SILC Module on Child Deprivation 2024

In 2024, of the thirteen child-specific deprivation items, the item with the highest deprivation rate was the ability to afford a weeks’ holiday away from home. Over one in six (17.9%) households could not afford a one-week holiday away from home for their children. The percentage of households deprived of the other child-specific items were comparatively lower. One in seventeen households (5.9%) reported they were unable to afford regular leisure activities (e.g. swimming and playing an instrument) and 2.5% reported that they were unable to afford new (not second-hand) clothes for their children. The child-specific deprivation rates for each of the remaining 10 items were all less than 2.5%.

The deprivation rates for nine of the 13 child-specific deprivation items were lower in 2024 when compared with 2021. In percentage point terms, the largest decrease was in the percentage of households that were unable to afford new (not second hand) clothes for their children, which fell from 4.8% in 2021 to 2.5% in 2024. The deprivation item with the largest percentage point increase was being unable to afford regular leisure activities for children which increased from 4.5% of households in 2021 to 5.9% in 2024. See figure 3.1, table 3.1 and PxStat table SILCCD02.

Child-Specific Deprivation by Household Composition

One in three single-parent households could not afford a week holiday away from home

Deprivation rates for individual child-specific items were higher for single-parent households. One in three (33.2%) single-parent households could not afford a one-week holiday away from home for their children. This compares with 14.1% of two-parent households.

In 2024, one in eight (12.1%) single-parent households reported that they were unable to afford to pay for regular leisure activities for their children. The rate was three times the corresponding figure of 4.3% for two-parent households.

One in twenty (5.2%) single-parent household said they could not afford to invite friends of their children to their household to play or eat from time to time, and a similar percentage (6.2%) could not afford school trips and school events (that cost money). The comparable rates for two-parent households were 1.1% and 0.6% respectively. See figure 3.2 and PxStat table SILCCD10.

One in four of households where nobody worked were unable to afford to pay for regular leisure activities for their children

Deprivation rates for individual child-specific items were higher for households with no workers, and furthermore, deprivation rates tended to decrease as the number of workers in the household increased.  For example, over half (54.9%) households with no worker could not afford a one-week holiday away from home for their child/children, compared with one in four (26.0%) households where one adult worked and one in ten households with two workers (10.0%).

Households where nobody worked were more likely to be deprived of being able to pay for Leisure activities (24.9%), New clothes (8.5%) and Celebrations on special occasions (8.5%) than households with at least one worker. The comparable deprivation rates for households with one worker were Leisure activities (8.0%), New clothes (4.8%) and Celebrations on special occasions (2.2%) and for two-worker households, Leisure activities (2.7%), New clothes (0.5%) and Celebrations on special occasions (0.2%). See figure 3.3 and PxStat table SILCCD04.

Household with more than two children less likely to be able to afford celebrations

Households with three or more children tended to be more deprived of child specific items when compared with households with one or two children. For 10 of the 13 items, households with three or more children had higher deprivation rates compared with households with one or two children. For example, 2.9% of households with three or more children could not afford to pay for celebrations for special occasions for their children compared with 1.2% of households who had one or two children in 2024. See figure 3.4 and PxStat table SILCCD12.

Children in rented households have higher rates of child-specific deprivation

Analysis of individual deprivation items by tenure status shows that children living in rented households had higher deprivation rates for each of the 13 items. One in twenty (5.6%) rented households with children could not afford some new (not second-hand) clothes for their children, compared with 0.6% of owner-occupied households.

One in three rented (33.2%) households could not afford a one-week holiday away from home for children, almost four times higher than the rate for owner-occupied households (8.6%).

Overall, 14.1% of rented households could not afford leisure activities for their children, compared with 0.8% of owner-occupied households. See figure 3.5 and PxStat table SILCCD16.

Higher education levels in parents associated with lower child-specific deprivation

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.  In this release parent education level is reported as either

1. Upper secondary (leaving certificate or equivalent) or lower (e.g. primary or junior certificate)
2. Post-secondary or short cycle tertiary (e.g. completed apprenticeship programme)
3. Third level degree or above (e.g. masters or doctorate).

Analysis by the highest level of education level of the parent(s) shows that deprivation rates tend to decrease as the level of education increases.

One in four (24.2%) 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. This rate dropped to 8.8% for households where the highest level of education was third level degree or above.

One in twelve (8.3%) households where the highest level of education of the parent was upper secondary or lower could not afford leisure activities for their children, almost three times higher than the rate for households where the highest education level of a parent was third level degree or above (3.0%). See figure 3.6 and PxStat table SILCCD06.

Higher income associated with lower child-specific deprivation

To analyse the impact of household income on child deprivation, SILC households were split into five groups (quintiles) based on 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. Disposable income quintile calculations are based on all households collected.

The percentage of households in the first income quintile that experienced child-specific deprivation is much higher when compared with households in fifth income quintile. For example, almost one in ten (10.0%) households in the first quintile were unable to afford new clothes for children compared to 1.3% of households in the fifth quintile. See figure 3.7 and PxStat table SILCCD08.

 

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

One in three (31.2%) households without an Irish-born parent could not afford a one-week holiday and 17.1% were unable to afford regular leisure activities for their children in 2024. The comparable rates for households with at least one Irish born parent were 13.5% and 2.1% respectively. One in twenty households (5.7%) without an Irish born parent were unable to afford to invite friends of their children to their home to play or eat. This was almost ten times the rate (0.6%) for households with at least one Irish born parent. See figure 3.8 and PxStat table SILCCD14.