Better Off For Workin' Women?
Leave it to a Republican lacking the courage of his convictions (sorry if that is redundant) and to miss an opportunity to have a real debate.
Virginia gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell is in hot water over his 1989 thesis in which he "wrote in the thesis that working women and feminists had been ‘detrimental’ to the traditional family and criticized federal tax credits for child care because they made it easier for women to be employed outside the home.(Newsbusters)"
McDonnell says that his views have changed. Maybe they have and maybe they haven't, but running from your previous views on this topic makes you a sissy. This is not a debate about the capabilities of women, but rather a debate about whether, as a whole, the society is better off for having encouraged women to enter the workforce. That, I think is a legitimate question that in no way denigrates the capabilities of women.
R.S. McCain also derides McDonell for running away from it.
And the problem with that is . . .? Man up, Bob. Own it. If you're going to run away from a perfectly defensible thesis like that, you don't have enough testosterone. I got your new slogan:Look, even if his views have changed why run away from the question? It is a perfectly legitimate one.
EQUALITY IS FOR UGLY LOSERS
We here at CMR will not run away. I think think that it is quite clear that as whole society has been severely damaged by encouraging and ultimately forcing the large majority of women out of the home and into the workforce.
If you disagree with this premise (not some other straw man premise) please let me know why. Not why you think women are just as capable as men and not how some women have contributed individually in some great way. The question up for discussion here is whether society is better off for having encouraged and ultimately forcing the large majority of women out of the home and into the workforce.
I am particularly interested in the opinions of Catholic women on this question. So let's rush in where fools and Republicans (sorry, redundant again) fear to tread!
P.S. I will be very disappointed if we don't get at least 30 comments on this post.
46 comments:
Thanks for catching my point. I not only agree with you, I also agree with me!
The assumption of the WaPo editors -- that the views expressed by McDonnell in 1989 would automatically cost him women's votes -- has no evidentiary basis. My wife works, but it's because of financial need, not some ideological commitment to the feminist cause. And I suspect more women work for money than work for . . . what, spiritual fulfillment? political equality?
McDonnell in 1989 was correct in saying that, unwittingly, government policy has created incentives that have the effect of undermining the family by forcing women into the workplace. Tax credits for child care are a perfect example.
But McDonnell is evidently being advised by the same kind of clueless GOP hacks who advised George Allen to launch his idiotic "apology tour" as a response to MacacaGate.
BTW, I think you'll get more comments if you don't have them as pop-ups in separate windows.
Complex question, but I doubt that any politician would get elected with the position of discussing working women as detrimental to traditional families. It might work in a district, but in the state of Virginia, you might as well hang it up as a candidate.
It is unfortunate that a lot of issues cannot be debated properly today.
Simple really: society is not better off for its obsession with forcing women out of the household into the workforce.(Which it has clearly accomplished)
A man's wife had left him with 3 children 10, 7 and 4. She insisted that she was not fulfilled and needed to work outside the home to feel fulfilled.
He worked a second job to pay for the day care necessary so that she could work. As I stated in the first paragraph, she didn't feel fulfilled. she went to work and found another man.
I met him on a professional basis because I had been diagnosed with cardiomyopathy and needed help filling out Social Security Disability Forms. He told me the story about what had happened because Im an inquisitive sort and told him about my life and I felt it only fair that I knew about his.
I was living alone, and somedays could not get out of bed to work and Doc told me, knock it off and take the benefits you have generously paid into over the years.
So this gentleman came from Social Services (yuk) but seemed like a gentle soul. He was to assist the disabled to fill out their SSD forms in they could not come into the office.
I was not married, had never had any children, had experience with kids a little, but I could recognize a man with a big hole in his heart.
I said look, you need more help than I do (he laughed) and Dr wont let me work, let me help. He looked at me and said, I must be nuts but okay. He said I cant help you with the forms then. I'll fend for myself, how hard can it be, you work for local government. I can do this.
He says before I walk into the house,the kids are a little different. Ok,let's deal with this.
Long story short, I got my SSD that I worked so hard for paying taxes for years to contribute to and agreed to live in and I would pay rent and my expenses. He looked at me with shock and I said hey, I aint the Nanny and your no Mr Sheffield!
Well, eleven years later, Im still alive, without a heart transplant and have raised 3 children. The older two boys are developmentally disabled and the youngest a girl was molested by the mothers boyfriend on one of the few visits the kids had with the "mother".
My kids are smart, Roman Catholic, Latin Mass going (and understanding) super kids. I homeschooled all three as they attended the organized school system that was supposed to help them with Special Ed. My daughter is beautiful, modest and discerning a vocation to the Religious Life after Culinary School. (She really wants to bring something to the Refectory table!)
Point of this rambling story: I am an extremely educated woman and have worked many years in a profession where I could never find time for husband or family. The last eleven years of my life are the happiest and most fulfilling I have ever experienced.
I am now bedridden, (thank God for computers) and these kids whose Mom left them because they were really "too much trouble" are now taking care of me.
I could never adopt them because the state says she has to give up her parental rights and I wouldnt ask any mother to do that. Their father has met a wonderful woman and is getting married next year. God Bless him-I prayed enough novenas to St Joseph!
The state says I am nothing legally to these children and the birth mother hasnt seen them in 8 years or even called (her choice) but according to the state she is Mom.
You know what, my kids say different when they assist me in my wheelchair or get up early to give me my meds. Dad will be moving when he gets married but the kids have asked to live with me to the end.
If I had to do over again, I would have left my job when I was healthy to do this. God granted me the gift of a lifetime: He allowed me to become so sick I could not work and was led to raise someone else's children. How lucky am I? How sorry do I feel for the McDonell's of the world?
Republicans, find your way home-for all my years supporting the Party because Im a ProLife voter, you owe me and millions like me.
Knock it off and do the right thing. Speak the truth...
I'm really just trying to help get moving on those 30 comments, so forgive my comment having no real value, particularly after Anon, above.
Making mothers work outside the home breaks families into smaller pieces so they're easier to move to divorce court, plain and simple.
I also agree with RSM, above, about new windows, and will go further to say that new windows are from the devil.
I agree! And thanks for posting - this is one of those "3rd rail" positions that very few will touch.
I did the working mom thing for 14 years, quit when we were able and have been home for 6 years and have been homeschooling for 3 years. It's not that I didn't like working, but there really wasn't the same fulfillment that there is now. My husband has been able to do more in his job, because we support him as a family instead of me competing with his time (e.g. who stays home for sick days, etc.). We're all more focused on our vocation as a family. I'm so grateful for the opportunity to do life this way. Most women are financially and socially pressured into working for pay. There's nothing "feminine" about feminism. My 4 boys have been taught that women are strong, powerful, capable, and the heart of the home. I pray my daughter will be strong enough to resist the pressure of her generation.
I can't believe I've let RSM get ahead of me on this (well, actually I can). Just for the record: changing the cultural norm to women working outside the home has not been good for children. What I mean to say is, daycare is from the devil.
Have you all seen this article which I briefly commented on here? Many women unthinkingly accept leaving their babies as the default option.
You know, the 'child care tax credit' isn't really good for most working women either, since it only covers certain kinds of child care.
Wealthy women get it by sending their kids to places with names like like 'Le Petit Ecole' where they learn algebra at the age of two and are all prima ballerinas.
If a poor woman wants to get it, she has to send her kids to the barbed-wire surrounded, unlicensed-charatcer decorated hellhole were kids sit around all day watching TV and beating each other. If she leaves her kids with grandma, no credit.
It's basically a sop to upper middle class women who work to be 'fufilled.' Because, lets face it... most jobs are NOT fufilling--they're drudgework you do because you need the money.
I mean, seriously. How many people, male or female, would ever work again if they could have a good income that just magically appeared? What guy WOULDN'T rather be home taking the kids camping, puttering in the shed, and generally doing what HE wanted to do?
Since I started staying at home with my kids (The second my daughter was born--I HATED work and couldn't wait to get OUT! She was like winning the lottery... :) ), I have gotten to write fiction (and sell it to magazines!), go to the zoo whenever I want, spend time at orchards and blueberry farms and beaches and playgrounds, and spend long afternoons at the library........
Because, seriously, if I worked instead of staying home with the kiddies, I woild STILL have to do dishes and laundry and clean up vomit and whatnot--- I'd just have to do them AFTER dealing with annoying people in an office all day!!!
My mom stayed home with me for the first few years of my life and had to take on a job for money reasons. She HATES working and would love to be a housewife, but in order to keep the house she must keep working.
I like working, but I don't have a family. If I did I would definitely prefer to be home with the children and I would especially want to homeschool (my public school experiences were wretched, especially after leaving mom who taught me reading and math before Kindergarten).
I personally think that single women should work (if you don't work - you don't eat) and should be allowed the same opportunities as men (in jobs they can do - so I'm not advocating a waif be made into a construction worker).
Once they decide to have a family though, then they should focus on that. YES you do have to decide between a job and kids, even if you "can keep both", one of them will suffer - as any working mother (if she's honest) will tell you.
The fundamental reason for so many of our society's ills is the breakdown of the American family.
The lack of one parent at home with the kids is a breakdown in the American family (Number one: divorce).
If there is no one home to keep an eye on them, kids will find trouble. Maybe it's a playground fight. Often, it's a lot worse.
Most of the women that I know who work a job outside of the home (myself included) do it out of necessity, not out of sense of personal fulfillment.
I wrote about this on my blog. Please check it out. Leave a comment if you feel like it. www.judiciouschristianparenting.blogspot.com
Please see post titled "Love American Style" dated Aug 7.
P.S. American women don't want to hear about it. Politicians will take it all back, no matter if they believe it "personally" or not. Cowards, the whole lot of 'em.
As several people have said, this is a complex issue. I'm 66 and have seen the world both ways and don't think that either works. My mom and my friend's moms spent their time in "garden clubs", "bridge clubs" and did NOT spend more time with the kids than most the working moms I know now. My mom was bored and unhappy until, over my dad's severe disapproval, got a job when the youngest was in High School. I never wanted to be a mom because all the mom's I knew were unhappy.
I, was not able to have children and my husband didn't really want to adopt, so thanks to the "equality in work" laws, I have been able to have fulfilling career.
Forcing women out of the home is bad. The breakdown in the family, I think has been caused more by "the pill" and abortion than the work options given to women.
I know this will be an unpopular answer but thought it should be said. God Bless you all.
Lavona, I appreciate your comment. I think that contraceptives, abortion, and mother-working-outside-the home as the default option are all of a piece.
I'm another commenter just trying to get to the 30 mark!! I am a RC homeschooling mom. I worked for 7 years and got a masters degree prior to marriage and children. I always knew I would stay home with my kids when they came along. I told my husband that this was my plan on our first date. I toured a day care once just because it was part of the YMCA we were thinking of joining and cried through the whole thing.
We weren't even considering day care! Just the sight of institutional child-rearing made me so incredibly sad! I firmly believe that women's most powerful role is in the home, forming the next generation. God has created us for this, and it is an awe-inspiring position. What trust He has in his daughters!! Of course, I realize some women must work for financial reasons. But those who turn to a career seeking 'fulfillment' are not likely to find it there.
Hey, way to jump off into the deep end of the pool!
Years ago I read a piece on the mathematics behind women entering the workforce in droves. It magnifies the effect on married men having to compete with single men for jobs (single men being less encumbered than their married counterparts).
Women in the workforce (I agree single women should work, and by extension single men should be able to manage their home) depress the wages of the rest of us by supply-and-demand.
Gentlemen--I propose that we should make an effort to ensure our wives are fulfilled in their work at home. Support their efforts, be generous of your time and treasure, respect their opinions, treat them as partners.
Society wins if we do.
Just an observation, but didn't one of Obama's high-ranking officials write a book detailing his support of mandatory, forced abortions and mass sterilizations - something he hasn't renounced, yet we're criticized for mentioning?
And then this thesis, almost as old as Holdren's writing, incites outrage from the same people who give Holdren's views a pass?
What am I missing here?
I like what Family Man said and agree with what many other ladies have said.
Working to find fulfilment for a woman is a lie. Not that I don't find enjoyment or satisfaction in the job I do, but it never leaves me satisfied spiritually. In other words, my work is more a means to an end and not a calling.
I hope to stay at home with our child or work part-time when necessary when the baby arrives. Unfortunately, being an engineer, it makes it difficult for me to job share or work part time- especially during this economic downturn- I'd be the first one to go the next time layoffs come through! So now I'm looking at being an adjuct at a local community college instead:).
If I could do it all again, I would probably have chosen a more family friendly career path- teaching, nursing or other service work which allows for flex hours or half time employment. I'm definitely going to encourage my daughters to consider this when they choose their own way in life!
At the same time, it is still useful to educate our daughters in professions outside the home. What if they're married with young children and their husband dies? This happened to my husband's father and even myself growing up (thankfully I was finishing up college when my dad died- as the youngest, this left my mom with a smaller bag to hold). If the dad dies and leaves the family unprovided for because the mom was not trained in gainful employment out of the home, the children could suffer. Who will put bread on the table?
For the majority, I think women work more out of necessecity than out of a genuine calling when there are young children in the home.
My contribution to the 30-comment goal:
I never had any intention of staying home with the kids. As a matter of fact - I never had any intention of having kids. I was liberated, you know.
I won't go into the details of it... But I ended up 'married' to a liberated man who believed in liberated women. Within three months I was the sole financial support of our household. When the children came along they were my responsibility - as this liberated man believed that liberated women were responsible for 'reproductive consequences'. I worked to pay the bills and keep my children in the care of strangers so that my 'husband' could remain a liberated man.
That was a long time ago. Obviously a lot has happened since then... But today I am married - really actually married. My husband adopted the children - and the family has grown significantly since then. I'm now a Catholic, stay-at-home, homeschooling mother to five kids and wife to a working husband. Every now and then when I escape the bondage of household chores - I encounter other people. Often those other people sympathetically describe my lifestyle as archaic and oppressive.
OH the irony.
Society is NOT better off forcing women into the workforce.
Our mandate as Catholics is to be our children's first teachers. How can we do that when we are too busy working? Can a mom move ahead in the work force when she puts the children first? Probably not. If she doesn't do something for work, she will have her review to worry about. If she doesn't show up for something for her children, there is no review board (except when she dies).
Ultimately, we are responsible for our children. Unless absolutely necessary, I don't think moms should work outside the home. Our first and foremost responsibility is to be there for our children.
I am a stay-at-home, homeschooling mom.
Saying that women should stay home with the kids does NOT mean they shouldn't be educated or work before they have kids (or after the kids are big enough not to need them at home all day!)
For one, educated men should have educated wives--it makes for better dinner table conversation! (And better educated kids!)
And it's good to have the OPTION of going back to work--for instance, when one parent is out of work, the other one can get a job!
Frankly, I don't think it HAS to be the woman staying home with the kids--- after they're weaned, they like Daddy just as much! (Ok. I'll be honest. They actually like him more. A lot more. But I like him too--that's why I married him!)
So really, individual couples need to figure out what works for them. (I've met some where the best financial option is for both to work 1/2 time....) BUT the big thing is that when we're figuring out how a couple ought to earn money to live, we need to think about what is best for their kids. Daycare is not a good option. Kids need parents.
I'd also argue that men with 80-hour-a-week jobs who never see their wife or kids ALSO might want to take a step back and examine the best way to balance finances and vocation.....
Anyway, really I'm just helping get you guys to 30--now I need to get back to work! (On laundry. We're trying to sell the house, and I have a feeling that the giant piles of soiled clothing does not constitute 'good staging'....)
In response to Lavona's comment, I think you have touched on another important point. There's no guarantee that staying home will be more fulfilling for a women.
First, I think it has to be a decision that a woman makes for herself, and not something that she is forced to do by her husband. You FORCE a woman to do anything and she's not going to like it.
Secondly, I think the woman has to view staying-at-home as the true vocation that it is. You're not just the slave that cooks and cleans, you are the heart of the home, and you do what you do out of loving service to your family and in response to a discernible call from the Lord.
Finally, we men have to make our women feel appreciated for the choice that they have made to devote themselves to the family in that way. We have to remain emotionally engaged, even after a long day's work. We have to do our own part to raise the children, not simply leaving all the caring up to the mother. We have to thank our wives every day for what they are striving to do.
When all of those things happen, then a woman CAN feel fulfilled at home, and she can bust the stereotype that a woman's worth is measured by how much money she makes.
Why give women who choose to stay home the same encouragement that women who work get? Why not give THEM a tax break or some sort of compensation for all their work? Just a thought...(from a stay at home mom).
I'm a Catholic mom now at home with my 5 young kids after spending a decade in a successful professional career.
From my perspective, working women are VICTIMS of society's push to "enable" them to claim their "equality." And many aspects of our society--from the quality of our kids' childhoods to the success of American businesses--are out of whack as a result.
I'm a faithful Catholic working mother of 5 children, ages 9, 7, 5, 4, and 5 mos, and I have a fantastic working husband. As with other mothers, I pray daily that my decisions support God's will for me.
I don't think that the problems with society and working versus stay-at-home moms is the right question. I think that encouraging women, even family women, into the work force on a society level is *neutral*. *Society* may be worse off because women may not know what it looks like to be a faithful Catholic working mom, and there may not be enough support and examples of what that may be. The fact that there are so many women in the workforce, I think that we should be giving encouragement to moms who work to prayfully raise their children to be heaven-bound, just as stay-at-home moms do. We all need to listen to God's guidance, no matter what the setting is. Society's problem may be that the *focus* has not been God, but other earthly things. This is not to say that you can't be a working Mom *and* also focusing your life and family on God. It may be easier to understand and identify the stay-at-home mom as focusing her life and family on God, but let's recognize the faithfulness of all women!
I'm always happy to see someone bravely wade in to this topic. When I had children in the late 80's, I would never have thought I would have been able to stay home until they left the nest! God is Good! Every time I tried, at great pains, to readjust our household so that I could take on freelance work, the money was definitely not worth it for the toll it took on peace in our home. In the mid 90's I decided to abandon my attempt to "contribute" financially to our household, and put all my energy instead to supporting my husband's career, making sure that work was all he needed to think about. The first year I did that he got a tremendous raise, three times what I had been able to "contribute" as a freelance writer.
Now that my children are gone: I won't tell you that Mom in the home is a guarantee that you will raise perfect angels. But I believe that a woman brings a peace and grace to a home, as a refuge from the world, that simply doesn't come naturally to a man. Women are more biologically suited to mothering and homemaking. Just look at how "nurturing" the workplace has become--cupcakes everywhere, trick or treat parties, gimme a break. There are, of course, lots of things men are better suited to, as well -- say, how many women firefighters have you seen on the news this week putting themselves on the line in California???--
Now I'm beginning to see a new trend that troubles me greatly. Our sons & daughters, I notice, are arranging their households more and more with Dad as primary nurturer. While I have seen this model work in rare, exceptional cases, for most of us, on the whole, this is an unbalanced arrangement. I just don't see that men have the natural civilizing effect on children that women do. But I am seeing this become a new cultural norm. Our kids, I'm afraid, are confused about sexual roles, and have overwhelmingly bought the lie that there are no innate differences between the sexes. Our society ignores this at its peril. Things will look dire indeed when we arrive at the point where the roles are exactly flipped, and women predominate in the workplace, and men predominate in the home. I think men have a real need & gift for "going out into the world," and when that's missing from their lives, they feel diminished. Just as women feel diminished when they miss out on childrearing.
This is a tough topic. I can possibly see myself as staying at home with kids someday - but would definitely want to be involved in SOMETHING that would provide me with regular adult contact. I say this after my experience with my stay at home mom. She was severely depressed for years to the point that it wasn't like her being home was beneficial for us. I think part of it was being at home and NOT having regular adult contact. She works now and has more friends and happy. I would have preferred a happy working mom to a depressed stay at home one.
Not to criticize you Winnie, for I too may be in your boat after the upcoming birth of my first child, but who takes care of your children during the day? How do you balance work and home life schedules with your husband in order to have at least one of you fully available to your children at all times? Do you work days and he nights?
The reason I'm asking this is because my job in particular requires me to be away from the home for at least 11 hours out of my day (one hour commute each way, 9hr work day). During your *minimum* amount of time away from home of, say 9hrs (8hr work day with half hour commute), who is spending that long bulk of time with your children? Who is caring for them while you are gone?
Also, if your youngest (5mos) is at daycare, how do you protect them from all the germs and illnesses they're exposed to during the day? Do you at least pump milk for your child so he/she can receive your antibodies?
Again, I'm not trying to criticize, I'm genuinely curious about how you make this work since I'm approaching motherhood myself.
i'm just some twenty-something, recent college grad who moved from pittsburgh, pa to southern california who is, at best, naive, and at worst, ignorant, but these are my thoughts...
i, eventually, want to be a dread-locked housewife raising my kids (i'd like a soccer team or baseball team's worth). right now, i'm undread-locked and dateless, living off my small savings until i can find employment...which has proved to be frustrating.
something i've always struggled with is working and being a mom. i've just never felt the two were truly compatible...you really have to work to make them work. it's kinda like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole (i know, i'm so incredibly creative and original). if the square peg is smaller in diameter than the round hole, eventually you'll get it to go in, but it's not the best fit. the best fit for a square peg is a square hole. i feel that's the same for women/wives/mothers.
i think that society is worse off with women who work, both for financial reasons and for "fulfillment". i think that all too often all of us, men and women, buy into this "live to work" mentality or the cog in the machine mindset. if you don't work, you are perceived as ignorant, a bum, and a drain on society. work for your keep! i don't buy that. the mentality that is true and compatible with our worth as beings is work to live. work is a necessity to be able to live. i want a man who can provide for me--financially, emotionally, mentally, physically, spiritually. in some families it is necessary for the wife to work, but government/employers should be providing family-friendly environments and benefits so that doesn't have to be the norm. but we all know how family-friendly our society is...
something my mom (God rest her soul) once told me was that to be married, you have to bring something to the table-- an interest in something outside the home, but that doesn't contradict the home. like books, so you can join a book club. or painting. or something. so often housewives are perceived and perceive themselves as deprived because they have left everything by the wayside for this obligation they now have. yes, family becomes an obligation, but it is first a gift and a joy, and just as the husband has interests outside the home (like going out for a beer with the guys after work or something less stereotypical), so should the wife.
as for me, i'm praying to st. cajetan for a job so i don't have to start selling my possessions to eat and dreaming of the days when i will be working at home, raising my family.
Catholic woman here, with an opinion. I have been blessed to be in circumstances where I can stay home and be just a mom and a housewife and I am so incredibly grateful. I love my job and I truly believe our children are better for it. Happy housewives do exist, not only am I an example, but the vast majority of my close friends are also happy stay at home wives and mothers.
I do have to admit, this was all I ever dreamed of as a child. I have a bachelors degree in Sociology and I was accepted into a doctoral program in education, but that life was not what I was called to.
Can I speak for all women, wives and mothers? I don't think I can. Not every family is in the same financial position as we are. I know so many families that juggle work and home and do it for the betterment of their families. Has our culture pushed women into the workforce? I believe so and I do not believe society is better for it.
Undeniably, the family unit is stronger if one of the parents can stay home to raise the children. But I reject the premise that tax credits for daycare forced women out of the home. Those tax credits were created BECAUSE women were forced out of the home to work due to wage stagnation.
Well, I left work last year and am now home with my kids. I know I'm about to be slapped for this, but staying at home is no picnic. You work twice as hard, you get three (now four) times as dirty, you don't have a paycheck to affirm you every week, you don't have a lunchbreak (naptime is a fluke), and you don't have any benefits like social security or a 401k. I found fulfillment in my job, I was successful, I was liked, I was social, I got to shower every day.
But I'm done whining now, because I know that I will look back and realize I made the right decision. Getting my head to shrink back to its original size has been a painful process, but in the end my boys need to see a humble woman more than a successful one. And maybe, just maybe in the end, that might be the same thing...
32 Comments! We did it! :D
No slaps for you, Patty. That's just reality. Staying home with children can be frustrating, exhausting, and messy and still be meaningful and -- most importantly -- the best thing for the kids.
Craig-- I think it's a bit of both/and. One area that has impacted is housing prices. Once you have a critical mass of two-income families with young children, it becomes increasingly difficult for the one-income families to compete for the same stock of houses. On paper, the dual-incomes are making twice as much money. All of that second income may be going straight into daycare costs, but that doesn't matter on a mortgage application. So unless the one-income family is lucking to be pulling down "professional" wages, they will consistently qualify for far less mortgage (hence far less house) than the double-income family. DH & I faced this for years here in over-inflated Silicon Valley.
Patty,
Take heart! It took me a long time to adjust to being home after working for many years! Yes, everything you said is true! It is hard work to be with the kids all day long. I think the hardest part was not having a list tangible accomplishments for the day (such as having seen a certain number of patients). I would give my husband a play by play of the entire day, because I felt I needed to prove that I had actually done something. He listened patiently, bless his heart. But, it's an adjustment that takes time. It takes time to realize that the accomplishments at home are longer brewing and sometimes less apparent than getting through a certain number of hours or procedures at work. There is nothing like full-time, at-home motherhood to teach a person self-donation.
Can we define "society" please? I'm mostly joking, but not entirely. I'm a SAHM and the transition from a satisfying (but not lucrative) profession was very difficult. Is "society" served by having me out of the profession? I don't think so. I think of it more as choosing the good of my children over the good done (to far more people!) of my job.
On the other hand, my own mother was a SAHM and suffered mental illness. (No, not caused by being home; it almost certainly developed before I was born.)Had she worked outside the home during my childhood, I think she would have gotten a diagnosis and help long before she did--which certainly would have been better for me. I don't think "society" is served by having women stay home to raise the kids who aren't equipped to do so--whether that's a matter of mental health, emotional maturity, or whatever.
The plural of anecdote isn't data, of course. But even though I think I'm doing the best thing for the family by being a SAHM, there are enough situations where that's not true to make me unwilling to generalize so broadly.
Anon,
I don't think it's an either/or situation. I think society is greatly served by parents staying at home and raising children to be wonderful adults.
I don't think by staying at home you're cutting society, you're simply enriching society in a different way.
Before I married, I went to college because I wanted to be able to support myself--whether I eventually married or not--and also help my parents as they got older. I did marry and ended up moving from Oregon to Minnesota. Our first baby was born nine months later, and my husband and I had already agreed that, when the baby was born, I would stay home with him--even if I managed to find a job before he was born (which I didn't). Now, our youngest (of 3 kids) is almost three, and I've been looking for a part-time job just to help pay the bills. Since I haven't had a job since 2001, however, it's been difficult to find a job that dovetails with my husband's (full-time) job schedule. The idea is for one of us to be at home with the kids, since, even if I worked full-time, most of my income would go toward day-care expenses and commuting (to say nothing of work clothes, lunches, etc.), and it'd be a wash (or
worse).
I still haven't found a job, but I write articles (have sold a couple so far) and make up stories for my kids (for daily story time). I love being a stay-at-home mom, though I have been feeling a greater need lately for social time with other moms. I've met some real winners and their company is medicine.
Thanks for bringing this up. I would agree that forcing women out of the home has been detrimental to families. All the women I know who work outside the home work only because they have to--to pay the bills. I may yet find an early morning part-time job (maybe at a coffee shop; you can't argue free coffee!), but while I continue looking and applying for jobs that would work for our family, I believe I'm right where God wants me to be.
I think it's great that you've brought this up. I wish that more people would engage in conversations about topics such as this. I'm a Catholic, stay at home mom. Our children are 7,3 and 4 mos., and I homeschool them. I love staying at home and raising my children. I honestly cannot imagine it any other way.
I'm grateful to my husband for working as hard as he does so that I can stay at home. We know that it is the best thing we can do for our children and our family. However this does come with some sacrifices. We only have one cell phone, for emergencies. We don't have cable TV, we wear hand me down clothes, and I can't tell you the last time we went to the movies, let alone rented one. (We fortunately have great libraries.) The fact is that we make it work. My husband is a teacher, and we aren't rolling in the dough. But I often think about all of the money that we save because I have the time to make it work. Because the kids aren't in daycare, there's one less bill to pay. And I don't have to spend our money on a glamorous wardrobe. In the last two years, the book rental fees for our local school district were equal to or more than what I paid for in homeschooling materials. We rarely eat out, and I'm able to cook meals from scratch which are a lot cheaper than prepackaged meals. Sometimes I don't think that people realize just how much money you can actually save by having someone home to manage things. And you really can't put a price on the value of raising your own children. Generally, I believe that there is no one else who is better at raising a child than that child's parents.
I've really enjoyed reading everyone's comments! Thanks!
Thanks annef!
You know, I guess I don't need to look for affirmation further than in the reactions to my children. I see them at home climbing off the walls and trying to do science experiments on the family cat (he's one brave kitty), but when they're in public I often receive compliment upon compliment about them. These alone tell me I'm doing something right. It's just hard when you can't gague your work ethic by instant rewards, you know?
So my hat's off to stay at home moms, and not just because I am one. They're right up there with policemen, firemen, paramedics - they sacrifice it all for the good of society!
On another side of things, I'd say I don't like that work has become more of a "family" atmosphere in part, I think, because with both parents working, people need to feel "a part of something" at their jobs much more than they used to.
I wish we could just work at our jobs and then go home to are real lives, but maybe that's just the manager in me.
Anonymous 9/3 3.14 am. Thank you.
I can't believe you've started another round of the Mommy wars on CMR. Women have enough on their shoulders without having to defend working to others who are blessed to have the luxury of staying at home. (And yes, I know it's not easy and God bless the SAHMs!) Bringing up children with God, faith, values and love is more important than headcount, and it CAN be done in a dual income family, although it's hard and requires a lot of sacrifice. I've often thought that all of those feminists touting that "we can have it all" oughtta be lined up and shot. The bottom line is that nothing is easy in today's culture, but if we keep Jesus and His Church front and center, no matter what our employment status, with His help we will survive and thrive.
Yes, the larger socioeconomic implications, blah, blah, blah. It's probably true that there've been unintended consequences of women joining the workforce in larger numbers; but there's also been good consequences, in opportunities, and in terms of perspectives -- more men have come to see women as adults than ever did before. And you couldn't have SAHDs without working Moms! God bless 'em both.
Siobhan's right - there're are as many different right ways to be a woman as there are women.
Now, I don't think the man should be barred from public office over some old academic thinking out loud, or even for pointing out those unintended bad consequences -- unless he turned out to be think he was on a mission from Osama to keep women under guard or hidden in Jawa costumes - which I somehow doubt is the case.
Now I doubt if my opinion is of major importance, but I was a stay at home mom until my husband's death at 50. I must say that I loved it, and now that I have been working for the past 14 years I can say I don't care for it. I also can say there are those I work with that would prefer being at home. Those that give birth are back in the work force in about 6 weeks in order to keep the job. I think the losers are the the children---they want their moms and all the attention they can get. Mom goes home to make dinner, clean the house and say "goodnight" My grandaughter complains that she doesn't see her mom as much because she is in school now. In fact all my grandchildren have voiced complaints when mom is absent for any reason. When I was a teen my mother had to go to work, and I did not like it then. Mothers are the ones that are the center point, but sadly times have changed...
If it is possible to be home, then it is (to me) the best choice,
Post a Comment