Introduction

Lone motherhood is a key issue when exploring the politicisation of parenthood. The meaning of lone motherhood has changed quite radically from the early days of the welfare state. Two or three generations ago, lone mothers made up a small group of women surrounded by stable two-parent families provided for by the male breadwinner. As we enter the 2000s, high proportions of women pass through a stage as a lone mother, and the ideal of lifelong partnerships between male breadwinners and female homemakers has lost considerable normative power. This presents policy-makers with new challenges. The challenges are particularly acute in the Nordic countries, with their high rates of parental break-ups and strong traditions for female employment. Should lone mothers still be understood as a group with special needs in this situation? What is the proper conception of public and private responsibilities towards lone mothers and their children? How should lone mothers be expected to juggle their earning and caring responsibilities at different stages in their children's lives?

Lone mothers are women living with children, but without men. From Biblical times, the high poverty risk of this group has been recognised. Traditional responses to the poverty problem among lone mothers have typically been mixed. Poor relief has existed in many countries, but payouts from the public purse have been strictly tested against other possible sources of provisions: the mother's own capacity to work, and the existence of a potential private breadwinner. As welfare states developed in Europe, these criteria have been applied less rigorously. It became less common to insist that a mother should take up employment while she had young children, the obligations on biological fathers were negotiated and codified, and it was no longer to be assumed that any new boyfriend was a potential family provider. Since the mid-1990s, however, we may be witnessing a new gradual shift: increasing numbers of countries place stronger emphasis on employment, and use this as an argument to withdraw or reshape benefits for lone mothers (Millar and Rowlingson, 2001). Simultaneously, given more unstable partnerships and increasing numbers of couples cohabiting, policy-makers have to address again the question of what sort of obligations should follow from different forms of private relationships.