Article - The Nuclear Family Was a Mistake

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have not read any of these articles. But I have told my husband (seriously only half joking) that I'm down for it if he wants another wife. I want veto power, since I'm the first wife, but if he can find a woman who will help take care of our kids (and I love babies, so go ahead and have more) and clean the house and/or work so I can do these things, let's do it. He said, then wouldn't you want another husband? Hell no. One is more than enough work, thankyouverymuch. That is when negotiations stalled.

Lol. Have literally had this exact conversation with my husband. We both need a wife.

Same here. I would love a stay at home wife.

I actually would like a 2nd husband. I wouldn't mind staying home either, but I do currently work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read the article yet, but have thought a lot that I kind of wish I had just stayed in the town where I grew up surrounded by family. My friends who have done that have so much easier lives. Even if they pay for full time child care, it's just so much easier when there is occasional help from grandparents, cousins, etc. And I think we're all happier with a network/community of people around us. That's so much easier to establish in a place where you have extended family.

I have thought this too, occasionally, but I would never admit this out loud.

I left the lightly populated farm state to come East and make a name for myself. I succeeded in that, I guess, and I've had so many experiences here that would not be possible in my hometown. But 25 years later, I do find myself missing a life with extended family around all the time. Not necessarily under one roof, just a couple of zip codes away.

[Anonymous]

Another thought I had when reading this article was that no only did many of us not have any extended family support when our kids were younger, on top of that we now are left with caregiver responsibility for both teenagers and young adults and our aging parents. The stress is unbearable.

[Anonymous]

A good compromise is living in the same town but in separate houses. Plus, raising kids gets so much easier the older they get.

I like my privacy.

[Anonymous]

This is why I’ve always wanted to visit/
Live on a kibbutz. It so appealing to have a shared supportive community, but another spouse? No thanks!

[Anonymous]

When i was with my long-term boyfriend I brought up the idea of having a 2nd husband in the house. That way, lots of income without me having leave our future children to go out to work. Plus, I have always had a voracious sexual appetite and each time my boyfriend and I would finish I would half-jokingly say "next?" Boyfriend had no objections and it was really a turn-on for him. I told him no 3-somes; this was a utilitarian plan where no one person would be under pressure to provide all the income, etc. It was also not a proposal to become an open marriage; the 3 of would be committed.

So one day he brought over a good friend to whom he had proposed the idea. Unfortunately he had not informed me of doing so and I did not like the looks of his friend, whom I sent packing. We laughed about it for years until he moved to another country for work and we said our good-byes.

[Anonymous]

I did not read the article. We moved coasts to be near DH’s family. It's hard. It was much easier as a nuclear family. MIL, who is the ”second wife” and occasionally babysits, has opinions about everything (e.g., is against vaccines), DH listened to her and tried to appease, there is always someone’s birthday, party, a celebration that requires our presence. We cannot make friends because all our free time is spent with the family. I left for a business trip, and MIL moved in to help but wanted to stay in our bedroom and sleep on my bed. There is no privacy; everyone is into everyone’s business. Vacations are spent with my family. We are treated as a couple of teenagers who don't know better.
I liked it better before.

[Anonymous]

Co-housing tried to address some of this to build a closer non related community.

My extended family is riddled with mental illness, so no help there!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure his statistics make sense and I don't think his conclusions drawn from them make sense.

The Scandinavian countries are the "happiest", also do not have large extended families living together, and are wealthy. Also, most Americans who moved here over the past centuries were loners, single, or maybe a married couple. They obviously didn't bring a large family with them.

In Scandinavian countries, society has taken place of the extended family. Young families are supported. Childcare and family leave is subsidized by the government, and work-life balance is valued and prioritized.

What's valued and prioritized here is the almighty dollar and working yourself to death. People are actually proud of working crazy hours. Many employers don't want to hire mothers or mothers to be. Men are considered emasculated and shamed if they want to take parental leave to bond with and care for children. Women are expected to work as if they don't have kids and parent as if they don't work. If you say you're having a hard time, you're told that you shouldn't have had kids in the first place if you can't afford (or don't want) to quit your job to care for them. If you do quit, that you're an affront to feminism and a burden on your husband. Of course the nuclear family struggles, given these conditions.

::standing ovation::

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with much of the concepts raised by the article.

But find it surprising coming from David Brooks, who left his wife and children for his younger research assistant. How did that impact his nuclear family?

Are you suggesting that someone can't know alcohol is bad and still be an alcoholic?

I am not the previous poster, but I think he has lost his credibility on this subject. Yes, I judge his actions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure his statistics make sense and I don't think his conclusions drawn from them make sense.

The Scandinavian countries are the "happiest", also do not have large extended families living together, and are wealthy. Also, most Americans who moved here over the past centuries were loners, single, or maybe a married couple. They obviously didn't bring a large family with them.

In Scandinavian countries, society has taken place of the extended family. Young families are supported. Childcare and family leave is subsidized by the government, and work-life balance is valued and prioritized.

What's valued and prioritized here is the almighty dollar and working yourself to death. People are actually proud of working crazy hours. Many employers don't want to hire mothers or mothers to be. Men are considered emasculated and shamed if they want to take parental leave to bond with and care for children. Women are expected to work as if they don't have kids and parent as if they don't work. If you say you're having a hard time, you're told that you shouldn't have had kids in the first place if you can't afford (or don't want) to quit your job to care for them. If you do quit, that you're an affront to feminism and a burden on your husband. Of course the nuclear family struggles, given these conditions.

::standing ovation::

Joining in the standing ovation. It doesn't have to be a "traditional" family, but support has to come from somewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with much of the concepts raised by the article.

But find it surprising coming from David Brooks, who left his wife and children for his younger research assistant. How did that impact his nuclear family?

Are you suggesting that someone can't know alcohol is bad and still be an alcoholic?

I am not the previous poster, but I think he has lost his credibility on this subject. Yes, I judge his actions.

That's not how this works.

[Anonymous]

We have lived all over the country and far from any family since 1991. Since 2005 have lived in one town and it's very interesting to spend time with people who have lived their entire lives there. I envy their local family connections and deep roots but I know they envy that we have lived all over the country in highly desirable areas. And, most of them have said that their careers were really held back by not being willing to move.

[Anonymous]

Don’t a lot of people still live in the same town or city as family?

My DH and I both moved to a random city for college (no connection prior), we stayed out after, then his brothers moved here, then his parents, then my parents.

Now my kids are growing up with extended family that we see all the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with much of the concepts raised by the article.

But find it surprising coming from David Brooks, who left his wife and children for his younger research assistant. How did that impact his nuclear family?

Are you suggesting that someone can't know alcohol is bad and still be an alcoholic?

I am not the previous poster, but I think he has lost his credibility on this subject. Yes, I judge his actions.

He has made it sound in interviews like his wife left him (due to his workaholism). Sounds like he was pretty devastated for a long time.