What do you think of this article?

[mommax3]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6959880/site/newsweek/

I'll post my take on it after I have a chance to take a shower and sit back down at the computer!

Sally

[PrincessFiona]

Some random thoughts as I'm reading:

70% of American moms find motherhood way too stressful Yes, because we're supposed to be super-moms. our tots are supposed to be in competitive gmynastics, playing violin and piano, reading before kindergarten and our house's are supposed to be spotless.

30% of mothers of young children suffer from depression I find mothering to be extremely stressful and one of the things 'depressing' to me is the lack of honesty very often from other mothers about how they feel, and the arrogance of moms who look down their noses at you for anything that your child does that their 1 month old baby will never do when he/she gets older. I feel more stressed out by how people will interpret my children's bad behavior when they act up than the actual behavior itself. Instead of people (especially other parents) saying "oh, there but for the grace of God go I" they are saying "My child will never....she must be a bad mom". How do I know? My little Andrew was perfect once too :>

The isolation and lonliness can sometimes be unbearable and God forbid you want to exercise a part of your brain that isn't related to how hot the washing machine should be set (does anyone here even distinguish anymore between hot and cold, because I just throw them all in on hot! ) or the changing of diapers etc. Many people feel that there is only one right way to parent and if you don't do it their way, why are you even bothering to have children. If you work outside of the home full-time you are a bad mom, if you work part-time you aren't committed to your kids or your job and if you are home full-time it must be because you aren't very ambitions....It IS depressing.

Then comes the fact that there is no cookie cutter child that I know of..you know that 'all america' boy or girl that is touted in the magazines. I honestly have yet to meet one. We are then free to feel bad about our children being different from some expected norm that doesn't even really exist. We are under pressure to buy our kids the right clothes, have super birthday parties and shuffle through mountains of homework papers that no longer come in workbooks but are just pages and pages of photocopied papers.

They said they wished their lives could change. But they had no idea of how to make that happen.

Exactly. Here we are driving our kids all over creation, competing for having our kids each be the 'best' at something which is ridiculous and feeling like it is our job to be the full-time entertainment coordinator for our offspring. When I was young, we came home from school, grabbed a snack from teh fridge and then went outside and played until the street lights went on ...winter, spring, summer and fall. My mom worked nights and she slept all day...we were only to bother her if someone's limb was impaled or something. Today that would garner a call to social services. My mom said she never felt the social pressure not to work nor did this competitive parenting that exists today have a foothold back then.

I love my children more than I can begin to express and yet I am exhausted by the sheer magnitude of what is expected of me now. I am always looking for ways to change my life to make myself happier without really knowing 'what' to do.

I grew up being told "you can be anything you set your mind to....if you just work hard". I worked hard in school and I was really active....I took dance lessons, singing lessons, learned german, doubled majored in college etc etc etc and then after all of that push to achieve have really struggled to adjust to the idea that achieving for me now means 'having the cleanest house (Guess I lose THAT one) or the child who plays hockey the best (ooops, lost that one too ). Personal achievement as a mom is seen as being selfish.

But something happened then, as the 1990s advanced, and the Girls Who Could Have Done Anything grew up into women who found, as the millennium turned, that they couldn't quite ... get it together, or get beyond the stuck feeling that had somehow lodged in their minds.

Life happened. We became mothers. and found, when we set out to "balance" our lives—and in particular to balance some semblance of the girls and women we had been against the mothers we'd become—that there was no way to make this most basic of "balancing acts" work. Life was hard. It was stressful. It was expensive. Jobs—and children—were demanding. And the ambitious form of motherhood most of us wanted to practice was utterly incompatible with any kind of outside work, or friendship, or life, generally.

yes!

Most of us in this generation grew up believing that we had fantastic, unlimited, freedom of choice. Yet as mothers many women face "choices" on the order of: You can continue to pursue your professional dreams at the cost of abandoning your children to long hours of inadequate child care. Or: You can stay at home with your baby and live in a state of virtual, crazy-making isolation because you can't afford a nanny, because there is no such thing as part-time day care, and because your husband doesn't come home until 8:30 at night.

yes!

As to the solutions presented: tax subsidies to corporations for implementing family friendly policies; quality, affordable part-time daycare; and progressive tax policies to return wealth to the middle class I will say this. It would be a nice idea to give corporations incentives.....but how about giving sahm's the same 'credit' in terms of social security benefits for working at home to raise their children that someone who works at McDonalds earns (for example). How about introducing longer paid maternity and paternity leaves? Why should taxes be 'returned' to the middle class? I think that there should be a flat tax for everyone and that we can vote as a country to do things like go to war. If the vote is 'yes' then there could be a temporary increase across the board for all tax payers to pay for it. I don't like the idea of forcing those who have worked hard to get where they are to pay for those who have chosen another path. Say what you will about that.

If you keep banging your head against the wall," he said, "you're going to have headaches."

This is why at some level I've become so....rude. I have had to decide that I don't care about all of the multiple comments, suggestions and expectations that everyone else has for me as a mother or for my children and it has been a long and even...painful experience. There is no way to please everyone and I finally had to accept that the only one I had to answer to was me....and that the people that have to be happy are my children, my husband and yes...ME.

This article was fabulous.

Thanks for sharing it, Sally...sorry for the long rambling response.

kris

[Rapunzel]

Wellllll, I have some thoughts on this:

1.) I believe that we learn to be mothers from our own mothers. It's hard to learn how to be a full-time mom if your own mother was not a full-time mom. You simply are not exposed to the same myriad details of how to make that type of lifestyle work in a successful way. Among myself and my friends I have observed that those who grew up with a mom that worked full-time outside of the home tend to have a harder time with doing things differently than their own mothers. Those of us among my friends who grew up with moms who raised children as their full-time occupation seem to have a better handle on the normal struggles of that lifestyle. I really think it is all an example of we learn best by experience.

Interestingly enough, I am pretty sure that my generation (ie Generation"X") is the first in American culture to have such a large number of us having grown up without mothers in the home full-time. I don't believe in coincidence and I see a correlation here.

2.) I was always taught that I could be anything I wanted when I grew up. When I told my mom my list of aspirations she would nod her head and say that I could do any of those things. But, I'll always remember the conversation I had with her in my early teens where I suddenly thought, "But, I think I'd also like to be a mother, too." My mother wisely stated, simply, "Then you will have some choices to make." She said nothing more. But that always stuck with me and she left it to my own powers of observation to discover this truth for myself.

Perhaps there is a denial in our current culture of the fact that one has difficult choices to make in life if one wants to perform certain, necessary, roles in society. And, this denial means that our daughters aren't taught this basic piece of common sense and their ensuing ignorance on the subject leads to much heartache.

3.) There DEFINITELY is this part of our current society that is in some "hyper-parenting" mode - competitive parenting is another way to put it. Perhaps this is an over-reaction to the problems from the first two points I made above? What I am discovering is that more and more parents are opting out of this hyper-competitiveness. Interestingly enough, all of those parents seem to be homeschoolers. What was the old, "hippy" saying? "Tune out, drop out" or something like that? Well, that's what a lot of us are doing - we are simply rejecting this as the new "paradigm" of acceptable full-time parenting. We do what is best for our children as individuals and we say to heck with the artificial constructs that our current society has in place for what is currently considered a "happy" childhood.

I think there is a genuine disconnect in our modern culture between reality and fantasy as well as between parents and children. We have shows that are on today like "SuperNanny" (which I watched for the first time last night) where parents have seemingly never learned to, well, parent. I just cringed through that entire entire show - those poor parents seemed to never have had the parenting examples they needed in their own lives in order to function as parents themselves. What we perceive of as "parenting intuition" isn't really an innate instinct - it is the millions of tiny little lessons we learn from our own parents that build into reactions that are almost subconcsious, and, therefore, often called "intuition" or "instinct".

I really, really think this is a major problem in our society today. It causes so much heartache among parents and children alike.

I guess that is the end to my random thoughts on this particular subject matter.

Jennifer

[spotty_dog]

From a wannabe momma: scary.

I see and I understand the pressures. I tell myself I will be different: I don't care if my kids get the best of the best, as long as they're given room to grow into themselves. I don't want to be their friend or activity coordinator, I don't want to plan their lives to the iota, I just want to be their guide, disciplinarian, and source of love. (A metaphor I've been mulling over lately: I want to be the safety net below the tightrope, not a 3-foot-wide plank laid over top of the rope.) I want to be an at-home mom, but I don't want my life's focus to be 100% inside the home for 18 years.

So the issue of balance comes up. And it's a hard nut to crack.

Yikes. Food for thought. Thanks, Sally.

[mommax3]

Okay, here are my thoughts.....bear in mind that I am a little grumpy and somewhat sick, and just returned from picking a sick child up at school......and IN NO WAY do I intend to denigrate, insult, or question other peoples' choices, especially people here!

Back in the days when I was a Good Mommy, I tried to do everything right. I breast-fed and co-slept, and responded to each and every cry with anxious alacrity. I awoke with my daughter at 6:30 AM and, eschewing TV, curled up on the couch with a stack of books that I could recite in my sleep. I did this, in fact, many times, jerking myself back awake as the clock rounded 6:45 and the words of Curious George started to merge with my dreams.

Was I crazy?

Actually, yes. Especially when she goes on to state that she spent three high-intensity parenting hours with her daughter, went to work at her full-time job, and congratulated herself that she would have three more high-intensity parenting hours to spend with her daughter when she got home. WTH?

All around me, the expert advice on baby care, whether it came from the What to Expect booksor the legions of "specialists" hawking videos, computer software, smart baby toys or audiotapes to advance brain development, was unanimous: Read! Talk! Sing!

Elsewhere in the article, she includes Hillary Clinton (mother of ONE child, btw) as one of the "experts" she listens to. What about listening to some real-life moms who had been there, done that? Was the entire human race, up to the birth of her daughter, so sub-standard that she felt the need to re-invent the wheel?

Jobs—and children—were demanding.

Big surprise? Why? Children have ALWAYS been a 24-7 deal. I fit perfectly in the demographic that the author is addressing, and I knew from the get-go that some of the careers I was interested in were just not compatible with being a mom. I am sure that the experience I had nannying and working in a ritzy day-care center during college solidified my feelings. I remember saying to myself "that will NOT be my life or my kid's life" more than once during those days.

And the ambitious form of motherhood most of us wanted to practice was utterly incompatible with any kind of outside work, or friendship, or life, generally.

So snap back to reality and practice the form of motherhood that has worked, more or less, for centuries. The words "ambitious" and "motherhood" don't belong in the same sentence.

You can stay at home with your baby and live in a state of virtual, crazy-making isolation because you can't afford a nanny, because there is no such thing as part-time day care, and because your husband doesn't come home until 8:30 at night.

Nice statement. Things are different once you have a baby, but you are limited only by your creativity and imagination. Yeah, there will be days when the walls will close in, but there are also beautiful sunny days that come along, perfect for taking walks and playing at the park......they just don't happen on a schedule. And about the part-time daycare......I have ALWAYS been able to find this at church-based preschool programs, for well under the $150/month she says she paid when she lived in France. Some of the programs have been accredited by the NAEYC, some haven't, but all have had a low staff-child ratio and have provided great activities and social opportunities for my kids. And crafts that I would NEVER have attempted at home.

The author goes on to talk about how women of our generation thought we would be the ones to "have it all" and then bemoans the fact that government policies keep us mired in this horrible state of affairs. Baloney. If we are mired in this, then we have done it to ourselves, by setting parenting standards so high that no one can reach them, and by taking the competitive edge that helped us in our careers and applying it to motherhood, making it all about the mommies instead of all about the kids. Well, here is my answer......OPT OUT! Stop researching every little decision, determined to find the best answer and then provide it for your kid. Set your priorities and then enjoy life with your little one. Read to learn about child development and eschew "parenting" books. Talk with other moms, those with kids a little older than yours who seem to be turning out okay....that is where you will get the best advice. If there is a preschool/dance class/lesson/activity that is the in thing, go the opposite direction. If more moms started doing this (and in fact, a lot of moms without disposable income DO do this and their kids turn out fine) THEN things would change. The government does not need to do this for us. We just need to use common sense. And here is where I am sure to step on some toes......I have a hard time believing that so many families HAVE to be two-income families to survive, at least while their kids are preschool aged. Our society is so consumptive that I think we don't even see the difference between needs and wants anymore. NEED = food, water, shelter, transportation WANT= two late model cars, new-ish home, fancy food from a fancy grocery store.....I could go on and on. There is nothing wrong with having those things, but if both parents are working to be able to afford them, and one would rather be home, perhaps a step back to re-evaluate and a priority check are in order. It can be done. Not if you want to live in places with a high cost of living, granted, and sometimes there is not a choice about that, but again, that should be taken into consideration when decisions about where to live are made.

In general, we need to alleviate the economic pressures that currently make so many families' lives so high-pressured, through progressive tax policies that would transfer our nation's wealth back to the middle class. So that mothers and fathers could stop running like lunatics, and start spending real quality—and quantity—time with their children. And so that motherhood could stop being the awful burden it is for so many women today and instead become something more like a joy.

If parenthood is not a joy to you, nothing the government does or does not do will make it one. If you expect bliss every day that you are a parent, due to the superior techniques that you have gleaned from obsessive research, get ready to be disappointed. If you want to really get to know the little person that you brought into the world, the good AND the bad, then join a sisterhood that goes back for centuries and prepare to be stretched like you never have been before. You will discover the best and worst you can be, and you will emerge a better, wiser person from the experience.

So there is my grumpy rant. There are small grains of truth in what she says, of course, but so much of it is really about choices and expectations. While I was reading her column, I was reminded of the "beautiful people" in high school/college who, because of their parents resources, pretty much had the world at their feet and had LOTS of choices. (and yeah, I was jealous of them ) They had big plans, and didn't have to waste any time babysitting (or working at any other part-time job) because it wasn't a financial necessity. If they found out that you babysat/nannied, they thought it was "sweet" or looked shocked that someone they knew actually had to work. Well, guess what.....there was much more to be gained through that experience than the temporary monetary reward. Reality is a bitch and I saw that first-hand while comforting teary children who really just wanted their moms to stay home......and sometimes the mommies cried, too. I deliberately chose the life I have, and while I don't think I will ever win mother of the year, I am joyful (for the most part) about the way I spend my days and about the pressure I choose not to feel each and every day.

[houseelf]

I have agreed with all of the above posts and yet find a few points that don't stick so well. I'm going to jump in here because this topic is near and dear to my heart. And like Sally, I'll try to hedge appropriately in order to ensure peace and harmony with a group of people who I think are fabulous. Soooooo.....This post is not meant to be a judgment call or step on any toes, it is just the world as this slightly deranged and tired mom sees it.

I agree with Rapunzel that we parent the way we were parented. The fact that my mom worked full time outside the home seeps into my mind and makes it harder for me (and my spouse whose mom also worked full time) to contemplate fully dropping out of the paying job market. Right, wrong, or whatever, working outside the home firmly is embedded in my head as a "reality". As a corollary to this "reality", I think there may be some men out there who never fully contemplated having a full-time stay at home wife and this may add to some of the frustration felt by SAHMs: another source of failing to be acknowledged? Thus, the problem underscored by this author feeds on itself in that these moms become more unhappy. (Not all marriages mind you, just some.)

I think Sally eloquently bemoaned the competitive parenting that has become today's impossible standard. If..I...can..be...truly...honest...I have...overscheduled...and...overanalyzed...my...k id. There, I've said it. I'm guilty too. I'm working on this. Feel free to gloat at my admission.

Further, Sally touches upon an issue near and dear to my heart: the hyperconsumerism that has created "needs" which used to be wants: cell phones, two cars, etc. Here too, I'll be the first to admit that I have confused these terms myself and currently am making a concentrated effort to scrutinize my family's spending habits. Damn, the coffee habit is particularly hard to give up.

However, we part company on the childcare issue. Perhaps I am clouded by my own experiences on this issue, but I think that policy makers have been the true beneficiaries of the so-called "mommy wars". While we women engage in vindictive undermining of one another on who is making the best decision on behalf of their children and families, we turn a blind eye to the fact that our public school systems are in crisis and even simply adequate childcare is an enormous expense for the average family. Things like adequate eduations (including such novel concepts as gym class and art) and the safe monitoring of our children have been almost exclusively born by the private sector. Meanwhile, the powers-that-be can go off and sip brandy rather than having to come up with pesky solutions for helping American families. ** (This thought is completely plagerism by some other writer who escapes my mind right now).

For the purposes of working, childcare bears an expensive price tag to the payor (think of taking on another mortgage payment or two each month) and insultingly low wage to the payee. (As in, "Here is the most important thing in my life, my darling baby girl, please watch her for $30 a day and no benefits. Oh by the way, here are the 10,000 little requests that I have for her care and if you don't comply, you'll be shitcanned....." ) I want to pay my childcare provider her worth, but I don't get paid enough to do that.

I realize that the reference to childcare was for a Mothers' Day Out or preschool program intended for SAHPs, both which serve excellent purposes. Truly, there should be more of these programs available, especially to the poor. I am impassioned about the availability and cost of childcare for all parents, regardless of the paid employment status. SAHparents need (not want but need) a break such as MDO programs and working parents need to know that there kids are at least safe and happy while they work.

Which brings me around to the rant of when did this country start to think that they only way to work was to do so obsessively, staying late and going in early. Is there not value in the balance of perspective that perhaps part-time or jobshares permit? Now I'm preaching to the choir because we, of all people, live with, or more accurately, without a workaholic spouse every day. What if we had another parent in our home who was more available? Would this change all of the assumptions? Of course, this has become a circular argument which goes back to the hyperconsumerism of our culture.

Did I make any sense? Am I just a wide-eyed lunatic who rambles with conviction but not clarity. Speak to me now....Give me an "amen" or a WTF, that girl is crazy. But speak to me baby.

Kelly

[Rapunzel]

I just wanted to address what Kelly stated about full-time mothers "needing" Mother's Day Out programs.

Yes, we need to have a support system in place that will meet our needs if we are to successfully parent our own children. That's something you learn by observing a stay-at-home mom (such as my own). But, I think the problem in our society may be that we now expect to pay for such support (or have the government pay for it) rather than doing it as it has always been done through the centuries (as Sally pointed out that this odd mothering "crisis" is really a very, very new phenomenon). Rather, the support system I have in place is a an old-fashioned "net" (so to speak) of other mothers that have made the same choices that I have. So, rather than pay someone to watch my older children while I go to my obstetric appointments I have a close friend that trades off with me every few weeks - I watch her children for her while she does a bit of paralegal work on occasion. Similarly, my husband and I have been trading off babysitting with other couples that we are close with. There is one sweet older woman from my church congregation who just really loves watching my children every once in a while for the joy of it.

I guess my point here is that I think some basic things in our society such as parenting and support networks for parents are learned behaviors that we are rapidly "forgetting" as a society how to do/go about obtaining. Instead, we are replacing this with a highly socialist principle that the government will provide (or, rather, should provide).

Jennifer

[mommax3]

Yes, Kelly, you do make perfect sense.....and I should have added in my post that I have been guilty many times of both obsessive research about the best _________ for my children and competitive parenting. I have learned that those are two little games that can never be won.

About childcare.....I have not thought a great deal about the costs of full-time childcare because the degree I have does not get me a salary that would afford even sub-standard (in my opinion) childcare. I did the math ten years ago when DH was an MS II and made the decision to stay home. I know my son was better off with me than he would have been in the situations I could have afforded for him. As for me, I struggled with boredom and loneliness, but eventually found a rhythm that worked for me.....and also a part-time job (nannying) that let me keep my son with me. Of course my equilibrium was interrupted each time we moved, but I was able, each time, to get my groove back eventually, usually with the help of another part-time job. I have always made MDO programs/preschool a twice or thrice weekly part of our routine, beginning when my oldest was two.....his younger siblings were younger than that when I started loading up their backpacks!

About public education.....I have stated before that I think the system is broken, and I still believe that, especially in large urban areas, and in poor states. However, there are plenty of good public schools to be found, and the secret, which someone (Cherry?) eloquently stated in another thread, is parent involvement. We are most likely going to put at least one of our kids back into public school when we move.....the schools where we are going look very strong, but you had better believe I plan to be involved, not just because of MY kid, but because of all the kids, and all the teachers, who could use a little extra help. By being there, I can get the truth about what is going on in the school with my own eyes and ears instead of relying on a newspaper article, isolated test score, or sound byte on the news.

If I had the earning potential that you (and others here) do, (I am not slamming you, just acknowledging the difference) I think I might have made similar choices to yours because I would still be able to bank some $$ after paying for childcare that I was comfortable with. SO I defer to your knowledge on the subject on this one.......but I still think that if many women did the math, they would find that they are actually spending money to be in the work force, rather than making it.

I apologize to anybody who thought I was harsh earlier......I just get so tired of people (like the author) whining about how hard it is to be a mother, (which is true) and then say it is hard because of all of the competition and because the government isn't supportive. Please. It is hard because trying to shape another human being, with strengths and weaknesses inherent from birth but unknown until they emerge is a HUGE responsibility, and one that can't be penciled in between appts. in an organizer or managed by reading the latest parenting guru. All of the competitive parenting is just something that distracts us from our goals as parents, and whining about it just feeds the monster.

[Rapunzel]

Oh, I had to add - I do see a big part of the entire current problem as being intimately related to greed (ie the desire for bigger, better, and highly unneccessary) and selfishness (ie the placing of personal gain/desire for THINGS over what is best for people). I think this was referred to as consumerism by everyone else - but I have to modify this somewhat as I don't see consumerism as inherently wrong or at fault here, rather, the very human traits of greed and selfishness.

Jennifer

It is funny that she mentions Betty Fridan's work.

Historically, the 1950's were the LAST era of intense pressure to be a good wife and mother.

Some historians say that period was a result of women gaining more power in the workplace, too. Women's income was depended on during the depression to make ends meet, and during the war years women took over many jobs formerly held by men. It was also a period for pushing school quality.

The return to domesticity was pushed by the gov't and marketers back then and women internalized it.

I'm rambling...

[mommax3]

Kris,

I know this is a topic that you have done a lot of thinking about and I seem to have inadvertently touched some sore spots, and I apologize if I have made you feel defensive about the feelings you have on this issue. Rapunzel was right (I didn't see her post before I posted the first time) that childhood experiences play into this. My mom stayed home, even after my dad divorced her, until my youngest sister went to school full time. THEN she went back to school to finish her college education. If that doesn't teach a little girl that being home with kids is important, I don't know what will. Most of my friends in elementary school (midwest college city) had moms that stayed home and then went back to work as their kids got older. I need to acknowledge, though, that what I experienced isn't the norm for everyone.

Please remember, Kris, that I have and do work part time and have no problem with that......nor do I have a problem with part time daycare, which I have used for the past 8 years. I wouldn't (couldn't! ) live in a place where it wasn't available.....it is the first thing I check out. In fact, lack of MDO/preschool options put the kibosh on a very attractive offer DH had early in his job search. I am sorry it isn't available to you, but you were able to figure something out....as moms have done through the ages, but seem to be forgetting how to do these days, as Rapunzel pointed out. I have also, from time to time, had informal arrangements with other moms and they have been lifesavers!

Oh...and parenting hasn't always been a 24/7 proposition

I don't get this.....of course it has! Even when extended families stayed close together, babies and kids have always needed looking after, and as far as I know, they have never had "off" buttons. Someone has to do the work that kids require.

That's great, Sally...but some of us actually do struggle with depression...wow, a whopping 70% were feeling frustrated and 30% suffered from depression. That's a lot of people feeling like the walls are closing in on them. Not everyone has the same life experiences or emotional needs. In TX, there certainly are more sunny park days than there are here in MN...and the only indoor winter activities around here are McDonald's play areas.

Kris, I too have struggled with depression and don't mean to minimize the struggles of anyone who has dealt with it. Frustrated? Well, yeah.....I think I would probably answer yes to that one 80% of the time. Teaching a little human being to live in the world is incredibly frustrating. And potty training is the 7th circle of hell. But would legislation/new gov't policies change this? I realize I get a lot more sun down here, Kris, but the catch is (as you know).....you pretty much can't go outside in the summer. Period. And as for crafts, I know for a fact that you do way more crafty stuff with your kids than I have ever even thought about doing with mine. I was not, in responding to the article, attempting to criticize you or the choices you have made.....I think you are a great mom and I wish I could see you in action and have you teach my family to speak German.

About having to work....

I guess it depends on whether you are living in wichita falls, TX or St. Paul, MN, Sally.

Again, Kris, I was not responding to you or your choices or those of anyone else here, because eventually, all of us will be married to someone who makes significantly more than an average salary. I am well aware that the cost of living is very low where I live. However, I have not always lived here, and it was very different in Indianapolis, Indiana, where I lived when I made the decision to stay home. I am basing my remarks on couples who have "average" careers.....say, a teacher and an accountant. If they have two kids in quality daycare, one of them isn't actually bringing home much, and if they have three in daycare, they are actually spending money to make it. THAT was my point.

I guess I did have enlightening experiences regarding childcare that most parents have not been privy to. But that troubles me, too, because why would anyone choose to bring a child into the world without spending at least a little time finding out what life would be like once they did?

The irritation expressed in my first post was intended for the author and all of those like her who drive the competitive parenting trend, even as they bemoan it, and then want the gov't to provide a solution to the frustrations of parenting. I don't want to pay more taxes (and I don't think you do, either ) to let bureaucracy keep most of it and offer a paltry panacea when I think that women and men who stay home with their children could take the energy they put into the parenting wars and instead work on creating communities where there are co-op preschools and adult conversations to add spice to the parenting season of life.

Kris, honestly I apologize for offending you. I wasn't thinking of you or any choices you have made when I typed my initial post, but obviously I struck a nerve. I consider you my friend.....please don't take anything I said in that post personally.

Sally

[houseelf]

So many thoughts here, but off the cuff, I'll limit my response to just to this single narrow point....

RE: the suggestion that we parents are simply failing to tap into the community of other parents and create a group effort to raise the kids escapes me. Yes, it takes a village to raise a chilid but the village has done gone and left. We are an increasingly transient society. We are working more hours with less family nearby in sometimes marginally safe communities. We can't just push the kiddies out the door for fear of neglect charges or, worse case scenario, one of those god awful fears of what could happen to our kids actually comes true. For a multitude of reasons, a grass roots, community based coalition clearly is not serving our children's needs. We are the only industrialized nation in the world that does not provide some sort of subsidized preschool. Kindergartens expect the children to have a base of knowledge that we were not expected to have. Would their be true harm to extending compulsory public education to ages 3 and 4? Making changes in education to reflect that we are no longer a primarily agrarian society which necessitates lengthy summer breaks. (Run like the wind with these rhetorical questions!)

In my mind, the question is not whether mothers should be working outside the home. (Mom isn't home already-- last time I checked she and over 70% of her compatriots engage in a profession for wages). The question is how to make the situation the best case scenario for the children in the society that we live in today. The status quo is not serving anyone's needs best.

But, for the sake of congeniality, I could be wrong about all this.

Kelly

[mommax3]

I'm all for congeniality as mentioned by Kelly and have no idea why I am continuing to post in this thread......perhaps it is because I feel like fainting everytime I get up from the computer and have two children in the next room who look like I feel.....this is my way of feeling productive today and I may regret it (or even deny having taken part) tomorrow.

Yes, it takes a village to raise a chilid but the village has done gone and left.

I would say that the village is smaller, but it is definitely still here. The members are just having trouble locating one another, especially if they don't participate in a church, which has always helped me find "my" village.....you know, the one missing its idiot?

Would their be true harm to extending compulsory public education to ages 3 and 4?

YES! Because I don't want to send my kids to school at that age. And also because the schools are strapped as it is, to the point where having full-day kindergarten is an issue, so how would states pay for these classes? I would be in favor of more Head Start classes for kids whose parents' incomes meet the guidelines, though.
And I would love to see more schools follow the year-round paradigm.

I am now stepping (slowly and carefully) away from the computer.

Hugs and kisses (although I'm probably contagious) to all.

Sally

[houseelf]

Hey, don't worry about offending me--I've only got the thinnest skin on the planet, transparent actually. Although I shouldn't keep posting, I can't help myself, this issue is so compelling!

If I'm truly honest, I'll agree with your assessment that I'm a tad myopic about this issue because of my own circumstances. Perhaps we both may be. In truth, I am an educated, white, thin, blondish, former southern sorority girl (quit your collective groaning...I'm not like that stereotype, I'm probably more neurotic than all of you combined) who has privileges that many of the working poor and minorities will never know. Lest you think that I'm totally clueless about any aspect of classism in this country, it would only be fair to add that my dad is a trucker/farmer and my mom was an telephone operator who filed bankruptcy at one point in my childhood. Blue Collar TV serves as a sort of sociological documentary of my childhood.

With this frame of reference, I agree with critics who point out that only a few of the wealthy educated white women can bemoan the "difficulties" of mothering, overscheduled children, and the intense pressure. The rest of the planet is just trying to put meals on the table and pay their overdue bills. In addition to aiding the privileged among us, the poor and the marginally poor can and will benefit from compulsory, publicly funded preschool. While the church can serve as a wonderful collective childrearing village, there are a whole lot of non-church goers who would still like the best for their children. A "community" of educated, safely cared for children is actually in the best interest of the privileged as well.

Regarding the tax dollars--IMHO, this is not an issue of raising taxes but rather where we spend them. Perhaps we should reexamine our public funding. Now how is that for opening up a can of worms?

My question to you is how do you convince more parents to keep one of the partners at home in the circumstance that the accountant and teacher are both working? Do you offer them tax incentives? In other words, how do you put the cat back into the bag?

Hugs, kisses, and a cheap feel.


Kelly

Hugs, kisses, and a cheap feel.


Kelly

And that is ALL I have to say about this.....except that co-op pre-school is an awesome idea and my worst nightmare combined.
:!