Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

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

320 replies

LadyBiscuit · 01/08/2010 20:46

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

OP posts:
OrmRenewed · 02/08/2010 17:30

But it isn't a sahm/wohm issue is it? It's an issue for working parents only. There is no need for SAHPs to get upset or involved one way or the other. That is what is so stupid about all those comments on the Guardian site - why do they get so irate when it's clearly not impacting on them at all?

wouldliketoknow · 02/08/2010 17:33

i was a baby group with a few new mums like me, we were talking of how hard is to have a new born and a house to clean, when i said' thank goodness for dh who cleans, baths the baby, plays with him so i can have a bubble bath for an hour and spends the weekends doing the big stuff that takes longer, they all look at me , turns out not many dhs do this, most of this group's dhs got as far as calling the just gave birth mum when the baby cries, ah, and bring a take away sometimes 'so you don't have to cook, hun'
so when they go back to work i don't think these men are going to suddenly start thinking, right, i must do same chores now...

i intent to get back to work full time when maternity leave is over, and depending in circuntances (dh), ds is gonna need more or less childcare, do i feel guilty? hell no!

schmee · 02/08/2010 18:00

The comment from the article "Even for women who have to work more than 30 hours a week, they can make things better for themselves, they just need to take a deep breath on the doorstep, dump all the office worries behind them and go in the door prepared to pay attention to all their children's cues. This is good news for all mothers." made me pretty angry - soooo patronising. It's ok to go back to work so long as you can be absolutely perfect as a mother outside of that time - no pressure then. Just need to be more than perfect at work (to prove yourself as a working mother) and more than perfect at home.

I would question the idea that an advantage of going back to work is better quality childcare. I think working mothers really do themselves down when they say that the child gets more out of nursery than being with them.

PosieParker · 02/08/2010 18:08

I think we worry too much about a child 'achieving' at nursery too. Surely formative years are about play and nurture.

amothersplaceisinthewrong · 02/08/2010 18:16

So are SAHM mothers "second rate childcare" then, if working mothers have the advantage of "quality childcare".

Haven't read all posts, but sure its been asked - why are Mothers who work singled out.....

moondog · 02/08/2010 18:19

God, why do any of you give a hoot about what other people think of your domestic set up?

Noone really cares less anyway, apart from pop psychologists with crappy books to sell.

foxytocin · 02/08/2010 18:21

I need a 'like' button for moondog's last post.

Original poster
LadyBiscuit · 02/08/2010 18:25

Speaking personally moondog, it's because 99% of studies to date are determined to prove that working mothers have a deleterious effect on their children. Funnily enough, that has made me feel a bit guilty, given that babies aren't the most articulate people in the world. I am fed up of people saying to me 'oh well my child is too young to go to nursery' when they're 2 or 3 or the likes of Oliver James telling me I'm damaging my child by not living on benefits.

It's nice to redress the balance a bit. That's all. I really don't understand why some people are so hostile

OP posts:
bronze · 02/08/2010 18:26

Orm - I think its because what always happens (as it has on here) is that people start to make comments that make SAHM feel second best again.
Funny how WOHM and SAHm mums are all made to feel crap. Can't win really.

Original poster
LadyBiscuit · 02/08/2010 18:27

And as the end of the article in the Washington Post puts it:

The new study is "every bit as important as you might think," because it suggests mothers can decide, without guilt, "whether they want to stay home with their children," said Greg Duncan, a scholar at the University of California at Irvine, who is president of the Society for Research in Child Development.

ProfLayton - your link doesn't work (or not if you're not registered anyway!)

OP posts:
Catitainahatita · 02/08/2010 18:28

@amothersplace: Well exactly. The whole tone of the argument fits generally with the attitude that newspapers always seem to project; ie, a mother is wrong whatever shes does.

@moondog. I also agree. I have no beef with SAHM nor WM. I find it hard to understand why people feel the need to criticise their neighbour simply because they do things differently. Live and let live I say.

moondog · 02/08/2010 18:29

That's bollocks too LB.

What you mean is that crappy journalists with degrees in friendship bracelet-making rehash and embellish 'research' which was dubious in the first place to create asensationalist news article.

Fuck 'em.
You know what is best for yuor family.

Read 'Bad Science' by Ben Goldacre and you will never ever be troubled again for a nanosecond by such 'studies.

Northernlurker · 02/08/2010 18:32

I think the hostility comes from a feelinsg on the part of some parents that it isn't actually possible for someone else's (different) choice to be as valid as yours. I think that's bollocks tbh.
I don't care about other peoples setups as long as they keep their opinions zipped about mine

It's good to read this study being reported but I drew the same conclusion years ago

sprogger · 02/08/2010 18:37

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
LadyBiscuit · 02/08/2010 18:38

I've read Bad Science, there's really no need to be quite so patronising.

I'll be honest, I do sometimes feel bad that I work in a full time job and I think most mothers do. I may argue that it's best for us financially but the fact is that my DS spends more time with other people than he does with me. Although I think he seems perfectly happy, most research in the past has shown that it's not the 'best' for him. And of course I want the best for him, I'm his mother. What's odd about that?

I don't care what most people think but it's nice to have a serious study, whether or not you think it's bollocks. I'd be interested to know quite what your criticisms are of it. As far as I can see, it's fairly robust (or as much as these things ever can be).

OP posts:
Original poster
LadyBiscuit · 02/08/2010 18:41

Replace 'most' with 'some'. I don't wander round wringing my hands with guilt but I miss my DS sometimes and would like to spend a bit more time with him than I do but my job is not the sort of thing you can do 3 days a week

OP posts:
moondog · 02/08/2010 18:42

I'm not being patronising-it's called being humorous and dare I say it, supportive.

The prevailing viwe that mothers need to be with kidsat all times isat odds with what has always happened. Rich people have always famred their kidsout, poor people have laways had to work.

If you love your kids, provide for them, provide them with a stable home and devote time and energy to them when you are with them, you are doing a good job.

Original poster
LadyBiscuit · 02/08/2010 18:44

Sorry, missed that. I think it is an important study and I don't really understand why you're rubbishing it. Have got a screaming toddler here who won't eat his tea and two outstanding work calls to make so am probably being a bit tetchy

OP posts:
moondog · 02/08/2010 19:05

Well the link to the study itself doesn't seem to work.

I wouldn't waste 5 minutes on the newspaper articles that purports to summarise the study's findings.

sunny2010 · 02/08/2010 19:13

'The point about which is harder is not how much you have to do, it's the monotony and chore of stimulating your small child all day, everyday'

How is looking after a child monotonous? I never get that attitude. I have kids and work with kids and never think a moment of it is monotonous playing with children is the most fun thing in the world I think.

I dont think looking after children is a particularly hard job. I love it and never want to do anything else. Maybe it depends on how old you are and whether you are still in the kiddy things stage.

Catitainahatita · 02/08/2010 19:13

It doesn't work because you need to be a subscriber to the Wiley Journals website to read it. Which is a bugger.

Newspaper science as Ben Goldacre shows vry well, doesn't usually explain things very well. It's more a case of making the story "newsworthy" (ie, distorting the findings in a way to appeal to the prejudices and ideas of its readership).

scottishmummy · 02/08/2010 19:14

dont need research to tell me what i instinctively and intuitively know.by the gift of observation and i am able to ascertain my children like nursery.who'd have thunk it

the main purpose this will have on mn is ammuno in the mêlée that is "aibu to think why have children if you let strangers watch em..." something to bat back to the precious moments mamas who will cite biddulph

moondog · 02/08/2010 19:15

Biddulph.What a sanctimonious prick.

Original poster
LadyBiscuit · 02/08/2010 19:16

This is a better article (well from a more credible source in any event)

OP posts:
Northernlurker · 02/08/2010 19:18

I never get that 'why have children if you let strangers care for them' arguement. It always puzzles me because:
a) I don't have strangers - I have carers they know and like. Does anybody take their 1 year old to the centre of town and yell 'oy, strangers, watch this whilst I go deal stocks and shares!'
and b) nobody will be caring for their child every moment of their lives. In most cases God willing the child will become independant. In the cases where that's impossible other carers will be involved to some extent - have to be or the parents will keel over. So nobody raises their child life long alone. Our children are part of society not our property alone.