The Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology assembled a Consensus Panel representing national organizations, content experts, methodologists, stakeholders, and end-users and followed an established guideline development procedure to create the Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Adults aged 18–64 years and Adults aged 65 years or older: An Integration of Physical Activity, Sedentary Behaviour, and Sleep. These guidelines underscore the importance of movement behaviours across the whole 24-h day. The development process followed the strategy outlined in the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. A large body of evidence was used to inform the guidelines including 2 de novo systematic reviews and 4 overviews of reviews examining the relationships among movement behaviours (physical activity, sedentary behaviour, sleep, and all behaviours together) and several health outcomes. Draft guideline recommendations were discussed at a 4-day in-person Consensus Panel meeting. Feedback from stakeholders was obtained by survey (n = 877) and the draft guidelines were revised accordingly. The final guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for a healthy day (24-h), comprising a combination of sleep, sedentary behaviours, and light-intensity and moderate-to-vigorous-intensity physical activity. Dissemination and implementation efforts with corresponding evaluation plans are in place to help ensure that guideline awareness and use are optimized. Novelty First ever 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Adults aged 18–64 years and Adults aged 65 years or older with consideration of a balanced approach to physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and sleep Finalizes the suite of 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Canadians across the lifespan

The shift to more time-intensive and child-centered parenting in the United States is widely assumed to be positively linked to healthy child development, but implications for adult well-being are less clear. We assess multiple dimensions of parents’ subjective well-being in activities with children and explore how the gendered nature of time potentially contributes to differences in mothers’ and fathers’ parenting experiences. Relying on nationally representative time diary data linked to respondents’ feelings in activities from the 2010, 2012, and 2013 well-being module of the American Time Use Survey ( N = 12,163 persons and 36,036 activities), we find that parents consistently report greater subjective well-being in activities with children than without. Mothers, however, report less happiness, more stress, and greater fatigue in time with children than do fathers. These gaps are relatively small and can be accounted for by differences in the activities that mothers and fathers engage in with children, whether other adults are present, and the quality of their sleep and leisure. We go beyond prior work on parental happiness and life satisfaction to document how contemporary parenting is woven differently into the lives of mothers and fathers.

Limited research on parental well-being by child age suggests that parents are better off with very young children, despite intense time demands of caring for them. This study uses the American Time Use Survey Well-Being Module ( = 18,124) to assess how parents feel in activities with children of different ages. Results show that parents are worse off with adolescent children relative to young children. Parents report the lowest levels of happiness with adolescents relative to younger children, and mothers report more stress and less meaning with adolescents. Controlling for contextual features of parenting including activity type, solo parenting, and restorative time does not fully account for the adolescent disadvantage in fathers' happiness or mothers' stress. This study highlights adolescence as a particularly difficult stage for parental well-being, and it shows that mothers shoulder stress that fathers do not, even after accounting for differences in the context of their parenting activities.

Research studies and popular accounts of parenting document the joys and strains of raising children. Much of the literature comparing parents to those who do not have children indicates a happiness advantage for those without children, though recent studies unpack this general advantage to reveal differences by the dimension of well-being considered and important features in parents’ lives and parenting experiences. We use unique data from the 2010, 2012, and 2013 American Time Use Survey to understand emotions in mothering experiences and how these vary by key demographic factors: employment and partnership status. Assessing mothers’ emotions in a broad set of parenting activities while controlling for a rich set of person- and activity-level factors, we find that mothering experiences are generally associated with high levels of emotional well-being, though single parenthood is associated with shifts in the emotional valence. Single mothers report less happiness and more sadness, stress and fatigue in parenting than partnered mothers. This is concentrated among those single mothers who are not employed. Employed single mothers are happier and less sad and stressed when parenting than single mothers who are not employed. Contrary to common assumptions about maternal employment, we find overall few negative associations between employment and mothers’ feelings in time with children, with the exception that employed mothers report more fatigue in parenting than those who are not employed.

These are unprecedented times, as the COVID-19 pandemic disrupts public health, social interaction, and employment attachments. Evidence to date has been about broad shifts in unemployment rates as a percent of the labor force. We draw on monthly Current Population Survey data to examine subpopulation changes in employment states across the life course, from January through April 2020. COVID-19 downturns produced disparate life-course impacts. There are increases in unemployment and being out of the workforce at all ages, but especially among young adults, with young women most at risk. Intersectional analyses document conjoint life-course vulnerabilities by gender, educational attainment, and race/ethnicity. For example, Black men aged 20–29 with a college degree experienced a 12.4 percentage point increase in being not in the labor force for other reasons (NILF-other). Individuals with less than a college degree in their 50s and 60s were more likely to become unemployed, regardless of race. And more non-college-educated Asian men in their 60s and 70s reported being retired (6.6 and 8.9 percentage point increases, respectively). Repercussions from the pandemic may well challenge assumptions and possibilities for older adults’ working longer.