NYT: In the Covid-19 Economy, You Can Have a Kid or a Job. You Can’t Have Both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People aren't talking about it because it requires admitting the vast majority of parents with school aged kids aren't able to work with the same availability or quality as pre-pandemic. And of course we all know and see that, but openly discussing it makes it real.

And we all know employers are looking for any reason to cut people right now. While they can't discriminate based on familial status, they certainly can terminate people for low performance.

So if we all just pretend like it isn't happening, we feel about 10% safer in our jobs, that we need to pay the bills. At least the employer would need to broach the conversation and document low performance to terminate for cause, which is a real bad look right now when you can just lay people off and give them unemployment. But if workers are out there talking about it, the employer has all the proof they need with no work on their side.

That is why she can speak up as a self-employed blogger and all us W2 employees are just trying to keep our heads down and appearances of having it together up.

I agree, but also identify with her point about exhaustion. I managed to fire off some emails to lawmakers raising concerns about childcare a few weeks ago but it just took me forever to do it. I just don't have time or energy to fight right now.

I was brought to tears reading this because it just rang so true to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We know a family where the grandparents, parents and kids all live in one household. They are the ones who have been able to continue without the issue of childcare because there are 4 adults to two kids. Parents work in IT and medical field. Both grandparents had prestigious careers too before retiring. Before COVID they had outsourced cleaning etc, so I am sure that cooking, cleaning and laundry is not easier than before COVID.

Perhaps we should think not of women opting out of workplace but recognizing that multigenerational households have some positives for working parents. We are too screwed as a planet and species to now worry about the cons of joint families.

+1 My parents are moving in with us next month. Multigenerational household makes sense to us right now and we are looking forward to it.

I suppose this works for parents who are continuing to telework indefinitely but DH is an essential worker and there is no way we would put our parents at risk like that. Although we don't have a spare bedroom anyway, so....

[Anonymous]

I thought the author brought up a good point about risks to teachers, which is commonly cited as a reason for these on/off days and weeks:

"it’s hard to imagine that a system in which each child will spend two weeks out of every three being handed off among various caretakers only to reconvene in a classroom, infinitely increasing the number of potential virus-carrying interactions, protects a teacher more than a consistent pod of students week in and out with minimized external interactions."

And with people bringing in grandparents to help out more, it will increase risks to them too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the basic premise of the article is correct, but I have to admit, I am annoyed by her particular situation. She has a crazy successful blog and plenty of cookbooks. She could 1) move to a lower cost area (plenty of them still have cool food scenes), and 2) her husband could work part-time or stay home altogether to take care of the kids bc his wife is rich and has an awesome job. To me, she kind of sounded like "why isn't anyone helping me live in Brooklyn and write about cake!!!!!!"

Just because she has a cool job and lives in an interesting place doesn't make her life less stressful. Her husband was laid off and she was located in the middle of the worst COVID outbreak. She also is very professionally successful, which comes with the pressure to continue to produce. Stop devaluing her job just because you view it as less important "women's work."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So true. Woman will be set back by this for sure.

Nope! Not the smart childfree women!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Multi generational housing is NOT the answer during the time of Covid! Are you nuts??? Look at what happened in Italy you idiots.

Exactly. Multi-generational households were THE driver of the high fatality rate in Italy. Hotel Mama is a common concept there, and it didn't work out well for the elders.

Right?! Are these people the same ones that were baffled when Wuhan and Italy's cases continued to rise weeks into the lockdown? It's because infected people were all just passing it around to other family members that lived with them in the house. Unless everyone in a multi-generational household can agree to be on a very tight lockdown at home, this is going to end badly for a lot of people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought the author brought up a good point about risks to teachers, which is commonly cited as a reason for these on/off days and weeks:

"it’s hard to imagine that a system in which each child will spend two weeks out of every three being handed off among various caretakers only to reconvene in a classroom, infinitely increasing the number of potential virus-carrying interactions, protects a teacher more than a consistent pod of students week in and out with minimized external interactions."

And with people bringing in grandparents to help out more, it will increase risks to them too.

But I thought kids can't spread the virus? So how would this increase the risk to teachers? It seems like a lot of parents want to insist that kids can't transmit COVID but all of a sudden when it suits them, they can!

[Anonymous]

Unpopular opinion, I know. But maybe having more parents at home will bring back family values.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unpopular opinion, I know. But maybe having more parents at home will bring back family values.

Wow. You suck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So true. Woman will be set back by this for sure.

or men will finally step up.

I work in an elementary school and I told my husband If the school implements hybrid learning I will likely be working full time and since he has the flexibility to work remotely he would likely be on deck be managing her daughter's virtual learning.

He immediately said he didn't know how he's be able to do his job and help our daughter with her school work. And that we should get a tax break for not having our kid in school full time

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unpopular opinion, I know. But maybe having more parents at home will bring back family values.

Which family values?

We live in the society that does not value families. If we did there would be a much better social safety net

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So true. Woman will be set back by this for sure.

or men will finally step up.

And do what? They have precisely the dilemma described in the article - they need to send their kids to school and they need to go back to work - and the article did not propose any solutions.

It is idiotic to make this a men vs women problem, because it isn’t.

Women disproportionally do the vast bulk of childcare in this country.

SO. WHAT.

You’re totally missing the point.

WHAT DO YOU WANT MEN TO DO?

Ummm...how about take responsibility and care for their own kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the basic premise of the article is correct, but I have to admit, I am annoyed by her particular situation. She has a crazy successful blog and plenty of cookbooks. She could 1) move to a lower cost area (plenty of them still have cool food scenes), and 2) her husband could work part-time or stay home altogether to take care of the kids bc his wife is rich and has an awesome job. To me, she kind of sounded like "why isn't anyone helping me live in Brooklyn and write about cake!!!!!!"

Just because she has a cool job and lives in an interesting place doesn't make her life less stressful. Her husband was laid off and she was located in the middle of the worst COVID outbreak. She also is very professionally successful, which comes with the pressure to continue to produce. Stop devaluing her job just because you view it as less important "women's work."

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So true. Woman will be set back by this for sure.

Nope! Not the smart childfree women!

A collapsing economy affects everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unpopular opinion, I know. But maybe having more parents at home will bring back family values.

No, if anything, a lot of marriages are going through unprecedented stress right now and probably won't make it or will be dealing with the negative consequences for years.