What can be done to get fathers more equally involved in childcare?

[KateMumsnet]

Hello there

Maria Miller, the Minister for Women and Equalities, has asked us what MNers think could be done to encourage fathers to be more equally involved in childcare and education.

As you might know, the government proposes to change the way that parental leave works - after the first six weeks, working families can now choose which parent uses a 'joint' parental leave allowance. They can split it between both parents either consecutively or concurrently, or choose to have either the father or the mother stay at home exclusively, for the duration of the leave.

What do you think? Will shared parental leave have an effect on how families divide childcare? And what else could help to encourage fathers to become more involved in caring for their children? What about education - are fathers as involved as they could be? Please do tell us your thoughts - and any great ideas you might have - here on the thread.

Given that only women gestate and lactate, however, and that nature has evolved a hormonal cascade to make women want to care for their children, I wonder if it will always be the case that more women than men want to play the role of primary carer, simply because biologically it will be the woman performing that role for the first 9 months (with baby in utero) before the man can even get a look in.

Obviously there will always be exceptions and a society that encourages men to take equal responsibility will do much to equalise numbers, but I can't help feeling that women will always outnumber men.

I don't actually think that's sexist. I think it's acknowledging that men and women are different biologically, which they are. What's important is that the difference does not mean inequal. I think, for example, that rearing even very young babies is about much more than simply breast-feeding, which is why there is no reason men cannot make just as good primary carers and society should be restructured to allow that for those parents who want it.

However, I do feel that it is right that women should have a more significant status for a short, finite period to reflect the fact that their involvement in the creation and production of that child is far more involved than the father's. In some cases the woman's body is irrevocably changed for the worse, not to mention her mental health in some cases. Women take a much, much bigger risk having children than men can ever do.

As the child grows, this 'superior' status changes and equalises, but immediately post birth, I think women should retain the greater 'right'. In cases where both parents want to be involved, this shouldn't matter and society should allow both to be as involved as they want. However, in cases where the child is born and the parents separate or were never together in the first place, if the mother wants to be primary carer and it's not obvious that the father would be a better choice (because the child's needs has to trump both parents'), I feel the mother should have the greater claim.

allnew - agreed, but people can be damn good at hiding them and presenting a very good front - often for years. It's too simplistic and pat to argue that everyone who falls foul of someone who lets them down badly just chose a bad person and should have seen the signs. Often they weren't there. Again, you'd be amazed at the amount of people I come across who are known for being excellent judges of character or people who 'don't take any crap' who still manage to fall foul of these people in either their personal or professional lives.

People and life just aren't that neat.

Besides which, think of this scenario. You go out to work one day and forget to lock your back door. You come home and discover you've been burgled. You may have 'brought it on yourself' by being careless, but that doesn't diminish the burglar's responsibility for breaking the law.

The same should apply for fathers who refuse to get involved in childcare whether as part of the couple or as a separated co-parent. We don't reduce sentences for burglary based on how easy it was for the burglar to steal. Men shouldn't be given a licence to opt out because their female partners allowed them to either.

I just wonder though how many women and men actually have a conversation about childcare expectations before they have a baby. You don't get to have a conversation with a burglar before you leave your door open, but you at least have a chance to discuss expectations pre children with your partner. Clearly not a catch all, but I doubt many people really do plan ahead in this way.

I did. It was his suggestion that he be primary carer, so you can imagine my anger when he reneged on that.

Apparently some 40% of pregnancies are unplanned, meaning more than half are planned. I would have thought that the conversation, "shall we have a baby" would include some discussion about what happens once that baby materialised, even if it starts of in the realm of fantasy.

Trouble is, words are cheap and often sincere when there is no real understanding of what is involved. I really feel that parenting classes in schools are the way to tackle sexism in childcare attitudes and a general misunderstanding of what's involved in parenting by both sexes.

It's all well and good arguing that these are roles that should be taught by parents, but in many cases they are not. If you take a look at child abuse/neglect stats and the fact that nearly half of all children born now will grow up without both biological parents living together, it's quite clear that childhood in this country for most children is not the utopia that teaches good models that many would like to believe.

DH is trying to arrange flexible working round my new job - he has asked to work from home, one day a week, and every alternate week a second day, to allow him to drop at the childminders at a decent time before school.

There is no valid reason his company wont let him, he is in IT and as long as he can log into the system he could work anywhere, but "it's not their policy".

As our DC are older than 6 years of age, they don't even have to give lip service to his flexible working request.

Attitudes need to change in business.

atouchofstuffing - Didn't you say that your child was a donor baby? www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/a1698538-2ww-single-with-donor-unsure-but-against-the-odds-complicated-feelings#37641161

Do donors have to pay CSA?

Exactly flatmum- that was my approach and it works perfectly.

And what happens if it doesn't?

If you do X other people will always do Y is not a solution.

But it isn't just "other people" is it. It's the one person one has chosen to procreate with. Someone who has presumably been chosen as a life partner and someone you love and trust. Yes of course sometimes we judge people wrong (I'm divorced, I know ), but there is a hell of a lot within our own control to minimise the chances of ending up in such a hopeless position.

I agree allnew. In many cases, the signs are obvious and people make bad choices despite the warning signs. There are many relationships that go wrong where everyone could see getting married/having a baby was a bad idea, including (if they're honest) the people concerned.

However, the number of people who find themselves in a relationship where the other person changes their behaviour in a way that is unacceptable and yet did not come with advance warning signs is high enough for it to be completely facile to say it's simply a case of choosing the right person.

Maybe then the only real way to help immunise yourself against these risks is making sure, as you're growing up and getting educated/choosing a career, that, whatever kind of an idiot you end up with, you will be fine on your own and able to support yourself/your children. And don't give all that up to become so dependent upon someone else. Xenia isn't far off course with that idea as far as I'm concerned

There we are in agreement. I left my X very quickly after his behaviour changed in no small part because I was able to - I was financially independent.

Rather than judging women who don't as the architects of their own misfortune, however, it has made me realise how lucky I was to be able to do that. How much harder would that decision have been if I hadn't been in that situation?

I had the fortune to grow up in a family that was loving and nurturing. I had access to a good education and the intelligence necessary to gain good qualifications. Many of those things are denied to many people, and it is harsh to judge them for not having skills/resources they have never been taught or given.

It is again why I feel that if we want a nation where people are held accountable for their behaviour, we have to give them the opportunity to be the best people they can be - which means offering through state support the things that very many people are not getting at home. Condemning sexism is just one element of that.

I admit defeat Booyhoo and take back any statements about 'most' women.
About 8 women have said they wouldn't like it-and 9 if you count someone who would hate it for children under 9yrs- I agree that isn't most.

"I had access to a good education and the intelligence necessary to gain good qualifications. Many of those things are denied to many people"

But are education and intelligence denied to more women than men??

Intelligence, no. Education yes.

Despite the fact that education is equally available to boys and girls, and despite the fact that at present it currently favours girls over boys, education has to be seen in its social context. Girls are still pushed towards humanities, boys sciences. Our culture spews out boys toys and girls toys, all of which inexorably lead girls towards favouring certain subjects and boys others unless there is a huge attempt at home to counteract it.

How can you be "steered" towards humanities if you want to do science?

I wasn't steered to anything-I liked loved humanities and hated science. My brother was the same. How about not 'steering' anyone to anything and just letting them choose?

But I loved maths. Steering me to anything because of my gender would immediately set my back up.

Do you believe girls instinctively like Barbie or all things pink because of their x chromosomes?

If not, then you accept that culture encourages girls towards these things and peer pressure does the rest. Often, it is internalised to such an extent that a girl will tell you - quite genuinely - that she prefers english to science.

There will always be girls for whom the appeal of science is strong enough to withstand social conditioning and (probably) whose parents encourage her to see through the marketing BS and not bow to peer pressure.

There will always be girls for whom english is a genuine love and science anathema.

Most will not fall into either category and will instead grow up with pink toy irons and fall victim to social conditioning.

Just as, in fact, do boys, but with different results.

It appears to me that boys are applauded if they choose a traditional female subject and have the whole choice. Girls are made to feel that traditional 'male' subjects are superior. How can Physics be better than History? (or better than History if you are a girl)? It is like apples and pears.

But even if the girl did english instead of science at the age of say 14/15/16 - there are still plenty of high flying careers she could have chosen thereafter if she'd done well.

I think it's disingenuous to believe that woman are manipulated and steered against their own free will to this extent. It's so easy to blame "society". Among my peers I never felt anyone was "steered" towards or away from anything, other than doing and being the absolute best we could.

exactly exotic - there are plenty of people with science degrees who have ended up in call centres, just as there as plenty with arts degrees who have ended up running large companies. It's about having aspirations, initiative, independence of mind and talent. As a parent these are the things we must nurture. And you can have all of those things even if you like playing with barbie dolls

exoticfruits do you really think boys choosing Childcare or Nursing are "applauded"?

I was the only girl in my A level physics set. Didn't bother me, possibly due to strong gender neutral influences at home and 3 brothers, but I imagine it could well put other girls off.

My friend's DS is a nurse, starting with a history degree-he went onto be a nurse because that is what he really wanted to do-everyone says well done. If he was a girl he would get 'why can't you be a doctor?' I wouldn't want a career in the medical profession -but if I did I would prefer nurse and to go out into the community as a district one.
I know a male reception teacher-everyone says 'how refreshing-we need more'.
My DS's girlfriend has just finished a Science degree-she did it because she was fascinated with the subject-nothing more.

I grew up with brothers-there was never any distinction made.