Two feminist articles - motherhood & patriarchy in US and Europe

[LucyStoner]

Feminism has moved on a bit since the second wave.

That's right.

 

-signed a primary at home caregiver to a strange brood of children not all my own and big, mean, raging radical feminist who continues to put the itch in b!tch.

[Carrie12345]

So, here's where I get confused.

 

There are a lot of posts stating things like:

We talk about things.

We want each other's opinions.

We work together.

We make joint decisions.

 

And then there's (loosely paraphrasing several examples) "Well, he COULD override me and I WOULD submit, but we never do that!"

 

Why would someone use the fact that it never happens as a defense of the practice if that practice is so right and good?

And, if that never happens, how exactly is it a patriarchy in any way other than the overhanging threat that it *could be treated as such?

 

Genuine questions here, because I just don't get it.

[regentrude]

I read only the article about Europe, and honestly, I found it highly offensive. This is my main beef with "feminism": unlike all too many I have known who call themselves feminists, I actually believe that a woman should be free to pursue whatever roles in life she desires and is capable of--not just the role of careerwoman. Why is it considered less for a woman to devote herself to nurturing and raising her children rather than climbing a corporate ladder? What right does this woman have to be patronizing and impatient with the German mother's stance of wanting her young child to be cared for within her family? Perhaps there are few childcare facilities in Germany because there's little demand, because they value being at home with their children more than outside employment--not that the government needs to step in and provide childcare facilities to rescue those poor trapped mothers from their homes, that they are "reduced" to motherhood, to "powerlessness", that "their freedom to choose remains. . . Illusory". Because, of course, they couldn't possibly really want to choose motherhood, if they were truly free to choose, they would of course all make the same choice as the journalist!

 

Without the availability of childcare facilities, a woman does not actually HAVE the freedom to pursue what role she desires. She only has one option: to stay home.

And yes, some feel powerless because full time SAHM would not be their chosen role.

 

The article simply does not apply to women who would choose to stay home, even if they had a realistic option to be a mother and have a job.

 

 

 

[Firefly]

My point in mentioning my experience with extreme patriarchy was that, immoderate or not, women's attitudes and feelings about their relationships are very much the same.

[albeto.]

Enjoy the discussion...  I'm going to find some real people to talk to and interact with my children.

Damn. How did she find out I wasn't real?

[La Condessa]

Without the availability of childcare facilities, a woman does not actually HAVE the freedom to pursue what role she desires. She only has one option: to stay home.

And yes, some feel powerless because full time SAHM would not be their chosen role.

 

The article simply does not apply to women who would choose to stay home, even if they had a realistic option to be a mother and have a job.

I appreciate your input that this really is a problem in W Germany, as the only German mother quoted in the article didn't want to leave her child, and was looked down on for it.

 

I do wonder, though, why she thinks it is wrong that the government doesn't provide these facilities. Aren't there people setting up private day cares if the demand is high? Or, like in the small town without childcare facilities that I used to live in, don't people use the cottage industry method of paying a SAH friend to watch their kids, too? American capitalist's perspective, here.

[LucyStoner]

I appreciate your input that this really is a problem in W Germany, as the only German mother quoted in the article didn't want to leave her child, and was looked down on for it.

 

I do wonder, though, why she thinks it is wrong that the government doesn't provide these facilities. Aren't there people setting up private day cares if the demand is high? Or, like in the small town without childcare facilities that I used to live in, don't people use the cottage industry method of paying a SAH friend to watch their kids, too? American capitalist's perspective, here.

There are many interesting, meaningful and needed careers that simply do not pay enough to pay wholly out of pocket for FT childcare, even informal arrangements. This often times takes women out of the labor force who, in the long run are negatively financially impacted in far reaching ways by the decision to totally leave the labor market.

[LucyStoner]

So, here's where I get confused.

 

There are a lot of posts stating things like:

We talk about things.

We want each other's opinions.

We work together.

We make joint decisions.

 

And then there's (loosely paraphrasing several examples) "Well, he COULD override me and I WOULD submit, but we never do that!"

 

Why would someone use the fact that it never happens as a defense of the practice if that practice is so right and good?

And, if that never happens, how exactly is it a patriarchy in any way other than the overhanging threat that it *could be treated as such?

 

Genuine questions here, because I just don't get it.

Yeah, if a wife submits in a forest, and no one is around to see it...

[La Condessa]

There are many interesting, meaningful and needed careers that simply do not pay enough to pay wholly out of pocket for FT childcare, even informal arrangements. This often times takes women out of the labor force who, in the long run are negatively financially impacted in far reaching ways by the decision to totally leave the labor market.

I understand that. When my eldest was a baby and I worked afternoons at a daycare, the parents were always asking me why I didn't bring my daughter there. It would have cost significantly more than I was earning. But I could have earned close to enough to enroll her full time, if I went to work full time, as the journalist thinks is worth it.

 

So, is the contention not that the actual lack of child care facilities is a problem, but that they want someone to subsidize their childcare costs?

[LucyStoner]

I think available childcare that is unaffordable to average people is no childcare at all. Most first world countries have something in place to help figure this out.

 

Personally I think job security for longer maternity leaves or changing attitudes about hiring people who were caregivers is an important factor. Right now, being out for than 1-2 years seriously limits your options. It's not staying home for a few years that really hurts women, it's staying home for a few years and then never finding a career level job again, and being financially up the creek when middle aged and the husband becomes disabled, leaves or dies and the wife has no savings from working, few prospects and is lucky to get a low paycheck.

[AimeeM]

I can't imagine, especially with our strong willed daughter, that any attempt to force her to adopt any model in her relationship that she didn't want for herself would go over well (or at all, really). 

We expect our children to study hard, go to college (or develop a trade), and hopefully to one day marry and give us grandchildren :) If they choose not to marry (and DD isn't sure that she wants to marry, or have children) that's cool, too. We expect them to be happy, to be secure (financially, emotionally), and to know that no matter where life takes them, mom and dad are here if they need us. Of course I hope they carry on the values we have taught them - doesn't every parent? If not, why teach them? Would I be disappointed if they didn't - I'm not sure; I suppose that would depend on the context.

Ultimately, though, what type of marriage they should have (outside of a loving one) isn't something that has even crossed our minds. 

You know what, honestly, I don't mind if you and your dh follow this particular model of relationship.  I have observed BDSM couples in public where one person has a collar and the other has a leash.  I was honestly torn between fascination and embarrassment, lol.  I mention that only to say that I wouldn't ever say you should not model your marriage in whatever way works best for sets of emotional and psychological needs.  (With the caveat that if it was a very unhealthy or abusive relationship, I would definitely try to persuade you to recognize that and get help, though.)

 

I guess the only issue I might have is if you required that your children adopt the same model in their relationships.  It's really damaging when you try to force someone who is a leader into a mold where they must always deny that aspect of their personality.  Similarly, it's really bad when you try to force a follower into the leadership mold.  In the cases where I've seen patriarchy go really off rails (this was in my days as an evangelical Christian), it almost always seemed to be where the guy just was NOT a natural leader, and did not particularly desire that position in relation to his spouse.  In every case, the lack of natural leadership ability translated to a lack of confidence, which in turn quickly turned to insecurity.  Insecurity + leadership is an awful combination, let me tell you.

 

 

JMO.

 

[FaithManor]

I think available childcare that is unaffordable to average people is no childcare at all. Most first world countries have something in place to help figure this out.

 

Personally I think job security for longer maternity leaves or changing attitudes about hiring people who were caregivers is an important factor. Right now, being out for than 1-2 years seriously limits your options. It's not staying home for a few years that really hurts women, it's staying home for a few years and then never finding a career level job again, and being financially up the creek when middle aged and the husband becomes disable, leaves or dies and the wife has no savings from working, few prospects and is lucky to get a low paycheck.

And I know a TON of women in that set of circumstances. They live in abject poverty because of it with little hope of working their way out either.

 

I am fortunate that I've been able to juggle motherhood, homeschooling, and my music career enough that I can resume it full time if I need to, and I have a side business of event planning that just might pan out to be an okay income provider. I am SUPER fortunate, and I know it. Most of my homeschooling mother friends are utterly doomed to financial ruin should their husbands become sick, injured, die, or leave, they are toast. As for childcare here, most of the jobs pay minimum wage anymore so paying daycare out of that is not to be born.

 

Technically, Michigan will subsidize the cost of daycare for women on assistance who want to go back to work and have children under five. BUT, many daycares will not accept these children because the state also takes up to six months to pay the bill. So, the owner has all of the expenses and payroll in order to accommodate the child in the first place, and no pay for a very long time. Crazy!

 

My daughter is a paramedic and though she would love to be a SAHM for a couple of years, she knows that getting out of the workforce will be an absolute disaster. So, she is going to be one exhausted mother when the time comes because she will work opposite shifts of her husband to minimize day care costs since in their area, $2000.00 a month for 35 hours per week of daycare is the norm, and it would take over half her monthly take home pay. She will work twelves, get home to a husband getting ready for work, try to sleep when baby sleeps, and go to work sleep deprived in the evening which isn't an ideal situation by any stretch of the imagination. But, they do not live near us, so we will be unable to help them by keeping baby some. I have wondered if when the time comes, we should make a financial contribution to day care. However, that's a big burden for us as well because we will likely still have more than one child in college at that time, and significant expenses in that regard.

 

America is in an atrocious position. Inflation and stagnating wages have made it a necessity for most families to need two incomes in order to keep their heads above water, but for the all the taxes paid into the system, working parents get very, very little out of it. Horrific health care costs, no assistance, and a crappy public school education in the future, followed by staggering college and trade school costs. It's grim. I do predict that the birth rate in the nation will fall yet again, and continue that way until our leadership gets their heads on straight. As it is, while dd and husband would like to have three children, they will limit themselves to one. I know other couples who would like to have children who have said they will have none due to economic necessity.

 

Seeing what friends are going through due to illness, death, and divorce, I cannot imagine encouraging women to stay out of the work force in order to bond with babies much less raise them, not anymore. America needs to do better. Really. The crap we fund with taxpayer dollars staggers the imagination while money can't be found to help strengthen families, and support healthy futures for the next generation!

[Joanne]

There are many interesting, meaningful and needed careers that simply do not pay enough to pay wholly out of pocket for FT childcare, even informal arrangements. This often times takes women out of the labor force who, in the long run are negatively financially impacted in far reaching ways by the decision to totally leave the labor market.

 

And the other side of the coin. On the provider side, childcare workers are paid poorly. We, as a US culture, don't appear to value childcare workers as evidenced by their pay, benefits, remuneration for training, etc.

 

And the lamentation I hear from parents who think daycare costs too much - a complicated dilemma, that one. For non chain, or individual providers it takes quite a few enrollees OR high rates to be profitable. Many working parents can't afford the high rates, and so they have to use the overcrowded services. It is an awful cycle. On one hand, we romantize the workers (i.e. it takes a special person) but fail to create compensation that supports actually valuing their role.

 

We make it difficult for parents to make any choice that is healthy, and yet as a culture, we have a lot to say about those choices as they make them.

[FaithManor]

 

 

We make it difficult for parents to make any choice that is healthy, and yet as a culture, we have a lot to say about those choices as they make them.

This! A thousand times over...so much judgment, and NO desire to provide reasonable solutions.

[regentrude]

I do wonder, though, why she thinks it is wrong that the government doesn't provide these facilities. Aren't there people setting up private day cares if the demand is high? Or, like in the small town without childcare facilities that I used to live in, don't people use the cottage industry method of paying a SAH friend to watch their kids, too? American capitalist's perspective, here.

 

The expectations for quality daycare are quite different in Germany. Many of the daycare places I have seen here in the US would be considered unacceptable in Germany: uneducated personel, no educational philosophy, TV on all day, junk food for snacks. Daycare workers in Germany are trained professionals who must have completed a 2-3 year education in early childhood ed.

There are private in home daycares, but even those mothers have to undergo 120 hours of mandatory training before they are allowed to watch children in their homes. And please remember that most people do not own homes, but live in rental apartments with much less space, which makes running an in home daycare difficult.

 

This makes quality daycare expensive. Most daycare centers in the East are run by the communities or churches, and they are subsidized.

 

An unregulated cottage industry that flies below the radar raises safety and quality issues. Germans prefer to err on the side of quality and safety; they can afford to because the economic pressure for mothers of young children to work is much less than in the US.

[LucyStoner]

And the other side of the coin. On the provider side, childcare workers are paid poorly. We, as a US culture, don't appear to value childcare workers as evidenced by their pay, benefits, remuneration for training, etc.

 

And the lamentation I hear from parents who think daycare costs too much - a complicated dilemma, that one. For non chain, or individual providers it takes quite a few enrollees OR high rates to be profitable. Many working parents can't afford the high rates, and so they have to use the overcrowded services. It is an awful cycle. On one hand, we romantize the workers (i.e. it takes a special person) but fail to create compensation that supports actually valuing their role.

 

We make it difficult for parents to make any choice that is healthy, and yet as a culture, we have a lot to say about those choices as they make them.

I believe this is a manifestation of misogyny. We do not actually value women and children. We underpay any job that has to do with caring for small children. We stigmatize moms who stay home. We stigmatize moms who work. We suck.

[FaithManor]

I believe this is a manifestation of misogyny. We do not actually value women and children. We underpay any job that has to do with caring for small children. We stigmatize moms who stay home. We stigmatize moms who work. We suck.

:iagree:

 

This is also born out by the fact that the wage inequity still shows that years of working experience, training, and education being equal, women will earn 1/3 less for the job than a man will. I've personally witnessed that time and time again as well. I left a job over that philosophy.

[Barb_]

:iagree:

 

This is also born out by the fact that the wage inequity still shows that years of working experience, training, and education being equal, women will earn 1/3 less for the job than a man will. I've personally witnessed that time and time again as well. I left a job over that philosophy.

 

Hello, Patriarchy.

[Wind-in-my-hair]

I appreciate your input that this really is a problem in W Germany, as the only German mother quoted in the article didn't want to leave her child, and was looked down on for it.

 

I do wonder, though, why she thinks it is wrong that the government doesn't provide these facilities. Aren't there people setting up private day cares if the demand is high? Or, like in the small town without childcare facilities that I used to live in, don't people use the cottage industry method of paying a SAH friend to watch their kids, too? American capitalist's perspective, here.

 

 

The article pointed out that despite getting parental leave, the tax code in Germany favors the 1 income family, and the lack of child care contradicts the promise to hold jobs for mothers. I think the author suspects that the German mothers are making choices based on cultural norms and should rethink their decision in light of what they could be missing. I often need that kind of reminder as I weigh the pros and cons of keeping my kids out of school.

 

What we have here in American capitalism is a promise to moms that they can take off enough time to heal from the physical stress of birth -- I have heard of anywhere between 4 weeks to 12 weeks, with pay during that time being either a fringe benefit or coming out of sick pay and vacation. Regentrude suggests that with a parental leave policy it would be possible to see more women choose stay-at-home motherhood, at least for the months and years when the child is developing attachment, and not lose their jobs unless it is a choice they are making to leave the field. This may sound socialist, but it is not; it is legal protection and responsible workplace policy. It helps retain talent and diversity in the workforce while also promotes family values -- who would be opposed to seeing those kind of reforms?

 

We don't have what Germany has -- a system that already sees it as the government's responsibility to provide long-term family leave, some of it paid, and that, as the article cited, even passed a law to create nurseries but hasn't acted to uphold it. I think her expectations as a European are what they ought to be, and I don't think those German mothers will be begging to have our system supplant theirs anytime soon. 

[IsabelC]

My brain is exploding at the number of people who don't think patriarchy is a problem.

[LucyStoner]

Serious question ladies - if women are making 1/3 less than men, what is the financial impetus for a company to have male employees at all? The women make much more economic sense to the corporation if, all else being equal, they are less expensive employees.

I am on two deadlines tonight and like to be with my family so I am not going to footnote this post, but here's the gist.

 

First, the wage differential, which is very real, is not 1/3. In some fields it is that high, in others it is not.

 

Second, the problem is far more complex than the point you are trying to make here.

 

Third, the gap is far more pronounced with mothers. Childless women have closed the gap to less than a dime per dollar. That said, all things being equal means I get my whole darn dollar, thank you very much. 7-9 cents less is still hundreds and thousands of dollars less per year, and a considerable sum in forgone lifetime compensation.

 

The myriad of reasons that a wage differential persists, for women and primarily for women who are family caregivers:

 

-"Pink collar" jobs are consistently lower compensated that similarly skilled/similarly laborious blue collar jobs. Compare the aggregate picture for lunch lady to line cook, hotel maid to office custodian, nurse practitioners to physicians assistants, daycare worker to entry construction. And on and on and on.

 

-Men are not equal partners in homelife, generally necessitating women split their energies between domestic duties and job duties.

 

-Years out of the workforce cost contacts, skills, salary history etc. Women are not only more likely to take time out to care for their children than men, they are more likely to take time to care for their spouses and elders than men are.

 

-Studies show that women applicants are reccomended for lower starting salaries across the employment spectrum, even when all qualifications are the same. Literally being Joan instead of John will cost you.

 

-Culturally women are much less likely to counter an employment offer and ask for a higher starting salary. Women are much less likely to push for a raise when they are on staff.

 

-Managers in many fields are more likely to give promotion opportunities to men, believing they need the opportunity more.

 

-By self selection and by cultural pressures, equally capable young women are steered into lower wage tracks than young men.

 

And many other reasons I do not have time to enumerate but which are well researched and documented and available to learn about.

 

I would argue that few of these reasons are nefarious or intentionally designed to be discriminatory. Some are matters of choice for women. Some are just the nature of motherhood and of women bearing most of the responsibilities of caregiving. The sum though is that there is a persistent gender wage gap which dramatically increases the risk of poverty for women and children and perpetuates a power differential between males and females.

 

It can be a problem without being a plot.

[IsabelC]

It can be a problem without being a plot.

 

Yes. Because it's a systemic issue. Few men would wake up in the morning thinking "Right, how can I oppress women today?", but nevertheless the system as a whole is oppressive to women.

[Wind-in-my-hair]

Serious question ladies - if women are making 1/3 less than men, what is the financial impetus for a company to have male employees at all? The women make much more economic sense to the corporation if, all else being equal, they are less expensive employees.

 

I guess the impetus is that they are considered fixtures in the workplace. I mean, in insurance, you would look at the aggregate rather than the individual, so "all other things being equal" between a perfectly matched man and woman in a field doesn't matter; its the gender group as a whole that determines who is more of an asset than a liability. If women have barriers to keeping their jobs, that would naturally cost the company productivity.

 

In medical insurance, pregnancy is considered a cost to be shouldered by women. They do not look at the man and look at the woman and say, okay, he's had 3 children and she's had three children, and as far as we know all things in their reproductive capacities and the rest of their health are equal, so we will charge them the same premium. No, the women of the pool bear the costs of everybody's fecundity. 

[Barb_]

My daughter cried on and off for three hours last Sunday because she's thisclose to giving up her dream of a Phd in a medical research field because she wants a family SO MUCH and isn't convinced that's going to be possible to combine.  Honestly without a spouse who's willing to shoulder the primary burden of childcare I don't see how it can happen either. Even very young women still feel like they have to choose one or the other.  

[Aelwydd]

:(

 

I hope she finds a nice bloke who is looking forward to being a stay-at-home daddy.

That's my dh!

[YaelAldrich]

:(

 

I hope she finds a nice bloke who is looking forward to being a stay-at-home daddy.

moved this post to the right attribution 

[YaelAldrich]

My daughter cried on and off for three hours last Sunday because she's thisclose to giving up her dream of a Phd in a medical research field because she wants a family SO MUCH and isn't convinced that's going to be possible to combine.  Honestly without a spouse who's willing to shoulder the primary burden of childcare I don't see how it can happen either. Even very young women still feel like they have to choose one or the other.  

 

:(

 

I hope she finds a nice bloke who is looking forward to being a stay-at-home daddy.

But in today's society and with your daughter wanting to get a PhD in the hard sciences, she can't afford to get a SAHH(usband).  Those people crazy enough to stick with the PhD program need to be ready to commit to years of poverty-like level wages as eternal post-docs until they can (if they can) establish their own lab with their own grad flunkies.  She needs to find someone either willing to live the life of poverty, not seeing their spouse/children so much, and possibly moving with their spouses mentor's lab if it moves or get a man with a good job and outsource day-time (possibly nighttime care too).  I have women  (and men) friends in both categories.

[Barb_]

But in today's society and with your daughter wanting to get a PhD in the hard sciences, she can't afford to get a SAHH(usband).  Those people crazy enough to stick with the PhD program need to be ready to commit to years of poverty-like level wages as eternal post-docs until they can (if they can) establish their own lab with their own grad flunkies.  She needs to find someone either willing to live the life of poverty, not seeing their spouse/children so much, and possibly moving with their spouses mentor's lab if it moves or get a man with a good job and outsource day-time (possibly nighttime care too).  I have women  (and men) friends in both categories.

 

Exactly this.  She has worked in three different labs during undergrad and she said that while the women who've run the labs are inspiring, they seem to never see their children.  Having been raised in a close knit homeschooling family she doesn't know if she can live with that. I'm sure she'll eventually figure it all out, but it makes me sad that someone can spend a decade prepping for a job that pays nothing and virtually requires her have no family life because she can't afford child care. Seriously, what is wrong with our priorities?  Work at home spouse would be ideal except that it's not really something one can count on.  My older daughter isn't as much about children or family, but this one is blessed/cursed with strong baby cravings.  Anyway, whatever.  Derail, sorry.  I think this is why this thread is hitting home for me this week.  I have six capable and ambitious daughters who are going to have to make a lot of difficult choices as they realize they can't have it both ways.  They all need wives, apparently.

 

ETA: Ok, so the 6yo isn't ambitious or capable yet.  She'll probably run off with the circus, anyway.  She's that type.

[LucyStoner]

Exactly this. She has worked in three different labs during undergrad and she said that while the women who've run the labs are inspiring, they seem to never see their children. Having been raised in a close knit homeschooling family she doesn't know if she can live with that. I'm sure she'll eventually figure it all out, but it makes me sad that someone can spend a decade prepping for a job that pays nothing and virtually requires her have no family life because she can't afford child care. Seriously, what is wrong with our priorities? Work at home spouse would be ideal except that it's not really something one can count on. My older daughter isn't as much about children or family, but this one is blessed/cursed with strong baby cravings. Anyway, whatever. Derail, sorry. I think this is why this thread is hitting home for me this week. I have six capable and ambitious daughters who are going to have to make a lot of difficult choices as they realize they can't have it both ways. They all need wives, apparently.

 

ETA: Ok, so the 6yo isn't ambitious or capable yet. She'll probably run off with the circus, anyway. She's that type.

I think it is great though that they are thinking about it upfront. There's a lot of tough choices. Most women have the baby first and make the decision later. I wish I had more help thinking about these issues in advance in a way that was focused on personal choice and not ideology and idealism.

[regentrude]

But in today's society and with your daughter wanting to get a PhD in the hard sciences, she can't afford to get a SAHH(usband).  Those people crazy enough to stick with the PhD program need to be ready to commit to years of poverty-like level wages as eternal post-docs until they can (if they can) establish their own lab with their own grad flunkies.  She needs to find someone either willing to live the life of poverty, not seeing their spouse/children so much, and possibly moving with their spouses mentor's lab if it moves or get a man with a good job and outsource day-time (possibly nighttime care too).  I have women  (and men) friends in both categories.

 

I would not call a post doc salary  "poverty". It may depend somewhat on the field - but at least in physical sciences, actual postdocs make 40k even at state schools; significantly more at national labs.

 

But I agree that a career in science requires an immense level of dedication and the willingness to relocate. I do, however, not really see a solution for the problem (we have debated this among female colleagues a lot) that can be implemented by society: any scientist (male of female) who wants to combine science and family will always be in competition with single, childless scientists who can devote many more hours to work - and the catch is: for them, science is the thing they love most. So, they don't think of the long hours as imposed drudgery- they willingly spend their weekends at the lab doing the thing they love best in the world.

 

I would encourage the young woman to go ahead and aim at her goal and not give up in anticipation of the difficulties. She should try and see. There may be opportunities coming her way that she is not aware of yet; she may find a great job that does not require the immense commitment, she may have a perfect solution with her spouse, she may be lucky to land a stable position early. I would never discourage a young woman to give up her dreams without giving it a shot. You never know what happens.

 

[MedicMom]

[quote name="FaithManor" post="6207523" timestamp

 

My daughter is a paramedic and though she would love to be a SAHM for a couple of years, she knows that getting out of the workforce will be an absolute disaster. So, she is going to be one exhausted mother when the time comes because she will work opposite shifts of her husband to minimize day care costs since in their area, $2000.00 a month for 35 hours per week of daycare is the norm, and it would take over half her monthly take home pay. She will work twelves, get home to a husband getting ready for work, try to sleep when baby sleeps, and go to work sleep deprived in the evening which isn't an ideal situation by any stretch of the imagination. But, they do not live near us, so we will be unable to help them by keeping baby some. I have wondered if when the time comes, we should make a financial contribution to day care. However, that's a big burden for us as well because we will likely still have more than one child in college at that time, and significant expenses in that regard.

 

America is in an atrocious position. Inflation and stagnating wages have made it a necessity for most families to need two incomes in order to keep their heads above water, but for the all the taxes paid into the system, working parents get very, very little out of it. Horrific health care costs, no assistance, and a crappy public school education in the future, followed by staggering college and trade school costs. It's grim. I do predict that the birth rate in the nation will fall yet again, and continue that way until our leadership gets their heads on straight. As it is, while dd and husband would like to have three children, they will limit themselves to one. I know other couples who would like to have children who have said they will have none due to economic necessity.

 

Seeing what friends are going through due to illness, death, and divorce, I cannot imagine encouraging women to stay out of the work force in order to bond with babies much less raise them, not anymore. America needs to do better. Really. The crap we fund with taxpayer dollars staggers the imagination while money can't be found to help strengthen families, and support healthy futures for the next generation!

 

This is my life. Now that I'm used to it it isn't as bad, but I highly encourage her to make friends now with people who may be willing to watch the baby for a few hours so she can get a little nap here and there. I work 24s now and it's a stretch, but I am so thankful I didn't leave the workforce completely because I was able to walk back into a full time job when DH was injured. He is now about to start training for a new career so I will be working full time a while longer.

 

None of it is easy. But it is doable.

 

And I have looked into day care several times. I simply can't afford it, so we work opposite shifts and they play at grandmas when I need a bit of sleep. Every other week I go Sunday-Friday without seeing my husband. It isn't ideal, but you do what you have to do. (We were stopping at one child too, but life had different plans...)

[FaithManor]

Thanks medic mom. I will relate your encouragement to her!

 

I know they will stop with one, as in take permanent measures. They do not see any other possibility.

 

My concern is that the nearest relative who would consider helping them out with a bit of childcare here or there lives 3 hours away so it's not an option. We are 12. Sigh......

[JumpyTheFrog]

Once again, I am left wishing that there were more options for part-time work for scientists, engineers, and other professionals. It would be nice if neither mothers nor fathers had to choose between raising their kids and having a career. It would be great if there were enough half-time jobs in all fields that both parents had the option to work 20-25 hours per week so they didn't need much childcare and so they could keep their foot in the door.

[Wind-in-my-hair]

Just look at the vitriol coming from this article, in the guise of a rational discussion: 

 

http://ideas.time.com/2013/09/30/longer-maternity-leave-not-so-great-for-women-after-all/

 

She is implying that the opportunity at the executive level in the US is equal to or better than European systems that strive to uphold universal opportunity. According to her argument our system is not broken if some people are rising to the top -- its the ceiling's more important than the floor view. That is a very common attitude in this country.

 

Her book is a 3-star-er, with the most ratings being either 1s or 5s, on Amazon. Divisive and skewed rhetoric such as this does not get us anywhere.

 

And I know this is an oldie, but Peggy O'Mara was/is my mama-hero. Here is a view I agree with wholeheartedly: 

http://daraluznetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Postpartum_Postpartum_Depression.pdf

 

"We need a national policy to support families to successfully balance work and family" (p 3 para 3).

 

How many on this forum enjoyed the days of Mothering magazine? 

 

 

[busymama7]

I would not call a post doc salary "poverty". It may depend somewhat on the field - but at least in physical sciences, actual postdocs make 40k even at state schools; significantly more at national labs.

 

But I agree that a career in science requires an immense level of dedication and the willingness to relocate. I do, however, not really see a solution for the problem (we have debated this among female colleagues a lot) that can be implemented by society: any scientist (male of female) who wants to combine science and family will always be in competition with single, childless scientists who can devote many more hours to work - and the catch is: for them, science is the thing they love most. So, they don't think of the long hours as imposed drudgery- they willingly spend their weekends at the lab doing the thing they love best in the world.

 

I would encourage the young woman to go ahead and aim at her goal and not give up in anticipation of the difficulties. She should try and see. There may be opportunities coming her way that she is not aware of yet; she may find a great job that does not require the immense commitment, she may have a perfect solution with her spouse, she may be lucky to land a stable position early. I would never discourage a young woman to give up her dreams without giving it a shot. You never know what happens.

 

While I agree with your last paragraph in theory it does need to be noted that if following the desired path leads to educational debt, the choice is already set. Somehow those loans have to be paid back and that makes leaving the workforce even harder.

[regentrude]

While I agree with your last paragraph in theory it does need to be noted that if following the desired path leads to educational debt, the choice is already set. Somehow those loans have to be paid back and that makes leaving the workforce even harder.

 

I was under the impression that leaving the workforce was not the desired goal of the young lady to whose situation I was referring, but rather combining family and work. So, there are options: working and paying off debt before starting a family; settling for a job in the field that is not exactly the dream research job but a compromise between family and work. Also, in the sciences grad school is free and students do not incur any additional debt if they choose a postgraduate education, they just earn a very small income for the duration.

[brehon]

Thanks medic mom. I will relate your encouragement to her!

 

I know they will stop with one, as in take permanent measures. They do not see any other possibility.

 

My concern is that the nearest relative who would consider helping them out with a bit of childcare here or there lives 3 hours away so it's not an option. We are 12. Sigh......

FM, I've been thinking about your post for a couple of days. I, too, want to encourage you (and by proxy your dd) by relating a bit of my story. I became a paramedic just after I graduated from university and before I was married. Dh and I had our first child very quickly after we were married. He and I both still worked full time jobs: his was from 0545-1500 Tues - Sat; mine was the typical 24/48 hour schedule. By asking around within my community (i.e., the public service community which includes EMS, PD, & FD) I was able to plug in to a network of licensed in-home caregivers who specialize, as it were, in caring for the little ones of those of us who worked the unusual public servant schedules. This includes overnight care for those who need that service. I found a wonderful woman who watched my 4 older kids from infancy to (for the eldest two) early - mid elementary age. This family became so important to my family that we still exchange letters and cards even though they moved to PA some years ago.

 

Now, I don't want to minimize the cost. It *was* expensive, especially with 4 kids in daycare. We didn't need the overnight care as dh was able to pick the kids up when he got off work. I took advantage of this wonderful woman (with her blessing) to go home when I got off shift and sleep or even (quelle horror!) clean house a bit. We didn't pay per hour; it was a per month payment; so, I was able to do that without incurring additional payments. I still "joked" that I paid two mortgages.

 

This network of what I like to call angel workers is still around and very active. I have plugged several of my colleagues into the network as they have had children and they all have been very happy with the care their children are receiving. I no longer need it as my dh retired 7 or so years ago and stays home with the kids. We now have six kids and are able to generally comfortably live on my gov't salary. Not extravagantly, mind you, and we do budget and stretch dollars; however, the 4 oldest are able to participate in one or two (depending on the kid) low to medium cost activities.

 

I guess I'd like to encourage your dd and her dh to look beyond the obvious. There may indeed be a similar type child care network near where she lives. It probably won't be advertised as such, though, and she'll need to ask her EMS, FD, & PD colleagues. Or maybe there isn't, unfortunately. I'd also encourage them to look around the country. I know a little while ago you wrote that your sil took his job because it was the only one in his specialty (or something, right? I'm a little hazy on the details.) Where I live is still (after well over a decade) one of the fastest growing areas in the nation and has tech galore. My system pays an excellent wage PLUS has one of the best total compensation packages around (pension + insurance). The EMS service just south of mine (also a third service gov't system) also has excellent pay and benefits. Both systems are nationally recognized as outstanding progressive systems in STEMI, stroke, trauma, etc care.

 

Anyway, I am sorry your dd and her dh are facing such hard choices. My best to them and you!

[Carol in Cal.]

Just look at the vitriol coming from this article, in the guise of a rational discussion: 

 

http://ideas.time.com/2013/09/30/longer-maternity-leave-not-so-great-for-women-after-all/

 

She is implying that the opportunity at the executive level in the US is equal to or better than European systems that strive to uphold universal opportunity. According to her argument our system is not broken if some people are rising to the top -- its the ceiling's more important than the floor view. That is a very common attitude in this country.

 

 

 

The worst thing about this article is that it blames the mothers for being underpaid later on, because they supposedly have let their connections or their skills go while being out of the workforce for a year.  My direct observation is that what ACTUALLY happens is that the moms work harder and more effectively than ever, that they work like dogs to keep their connections and skills maintained during their (unpaid) leave, but are regarded as having been 'lucky' to have gotten the (unpaid but bitterly envied) leave of absence, and also not fully serious about their careers, so no matter what they do they do not get the same high rating as they deserve.

 

Again, this is an observation, not a speculation.  

[Barb_]

I would not call a post doc salary "poverty". It may depend somewhat on the field - but at least in physical sciences, actual postdocs make 40k even at state schools; significantly more at national labs.

 

But I agree that a career in science requires an immense level of dedication and the willingness to relocate. I do, however, not really see a solution for the problem (we have debated this among female colleagues a lot) that can be implemented by society: any scientist (male of female) who wants to combine science and family will always be in competition with single, childless scientists who can devote many more hours to work - and the catch is: for them, science is the thing they love most. So, they don't think of the long hours as imposed drudgery- they willingly spend their weekends at the lab doing the thing they love best in the world.

 

I would encourage the young woman to go ahead and aim at her goal and not give up in anticipation of the difficulties. She should try and see. There may be opportunities coming her way that she is not aware of yet; she may find a great job that does not require the immense commitment, she may have a perfect solution with her spouse, she may be lucky to land a stable position early. I would never discourage a young woman to give up her dreams without giving it a shot. You never know what happens.

 

Fair enough, I was feeling dramatic, but the return on investment can feel a lot like poverty considering how hard and long you have to work to get there. And you are correct, I'm not encouraging her or discouraging her. I'm trying to walk a fine line and help her to see all sides of the equation. Her mentors are strongly encouraging her to continue on the research track and I'm trying to offer her some balance. She feels like she has in her words, "a responsibly to give back and to help society at large," and that if would be selfish to follows her instinct and go into something more lucrative and less world-altering.

[hornblower]

Once again, I am left wishing that there were more options for part-time work for scientists, engineers, and other professionals. It would be nice if neither mothers nor fathers had to choose between raising their kids and having a career. It would be great if there were enough half-time jobs in all fields that both parents had the option to work 20-25 hours per week so they didn't need much childcare and so they could keep their foot in the door.

 

Yes, and I heard a neat idea recently about making conferences & professional development days more family friendly  - onsite daycare.  Esp those events where there is an open bar...if you can afford an open bar, you can afford onsite daycare. 

[Barb_]

The worst thing about this article is that it blames the mothers for being underpaid later on, because they supposedly have let their connections or their skills go while being out of the workforce for a year. My direct observation is that what ACTUALLY happens is that the moms work harder and more effectively than ever, that they work like dogs to keep their connections and skills maintained during their (unpaid) leave, but are regarded as having been 'lucky' to have gotten the (unpaid but bitterly envied) leave of absence, and also not fully serious about their careers, so no matter what they do they do not get the same high rating as they deserve.

 

Again, this is an observation, not a speculation.

I agree with this. It's the perception. If my husband were to have an accident or illness bad enough to temporarily disable him, I don't have any idea what we'd do. I've been out of the paid workforce since 1996 and have no marketable skills. I'm responsible, mature, widely read and an excellent manager of time and resources. I communicate well. I have fab math skills. But I have no paper trail and no proof, so no official skill set.

[regentrude]

dp

[regentrude]

Fair enough, I was feeling dramatic, but the return on investment can feel a lot like poverty considering how hard and long you have to work to get there. And you are correct, I'm not encouraging her or discouraging her. I'm trying to walk a fine line and help her to see all sides of the equation. Her mentors are strongly encouraging her to continue on the research track and I'm trying to offer her some balance. She feels like she has in her words, "a responsibly to give back and to help society at large," and that if would be selfish to follows her instinct and go into something more lucrative and less world-altering.

 

Best wishes to her. FWIW, I did the career track thing: research, PhD, postdoc abroad. Then I had two children and made the choice to reduce hours, stay home for a few years, and return back to work part time in a  teaching capacity. It is not the most prestigious career I would have been capable of, nor the much higher salary I could have made had I stayed with research, but for our family, that was the right choice - and I do not regret for a minute the years I put into my education.

I could not have anticipated how things would turn out when I set out. I was lucky to have this opportunity, to have the spouse with whom I can make my family work. I want to give your DD all the encouragement. Do not settle in anticipation. You never know what happens And the education is not wasted - it stays with you, even if you decide to take a step back and choose a less high powered, more family friendly job. Best wishes to her.

[hornblower]

I believe this is a manifestation of misogyny. We do not actually value women and children. We underpay any job that has to do with caring for small children. We stigmatize moms who stay home. We stigmatize moms who work. We suck.

 

yes, & why do we not stigmatize men who keep on working? Or who work even more?  (oh, they're allowed to work insane hours & be workaholics because they're doing it for family!)

 

Where are the men staying home?

 

Why are men not the ones staying home?  Gee, could it be because of greater earning power even in the same jobs? That is misogyny & patriarchy.

 

Where are the men choosing to become daycare providers?

 

I really want to see more parents of all genders be able to take time off to parent, to raise their own kids.

 

We now have parental leave in Canada & a couple men at dh's office actually chose to take it so there are some changes but culturally and financially it seems a huge slog...

 

The problem with the daycare equation is that it doesn't add up. We end up exploiting someone else to look after our kids.  If you actually pay a real living wage for daycare, for most people it stops making financial sense to work.

 

It's extremely popular here to have a Filipino nanny. The vast majority of them are leaving behind their families to raise the families of some dual income couple here. There was a radio documentary about Filipino dads having to take courses on how to parent their own kids - because many of them knew nothing about it really, and having had the wives go off to Canada, now the dads are having to figure out how to do the parenting thing.  While on one hand it strikes me as kind of interesting & possibly even beneficial for the men to take on parenting that way in those communities, how is this not an exploitative system?

 

Then recently I heard that the Philippines were no longer as good a place to get a nanny from - people were seeking out nannies from more underprivileged nations because they were more desperate & worked harder. O.o

 

 

[MedicMom]

Thanks medic mom. I will relate your encouragement to her!

 

I know they will stop with one, as in take permanent measures. They do not see any other possibility.

 

My concern is that the nearest relative who would consider helping them out with a bit of childcare here or there lives 3 hours away so it's not an option. We are 12. Sigh......

My DH will soon be taking a normal 9-5 job, this screwing up our switching shifts plan. What I've found over the years(almost a decade in EMS, five years as a mom) is that a lot of my coworker's wives with young children have been happy to watch mine once or twice a week for less than day care would cost. They understand the unusual hours and that is probably what we will do. I don't work five days a week so I don't need the expensive five day a week day care; but bartering child care and other out of the box ideas are common for public servant parents. Encourage her that things are not as bleak as they seem. :). It can just take some extra creativity.

[Wind-in-my-hair]

yes, & why do we not stigmatize men who keep on working? Or who work even more?  (oh, they're allowed to work insane hours & be workaholics because they're doing it for family!)

 

Where are the men staying home?

 

Why are men not the ones staying home?  Gee, could it be because of greater earning power even in the same jobs? That is misogyny & patriarchy.

 

Where are the men choosing to become daycare providers?

 

I really want to see more parents of all genders be able to take time off to parent, to raise their own kids.

 

We now have parental leave in Canada & a couple men at dh's office actually chose to take it so there are some changes but culturally and financially it seems a huge slog...

 

The problem with the daycare equation is that it doesn't add up. We end up exploiting someone else to look after our kids.  If you actually pay a real living wage for daycare, for most people it stops making financial sense to work.

 

It's extremely popular here to have a Filipino nanny. The vast majority of them are leaving behind their families to raise the families of some dual income couple here. There was a radio documentary about Filipino dads having to take courses on how to parent their own kids - because many of them knew nothing about it really, and having had the wives go off to Canada, now the dads are having to figure out how to do the parenting thing.  While on one hand it strikes me as kind of interesting & possibly even beneficial for the men to take on parenting that way in those communities, how is this not an exploitative system?

 

Then recently I heard that the Philippines were no longer as good a place to get a nanny from - people were seeking out nannies from more underprivileged nations because they were more desperate & worked harder. O.o

 

 

 

So that's the caregiver criteria I've seen on Canada's immigration website. Pretty crappy to think about. One of my friends (I attended U of T for a year), Anglo Canadian, not an immigrant, was a part-time nanny from highschool all the way through her university years. She carried pictures around of the children she cared for. I admired the level of responsibility for such a young woman: I had only worked at Starbucks!  Another states-side friend of mine nannied while she attended Amherst. Again, what a thing to do for a family. 

 

On the beach I met of family of two working parents, both engineers, with one child. They loved their caregiver: for just 20 bucks a day she takes their toddler shopping, spoils him in ways that are out of her own pocket, and cares for him out of her home, posting pictures on FB so the parents can see what he's up to from their desks. 

 

The thing about all the above women were that they were childless -- never had a child or had grown children -- but I cannot imagine asking someone to leave their children to come overseas and be my child's nanny. How weird. Does Canada have a policy that let's these families reunite in Canada, or is immigration going to leave them cold?

[QueenCat]

On the beach I met of family of two working parents, both engineers, with one child. They loved their caregiver: for just 20 bucks a day she takes their toddler shopping, spoils him in ways that are out of her own pocket, and cares for him out of her home, posting pictures on FB so the parents can see what he's up to from their desks. 

 

 

 

 

$20 a day???????????????????????? That is wrong on so many counts. I wonder when she'll wake up and realize she is being taken advantage of...

[hornblower]

. Does Canada have a policy that let's these families reunite in Canada, or is immigration going to leave them cold?

 

well, we used to. The deal was we rip you from your children to work here and after minimum of 2 years you get to become a permanent resident and then eventually you can sponsor your family to come here.  For many that is an amazing opportunity, well worth the sacrifice. So actually we had lots of people applying & in the big cities at least & once the internet really took off, fairly vibrant nanny communities & networks. Many of them for example would rent an apartment together & stay there on weekends rather than staying in the home 24/7...

 

The federal gov't got twitchy about it last summer & say they're revamping it. Other temporary foreign workers don't get to apply for immigration that easily.  However, I think that's a dodgy proposition politically because so many families rely on these nannies (not just for child care but now increasingly for elder care)

 

[hornblower]

$20 a day???????????????????????? That is wrong on so many counts. I wonder when she'll wake up and realize she is being taken advantage of...

 

I think these are often more of an au pair arrangement where a young student travels, learns a local language & gets homestay in exchange for looking after kids for a short term. Usually these students are from fairly affluent families & it's more of a work experience/see the world arrangement. I know someone who got a degree in French & was happy to spend time as an au pair in Paris.

[Barb_]

Best wishes to her. FWIW, I did the career track thing: research, PhD, postdoc abroad. Then I had two children and made the choice to reduce hours, stay home for a few years, and return back to work part time in a teaching capacity. It is not the most prestigious career I would have been capable of, nor the much higher salary I could have made had I stayed with research, but for our family, that was the right choice - and I do not regret for a minute the years I put into my education.

I could not have anticipated how things would turn out when I set out. I was lucky to have this opportunity, to have the spouse with whom I can make my family work. I want to give your DD all the encouragement. Do not settle in anticipation. You never know what happens And the education is not wasted - it stays with you, even if you decide to take a step back and choose a less high powered, more family friendly job. Best wishes to her.

Thank you for this. I'm going to pass it on to her as first person encouragement.