The Mommy Wars have entered Politics

For the 11 years my husband was a house-husband we consistently and frequently shared that he worked all the time - correcting the idea that he did not work but was unemployed.  This was a choice we made because we did not desire the lifestyles of families we observed with two full-time employed parents. 

Yes, we chose to drive older cars, have a smaller tv, no cable, brown-bag our lunches, a smaller home, wear clothes that were not created last week.  For that we traded up to daily family meals and children who went to bed at reasonable hours and made good grades.  Sure others obtain the same upgrades with fast or faster than home-cooked food.  Their choice and they live with their choices. 

The option to be employed, not considered a choice by Brellyk because her reasons are strong.  To her the forfeit of caring for her child herself is less risky than the medical support afforded by healthcare insurance.  She chooses not to forfeit her health insurance benefits and I do not question her choices.  I merely want to show, this is a choice.  She also is firm in saying other women should not be criticized for their choices.  Using our differences against each other is what Brellyk tried to show us as a judgment that works against us all.  

My reference to the choice to be employed is that women are not restricted from employment by societal pressure (19th-Century-thinking).  I can see now that I was wrong.  21st-Century-thinking foments a societal pressure to BE EMPLOYED.    Social pressure seems to reinforce that a dollar-value on work is necessary for validation. 

The freedom I referred to in another comment was that employment for US women is neither legally restricted nor mandated.  I meant to only refer to US in my other comment, but erred in leaving out the word American. 

In our family we still drive old cars that are paid for, do not have cable or satellite tv, and none of us own an i-anything.  We converted from wireless to DSL later than anyone we know.  Our oldest child went to college with full financial scholarship, but I would not limit the investment we made into our family lifestyle to costs associated with college.  Our life-satisfaction – priceless. 

Barbara H. Boucher, PT, PhD, OT    TherExtras 

I have to admit that I always cringe when I read that someone is "not a feminist" and then they describe their lives which are filled with feminist ideals.  

My opposition to Palin has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that she is a mother, or that she has a special needs child.  And I also had similar thoughts about Obama.  http://nycmomandmore.blogspot.com/2008/09/is-obama...

But her hypocrisy and intellectual inconsistency of mocking feminism while living the life that feminism affords her isn't lost on me.

I hesitated using that word but felt since I identified myself as a Republican, it was a bold word to help get my point across.  However, while being bold, I feel I lumped everyone together, much like my friend lumped Palin into a mold, if you will.

 I'm a "not so conservative" Republican, and I too get irritated when I am lumped together with the ultra conservatives.

Kelly Curran

http://jenellesjourney.blogspot.com

I am sorry you had such harsh words from your Neuro.  To say his bedside manner was horrible is an understatment.

Please don't lump all liberal women into one group.  This liberal woman believes that what might work for one family may not work for another.  We all try and choose what is best for our families and it is not right for anyone else to judge someone's choice.

I do not like Sarah Palin for a laundry list of reasons.  Her being a working mother is probably the only thing I like about her.

Jess Mom to Thing 1 and Thing 2 CEO of Knight INC.

And maybe it is OT, but if I could just clarify -- I think that we agree that having a child with special needs doesn't tell voters what you'll do for other children with special needs -- and that's what matters. I've heard Obama bring up the needs of children with autism as a way of talking about what's wrong with our current health care system. I think that's okay, as long as you explain what you will do differently. That is at least information that voters can evaluate. 

Congrats on stimulating so much conversation!

Kim
BlogHer Contributing Editor ( http://blogher.org/blog/kim-pearson )|Professor Kim ( http://professorkim.blogspot.com/ )|

Except for this line: Personally, I'm tired of liberal women defining what women should be

In the sense of the mommy wars, I think there's a liberal camp and a conservative camp and both sides have squacked loudly about what they think women "should" be.

I totally agree with you that the WOHM vs. SAHM propaganda has NO place in our political choices, nor should it have to rear its ugly head in our personal lives.  Women ought to support one another's choice to work or stay home or anywhere in between, because the fact of the matter is that while our views and values might vary, every family is different, has different financial factors, different dynamics and different make-ups - so how could one even begin to say black or white, "Women should/shouldn't stay at home/work!"  No one could without judging another and sadly that is what the mommy wars have done.

 I find it interesting that you chose to say that liberal women are trying to define what women should be, because it is conservative women who've been the most damaging to me as a mother - telling me I shouldn't be working and should be at home.

and one reason he gives is Sarah Palin, saying McCain exhibited poor judgment in choosing her.

From the New Yorker online: 

Ken Adelman is a lifelong conservative Republican. Campaigned for Goldwater, was hired by Rumsfeld at the Office of Economic Opportunity under Nixon, was assistant to Defense Secretary Rumsfeld under Ford, served as Reagan’s director of arms control, and joined the Defense Policy Board for Rumsfeld’s second go-round at the Pentagon, in 2001. Adelman’s friendship with Rumsfeld, Cheney, and their wives goes back to the sixties, and he introduced Cheney to Paul Wolfowitz at a Washington brunch the day Reagan was sworn in.

In recent years, Adelman and his friends Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz fell out over his criticisms of the botching of the Iraq War. Still, he remains a bona-fide hawk (“not really a neo-con but a con-con”) who has never supported a Democrat for President in his life. Two weeks from now that’s going to change: Ken Adelman intends to vote for Barack Obama. He can hardly believe it himself.

See the article at the New Yorker for more:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/georgepacker... ( http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/georgepacker... )

I too am saddened when we chose to pull each other down needlessly.  But I think the problem this mom and many others have with Palin is not that she chooses to work but that she chose THIS work.  I know we need more women in office but this is a woman who truly has a CHOICE.  She CHOSE to take to the campaign trial witha a 4 month old child special needs or not 4 months old.  Her daughter does not need the public scrutiny that this CHOICE her mom made will bring.  I do take exception with her and it is not because she works but she CHOSE this.  Palin is not some working mom who needs insurance or thinks her husband is more equiped to handle the family.  She is a woman with means and healthcare and she CHOSE to use her kids for her gain and not the other way around.

As another poster put it her silence is deafening.  She has not taken a stand on this issue nor has her campaign put out anything but a vague she will represent special needs families.  How?  I would really like an answer as I have a 5 year-old autistic nephew and a kid with ADD in a school system that is not well equiped to handle either one.   

Michelle

I blog at http://www.mommycan.blogspot.com/

From the debate transcript ( http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2008d.html ), for what it's worth:

OBAMA: Yes, let me respond to this. If it sounds incredible
that I would vote to withhold lifesaving treatment from an infant,
that's because it's not true. The -- here are the facts.

There was a bill that was put forward before the Illinois Senate
that said you have to provide lifesaving treatment and that would have
helped to undermine Roe v. Wade. The fact is that there was already a
law on the books in Illinois that required providing lifesaving
treatment, which is why not only myself but pro-choice Republicans and
Democrats voted against it.

And the Illinois Medical Society, the organization of doctors in
Illinois, voted against it. Their Hippocratic Oath would have
required them to provide care, and there was already a law in the
books.

With respect to partial-birth abortion, I am completely
supportive of a ban on late-term abortions, partial-birth or
otherwise, as long as there's an exception for the mother's health and
life, and this did not contain that exception.

And I attempted, as many have in the past, of including that so
that it is constitutional. And that was rejected, and that's why I
voted present, because I'm willing to support a ban on late-term
abortions as long as we have that exception.

The last point I want to make on the issue of abortion. This is
an issue that -- look, it divides us. And in some ways, it may be
difficult to -- to reconcile the two views.

But there surely is some common ground when both those who
believe in choice and those who are opposed to abortion can come
together and say, "We should try to prevent unintended pregnancies by
providing appropriate education to our youth, communicating that
sexuality is sacred and that they should not be engaged in cavalier
activity, and providing options for adoption, and helping single
mothers if they want to choose to keep the baby."

Those are all things that we put in the Democratic platform for
the first time this year, and I think that's where we can find some
common ground, because nobody's pro-abortion. I think it's always a
tragic situation.

OBAMA: We should try to reduce these circumstances.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion that he views some infants as disposable. But it seems that one ought to acknowledge his claim that a law already exists in Illinois mandating such care. Now if you have evidence that this is not the case, that is another matter. And if he is not being truthful about the existence of such a law, that would be very good to know.

Kim
BlogHer Contributing Editor ( http://blogher.org/blog/kim-pearson )|Professor Kim ( http://professorkim.blogspot.com/ )|

For the record until two years ago I was a registered Republican, now my grandson is in Iraq a (US Marine) for the second time.  I've been so disappointed in the ignorance of Mr Bush I re registered a Democrat..Now I wish I'd become an Independent although, I'm a Christian I support neither abortion or life..I just can't find peace with either and you should know I'm 62, a grandmother and great grandmother and still don't even understand my  own feelings.  

 I support McCain, as I respect and believe he loves his country and wants to serve his country with the hope of making it a better place.  The war is here and in my uneducated opinion; it would be dificult to walk out of a place we demolished where there  are the innocents as well as the terrorist.  I think McCain has more understanding of what we need to do now that we are in Iraq.  This even knowing my grandson is in harms way for another 90 days.

So don't assume who I am. None of this is easy for any of us, I'm more sensitive to the negative conclusions people have blatently stated for both parties, they deflect in energy for the focus on the real issues...

McCain is my choice as he is more experienced and in my opinion will also cut spending and government which is something I beleive has to happen in order to reduce our debt.  Obama appears to want to give more then we have to spare....I truly wish we had a crystal ball, and we don't so now you know why I'll be voting Republican.

 I wish Mc Cain could have crossed party lines and picked Hillary as his running mate...imagine that...team

Thank you for taking time to respond to my post.  Hope you'll stop by my blog and tell me what you think.  We are a work in progress. If you ever want to guest post..let me know...

Dorothy from grammology

http://grammology.com

Kelly, when I read your post I see you are actually talking about judgment. 

And I think judgment is one of the most hurtful things we can do to each other and it is the very thing that wars are based on.
Why are we so ready to jump in with thinking we know what is happening to other people?
Why are we so little prepared to give a helping hand instead, without even wanting to know the full story.
Haven't we as mothers learnt that you never know how things are unless you have experienced them and than even so, every situation is different.
We jump in with an opinion based on nothing most of the time and we are also not very good listeners.

You touched on a very good point and in one of your replies you are carefully seperating judgment from your having done your research about the policies.
The danger is also that in our judgment we drag everything into the conversation and start losing the plot and what we are actually talking about.

I too have been guilty of judgment, but I am more and more aware of it and how dangerous it can be.
It is not that easy to discern when judgment pops up though as judging has been part of my life for a long time as that is the way of the world.

Wilma Ham

www.wilmasblog.com ( http://www.wilmasblog.com/ )

I'm not going to argue the points of your platform - you have your opinion.  To me, Abortion is the least important issue facing our country right now. 

On the "mom to mom" topic, I will agree, the Vice Presidenty is not a typical job.  Neither is the Presidency.  Obama has two very young children - why shouldn't he be held to the same standard?  Won't his daughter's lives be disrupted with a 4 year stay in the white house?  How distracted will he be when he misses out of the joys of children growing up at such a young age?  Shouldn't we be equally concerned with his lack of involvement in their lives?  

My point is not that no one should vote for Obama because he has young kids.  I am just trying to show how this argument is a double standard.  Why should these arguments only apply to Palin simply because she is a woman?   

i guess i don't understand how any parent can support a man who so openly views an infants life as so disposable.  it perplexes me, and im curious how mother's, fathers, aunts, or uncles could lay down at night and say their prayers, then wake in the morning and support obama.  im not being sassy, but truely would like to know how that happens.

voting four times against even allowing comfort measures to be provided for those babies who were placed on cold metal shelves, still breathing, left to die... it sickens me.  yes this is all  to protect the mother's health, im aware.  but that includes her "mental" health as well.  its just not right.

 when i say my prayers at night, i beg god to not allow a man who has pledged to sign the freedom of choice act as his first duty become our president.

where have our morals gone?  do people not understand that they need to take responsibility for their actions?  i hate that we are turning into such a quick fix society.

i vow to my family not to allow my children to be raised in such a way.

in the same way it is in Canada or England... many of us would stay with our exact same health care plan we have now.

McCain will tax your plan benefits as income.

If you think Health Insurance is expensive now... just wait until its FREE!  Universal Health Care would be an absolute nightmare and everyone with health issues would suffer across the board.

My daughter get lots of services because of her special needs, and when she turned 3 she was eligible for Medi-Cal.  The problem is, Medi-Cal is already so overburdened it doesn't cover all of her needs.  Thankfully with my job, my daughter benefits from both my private medical insurance, and the benefits she gets from Medi-cal (which is secondary to our private insurance.)  I am thankful there are social services in place for her to use and I do realize a lot of those services are because of liberal ideals.  I do not feel the whole country should bear the burden of health care for everyone.  In the end, it would be much more costly for us all to bear.

Brelly, you wrote:

Her stand on Abortion is not an issue for me. I am pro choice, but I
feel the abortion issue will continue to be decided in the state
courts, not in the oval office.

There will soon be supreme court seats to fill. You'd better hope your guy loses, if you are pro-choice.

Also, if McCain gets in, exerts predict the death of the employee sponsored health care plan; there won't be enough people to participate since many will drop out when their benefits begin being TAXED AS INCOME. And McCain thinks we can find health care for $5000.

From the NYT:

A study coming out Tuesday from scholars at Columbia, Harvard, Purdue
and Michigan projects that 20 million Americans who have
employment-based health insurance would lose it under the McCain plan.

On those two issues alone... Obama should be your guy. I'm confused.

On the original, mom to mom topic... I will admit that while I don't generally think Palin is wrong for having a career (I and every mom I know works!), there are certain, unusual circumstances to weigh here ... a VP position is very very diff. than gov. of a state with a population the size of ... Okalahoma City. She will never be home. She will (or should) work 16 hour days. that's life in the white house. This not a typical job! She has a teenage daughter expecting a baby and a special needs infant, plus all the other kids. Not fair to them, some might say. Others might say, fair to us? How distracted will she be? How distracted would you be?

KIDSFLIX ( http://kidsflix.blogspot.com )

You are insanely self-defeating. 

That group wasn't about the Mommy Wars. It was about the actual needs of moms with special needs kids. Do you need Sarah Palin on a commercial telling people to feel sorry for you or do you need equal, non-discriminatory health insurance.

 The last thing Special Needs Moms need is a visable woman with a special needs child - they have Jenny McCarthy to do commericals and be a celebrity advocate. Without equal, non-discriminatory access to health insurance as a platform - this is what Sarah Palin will amount to - a commerical.

Special needs moms need affordable and equal access to HEALTH INSURANCE.

 You're welcome from the rest of the country who didn't feel quite so
martyrish about their inablity to pay sky-rocketing medical bills.  The
rest of the country will do for you what you should have done for
yourself - vote for universal health care.

Empowering Girls: So Sioux Me ( http://www.traceesioux.blogspot.com )

Blog Fabulous ( http://www.blogfabulous.com )

Thanks for your thoughts.  There are many reasons this "first" doctor/neurologist is no longer my daughter's neurologist... one of them being that he couldn't let it go of the fact that I had to keep working.  ;)

I am not ignoring your points 1, 2 and 4, I just would rather not turn this into a debate.  Those are your concerns with the McCain/Palin ticket, and I respect that we can disagree.

I don't really have a problem with McCain trying to paint Palin as a Special Needs expert. When you have a family member with a certain condition, you tend to do more research and be more knowledgeable about that condition than most. Of course, the claim would have been far more credible, had he named some specific suggestions she made, or programs she endorsed.

But, since the GOP doesn't really believe in helping people beyond lowering their taxes and closing the programs those taxes pay for, any expertise that Palin might have exhibited would be pretty meaningless.

And for that reason, rather than her status as a working mother, I would be a Special Needs Mom Against Sarah Palin.

-Lisse

@ Home in the World ( http://homeintheworld.typepad.com )

Well, I was trying to avoid making this post about reasons to support Sarah Palin, but I will be fair and answer your question in #3.  No, my support for Palin is not simply my defending my own choices. 

Prior to the VP seletion for both parties I was very undecided between Obama and McCain.  In order to educate myself, I read up on all possible VP candidates for both back in March of this year.  At that time I read about Palin, and immediately loved everything about her, but knowing she was pregnant I thought her selection was unlikely.  I was thrilled when McCain announced her as his choice.  Here are my reasons:

I like what Palin has done in her state of Alaska - she ran against her own party to defeat corruption and she promotes ethics reform.  None of us like President Bush, and I think McCain and Palin's history for going against their party is what we need right now.  I think we need someone like that after 8 years of President Bush.

I really like her stand on energy development and feel we need to use more of our natural resources to break away from the use of foreign oil.  This will help boost our economy while also bring new jobs.  She has done much to help businesses in Alaska while also giving its residents an energy dividend check in the mail every year.  I like that.

She and I also see eye to eye on our support for our military.  While I feel we've been in Iraq too long, I don't think we should have an immediate pull out. 

I like that she has exectuive experience, something I think Obama is missing. 

Her stand on Abortion is not an issue for me.  I am pro choice, but I feel the abortion issue will continue to be decided in the state courts, not in the oval office.

In addition to my reasons above, I do identify greatly with Sarah Palin.  She is a working mother with a special needs child.  She is no nonsense, and she lives what she preaches.  Because of the issues above, and because of other concerns I have against the Obama/Biden ticket (stance on health care, taxes, economy, experience, etc.) I voted for McCain/Palin. 

Sorry to be so wordy, but in order to avoid sounding "snarky" in response, I needed to show you that I feel well educated on the issues I feel are important, and give you my reasons for my vote.

Thanks for listening.

Every time this conversation emerges I want to jump out the window (but I'm only on the second floor so it would be pretty existential...)  I was questioned all the time, someone once asked me if my 18-month-old knew the difference between me and the babysitter, OH I could tell you stories - and that was 33 YEARS AGO!!!!  How can this still be going on?  Brellyk is an American heroine - meeting responsiblities at a great emotional cost.  That anyone would question that (and I am waaaay on the other side of the electoral divide) is dreadful.  That we have to have two sides in this argument is dreadful.   We all do what we can and should respect that about one another.  We women are so good at supporting each other, and have been since the days of The Red Tent or quilting bees or women's groups.  It's a pity when we forget that.

Cynthia Samuels, Partner
Cobblestone Associates, LLP
Blog and Media Strategies and Content Development Online and on Television   

Don’t
Gel Too Soon ( http://dontgelyet.typepad.com/dontgeltoosoon )

NOW doesn't support Palin because they aren't a sexist groupt.  To say that Palin should be backed purely because she has a vagina is as bad as saying she SHOULDN'T be backed because she has a vagina.  That is a SEXIST statement. 

NOW supports women who are for the advancement of women.  Although Palin is all for her OWN advancement, she has a voting record that is AGAINST other women, making her the epitome of what NOW is trying to change.

It irks me when women don't understand the simple fact that BEING a woman doesn't make you feminist. 

I appreciate this response, and your thoughts.

1. I am 100% against Palin on so many levels - none of which involve her working while being a mother. I have worked for many years - I cannot judge that in another.

2. I can judge Palin's selfish use of her children to fodder her career. A child should never be used for political or career gain. I can also question her need to run for government office of this magnitude during a time frame when her daughter needs as much privacy as possible. She could have run (more successfully, I might add) for this office in four years when her daughter was in a less precarious and life altering situation. Note I did not say she shouldn't be in office, or be working - my issues is a presidency run in which she proudly put her daughter on stage to use as pro-life fodder. to note, I would say the same if it was a father doing so.

3. My question to you (and I know this will sound snarky, but is not intended) is: Does your defence of Palin to such an extreme have any connection to feeling you need to defend your own choices? (I don't feel you need to defend your own choices - but I know a lot of people have a habit of defending others to justify to themselves).

 4.  And I will say that I sincerely question her judgement when hearing the details of h labor and delivery.  Every mother has the right to decide how to birth their baby - but she took MANY MANY risks (traveling via air while in active labor with a preterm, special needs child also requiring hours of ground transport to get to an acceptable hospital being this is her ?? pregnancy).  As a parent, I don't care what she did - but I do feel that's highly indicative of just plain not-understandable risks she would be willing to take with others' lives if in office.  I mean - doesn't that alone bother you?   There's no doctor in the land that would have said that was a good idea.

Good post and conversation starter!

Thank you for your response and apology.  I appreciate you hearing me. 

Rather than respond your comments here about the GOP ticket, I'd prefer this post stay on topic about Moms against Moms in general.   I will respectfully agree to disagree with you about Gov. Palin and her qualifications.

And thanks, Rita Arens, for the rational, straightforward approach.

About using special needs as an issue to get votes, you are absolutely right.  I have also read a lot of blog posts lately by bloggers who were upset when McCain brought up Palin's knowledge of special needs in last week's debate.  That bothered me too, and I wish he hadn't gone there.  However, I think that issue is separate from the one I try to make in my post. 

And for what its worth, in the same debate Obama was just as guilty of this when he brought up Autism.  Both parties are now trying to use hot topic issues to get more votes, and it saddens me that special needs is being thrown out there for that purpose.  They are using us not to create more awareness of our issues and needs, but rather to get sympathy from others and get the vote.  It is very sad that it has come to this. 

I, too, have been really surprised by the number of my liberal friends who have said something to the extent of "but don't you think Palin shouldn't be running around the country running for office with a baby?"

Sorry, guys, but I think if she chooses to run around the country running for office, then I'm not going to judge her for it.  As a working mom who didn't necessarily want to be a working mom, I know you have to walk in another person's shoes before you can really understand his or her challenges. 

I disagree with Palin on the issues, primarily women's issues. I think she's an uninformed moron who's dangerous because she believes she knows what she's talking about when she clearly has no grasp of the way the world works. She's George Bush in a skirt.  Affable, winking, clueless and dangerous.

But please -- questioning whether or not she should work sets us back forty years.  Thanks for this post. I think you did a good job of isolating the problem -- that women are questioning Palin's decision to work, whether or not they support her.

We can't do this to each other.

Surrender, Dorothy ( http://surrenderdorothy.typepad.com )- When I was your age, we just let them ride in the back window.

Rita Arens is a contributing editor for BlogHer -- Mommy & Family.

I completely agree with Atena. I don't condemn or condone any of the personal choices that Sarah Palin has made, but I do condemn the fact that she supports a variety of policies and politics that seek to restrict the choices and support that mothers and families have.

PhD in Parenting - http://phdinparenting.wordpress.com ( http://phdinparenting.wordpress.com/ )

iBrelly, you are so right .... it's really not like me to stereotype and generalize! I apologize to everyone for saying that if you support Palin, you're either a diehard GOP or a fundamentalist Christian. I'm very sorry. 

I was also responding to the conversation here which seems to be so pointed to criticism of Palin being a working mom.... In the news blogs I visit, and the circles I keep, in all honesty, this doesn't come up... EVER... it's not even a part of my thinking. I'll agree with you all that that is wrong and pig-headed and very 19th century! 

I guess, in general, I'm having a very hard time understanding smart women endorsing her... If, God forbid, she became President, I truly think we would be in a deep heap o'trouble. BEFORE she went to debate camp and spent four days memorizing talking points, which also honed her rally-speech skills, she could not answer the simplest questions in impartial interviews. And they continue to shield her from further scrutiny.

Doesn't it seem like someone who has the potential to be our President very soon should be holding press conferences and doing regular interviews, with media beside Rush and Hannity?

THIS is unAmerican, to me. (Also, the media is not covering her ties to the radical secessionist group in AK (read about this! they ARE radical and extreme), or her prophetic church, or the witch hunting pastor who blessed her... Why not? That all plays into my feelings about her, as well. Talk about a slanted mainstream media...)

I think everyone has the right to decide whom to be voted. Even you closest friend, she has no right to change your vote. We have different choice, but I can respect your vote and I hope everyone can do the same to other. I'm proud to your persistance to your own vote. 

Vicky Adams ( http://www.quitsmokingeasily.net/Start-Meditation-... )

mom 101,

the point here is that when geraldine was nominated
back in '84, most women were thrilled to death. also look at the
reaction hillary got this year.

again, no one has to like or agree
with palin's politics....but it is a step forward for women having her
potentially be the second most powerful person in the country. we all
know that much of the discontent towards palin is driven by the
abortion issue. if she were a pro-choice liberal, many women would be
supporting her. groups like NOW can't have their cake and eat it too.
if they back liberal democratic women in a position like this, then
they should also support when a woman from the other side of the
political spectrum advances opportunities for women. otherwise,groups like NOW
should change their letters to NOL (LIBERAL)W.

as for biden, i'm
sure as a senator he could have afforded some "help" along the way
after his wife and daughter died, leaving him to raise the 2 young
boys. i applaud him for coming home on the train every night from
washington, etc. to care for his kids. the problem is, folks like CNN's
john roberts wouldn't have asked biden if he could be both a VP and
care for his kids at the same time.

although i'm a republican,
i'm predicting that mc cain will lose the election and obviously will
not run again. i also think obama will be a one-term president and that
we have not heard the last of palin. if hillary is planning on running
again in 2012, she will likely not be the only woman seeking the
highest office. i think palin has accounted herself well overall and
will be heard from again.

for posting this. It's shamless how McCain/Palin suppoorters have spun this legislation to make it sound like Obama eats babies for breakfast. 

Brelly, I won't beat a dead horse here, but everyone knows (and the truth hurts) that moms play a bigger role in daily parenting and nurturing than dads do, in most cases anyway, AND five kids vs. two is quite different, as is having two with special needs (an infant and a teen mother).

KeegsMom
KIDSFLIX ( http://kidsflix.blogspot.com )

Maybe it's because I didn't grow up around women who had a choice about working. Nor have I ever had a choice about working. My husband and I never earned enough to allow  one of us to stay home -- not with the cost of living in New Jersey. If someone can manage being a SAHM and thinks that's what's best for her situation, more power to her. If someone thinks I'm wrong for working two and sometimes three jobs, well, they are welcome to pay my bills. Otherwise, I'm busy.

But I do know about parenting a child with special needs, and I know we have a lot of work to do. I find it frustrating when Sen. McCain invokes Gov. Palin's baby as a reason why the GOP ticket would be better for children with special needs. I'm sure Trig Palin is a beautiful child who is much loved and that's great. That tells me nothing about the policies you'll enact in the areas of health care education public accommodations and employment for all of our childrent and their families.  It's just another way in which our public discourse has been dumbed down this election year, and frankly I'm getting pretty tired of it.

Kim
BlogHer Contributing Editor ( http://blogher.org/blog/kim-pearson )|Professor Kim ( http://professorkim.blogspot.com/ )|

My 4-year-old daughter has autism and epilepsy, so I'm very interested in these issues.  When Gov. Palin was nominated, I started my blog, Special Needs 08 ( http://specialneeds08.blogspot.com ).  I looked forward to a healthy exchange of ideas as the campaign evolved, especially since to that date McCain, unlike Obama, had not really laid out a plan to help children with special needs.  After following this issue closely -- reading positions and commentaries on both sides -- I am still amazed that while Obama and Biden have explained how they will help families dealing with disabilities, McCain and Palin have not.  They talk about research in the same sentence they talk about a spending freeze that would keep autism research woefully underfunded.  Their health plan would exclude coverage for people with pre-existing conditions -- like, say, Down Syndrome or autism.  Read more at http://specialneeds08.blogspot.com ( http://specialneeds08.blogspot.com/ )

Keegsmom,

Simply saying, "I don't know one woman who has an issue with this" is somewhat bold, and naive.  Do a simple Google search and you will find many bloggers who take issue with the fact that Sarah Palin works outside the home and takes her special needs baby with her on the campaign trail.  Also, I do not like that you unilaterally decide that any woman who supports Palin are die hard GOP'ers, or fundamentalist Christians.  I am a Palin supporter and I am neither. 

Just as there are serious issues to weigh for Palin, there are just as many serious issues to consider for Obama, McCain and Biden.  My post and opinion was not posted as a way to "rally around Palin", but rather to bring to light the issue that this election has started to divide women in ways none of us imagined.  

Sounds like you got some really great advice about your role in the situation - maybe she needs to hear the same thing.  It's sad when women can't support one another. 

April

www.AprilsLittleFamily.blogspot.com ( http://www.AprilsLittleFamily.blogspot.com )

Dorothy, Palin being a working mom is not the issue! ...  I don't know one woman who has an issue with this, as they all W O R K, including myself, and I know many women who are alarmed by Palin.

There are other serious issues about her that need to be considered. If you are not truly evaluating the whole person here, who happens to be a woman, then I can only guess that you are supporting her because you are a) a die hard GOP-er, who will support any GOP candidate, and/or b) a fundamentalist Christian who wants to see one in the White House.

I'm so happy to read someone who is disappointed at the women who have been extremely critical of Palin and McCain.  I've worked out of the home for almost 30 years and it never reflected how much I love my children and now grandchildren.  On the contrary I couldn't love them any more and if I could I would have stayed home, however, like most women today many of us have to work.  And often there is guilt and concern that we cannot fulfill all of our obligations yet out the door we go. So when we hear it it's even more hurtful, as we've already beat ourselves up in our hearts and minds.

 And if Sarah wants to be a working mother, she as well, is entitled to making her own decesion and providing for her family while her husband who is every bit as capable of being the parent and more involved in the day to day family needs does so.

So thank you for giving me a positive thought regarding Sarah as it's disheartening to read negative stories regarding mothers who are not everyday stay at home moms.  I think some full time moms don't give as much as those of us who leave the home every day.  Love and care are not always calcualted by the time spent with children. What we share and teach is what a child will leave as an adult and continue as they have their own families.

I'm grateful for all my time with my family and hopeful I've given them enough to be strong willed, filled with family values, and do the same with their children some day.

My best,

Dorothy from grammology

grammology.com

Hi!  I'm new to blogher and only posted this when a commentor from my blog suggested it.  What a wonderful group you have and thank you all for your thoughts and comments.

As for your question, specifically, this special needs mom and a few others I know like her where outraged that Palin would agree to be VP in light of the future needs of her son.  Specifically, "Palin needs to be at therapy with him, etc." and "she should be home raising her kids."

 Since that e-mail, I've also seen many blog posts about her political views, and how the parties are now using "special needs" as a hot topic to try to get votes.  Just because I support McCain/Palin, I do not want that to overshadow the very real way in the issue is dividing special needs parents.   A heartfelt comment left on my blog (by an Obama supporter) said it best, " I think we all lose if this race breaks apart the strong network of [special needs] parents that we have."

Thanks again for your comments and thoughts.  And thanks for listening to mine.

Ha, Atena, Palin doesn't say anything about how she would help special needs families specifically, because the GOP is keeping her under wraps and she's not speaking on ANYTHING. I believe she vetoed a budget item that would have given money to special needs families.  But who would know? Who can ask her?  This has to be a first for a candidate of this magnitude. Why are people ok with this?

Not one press conference where reporters could ask about her legislation that might help families (past and present), about her stance on birth control/education (she was pregnant when she got married... and now her own daughter will become a mom at 17, with her boyfriend dropping OUT OF SCHOOL to get a job and marry her.. Hmmm. is this all GOOD? Is this conservative values at work? and the hypocrisy... remember the right's flap over Murphy Brown? and she wasn't even REAL!); they could ask about her religious views (young earth? Dinos walked with man? or does she NOT believe that? i don't know!), and about her and Todd's affiliation with the very extreme secessionist group in AK, which is affiliated with militia groups and others of questionable tendencies... and what about the witchhunting pastor who lay hands on her?

It's an abomination she is not able to be more closely scrutinized, especially after she couldn't answer some pretty basic questions with K. Couric... they cut her off. Foreign policy? Supreme court issues? States' rights? Poverty? Education?

God forbid she should become president. Colin Powell is right to call it as he sees it.  There are PLENTY Of reasons to dislike Sarah Palin. I'm really appalled at what's going on.

KeegsMom blogs at:

KIDSFLIX

http://kidsflix.blogspot.com

I'm sure you didn't mean it to come across this way Dave, but it's a little insulting when I hear that women should be happy that "any woman" is running. It's not, any more than Jews were supposed to be happy that Lieberman was running last time around, or that veterans should be happy that McCain is running considering his history of votes against veterans.  If the candidate doesn't support your interests, then the commonality of gender actually becomes more repelling than appealing.

I also can't give Palin credit for "trying to make this a better country" because I don't for one second believe that that's her aim in life.  And I certainly don't think that the best interests of this country were in McCain's heart when he chose her.

As for the notion that no one challenged Biden - I'm not sure what his alternative would have been. He's not a rich guy. Single parents have to work.

Mom-101 ( http://mom-101.blogspot.com )
( http://coolmompicks.com )

I hope, in a way, this almost puts the issue to rest. Bipartisan working mothers! lol

Politics & News Contributing Editor
Queen of Spain ( http://queenofspainblog.com/ )

I'm totally against Sarah Palin, and it has nothing to do with her choice to be a working mother.  I'm a working mama, too - I bring home the good insurance and my husband takes excellent care of our daughter every day.

As it relates to special needs, I am against Palin because I think that her views on how to fund public programs may lead to cuts that endanger many of the services we have depended on to support our daughter.  I think what I've read about her record - not to mention the general fiscal conservatism that is symptomatic of many republicans - could lead to less access to things like Early Intervention services, less subsidizing of the very expensive physical therapy and orthotics that make it possible for her to walk, less compensation for professionals that provide these services through programs like Medicaid, Early Intervention and other human services programs that already don't have enough to help people to need it.

I don't appreciate how she trots out her 'special needs family' status, but doesn't say anything about how she would help special needs families who don't have the privileges that she enjoys.   This has nothing to do with her personal choices and everything to do with how she presents herself as a professional person.

I believe that mamas should have at least a little sympathy for each other.  But as a public figure, her status as a mother doesn't exempt her from criticism or accountability.  So I won't be beating her down about her personal choices, but I find her professional positions to be problematic and feel responsible to say so.  I don't think she's trying to make this a better country for everyone, just the people who look, think and act like her.  That is not okay with me, and it's not okay for a lot of other people, and it has nothing to do with the "mommy wars."  It's about thinking people (many of them women) asking reasonable questions of our would-be leaders.

 I apologize for not providing links - I will have to scrounge some up later.

Peace,

Atena

Assumptions, Biases & Irrational Fantasies ( http://antibias.wordpress.com )

I didn't read the other comments so this is my opinion. Women are more often than not harder on women. And there are women who think they should be the ones that controlls others lives. It drives me crazy! Okay, I am not a mother of a special needs child but I have run into 'people' who told me it was God's will for me to get a babysitter and go to the Womans Prayer meeting every week. I explained to this individual person that my husband (who was working for her husband) didn't make enough money to pay rent and buy food so a baby sitter was out of the question. So I was out of God's will because I didn't do as I was told. Oh well.

Just do what is right in your eyes and pray and God will be with you.

Julia

www.aheartofmersea.etsy.com ( http://www.aheartofmersea.etsy.com/ )  www.aheartofmersea.blogspot.com ( http://www.aheartofmersea.blogspot.com/ )  

i've found the furor against sarah palin to be rather interesting.
you (women) don't have to like her politics, in fact, you can totally
disagree with them. i do think, however, women in general should be
happy that a woman is possibly going to be the next VP of this country.
as a male pro-choice republican, i obviously disagree with her on
abortion, but i am proud of her and her efforts to make things better
for the people of alaska and possibly the rest of the country. no one
questioned joe biden decades ago if he was capable of taking care of
his two young boys after their mother was killed in a car crash. so why
then is the liberal media questioning sarah palin? fine to disagree
with her politics, but the woman deserves credit for trying to make
this a better country.

dave

gocalifornia.blogspot.com

On a related note, my frustration is not with the mothers who work v. mothers who don't divide - my frustration lies in that we divide women into mothers and non-mothers to begin with.

Great post - thanks for getting us to think!

www.notyetawino.com ( http://www.notyetawino.com )

Erin - That bugs me, too. People like Dr. Laura and the like, women who quote the Bible but the convenietly forget women like Deborah, Ruth, et al. figures who completely invalidate their stance that mothers shouldn't work. 

Dana Loesch
Mamalogues.com ( http://www.mamalogues.com )

Host and executive producer, "The Dana Show" ( http://www.971talk.com/dana/index.aspx )
on Fox News affiliate KFTK 97.1 FM Talk