Can moral injury explain the negative effects of work-family conflict on psychological well-being? A cross-sectional study on Italian working mothers

In contemporary society individuals are expected to fulfil multiple roles simultaneously such as parent, partner, professional, caregiver, and community member. Balancing different responsibilities can lead to stress, burnout, strained relationships, and compromised well-being. Specifically, conflicting demands associated with work and family roles could lead people feeling a particular form of distress, namely moral injury. This construct refers to a dissonance between an individual's moral values and enacted behaviours. Moral injury is often associated with symptoms such as anxiety, depression, PTSD, guilt, and shame. Despite its relevant impact on health and well-being, it has never been studied as a result of work-family conflict, a specific situation where many conflicting responsibilities are at play. The present study investigates the mediating role of moral injury in the relationship between work-family conflict and PTSD, state guilt, and state shame. We collected self-report data from 285 working women, since they generally report higher levels of work–family conflict compared to men: 160 women with at least one child up to the age of five, and 125 women taking care of their (in-law) parents and having at least one cohabiting child aged fourteen years or older. Results revealed that moral injury was a significant mediator in the relationship between work-family conflict and psychological well-being in each sample. Specifically, individuals experiencing high levels of conflict between work and family roles reported greater moral injury and, in turn, higher levels of PTSD, guilt, and shame. Differences emerged between the two samples will be discussed. The study opens a new research path on the moral distress outcomes of work-family conflicts, which future studies can explore by addressing the present study limitations. These limitations concern the use of a self-report questionnaire, which may introduce biases and social desirability effects, and a cross-sectional design, which precludes making causal inferences.