Work is good for your health?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Work is good for your health?
1599
Mon, 05-15-2006 - 5:25am

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/healthnews.php?newsid=43421
Working Mothers Healthier Than Full-time Housewives

Main Category: Women's Health / OBGYN News
Article Date: 15 May 2006 - 1:00am (PDT)

According to new research carried out in Britain, working mothers enjoy better health than full-time housewives. Despite the stress working mothers face by holding down a job, dealing with childcare, housework and striving to keep the family happy.

It appears that working mothers, when compared to full-time housewives, are less likely to become overweight, have a better level of health and a healthier relationship. The study also found that single mothers experience worse health than working mothers who have a partner and children.

You can read about this study in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

Team leader, Dr. Anne McMunn, University College London, said that women who combine work with children and marriage do seem to have better health than full-time housewives. Even though they may experience high levels of stress sometimes.

It is not a question of chicken-and-egg either. Dr. McMunn said it is the experience of work plus having a family that brings on the better health, not the fact that only healthier mothers decide to carry on working.

The researchers examined data on women born in 1946 from the Medical Research Council's National Study of Health and Development. The data registers their health from 1946 until they are 54. Women's health was examined, with the help of a questionnaire at the ages of 26 through to 54. Every decade, the questionnaire collects data on each woman's work history, whether she is/was married, has children, her height and weight.

The healthiest women were the ones who had all three of the following:

-- A Partner
-- Children
-- A job

Those reporting the worst health were stay-at-home mothers, followed by childless women and single mothers.

38% of stay-at-home mothers were obese when they reached their 50s, for working mothers the percentage was 23%.

Written by: Christian Nordqvist
Editor: Medical News Today

Pages

Avatar for myshkamouse
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 06-05-2006 - 3:38pm


5). How would your life/career be different if you didn't have to worry about health care? Just a thought."

Not at all different. Wouldnt matter at all.

6). Truth: staying at home with an infant is difficult, mind-numbing work. Staying at home with a toddler can be crazy-making, too. Nothin but respect for moms who are able to do it and keep their sanity."

Nothing but respect yet you go on to claim that working moms are the super moms? Personally I don't think work status itself has anything to do with how well we parent out children.

7). Another truth: I handle absolutely every domestic duty in addition to working full-time (no amount of nagging, threats, incentives, praise, or bribery can stir my husband from his absolute inertia)."

Well that's just, sorry, but stupid. I can't imagine why otherwise intelligent, confident, women, would put up with that. Never have, never will.

Stay-at-home moms often have all day to do the things I do in a few hours in the evening: cook (yes, I cook all our meals), shop, pay bills, clean house, volunteer, make social engagements, make other necessary appointments (e.g., doctor visits and hair cuts), and take care of our dogs. "

I know quite a few SAHP's who do much much more than I could ever do in a few hours in the evenings. I think its disengenous to think a WOHFT parent can actually spend all the time that a SAHP can on things like you've noted above; especially "volunteer, make social engagements). I've gone to about 1/10 the play dates I would if I were at home, for example, and about the same number of classes, etc. with the kids. Just not physically possible.

Oh, and chase my 3-year-old around! I wouldn't trade places with anybody. Working moms (which is something like 70% of women with school-age children) are ALL SuperMoms."

Good parents are all super.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-26-2006
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 1:19am

"Why does there only have to be one reason to get rid of him? I think we killed a couple of birds with one stone. "

Ahhh!! I can't even take it anymore. This was really interesting, at times downright hilarious, but this has brought me to my boiling point.

I don't understand why there hasn't been an explaination yet on why you think/believe what you do!? If you truly belive the Iraq War was the right thing to do, why not come up with some good explainations why - such as, something had to be done, he ruined a bunch of natural resources when he invaded Kuwait, we couldn't get him the first time, now we had our chance, the UN wasn't going to stop him, and yes it is the USA's responsibilty to save the world, because apparently no other country seems to care...and eventually the USA will get to all the other dictators in the world - such as africa and NK. Although right now NK is too dangerous (or at least we think it might be, which is too big of a risk) and Africa simply doesn't matter because they are not sitting on natural resources which are to great value to the USA.

Why does it take me, a person who believes NONE of the above to argue for you, I just wanted to point out what you could have said, which I would take as at least legitimate arguements according to your beliefs.

Frankly i find it very tiresome to read your posts, but - they are entertaing at the least, and i don't know how to sift through them yet, and really that would break up the thread too much. On a different thread i believe that it was you (i could be wrong) told someone you have stuff that they would never have in their dreams, yet never pointed out what you were talking about (another story).

Just wanted to let you know that you do have arguements, why don't you use them?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2006
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 7:07am

"such as, something had to be done, he ruined a bunch of natural resources when he invaded Kuwait, we couldn't get him the first time, now we had our chance, the UN wasn't going to stop him,"

Those are some of the reasons, yes. Also, the US must protect democracy at all costs. I'd rather the war being fought on Iraqi soil, than American soil.

"Frankly i find it very tiresome to read your posts, but - they are entertaing at the least, and i don't know how to sift through them yet, and really that would break up the thread too much. On a different thread i believe that it was you (i could be wrong) told someone you have stuff that they would never have in their dreams, yet never pointed out what you were talking about (another story)."

If you find it tiresome to read my posts, there's always the ignore button. I'm not forcing anyone to read my posts.
I posted to another poster that I had stuff that she would only have in her dreams and I meant it as being an American citizen. Because I am very proud of that fact.

Also, you stated in the beginning of your post that my opinions are "downright hilarious". Do you burst out laughing at everyone's opinions that you meet in real life? I'd get a pair of boxing gloves if I were you!

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2006
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 7:12am
And since I've just read that you're only 20 years old, you're not even considered an adult yet. So, get some more life experience besides the 4 walls of a college classroom with a liberal professor spewing things at you and then I'll debate with you.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 7:18am

"Just wanted to let you know that you do have arguements, why don't you use them?"

It is a valid question, but don't hold your breath for an answer. ; )

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2006
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 7:22am

She answered her own question and I threw in something else for good measure.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 7:32am
Oh, I see! So, you believe that the US should take out dictators around the world. Why?
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2006
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 8:14am

No, I don't believe that. But, when they threaten the safety of our people then they should be dealt with accordingly.

Would you live in a country that was ruled by a dictator?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 8:19am

"But, when they threaten the safety of our people then they should be dealt with accordingly."

Does that mean you believe that Saddam Hussein threatened the security of the American people? If so, why?

Where I would or would not live and under what conditions is irrelevant to the setting of US foreign policy.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2006
Tue, 06-06-2006 - 9:01am

"Does that mean you believe that Saddam Hussein threatened the security of the American people? If so, why?"

Yes, with his funding of the terrorists who want to do harm to our country.

"Where I would or would not live and under what conditions is irrelevant to the setting of US foreign policy."

I thought so.

Pages