BlogHer - Is "sharing the work" between parents for suckers? - Comments

Great Blog!

Claudia Broome — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:03:57 -0500

As I see it, here's the problem with all women and especially moms. We all suffer from "guiltism." We strive for perfection in every part of our lives. If we work outside of the home, we are guilty. If we are Stay At Home Moms, we are guilty. There is always someone out there who will offer a critical, but oh so kind, opinion about our career choices. Then the "guiltism" goes into attack mode! Hurray for the women who have the self esteem to be confident in their life choices, what ever they may be! Great are the husbands who do their fair share at home as well as at work. Kudos to the men who save the sexist attitudes for the bedroom they share with their wives!

Claudia Broome

LadiesDontQuitYet.com

"Good" mothers come in all shapes & sizes.

Asianmommy — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:43:29 -0500

Honestly, whether you work outside the home or not has nothing to do with whether or not you're a good mother. Plenty of SAHMs are good mothers, and plenty of working moms are good mothers. No one opts of being a good mom simply because she has a job--high-paying, more demanding, or not.

Mama Hope

Corina Fiore — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:24:00 -0500

Thank you. I don't think you were being obnoxious at all. What you offered just changed my day, changed my outlook. Thanks for the wonderful insight. It was a splash of cold water in the face, but refreshing.

Corina Fiore from www.dtemama.com

We can have it all, but we have to define "all" for ourselves.

froggemom — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:21:58 -0500

I am so grateful for this thoughtful discussion. I am in the middle of my own struggle with wanting and trying to have it all, as I am poised to go back to work part time after being home with my son for the last two years. On top of this we are planning kid #2.

From my own experience and reading, I think you can have all of what you want, provided you have realistic expectations and you are willing to work at it. Kids grow up and become independent. After a while they don't need or want you around. So in preparation, I'm going to have my own life, in addition to being the best mom I can be. To me, being the best mom includes being a happy person who is fulfilled and enthusiastic about life. I am a role model for my son. I want him to see that a woman/mother can be as many things as she has the desire and the energy to be. I want him to see that a partnership can be whatever the people in it make it.

I am so grateful that I have the ability to live my values and make my own choices.

It what's I needed to hear

Jory Des Jardins — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 12:53:17 -0500

A story from someone who DID do it all and can say, nope, didn't do it for me. Thanks for sharing your personal story. Sounds like the reality of your decision hit you like a ton of bricks. This is a compelling story!

Jory Des Jardins
BlogHer
Personal Blog Pause

what nobody wants to hear

hopealso — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 00:34:34 -0500

As I read through the various and intelligent responses to this well thought out and provocative post (thank you!), part of me wants to be cooperative, nod my head, and say, "Yes, me too!" and part of me wants to scream, "No, you just don't get it!" The truth lies somewhere in between.

I've passed through many phases of this question. When I was in my early twenties, I was poised. I had seen nothing but exemplary successes in nearly everything I tried. Accolades, awards, scholarships, significant GPAs from significant institutions. Even then, however, something in me knew that something was missing...

It was then that I found out my first son had chosen me as a parent. I did not decline the invitation. Like Jory's sister, I told myself that I would be the exception, I would be the mom that could do *both*. So I taught myself to do computer programming and found a consulting agency that allowed me to work from my home, *part time*, and paid $40/hr. That way I could work 25 hours a week and spend the rest of my time mothering and pursuing my actual career as an operatic soprano. I kid you not.

This worked well for me for the first few years. Within a few months I was proving my competancy so well that my programming gig raised my pay to $60/hr, more in line with standard pay at the time. I moved to New York and found a proper vocal instructor which I could easily afford given my salary. Things continued to go well. I never had the need of full time day care, and over time very gradually transitioned my son from part time nursery to a public alternative school in New York populated by liberal intellectuals, artists and small celebrities. Eventually I was accepted into a graduate program, which I was able to manage by hiring my first ever babysitter for after school, and then bringing my Kindergarten son with me to opera rehearsals in the evenings. I was living any woman's dream, right? Pursuing my career without giving up my role as a parent. ...You know it ain't so.

Of course I was overworked! You saw that coming. I was doing a smash up job and I was exhausted. My story then became very much more dramatic and atypical, but even so it underscores a point that needs to be made. And that point is this:

Sorry, Charlie, you can't have it all. You can't have the kind of career that devalues family life, have a rich economic lifestyle that requires a double income in a big house and a fancy neighborhood, be the best parent that is inside you,... and be sane.

You can't have all these things at the same time because (and I realize that, yes this is my own opinion and may turn some people off to me forever) these things do not go together. You can't go through the door marked "the best mama I could be" and the door marked "brilliant, hard-working rich career woman" at the same time.

What I believe you can have, however, is a new kind of career. One that exists within communities, online or otherwise, that value family. One that doesn't involve two selves, requiring your "ambitious brain" to pretend you don't have children and spring back into life after the midnight hour, saying, "It's me, the REAL Jory, not that other less important person who watches babies!" (Ignore the woman behind the green curtain, says the Wizardess of Oz.)

OK, now I'm the one being obnoxious, and perhaps a bit too agressive to allow my point to be heard. Getting back to my story, what happened to me is this: I had a nervous breakdown. A full blown I'm-lucky-to-be-alive nervous breakdown. Starting September 11, 2001, the day I didn't make it to work on Wall Street after dropping off my son at school, and instead watched hundreds of suited fellow New Yorkers flood North, covered in the white ashes of the morning that changed so many peoples lives, mine included.

It took me years to recover from my breakdown, and in a way I still am recovering. I mentioned that I have passed through several phases of this question, and as I write I am in the midst of passing into a new one. What I have realized is this:

I refuse to play the game that today's society says I must play. Today's society says that if you're smart and competant and responsible, you must work 40-100 hours per week. You must work that many hours because you need the money to buy all the things (we say) you need, and to live in a good neighborhood so you can put your kids into schools that (we say) do a good job educating your kids. Today's society doesn't care whether you're male or female and whether you have kids or not. Everyone must comply (or be poor, dissatisfied, and without inherent value).

But this doesn't work for children. It doesn't work for children and it doesn't work for parents. We all intuitively know that, whether we currently have kids or not. If we didn't, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

So how do you get around all that? You have to be creative. Miriam Anton hinted at it above. You have to decide what you want more. Worried about quality of school? Home school. Homeschooled kids score significantly higher and gain significantly more job skills. Worried about looking good? Make your own cosmetics and trade your skills with designer moms for dress-up duds. Worried about paying for the house? Live in a "tribe", with extended family, roommates or friends. You'll cut your environmental footprint in half and gain free babysitting. Don't want to give up your prestige and area of expertise? First, be humble, love yourself, lower your standards. Then, write a book, or blog, or start a business that places family before profits.

Some people will read this, will think I'm crazy, and won't want to give up the societal norms they're accustomed to. But I'm beginning to meet and observe some amazing women that inspire me to imagine.

I imagine a world where there's no "career." Where there's just "living for today," as John Lennon put it. Doing what we're good at, being whole women who don't judge ourselves according to a work week that has lost touch with the reality of family, and that frankly was never built to accomodate us in the first place. I imagine a world where saying you only work part time or you work at home because you parent doesn't mean you're unworthy of taking seriously. Where voluntary simplicity doesn't read as an excuse for failure. Where SAHM doesn't mean "giving something up" but tricking the system to get more. And where tricking the system means two partners working together, not according to some rigid concept of equality but instead with deep respect for what each partner can uniquely contribute according to their real differences and strengths.

The internet is doing amazing things for peoples lives, especially for those inspirational people who are creating something different. I'm gradually learning to follow them.

You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.

Mama Hope

a la hippie dippie bébé, A Natural Parenting Blog

...invaluable dialogue!

Jeannine — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 15:00:05 -0500

Jory, Thank you for your blog! As another childless-thirty-something who devotes much of my professional and personal energies to this topic, I can’t tell you how wonderful it is to have you give such honest voice to many of what I have seen to be the thoughts and worries of our generation. Worries that come from still searching for that “hope” and not seeing enough available options - let alone ones that seem viable. We are fortunate to have the benefit of learning from the generations that went before us (as well as our peers now, for those of who delay having children). (Both evidenced in so many of the thoughtful posts above.) But as such, and as you aptly pointed out, it can often feel as if we are a generation that is (almost far too) close and familiar to these topics (for our own good) now.

That said, on a positive note, I believe having awareness and advanced insight as to what those trade-offs may/will be is incredibly beneficial. And even more importantly, we have learned it is the process of weighing them in thought and conversation that is the healthy and fruitful exercise. (And...might I emphasize, as Morra mentioned, this is for parents AND non-parents, AS WELL AS partnered, not-partnered, women, men, at any socio-economic level, and during any (if not all!) life and career stage(s)!) Consciously contemplating the paths we are taking, attempting to make informed intentional choices, and being true and flexible with ourselves (and our partners/families) about both our paths (ie actions) AND our definitions (ie thoughts), over our lifetimes will facilitate both personal-life and professional-life satisfaction - if not joy - however it is that we each determine those to be defined at any given time!

In my years working within this arena and thinking about these complex issues, both for myself and for my clients, I have found the ThirdPath Institute (www.ThirdPath.com) and it’s President & Founder, Jessica DeGroot, to be an invaluable source for that needed hope around these topics and the guidance for those processes. Working with a wide range from couples and families to leaders and organizations, The ThirdPath assists individuals and organizations in creating sustainable systemic change and finding unique and adaptable solutions to balancing paid-work and personal-life.

Who sets the value of parenting?

esthermarie — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 13:21:38 -0500

"There is an argument in Belkin's article: women, by virtue of choosing lower-paying professions, or having jobs with flexible hours, have made a choice regarding their future role as a caregiver."

I'm interested in the way that our society associates parenting-friendly hours with low pay. Who decided that? Some positions of power and financial reward allow extremely flexible hours. The presidency is arguably not well paid, of course, but GW has found lots of time for golfing. He didn't sacrifice his career in order to maintain that putt. In offices there are ranging levels of tolerance for personal phone calls, funny emails, social networks, coffee breaks, even porn. But no kids. It just isn't done.

I make a point to demonstrate my ability to serve in a position of leadership WITH my baby on my hip. I do this because I'm exhausted by the "always a struggle"/"both things suffer"/"something's gotta give" debate surrounding moms who work. The need to be in two places at once obviously causes psychic distress. I have a hard time going out for a walk and writing this comment at the same time. But as long as I have control over my own destiny, I can, in a logical progression, do both.

As long as I am at the bottom of the ladder in my workplace, someone else gets to decide when I see my kid. But if I determine my own work hours, then the choice is mine. That's why I don't associate low status in the workplace with good mothering.

If we, as a society, continue to perceive professional success at odds with parenting, then it isn't only women we're devaluing. It's children. We fought hard to keep kids out of our factories, and I'm grateful for that legislation. But do we really need to keep them out of the corner office?

From 20 years in....

Laura79 — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:03:32 -0500

...my friends and I are NOT talking about these things anymore. We did. Oh, we did. We were just as stressed about these issues as young women are today. "Life is long", my mother, who is now 80, has been telling me for years....and it's only now that I am beginning to understand what she means. Life is long....because 20 years goes by faster than you think and you still have so many many more working years ahead of you....and then you could have another 20 years or more after work stops.

From 20 years in....( with two teenagers) I can just begin to look back....and somehow, finally, looking ahead is less of a distraction. My peers and I are dealing with other issues now. Some are work related - depending on which path we took - but very few, if any, of them have to do with this "shared parenting" ideal. That battle was over long long ago.

It is really funny/sad to think about - how much time couples spend on negotiating or downright fighting about household duties when their kids are young. Trust me, that completely goes away. Cleaning issues were huge on my list! And then it was gone. I can't exactly recall when it just disappeared as an issue - but it makes me laugh to read about -so it must have been ages ago. The kids grow up, the household gets into a rhythm - it just works out - no one makes a chart. I remember how difficult it was at first when the kids were young - but that time is very short in the scheme of things.

I can't say the career issues ever stop. It seems everyone still talks about their work lives. I've seen freelancers, full-timers, part-timers, and sahm's - everyone is still thinking about it. But thinking about it in a very different way. Most people have been through at least one "downturn" or more -and experiences in work are as varied as experiences in life. Single or married - kids or no kids - work issues are always going to be there. Life is long. Work life is long, too.

If I knew then what I know now, I would never have stressed so much about it. It's a short period of time in life - as I have finally come to understand, Life is Long.

So many good points here.

Dana Loesch — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 14:55:55 -0500

So many good points here.

To echo one of them: just as nature finds away, so does the drive, the ambition.

I did not set out to have children; in fact I emphatically did not want children. Then we had children and to repeat all the more cleverly worded Hallmark phrases it has been wonderful. Sincerely - I can't imagine what life was like before them.

I work from home, sometimes full-time hours, as a writer and radio show host (though I do leave to go in studio). My husband owns and operates a music production facility and we have a very atypical family life. It's all a difficult balance. Sometimes I feel like I'm shortchanging my kids, my work, my husband, myself, etc. Really though, you can't please people all of the time and if you can go to bed knowing that you did your best that day then you did well. Elana is right: I had a single working mother who missed 98% of my track meets and academic stuff. She worked constantly and I was a latchkey kid. That's not what I remember most. What I remember most is that she loved me and she worked hard for me and never lost herself in the process. That's cool.

You can never plan too much to start a family and really, you're never *ready.* Parenting, like most everything in life, is a deep breath before jumping. We make so many choices in our lives based on fear; it's remarkable to see what happens when we ignore that feeling once in awhile.

(Also - we share work in my house. My mantra is that until my husband makes enough money for me not to work and to wear designer haus frau fashions and big pearls like June Cleaver, the 50s dream, he can help with housework.)

Dana
Mamalogues.com

on KFTK 97.1 FM/Fox News Radio

This article touched a nerve or two!

MiriamAnton — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 11:13:53 -0500

Hello all!

Recently joined the team @ BlogHer...here's my response to Jory's first post on the Belkin article. An interesting thread here! As the working mother of a 4 yr old, I relate to so many of the above comments.

I have struggled with all of
the issues described in this article from job identity to mommy identity to
juggling work schedules with child, time to self and so on. After my
son’s birth, I was home with him much longer than originally planned. I feel
lucky that I had 10 months with him. But in this region, we couldn’t
comfortably survive on my husband’s position as an attorney and staying home
for longer was not an option. Not to mention that I am simply NOT
"stay at home" material. But this is a whole separate topic.

What I did find refreshing
about this read was that none of the couples claimed to “have it all”.
Even the Vachons, who appear to have reached nauseating levels of harmony and
balance, fully disclose their modest lifestyle with their single car and no
fancy trips. But I kept thinking to myself – could this family really
make it in the Silicon Valley or in a place like Manhattan for instance?
I kept waiting for the topics of resources (both financial and otherwise) and
locale to be more fully addressed. In other words, can the ThirdPath
formula work anywhere?

My husband and I had dinner
with our best friend from grad school in the city Saturday night. I asked
about a mutual friend from school who I knew had a baby about a year or two
ago. When our friend told us she was at home with the baby full time I
was shocked because I remember her being so focused on her career. I
asked what her spouse did for a living and when our friend said he worked for a
non-profit, my husband and I seemed to simultaneously gasp - How do they
survive?! This has become our obsession. My immediate response
was that there must be a trust fund in the equation and then again they do live
in Portland where the cost of living is much cheaper...but still!

Maybe they, like the Vachons
have found that sense of balance and equity in sharing life's tasks. But
I sure as hell have NOT. I also don't feel I'm in the position to work
less, nor do I want to give up time working and my husband's job has no room to
reduce hours - quite the opposite. From this article's stance, a true and
equitable balance between career and family can only be obtained by those
willing to budge and compromise - okay I get that. But but what if you
want more? What if you want the bigger house in the better school
district?

It's always valuable to look

debontherocks — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 23:40:34 -0500

It's always valuable to look at how we design our lives, but it's a shame this question is almost always posed in the context of a fairly traditional definition of an intact marriage. Single parents, divorced co-parents, gay parents without access to family health care if a parent stays home, parents from cultures with high family involvement, telecommuting parents and other contemporary configurations are changing the way that the Venn diagram of home and career in the 60s suburban model are viewed. The gender split discussion is decidedly old school.

Deb

www.debontherocks.com

when life throws you on the rocks, it's time to get your rocks off

I think my opinion of this

Pamela Sansour — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 20:21:49 -0500

I think my opinion of this changes day to day....there are days when the thought of leaving my two beautiful and often annoying spawn with someone else while I babysit for the public school system floors me. Then there are those days when I sprint for the door, desperate for adult/intellectual interaction. My babes are my joy, and most of the time they know just that. Am I cranky? You betcha. Do I crack? All the time. Am I nicer in general because I am achieving somewhat of a balance in MY life, which makes THEIR lives that much more shiny and happy? For sure. ~Pamela

So there's another interesting argument/societal norm...

Jory Des Jardins — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 19:34:44 -0500

...that we're not truly empowered to take time off from career unless it's to have kids. I hadn't even thought of that.

Jory Des Jardins
BlogHer
Personal Blog Pause

A friend of mine...

Jory Des Jardins — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 19:32:28 -0500

...with four kids under the age of 8 decided to get a divorce and said she was doing this for a similar reason: to teach her kids that Mommy was able to take care of herself and wouldn't stay in a relationship just to pay the bills. Working Moms, I imagine, can teach their kids about making things work!

Jory Des Jardins
BlogHer
Personal Blog Pause

Is "sharing the work" between parents for suckers?

Jory Des Jardins — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 19:30:12 -0500

This weekend I perused Lisa Belkin's NYT Magazine Cover Story, "When Mom and Dad Share it All," a piece that explores the ways that couples are devising work and childcare beyond the traditional gender-delineated lines. Belkin, you may recall, wrote another intriguing piece in 2003 about the (possibly) emerging trend of highly educated women who stop working in favor of full-time maternal duties.

Despite the fact that I have no children, I find anything about work, women and childrearing fascinating, perhaps because a big reason for my own childlessness has to do with not having settled on a solution for having a career and children that I can live with. I've seen the effects that raising children has had on my friends' careers. While some willingly give up their jobs for motherhood, others struggle and never quite rectify the decision in their minds. My sister, for one, opted to do both with full fervor and found herself disappointed with her performance at both. Friends who fully embraced motherhood I found myself silently and unfairly accusing of never wanting a career in the first place.

I haven't figured out how to make both a consuming career and childrearing "work" in tandem, or probably more accurately I haven't been willing to yet address the inevitable compromise that I would need to make with both, so I sift through articles like Belkin's, hoping to glean, I don't know, HOPE perhaps that one can truly have it all. Or that, at least, I can choose one because I have proof that trying to do both is fruitless.

This article, which focused on a number of couples in various arrangements--one income, dual income, straight and gay--illustrated some of the potential pitfalls behind each. For instance, one couple who split childrearing duties down the middle, while maintaining a dual income, realized that attempting equality didn't make sense for the lower earner, who would have spent her salary on childcare alone. Another couple realized that there are specific compentencies that conformed with more traditional gender roles, and they had to stop being so rigidly insistent on parenting equality that they didn't do the tasks they preferred. The non-gestational parent in lesbian couples often felt left out of the parenting process because of not having a physical bond that biological mothers experience naturally.

I found the most inspiring couple for me, personally, were the Vachons, who met and had children in their late 30s, after having experienced careers and other relationships. They fit what I characterize as the couple who have, like me, had time to overthink parenting and career. So many friends of mine who had kids earlier in life say that if they had worried about how they would make it all work out--kids and career--they may not have had kids at all. And some, like the Vachons, almost didn't, but had enough experience with poor relationships and the meaninglessness of myopic focus on fast-track careers that they'd come to a place where making less for flextime wasn't seen as a sacrifice.

Initially, they tried to split all duties, but over time they realized that some traditionally "male" or "female" duties were, in fact, desirable. I agree that a common misstep of couples who insist on equality end up bleaching out the natural desires, and thus, the passion, in their relationship by always striving for fairness.

My own domestic partnership has formed an unspoken allocation of duties, interestingly, in a direction opposite what most would expect. While my husband, Jesse, "sees dirt quicker" that I would, to coin a phrase used by one of the women in Belkin's article, I see the longer-term. Jesse tends to handle much of the day to day housecleaning, cooking, and home repairs, while I pay bills and make vacation and social plans. I know my husband isn't always happy with what has become his role, just as I am not always thrilled to stay up late on Sunday nights to ensure our bills get paid that week. But overall, we are happiest with these duties. As my husband says, "It's not always 50-50, but it's teamwork, nonetheless."

Mom and ParentDish columnist (and BlogHer Contibuting Editor) Susan Wagner would agree:

"...my husband and I both work full-time, and we both bring different things to the table. His job comes with really good health care, for example, while mine comes with a flexible schedule that lets me take the kids to the doctor when they need to go. Is it equal? No, not really. Is it fair? Certainly. Is it working? Most days, yes."

Though, admittedly, when I'm reading email in the living room and raise my legs so that Jesse can vacuum the crumbs that are under the couch, I think to myself, what kind of a homemaker am I? Am I being a good spouse? And what kind of mother would I be, knowing I could full-well leave crumbs on the floor another day? We've created scenarios of what we would do, should we decide to have kids. The highest earner would work full time, we say, while the other may opt to work part-time, but ultimately would be the primary caregiver. Still, will this make sense outside the hypothetical? Will everyone feel satisfied with their role? Or will we be pissed at ourselves for the choices we've made that put us here?

There is an argument in Belkin's article: women, by virtue of choosing lower-paying professions, or having jobs with flexible hours, have made a choice regarding their future role as a caregiver. So then, what about women who have opted to have the higher-paying, more demanding careers? Have we unwittingly opted out of being good mothers?

Jory Des Jardins

--Pause