Intensive mothers

[Xenia]

It seems pretty clear children benefit a lot if their mother has a good career and here is another piece of evidence of the damage housewives do to children:-

"Stay at home mothers are more likely to be unhappy than those who go out to work, according to new research.
Women who believe in "intensive parenting" are at risk of a range of mental illnesses including depression.

They think women are better parents than men, that mothering should be child centred and that children should be considered sacred and fulfilling.

This may put them in danger of suffering the 'parenthood paradox' where their ideology increases feelings of stress and guilt.

Psychologist Kathryn Rizzo, whose findings are published online in Springer's Journal of Child and Family Studies, said: "If intensive mothering is related to so many negative mental health outcomes, why do women do it?

"They may think that it makes them better mothers, so they are willing to sacrifice their own mental health to enhance their children's cognitive, social and emotional outcomes."
Related Articles

She said parenting is a big task and requires a variety of skills and expertise. Many women rate the challenge as one of the most fulfilling experiences in life.

But some previous research has suggested it may be detrimental to mental health, with women reporting taking care of their children as more stressful than being at work.

So her team at the University of Mary Washington, Virginia, looked at whether intensive parenting in particular was linked to increased levels of stress, depression and lower life satisfaction among 181 mothers of children under five.

Using an online questionnaire, they found out to what extent the participants endorsed intensive parenting beliefs by measuring their responses to a series of statements.

These included "mothers are the most necessary and capable parent", "parents' happiness is derived primarily from their children" and "parents should always provide their children with stimulating activities that aid in their development".

Others were "parenting is more difficult than working" and "a parent should always sacrifice their needs for the needs of the child".

Overall, the women were satisfied with their lives but had moderate levels of stress and depression.

Almost one in four had symptoms of depression and these negative mental health outcomes were accounted for by their endorsement of intensive parenting attitudes.

When the level of family support was taken into account, those mothers who believed women are the essential parent were less satisfied with their lives. Those who believed that parenting is challenging were more stressed and depressed.

The researchers said overall, the women were satisfied with their lives but had moderate levels of stress and depression.

They added: "In reality, intensive parenting may have the opposite effect on children from what parents intend."

Earlier this year a study of more than 60,000 US mothers found 41 percent of those not in work experienced worry compared to 34 per cent of those employed.

And 28 per cent suffered depression, eleven per cent more than the others. Psychlogists fear the phenomenon is linked with feelings of isolation and a lack of fulfillment. "

www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9381449/Stay-at-home-mothers-more-unhappy-than-those-who-work.html

YoYo, don't get your knickers in a twist.

My point was about conceit, of which there are bucketfuls in Xenia's posts.

Now I have visions of twisted knickers and a line of women seeing who can urinate furthest on the grass. At least we can't get into penis size. (Mine would be biggest of course)

Oh FFS how many posts about one poster?

'If there were no lawyers you would always find in all cultures and groups rules would be drawn up, even in communes. If you aren't a hermit you need some rules.'

'Childcare should not be economically rewarded at all,. It's low grade stuff anyone should do so rightly the market rates it at zero value'

Here's an example of conceit: I have juxtaposed her apology for the functioning of lawyers (and bear in mind that according to MN lore, Xenia is a lawyer; according to her own recent post and many others in the past, a very successful one) with her scathing disdain for the functioning of sahps. Apparently if there were no lawyers society would actually have to invent them they are so necessary, whereas childcare, which co-incidentally Xenia does not do, is a task so low grade that it should not even be paid for.

We might be able to afford universal free childcare if more of the rich paid more taxes. That way, maybe more women wouldn't feel they had to interrupt their march to the boardroom when they had babies.

Xenia - childcare will always have economic value indirectly as it facilitates parents working. Also women bearing and raising children provides the future workforce society needs.

Many families struggle with a single wage, especially the national average wage. It is often the most quoted reason for both parents working.

maths - but lawyers are useful. i have taken a company to court for sexual discrimination. i use a company lawyer as well to help me with work issues (and very handsome he is too)

not everyone can be a lawyer.

i dont think looking after your own children merits a financial reward. Looking after other peoples is and should be paid.

you dont get paid to clean your own house, you do get paid to clean someone elses.

ma, isn't that what the working mothers go on about - that housewives suggest we (and presumably working fathers) don't do "childcare". In fact all working parents do hours and hours of childcare. I will have done more than any housewife on the thread if you add up 5 children over nearly 28 years weekends, evenings, holidays. I have more childcare hours notched up than any other mumsnetter despite working full time I suspect.

Yes of course childcare has a cost but as anyone can do it the rate you pay to someone to do it is very low or the cost of keeping a housewife. It is not a high paid task.

I don't think I've said I'm a lawyer.

Xenia - assuming you're as elevated as you say you are, I find your lack of precision with language startling. When you say childcare is low-grade stuff (I work, btw, not that it should matter) you must surely have seen the macro-economic impact of poor childcare on society? The studies around early years intervention? The market may have found a low wage for childcare but the social cost of negligent parenting is immense, and the "back-up" costs for intervening are also significant.

Xenia you are coming across as so incredibly up yourself I am now hiding this thread

I have five children too. The oldest is 22. I was a sahm for years, so I think if we sat down and added up the hours, I would probably come out ahead of you, hours-wise, even though you had a head start of six years. I should get bonus points for DD3, who was a terror for the first three years of her life.

I have also represented myself in court, against my exH, a lawyer incidentally. And I won.

So ner ner.

And I think that's QED.

'as anyone can do it the rate you pay to someone to do it is very low or the cost of keeping a housewife. It is not a high paid task.'

The reason why childcare is not high paid work is because it is assumed to be women's work, not 'anyone's' work. 'Women's work' is assumed to be easy, uncomplicated, and by misogynistic and circular reasoning, 'anyone' could do it, but strangely only women do or used to do it. Therefore women's work is not highly valued and not highly paid.

The fact that women perform a certain task automatically reduces its value in this fabulously equal society we live in where women earn 75% of what men do across all walks of life.

Teaching and nursing are equally underpaid and undervalued and considered to be vocations and not careers or ways of making money, or they were until men started entering those professions.

I know who Xenia is supposed to be but who is to say that she really is that person?

Metabilis3 I SAH because I want to and it is best for our family. Dh works ever changing shifts. Unless we both want to work away, nights and Xmas days etc (we both used to) then it is easier to have a parent at home. Also the most important thing to me is time with the DC so i would rather stay home than sell my time to an employer. I also am not keen on group daycare for little ones (I used it with DD1) but that is personal and if people are happy with their childcare then that is great for them. I certainly wouldn't say I was a SAHM because of something on your list! Because none are true in my case! That is like me saying some WOHMs should admit they work for holidays etc! (when it isn't the case for most!)

Exactly mathanxiety childcare's value has historically been kept low not because good childcare does not have intrinsic value, ( producing well rounded, productive members of society is very valuable) but because of women's (as the main carers) perceived worth in an unequal society.

'If you were that happy with your choice to work then surely you wouldn't give a rat's arse about what other people do.'

Excellent post MonaLotte

@Jelly it sounds like you stay at home because you husband is adequately paid enough that you can afford to. What's wrong with admitting that?

On the daycare point - you can't possibly be qualified to comment on all daycare solutions.

Xenia,who does the chores in your house,men or women?
Oh yes,on the whole women.
Why dont you get men to do them?
Oh, that is right,because you cant.

Yes I did say that is personal to me (the how I feel about daycare comment).

Yes my husband earns enough for me to SAH but that is not primarily why I do it and I wouldn't describe it as that. DH's job has an impact due to the unsocial hours and if we both did the same hours one of us wouldn't be here kids birthdays, Xmas etc. So you could say his job limits what I can do because we both worked shifts with no option of part time/day shift only without a struggle. I could choose to work although would need to pay for childcare (and find one that does evenings etc) and I have 5 DC-although 2 are teenagers. But I prefer SAH, it just feels right for us at this time. I have worked in the past (DD1 full time childcare) and may do again at some stage. We went down a long road to have DCs including multiple late losses and I want to be here as much as possible. I am not especially mollycoddling though and do study several hours a week so DH often has DC on his own which is great. I feel one if us should be here as much as possible and it just works out better for us this way with no stress about childcare etc when shifts are changed last minute.

I did not bring her children 'into it' I said it would be interesting to hear the views of the children who have had xenia's ideal 100% every day.As I don't know anyone who has such a religious view to working and reaching a certain level. I am not saying there is anything wrong with working I work but it is not right to present anything else as less when the people living that way are perfectly happy. Xenia is always quick to comment on the children of sahm if you look back

Xenia,if you converted 1 woman to the cause,but put off 100 others,would it still be worth it?

I doubt getting more women in the boardroom would make a lick of difference in a patriarchal capitalist society. Even some women devalue work that is done predominately by women, such as stay at home parenting. I wonder if an 80% representation in the boardroom would make it de facto women's work.

What a strange world, indeed, if men stayed home and women just took over the workplace. We would at least see how deep-seated this patriarchy really is. I say we start by not devaluing work that women do, even if it is considered just 'women's work' by the patriarchy.

Boardroom salaries would take a nosedive if it was suddenly women's work, and childcare would become highly paid and valued, overnight...

or maybe its because most people are able to look after ther own children and not many people can run a multi m/billion pound company (or would want to)?

No, apparently anyone can do it. If only they wanted to.