So working mothers do NOT harm their children - stuff you (again) Oliver James

[LadyBiscuit]

A very comprehensive study (most comprehensive ever apparently) has been done which shows that mothers who work don't disadvantage their children. It does show that working under 30 hours a week is better for babies but that working per se can actually give children some advantages.

Hurrah

Articles: Torygraph
Grauniad
Washington Post

dear god what a socialsciencetastic rant that was.shall we beat ourselves with birch that soem children have no boden or strabucks

jjkm - Studies are not biased. They are good or bad. The conclusions drawn from them can be biased though. Any study that doesn't have enough detail to decide if it is good or bad can be disregarded (as well as bad ones obv)

JJKM "I really see nothing lost for me in staying at home with little kids. "

Your sould darling...your very soul!

annatw9 - people obsess over this as they feel like it is in their control. Issues that have a much bigger effect on childrens life chances such as health, pollution, economics etc. we don't feel we can control so we just try and ignore them, and waste our time obsessing over relative trivia.

how very pompous to infer research about something many of us do isnt worthy enough.well sister some of us can cope with thinking about poverty,socio-economics,and research about working mums.all at same time

The other thing about studies like this is that tell you exactly (and I can be precise about this) FUCK ALL about what is right for you and your children.

They can tell you broadly what the societal effects might be, point towards social policy idea, and say that all things being equal in an individual case there ix x% chance of y. But all things are never equal.

I happily stayed at home with my two boys until the first one started school. Don't regret it at all.

But really happy to be back at work now. WOuldn't change it for a world. However! I do think that there should be easier and flexible working conditions for mums that return to work. If I could work 3 or 4 days a week only I would be delighted.

In fact, I am sure many more mums would go back to work if conditions were a bit more flexible. And I don't care what people say, but surely it would benefit the children to spend somemore time with their parent.

Do come back and report on your success at studying or learning music when you're caring for two young children jjkm

My main point is be happy and satisfied and then the children will be whatever your life choices. My second point was women hav a duty to retain gains made and it is a political and moral choice whether you work or not which it is not so much for men. You damage women every time you request part time hours rather than a man doing so. It engrains the sexism.

Rich women which tends to be those who can afford not to do paid work (most womeh have always worked and always will) may also be able to afford a cleaner or time off to go to the gym or read but the reality of life with a small child is described in Rachel Cusk's book - you hardly have a second even to have a shower. Until you have a child you can't understand that but it is so. Also plenty of us have more than one. We had three under 4 at one time and both worked full time. It is very hard work. I found that harder than with the twins later as twins are at the same stage and easier to manage. A baby, a 1 year old and a 3 year old - huge fun now they're in their early 20s ad can be friends and I seem to have been to graduation ceremonies every year for years but when they're younger it's just not possible to do other things whilst looking after them. You can put a baby in a sling and push the vaccuum cleaner and they love being held and you get it done but if you've the 1 year old "helping" and 3 year old having a tantrum it's difficult even to get the 4 of you dressed by 10am.
Contrast that with doing what most adults ofboth geneders have done in all cultures from time immiemorial, the true natural way, which is hand them over to someone else for part of the day whilst you work or do other things. The ancient Romans did it, tribespeople do it, the British always did it.... tis the one true path and if it also ensures we get up those numbers round the cabinet table and get to a position when if a board of a plc is 70% femaleno one bats an eye lid then we might have made a few strides for women.

I love babies, breastfeeding, seeing them growing up,listening to them, being with them but not for more than 2 or 3 hours a day like most adults in the UK. No one says a man is a bad parent because he works. A penis shouldn't sanctify you with a halo. Also work is huge fun. Working mothers don't say this enough. They talk about wanting to work 2 hours a day . In many jobs people love their work whether it's working in the corner shop or performing major surgery or even just as a female or male farmer tending your land.

Xenia, 'true natural way' Anthropology is not my specialist subject but there are many examples of ancient cultures and differences in child rearing. The Romans weren't exactly known for being the most functional in terms of their family relationships. And the British didn't 'always do it' to my knowledge. Hunter Gatherer people (which we spent most of our evolution being) carry their babies in slings on their bodies until they can walk, and space their children (about 3 years) in order that they can manage the burden one at a time until each becomes a bit more independant. (interesting that studies suggest that at 2.5 yrs it is beneficial for children to be in a nursery style setting and mixing with other adults and children) When they are left with relatives they will be close family members or kin in high adult / child ratios and with other children who are also close relations. Its not the same as putting a baby in most contemporary professional childcare. The closest thing to though would be a childminder who develops a relationship with the child, not an underpaid young woman in a nursery who may or may not be around in 3 months, or next week.

Our DD was in childcare before she could walk, due to circumstances beyond anyone's control but I would have preferred if it hadn't been until later. I wouldn't have planned it that way. Now I am lucky to work in the public sector in a job with flexible hours, working 3 days a week, and it feels like the perfect balance. I regret that i couldn't do this sooner.

The Romans were certainly functional enough to rule most of the 'known' world - we might not LIKE how they organised their families or massacared and enslaved their enemies, but one thing they were is 'functional'. The thing that hunter-gatherers DON'T have, which is the cornerstone of civilisation, is a way of storing wealth. So they HAVE to go out to work everyday. It happens to be work that they can take their children with them to do, but it is still work.

I think arguments from 'nature' and 'evolution' tend to be almost entirely specious anyway. We are NOT hunter-gatherers anymore, our needs and the pressures on us are entirely different. Culture is our dominant selective pressure for behaviour now.

i found this thread i think it deserves some attention
Offensive men's t-shirt sold by Peacocks

jjkm, am I right in understanding you haven't had children yet?

Cos some of your posts sound wonderfully naive. I am not saying people shouldn't have an opinion on parenting matters if they don't have children, only that your view of the world will inevitably change based on your own personal experience of being a mother. Of which you know nothing about right now.

Still- I wish you luck. I should only offer a word of warning so you go into it with your eyes open: for a few months/years you will "do nothing but change diapers, mop, scrub, etc", AND you will occasionally be " miserable, stressed, or otherwise depressed". This is the reality of mothering small children, regardless of your socioeconomic or employment status, and the reason, I think, why websites like MN are so successful.

Personally, if I have to direct my energies and times towards something, I'd rather it be a job with money attached, as well as benefits and pension contributions, not to mention some degree of professional validation if I am lucky, rather than a "hobby". That, to me, sounds really very reactionary and diminishing of your abilities as a woman, but then I concede I have zero talent or inclination for anything artistic or athletic or crafty or housewifey.

jjkm,you paint a very homely picture postcard image of motherhood that is pretty unrealistic

what do you want women get approbation for housework,watching children and shoving a hoover about?hell i do that already and i work too. no one gets a medal or societal approval for watching their own kids and rightly so

aaah jjkm bless you! I know you have good intentions and there is nothing wrong with having ideals and a goal plan but, please, let me tell you, with 2 small children to care for the only time I have to go to the toilet in peace without being interrupted or actually finish a cup of tea is when I go to work! If you manage to learn a musical instrument while being a full-time carer of 2 young children, with the associated laundry, housework, tidying up (even if you have a cleaner) (and forget the gardening) then I will vote you THE BEST MOTHER/WOMAN IN THE WORLD, EVER!! - maybe once they are all in full-time education but before then, forget all these hobbies!

scottish mummy - please dont call me 'sister'.i have two sisters of my own, dont need another one.

Am I missing something here? I read Oliver James' most recent book and I didn't see him putting down working mothers at all, he quite clearly stated that in some cases a child was better off with a childminder than with a mother who wanted to be working but felt pressured to stay at home. Overall I thought he was very positive about mothers making the choices that suited them and their children best. He did say some fairly scathing things about nurserys, but I can't say I would be surprised to find that a 1:3 ratio was not as good for a child as 1:1, and he also made it clear he was referring to low quality daycare, not the good ones.
Maybe I was reading through rose tinted specs.

i called you sister!your socialsciencetastic rant.must have reminded me of summat.so anna dont tell other women what bleeding heart cause to prioritise when they have an opinion,on something that directly impacts.saying dont bother with all that stuff when people are starving/have no sanitation/live in poverty is pompous and trite

Well I remember I hated it when it wasn't my Mum picking me up from school years ago. I now hate leaving my kids on the days I work and they hate me going to work, and even say they want to kill my boss. I guess they are probably influenced by my attitude to myself going to work though.

I do feel terribly sorry for those kids in my sons school who get trooped off down the road to the after school club in the walking bus when mine are coming home with me. Often they are being snapped at by the bus 'driver' to keep up even before they are out of the gates. Even the little 4 year old Reception kids. I bet the leaders wouldn't speak to the kids like that if the Mums were about!

Everyone has a different attitude, but mine is primarily that my kids happiness comes before my own. In my case I go to work because we need the money, but am certainly not bothered about the 'adult interaction' when some of the people I work with are more 'challenging' than the kids.
I certainly woudn;t work through choice just so I could feel 'fulfilled as a person' as someone called it, when my kids hate it as much as they do.

my kids happiness doesn't come before mine.im not that big a martyr.its a both and thang.my kids are happy with the arrangements we have,and i need approbation from a source that isnt wholly being mum.being mum isn't enough.mentally or emotionally

marge what a value laden post assuming unhappy kids trooped off to after school holding pen,as yours gleefully skip home

They look bloody unhappy to me - but perhaps it's just a rubbish after school club. You should hear the staff shouting!

if thats what you observe fair enough,but well we can all swop i saw shouty mums/shouty staff stories

we all do what suits us,and overall loved,valued kids grow up into loved valued adults.irrespective of whether mum works or not

I think it's all about balance.

I don't get why some people (who DONT financially have to) go back to work full-time at the earliest opportunity (when child is under one yr) - what's the point of having kids if they hardly see them! I recognise these people are in the minority though.

Obviously its a different story if they have to work full-time for financial reasons - it's the ones who don't have to financially that I don't get.

kerching!you said whats the point...a moot point really

i dont have to work i chose to work.i am not compelled to return to work financially. i chose it wholeheartedly

the point being choice volition and i like being mum and working