A Mixed Methods Analysis of Australian Women's Reported Intentions to Use Paid Menstrual Leave

Abstract

Menstrual leave provides paid or unpaid leave for those whose work is considerably affected by menstrual symptoms. While many individuals support it, others voice concerns, and in nations with established legislation, employee uptake is seemingly low. Due to the recency of the idea in high-income countries, limited studies on menstrual leave exist. This knowledge gap was addressed using online questionnaire data from 554 Australian women in a concurrent embedded mixed methods design utilising binary logistic regression and conventional content analysis. Participants were primarily recruited via women's health organisations and menstrual health forums. The aims included examining the proportion of participants who would or would not use paid menstrual leave, characteristics associated with reported intention to use it and reasons participants would or would not use it. Overall, 83.6% (95% C1 [80.2, 86.6], n = 463) of women reported they would use paid menstrual leave compared to 16.4% (95% C1 [13.4, 19.8], n = 91) who reported they would not. Those who supported menstrual leave, had experiences of debilitating pain and have skipped work for menstrual pain showed 2.7, 5.6, and 8 times increased odds, respectively, of reported intention to use menstrual leave. Correspondingly, debilitating symptoms was the most endorsed reason by those reporting intention to use menstrual leave, while low need was most endorsed by those who reported they did not intend to use it. Findings can inform Australian policymakers, lawmakers, unions and workplaces. Future research should extend to additional stakeholders and examine if intentions correspond to genuine usage. Keywords: mixed methods; menstrual leave; menstrual health; binary logistic regression; content analysis