Stay at home Moms are bad!!?
Find a Conversation
| Wed, 08-04-2004 - 3:23pm |
How in the world this woman makes these statements and believes them is amazing.
Oh and here are her qualifications:
"Ritter is director of the Center for Women's and Gender Studies at UT and an associate professor of government and women studies."
Want to bet whether she is on the left or the right?
***********************************************************
Ritter: The messages we send when moms stay home
By Gretchen Ritter
'Well, I could have just stayed home and baked cookies." In the firestorm that followed her comment, Hillary Rodham Clinton learned that you should never deny the virtues of stay-at-home motherhood.
Nowadays, the candidates' wives prove their maternal merit by competing in a cookie cook-off every four years. In the decade or so since this line was uttered, women's rights advocates have grown silent on the topic of motherhood. Few dare to criticize the new stay-at-home mom movement recently discussed on this page in the Austin American-Statesman.
It is time to have an honest conversation about what is lost when women stay home. In a nation devoted to motherhood and apple pie, what could possibly be wrong with staying home to care for your children?
Several things, I think.
It denies men the chance to be involved fathers. This is a loss for them and a loss for their children. What does it mean when fathers are denied the opportunity to nurture their kids in ways that are as important as their work? What do the children miss when they don't have fathers changing their diapers, picking them up from school, coaching soccer, making breakfast or dinner and doing homework with them? On both sides, the answer is too much.
Women who stay at home also lose out — they lose a chance to contribute as professionals and community activists. Parenting is an important social contribution. But we need women in medicine, law, education, politics and the arts. It is not selfish to want to give your talents to the broader community — it is an important part of citizenship to do so, and it is something we should expect of everyone.
Full-time mothering is also bad for children. It teaches them that the world is divided by gender. This sends the wrong message to our sons and daughters. I do not want our girls to grow up thinking they must marry and have children to be successful, or that you can only be a good mother if you give up your work.
Nor do I want boys to think that caring for families is women's work and making money is men's work. Our sons and daughters should grow up thinking that raising and providing for a family is a joint enterprise among all the adults in the family.
The new stay-at-home motherhood movement parallels the movement to create the "perfect" child. It's not just that mothers are home with their children; they are engaged with their children constantly so they will "develop" properly. Many middle-class parents demand too much of their children. We enroll them in soccer, religious classes, dance, art, piano, French lessons, etc., placing them on the quest for continuous self-improvement.
Many of these youngsters end up stressed out. Children should think it is all right to just hang out and be kids sometimes. They should learn that parents have interests separate from their lives as parents. And we should all learn that mothers are not fully responsible for who their children become — so are fathers, neighbors, friends, the extended family and children themselves.
Finally, the stay-at-home mother movement is bad for society. It tells employers that women who marry and have children are at risk of withdrawing from their careers, and that men who marry and have children will remain fully focused on their careers, regardless of family demands. Both lessons reinforce sex discrimination.
This movement also privileges certain kinds of families, making it harder for others. The more stay-at-home mothers there are, the more schools and libraries will neglect the needs of working parents, and the more professional mothers, single mothers, working-class mothers and lesbian mothers will feel judged for their failure to be in a traditional family and stay home their children.
By creating an expectation that mothers could and should stay home, we lose sight of the fact that most parents do work — and that they need affordable, high quality child care, after-school enrichment programs and family leave policies that allow mothers and fathers to nurture their children without giving up work.
Raising children is one of the most demanding and rewarding of jobs. It is also a job that should be shared, between parents and within communities, for the sake of us all.
Ritter is director of the Center for Women's and Gender Studies at UT and an associate professor of government and women studies.

Pages
Before I get started, let me point out that I have been a stay-at-home mom for a few years (with three young children), and now I'm a working mom. My years as a stay-at-home mom were the best of my life.
Let me also clarify that I don't agree with MOST of the statements in that article. However, I do think that being a stay-at-home mom until children are adults is not a good idea.
Multiple reasons. First, let's look at history of humanity. Today's definition of a stay-at-home mom is a VERY NEW CONCEPT. It only started in the 1950's. Before that, women worked a lot - whether on the fields, in the family business, on the farm, and at home! When mothers had LOTS of children, and had to do everything from scratch, baked bread, needed a whole day to do laundry, they had a hard life. Children of these 'so-called' stay-at-home moms were not getting lots of personal attention and were'nt coddled. They learned to help very early on, had lots of chores, and were often looked after by older siblings or other family members. And those in rich families where the women didn't have to do all that work hired governesses and even other women to nurse their babies! Families of today tend to me small, women benefit from vacuum cleaners, microwave ovens, convenience foods, dishwashers, washers and driers, etc. to name a few. The life of today's SAHM is totally different from that of a mother who didn't work outside of the home of 100 years ago and before. Now let's see what happened to the children of the first generation of 'career SAHMs' with small families and the conveniences of today's modern society.... These are the children of the 1950's.. They are the 'ME generation' of the 70's, the 'hippies of the 60's' and the 'yuppies of the 80's'. The babyboomers. Yes, they have lots of positive attributes (I belong to that generation.. well the very end of it at least). But they are also self-centered, materalistic, and many women my own age (with SAHMs who looked after them until they were adults) don't have a clue how to cook (their mother did everything for them), don't know how to mend clothes. That generation didn't do better than others, despite all that extra attention. Some of my friend's mothers have felt very lost and lonely once their children all left the nest, and had difficulties adjusting. The bottomline is that I think that all that attention to *school-aged* children is not necessarily for the best for either the children or their mothers. There is something as 'too much of a good thing"...
I happen to think that in the early years, mothers or fathers should be home as much as possible (not necessarily full-time), and then gradually go back to work as the children grow. However even once the children are in school, it would be best if one parent is home when children are *out of school* (I've done the staggered schedule thing myself..), although that isn't an absolute. When there are two parents, these things can be simple to arrange with a little planning.
I've known great "stay at home moms" who made it a 'job' to take care of their children and help them learn and grow, and I've also known bad ones who spent most of the day watching TV, were constantly screaming at their kids, and admitted that they only stayed at home because they hated their former job. I've known great working mothers and terrible ones too. I don't think being a stay-at-home mom or being a working mom makes you a good mother. You can be home and not really be 'there' for your kids, and you can work and yet still give your priority to your children and spend both quantity and quality time with them.
Anyway, the bottomline is that I don't think it's an 'all or nothing' proposition. It's about balance between protecting our children and also helping them become independent and capable adults.
You will always have parents who "coddle" their children more than others, whether they work or remain at home. My husband's mother stayed at home, raised five children, all of which were spoiled in terms of material items but in my eyes deprived emotionally, and sometimes abused, in my opinion, with the exception of the youngest who came 7 years after my husband. I was an only child, with a SAHM and still somehow spent most of my time alone. Parents, though maybe filled with the best intentions, do not always execute the best of plan when it comes to raising their children. And there are people who grew up with parents who always worked, and weren't there for them and probably feel as I do about a lonely childhood. No one ever has the perfect family, but I think everyone does at least *try* to improve on what they think went wrong when they were children.
But to say that a mother staying at home is, in essence, bad for children and society as the OPed article did is just...beyond my comprehension. Even in SAHM situations, children have different experiences. My husband is forever driving me crazy because he won't get up and get himself lunch if he's hungry. In his house he waited for Mom to get it for him. Yet I had a SAHM and in my house, if it wasn't dinner, you fend for yourself. For all my loneliness as a child, I am an independant person in the respect that I can do what needs to be done to take care of myself.
These broad, blanket statements either way, about SAHMS or WOHMS are inaccurate. There is no perfect family model. The only thing that makes a family perfect is love and security, and that can be found in all forms of families.
*waving hands furiously* You do now! TVs off or on kids shows here. But, most of the Oprah and Dr. Phil watchers i know are either parents of grown children or childless....in fact, none of my mom friends watch daytime tv because they don't have the peace and quiet to do so if they wanted to.
The type of parent you are should remain the same if you work or not. My son will learn to do chores and clean up for himself. He will also value things that are done for him. I CHOSE to be a SAHM and left a great "career" on Wall St. My mom was a single parent and worked full-time, sometimes two jobs to keep our tiny family going.... All of the independence that I learned by living in that situation will be passed on to my son eventually.... Staying home with him is as much for me as it is for him... I want to challenge myself to be the best parent that I can be.... For me, that's staying home with him... It's a challenge for me to get motivated everyday. When you work, you have a set schedule or a routine that you follow. When you stay at home, it's up to you to make the agenda.... It would be easy to watch tv all day and do nothing.... But the results would be staggering.... My son would not learn, my house would be a mess, the finances and bills would not get paid or taken care of, no one would eat, etc.......
When I worked, I was fortunate enough to have a cleaning lady... I had one for almost 6 years. When I chose to stay home, she was one of the first luxuries to go.... Someone mentioned in one of the earlier posts that by staying at home and taking care of all of those above mentioned things, the quality time when Dad gets home is much more meaningful... We have dinner together as a family, we go for walks as a family and then bath time and story time.....
If you have children, the choices you make have to suit your life... As long as you teach strong values, your kids can go a long way....
In my experience the people watching daytime TV are the people who work full-time... Have you ever heard of TIVO????..... So many people I worked with would tape shows like soaps or Oprah and watch them at night when they had the time....
I know this because I'd have to listen to them discuss the shows the next day!! All of that programming should be on one channel ... It could be called Crap TV.... You could have all the reality shows, soaps, talk shows and other mindless shows on one network..... HMMMM There's a thought....
Now regarding Dr Phil and Oprah.... all my stay-at-home friends watch one or both shows daily, and I remember Oprah herself saying that the bulk of her audience was stay-at-home moms. The ads shown during the shows (diapers, and the like) also tell me that at least a chunk of her audience is mothers.
But as we've all pointed out before, we can never generalize from just the people we know... If I gave the impression of generalizing and offended someone, I apologize.
You know, this got me thinking about my day-time tv habits when I was pregnant with my first, and even then they weren't soaps or talk shows. I watched TLC (baby story, wedding story, trading spaces) and when those shows weren't on, the tv was off and I listened to local talk radio. Maybe *I'm* just wierd...lol
I was a SAHM a total of over 6 yrs, and I think I watched Oprah, Dr. Phil, etc. maybe a total of 10 times, and even those few times were interrupted often by the kids. It's too frustrating to try to watch a show when little children need you every 13 seconds.
Pages