Although the French welfare state is characterised as a conservative corporatist welfare regime in most research comparing social protection systems in Europe, it differs from the other corporatist welfare states when social care is taken into account. Following the Esping-Andersen classification (1990), conservative welfare regimes build on corporatism and rely on families taking responsibility for providing care for children, older and disabled people. However, the French welfare state differs from other corporatist-conservative countries in that the state has responsibility for providing social care. However, is it a woman-friendly welfare state? Social care services have a real impact on the social integration of women, but what about the impact on gender equality?

While caring for older people remains an important issue, the focus of this chapter is childcare and family policies. Recognition of care work by the French welfare state is associated with strong support for the family as a fundamental social institution. The social security system is still based on the family unit and not the individual. The legitimacy of state action in this domain is not questioned. Family policies receive widespread support and are constantly a subject of public debate (Hantrais and Letablier, 1996). First, this chapter reviews the historical background to the state–family relationship in France to provide an understanding of the place of social care in the French welfare state. Then, it looks at the extent to which the rights of families to provision for care are written into labour law, the tax and social security systems. Legal recognition of family rights to care has an impact on women's employment patterns and on women's social rights as well. They also impact on the management of childcare. In this field, state support for childcare is both generous and diversified. Childcare benefits and services form a complex system in which responsibilities are shared between state and families. Enterprises, non-profit organisations and the market play a minor role in comparison to the state.

However, the broad consensus among economic, political and civil society over the legitimacy of the state to intervene in family affairs conceals divergence over the principles behind public action and over the measures being implemented.