Uprooting family to become vp

[Sarah CB]

I wonder if you would consider this if she was a man? I don't remember hearing others being concerned about a man's family having to transfer for his job. I'm sure she's discussed it with her family and they decided together to go for it.

 

You know what I'd consider even with a man? Whether there is a parent at home with the small children who are making this move and transitioning to the life of children of a VP.

 

I sure hope her dh is planning to sah.

[ekarl2]

http://www.wsj.com/article/SB122002155637283431.html?mod=psp_mostpop

 

There is no way that many women nursing a baby could keep up the physical demands and sleep deprivation' date=' but she seems to be VERY high energy.[/quote']

 

My mom and I were laughing yesterday about the image of Sarah Palin on her laptop, doing a phone interview and pumping with her hands-free pumping bra (the greatest invention ever, by the way! I love mine!). Too funny!

 

"Brit, don't mind that 'whoosh, whoosh' sound in the background. What was your question?"

 

LOL

[Trivium Academy]

I really don't think anyone that brings this up is REALLY concerned about her new baby/kids/family. they are just trying to plant doubts in people's minds about her as a candidate under the guise of concern so that they don't look bad for doing it, but it really is a hollow argument.

 

I agree with Colleen with much of what she has said but JustMe's comment about bringing this issue up, it does reek of trying to undermine Palin as a candidate.

 

This issue of what would the Presidency do to a family hasn't been discussed since Elizabeth and John Edwards with her cancer announcement. It seems like it is a bit unbalanced- that this discussion would happen only when a woman is announced as a running mate.

 

I may be wrong, I don't read every thread on these boards. What a candidate does or doesn't do in their family life is their choice, decision, etc. to live with- I'm voting for a President and Vice President, not a Mom or Dad.

[teamturner]

Her husband has a local business so for them to move would mean a career change for him or having a difficult time in his current one. I remember one of President Bush's top advisors from Texas (I can't remember her name) that was a wife and mother to a teenage son. They lasted 1 year in DC because the family was so unhappy that she resigned and they all moved back to Texas. The story was something like that. It was a big loss to his administration.

 

So I think this is a good question but obviously the Palin's have discussed it and made their decision. We can just pray that through the process of campaigning and a possible subsequent move for this family (and heavy work load for her) they will grow stronger as a family and thrive.

[Frankie]

I really don't think anyone that brings this up is REALLY concerned about her new baby/kids/family. they are just trying to plant doubts in people's minds about her as a candidate under the guise of concern so that they don't look bad for doing it, but it really is a hollow argument.

 

 

Wrong.

 

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

:mad:

 

Caring about a child is never a hollow argument. Ever.

[sdWTMer]

Her husband has a local business so for them to move would mean a career change for him or having a difficult time in his current one. I remember one of President Bush's top advisors from Texas (I can't remember her name) that was a wife and mother to a teenage son. They lasted 1 year in DC because the family was so unhappy that she resigned and they all moved back to Texas. The story was something like that. It was a big loss to his administration.

 

That would be Karen Hughes.

[kaylk in tx]

Wrong.

 

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

:mad:

 

Caring about a child is never a hollow argument. Ever.

 

if they really couldn't care one way or another and are just using the issue to further their own agenda? isn't that called a red herring? (sorry if that's not what it's called.... we haven't done logic yet! :D)

[LNC]

I just read the upcoming profile for People Magazine - she went backstage after her speech to change her baby's diaper before the interview could start. :)

 

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20222685,00.html

 

Also, did you see this blog post by Doug Phillips of Vision Forum?

scroll down to Friday's post:

 

http://www.visionforum.com/hottopics/blogs/dwp/

 

 

I'm very traditional. I am also a conservative, pro life, and I love my country. Gov. Palin having such young children is a jaw dropper, but she just seems to me to be a Deborah. This is a unique time, and she seems to me to be a unique woman suited to lead in these times. Just my take, and I respect any other opinions...

[TXMomof4]

Just a thought...then they could travel around the world with VP. AND he could come on the boards here and get better advice than all the presidential advisors put together!;)

 

BRILLIANT! (I believe I need a Guiness now!)

[lwilliams1922]

Moving them to DC wouldn't faze me in the least. The part I wonder about is caring for a newborn (and a special needs one at that), while taking on a position like VP. That sounds pretty overwhelming to me...

 

 

 

 

:iagree:

[Spy Car]

My mom and I were laughing yesterday about the image of Sarah Palin on her laptop, doing a phone interview and pumping with her hands-free pumping bra (the greatest invention ever, by the way! I love mine!). Too funny!

 

"Brit, don't mind that 'whoosh, whoosh' sound in the background. What was your question?"

 

LOL

 

AWESOME!!! :D

 

Almost makes me almost wish I was voting for her.

 

Bill

[Jenny in Atl]

Moving them to DC wouldn't faze me in the least. The part I wonder about is caring for a newborn (and a special needs one at that), while taking on a position like VP. That sounds pretty overwhelming to me...

 

 

I'm going to show my bias here... I personally feel an infant/child in the first three years has a need for its mother that is a strong as its need for food.

 

I am very surprised at the very pro reaction to Palin's nod despite the age of her youngest two. I'm also surprised, because I have heard so often that the man is the head of the house in many of the posts here. How do those of you who believe this reconcile this with a female VP or even female president?

[teamturner]

That would be Karen Hughes.

 

Yes, thanks!

[Mama Lynx]

But you do understand why our nation is reacting in this manner, don't you?

So many of us have a difficult time imagining how other's lives run on a day to day basis.

We are used to seeing Mom caring for the kids while Dad brings in a paycheck. When Mom does the outside work, I think it's pretty natural for many of us to ask, "How is that going to work?" Or, "How will they manage?"

 

I do understand.

 

It's tricky. I do understand, and I agree with you that that is what we're used to seeing. Colleen's point aside, that has been the default, the typical image - if you like, the mythic image - of family life for, oh, ever. Even if that is not statistially the norm, any more, that is what is ingrained into our psyches. (And, I think, it really still is the norm. Haven't they done studies that show that even in two-parent, heterosexual, families where both spouses work, a disproportionate share of childcare and household duties fall on the wife? I remember reading studies that show that, for instance, when a child is sick, it is far more often the mom who takes off work to care for the child.)

 

And I do think that kids have a special need for their mothers, and I like to see mothers putting their babies first in any way they can. Obviously, I strongly support SAHMs.

 

However, at the same time, I also decry the double standard. And I do think it is a double standard. I am a feminist in the sense that to me, equality of the sexes involves men being more and more in that role of responsibility for their family, equally. I want men to be asked those questions of their families, too. I want to see many more SAHDs. It is a normal, typical, understandable response that I would like to see change.

[Mama Lynx]

 

I don't know. Why do you think it'd be fantastic?

 

Because it represents a vision of gender equality that I particularly like. You certainly do not have to agree with my opinion. Having a Mom VP with a SAHD taking care of the kids and supporting her would thrill me to no end.

[sdWTMer]

I am very surprised at the very pro reaction to Palin's nod despite the age of her youngest two. I'm also surprised, because I have heard so often that the man is the head of the house in many of the posts here. How do those of you who believe this reconcile this with a female VP or even female president?

 

Frankly, I think right now it's extraordinary measures for extraordinary times.

 

Like I said in another post, who's to say that God has not raised up this woman to be a leader? This only applies to those who are religious, obviously. ;) I just feel that in these times, someone older than Sarah, just would not cut it.

 

As a conservative, Christian woman I ordinarily believe that the man is the head of the house; but culturally, things are way different and we have to live with these times. Whether I think it should be one way or another is not how society sees it at all. That's not to say that I am totally swayed by peers, I am not.

[Colleen]

I'm going to show my bias here... I personally feel an infant/child in the first three years has a need for its mother that is a strong as its need for food.

 

I agree.

 

I am very surprised at the very pro reaction to Palin's nod despite the age of her youngest two. I'm also surprised, because I have heard so often that the man is the head of the house in many of the posts here.

 

There's rich irony here indeed. Apparently some on the far right are willing to back burner traditional beliefs they've long proclaimed when the right opportunity presents itself. (Please not I'm speaking in generalities with no specific person or persons in mind.)

[Jenny in Atl]

Frankly, I think right now it's extraordinary measures for extraordinary times.

 

Like I said in another post, who's to say that God has not raised up this woman to be a leader? This only applies to those who are religious, obviously. ;) I just feel that in these times, someone older than Sarah, just would not cut it.

 

As a conservative, Christian woman I ordinarily believe that the man is the head of the house; but culturally, things are way different and we have to live with these times. Whether I think it should be one way or another is not how society sees it at all. That's not to say that I am totally swayed by peers, I am not.

 

But isn't that a convenient argument? Do you sway so easily with other cultural norms as well? If Palin was not as conservative as she seems, I doubt you would be as excited about her nod as VP. How strong are you in your beliefs? This is an honest question.

[sdWTMer]

There's rich irony here indeed.

 

I think that there's rich irony, no matter where you look, is there not?

 

That's what makes life so unpredictable.

 

;)

[Colleen]

Because it represents a vision of gender equality that I particularly like. You certainly do not have to agree with my opinion. Having a Mom VP with a SAHD taking care of the kids and supporting her would thrill me to no end.

 

To my mind, the very fact that she's receiving accolades is indicative of inequality. That is to say, a man with her qualifications (or lack thereof) would never have been selected.

[Colleen]

I think that there's rich irony, no matter where you look, is there not?

 

Not that I would've mentioned, no.

[Michelle in MO]

Why not ask this question about any of the men in the race? They have families too.

 

My take on it is that only Sarah Palin, and her husband, can say what is best for Sarah Palin's children. I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt that she has considered the impact on her family.

 

To me, so many of these posts over the past couple of days since McCain announced his VP pick are simply ad hominem attacks.

 

Palin isn't Ivy League:

 

Hmmm, let's look back in the record books on that one, shall we? George Washington seemed to do well as our first president without Harvard or Yale.

 

Palin was picked because she's pretty

 

What!? Being pretty and being smart are mutually exclusive?

 

There are so many it isn't even funny. I'm sure that a smart, gutsy woman like Palin has considered the effects of a move on her family.

 

Yes indeed! Why aren't we asking the men these same questions?

 

People---look at the real issues. These attacks on the woman are straw men; they're pointless, worthless arguments. It boils down to this: do you agree with the way McCain and Palin would handle the highest offices in the land, or do you agree with Obama and Biden instead?

 

Mamalynx, I'd rep. you if I could, but I'm out for the day!

[Twinmom]

I'm going to show my bias here... I personally feel an infant/child in the first three years has a need for its mother that is a strong as its need for food.

 

I am very surprised at the very pro reaction to Palin's nod despite the age of her youngest two. I'm also surprised, because I have heard so often that the man is the head of the house in many of the posts here. How do those of you who believe this reconcile this with a female VP or even female president?

 

I'm with you on the kiddo thing, Jenny. My first reaction was "oh, I LOVE her, but geez...what about the baby?" Kiddos need their mommas. I don't think this eliminates her as a great candidate, because I don't live in her house and know how it operates, but I do know that I personally couldn't do it. (Not that I'd make a great VP or anything!)

 

Not trying to start a long debate here (and I'm headed out the door to help DH in the yard, anyway), but I did want to say that I also believe that the Bible says a man is the head of the household.

 

Ducking here...:D

 

However...and it's a big however...I'm probably not completely traditional in this respect. I don't think that God has the same definition of "head of household" that humans generally do. It's not a hierarchy, IMO. My best way of explaining this would be a paraphrase from the new book that's out called "The Shack." (Very cool, if you've not read it!) God designed marriage to be a "circle of relationship" (much like His relationship with the Trinity) where each have interdependence on each other. Man came from woman (thus he's first), woman gives birth to man, we all need each other and are dependent upon each other. One is not more important than the other, no one is to lord over another, partners and all that. I respect him, he leads because he is gifted in that area, he loves me and puts me above himself, making all decisions with my input and for my benefit...it's a circle, not a hierarchy.

 

I say all that to explain that I can support Sarah Palen's bid for VP because I don't see her role in marriage as exclusive of leadership as VP. Inside their marriage, they have to decide together what works for them within the gifts and responsibilities that God has given them...that's between God and the two of them, not the two of them and me! I'd not venture to say that she should not be VP because she's a married woman...there are many examples in the Bible of women God chose to lead. And, frankly, I admire her DH's strength for being willing to face the emasculating comments he's likely to receive from some quarters! My DH is that kind of man (actually, yesterday he said he'd support me running if I wanted to!) so I guess it's easy for me to see as possible.

 

She may be God's woman for the hour, but that remains to be seen. My hope is only that their family has carefully considered this decision in light of their children's needs and the needs of their family, just as I hope that the other families with candidates running do the same.

 

Off to cut shrubs...I hate that job. :glare:

[sdWTMer]

 

Not that I would've mentioned, no.

 

Well, again, we are at an impasse.

[Melinda in VT]

I agree with Colleen with much of what she has said but JustMe's comment about bringing this issue up, it does reek of trying to undermine Palin as a candidate.

 

This issue of what would the Presidency do to a family hasn't been discussed since Elizabeth and John Edwards with her cancer announcement. It seems like it is a bit unbalanced- that this discussion would happen only when a woman is announced as a running mate.

 

I may be wrong, I don't read every thread on these boards. What a candidate does or doesn't do in their family life is their choice, decision, etc. to live with- I'm voting for a President and Vice President, not a Mom or Dad.

 

Well, I think the fact that the family issue was discussed when Elizabeth Edwards announced her cancer diagnosis shows that it isn't just an issue when a woman is announced as a running mate. It can also be an issue with a male candidate under certain conditions.

 

Personally, although my husband has been the primary care giver when two of our four children were infants and newborns (and is wonderful at it), I do find myself wondering about the short- and long-term effects on Palin's baby. Just as I was concerned about the effect of the campaign on Elizabeth Edwards' health.

[Jill- OK]

I'm going to show my bias here... I personally feel an infant/child in the first three years has a need for its mother that is a strong as its need for food.

 

I am very surprised at the very pro reaction to Palin's nod despite the age of her youngest two. I'm also surprised, because I have heard so often that the man is the head of the house in many of the posts here. How do those of you who believe this reconcile this with a female VP or even female president?

 

...of those who *don't* believe in that sort of traditional male/female setup of the household...why aren't you excited about her nomination? Why are those two viewpoints automatically placed opposite each other? Why does a position that the man is the 'head of household' lead you to believe that the wife doesn't work, or not hold to a view that keeps Mom at home with the kids?

 

I'm with you on your bias about a child's need for mom during early years...but I fully realize that some women either a) have an ability to balance kids' needs that far outstrips mine, or b) don't hold to that opinion. If someone is running for office, and doesn't share my view about raising children, or mom and dad both working fulltime with little kids at home...does that mean I can't agree with her on other issues? (I'm speaking in generalities, here...I know next to nothing about Palin, lol, so can't say whether I agree with her politics yet, or not...just musing about this line of thinking, in general).

[Jill- OK]

I thought about not adding this, because I didn't want to seem nitpicky or risk having my posts seem as if they're huffy, lol, but I do want to say that I'm surprised at this grouping together several beliefs automatically (i.e., this woman considers her husband 'head of the home', so she must not agree with mothers of young children working, or support the idea of female leaders).

 

Not that I'm not tempted to do it, myself (because I find myself wondering the opposite about those who adamently oppose the 'man as head of household' idea while questioning/disapproving Palin's choice), but I'm trying to remember that folks can have an array of viewpoints that don't automatically fall in to what we consider their 'box'. (i.e., just because one believes "Conservative Viewpoint A" doesn't mean that they're on board, whole-hog, with what we see as the rest of the Conservative Train of Thought).

 

(Said with a conversational tone, and not meant to be snarly or disrespectful, at all...I do understand where you're coming from, about your concerns about Palin, and I share them...I just don't see the connection with the rest of it.)

[Frontier Mom]

I'm really excited that I am old enough to be VP!! She is my age and I didn't even get considered by either political camp. What's up with that?

 

I say, "You go girl!" in my best southern drawl.

[Jill- OK]

I do find myself wondering about the short- and long-term effects on Palin's baby. Just as I was concerned about the effect of the campaign on Elizabeth Edwards' health.

 

I agree; matters like this play a part--even if they're not a large one--for me, when looking at a candidate. How an adult manages her/his family is reflective of her/him, not only as a person, but as a leader.

 

I might have been more shocked at Edwards' decision, than I am concerned about Palin's...just because there's the potential of life being drastically shortened when you're talking about terminal illness, and an urgency that most folks don't feel when talking about raising children (not saying it shouldn't be thought of that way, just that there's some difference, and I don't put them on exactly the same level).

[Jenny in Atl]

I agree; matters like this play a part--even if they're not a large one--for me, when looking at a candidate. How an adult manages her/his family is reflective of her/him, not only as a person, but as a leader.

 

I might have been more shocked at Edwards' decision, than I am concerned about Palin's...just because there's the potential of life being drastically shortened when you're talking about terminal illness, and an urgency that most folks don't feel when talking about raising children (not saying it shouldn't be thought of that way, just that there's some difference, and I don't put them on exactly the same level).

 

:iagree: I disagree with both. Thought Edwards was a cad for continuing, and I question strongly the mindset of a woman who agrees to take on a job as big as VP with a baby. Neither decisions seem wise nor reflect strong family values.

[Plucky]

I understood why Edwards continued (before I knew he was a jerk) and I don't have a problem with Palin. What if Martin Luther King Jr. just stayed home and was a good dad? My apologies to an exagerated comparison. But people who are called to serve our country in these ways sometimes have to make choices they wouldn't have made if they were private people? Yes, men do it more often but so many women nowadays put their kids in daycare at 6 weeks old and society for the most part endorses it. If Palin will have good care and likely a full-time dad for her kids then I do not see the difference.

[abbeyej]

I'm going to show my bias here... I personally feel an infant/child in the first three years has a need for its mother that is a strong as its need for food.

 

I heard a bit of an NPR interview with her yesterday that made it clear that as governor of Alaska, she's been able to have her kids around and very close through *that* job at least. A baby swing next to her desk, her 7yo carrying the baby into an important meeting, etc... It sounded like a great set-up really.

 

But I don't know how she can possibly continue that as VP. And while I would assume that her dh would step away from his work (seasonal jobs in the oil and fishing industries), and they would certainly have lots of "help"... The age of the youngest and the intensity of the VP position does give me pause.

 

And yet my concerns over her children will not play into my decisions about my vote. There are plenty of people whose parenting decisions I question, and she seems like someone who has been a conscientious parent so far. But it does sound ... well... I have trouble imagining it myself.

[Tracey in TX]

:iagree: I disagree with both. Thought Edwards was a cad for continuing, and I question strongly the mindset of a woman who agrees to take on a job as big as VP with a baby. Neither decisions seem wise nor reflect strong family values.

Does that mean that each military personnel being deployed overseas without their family is not reflecting strong family values? They both are serving their country by choice.

[Jugglin'5]

This is me. I think that usually it is best for mom to be home when they are little. But if God wants her to be a Deborah, I'm not gonna complain. And there are some super-energetic women that seem to do it all very well. And from what I've seen so far, she seems to handle it admirably. If her kids are attention starved basket cases, I am sure the press will suggest as much in the next few weeks. I am sure they are swarming Alaska, going over every bad thing the kids have ever done right now.:glare:

 

Frankly, I think right now it's extraordinary measures for extraordinary times.

 

Like I said in another post, who's to say that God has not raised up this woman to be a leader? This only applies to those who are religious, obviously. ;) I just feel that in these times, someone older than Sarah, just would not cut it.

 

As a conservative, Christian woman I ordinarily believe that the man is the head of the house; but culturally, things are way different and we have to live with these times. Whether I think it should be one way or another is not how society sees it at all. That's not to say that I am totally swayed by peers, I am not.

[Kelli in TN]

I heard a bit of an NPR interview with her yesterday that made it clear that as governor of Alaska, she's been able to have her kids around and very close through *that* job at least. A baby swing next to her desk, her 7yo carrying the baby into an important meeting, etc... It sounded like a great set-up really.

 

But I don't know how she can possibly continue that as VP. And while I would assume that her dh would step away from his work (seasonal jobs in the oil and fishing industries), and they would certainly have lots of "help"... The age of the youngest and the intensity of the VP position does give me pause.

 

And yet my concerns over her children will not play into my decisions about my vote. There are plenty of people whose parenting decisions I question, and she seems like someone who has been a conscientious parent so far. But it does sound ... well... I have trouble imagining it myself.

 

If she is the VP and if she could somehow shake the world up by keeping her kids around her to that degree while still fulfilling the expectations of her job, might it make a good argument for more progressive changes in the workplace; changes that are profamily? Maybe we would see other women being allowed to have a baby swing next to their desk, maybe babywearing would be as acceptable as power suits, maybe on-site childcare would be the norm?

 

Oh, I am just dreaming now.

 

But it is a very nice dream, isn't it?

[Melinda in VT]

And yet my concerns over her children will not play into my decisions about my vote. There are plenty of people whose parenting decisions I question, and she seems like someone who has been a conscientious parent so far. But it does sound ... well... I have trouble imagining it myself.

 

:iagree: I wasn't voting for McCain before he picked Palin, so this isn't playing into my vote. But that doesn't mean I don't have an opinion. :D

 

(And, fwiw, I would have concerns about a man running for VP with children that young too.)

[E_Edgerton]

I think...like all families, they will make it work. I do have to agree with other posters, if the 'she' in this equation was a 'he' this question would not be asked. That is probably a bigger issue than a family moving to a new state.

[Mama Lynx]

If she is the VP and if she could somehow shake the world up by keeping her kids around her to that degree while still fulfilling the expectations of her job, might it make a good argument for more progressive changes in the workplace; changes that are profamily? Maybe we would see other women being allowed to have a baby swing next to their desk, maybe babywearing would be as acceptable as power suits, maybe on-site childcare would be the norm?

 

Oh, I am just dreaming now.

 

But it is a very nice dream, isn't it?

 

It is a very nice dream, and I'm glad we share it!

[abbeyej]

Oh, I am just dreaming now.

 

Yeah, lol, I think you are... ;)

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

I can not stand Palin, but there is nothing about being a working mom in and of itself that is going to be bad for her kids. I know plenty of kids with SAHMs who are 100 times worse than kids I know who are away from home up to 10 hours a day. The mere act of working or staying at home is a non-issue. I am more concerned about how she is going to care for America's sons and daughters, not her own. That's none of my business.

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

I wonder if you would consider this if she was a man? I don't remember hearing others being concerned about a man's family having to transfer for his job. I'm sure she's discussed it with her family and they decided together to go for it.

 

 

This is exactly the point! Thanks Jessica!

 

There are many people who move frequently in the service of their country. Many more who move to ensure their families financial security. More who move for a multitude of reasons. I'm sure they will adjust as many of the citizens they represent adjust.

 

However, she and her husband appear to have decided what is best for their family when she accepted the nomination. If we want people to accept our parenting choices and how we exercise our parental rights (most specifically our choice to homeschool) shouldn't we respect theirs?

[Kelli in TN]

I can not stand Palin, .

 

I am hoping against hope that what you really meant to say is "I do not care for Palin's platform" or "I do not prefer the vision of Palin's party" or even "I think Palin lacks fashion sense". Surely you are not deciding that you cannot stand a person that you have never met.

[Jenny in Atl]

Does that mean that each military personnel being deployed overseas without their family is not reflecting strong family values? They both are serving their country by choice.

 

I do have issues with females who have young children being deployed. It's my bias. I said that to begin with. I'm not wild about men with young children signing up either. I've seen families struggle (especially the children) when dad's job took him away most of the time.

 

As adults we often think just of ourselves and how we handle the separation. Again, it's ironic when many of you are pro-life, but think little of how the child feels once it is out of the womb. There is science to back up the fact that babies and children suffer w/o the physical contact of their parents in the early years.

[abbeyej]

...but there is nothing about being a working mom in and of itself that is going to be bad for her kids. ... I know plenty of kids with SAHMs who are 100 times worse than kids I know who are away from home up to 10 hours a day.

I certainly never said that mothers should never work, or that all children with working mothers suffer. I did question the needs of her four-month-old...

 

But my real problem with your argument is that the VP position is far from being a mere 10 hours a day! It's really *not* equivalent to the work that the majority of working mothers do. One is *always* on-call, constantly traveling, under tremendous stress and non-stop scrutiny... It's just not the same as making the decision to return to some other job -- even, perhaps, when that job is as governor (particularly of a rather laid-back state)...

[Katrina]

Would it be fantastic, to have a woman VP with a SAHD as a husband?

 

Actually, I think it would be great! If a job is important enough for a woman to do, then it's important enough for a man to do as well. And what a statement it would make to America for a husband to say that he supports his wife's ambition so much that he'd take on the main caregiver role. So much for women sitting at home because they have to!:lol:

 

(okay, actually I don't think it would be great if he stayed home because she was the VP, because then it would mean McCain won and that wont make me happy, but oh well) ;)

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

I certainly never said that mothers should never work, or that all children with working mothers suffer. I did question the needs of her four-month-old...

 

But my real problem with your argument is that the VP position is far from being a mere 10 hours a day! It's really *not* equivalent to the work that the majority of working mothers do. One is *always* on-call, constantly traveling, under tremendous stress and non-stop scrutiny... It's just not the same as making the decision to return to some other job -- even, perhaps, when that job is as governor (particularly of a rather laid-back state)...

 

ITA that VP is more than 10 hours a day. I was merely saying I know mothers who work more than 10 hours a day and their kids (even young babies) are fine.

 

Her husband could always be a stay at home dad. I am sure they have enough money to hire private child care too if there are no openings in a quality center near the home or office.

 

I do agree though that this job is going to be totally different than anything most women will ever experience. She is going to be traveling a great deal too. Her career isn't going to effect whether her kids turn out good or bad unless she lets it or can't handle the pressure.

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

I am hoping against hope that what you really meant to say is "I do not care for Palin's platform" or "I do not prefer the vision of Palin's party" or even "I think Palin lacks fashion sense". Surely you are not deciding that you cannot stand a person that you have never met.

 

To explain myself further, I can't stand Palin as a VP pick, not as a person. As a person I'd be glad to buy her a beer, although I would probably invite some of my gay friends to the bar. :D

[abbeyej]

So will your husband be on leave now indefinitely to be Mr. Mom?

SARAH: I would say so, yes.

 

John McCain & Sarah Palin on Shattering the Glass Ceiling

 

[Parrothead]

So will your husband be on leave now indefinitely to be Mr. Mom?

SARAH: I would say so, yes.

 

John McCain & Sarah Palin on Shattering the Glass Ceiling

 

Well, there is the answer to the question.

[Jill- OK]

Does that mean that each military personnel being deployed overseas without their family is not reflecting strong family values? They both are serving their country by choice.

 

My husband was in the military for close to 30 years.

 

We started a family with the expectation that for at least a while, we'd be living a life that was somewhat compromised; dad gone for spates of time--and at least during some of it, risking his life. We probably would have made the decision for me to stay home, regardless of whether or not he was in the military, but his specific career made it even more desirable, since we'd have little predictability.

 

But the time came when his particular job was taking so much away from his dad role, that he had to make a choice. And he chose to get out.

 

All kinds of jobs have sacrifice involved. People usually make better...whatever-they-ares...if they have the opportunity for family. That means cops, firefighters, military personnel, and other dangerous jobs (one friend of mine is getting ready to embark on a life as the spouse of a State Department employee that will probably have some hair-raising risks involved). Life isn't really that secure, anyway, and we need folks to do the difficult things. They can't all not have children, or organize opportunities around child-raising years.

 

*But*...(what do I always say, lol? As the Artist Formerly Known as Pee Wee would say, "There's always a Big Butt...")

 

Sometimes someone isn't doing the right thing. Sometimes, the better decision is to step aside, and let someone else be the hero. Then, on the other hand, sometimes it's right for the person with little kids to do what they're going to do, and their kids aren't going to suffer. I know families that have children who really have suffered, because of Dad/Mom not being around as much, and I know some where the kids are incredibly well-adjusted, despite having what many would consider to be a crazy childhood. (Heck, some are maladjusted despite Dad/Mom being around, lol.)

 

My point (and I do have one) is that it isn't always as easy as "People who do A or B shouldn't do it when children are involved". Sometimes it's not that simple.

 

Everyone's got to take specific circumstances into account.

 

That isn't to say that folks don't have opinions about particular situations (I'll risk some tsk-ing by saying that I have a hard time reconciling the decision for both parents to have a risky job, or be away from children regularly), but generally...there are many things to take into account.

 

JMO.