Reply to NYT: professional moms who opted out of work after kids are now opting back in

Forum Index » Infants, Toddlers, & Preschoolers

Reply to "NYT: professional moms who opted out of work after kids are now opting back in"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It makes me so angry that these discussions (the article and here) completely overlook the root of the problem, which is that society doesn't value childrearing and caring for the home, and there aren't enough flexible and part-time jobs available in the professional world.

Just because a woman stays home does not mean she is no longer her husband's "intellectual equal."  Working at a computer from 9-5 somehow makes you intellectual, but cleaning, teaching, shopping, playing, and cooking from 9-5 makes you an idiot?  That's ridiculous.  SAHMs (and dads!) are not just sitting around.  They're doing an unbelievable amount of very important work.  This is literally the job of raising the next generation!  (Also, would you consider someone who works as a nanny or preschool teacher to be somehow unintellectual and worthless, or does the fact that they make money for this work somehow change the value of their activities??)

We need to work to teach each other the value of the work done at home.  This needs to come into the media, classrooms, and our everyday conversations.

And the workforce needs to change so that parents -- men and women -- can have sustainable careers and good family lives.  As the article points out, a "good" job is one that requires travel, 50+ hours a week, etc.  So, the only options a woman has then are to (1) work all the time and spend very little time/energy with her kids, (2) work in a mediocre, "second-rate" job for which she isn't valued any more than she would if staying at home, or (3) stay at home and be devalued by society.  The professional workforce needs to offer more part-time positions, more flexibility for consulting roles, and an understanding that employees who feel supported in their family life will also be good workers.

The conversation is, frankly, really selfish.  Where is the discussion about our kids?  Is it really best for our kids to be raised in daycare from the time they're a couple weeks old, rarely seeing either parent?  And we can't protect ourselves against every awful future possibility, so the idea of having to "protect yourself" from the possibility of future divorce by working today despite the fact that you have an excellent relationship is ridiculous.

I can't believe that all the other PPs are so anti-SAHM.[/quote]

+1 I agree with this, and here is another side of the story. I live in a neighborhood with very busy biglaw husbands with wives and children. They are NEVER home, and in addition they are often travelling. So some of the wives are staying home to take care of their children. If both of them worked at 60+ hour a week jobs, there would be no one taking care of their kids but the nannies. The mothers, who all had professional jobs before kids, made a choice that they wanted to be there for their kids. After 10 years out of the job market, re entry would be hard, if not impossible,  in the job they left. It would be the same if their husbands left for that long also. They know that. But look around in a Biglaw firm -- very few of the wives have significant jobs. In fact, there is a study that once a man is making more than $300K, he has a non-working wife in most cases, something like 80%. Re-entry is very hard for anyone-- even these elite mothers profiled in the article.
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics