines. As a result, the number of Stay-At-Home-Fathers (SAHFs) has increased, with fathers becoming primary givers and mothers becoming breadwinners. A phenomenological qualitative study was utilized in this study to understand the lived experiences of SAHFs focused on their life history, present experiences, and their reflections on hopes and aspirations. Reasons for becoming a SAHF are largely based on the socioeconomic status of the family and the readiness to end the cycle of poverty. Though there is an increased number of SAHFs, they continue to face isolation, stereotypes, and stigma. They expressed a desire for greater appreciation and understanding of their parental and emotional lives as fathers while finding balance in their new role and contribution to the family.
AlampayL. P.JocsonR. M. (2011). Attributions and attitudes of mothers and fathers in the Philippines. Parenting, Science and Practice, 11(2–3), 163–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295192.2011.585564
2.
ArciniegaG. M.AndersonT. C.Tovar-BlankZ. G.TraceyT. J. G. (2008). Toward a fuller conception of Machismo: Development of a traditional Machismo and Caballerismo scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55(1), 19–33. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.55.1.19
3.
BánovčinováA.LevickáJ.VerešM. (2014). The impact of poverty on the family system functioning. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 132, 148–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.04.291
4.
BermudezJ. M.ManciniJ. A. (2013). Familias fuertes: Family resilience among Latinos. In D. S. Becvar (Ed.), Handbook of family resilience (pp. 215–227). Springer Science + Business Media.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3917-2_13
5.
CarlsonM. J.TurnerK. J. (2010). Fathers’ involvement and fathers’ well-being over children’s first five years. Institute for Research on Poverty.
6.
Castelain-MeunierC. (2002). The place of fatherhood and the parental role: Tensions, ambivalence and contradictions. Current Sociology, 50, 185–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392102050002616
7.
ChesleyN. (2011). Stay-at-home fathers and breadwinning mothers: Gender, couple dynamics, and social change. Gender & Society, 25(5), 642–664. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243211417433
8.
ColtraneS. (1996). Family man: Fatherhood, housework, and gender equity. Oxford University Press.
9.
CongerK.RueterM.CongerR. (1999). The role of economic pressure in the lives of parents and their adolescents: The family stress model. In CrockettL.SilbereisenR. (Eds.), Negotiating adolescence in times of social change (pp. 201–223). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511600906.014.
10.
DavisE. S.HaberlinS.SmithV. S.SmithS.WolgemuthJ. (2020). Being a stay-at-home dad (SAHD): Implication for the mental health profession. The Family Journal, 28(2), 150–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/1066480720906121
11.
DienhartA. (1998). Reshaping fatherhood: The social construction of shared parenting. Sage Publications, Inc.
12.
GarabilesM. R.OfreneoM. A. P.HallB. J. (2017). Towards a model of resilience for transnational families of Filipina domestic workers. PLoS ONE, 12(8), e0183703. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0183703
13.
GrahamE.JordanL. P. (2011). Migrant parents and the psychological well-being of left-behind children in Southeast Asia. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 73(4), 763–787. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2011.00844.x
14.
GrayP. B.AndersonK. G. (2010). Fatherhood: Evolution and human paternal behavior. Harvard University Press.
HolmesE. K.WikleJ.ThomasC. R.JorgensenM. A.EggintonB. R. (2021). Social contact, time alone, and parental subjective well-being: A focus on stay-at-home fathers using the American time use survey. Psychology of Men & Masculinities, 22(3), 488–499. https://doi.org/10.1037/men0000321
17.
JocanoF. L. (1998). Filipino social organization: Traditional kinship and family organization. Punlad Research House.
18.
JohnstonC. A.MorrisonT. G. (2007). The presentation of masculinity in everyday life: Contextual variations in the masculine behaviour of Irish men. Sex Roles, 57(9/10), 661–674. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-007-9299-9
19.
KramerK. Z.KellyE. L.McCullochJ. B. (2015). Stay-at-home fathers: Definition and characteristics based on 34 years of CPS data. Journal of Family Issues, 36(12), 1651–1673. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X13502479
20.
LeeY.LeeS. J. (2018). Caring is masculine: Stay-at-home fathers and masculine identity. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 19, 47–58. https://doi.org/10.1037/men0000079
LorberJ. (2010). “Night to His Day”: The social construction of gender. In GoodmanJ. (Ed.), Global perspectives on gender & work: Readings and interpretations (pp. 15–32). Rowan & Littlefield Publishers.
23.
McFarland-PiazzaL.HazenN.JacobvitzD.Boyd-SoissonE. (2012). The development of father–child attachment: Associations between adult attachment representations, recollections of childhood experiences and caregiving. Early Child Development and Care, 182(6), 701–721. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2011.573071
Moss-RacusinC. A.PhelanJ. E.RudmanL. A. (2010). When men break the gender rules: Status incongruity and backlash against modest men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 11(2), 140–151. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018093
26.
PengY.WongO. M. H. (2016). Who takes care of my left-behind children? Migrant mothers and caregivers in transnational child care. Journal of Family Issues, 37(14), 2021–2044. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X15578006
27.
PerroneK. M.WrightS. L.JacksonZ. V. (2009). Traditional and nontraditional gender roles and work–family interface for men and women. Journal of Career Development, 36(1), 8–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845308327736
28.
Philippine Health Research Ethics Board (2017). National ethical guidelines for health and health-related research. Department of Science and Technology.
PingolA. (2001). Remaking masculinities identity, power, and gender dynamics in families with migrant wives and housebands. University of the Philippines: University Center for Women’s Studies.
31.
RochlenA. B.SuizzoM.McKelleyR. A.ScaringiV. (2008). ‘I’m just providing for my family’: A qualitative study of stay-at-home fathers. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 9, 193–206. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012510
32.
RosenbergJ.WilcoxW. B., & United States (2006). The importance of fathers in the healthy development of children. U.S. Dept. Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, Children’s Bureau, Office of Child Abuse and Neglect. https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubpdfs/fatherhood.pdf
33.
SchwandtT. A. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: Interpretivism, hermeneutics, and social constructionism. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 189–213). SAGE Publishing.
34.
SnitkerA. (2018). Not Mr. Mom: Navigating discourses for stay-at-home fathers. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 26, 203–221. https://doi.org/10.1177/1060826518758628
35.
StevensE. (2015). Understanding discursive barriers to involved father-hood: The case of Australian stay-at-home fathers. Journal of Family Studies, 21, 22–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/13229400.2015.1020989
36.
StrykerS. (1968). Identity salience and role performance: The relevance of symbolic interaction theory for family research. Journal of Marriage and Family, 30, 558. https://doi.org/10.2307/349494
37.
van ManenM. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. State University of New York Press.
