Working mums: new study finds going out to work has no harmful effect on small children

[HelenMumsnet]

Hello. We've just had the heads-up on this study suggesting that there are no significant detrimental effects on a child's social or emotional development if her or his mother works during her or his early years.

In fact, young girls may even gain from being in a household where their mother works, say researchers at University College London, in a UK-wide project funded by the Economic and Social Research Council.

These findings run counter to those of some previous studies, which have suggested that children whose mother works in the first year of their life may be more prone to bad behaviour, or even to be more overweight.

What do you think? Do the new findings surprise you? Or confirm what you already knew? Do tell...

This is the article. It's McMunn A., Kelly Y., Cable N., et al. "Maternal employment and child socio-emotional behaviour in the UK: longitudinal evidence from the UK Millennium Cohort Study" J Epidemiol Community Health 2011.

'If she had had an income, she could have walked away.'
Very sorry for your Grandmother's situation working9while5 but many mothers are still dependent on their OH's wage whether working or not. I mean the mums who have to work as a dual income is needed for their mortgage. Are they really in a better situation than a SAHM who seperates but the household was run one one income? I agree if you are well paid and have enough to cover all the bills yourself then you can not be dependant.

Larald that is indeed very sad but we all have regrets and you did what was best at the time. I do know, though, of several people who regretted not being a SAHM with their earlier children and have gone on to SAH with further children. But there are also mums who regret not staying in work so you never know. It's easy with hindsight as with everything.

I do have alot of memories of my mum spending alot of time with us and at school plays etc. She SAH till we were at secondary and then worked full time. She regrets not being p/t when we were teenagers as we got up to allsorts at times in an empty house! But they really did need the money so she shouldn't feel bad at all and it was her choice.

I have read the full research paper and still think it is subjective, after all it was only white children, many things were that way because of household income and maternal factors, not to mention the mother reported her child's difficulties which could be affected by bias.

I've got the paper - PM me if you want.

"But they really did need the money so she shouldn't feel bad at all and it was her choice."

So if they hadn't needed the money, she should have felt bad jellybeans? What about your dad? Does he regret what you got up to while at secondary?

i dont need to work,no compulsion i chose to work, i want to work. i see this feeble platitude of well if you have to work or else poverty then fair enough.a mum may permissibly leave family if absolutely required to.but heavens above if she works because she wants to and its not a hand to mouth situation

Yes..the underlying message is that a working mother is bad but poverty is worse. Therefore a working mother who risks poverty places her child in a better overall situation.

But there is no evidence that working is bad so this calculation does not make a lot of sense...

I too love my job.

DS1 and DD also love my job because there are biscuits there

Larald, my mum was SAHM till I was 15, but I can't say I have a lot of childhood memories of her - the main one is resentment that she ordered salad instead of cake for me when we went to a hotel for my 8th birthday. (My poor mother).

Can't say the findings rock my world one way or another. My gut feeling is that you have to get out of the home and engage with the world somehow, and perhaps the main route to this is paid work (although a case can be made that it's not the only way).

i like that i get to pee on my own at work
dont hear muummeeee every 12 seconds

Larald, I was home with my amazing grandmother before going to school.

I remember (in no particular order)

• one day she put red socks on me while I was watching a particular children's TV programme while sitting on a bunk bed.
• cycling around the kitchen while she put the dinner on
• her saying something about finding something in nanny's room behind the wallpaper and wondering how it got there

The first two I remember really clearly but they are inaccurate. The television was not in the same room as the bunkbed. I never cycled around the kitchen either! I didn't even have a bike.. yet I "remember" them as clearly as if they had happened yesterday.

The third one probably happened. I have similar levels of memory about my mother/father in those years.

Not a lot to feel guilty about!

'So if they hadn't needed the money, she should have felt bad jellybeans? What about your dad? Does he regret what you got up to while at secondary?'

My Dad worked from when we were born so there was no change for him, I guess he never felt guilty, no-he saw his role as breadwinner. But my mum went from SAH to WOH and regretted doing it in the teenage years as she (looking back) felt we needed a parent just as much. She would have waited till we were 18 if she had her time again and was able to afford it (doubtful as it was the time of 15% interest rates). I reassured her (when she talked about it) that she shouldn't feel bad as we could see we needed the moeny. If it was not that she needed to money but was going stir crazy at home then I would have also reassured her.

So it may not sound like it but i do believe in choice. If a mum wants to work and can do then good for her. Happy mum, happy child and all that. I did it myself with DD1 and don't see myself as a worse mother at that point. I do feel I was going along with what was expected of me, though, not what i actually wanted deep down. I really enjoyed part time in fact but DH's job put paid to that. Luckily it meant i could do my degree instead while SAH.

depends on your plans.i always planned to work ft after kids.had it all organised and planned.researched nurseries and waiting lists when ttc. nursery place booked 12 wk pg. we both had it all worked out, and discussed pre-babies

You are one organised scottishmummy! Good on you :) I was organised with dd2, but dd1 took me a little by surprise then I did actually have to work to feed the wee babe I found myself 'Mummy' to at an early age.

Does this research apply to young single Mums?! Thank goodness I was young as it took a hell of a lot of a lot of energy. However after researching which nursery to use, I used the same in 2008 as in 1998 when dd1 was wee! I love it and they are as wonderful with dd2 as they were with dd1 a decade ago. However, I am no longer the parent most likely to forget a packed lunch when they go on a trip etc

cheers!i knew good nursery baby room like hen teeth,so aye was off the mark quick

Silly point, and not to in any way suggest that the anger expressed here about why mothers are singled out and why it is all treated as some magic 'choice' are in any way not true, but this study did look at men.

It took a cohort of children and asked their parents to comment on their behaviour. It does therefore include children whose principal carers are men. Its conclusions, interestingly, seem to be that behaviour is best among children growing up in households where the principal breadwinner is of the same gender to the child. Girls with mothers working outside the home, however, were still reported to be better 'balanced' than girls whose mothers stayed at home. Whether you think that is reporting bias is for you to decide (other studies have hinted we look more favourably on children of the opposite gender to ourselves, and my experience has been I find the kids less stressful on a part-time than full-time caring basis). But any 'this is all about mums' stuff comes form the reporting and the publicity not the study design, which did not exclude children on the basis of their father's role.

Interestingly, the other studies in the OP did not quite show what is being suggested here either. If they had been done using the same method as this survey-a large cohort with correlations noted-what they showed was that children of working mothers (and they were about mothers) were better behaved and less overweight. But the researchers there stripped the data so that only the 'working mother' variable applied-seeking to compare children when all other variables (including family income) were the same. That was nice and scientific, but also cloud cuckoo land since if you are making the decision to work that will obviously increase your income.

Brawtoken-but people do suggest that very often. It goes without saying that many people have to work to pay the bills and that is that but I just think that we should be honest about what the best situation is for kids, if their main carer is able to care for them without their health being affected.Clearly a mother who finds being a sahm testing to her sanity is better off working and letting carers care for their child but in most cases, according to the research I have read, the best place for a child to be is with a close relative.

I just think there is a lot of defensive-"oh my child is much better off in nursery...far more stimulating than just being at home.....and that is insulting to the hard working parents who choose to or are able to raise their children full time"

If you want to/need to go to work go but don't pretend that it is the best for your child. Just be honest and say it how it is.It is a compromise for the child that is sometimes essential but it is a compromise still.

no,youre too full of definitives and assumptions.no one has to explain why or justify predicted effect upon their children. if your judgement tells you to sahm- great do that.and equally if your judgement is work,then do it

'the best place for a child to be is with a close relative' - so this does not have to be the mum, it can be the dad, grandparent, other family members...too much of these studies are focused on the parents, whether it be mother or father and the positive/negative effect of them working or staying at home. I'm a single-mother and work-fulltime outof neccesity, but think I would also choose to do so if still with ExP. My DC are looked after by their grandfather, and I don't think they are any worse or better off than being cared for by me as a SAHM.

my dc spend majority of their time with nursery nurses and teachers.because thats what we chose as a family and it works well

Since there are some here who actually work in the area, can I ask what they feel the point of such studies is? I find the surveys useful because I am a working parent who feels deep down that there is a compromise (that I have more moments at work where I find myself thinking wtf I am doing here not with the kids than vice versa). The studies help me see beyond my own feelings and prejudices to a braoder picture. But that reassurance doesn't make me feel any less wretched at times.

I'm all for increasing knowledge, but once produced it enters a strange vortex of guilt-tripping reporting and is routinely disbelieved if personal experience or politics works against it. It isn't much use for individuals because we don't have free choice, and because the choices we make affect all the variables not just one (would a mother who put her kids in part-time care to do a degree in early childhood studies really be better off not doing the degree, for instance, with all the knowledge and potential access to increased income it gave?). And policy makers routinely ignore them or trot them out according to political instinct-there will be no shift in marriage couple tax breaks (which in essence favour one form of childcare) just because this report has been published.

we all adjust to our individual preferences and circumstances. research is peripheral to that decision.central is what family needs are, economics,pragmatic stuff.not research as determining factor

yes people bang the biddulph drum,but i suspect it confirms a deeply held existing belief - no amount of bidduph or oliver james was going to stop me using ft childcare. we had made our decision as parents,and trust our own judgement

Scottishmummy, I am so glad to read your posts. I always knew I would return full time and arranged a place for my son at a nursery while I was still pregnant. I definitely feel more worried about it since I had him, and sad that I won't get so much time with him after 9/10 months of being with him 24/7 and I definitely feel more judged since reading several posts on mumsnet about how awful mums are to go back full time but... I want to go back to work and at the moment, having spoken to the nursery and sorted out the finances I feel OK about my decision. I only feel really crap about it when someone tells me I should.

and that the rub,there are supposing how you should feel
it is actually a projection of how they feel
practise you're im listening face,as you steadfastly ignore the look and precious moments mamas. best wishes and do what works for your family

Jumping in without have read anything else, but just want to say - are working mums a new thing then? I thought mums had always had to work, since we were cave women...

It's possible to raise a family and have another job/role too, isn't it? As long as the child(ren) get input, time and affection from the parents as well as other care givers (related or not) then they'll grow up well and have a healthy attitude to being part of a community and contributing to society.

Don't we all just try to strike the right balance for our own families?

And yeah, I agree with you wompoopigeon - What about the friggin' dads? These studies always seem to be about slapping down mothers and trying to make us feel guilty and inadequate.

ive never felt guilty or inadequate for working.at all
it was always the plan.had it all worked out