SAHMs: can't do anything right
Find a Conversation
| Wed, 12-06-2006 - 8:11am |
I've noticed in the lifestyles thread that almost everything SAHM's do is immediately knocked down or one-upped. I don't see that the same is true for the WOHM's on the thread. Some examples:
If a SAHM cleans the house during the day, she isn't spending quality time with her children, or any more time with her children than do WOHM's. If she doesn't clean the house, she is being overinvolved with her children and interacting too much with them; she's not giving them time for free play.
If a SAHM teaches her children, she is an overachiever who is trying to produce an Einstein, not allowing her children to develop at their own rate, buying into commercialism. If she doesn't teach her children, she is just leaving them to their own devices while she gets "me time" or isn't providing them with the opportunities that daycare or preschool provides.
If a SAHM tries to socialize her children by letting them interact with other children on a regular basis, that's very nice, but kids of WOHM's in day care get MORE interaction, which is obviously BETTER. If a SAHM doesn't plan plenty of socialization activities, she isn't preparing her children for school.
If a SAHM tries to schedule regular activities and outings for her children, she's producing "jaded" children, forgoing a routine, "working too hard," wasting time driving around, and not providing enough time for her children to explore and investigate their own environment. If she doesn't schedule regular activities and outings, then her children are deprived of the many wonderful, exciting experiences that all day cares have to offer.
***
So tell me, WOHM's, is there anything short of returning to work that SAHM's could do right?

Pages
? i've not asked you to defend posting style, but rather actual comments. unless you consider making comments about people's lifestyle when it was unwarrented (meaning, tehre was no reason to post it at all - it wasn't in retort to anything) as a "posting style". i consider it a comment, and as is the rule on the debate board all comments are up for questioning.
but lets recap:
the orignal idea in this thread is (paraphrased) "why do some posters feel the need to cut down other posters for lifestyle choices?"
or, more specifically if tehre is anything a WOHP feels that a SAHP can do right...
to which i answered that some people slide into one upmanship and snarky comments for certain reasons etc...looking at both sides of the camp, and both online and IRL, to which you began repliying to me rather aggressivly. when i questioned your response, you began with replying to me as if i had questioned or insulted your choice to work - when your lifestyle was never in question in the first place.
does that make more sense? i'm asking you why your rebuttal to me included the very typw of commentary that was raised in the original post in the thread.
>>Are you so unable to debate with me that you have to go after the tone of my answers?<<
again, there is a difference between tone of a post and actual comments in a post. i'm "going after" your comments. and FWIW i gave you several chances to exaplin them, which would be sticking to the topic at hand. exactly sticking to the topic at hand, actually.
Hmmmm, my mom was a WOHM, then a SAHM then a PTWOHM. She taught me that it is possible, given the right planning and circumstances, to be both when one's children are growing up.
So far, and not necessarily b/c my mom did it, I have done the same. I was a WOHM for 20 months, then a SAHM for five years, and now I work extremely part time (5 hrs a week) with the offer from my current employer to increase my hours whenever I want. The plan right now is that as my younger children start/spend more time at school, I will increase my hours and eventually work 30-35 hrs a week.
Ironically, I am actually now in a field that I always wanted to be in - politics. I had given that up when I changed jobs after my dd was born in order to keep her from being in daycare more than 10 hrs per day. Had I continued working, most likely I'd still be at that job, not in my specific field of interest (though one I liked). Now I have the opportunity to do what I wanted all along and I wouldn't necessarily have had this option had I not been a SAHM and approached by my neighbor to work for his firm.
I don't think being a SAHM reinforces the old stereotype unless the SAHM never works again. In my middle/upper middle class area, the majority of women I know either work part-time or re-enter the workforce at some point after staying home with their kids. In fact, one of my friends is going back to work after being on a 3yr "sabbatical" (as she called it) from the pharmaceutical company she worked for - she was guaranteed a job after her "sabbatical" but not necessarily one that she would want. She took the risk, but got the job that she wanted at her company. While it may not be your experience (you seem to know quite a different group of SAHMs than I), I don't really know anyone who had a hard time getting a job in their profession or a similar one once they were ready to re-enter the workforce. That's b/c they continued to network, utilize their skills through volunteer work, etc with the knowledge that they wouldn't be a SAHM forever. My mom had no problems either when she did it 25 years ago.
<
If there's one thing I want to impart to my dd's it's that women are supposed to work and be self sufficient like my mother before me. That was the most empowering thing she ever did for me. Of course, I didn't appreciate it at the time. I wish I could tell her how proud I am of her now. She didn't just talk the talk, she walked the walk.>>
I could say the same thing about my own mother, who, at different times in her life, was a SAHM and a WOHM. She was a role model for me just like your mom was for you. It is quite possible to instill the same values about work without necessarily remaining in the work force for one's entire "working age."
>>As the dd of a WM, there was never any question in my mind that I would be self sufficient. I think you approach life differently if you're looking to be self sufficient vs. looking for someone to depend on to take care of you. My criteria for a husband did not include the ability to support me.<<
i think its interesting that you focus so much on dependency, and self sufficiency.
the way i interpret life and choices isn't that i am soley dependant on my DH - i'm perfectly capable of re entering the workforce at anytime should i choose to do so. however, i depend on my DH to make the income (or part of it actually, since i suppliment with my home business) just as he depends on me to provide child care, take care of teh home and the finances/budget.
we work as a team - as marraige in my definition should be. our respective roles focus on our strengths, so that we can avoid our weaknesses. we depend on eachother rather than worrying about who is more self sufficient than the other.
on the other hand my DH depnds on me the same way you depend on your DCP. without your DCP you would also be forced to either SAH, bring your children to work with you, or have your DH SAH.
and on that note, since i have my own business, i am able to make money to either suppliment my DH's income or make enough to be self sufficient if i chose to do so. all while being able to SAH with my child. so what does that teach my DD? that a woman can be as independant as she chooses to, and can also be the parent she chooses to, and that she can accomplish her dreams - evem if her dreams are outside of the box.
it also should teach her (in the even of a divorce form my DH - to which we are very close) that a woman can be comepltely self sufficient and still SAH with ehr chidlren if she chooses to do so.
<>
It isn't that I am speculating. I am just asking you to back up what you say in order to be able to prove it.
<>
I was self sufficient for YEARS before I got married. Now I am caring for my family in a different way. In about 8 months I will self sufficient again. Then again I am not really sure why that matters. I know just as many SAHM that would be in VERY big financial trouble if they suddenly divorced. They require both paychecks to live. So not so many WOHM are really self sufficient.
<>
Are you serious? Do you really think that women that SAH look for DH that will support them? Really? I can assure you that while that is surely the case for some women I don't know one of them. My DH and I made a decision. You might want to rethink that whole DH that can support me. Things happen in life to people all the time. I am glad to know that my DH is willing to work and think it is great that I am SAH.
<>
Still can't find this study? Hmmmm. I can most definately say that WOH has little to nothing to do with a childs self esteem. It is all about the parenting.
Let's take your examples one by one, then.
#1 :http://www.aap.org/healthtopics/behavior.cfm
When both parents work, some children feel neglected. Two-parent working families may have more money, but material things and access to costly activities are no substitute for a parent's time.
Encourage your children to talk with you about how your job is affecting your relationship with them; if they are upset that you are spending less time with them than in the past, you need to make an extra effort
It's important to keep in mind that stress at work can find its way home. When parents feel overworked or unappreciated at their job, they may vent their frustration and anger at their children or at each other. And the way parents are supervised at work frequently becomes how they "supervise'' their children at home.
Parenting Alert
When both spouses work, there are two particular aspects of parenting that often suffer:
Some parents become less nurturing or less emotionally available. Caught up in the hectic pace of their lives, parents may give their children less attention and loving care than they need.
____________________________________________________
This is not datum. This is an article.
# 2: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/91/1/271
We need to know when it is safest for the child's future development to have to relate to two or three caregivers; what will be the effects of a group care situation on a baby's development; when babies are best able to find what they need from caregivers other than their parents; when parents are best able to separate from their babies without feeling too grieved at the loss. In a word, we need information on which to base general guidelines for parents. For it could be that the most subtle, hard-to-deal-with pressure on young adults comes indirectly from society's ambivalent and discordant attitudes, which create a void of values in which the building and nurturing of a family becomes very difficult.
Submitted on July 7, 1992
Accepted on August 5, 1992
________________________________________________________
This is an opinion piece by Terry Brazelton. Authoratative, for sure, but most definitely not an objective researcher or observer on the topic of ECE. And written in 1993.
#3 :http://www.nimh.nih.gov/publicat/adhd.cfm
The principal characteristics of ADHD are inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity. These symptoms appear early in a child's life. Because many normal children may have these symptoms, but at a low level, or the symptoms may be caused by another disorder, it is important that the child receive a thorough examination and appropriate diagnosis by a well-qualified professional.
When the child's hyperactivity, distractibility, poor concentration, or impulsivity begin to affect performance in school, social relationships with other children, or behavior at home, ADHD may be suspected. But because the symptoms vary so much across settings, ADHD is not easy to diagnose. This is especially true when inattentiveness is the primary symptom.
_______________________________________________________________
You've since corrected this and it should not be in this group.....
#4: http://www.aap.org/pubed/ZZZ85ZRA79C.htm?&sub_cat=1
Stress and Today's Middle-years Child
Some psychologists believe that today's middle-years youngsters actually are faced with more stress than the children of previous generations were and have fewer social supports available. The change in family structure from the large, supportive, extended families (including both parents, aunts, uncles and grandparents) of previous generations, to the present high incidence of divorced families, single-parent families and stepfamilies has drastically altered the experience of childhood. Millions of youngsters must adjust to such changes.
________________________________________________________________
This is a book. Informative, but the authors conclusions and opinions presented in what it supposed to be helpful and easy to read. Again, this is not research.
#5 :AAP report: View whole family as the patient: Pediatricians called on to screen, assess ...
... about their families. Do the parents get along? Are they both working? Does anyone seem to be ...
http://aapnews.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/22/5/230 - 31.6KB - ** AAP Journals & Red Book
Stressed Out: Look for signs of tension in patients' families and recommend coping strategies
... Working parents often place children in ...
http://aapnews.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/23/1/11 - 31.0KB - ** AAP Journals & Red Book
AdMed News release.doc
____________________________________________________________________
I can't access these, but they appear to be *news* articles on various aspects of parenting and families. Not research.
#6 :http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/55/2/171
Separation protest was measured by the onset and duration of fretting or crying in 24 day-care and 28 home-reared infants during a two-minute period of isolated separation from their mothers in an unfamiliar room. Separation episodes were repeated under similarly controlled circumstances at two-month intervals from 3 through 13 months and at 20 months of age. The composition of the daycare and home-reared groups was similar for sex, ordinal position, and family background. Day-care and home-reared infants showed similar patterns in the manifestation of separation protest over age, with sharp reductions in latency to crying and marked increases in the occurrence of crying at 9 and 13 months. These results suggest that the psychological processes underlying separation protest are not meterially altered by the continuing presence of the young infant in a day-care program designed to meet both his physical and psychological requirements.
________________________________________________________________
This appears to be an actual study. One published in 1974, but a bonafide research article, lol. The summary, however, does not support your thesis that working moms or childcare cause any problems. The data showed normal patterns of separation anxiety in both daycare and home-reared groups. In fact, this study concludes that separation anxiety is not altered with daycare.
#7 : SUBSCRIPTIONS CME ARCHIVE ...
http://pedsinreview.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/27/2/56 - 90.2KB - ** AAP Journals & Red Book
________________________________________________________________
This one appears to be current and potentially interesting. However, if you will notice, it is a *review* article. Not a research article. This is a paper explaining this author's point of view on the topic. Authoratative opinion, but opinion nonetheless.
#8: your violence proposal.... http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/youthviolence/chapter1/sec1.html#intro
The report views violence from a developmental perspective. It examines the interactions of youths' personal characteristics and the social contexts... and
http://www.safeyouth.org/scripts/utilities/DocView.asp
The ecological framework is based upon a public health perspective for reducing risks and preventing disease, illness and injury. Instead of focusing just on the individual who is at risk for, or who engages in, a particular behavior such as violence, the public health approach considers the individual's relationship to his or her surroundings. Recently, other disciplines, including mental health and criminal justice, have begun to adopt this multi-leveled approach in their efforts to understand the nature of violence and identify potential points of intervention that reach beyond the individual.
______________________________________________________________________
Neither are studies but rather reports/articles on the topic dating back to 1994. I will address your violence ideas in another post, but sufficit to say that I think you are way off the mark to include something like this under the banner of Things to Blame on Working Moms.
#9 :http://bmo.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/25/1/3
Child Sociometric Status and Parent Behaviors
An Observational Study
Diane Z. Franz
Alan M. Gross
University of Mississippi
_________________________________________________________
Your second actual study. That concludes that there are negative consequences when parents neglect or reject their children. Unless you are willing to state that a mom working and a child being cared for by someone other than mom is tantamount to neglect or rejection, then I do not see the relevence.
#10 :http://health.enotes.com/childrens-health-encyclopedia/parent-child-relationships
Disengaged parents
Finally, disengaged (detached) parents are neither responsive nor demanding. They may be careless or unaware of the child's needs for affection and discipline. Children whose parents are detached have higher numbers of psychological difficulties and behavior problems than other youngsters.
Parental concerns
_______________________________________________________
Again, an article. Not a research study. No data. And again curious as to why you specifically include the section on disengaged parenting. Are you suggesting that mothers that also hold down jobs are disengaged? Would this theory also apply to emloyed fathers?
#11: The share of parental work hours worked by the mother, however, is negatively associated with school engagement among low-income, school-age children. Low-income, school-age children of married parents who try to arrange their work hours so one of them can care for their child(ren) are more likely to be highly engaged in school than their counterparts whose parents do not arrange their work hours.
___________________________________________________________
No link or citation, so hard to say. Might be a portion of a discussion of a research article, but more likely another article/opinion piece.
#12 :http://www.mentalhealthscreening.org/infofaq/depression.aspx
_________________________________________________________
Another curious inclusion. Was there a point you wanted to make about WOHMs and depression?
So....that brings our total to *2* studies, one of which contradicts your point and one that is not at all germain.
Please do some better reading on your own before you start lecturing others on their inability to follow the "research" you offer to support your POV. Try the urban institute, for example or AskEric. Two great databases of published, peer-reviewed research studies. There is plenty to discuss on this subject, but first we have to agree on what is "research" and begin with objective material upon which to base a disucssion. I can see your Terry Brazelton with a Linda Hirshmann all day and it may be fun but it's not terribly productive.
http://www.urban.org/
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/Home.portal
"that said, i still see no warnings for SAH parenting. all gentle warnings are focused on families with dual incomes or the single parent family."
Then you aren't looking at the right things. The most obvious place where an organization like the aap weighs in on this topic would be the effects of poverty on children. The vast majority of moms WOH do so out of financial need. Try looking up "poverty" "income" "SES" and childhood development, health and outcomes on aap. Plenty for parents to think about there when deciding to have one income or maintain two.
I appreciate the effort you have apparently put into your ideas about youth violence, but I have to disagree with your overriding premise.
For the at-risk kids you are talking about, a lack of parental involvement is not due to a working mom, it is most likely due to an absent father (and, it would then follow, a working mom). And the poor environment has nothing to do with fast-food-for-dinner stereotypes and overcrowded daycare; it is poverty and a lack of education and all the burdens that come with them.
Your historical perspective is interesting, but trends can be plucked from any data one wishes. I wrote a sociology term paper about Broadway musicals as a reflection of society's changing values in the 20th centuries. I chose that topic based on a 5 minute scan of titles and then choosing a handful that made my point. Got an 'A', too. One bit of data to counter your proposal, however, is the fact that many at-risk behaviors have been steadily declining since the 90s - the same time-frame in which WOHMs continue to rise. So I can't see the connection you are trying so hard to make.
My personal thesis, since we are sharing, comes down to three things: family income, maternal education, and an involved father. IMO, these are the things that most influence our children (the thing we can control, at least, the fact that two of my children were bron white males will undoubtable have a greater affect on their lives that any other single factor). Mothers WOH/SAH may stem from these things - financial need, or lack thereof; education to obtain a job that facilitates family life or the lack of an education hampering the same; presence and involvement of a father to co-parent and jointly nurture and caregive - or lack thereof.
I've learned them here. :) And since it appears we'll be recycling arguments about every four months, I'm glad I've bookmarked many of the better studies!
Pages