Beyond the Breadwinner: A Descriptive Qualitative Study of the Experiences, Challenges, and Mental Health Needs of Fathers in Singapore During the Postpartum Period
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Postpartum experiences and challenges faced by fathers in Singapore are often overlooked. A more comprehensive understanding is essential to identify areas for supporting fathers' mental health and developing father-inclusive healthcare strategies, ultimately enhancing family-centered care. The perinatal period is challenging for fathers, with shifts in roles, routine changes, and societal pressures which can lead to anxiety or depression, especially during postpartum. The aim of this paper was to explore the experiences, challenges, emotional, and mental health needs of multi-racial fathers in Singapore during postpartum. We used a descriptive qualitative design. Thirteen fathers were recruited through purposive sampling from a single tertiary hospital in Singapore. They were invited to participate in a one-to-one semi-structured interview via Zoom at 1 month postpartum. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Four themes were identified: (a) great expectations and self-blame; (b) dual role of provider-caregiver; (c) when family support helps and hurts; (d) visibility of fathers' mental health. We learned that fathers often suppressed emotional struggles due to societal expectations of masculinity. While they valued caregiving support from family, conflicting parenting beliefs caused tension. Fathers also faced financial pressures, frequently assuming provider roles despite dual-income households, alongside active caregiving responsibilities. The findings highlight the need for discreet, gender-sensitive mental health support, such as routine check-ins and male-oriented services that are tailored to fathers' needs. Future research should develop diagnostic tools specific to paternal postpartum depression for better identification and support.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".