| Task | Men | Women | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 | 2022 | 2004 | 2022 | |
| Cooking | 2.5 | 4.5 | 8.0 | 6.5 |
| Cleaning | 2.0 | 3.0 | 6.5 | 5.0 |
| Laundry and ironing | 0.5 | 1.0 | 4.0 | 3.0 |
| Shopping | 2.5 | 2.0 | 3.5 | 2.5 |
| Childcare | 3.0 | 6.0 | 9.0 | 9.5 |
| Repairs and gardening | 4.0 | 3.0 | 1.5 | 2.0 |
| Total | 14.5 | 19.5 | 32.5 | 28.5 |
The table compares how many hours a week men and women in one country devoted to six kinds of unpaid domestic work in 2004 and 2022.
Overall, women did far more of this work than men in both years, but the gap between the sexes halved, as the male total rose while the female total fell. By 2022, childcare took up more time than any other task for both groups.
In 2004, women spent 32.5 hours a week on these activities, more than twice the male figure of 14.5. Their heaviest commitments were childcare (9 hours) and cooking (8), whereas men gave most time to repairs and gardening (4), the only task on which they exceeded women. By 2022, the female total had dropped to 28.5 hours, with cooking falling to 6.5 and cleaning, laundry and shopping also declining, although childcare edged up to 9.5 and repairs to 2.
The male total, by contrast, climbed by five hours to 19.5. Men’s childcare doubled from 3 to 6 hours and their cooking rose to 4.5, while only shopping and repairs fell, to 2 and 3 hours respectively. Consequently, the gap narrowed from 18 to 9 hours.
Every year, thousands of doctors and nurses educated in low-income countries move abroad to work in wealthier nations, attracted by higher salaries and better working conditions. I largely agree that this kind of recruitment should be restricted, although I do not believe it should be banned outright.
The strongest argument for restriction is one of fairness. Training a doctor takes many years and is often funded by governments whose health budgets are already stretched, so when that doctor emigrates, the investment is effectively transferred to a richer country free of charge. The human cost can be severe: a rural hospital that loses two or three of its specialists may be left with nobody able to perform operations at all. Rich countries that deliberately advertise for staff in such places are, in effect, solving their own shortages by deepening those of others.
That said, an outright ban would be neither practical nor just. Health workers, like anyone else, have the right to seek a better life, and preventing them from moving would simply push them towards other professions or irregular routes abroad. Moreover, many migrants send money home, and some eventually return with valuable experience, which benefits their countries of origin.
The answer, therefore, lies in managed rather than prohibited migration. Wealthy nations should stop active recruitment campaigns in countries facing critical shortages, as international codes of practice already recommend, and should compensate source countries, for instance by funding additional training places there. At the same time, they need to train enough staff of their own instead of relying on imports to fill the gaps.
In conclusion, while individual professionals must remain free to move, the systematic recruitment of health workers from poorer nations should be limited and balanced by fair compensation, so that one country’s gain is not simply another country’s loss.