GROWING UP IN SCOTLAND: THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND EXPERIENCES OF 3 YEAR OLD CHILDREN LIVING IN SCOTLAND IN 2007/08 AND 2013

Chapter 2 Overview Scottish Children at Age 3

This section provides an overview of socio-economic and demographic characteristics of 3-year-old children living in Scotland in 2007/08 and 2013. For each of the two cohorts the section provides information on: parental employment status; receipt of state benefits and tax credits; area deprivation; maternal age at child's birth; level of parental education; and family type.

2.1 Parental employment status

The vast majority of families in BC1 and BC2 obtained a proportion of their income from salaries and wages. Table 3.1 shows employment status at a household level, while Table 3.2 shows employment status for the child's main carer (in most cases the mother) for both cohorts.

Table 3.1 shows that, at age 3, a lower proportion of BC2 children (67%) than BC1 children (72%) lived in a household where at least one parent worked full time. BC2 children were slightly more likely to live in households where no parent worked full time but where at least one parent worked part time (16% in BC2, 13% in BC1). These differences were statistically significant. BC2 children appeared more likely than their BC1 counterparts to live in 'workless' households where neither parent (or the resident parent in a single parent household) were in paid employment (18% in BC2 versus 15% in BC1). However, this difference was not statistically significant.

Table 2.1 Household employment status, by cohort

	BC1	BC2
	%	%
At least one parent/carer in full time employment*	72	67
At least one parent/carer in part time employment (no parent in full-time employment)*	13	16
No parent/carer in paid employment	15	18
Unweighted bases	4167	4946

Differences by cohort on items marked * are statistically significant at p < .01 or less. All other differences are not statistically significant.

Table 2.2 shows the employment status of the child's main carer who, in the vast majority of cases, was the child's mother. BC2 main carers were slightly more likely to be in paid employment than main carers in BC1 (62% for BC1, 64% for BC2). Nearly half of main carers (48%) worked part-time. This figure was identical for both cohorts. In terms of full-time employment, BC2 main carers were slightly more likely to be in full-time employment than BC1 main carers (16% versus 14%). This difference was statistically significant.

Table 2.2 Employment status of main carer, by cohort

	BC1	BC2
	%	%
In paid employment - full-time (> = 35 hours per week)*	14	16
In paid employment - part-time (< 35 hours per week)	48	48
Not in paid employment	38	36
Unweighted bases	4190	5008

Differences by cohort on items marked * are statistically significant at p < .05 or less. All other differences are not statistically significant.

As Table 2.3 shows, partners of the respondent (in most cases, this was the child's biological father) were less likely to be working full time in BC2 than in BC1 (83% compared with 86%). As such, the drop in the proportion of children living in households where at least one parent was in full-time employment seems to have been driven primarily by a shift in employment status of partners, rather than mothers.

Table 2.3 Employment status of partner, by cohort

	BC1	BC2
	%	%
In paid employment - full-time (> = 35 hours per week)*	86	83
In paid employment - part-time (< 35 hours per week)*	6	7
Not in paid employment	8	10
Unweighted bases	3465	4013

Differences by cohort on items marked * are statistically significant at p < .01 or less. All other differences are not statistically significant.

2.2 Receipt of state benefits and tax credits

Table 2.4 shows the proportion of families in each cohort in receipt of various types of state benefits and tax credits. In both BC1 and BC2 around one in seven families received some sort of 'out of work' benefit (either Income Support or Job Seeker's Allowance).

BC2 families were more likely to receive housing benefit than BC1 families (19% in BC2 compared with 14% in BC1) and council tax benefit (18% in BC2 compared with 15% in BC1). However, receipt of Working and Child Tax Credits was lower amongst families in BC2 than in BC1. This is likely to reflect the lower thresholds for withdrawal of Tax Credits introduced in 2011 (Bradshaw et al., 2013).

Table 2.4 % of families in receipt of benefits and tax credits, by cohort

	BC1	BC2
	%	%
Child Tax Credit*	68	46
Unweighted bases	4060	5002
Working Tax Credit*	24	18
Unweighted bases	4060	5002
Housing Benefit*	14	19
Unweighted bases	4087	5013
Council Tax Benefit	15	18
Unweighted bases	4087	5013
Income Support	13	13
Unweighted bases	4087	5013
Job Seeker's Allowance*	1	2
Unweighted bases	4087	5013

Differences by cohort on items marked * are statistically significant at p < .01 or less. All other differences are not statistically significant.

2.3 Area deprivation (SIMD)

GUS measures area deprivation using the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD). SIMD identifies small area concentrations of multiple deprivation across Scotland based on a range of factors including income, employment, health, education, access to services, housing, and crime. Areas are listed from the most to the least deprived and divided into quintiles.^[5] Table 3.5 shows the proportion of families living in each of the five SIMD quintiles.

At age 3, 23% of BC1 and 24% of BC2 children lived in the most deprived areas of Scotland, while 19% and 18%, respectively, lived in the least deprived areas. There were no statistically significant differences between the cohorts in this respect.

Table 2.5 Area deprivation of home address (quintiles), by cohort

	BC1	BC2
	%	%
1 Most deprived	24	23
2	18	20
3	20	20
4	19	19
5 Least deprived	19	18
Unweighted bases	4193	4985

Differences by cohort are not statistically significant.

2.4 Maternal age

Table 2.6 shows the age of the child's mother at the time of birth of the cohort child. In both cohorts, the majority of mothers were in their twenties or their thirties. However, there were some differences between the cohorts. Firstly, while the proportion of teenage mothers was small in both cohorts, it was slightly higher in BC1 (8%) than in BC2 (6%). This difference is statistically significant and is consistent with data from ISD which shows a small drop in the number of babies born to teenage mothers between 2004 and 2010 (Macpherson, 2013; ISD, 2012). Secondly, mothers in BC2 were more likely than those in BC1 to be in their twenties (41% for BC1, 46% for BC2), and less likely to be in their thirties (48% for BC1, 44% for BC2) when the cohort child was born. This shift reflects a wider trend over the past decade that has seen a slight reduction in the age of first-time mothers following a long-term trend observed since the 1970s of first-time mothers getting older (Bradshaw et al., 2013; ISD, 2011).

Table 2.6 Mother's age at child's birth, by cohort

	BC1	BC2
	%	%
Under 20*	8	6
20 to 29*	41	46
30 to 39*	48	44
40 or older	3	4
Unweighted bases	4170	4996

Differences by cohort on items marked * are statistically significant at p < .05 or less. All other differences are not statistically significant.

2.5 Parental level of education

Table 2.7 shows levels of parental education for both cohorts. In couple households the figures reflect the highest level of education obtained by either the respondent or his/her partner, whichever is higher. For single parent families, figures reflect the education level of the respondent.^[6]

Children in BC2 (42%) were more likely than children in BC1 (34%) to be living in a household with at least one adult educated to degree level or above. This difference is in line with a wider trend within Scotland which has seen the proportion of adults (aged 16-64 years old) educated to degree level or above increase from 26% to 31% between 2004 and 2010 (Nomis, 2015).

A small proportion of children (6% in BC1; 5% in BC2) lived in households where no adult had any qualification.

Table 2.7 Parental level of education in household, by cohort

	BC1	BC2
	%	%
No qualifications*	6	5
Lower Standard Grades or VQs or Other	6	6
Upper level SGs or Intermediate VQs*	21	17
Higher grades and upper level VQs	32	30
Degree level academic and vocational qualifications*	34	42
Unweighted bases	4186	4841

Differences by cohort on items marked * are statistically significant at p < .05 or less. All other differences are not statistically significant.

2.6 Family type

Table 2.8 shows that at age 3 the vast majority of children lived in couple households (81% for BC1, 79% for BC2). For both BC1 and BC2 approximately one in five children lived in a single parent household.^[7] There were no statistically significant differences in family type between the cohorts.

Table 2.8 Family type, by cohort

	BC1	BC2
	%	%
Respondent not living with spouse/partner (Single parent family)	19	21
Respondent living with spouse/partner (Couple family)	81	79
Unweighted bases	4193	5019

Differences by cohort not statistically significant.