Child deprivation rates by household tenure status

One in five (20.1%) rented households with children experienced two or more deprivation items. The comparable rate for owner-occupied households was one in forty (2.5%).

Nine in ten (90.1%) owner-occupied households with children experienced no deprivation item, compared with 55.9% of rented household. See Figure 4.1 and view Table SILCCD15 in PxStat.

One in ten rented households cannot afford new clothes for their children

Analysis of individual deprivation items by tenure status shows that one in ten (9.6%) rented households with children could not afford some new (not second-hand) clothes for their children under 16, this compares with 1.1% of owner-occupied households.

Four in ten rented (39.2%) households could not afford a one-week holiday away from home for children under 16. This rate is five times higher than the rate for owner-occupied households (7.9%).

Just over 10% (10.4%) of rented households could not afford leisure activities (e.g. swimming, playing an instrument, youth organisations, etc.) for children under 16, compared with 1.2% of owner-occupied households. See Figure 4.2 and view Table SILCCD16 in PxStat.

Child deprivation rates by highest level of education of parent

In single-parent households the highest level of education achieved by the single-parent was assigned to the household. In two-parent households, the education level of the parent with the highest level of education was assigned to the household. Analysis by highest level of education of parent shows that deprivation rates decrease as the highest level of education increases. For example, of households where the highest level of the parent’s education was upper secondary (leaving certificate or equivalent) or lower, 16.0% experienced two or more deprivation items. This compares with 5.0% of households where the highest level of education was third level degree or higher. See Figure 4.3 and view Table SILCCD05 in PxStat.

One in three households where the highest level of parent education was secondary level or lower were unable to afford a holiday for their children

Analysis of child-specific deprivation items shows that more than one in three (35.4%) households where the highest level of education of the parent was upper secondary or lower were unable to afford a one-week holiday away from home for children under 16. This rate dropped to one in ten (10.7%) households where the highest level of education was third level degree or above.

The rate for households unable to afford school trips and school events (that cost money) for children under 16 was four times higher for households where the highest level of education of the parent was upper secondary or lower, when compared with households where the highest education level was third level degree or above (8.0% compared with 1.9%). See Figure 4.4 and view Table SILCCD06 in PxStat.

Child deprivation rates by household net income quintile

To analyse the impact of household income on child deprivation, SILC households ¹ were split into five groups (quintiles) based upon their disposable income, with the 20% of households with the lowest income in the first quintile and the 20% of households with the highest income in the fifth quintile.  

Child deprivation rates decrease as household income increase. Nine in ten (92.9%) households in the fifth disposable income quintile were not deprived of any of the child-specific deprivation items. This compares with four in ten (43.8%) households in the first quintile.

One in three households in the first quintile (35.0%) experienced two or more deprivation items compared with 1.6% of households in the fifth quintile. See Figure 4.5 and view Table SILCCD07 in PxStat.

¹All SILC households i.e. households with and without children

One in five households in quintile one were unable to afford school trips for their children

The percentage of households in quintile one that experienced child-specific deprivation is much higher when compared with households in quintile five (as shown in Table 4.1). For example, almost one in five (18.0%) households in quintile one were unable to afford school trips and school events (that cost money) for children under 16. This rate is 10 times higher than the rate for households in the fifth disposable income quintile (1.7%). See Table 4.1 and view Table SILCCD08 in PxStat for item deprivation rates for the five income quintiles.

Child deprivation rates by country of birth of parent(s)

Households with no parent born in Ireland had higher child deprivation rates with 17.5% of these households experiencing two or more deprivation items compared with 7.0% of households with at least one parent born in Ireland. See Figure 4.6 and view Table SILCCD13 in PxStat.

One in ten households without an Irish-born parent could not afford to buy new clothes for their children

One in ten (10.3%) households without an Irish-born parent could not afford some new (not second-hand) clothes for their children under 16. A similar percentage (8.9%) of these households were unable to afford two pairs of properly fitting shoes for their children. The comparable deprivation rates for households with a parent born in Ireland were 2.8% for clothes and 2.2% for shoes. The percentage of households unable to afford to pay for school trips or school events (that cost money) for their children in households with no Irish-born parent was double the rate for households with an Irish-born parent (6.3% compared with 3.1%). See Figure 4.7 and view Table SILCCD14 in PxStat.