A survey on the career development of women dentists

Key Points

• Women dentists occupy lower positions in the employment hierarchies of the General Dental Service, Hospital Dental Services and Community Dental Service.

• The differential advancement of women is most marked in the General Dental Service.

• The careers of women dentists are hampered by domestic commitments which limit their opportunities to spend longer hours at work, and to undertake postgraduate qualifications.

• Working practices within the hospital dental service and community dental service are conducive to equality of employment prospects. Such good practice should act as a model for the general dental service.

Abstract

Aim The aim of the study was to determine differences between male and female dental practitioners in the positions they occupy within their employment, and to analyse the correlates of such differences.

Method Postal questionnaire survey of a 1 in 10 sample of individuals taken from the General Dental Council register.

Results Female dental practitioners occupy lower positions in the employment hierarchies of the Community Dental Service and the Hospital Dental Service. Women general dental practitioners are significantly less likely to be sole proprietor of, or a partner in, a general practice.

Ownership of a general practice is related to: sex, age, number of years qualified, number of children, and hours worked. Consultants in the Hospital Dental Service are more likely to be male, older, to have been qualified longer and (obviously) to hold more additional qualifications than their non-consultant colleagues. Senior Dental Officers and Directors of the Community Dental Service are more likely to be male, work longer hours and (again obviously) to hold more additional qualifications than Community Dental Officers.

Conclusions Differences exist between male and female dental practitioners in the positions they occupy within employment hierarchies. Age, length of time since qualification and the acquisition of additional qualifications are consistently found to differentiate dental practitioners' status.

Main

A study of the career development of male and female dental practitioners, J. T. Newton, N. Thorogood, and D. E. Gibbons Br Dent J 2000; 188: 90–94

Comment

The aim of this paper was to examine the posts held by male and female dental practitioners and to try to identify some of the factors which might explain differences in men's and women's employment profiles. The paper gives an insight into past and present relationships between age, postgraduate qualifications, gender and position within a work hierarchy.

The paper describes the proportion of males and females entering dentistry in the past two decades and shows that although the number of women joining the profession has increased, the proportion acting as principals in practice has remained relatively low.

The investigation was carried out by surveying a random sample of 2,700 of the practitioners listed in the dental register. The questionnaire asked for information about respondents' gender, age, number of years qualified, additional qualifications, hours worked, career breaks, reading of journals and postgraduate attendance. Analysis of the responses showed that for general dental practice, females were less likely than males to be a partner in, or sole proprietors of, a dental practice. Practice owners were more likely to be older, have additional qualifications and to work longer hours. They also read more journals and attended more courses.

In the hospital service, women were more likely than men to hold non-consultant posts. Consultants read more journals and were unsurprisingly more likely to have additional qualifications.

In the community dental service, senior positions were once again more likely to he held by males. As in the general dental and hospital services, the individuals in promoted posts worked longer hours, read more journals and attended more courses.

The paper offers a variety of reasons as to why women might be under-represented among practice owners, in senior CDS positions, and among consultants. These include choice as well as the fulfillment of traditional domestic roles and the need for financial security. The authors conclude that general practice treats women less favourably than the hospital or community services in that women do not 'achieve' to the same extent as men.

This conclusion is valid only if a person's position within a hierarchical work structure is taken as the sole measure of achievement. It would he interesting to examine self-fulfillment, well-being and personal satisfaction among the two gender groups. Just perhaps, the women who do not achieve practice ownership actually 'achieve' much more than their male counterparts in the rest of their lives.

The paper is therefore an important and interesting contribution to the gender/ occupational status literature. Further work needs to be undertaken to determine whether the differences observed are caused by implicit and explicit sexism in the GDS, as suggested by the authors. An alternative and perhaps attractive hypothesis is that the findings reflect the fact that women make rational choices about their lives as a whole rather than simply about their work status and that this may be a luxury which is unavailable to the majority of male dentists.