The field of obstetrics & gynecology has undergone one of the most dramatic demographic shifts in medicine, transforming from a historically male-dominated specialty into one in which women now comprise the majority of trainees and practicing physicians. AAMC data revealed that the proportion of women residents in ob/gyn was 85% in 2021, compared to just 16% in 1975. By numbers alone, this transition appears to be a success story for gender equity in medicine. However, beneath this progress lies a contradiction: Positions of leadership, influence, and financial reward remain disproportionately held by men. This raises the question: how can a specialty dedicated to women’s health continue to perpetuate gender inequities?
Although the number of women in the field of ob/gyn has increased drastically, this representation has not been reflected proportionally in positions of authority within the field. Male physicians remain overrepresented in departmental leadership and roles with higher compensation.
A 2015 study examining leadership positions within ob/gyn departments demonstrated substantial gender disparities: Women held only 20% of department chairs, 36% of vice chairs, and 29% of division directors. A subsequent 2022 study demonstrated meaningful improvement, with women comprising 29% of chairs, 46% of vice chairs, and 47% of division directors. However, these gains still lag behind the specialty's overall demographics. Of note, Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Endocrinology & Infertility had more male leadership positions, whereas general ob/gyn had more female leadership positions. The study also found that female leaders were more likely to hold additional advanced degrees, suggesting that women may need to accumulate extra credentials or qualifications to achieve similar leadership opportunities.
These disparities extend beyond leadership and have measurable financial consequences. A 2022 retrospective study examined faculty compensation and found that female ob/gyns earned approximately $75,000 less annually than their male counterparts. Importantly, this difference was not explained solely by baseline salary disparities but also by differences in supplemental compensation such as administrative roles, leadership positions, and other incentives. These findings suggest that unequal access to high-value professional opportunities may contribute substantially to the gender pay gap.
This phenomenon intersects with the “motherhood penalty.” Surgical subspecialties such as ob/gyn often require prolonged training, demanding call schedules, and unpredictable hours. Limited parental leave, rigid fellowship structures, and insufficient flexibility contribute to a system in which women may self-select away from certain career paths — not because of a lack of interest or ability, but because existing structures remain incompatible with many physicians’ goals outside of work. These constraints are less commonly experienced by male physicians and therefore contribute to persistent disparities in career trajectories. Because women disproportionately shoulder pregnancy, childbirth, and caregiving responsibilities, these structural expectations create additional barriers to pursuing surgical careers.
Clearly, there are several challenges with disparities in the field of ob/gyn that require reflection. Achieving true equity in Obstetrics & Gynecology requires more than changing the demographics of those who enter the field; it requires transforming the structures that determine who advances within it. Solutions include normalizing and funding parental leave during residency and fellowship, strengthening mentorship and sponsorship pathways, increasing transparency in compensation and promotion criteria, and expanding definitions of effective leadership beyond traditional models historically associated with male physicians.
Equity in women’s health must extend beyond the patients we serve — it must also include the physicians who provide that care.
What are your thoughts on gender disparity between specialties? Share below!
