Immigrant Single Mothers in Germany: An Intersectional Perspective on a Group at Risk

Maciejewski, Linda; Harder, Niklas Article — Published Version Immigrant Single Mothers in Germany: An Intersectional Perspective on a Group at Risk Journal of International Migration and Integration Provided in Cooperation with: Springer Nature Suggested Citation: Maciejewski, Linda; Harder, Niklas (2025) : Immigrant Single Mothers in Germany: An Intersectional Perspective on a Group at Risk, Journal of International Migration and Integration, ISSN 1874-6365, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, Vol. 26, Iss. 3, pp. 1511-1546, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-025-01232-6 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/330221 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Journal of International Migration and Integration (2025) 26:1511–1546 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-025-01232-6 Immigrant Single Mothers in Germany: An Intersectional Perspective on a Group at Risk Linda Maciejewski1·Niklas Harder2 Accepted: 11 January 2025 / Published online: 3 February 2025 © The Author(s) 2025 Abstract The risk of poverty is not evenly distributed in the German population, and immigrants and single mothers are particularly at risk. According to the Family Stress Model, poverty can impact all family members and their relationships. We use the AID:A 2019 dataset on young families and apply an intersectional perspective to study the situation of immigrant single mothers and their children. We focus on how single mothers and in particular immigrant single mothers differ from mothers in two-parent families and non-immigrants in terms of poverty risk, reported life satisfaction, and mother-reported psychosocial difficulties (SDQ) of their children. Our results show that immigrant single mothers, especially first-generation non-naturalized immigrant mothers, face the highest risk of economic stress and lower life satisfaction. This supports the Family Stress Model. However, contrary to the extended Family Stress Model, children of immigrant single mothers are not more likely to show motherreported psychosocial difficulties than their peers from two-parent or non-immigrant families. Following an intersectional perspective, we do not assume that the reasons for these differences necessarily lie only in the individuals. Instead, we also interpret the effects of social positions as effects of the political and social dynamics creating these social positions and thus discuss the German institutional settings that might explain our results. Keywords Single mothers ·Migration ·Quantitative intersectionality ·Gender · Family Stress Model BNiklas Harder [email protected] Linda Maciejewski linda.macieje[email protected] 1Institute for Sociology, Leipzig University, Beethovenstraße 15, 04107 Leipzig, Saxony, Germany 2Abt. Integration, German Center for Integration and Migration Research (DeZIM e.V.), Mauerstraße 76, 10117 Berlin, Germany 123 1512 L. Maciejewski, N. Harder Introduction In 2021, 15.8% of the population in Germany earned less than 60% of the median income and thus fell below the poverty threshold (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2022). The poverty rate is especially high among single parents (41%), who are mostly mothers, and immigrants (29%), which makes them two of the top three groups at risk of living in poverty (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2021a).1These two dimensions of poverty have been studied intensively (see, e.g., Algan et al., 2010; Amo-Agyei, 2020; Grabka and Göbler, 2020; Hübgen, 2020b; Ingwersen and Thomsen, 2021; Krings, 2021; Levanon et al., 2019; Zucco, 2019), yet there is very little research on their intersection. That is, it is not known whether single parenthood and immigrant status are risk factors that amplify each other to create a specific poverty risk. It is also not known if the risk is similar for all immigrants or if the risk differs according to legal status or country of origin. Furthermore, it is unclear how living with an immigrant single parent at risk of poverty affects children. The share of foreign citizens in Germany rose from 4.5% in 1970 to 13.1% in 2021 (Bundesinstitut für Bevölkerungsforschung, 2023). In 2022, 24.3% of the German population were either immigrants or had at least one immigrant parent (Statistisches Bundesamt,2023).2Germanycanthusbeseenas aprototypical exampleofanindustrialized, Western country with a comparatively short migration history that is presently experiencing an influx of immigrants and facing the urgency of rapid integration due to a dwindling birthrate and labor shortages (Geis-Thöne, 2021,2022; Klinger & Fuchs, 2020). At the same time, Germany boasts a strong economy and a comparably well-established social welfare system. Investigating why certain segments of the population seem not to benefit from the country’s prosperity to the same degree as other segments is important for ensuring the long-term functioning and success of the social welfare system. Povertydirectlyimpactsaperson’sability tobuildtheirlifeandparticipatein society (Jahoda, 1981; Pohlan, 2019; Spannnagel & Zucco, 2022). Especially in the case of families, however, the impact of poverty goes beyond this immediate effect. According to the Family Stress Model (Conger & Conger, 2002; Conger et al., 2010), poverty as one source of stress can impact all family members and their relationship dynamics. It can lead to emotional distress in a parent, which may affect their relationship with their children. Here, the stress can express itself in the form of negative parenting behavior, which in turn can lead to stress in the children. The act of migrating from one country to another often has the potential to strain or fragment immigrant families (Boyle et al., 2008; Mansfeld, 2023). Therefore, it is important to consider family form when examining the economic and social situations of immigrants. For immigrant single parents, individual factors such as education and language proficiency can explain variations in their economic and psychological sit1The third group in the top three are people with only general elementary education and no professional degree. 2Foreigners are defined as individuals with foreign citizenship (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2023)Incomparison, the term “migration background” refers not only to the person’s own citizenship, but also to that of their parents. A person has a migration background if they were born with foreign citizenship or if at least one of their parents was (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2023). 123 Immigrant Single Mothers 1513 uations (Carlsson et al., 2023; OECD, 2023; Mui et al., 2007; Bernal et al., 2022). However, institutional factors such as legal status or legal benefits for married couples might equally play a role (Hainmueller et al., 2017; Johnson et al., 2024; Alegría et al., 2017). Explicit analysis of the interplay of institutional and individual factors in determining an individual’s social and economic position is at the heart of the intersectional approach (Crenshaw, 1991). From an intersectional perspective, immigrant status and single parenthood are social positions that can be interrelated and intersecting (Crenshaw, 1991; Cleton & Scuzzarello, 2024; Scuzzarello & Moro¸sanu, 2023). Social positions (e.g., being a woman and/or being black) exist through and are defined by processes of power, discrimination, privilege, and oppression, such as sexism and/or racism (Crenshaw, 1991). These factors can interact when social positions intersect. They may amplify and moderate each other, and hence, the circumstances of people in such social positions may vary at different intersections. Thus far, however, it has been more common for these social positions to be examined separately (see Angelov et al., 2016; England et al., 2016; Lundberg et al., 2016; Schmieder and Wrohlich, 2021; Ingwersen and Thomsen, 2021; Schmid, 2023; Klein and von dem Knesebeck, 2018). In this paper, we examine how the increased probability of poverty influences the lives of immigrant single mothers. To avoid overlooking the intersecting social positions and the interplay of individual and institutional factors, we test our hypotheses using approaches guided by intersectionality as a research paradigm (Hancock, 2013). We understand this paper to be Intersectional in three ways: First, we aim to study the phenomenon of interest—immigrant single-mother households—along a set of detailed social positions. Second, we follow an intercategorical approach (McCall, 2005) and advice by Hancock (2007); Bauer (2014), and Bowleg and Bauer (2016), modeling the intersections of social positions using interaction terms instead of estimating multiple main effect models or additive effects (Else-Quest & Hyde, 2016). Third, when we analyze potential disadvantages along certain social positions, we do not assume that the cause of disadvantage lies in the individuals in these positions. Instead, we interpret the effects of social positions as effects of the politics and social dynamics creating these social positions (Hancock, 2013). More specifically, we test hypotheses derived from the Family Stress Model and the extended Family Stress Model (Conger & Conger, 2002; Conger et al., 2010), which hold that financial difficulties may affect not only parents but indirectly also their children. Hence, we run separate models on the household, mother, and child level. This broadens our understanding of how power relations at the intersection of gender, family type, and migration (firstor second-generation migrant) manifest themselves at different units of analysis and for different outcomes. Here, we follow suggestions by Bowleg and Bauer (2016) to operationalize Intersectionality by using interaction effects. We also differentiate immigrant status by citizenship and generation. This allows a more detailed look than the umbrella term “migration background” (Migrationshintergrund) that is commonly used in studies on immigrants in Germany. We performed our analysis using micro-level data from the AID:A 2019 and the AID:A Mig+ surveys (Kuger et al., 2020,2022). The AID:A surveys are household surveys that contain information on all household members and also collect extensive 123 1514 L. Maciejewski, N. Harder data on household and family structures. The data allows us to examine different outcomes at different units of analysis without changing the households in our sample. Results show that compared to two-parent and/or non-immigrant households, the probability of living below the poverty line is substantially higher for all firstgeneration immigrant single-mother households. A closer look at first-generation immigrant single mothers also shows that they report significantly lower overall life satisfaction than other mothers. Looking more closely at generation status and citizenship, first-generation non-EU citizen households and single mothers are most at risk of poverty and lower life satisfaction compared to all other groups, yet exhibited no greater risk of mother-reported psychosocial difficulties for their children. The greater risk of negative outcomes diminishes in the second generation. With regard to mother-reported psychosocial difficulties and family structure, we find small differences for non-immigrant and second-generation immigrant children but no differences for first-generation children when comparing children in two-parent and single-mother families by generation status. Our results highlight the need for Intersectional analyses and careful interpretation of effects assigned to social positions. Furthermore, we argue that in order to apply an intersectional research paradigm in quantitative analyses, intersecting social positions must be considered even before data is collected. Background and Theoretical Perspectives Intersectionality The intersectional paradigm points out that social positions, such as being a woman or Black, are usually considered and studied separately, overlooking that multiple factors will inevitably apply to some people, as they are inherent to all of these socially constructed positions (Steinmetz, 2020;Bowleg,2008). The social position that a person holds can lead to (dis-)advantages in society through power relations such as laws or tax advantages for specific groups. This leads to inequalities for some groups. The social positions are mutually interrelated and therefore the differences entailed by one social position cannot simply be added to those of another social position. To assume there is a double disadvantage would fall short in this regard (Bowleg, 2008). The intersectional paradigm is originally rooted in Black feminist theory but has long been applied in many other disciplines as well (Crenshaw, 1989,1991; Collins, 1990; Combahee River Collective, 1977; Patterson et al., 2022; Restifo et al., 2023; Wilkins, 2022). It considers different social positions and looks at how their interrelation can reinforce social power relations and hierarchies (Steinmetz, 2020). The basic assumption is that different power relations create and sustain each other and thus form systems of oppression (Collins, 1998). Here, intersectionality is a tool to show how these power relations structure society and where they conflict and intersect. The intersectional perspective explicitly highlights the heterogeneity of society and reveals social structures shaped by societal institutions. Intersectionality was initially introduced to articulate a phenomenon that neither feminist theory nor legal frameworks could adequately address. The term was origi123 Immigrant Single Mothers 1515 nally intended to describe the unique experiences of women of color, whose oppression could not be understood solely through the lenses of race or gender independently. Intersectionality has since evolved into a critical framework for analyzing how multiple, intersecting social positions—such as race, gender, immigrant status, and family form—contribute to complex systems of oppression and privilege. Today, intersectionality is widely employed in research to acknowledge and address these overlapping and interacting axes of inequality, emphasizing how power relations shape the lived experiences of marginalized groups. Numerous studies have demonstrated that inequalities do not exist in isolation but are compounded through the interplay of various social positions, underscoring the value of adopting an intersectional perspective in both research and practice (Scuzzarello & Moro¸sanu, 2023; Nazari, 2024; Tunçer, 2024). As it was originally not meant for research, a consensual operationalization of intersectionality in quantitative research is missing (Bowleg & Bauer, 2016). McCall (2005) suggests three different methodological approaches to study intersectionality: anti-, intra-, and intercategorical. An anticategorical approach rejects fixed categories, as these are seen as simplistic representations of reality. In the intracategorial approach, categories are recognized, but the approach criticizes the fact that the heterogeneity within the categories is not represented. Therefore, this approach focuses on specific social groups in order to reveal diversity within these groups. The antiand intracatecorical approaches are used in qualitative research. The last approach, the intercategorical approach, assumes that categories are necessary to show inequalities and therefore compares intersecting categories with one another. In this paper, we study gender, family form, and immigrant status using an intercategorical approach. Intersectionality and Institutions A major challenge to quantitative intersectionality is intersectionality’s focus on the role of institutions. Estimating the effect of institutions is notoriously difficult when using quantitative approaches as it would presuppose some form of variation in institutions. In single-country studies such as this one, there is often little to no institutional variation during the observation period and without variation, it is impossible to estimate an effect. Variation in the institutional setting can be achieved in cross-country studies. However, here, the variation in institutions often correlates with other factors that set countries apart, and it is thus unclear whether the estimated effect really represents the influence of institutions or of other unobserved factors that differ between countries. However, the inability to estimate a precise effect of institutional influence does not mean that power relations in society are not shaped and transmitted by institutions. Considering the case of single mothers in Germany, there is ample reason to believe that their economic situation is significantly structured by institutions. Large parts of the still existing Gender Pay Gap (Grabka & Göbler, 2020; Statistisches Bundesamt, 2021b; Zucco, 2019) are most likely explained by the long-standing gender-specific division of labor that was upheld by German law (e.g., until 1977 according to §1356 BGB a woman was only allowed to work if this was compatible with her duties in marriage and family). This is also evident in a labor market that is segregated by 123 1516 L. Maciejewski, N. Harder gender, with a higher proportion of women in lower-status jobs (Wrohlich & Zucco, 2017). Today, the Gender Pay Gap is especially large for mothers and is known as the “motherhoodpenalty” (Budig et al., 2012; Hübgen, 2020a). Again,institutional factors such as tax advantages for a traditional family model in the division of labor for married couples (“Ehegattensplitting”) and a lack of sufficient childcare contribute to this situation (Berghahn, 2012). The lack of sufficient childcare is particularly difficult for the labor market participation of single parents—90% of them mothers (Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend, , 2021). In the German labor market, women often work only part-time and/or in low-wage sectors. This puts single mothers, who are primary caregivers and solely responsible for the household income, at a particular risk (Neuberger et al., 2019). In addition, the lack of flexible working hours makes it difficult for single mothers to stay in the labor market at all (Lenze, 2021). Some 38% of single parents receive social benefits, although single parents are more often in employment than parents in other family forms (Neuberger et al., 2019). Further, compared to married couples, they are excluded from certain welfare benefits, and as the duration of alimony payments (“Ehegattenunterhalt”) has been shortened, they are forced to enter the labor market more quickly (Lenze, 2021). Another problem is that the responsibility of the nonresident parent to pay child support is rarely enforced by the state. Hence, many single parents get little or no child support at all from the non-resident parent, which further exacerbates their economic situation (Hubert et al., 2020). Immigrants face legal barriers compared to German citizens, and their access to the labor market is only partially equivalent, as is the claim to social benefits. Those holding an EU passport have more rights than non-EU citizens, which hierarchizes the groups. A report by the OECD (2022) shows that differences in labor market outcomes between EU and non-EU citizens exist, although this gap is narrowing. There can be many reasons for this, ranging from lower educational levels and greater cultural and language barriers to a higher risk for discrimination and lower recognition of qualifications attained in the home country for non-EU citizens compared to EU citizens (OECD, 2022). Especially because of the cumbersome recognition process for vocational and educational qualifications, many immigrants are overqualified for the jobs they hold or are unable to find work at all (Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, , 2020). This is particularly evident among immigrants who entered Germany under the family reunification program (Böhmer et al., 2020; Maciejewski & Harder, 2022). The result is a labor market segregated not only by gender but also by immigrant status: just like women, immigrants work more often in the low-wage sector and have lower wages (Krings, 2021; Ingwersen & Thomsen, 2019). To further complicatematters,manyfirst-andsecond-generationimmigrantsfacediscrimination, for example, in the housing and labor markets (El-Mafaalani, 2017). In 2020, an estimated 11.4 million foreign citizens lived in Germany. Around 5.1 million of them were citizens of another EU country, 2.5 million were from a non-EU country but had permanent residence status, 1.4 million had some kind of humanitarian protection status, 800,000 had a visa for family reunification, and 500,000 had a visa for work or education. The remainder were either in the process of obtaining a form of legal status or had another temporary legal status (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2021b). To 123 Immigrant Single Mothers 1517 account for the different legal circumstances of immigrants in Germany, our analyses will consider EU and non-EU citizens separately. Combining the institutional barriers faced by women, single mothers, and immigrants raises the question of whether immigrant single mothers are the most disadvantaged group. In our analysis, we want to explore if and how they differ from theother groups. To do so, we analyze four differentgroups:non-immigranttwo-parent families, non-immigrant single-mother families, immigrant two-parent families, and immigrant single-mother families. Where the number of observations allows, we further distinguish immigrant groups by EU and non-EU citizenship to account for the group’s heterogeneity and to obtain a more nuanced picture. An Intersectional Approach to the Family Stress Model According to the Family Stress Model (Conger & Conger, 2002; Conger et al., 2010), multiple stressors, such as poverty, socioeconomic status, or marital conflict, can result in family stress that can potentially impact an individual. This stress leads to pressure that can result in increased emotional distress and behavioral problems or a lower sense of well-being (Conger et al., 2010). Further, the emotional stress of parents can impact multiple family members and their relationships. Family stress can result in conflict between parents and can also impact their children, as the parental stress can manifest itself in negative parenting behavior (Conger et al., 2010). Due to stress, parents might be emotionally unavailable or engage in harsh parenting behavior that can trigger the children so that they become stressed as well. This can lead to psychological difficulties in children (Conger et al., 2010; Hainmueller et al., 2017). With regard to immigrant single parents, other studies show that single parents and immigrants face multiple stressful situations, such as poverty, unemployment, discrimination, and legal obstacles, and are therefore at great risk of family stress (Milewski et al., 2018; Böhmer et al., 2020). According to the intersectional paradigm, the power relations that exist for specific groups and the aforementioned institutional barriers lead to disadvantages for women, single parents, and immigrants. It can be assumed that immigrant single parents face multiple and more frequent stressors, such as a greater risk of poverty combined with challenges due to their immigrant status, particularly with regard to entering the labor market. This can lead to more stress in parents and can affect their life satisfaction. Studies show that stress and life satisfaction are negatively correlated, while income and life satisfaction are positively correlated (Walsh & Murphy, 2021; Masuda et al., 2021; Jachimowicz et al., 2022). Further, the life satisfaction of the parents can impact their children, which might lead to psychosocial difficulties. According to the Family Stress Model, poverty is the relevant variable on the household level, life satisfaction on the mother’s level and psychosocial difficulties on the child’s level. These are the three levels of our analysis, from which we have derived three hypotheses. Our first hypothesis is at the household level and examines poverty risk in order to examine whether immigrant single mothers are actually exposed to the greatest risk of poverty, which can lead to family stress. Based on intersectionality, we propose that compared to two-parent family households and non-immigrant households, immigrant single-parent households face the highest risk: 123 1518 L. Maciejewski, N. Harder H1: Immigrant single-mother households have the highest probability of living below the poverty line. Our second hypothesis is based on the level of the mother. We assume that the emotional stress due to poverty decreases the life satisfaction of the mother. Following an intersectional perspective, we assume that compared to two-parent families and non-immigrant mothers, immigrant single mothers have the lowest life satisfaction: H2: Immigrant single mothers have the highest stress level due to a higher risk of living below the poverty line, which is reflected in their life satisfaction. Ourthird hypothesisisatthelevelof the child.FollowingtheextendedFamilyStress Model and an intersectional perspective, we assume that compared to children in twoparent families and non-immigrant children, children of immigrant single mothers have a higher risk of showing psychosocial difficulties. This is due to a higher poverty risk and therefore more stress in mothers: H3: Children of immigrant single mothers have the highest probability of showing psychosocial difficulties. Empirical Evidence on Immigrant Single Parents The existing studies on immigrant single parents indeed show intersectional relations between gender, family form, and immigrant status. A study from Switzerland that investigated labor market participation finds that immigrant single mothers are more disadvantaged than non-immigrant single mothers (Milewski et al., 2018). Especially, first-generation single mothers were at greater risk of being unemployed. On the other hand, differences between non-immigrants and second-generation immigrants were not significant. When the researchers looked more closely at the type of employment, first-generation immigrants were more often unemployed but also more likely to work full-time. For second-generation immigrant single mothers, the figures were smaller but differences between non-immigrants and second-generation immigrants remained. The country of origin did not play a key role in addition to immigrant status. Incontrast, astudyfromthe UnitedStatesthatanalyzed racial differencesinterms of family structure and children’s educational performance came to a different conclusion (Cross, 2020). The analysis showed that socioeconomic stress in particular, but also extended family embeddedness, weakened the effect of family structure on children’s education and could explain the gap between two-parent and single-parent families. The results showed that for Black children, spending a longer time with a single mother is less detrimental than for whites regarding on-time high school completion. The study showed no difference between white and Hispanic children. The authors interpreted this finding as support for the socioeconomic stress hypothesis, according to which living in a single-parent family has a lesser impact on Blacks as they are already socioeconomically disadvantaged. Supporting this, official statistics from Germany describe a similar picture: Single parents without a migration background have a poverty risk that is six times higher than that of two-parent families without a migration background (34% vs. 6%; Böhmer 123 Immigrant Single Mothers 1525 Table 1 continued (Full sample) (Twoparent family) (Twoparent family) (Twoparent family) (Twoparent family) (Twoparent family) (Single mothers) (Single mothers) (Single mothers) (Single mothers) (Single mothers) Full sample nonimmigrant 1. Gen. (GER) 1. Gen. (EU) 1. Gen. (non-EU) 2. Gen. nonimmigrant 1. Gen. (GER) 1. Gen. (EU) 1. Gen. (non-EU) 2. Gen. Part time 0.45 0.51 0.40 0.34 0.17 0.50 0.41 0.44 0.34 0.22 0.31 (0.497) (0.500) (0.491) (0.475) (0.377) (0.501) (0.492) (0.501) (0.482) (0.420) (0.466) Full time 0.37 0.30 0.44 0.47 0.76 0.37 0.28 0.35 0.37 0.71 0.37 (0.482) (0.459) (0.497) (0.501) (0.429) (0.484) (0.452) (0.483) (0.490) (0.458) (0.487) Age of mother 39.00 39.49 37.98 36.87 36.14 38.59 40.08 40.41 40.09 37.44 40.85 (7.613) (7.359) (7.314) (7.517) (7.059) (8.157) (8.393) (6.943) (7.582) (7.956) (9.283) Age of youngest child 6.45 6.42 5.97 5.70 4.69 6.15 8.41 8.12 8.03 6.49 8.11 (5.027) (5.043) (4.921) (4.857) (4.225) (5.014) (4.982) (4.304) (5.322) (4.625) (5.563) Number of children 1 child 0.27 0.25 0.23 0.30 0.19 0.27 0.40 0.39 0.34 0.36 0.32 (0.444) (0.436) (0.424) (0.459) (0.396) (0.445) (0.491) (0.492) (0.482) (0.484) (0.471) 2 children 0.47 0.52 0.45 0.41 0.40 0.42 0.38 0.31 0.37 0.24 0.47 (0.499) (0.500) (0.498) (0.493) (0.490) (0.495) (0.486) (0.466) (0.490) (0.435) (0.504) 3 children or more 0.26 0.22 0.32 0.29 0.41 0.31 0.22 0.31 0.29 0.40 0.21 (0.436) (0.415) (0.465) (0.456) (0.492) (0.461) (0.413) (0.466) (0.458) (0.495) (0.409) Observations 4193 2431 380 191 289 321 399 49 35 45 53 Shown are means with standard deviation in parentheses 123 1526 L. Maciejewski, N. Harder Multiple Regression Results Household Model: Poverty Risk The studies of Heintz-Martin and Langmeyer (2020) and Böhmer et al. (2020)show that (immigrant) single mothers are at the highest risk of living below the poverty line. However, Böhmer et al. (2020) and Cross (2020) find that the difference between family types is weaker for immigrants and their children than for non-immigrant families. In contrast to previous studies (Böhmer et al., 2020), our models include interaction terms as well as control variables (see Appendix Section A.3 Table 5). Still, these models support previous findings. Predicted probabilities with control variables set to their mean show that first-generation non-EU single-mother households have the highest probability of living below the poverty line (see Fig.1right panel). Compared to two-parent families, the probability of living in poverty increases for single mothers in all groups. Interestingly, the change in probability is highest for non-immigrant and first-generation EU households (see Fig.1left panel). Our results show that family type (single mother or two-parent family) is associated with a substantial difference regarding the risk of living in poverty. The estimated coefficient of family type is consistently substantial and significant, but not significantly different between groups. Fig. 1 The left panel shows the marginal effect of family type (i.e., single-mother household) on poverty risk by immigrant status. The right panel shows the predicted probability of living below the poverty threshold for each combination of family type and immigrant status. The results are taken from the full model, which includes all discussed control variables. N=3743 123 Immigrant Single Mothers 1527 However, the difference between family types (two-parent family vs. single mothers) is smallest for the group with the highest poverty risk over all family types (firstgeneration non-EU households). Similar patterns have been found by other studies (see Cross, 2020; Böhmer et al., 2020). Mother Model: Overall Life Satisfaction The study of Heintz-Martin and Langmeyer (2020) shows that single parents are most at risk of feeling subjective financial strain. It was previously noted that a lower income has been correlated with lower life satisfaction. As lower life satisfaction is closely related to stress, we used the overall life satisfaction of the mothers to indicate the impact of stress. Here, single mothers in all groups have a higher risk of being less satisfied. With regard to citizenship and immigrant generation in two-parent families, life satisfaction is highest for first-generation non-EU immigrant mothers (see Fig.2), while life satisfaction is lowest for non-immigrant mothers. When looking at single mothers, however, the order is reversed: Life satisfaction is lowest for first-generation immigrant single mothers with non-EU citizenship, followed by first-generation single mothers who are EU citizens. Family type—whether a two-parent family or single mother—determines the greatest difference in life satisfaction for first-generation nonFig. 2 The left panel shows the marginal effect of family type (i.e., single-mother household) on the life satisfaction of mothers by immigrant status. The right panel shows the predicted life satisfaction of each combination of family type and immigrant status. Lower values signify higher life satisfaction. The results are taken from the full model, which includes all discussed control variables. N=3556 123 1528 L. Maciejewski, N. Harder EU mothers. Our findings support the Family Stress Model: the group with the highest risk of living below the poverty line also has the highest likelihood of being less satisfied (see Appendix Section A.3 Table 6). To investigate whether financial distress is responsible for the differences between the groups, we ran another model in which we removed income as a control variable. This did not change the overall results, but looking at predicted probabilities of life satisfaction, we find slightly higher values of dissatisfaction in most groups, especially for single mothers (see Appendix Section A.3 Table 9). Child Model: Psychosocial Difficulties The child model estimates the risk of children showing psychosocial difficulties as reported by their mothers (see Appendix Section A.3 Table 7). Compared to the models discussed above, we find much smaller differences at the intersection of family type and immigrant status (see Fig.3). In two-parent families, the risk of mother-reported psychosocial difficulties does not vary by immigrant status. Comparing children in two-parent families with children in single-mother households, we only find small differences in non-immigrant and second-generation children. This indicates that the economic effects of single parenthood are much more pronounced than the potential psychological harm from stressed family life. In contrast to other studies (HeintzFig. 3 The left panel shows the marginal effect of family type (i.e., single-mother household) on motherreported psychosocial difficulties by generation status. The right panel shows the predicted probability of showing psychosocial difficulties for each combination of family type and generation status. The results are taken from the full model, which includes all discussed control variables. N=2678 123 Immigrant Single Mothers 1529 Martin & Langmeyer, 2020), we did not find a direct connection between family type and mother-reported psychosocial difficulties. However, the other study used selfreported measures, whereas we examined mother-reported psychosocial difficulties. As the case numbers were too small, we were unable to break the results down by generation or citizenship. Discussion The recent displacement crisis of Ukrainian refugees highlights how migration can fragment families (Rock & Yana¸smayan, 2024) and shows that migration and single parenthood are often interrelated phenomena. This study used cross-sectional data to examine the relationship of family structure, immigrant generation, and citizenship with the risk of poverty, overall life satisfaction of mothers, and mother-reported psychosocial difficulties of children. We applied an intersectional perspective to guide our research and test hypotheses derived from the Family Stress Model. Our analysis shows that immigrant single mothers have the highest risk of poverty, or, more precisely, that first-generation non-naturalized single mothers are most at risk. With regard to general life satisfaction, immigrant single mothers are less satisfied than nonimmigrants and the least satisfied are first-generation non-EU single mothers. Despite these effects on poverty and life satisfaction, we find that children of immigrant single mothers are not more likely to show mother-reported psychosocial difficulties than children from two-parent families. If anything, the mother-reported psychosocial difficulties of children from non-immigrant single mothers are slightly more severe than those of their peers from two-parent families. Future studies should also examine selfreportedpsychosocial difficulties,asstudiesshowthat parent-reported scores are better at detecting behavioral problems in their children, whereas child-reported measures are better at detecting emotional problems (Aebi et al., 2017; Theunissen et al., 2019). Therefore, both measures should be included when studying psychosocial difficulties in children. Looking at differences between two-parent families and single-mother households, the difference in poverty risk between those two family forms is in fact greatest among non-immigrant families and first-generation EU citizens, with single mothers in both cases being comparatively at much greater risk of poverty. Overall, non-immigrant families still have the lowest poverty risk. First-generation non-EU families, on the other hand, have a significantly higher poverty risk. However, this risk differs only slightly between two-parent families and single-mother households. Interestingly, overall life satisfaction among mothers is lower in non-immigrant twoparent families than in immigrant two-parent families. This changes with family type, however: Non-immigrant single mothers are more satisfied than their immigrant peers. It should be noted that while the overall levels of poverty and life satisfaction fall in line with the idea of the accumulation of disadvantages, as postulated by intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1989,1991), the comparatively large effect of family type on the poverty levels of non-immigrant single mothers also supports the socioeconomic stress hypothesis (McCubbin & McCubbin, 1993). This theory assumes that already disadvantaged groups have better coping strategies, so that single parenthood has a lesser 123 1530 L. Maciejewski, N. Harder impact on immigrants as they are already facing multiple disadvantages (McCubbin & McCubbin, 1993;Cross,2020). Overall, our study reveals intersectional relations between gender, migration, and family form. Our findings are important for gaining a better understanding of the relationships among these three social positions, and they demonstrate that single mothers are a particularly vulnerable group, even more so if they have migration experience. The results show why it is so important to apply an intersectional perspective and to focusonmorethan one social position. Only then can policyimplications be articulated and the needs of specific groups addressed appropriately. Critics might argue that intersectionality was never made for empirical testing and simply involves descriptive statistics based on interaction effects. However, the fact that intersectionality resonates with so many researchers and activists alike shows that quantitative researchers have not fully exhausted the possibilities of such a seemingly simple approach nor did they sufficiently communicate such findings. This might be because, thus far, intersectionality has usually been considered only in the analysis stage. Our research has shown, however, that it is important to consider different social positions already at the stage of design, particularly with regard to data collection. In our case, even data on more than 4000 families was not sufficient to analyze single fathers nor second-generation immigrants of different citizenship. With appropriate attention to sample size and sampling strategies, intersectional analysis can prove invaluable as a research tool, opening new avenues of investigation across multiple social positions and revealing more subtle distinctions in the data collected. Appendix A.1 Gender Table 2 Immigrant generation and gender of single parents Generation status Male Female Total Non-immigrant 78 402 480 16.25 83.75 100.00 1. Gen 23 159 182 12.64 87.36 100.00 2. Gen 9 55 64 14.06 85.94 100.00 Total 110 616 726 15.15 84.85 100.00 First row has frequencies, and second row has row percentages A.2 Descriptive Statistics 123 Immigrant Single Mothers 1531 Table 3 Composition of the parent level data (Full sample) (Twoparent family) (Twoparent family) (Twoparent family) (Twoparent family) (Twoparent family) (Single mothers) (Single mothers) (Single mothers) (Single mothers) (Single mothers) Full sample nonimmigrant 1. Gen. (GER) 1. Gen. (EU) 1. Gen. (non-EU) 2. Gen. nonimmigrant 1. Gen. (GER) 1. Gen. (EU) 1. Gen. (non-EU) 2. Gen. Life satisfaction (mother) 2.02 1.98 1.88 1.88 1.88 1.92 2.40 2.40 2.66 2.74 2.56 (0.888) (0.812) (0.902) (1.027) (0.897) (0.820) (0.923) (0.857) (1.413) (1.324) (1.056) Region 0.20 0.25 0.06 0.10 0.12 0.09 0.33 0.06 0.11 0.15 0.08 (0.403) (0.433) (0.239) (0.301) (0.324) (0.289) (0.470) (0.240) (0.323) (0.363) (0.269) Equivalent income (in 1000 EUR) 1.87 2.15 1.73 1.68 1.30 1.89 1.30 1.08 1.04 0.74 1.10 (1.585) (1.691) (1.018) (1.791) (1.712) (1.433) (1.153) (0.582) (0.704) (0.387) (0.494) Education No degree 0.14 0.09 0.15 0.18 0.31 0.17 0.22 0.27 0.25 0.43 0.27 (0.351) (0.286) (0.354) (0.386) (0.464) (0.378) (0.416) (0.446) (0.440) (0.501) (0.448) Some secondary education 0.31 0.32 0.31 0.17 0.11 0.30 0.40 0.35 0.22 0.11 0.42 (0.461) (0.468) (0.465) (0.381) (0.318) (0.461) (0.491) (0.481) (0.420) (0.321) (0.499) College degree 0.21 0.22 0.20 0.26 0.20 0.22 0.19 0.18 0.22 0.30 0.17 (0.410) (0.412) (0.403) (0.438) (0.400) (0.415) (0.393) (0.391) (0.420) (0.462) (0.382) 123 1532 L. Maciejewski, N. Harder Table 3 continued (Full sample) (Twoparent family) (Twoparent family) (Twoparent family) (Twoparent family) (Twoparent family) (Single mothers) (Single mothers) (Single mothers) (Single mothers) (Single mothers) Full sample nonimmigrant 1. Gen. (GER) 1. Gen. (EU) 1. Gen. (non-EU) 2. Gen. nonimmigrant 1. Gen. (GER) 1. Gen. (EU) 1. Gen. (non-EU) 2. Gen. University degree 0.34 0.37 0.34 0.39 0.38 0.30 0.19 0.20 0.31 0.16 0.13 (0.473) (0.483) (0.474) (0.489) (0.485) (0.461) (0.389) (0.407) (0.471) (0.370) (0.345) Employment Not working 0.19 0.19 0.16 0.19 0.07 0.13 0.30 0.20 0.29 0.07 0.31 (0.390) (0.392) (0.369) (0.393) (0.257) (0.339) (0.461) (0.407) (0.458) (0.250) (0.469) Part time 0.44 0.51 0.40 0.34 0.17 0.50 0.41 0.45 0.34 0.22 0.29 (0.497) (0.500) (0.490) (0.475) (0.379) (0.501) (0.492) (0.503) (0.482) (0.417) (0.460) Full time 0.37 0.30 0.44 0.47 0.76 0.37 0.29 0.35 0.37 0.72 0.39 (0.483) (0.460) (0.497) (0.500) (0.430) (0.484) (0.454) (0.481) (0.490) (0.455) (0.493) Age of mother 38.83 39.30 37.93 36.88 36.14 38.35 39.96 40.58 40.09 36.98 41.08 (7.553) (7.267) (7.286) (7.536) (7.092) (8.015) (8.438) (6.978) (7.582) (7.960) (9.180) Age of youngest child 6.30 6.22 5.94 5.71 4.73 6.02 8.30 7.98 8.03 6.07 7.81 (4.960) (4.941) (4.923) (4.869) (4.222) (4.956) (5.004) (4.378) (5.322) (4.592) (5.524) Number of children 1 child 0.27 0.26 0.24 0.30 0.20 0.29 0.41 0.38 0.34 0.35 0.31 (0.446) (0.438) (0.425) (0.459) (0.398) (0.456) (0.492) (0.490) (0.482) (0.482) (0.466) 123 Immigrant Single Mothers 1533 Table 3 continued (Full sample) (Twoparent family) (Twoparent family) (Twoparent family) (Twoparent family) (Twoparent family) (Single mothers) (Single mothers) (Single mothers) (Single mothers) (Single mothers) Full sample nonimmigrant 1. Gen. (GER) 1. Gen. (EU) 1. Gen. (non-EU) 2. Gen. nonimmigrant 1. Gen. (GER) 1. Gen. (EU) 1. Gen. (non-EU) 2. Gen. 2 children 0.47 0.52 0.45 0.41 0.40 0.42 0.37 0.30 0.37 0.24 0.44 (0.499) (0.500) (0.498) (0.493) (0.490) (0.495) (0.484) (0.463) (0.490) (0.431) (0.502) 3 children or more 0.26 0.22 0.31 0.29 0.41 0.28 0.22 0.32 0.29 0.41 0.25 (0.436) (0.415) (0.464) (0.455) (0.492) (0.451) (0.413) (0.471) (0.458) (0.498) (0.437) Observations 3891 2203 378 190 286 273 378 50 35 46 52 Shown are means with standard deviation in parentheses 123 1534 L. Maciejewski, N. Harder Table 4 Descriptive statistics on the children level Full sample Two-parent families Single parent families Immigrant status Non-immigrant 0.72 0.72 0.74 (0.448) (0.449) (0.439) 1. Gen 0.07 0.07 0.07 (0.258) (0.258) (0.257) 2. Gen 0.21 0.21 0.19 (0.404) (0.406) (0.392) Depressiveness (mother) Good mood 0.50 0.52 0.39 (0.500) (0.500) (0.489) Okay mood 0.48 0.46 0.55 (0.500) (0.499) (0.498) Bad mood 0.02 0.02 0.05 (0.151) (0.132) (0.225) Other Male 0.52 0.52 0.52 (0.500) (0.500) (0.500) Psychosocial difficulties 0.17* 0.15* 0.24* Observations 2949 2480 469 Shown are means with standard deviations in parentheses. *Imputed data A.3 Regression Results Table 5 Regression table for household models Not weighted Weighted Poverty risk Poverty risk Family type Single mothers 0.245*** 0.255*** (0.025) (0.026) Generation and citizenship 1. Gen.- Ger 0.075*** 0.061** (0.024) (0.027) 1. Gen. - EU 0.179*** 0.149*** (0.035) (0.040) 1. Gen. - non-EU 0.334*** 0.337*** (0.029) (0.032) 2. Gen 0.108*** 0.103*** (0.027) (0.030) 123 Immigrant Single Mothers 1541 Acknowledgements The authors thank Magdalena Nowicka for helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper. The authors acknowledge funding from the German Federal Ministry for Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth. Funding Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. Data Availability The full “AID:A (Growing up in Germany) 2019” data and the full “AID:A Mig+” data are available through the German Youth Institute (DJI) research data center. Replication code has been deposited in the Harvard Dataverse: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/E1UEQI Declarations Conflict of Interest The authors declare no competing interests. Open Access ThisarticleislicensedunderaCreativeCommons Attribution4.0InternationalLicense,which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. References 123 Aebi,M., Kuhn,C.,Banaschewski,T.,Grimmer,Y.,Poustka, L., Steinhausen,H.-C., &Goodman, R.(2017). The contribution of parent and youth information to identify mental health disorders or problems in adolescents. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, 11, 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/ s13034-017-0160-9 Aisa, R., Larramona, G., & Pueyo, F. (2019). Poverty in Europe by gender: The role of education and labour status. Economic Analysis and Policy, 63, 24–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2019.04.009 Alegría, M., Álvarez, K., & DiMarzio, K. (2017). Immigration and mental health. Current Epidemiology Reports, 4(2), 145–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40471-017-0111-2 Algan, Y., Dustmann, C., Glitz, A., & Manning, A. (2010). The economic situation of first and secondgenerationimmigrantsinFrance,Germanyand theUnited Kingdom.The Economic Journal, 120(542), F4–F30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2009.02338.x Amo-Agyei, S. (2020). Migrant pay gap: Understanding wage differences between migrants and nationals. Geneva: International Labour Office. Angelov, N., Johansson, P., & Lindahl, E. (2016). Parenthood and the gender gap in pay. Journal of Labor Economics, 34(3), 545–579. https://doi.org/10.1086/684851 Barbieri, D., Huchet, M., Janeckova, H., Karu, M., Luminari, D., Madarovo, Z., Paats, M., & Reingarde, J. (2016). Poverty, gender and intersecting inequalities in the EU review of the implementation of area A: Women and poverty of the Beijing platform for action. Barskanmaz, C. (2019). Recht und Rassismus. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/9783-662-59746-0 Bauer, G. R. (2014). Incorporating intersectionality theory into population health research methodology: Challenges and the potential to advance health equity. Social Science & Medicine, 1982(110), 10–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.03.022 Becker, A., Woerner, W., Hasselhorn, M., Banaschewski, T., & Rothenberger, A. (2004). Validation of the parent and teacher SDQ in a clinical sample. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 13 Suppl 2, II11–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-004-2003-5 Berghahn, S. (2012). Gleichberechtigung und männliches ernährermodell. In S. Berghahn & M. Wersig (Eds.), Gesicherte Existenz? Gleichberechtigung und männliches Ernährermodell in Deutschland (pp. 10–50). Baden-Baden. Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG. 1542 L. Maciejewski, N. Harder Bernal, D. R., Misiaszek, K. H., Ayala, J., & Kenley, N. (2022). Second-class citizens? Subjective social status, acculturative stress, and immigrant well-being. SN Social Sciences, 2(7). https://doi.org/10. 1007/s43545-022-00371-2 Böhmer, S., Broens, K., Niemeyer, C., & Washington, C. (2020). Gelebte vielfalt: Familien mit migrationshintergrund in deutschland. Retrieved October 15, 2024 from https://www.bmfsfj. de/resource/blob/116880/83c02ec19dbea15014d7868048f697f2/gelebte-vielfalt--familien-mitmigrationshintergrund-in-deutschland-data.pdf Bowleg, L. (2008). When black + lesbian + woman = black lesbian woman: The methodological challenges of qualitative and quantitative intersectionality research. Sex Roles, 59(5–6), 312–325. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11199-008-9400-z Bowleg, L., & Bauer, G. (2016). Invited reflection. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(3), 337–341. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0361684316654282 Boyle, P. J., Kulu, H., Cooke, T., Gayle, V., & Mulder, C. H. (2008). Moving and union dissolution. Demography, 45(1), 209–222. https://doi.org/10.1353/dem.2008.0000 Breen, R., Karlson, K. B., & Holm, A. (2018). Interpreting and understanding logits, probits, and other nonlinear probability models. Annual Review of Sociology, 44(1), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1146/ annurev-soc-073117-041429 Bruce-Jones, E. (2015). German policing at the intersection: Race, gender, migrant status and mental health. Race & Class, 56(3), 36–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306396814556223 Budig, M. J., Misra, J., & Boeckmann, I. (2012). The motherhood penalty in cross-national perspective: The importance of work-family policies and cultural attitudes. Social Politics, 19(2), 163–193. https:// doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxs006 Bundesinstitut für Bevölkerungsforschung (2023). Ausländische bevölkerung (1970-2021). Retrieved June 2, 2024 from https://www.bib.bund.de/DE/Fakten/Fakt/B39-Auslaendische-Bevoelkerung-ab-1970. html Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (2020). Bericht zum anerkennungsgesetz 2019. Retrieved December 14, 2023 from https://www.bmbf.de/SharedDocs/Publikationen/de/bmbf/3/ 31566_Anerkennungsgesetz_2019.pdf?__blob=publicationFile Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend (2012). Ausgeübte erwerbstätigkeit von müttern: Erwerbstätigkeit, erwerbsumfang und erwerbsvolumen. Retrieved June 15, 2024 from https://www.bmfsfj.de/resource/blob/93302/6a6368c5014a685b9f7627242c6cb0d1/ausgeuebteerwerbstaetigkeit-von-muettern-data.pdf Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend (2021). Alleinund getrennt erziehende fördern und unterstützen: Chancen und teilhabe für familien. Retrieved May 17, 2024 from https:// www.bmfsfj.de/bmfsfj/themen/familie/chancen-und-teilhabe-fuer-familien/alleinerziehende Burke, L. (2003). The impact of maternal depression on familial relationships. International review of psychiatry (Abingdon, England), 15(3), 243–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/0954026031000136866 Carlsson,M.,Eriksson,S., & Rooth,D.-O.(2023).Language proficiencyandhiring of immigrants:Evidence from a new field experimental approach. Retrieved from https://docs.iza.org/dp15950.pdf Cleton, L., & Scuzzarello, S. (2024). Intersectional migration research: Re-centring governance structures. International Migration, 62(1), 343–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2023.2171737 Collins, P. H. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. Boston: Unwin Hyman. Collins, P. H. (1998). It’s all in the family: Intersections of gender, race, and nation. Hypatia, 13(3), 62–82. Combahee River Collective (1977). The Combahee River collective statement. Retrieved from https:// historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/combrivercoll.html Conger, R. D., & Conger, K. J. (2002). Resilience in midwestern families: Selected findings from the first decade of a prospective, longitudinal study. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64(2), 361–373. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2002.00361.x Conger, R. D., Conger, K. J., & Martin, M. J. (2010). Socioeconomic status, family processes, and individual development. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 685–704. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737. 2010.00725.x Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), 139–167. Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039 123 Immigrant Single Mothers 1543 Cross, C. J. (2020). Racial/ethnic differences in the association between family structure and children’s education. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(2), 691–712. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12625 Deutsches Jugendinstitut (2023). Aid:a 2019 ergänzung migration. Retrieved from https://www.dji.de/ ueber-uns/projekte/projekte/aida-2019-ergaenzung-migration.html Die Beauftragte der Bundesregierung für Migration, Flüchtlinge und Integration (2019). Deutschland kann integration: Potenzial fördern, integration fordern, zusammenhalt stärken. 12. bericht der beauftragten der bundesregierung für migration, flüchtlinge und integration. Retrieved June 2, 2024 from https://www.integrationsbeauftragte.de/resource/blob/1872554/ 1876888/98e849dd7baa9d2358553dbc6aa1d946/lagebericht-12-data.pdf Downey, G., & Coyne, J. C. (1990). Children of depressed parents: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 108(1), 50–76. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.1.50 El-Mafaalani, A. (2017). Diskriminierung von menschen mit migrationshintergrund. In Scherr, A., Mafaalani, A. e., and Yüksel, E. G., editors, Handbuch Diskriminierung, Springer Reference Sozialwissenschaften, pages 465–478. Springer VS, Wiesbaden and Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/ 978-3-658-10976-9_ Else-Quest, N. M., & Hyde, J. S. (2016). Intersectionality in quantitative psychological research. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(3), 319–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684316647953 England, M. J. and Sim, L. J., editors (2009). Depression in parents, parenting, and children: Opportunities to improve identification, treatment, and prevention. National Academies Press (US), Washington (DC). https://doi.org/10.17226/12565 England, P., Bearak, J., Budig, M. J., & Hodges, M. J. (2016). Do highly paid, highly skilled women experience the largest motherhood penalty? American Sociological Review, 81(6), 1161–1189. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0003122416673598 Forschungsdatenzentren der Statistischen Ämter des Bundes und der Länder (2022). Mikrozensus 2019, suf, version 0. https://doi.org/10.21242/12211.2019.00.00.3.1.0 Gebel, M., & Gundert, S. (2023). Changes in income poverty risks at the transition from unemployment to employment: Comparing the short-term and medium-term effects of fixed-term and permanent jobs. Social Indicators Research.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-023-03118-5 Geis-Thöne, W. (2021). In europa entwickeln sich die bevölkerungen im erwerbsfähigen alter unterschiedlich. eine analyse der demografischen strukturen in den 27 eu-ländern. Retrieved June 15, 2024 from https://www.iwkoeln.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Studien/Report/PDF/2021/IW-Report_ 2021-Erwerbsbev%C3%B6lkerung-Europa.pdf Geis-Thöne, W. (2022). Die Bedeutung der Zuwanderung für den wirtschaftlichen Erfolg Deutschlands: Aktueller Stand und politische Gestaltungsmöglichkeiten, volume 151 of IWAnalysen. Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft Köln Medien GmbH, Köln. Retrieved June 15, 2024 from https://www.iwkoeln.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Studien/IW-Analysen/PDF/2022/ Analysen_151_Bedeutung-Zuwanderung.pdf Geisler, E., & Kreyenfeld, M. (2019). Why do lone mothers fare worse than lone fathers? Lone parenthood and welfare benefit receipt in Germany. Comparative Population Studies, 44. https://doi.org/10.12765/ CPoS-2019-09 Grabka, M. M., & Göbler, K. (2020). Der niedriglohnsektor in deutschland: Falle oder sprungbrett für beschäftigte?. BStift - Bertelsmann Stiftung. Retreived June 14, 2024 from https://www. bertelsmann-stiftung.de/fileadmin/files/BSt/Publikationen/GrauePublikationen/200624_Studie_ Niedriglohnsektor_DIW_final.pdf Hainmueller, J. (2012). Entropy balancing for causal effects: A multivariate reweighting method to produce balanced samples in observational studies. Political Analysis, 20(1), 25–46. https://doi.org/10.1093/ pan/mpr025 Hainmueller, J., Lawrence, D., Martén, L., Black, B., Figueroa, L., Hotard, M., Jiménez, T. R., Mendoza, F., Rodriguez, M. I., Swartz, J. J., & Laitin, D. D. (2017). Protecting unauthorized immigrant mothers improves their children’s mental health. Science (New York, N.Y.), 357(6355), 1041–1044. https://doi. org/10.1126/science.aan5893 Hancock, A.-M. (2007). Intersectionality as a normative and empirical paradigm. Politics & Gender, 3(02). https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X07000062 Hancock, A.-M. (2013). Empirical intersectionality: A tale of two approaches. UC Irvine Law Review, 3(2), 259–296. 123 1544 L. Maciejewski, N. Harder Heintz-Martin, V. K., & Langmeyer, A. N. (2020). Economic situation, financial strain and child wellbeing in stepfamilies and single-parent families in Germany. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 41(2), 238–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-019-09653-z Heintz-Martin, V. K., Recksiedler, C., & Langmeyer, A. N. (2022). Household debt, maternal well-being, and child adjustment in Germany: Examining the family stress model by family structure. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 43(2), 338–353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-021-09777-1 Hubert, S., Neuberger, F., & Sommer, M. (2020). Alleinerziehend, alleinbezahlend? kindesunterhalt, unterhaltsvorschuss und gründe für den unterhaltsausfall. Zeitschrift für Soziologie der Erziehung und Sozialisation, 40(1), 19–38. https://doi.org/10.3262/ZSE2001019 Hübgen, S. (2020). Armutsrisiko alleinerziehend: Die Bedeutung von sozialer Komposition und institutionellem Kontext in Deutschland. Leverkusen-Opladen: Verlag Barbara Budrich. https://doi.org/10. 2307/j.ctvt1sj2j Hübgen, S. (2020). Understanding lone mothers’ high poverty in Germany: Disentangling composition effects and effects of lone motherhood. Advances in Life Course Research, 44, 100327. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.alcr.2020.100327 Ingwersen, K., & Thomsen, S. L. (2019). The immigrant-native wage gap in Germany revisited. Retrieved from https://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.669348.de/diw_sp1042.pdf Ingwersen, K., & Thomsen, S. L. (2021). The immigrant-native wage gap in Germany revisited. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 19(4), 825–854. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10888-021-09493-8 Jachimowicz, J. M., Frey, E. L., Matz, S. C., Jeronimus, B. F., & Galinsky, A. D. (2022). The sharp spikes of poverty: Financial scarcity is related to higher levels of distress intensity in daily life. Social Psychological and Personality Science, page, 194855062110601. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506211060115 Jahoda, M. (1981). Work, employment, and unemployment: Values, theories, and approaches in social research. American Psychologist, 36(2), 184–191. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.36.2.184 Johnson, A. L., Levesque, C., Lewis, N. A., & Asad, A. L. (2024). Deportation threat predicts Latino US citizens and noncitizens’ psychological distress, 2011 to 2018. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 121(9). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2306554121 Karakayalı, J. (2022). Kritische rassismusforschung: Theorien, konzepte, zentrale befunde. In D. Hunold & T. Singelnstein (Eds.), Rassismus in der Polizei (pp. 15–31). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-37133-3_2 Klein, J., & von dem Knesebeck, O. (2018). Inequalities in health care utilization among migrants and non-migrants in Germany: A systematic review. International Journal for Equity in Health, 17(1), 160. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-018-0876-z Klindt, K. N., Holland, A. A., Wilkinson-Smith, A., Karni, C., & Clyde, A. (2024). Caution is indicated when interpreting behavioral rating scales from stressed parents. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 42(5), 588–595. https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829241247235 Klinger, S., & Fuchs, J. (2020). Effects of population changes on the labour market in Germany IABForum. Retrieved June 2, 2024 from https://www.iab-forum.de/en/effects-of-population-changeson-the-labour-market-in-germany/ Koskelainen, M., Sourander, A., & Kaljonen, A. (2000). The strengths and difficulties questionnaire among Finnish school-aged children and adolescents. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 9(4), 277– 284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s007870070031 Krings, T. (2021). ‘Good’ bad jobs? The evolution of migrant low-wage employment in Germany (1985– 2015). Work, Employment and Society, 35(3), 527–544. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017020946567 Kuger, S., Kalter, F., Prein, G., Nowicka, M., Langmeyer, A., Harder, N., Naab, T., Steiner, C., Beigang, S., Zimmermann, J., Bartig, S., Tran, K., Lietz, A., Hoffmann-Recksiedler, C., Schiefer, D., Herz, A., Herpel, M., Willems, D., Khalil, S., Bernhardt, J., Franke, J., Zerle-Elsässer, C., Öztürk, Y., Deutsches Jugendinstitut, & Deutsches Zentrum für Integrationsund Migrationsforschung (2022). Aida 2019 ergänzung migration (aid:a mig+). https://doi.org/10.17621/aidamig Kuger, S., Prein, G., Linberg, A., Hoffmann-Recksiedler, C., Herz, A., Gille, M., Berngruber, A., Bernhardt, J., Pötter, U., Zerle-Elsässer, C., Steiner, C., Zimmermann, J., Quellenberg, H., Walper, S., Rauschenbach, T., Maly-Motta, H., Schickle, V., Naab, T., Guglhör-Rudan, A., Langmeyer, A., Tran, K., Gaupp, N., Milbradt, B., Heintz-Martin, V., Gerum, M., Entleitner-Phleps, C., & Deutsches Jugendinstitut (2020). Aufwachsen in deutschland: Alltagswelten 2019 (aid:a 2019). https://doi.org/10.17621/ aida2019 123 Immigrant Single Mothers 1545 123 Lenze, A. (2021). Alleinerziehende weiter unter druck: Bedarfe, rechtliche regelungen und reformansätze. Bertelsmann Stiftung. Retrieved May 5, 2024 from https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/fileadmin/ files/Projekte/Familie_und_Bildung/Studie_WB_Alleinerziehende_weiter_unter_Druck_2021.pdf Levanon, A., Saburov, E., Gangl, M., & Brülle, J. (2019). Trends in the demographic composition of poverty among working families in Germany and in Israel, 1991–2011. Social Science Research, 83, 102318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2019.06.009 Lundberg, S., Pollak, R. A., & Stearns, J. (2016). Family inequality: Diverging patterns in marriage, cohabitation, and childbearing. The Journal of Economic Perspectives: A Journal of the American Economic Association, 30(2), 79–102. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.30.2.79 Maciejewski, L. and Harder, N. (2022). Überqualifiziert und un(ter)beschäftigt: Potenziale nachziehender Partner*innen für den deutschen Arbeitsmarkt, volume 07 of Briefing Notes+. Deutsches Zentrum für Integrationsund Migrationsforschung (DeZIM). Retrieved from https://www.dezim-institut.de/ fileadmin/user_upload/Demo_FIS/publikation_pdf/FA-5329.pdf Mansfeld, L. (2023). International migration and its short–term effect on partnership stability. Population, Space and Place, 29(4). https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2638 Masuda, Y. J., Williams, J. R., & Tallis, H. (2021). Does life satisfaction vary with time and income? Investigating the relationship among free time, income, and life satisfaction. Journal of Happiness Studies, 22, 2051–2073. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-020-00307-8 McCall, L. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30(3), 1771–1800. https://doi.org/10.1086/426800 McCubbin, M. A., & McCubbin, H. I. (1993). Families coping with illness: The resiliency model of family stress, adjustment and adaptation. In C. B. Danielson, B. Hamel-Bissell, & P. Winstead-Fry (Eds.), Families, health, & illness (pp. 21–64). St. Louis: Mosby. Milewski, N., Struffolino, E., & Bernardi, L. (2018). Migrant status and lone motherhood - Risk factors of female labour force participation in Switzerland. Life Course Research and Social PoliciesIn L. Bernardi & D. Mortelmans (Eds.), Lone Parenthood in the Life Course (Vol. 8, pp. 141–163). Springer International Publishing: Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63295-7_7 Mui, A. C., Kang, S.-Y., Kang, D., & Domanski, M. D. (2007). English language proficiency and healthrelated quality of life among Chinese and Korean immigrant elders. Health & Social Work, 32(2), 119–127. https://doi.org/10.1093/hsw/32.2.119 Nazari, S. (2024). The intersectional effects of race, gender, and religion on the economic integration of high-skilledimmigrants:Aliteraturereview.Journalof International Migration and Integration, 25(4), 2213–2252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-024-01171-8 Neuberger, F., Schutter, S., & Preisner, K. (2019). Einkommensunterschiede zwischen alleinerziehenden undverheiratetenmüttern1997–2015.einedetaillierteeffekt-dekomposition.ZeitschriftfürSoziologie, 48(1), 42–69. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfsoz-2019-0004 Niemz, J., & Singelnstein, T. (2022). Racial profiling als polizeiliche praxis. In D. Hunold & T. Singelnstein (Eds.), Rassismus in der Polizei (pp. 337–358). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-37133-3 OECD. (2022). The contribution of migration to regional development. OECD Regional Development Studies: OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/57046df4-en OECD. (2023). Indicators of Immigrant Integration 2023. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/ 1d5020a6-en Patterson, E. J., Becker, A., & Baluran, D. A. (2022). Gendered racism on the body: An intersectional approach to maternal mortality in the United States. Population Research and Policy Review, 41(3), 1261–1294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-021-09691-2 Pohlan, L. (2019). Unemployment and social exclusion. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 164, 273–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2019.06.006 Restifo, S. J., Ryabov, I., & Ruiz, B. (2023). Race, gender, and nativity in the southwest economy: An intersectional approach to income inequality. Population Research and Policy Review, 42(3). https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11113-023-09779-x Rock,J., &Yana¸smayan,Z.(2024). Motherhoodon themove:Forcedmigrantwomenfrom Ukraine.Journal of Refugee Studies.https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/feae084 Sarbo, B. (2022). Rassismus und gesellschaftliche produktionsverhältnisse: Ein materialistischer rassismusbegriff. In E. Roldán Mendívil & B. Sarbo (Eds.), Die Diversität der Ausbeutung, Analysen (pp. 37–63). Berlin: Dietz. 1546 L. Maciejewski, N. Harder Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. 123 Schmid, R. (2023). Migration and wage inequality: A detailed analysis for German metropolitan and nonmetropolitan regions. Review of Regional Research, 43(1), 147–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10037023-00180-x Schmieder, J., & Wrohlich, K. (2021). Gender pay gap im europäischen vergleich: Positiver zusammenhang zwischen frauenerwerbsquote und lohnlücke. (DIW Wochenbericht No. 9). https://doi.org/10.18723/ diw_wb:2021-9-3 Scuzzarello, S., & Moro¸sanu, L. (2023). Integration and intersectionality: Boundaries and belonging “from above” and “from below”. introduction to the special issue. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 46(14), 2991– 3013. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2023.2182649 Spannnagel, D., & Zucco, A. (2022). 2022. Armut grenzt aus: Wsi-verteilungsbericht. Retrieved June 2, 2024 from file:///C:/Users/et00efil/Downloads/p_wsi_report_79_2022-2.pdf Statistisches Bundesamt (04.08.2022). Relatives armutsrisiko in deutschland 2021 bei 15,8 %. Retrieved May 6, 2024 from https://www.destatis.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2022/08/PD22_327_634. html Statistisches Bundesamt (2021a). Armutsrisiken haben sich in deutschland verfestigt: Datenreport 2021 über ungleiche lebensbedingungen und die folgen von corona. Retreived May 26, 2023 from https:// www.destatis.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2021/03/PD21_113_p001.html Statistisches Bundesamt (2021b). Gender pay gap in der europäischen union. Retreived June 2, 2024 from https://www.destatis.de/Europa/DE/Thema/Bevoelkerung-Arbeit-Soziales/Arbeitsmarkt/ Qualitaet-der-Arbeit/_dimension-1/07_gender-pay-gap.html Statistisches Bundesamt (2023). 24,3 % der bevölkerung hatten 2022 eine einwanderungsgeschichte. Retreived January 30, 2024 from https://www.destatis.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2023/04/ PD23_158_125.html Steinmetz, K. (2020). She coined the term ‘intersectionality’ over 30 years ago. here’s what it means to her today. Time. Retrieved January 30, 2024 from https://time.com/5786710/kimberle-crenshawintersectionality/ Stewart, K., Patrick, R., & Reeves, A. (2023). A time of need: Exploring the changing poverty risk facing larger families in the uk. Journal of Social Policy, pp 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0047279422000952 Stone, L. L., Otten, R., Engels, R. C. M. E., Vermulst, A. A., & Janssens, J. M. A. M. (2010). Psychometric properties of the parent and teacher versions of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire for 4to 12-year-olds: a review. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 13(3), 254–274. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10567-010-0071-2 Theunissen,M.H.C.,deWolff,M.S.,&Reijneveld,S.A.(2019).Thestrengthsanddifficultiesquestionnaire self-report: A valid instrument for the identification of emotional and behavioral problems. Academic Pediatrics, 19(4), 471–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acap.2018.12.008 Tunçer, M. (2024). An intersectionallifecourse approach to explorethe narratives of ageing migrant women. Journal of Aging Studies, 71, 101267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2024.101267 Vugteveen, J., de Bildt, A., Theunissen, M., Reijneveld, S. A., & Timmerman, M. (2021). Validity aspects of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire (sdq) adolescent self-report and parent-report versions among dutch adolescents. Assessment, 28(2), 601–616. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191119858416 Walsh, E., & Murphy, A. (2021). Life satisfaction amongst working parents: examining the case of mothers and fathers in ireland. International Journal of Social Economics, 48(4), 622–639. https://doi.org/10. 1108/IJSE-05-2020-0295 Wilkins, K. (2022). Intersectional immunity? examining how race/ethnicity and sexual orientation combine to shape influenza vaccination among us adults. Population Research and Policy Review, 41(6), 2585– 2612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-022-09739-x Wrohlich, K., & Zucco, A. (2017). Gender pay gap varies greatly by occupation. (DIW Weekly Report 43). Retrieved from https://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.567699.de/ diw_econ_bull_2017-43-2.pdf Zucco, A. (2019). Große gender pay gaps in einzelnen berufen hängen stark mit der überproportionalen entlohnung von langen arbeitszeiten zusammen. (DIW Weekly Report 10). https://doi.org/10.18723/ diw_wb:2019-10-1