Occupational science, the field that studies how everyday activities shape human health and identity, has long been anchored in Western, autonomy-centered paradigms. Its foundational models emphasize volition, personal choice, and self-expression as the engines of occupational identity. But Budman and Bourke-Taylor point out that these assumptions may simply not hold in traditional, faith-based communities, where motherhood is not a lifestyle decision but a divinely ordained vocation. In such settings, maternal roles are socially prescribed, religiously defined, and structurally reinforced, meaning that the very concept of ‘choice’ operates differently than mainstream theory predicts.

To build their framework, the researchers used a reflective thematic synthesis of two previously conducted qualitative studies with ultra-Orthodox Jewish mothers—one using semi-structured in-depth interviews and the other using focus groups. Rather than re-coding raw transcripts, the team revisited original thematic matrices, analytic memos, and interpretive reflections to extract patterns with theoretical relevance. They then triangulated these empirical findings with three theoretical lenses: role theory, which explains how societies define and enforce roles like ‘good mother’; occupational identity theory, which describes how people come to know themselves through what they do; and occupational justice, which examines how structural barriers limit access to meaningful activity.

The result is a framework with five interrelated domains: Spiritual Meaning and Obligation, Communal Structures and Expectations, Family Dynamics and Resources, Health and Well-being Outcomes, and Negotiation and Adaptation. The first three act as foundational forces, embedding mothering in shared values, moral obligations, and systemic conditions. The final two capture how mothers respond over time—reprioritizing daily occupations, seeking guidance from religious authorities, or reframing struggles through a spiritual lens. Together, the domains model the interplay between structure and agency, showing identity as something continuously negotiated rather than fixed.

The ultra-Orthodox Jewish community in Israel provides a striking case study. Composed of Hasidic, Lithuanian, and Sephardic groups united by adherence to halacha, or Jewish law, the community structures daily life around spiritual practice. Because Torah study is prioritized—especially for men—women typically assume central responsibility for caregiving, household management, and often financial provision. Large families are common, and mothers are viewed not merely as caregivers but as transmitters of tradition and protectors of communal boundaries. Motherhood, in this context, is a sacred vocation shaped by teachings about self-sacrifice, modesty, and the sanctity of childrearing.

These conditions generate what the authors call deep occupational meaning alongside intense pressure. Communal structures—religious leadership, gendered education systems, and dense social networks—reinforce norms through what the researchers describe as social surveillance and communal cohesion. Maternal roles become publicly accountable as well as privately meaningful. For some mothers, this offers clarity, belonging, and identity affirmation; for others, it produces internal conflict when personal needs or aspirations diverge from communal expectations. Health and well-being, the framework suggests, are shaped not only by external demands but by internalized beliefs about what it means to be a ‘good’ mother, with well-being often measured by perceived success in meeting religious and familial expectations rather than personal fulfillment alone.

To illustrate the framework’s dynamics, the authors constructed two fictionalized composite vignettes based on common patterns in their data. The first portrays a 34-year-old mother of seven whose internal values and external environment are aligned: she keeps a kosher kitchen, orchestrates Sabbath preparations and holiday celebrations, and describes her home as a sacred space, finding coherence and satisfaction in roles her community affirms. The second portrays a 28-year-old mother of four who has begun part-time seminary studies and feels caught between communal expectations of prioritizing family and her desire for intellectual engagement and financial independence. Her story shows identity under tension—guilt over missed family meals, disrupted routines, and private questions about whether her aspirations are compatible with her faith.

The framework is also positioned as a critique and extension of two established occupational therapy models. The Model of Human Occupation, or MOHO, explains identity through volition, habituation, and performance capacity, but is grounded in individual agency—an emphasis that fits awkwardly where occupational roles are inherited and morally reinforced. The new framework situates volition within spiritual obedience and communal norms, suggesting that motivation is filtered through divine duty rather than emerging solely from personal preference. The Kawa Model, which uses the metaphor of a river shaped by rocks, banks, and driftwood to capture cultural context, offers narrative richness but does not explicitly theorize identity development. The proposed framework builds on both by showing how identity is actively constructed through alignment—or misalignment—between internal values and external expectations.

The authors are candid about the framework’s limitations. It is based on secondary analysis of previously published qualitative findings and reflects the researchers’ interpretations; it requires validation through participant feedback and application in other sociocultural settings. They also acknowledge an inherent tension: the foundational theories they build on originate from the very Western, autonomy-centered paradigms the framework critiques, and they describe engaging with these theories critically and reflexively. Future research, they argue, should explore how maternal occupational identity develops across the lifespan and in different religious traditions, with comparative studies clarifying which elements are context-specific and which have broader relevance.

Even so, the implications reach well beyond one community. For occupational therapists, the framework underscores cultural humility: clinicians working with mothers from traditional or minority communities must attend to the meanings, values, and expectations shaping maternal roles, or risk misinterpreting occupational needs and applying inappropriate service models. For occupational science, the work joins a growing critical movement calling for pluralistic, justice-oriented theory that accommodates collective meaning-making, spirituality, and diversity. The researchers suggest the framework may transfer to other collectivist or faith-oriented populations, including Indigenous, Muslim, and Christian communities where maternal identity is similarly shaped by collective values and gendered expectations. If validated, it could mark a meaningful step toward theories of occupation that recognize not just what people choose to do, but what they believe they are obligated to become.

Subject of Research: A conceptual framework for maternal occupational identity in faith-based minority communities

Article Title: Rituals, roles, and realities: A conceptual framework for maternal occupational identity in faith-based minority contexts

Article References: Rituals, roles, and realities: A conceptual framework for maternal occupational identity in faith-based minority contexts. (n.d.). https://doi.org/10.1080/11038128.2025.2558742

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1080/11038128.2025.2558742

Keywords: maternal occupational identity, occupational science, ultra-Orthodox Jewish mothers, faith-based communities, role theory, occupational justice, Model of Human Occupation, Kawa Model, occupational therapy, cultural responsiveness, motherhood, qualitative research