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

Xenia you know what, not everyone wants to climb the stiff corporate pole of male-dominated capitalism...

I'd rather be at home with my DC doing finger paintings and watching Shaun the Sheep.

Each to his own love. You climb the old greasy shaft if you want. As a feminist I applaud... good for you, enjoy your life and all that but please could you lay off bullying SAHMs? Our kids, our choice how we look after them innit? Why does it bother you so much that I don't have to go to (paid) work any more? I've spent nearly 20 years in fabulous self employment, doing what I loved doing and getting paid well for it. I've paid my dues. Now, with a two year old, you know what, I can't be arsed with the world of paid work any more. I'm perfectly happy and guess what? I'm sitting on my sofa RIGHT NOW drinking a cup of tea and idly surfing the internet. Deal with it.

nicely put, kendodd.

@noclueatall I've spent nearly 20 years in fabulous self employment, doing what I loved doing and getting paid well for it. I've paid my dues. Now, with a two year old, you know what, I can't be arsed with the world of paid work any more. I'm perfectly happy and guess what? I'm sitting on my sofa RIGHT NOW drinking a cup of tea and idly surfing the internet. Deal with it.

Brilliant. That's exactly what people should be saying. You had the economic power to make the choice you wanted to make. And you aren't flim flamming it. That's exactly the way things should be.

The only reason women like Xenia spout so much on Internet forums about this topic in particular is because they are wishing they were living this life of being a SAHM. The grass is always greener....

I don't feel the need to put down mums who WOH, it's their choice and in many cases they really don't have a choice because they need to work to put food on the table. Each to their own. We all have different circumstances.

Sorry lovechoc but that is utter shite. Utterly predictable and utterly unimaginative!!!

If you feel the need to insult, you need to do much better than trot out the usual crap of being a. jealous or b. unhappy.

I've been pondering this - and I've realised that the snidey things people would say to me about WOHM mothers back when I was a SAHM myself, were actually very rarely about what was best for the dc.

It was all about a judgment on WOHM as women. Things like 'why would you have children if you never get to see them' or 'Well I would never want to leave my children with a stranger etc. '

Guiltmongering as a form of bonding and self validation.

It was pure competitiveness, and only from Xenia have I ever seen that in reverse.

I think that competive drive is brilliant in the workplace and that is where it should be directed - however, competitive parenting is inherently destructive. It leads to dysfunctional families where we make choices based on the ideal rather than the good enough.

If I ruled the world we would all be able to celebrate the lifestyles we have chosen. It should be perfectly acceptable for women to make decsions based on their own interests, not just based on what is currently perceived to be ideal for their dc. That might be deciding to go with jars rather than Anabel Karmel or BLW because you hate cooking and cleaning. It might be choosing bottle over breast because you don't enjoy breastfeeding. It might be following NHS guidance on sleep training. It might be choosing to be a SAHP and wear a sling, it might be reveling in a career. It might be co-sleeping. Whatever the choices, it would be less intense and competitive.

In real life I've cut contact with the competitive parents I used to know.

Thanks Metabilis I do feel quite strongly about this sort of thing. Yay for mums that go out to work and yay for mums that get to stay at home.

Yay for mums. End of debate as far as I'm concerned.

There are more important battles to be fought in the world of women's rights. Equal pay, pensions rights... for example the Department of Work and Pensions can't even say whether SAHMs will lose their National Insurance credits next year if their partner's tax bracket means that they're no longer eligible for child benefit. They don't know. What the actual fuck??? They don't know, because they DON'T CARE. No one cares about SAHMs. We're invisible. Luckily, some of us have long memories, that even the ravages of pregnancy hormones and repeated viewings of Fireman Sam can't erase, and I'm pretty sure the lawyers, journalists and TV producers amongst us might have some things to publicly say about that sort of shit when they get back to the world of work.

Patronise SAHMs at your peril world. Eventually we're going to scrape this Weetabix off our blouses then we are going to KICK YOUR FECKIN' ARSE.

Hear hear Holyey. It's all such utter bollocks. AND it's designed by the patriarchal capitalist machine to grind us down (to sell us Supernanny books, Anabel Karmel weaning pots, Aptimil, breastpumps, expensive Boden baby socks... you name it, all rubbish.

As far as I'm concerned, any mum who loves her kids and really nurtures them is doing a good job. Anyone with anything to say on the matter can take a running jump.

I'm a mum and I'M MAD AS HELL!

I'M MAD AS HELL! angry or just mad?

...where is scottish mummy when you need her wit?

Holey I'm not a SAHM nor am I a WOHM, though I have been both.

I am an inconvenient outlier. An objective onlooker. And I am always shocked bu the attacks upon WOHMs. That their parenting, their very womanhood is called into question.

Given that most women do work it is highly corrosive.

ANGRY. Well, angryish. The sun's shining, it's Friday afternoon, I've got the house to myself and life's pretty sweet.

Actually, right now I sort of don't really give a fuck.

anyone?

noclue I wish you were right, but all the reasearch and data shows that women don't return to the workforce and regain their influence after taking an extended period out of the game.

They seem to fall into low paid. low influence positions. Soem stay home forever. I'm seeing it now wiht all my friends. They just can't get back to where they were. I certainly know I couldn't pick up my old career.

Agghghhh wordfactory you're quite right. Have smashed and now Friday mood is ruined.

Actually, sad to say that as a 40 year woman old in a media job, my career was kind of fucked even before I had time out to have children.

The pressure on intensive parenting through sleep training / weaning style / feeding style etc are all relevant. There is extraordinary vitriol and slander against parents who use controlled crying both here and in real life. But nobody can do a responsible job well if their baby has had them up ten times a night for the previous ten months. Nobody who has a baby and works full time has the spare time for preparing complicated weaning and toddler recipes. These choices will have sod all impact on the child's long term welfare but can have a massive impact on their mother's quality of life.

There is massive guilt if we don't somehow find a way of martyring* ourselves for our dc. And I think that is the real problem. Men are not pressured to do these things, they don't get criticised for working full time, or for loving their work.

*If you don't mind the interrupted sleep or you find the cooking from scratch and the shopping and clean up it entails fun, good for you - I don't mean you.

@noclue Yay to mums indeed. But BOO to flim flam. While I wasn't not supporting your choice (I do support your choice, it's yours and yours alone to make) what I was most supportive of and celebrating was your honesty. No film flam or self justification, nor pretence that you'd find a regular job 'boring' - just pure honesty. You could afford to do it so that was what you were doing. So refreshing. No flim flamming about damaging your children if you aren't there to do every bit of homework for them.

@noclue I'm sure the ambiguity in your mention of mothers who 'really nurture' their children was accidental though, right? I mean, you wouldn't be suggesting that I don't 'really nurture' my children by virtue of WOH, right?

I'm actually a terrible mother but it's not because I work.

No it bloody wasn't! By "really nurture" I mean actually mean pretty basic stuff like feed em, cuddle them, listen to them, keep them alive.

I don't think that means staying at home with them actually. I think a lot of that can be safely outsourced and one doesn't need to spend every day boiling organic carrots and homeschooling for a child to thrive.

I think every parent can decide for themselves how to parent children and I think the debate about SAH / WOH mums is a total red fucking herring. Really. If your child is happy at nursery / with a childminder / nanny and your happy at work, where's the problem? It's how they do it in more civilised countries anyway and their children turn out just swell.

Disclaimer: I might be a SAHM but my parenting style can best be described as benign neglect and I have many WOH mum friends who put my efforts to shame.

But, and here's my point. It doesn't matter. I'm good enough, and so are they.

Yay to nocluenolueatall - I think you are refreshingly clued in - you speak much sense,

Quite I honestly I don't understand why anyone gives a shit what anyone else is doing as long as it's not harming them. For my part I can't imagine anything worse than competing all day long and having to prove myself at work only to come home and deal with four kids and the accompnaying packed lunches, ballet, Brownies, swimming, karate, blah blah blah.

Why the constant gobbing off on the internet? Why not just get on with your choices?

Yes, HG, it's why I do it - it's rarely seen in reverse so why not? You just never hear - gosh you're at home, didn't you realse that damages chidlren? Don't you realise the harm you do? Laughing as I type because housewives think they have a psychological moral high ground which they don't have.

What is very clear is we need many many more women in positions of power and earning more of the money and we will never get that if they all bail out at 32 to have babies and be off that career ladder forever. So that's the political issue. The personal issue is that I have seen far too many of them later regeet it when their husband runs off and they have no income and cannot getb ack into their job. Sunny Jim sacrificed nothing and had a nice family and children and his wife is left on benefits as she sacrificed all or else her chidlren grow, her husband is busy and she has an empty life and is bored and has lost purpose.

The thread has been nothing really about intensive parenting which is not something relating to being at home or not. Some fathers (and mothers) are the tiger parent sort. Some parents are totally uninvolved. I asked someone today why their sister gave up her career. He said because she was a perfectionist. In some ways they are the worst people to be parents as being a parent is about love and compromise. It is not about doing XYZ to a child and it emerges like a robot exactly as you planned. If you are perfectionist that is a reason to stay working as you will not be that great home with the children.

Exactly what noclue said, down to the benign neglect.

I bailed out of full time work at 25...oooo er! :o

I do not think I have any sort of high ground other than the satisfaction of being delighted with my life choices.

I'm benign neglect too. And sometimes, no so benign. Very very macro, me.

I think it's easier to do my sort of job now, with things like FaceTime. I can remember going to Beijing for a week (I was actually away from home for about 9 days I think cos there were two night flights) in 2001 and there was not only nothing like FaceTime or Skype, there was not even any mobile signal for the most advanced UK phones at the time. Nightmare. I remember doing thinks like standing outside TGI Fridays in Times Square when in NY, waving to a webcam and talking to the kids (well, the older ones) on my mobile (which did work there) while they watched me on the laptop at home and listened to me on the phone. It's all so different now, with mobiles that work everywhere and wifi and iPhones/ipads/laptops having FaceTime everywhere. The next thing will be for someone to invent the teleport or the trek transporter and then we will truly be living in utopia.

It's certainly easier now for parents of either gender to do business trips. Plenty of women do trips abroad. I had one just over a week ago although my children are getting older (youngest leaving prep school) that I am starting not to have the same issues as those away from their younger children. Also more can be done remotely. If I cannot be bothered to go somewhere I can often just refuse and do it by email. That is the power you get when you earn more and have a proper career. If you are always at the bottom you do what you're told or lose your job.

The issue of how much attention to give a child a different ages is never very clear cut once you get beyond abuse tige parent or the other extreme totally ignored child, parents on drugs, flat without food in it. (Gosh Rausing came to mind and I was trying to visualise a London council estate and children go to Kids Company for food).

Somewhere in the middle most parents are, male and female. You get the I just want them to be happy, let them make their own choices and no parental steer (and children may end up in call centres) and on the other hand My Jane will go to Oxford and then XYZ. Most of us are probably somewhere inthe middle, making sure homework is done, picking reasonable schools and giving some guidance.