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

I dont listen to radio full stop.So no idea what was on Radio 4.
Oh,and I am British

Metabilis, I can see why you get approached by other women and firms. A woman making her name in a demanding male-dominated area and most importantly on her own terms is so rare! That is inspiring for young women coming up through the pipeline and older birds like me who need a good kick every now and then.

If I had a mentor like you, I might very well have stayed the course.

As it turns out, I now work in a City law firm ft but flexibly. I am not a partner. Whilst I am not a trailblazer, I see myself as a placeholder for ft working mothers. There is almost surprise when the partners I do work with realise that I have young children and am married to another partner (different law firm) and am still working ft, sending emails at night or over WEs. Why? Because their wives in all likelihood don't/won't do that.

I don't have to work ft, but I do. And I deal with them as equals. And I apparently don't have any guilt or ambivalence about my choices. A small but important blow for feminism. Just chipping away.

I'm the one with great kids who are doing really well

And here we go again. Doing well in your estimation, choice again.

Xenia argues that any numpty can perform childcare and yet she pays for private education which flys in the face of this assertion. No one else see the irony in this.

The first 3 years of a child's life are crucial in the development of personality, motivation, language skills and empathy and yet some women are prepared to outsource this important learning to a "numpty" another person who is defined by their low paid status to be mentally deficient.

having never been in a boardroom in my life,can I ask if presenteeism and productivity is still seen as status or increase in human value by men

Mama, I am all for freedom of choice. But it is truly depressing how many women choose to exercise their freedom of choice in utterly predictable ways by choosing domestic bliss (what a 'lovely' life) over being a skilled and useful member of the workforce.

It sounds more like brainwashing/societal conditioning of the patriarchy than true freedom of choice.

Mini, "Women are not being passive, they are 2/3rds of the worlds worforce!!!!!!!!" Yes, the low paid bit of the workforce. And women in the developed world with a choice choose to opt out to (apparently) raise their own children rather than find accomplishment in paid work. Sad.

Mini, how is childcare comparable to private education? Both can equally be high quality. But you don't need a degree to do childcare, for sure.

Yes it is Million, which is why so many women struggle to find a work-life balance. Men willingly play the presenteeism game which sets the bar high for women. Women who's husbands do this find themselves find themselves doing a double shift, at home and in the office, never completely able to focus in either sphere and intensely aware that someone must make sure they don't drop the baby. Corporate profits have risen whilst wages have stagnated. The only winners are men and corporations.

I don't agree that if you pay school fees you are contradictory. I have said most of looking after under 3s particularly if you had 3 under 4 as we did is cleaning up, washing, feeding them, nappies. Yes, there is some singing, some playing and of course hours of breastfeeding which plentyo f we full working women do too through the night and after and before work and at weekends.

Working fathers and mothers spend a lot of time doing all kinds of interactions with their under 3s. I adore babies and toddlers but I would say for about 3 hours a day. I don't think someone else is playing with them whilst I and their father was a work means we are not bringing them up or talking to them or reading their bed time stories. Parents have always done the latter. My parents in the 60s always read to us each night and sang to us and working parents do that too. Plenty rush home for bed time either every day or some days as that can be nice. Sometimes we work late on purpose to avoid it too as bed time can also be very stressful as well. (Nice to have a choice).

I think the housewives on the thread seem to think if yo have someone caring for your childern form 8 - 6 5/7 days a week then you have basically opted out, you don't speak to them and you prod them with a stick once a day before bed and don't see them at weekends which of cousre is not how it is at all. May be they are just married to sexist men who don't like children and they think that man who has lumbered them wilth all the dull stuff is typical of working fathers and mothers when in fact that is not so.

This of course sums up the thread
"But it is truly depressing how many women choose to exercise their freedom of choice in utterly predictable ways by choosing domestic bliss (what a 'lovely' life) over being a skilled and useful member of the workforce. "

Yes, we want adults to make choices (as long as not tax payer expense) but not when lo and behold time and again it's the woman giving up a balanced nice life of work and home as most men achieve and instead becoming a bored and virtual servant at home, like a Saudi woman, the old kinder, kuche and kirche, a woman's place is in the home stuff.

Mini, the whole point is, that if women could/would strive long enough to reach the senior levels of an organisation, they can show how it possible to do with WITHOUT presenteeism and facetime.

Metabilis is a case study on point and has been approached by others within and beyond her organisation to ask how she does it. It is people like her, and not hippie communities or dippy SAHM-ing, who are making a difference in challenging the family unfriendly workplace.

AMericans can listen to Radio 4. And all other BBc radio stations as well. I find it difficult to believe you don't know that.

@mini not doing well in my estimation. Doing well in their schools' estimation. Doing well in their chosen activities (as measured by exam results, successful auditions etc) . Interesting that you don't challenge any of the 'I could have done really well if I wanted to' mob, but get all 'show me your medals' when it comes to me. Luckily my children have plenty to show (and all from a state school education too ) so I'm not fussed. But it is interesting.

@blue yes. Nobody who works with me is in any doubt about my order of priorities. The ones who know me really well suspect (or know) that I use the 'I need to FaceTime my kids, sorry' reason for not going out for dinner in the evenings when on work trips as an excuse to and the sort of socializing I hate and am ill suited for (I don't drink) but they know I'm serious about needing time with the kids every night (even if it is only throu the medium of apple gadgets) as well. It's not just the kids though - I make time in my life for my interests too, and people at work have to accept that. I'm lucky in my firm, I know, we do tend to have some mavericks in important positions which helps.

Metabilis3,slightly as an aside,as you dont come from a private school background,have you found that a hindrance in terms of social networks.

I am not one of the "I could do well if I chose to brigade" I am here to make a political point about motherhood.

I will not be goaded into playing child achievement top trumps and I am not interested in discussing personal lives, playing the person and making the politics personal. I can tell you I have more in common with working mothers and capitalists in general ( I work for myself, I run a business and work from home and have financial autonomy and an equal partnership)and that I have as much to gain as them in trotting out the work is best mantra and by consolidating my position in the pecking order through exhorting the capitalism/work is best mantra.

I don't trot out these arguments because I am more concerned with discussing the high jacking of women's innate natural capacities to mothering. Women have materially and economically been deprived and alienated from mothering, in the same way that workers have been alienated from the product of their labour. That is a historical material fact, not a personal opinion.

Not sad at all blueshoes well not for me anyway. I am happy and secure in my choice and I don't feel the need to berate others for theirs. I will however vehemently defend my choice, as it is that I believe to be right for me and my family

Please don't make assumptions and generalisations Xenia, I have not done so in order to make my point,

Mini, what about reuniting men with their innate paternal instincts?

if you encourage DDs to be aim for the best paid job they can, they will have a much greater chance of being able to be a SAHM, if they want to. money = freedom & choice

Mini, what about reuniting men with their innate paternal instincts?

did they ever have any? find me the historical and anthropological proof and we can discuss it.

Hello Tilly, you are the worst advocate of capitalism and money I know.

money = freedom & choice that is why millions of women around the world live in poverty because we pay them peanuts to produce what we will only pay peanuts to buy.

Exactly Tilly. Otherwise the message inevitably ends up being our dds have to catch the eye of the best paid alphamale, to maximise their choice to SAHM.

That would be slavery to patriarchial notions as well. Freedom of choice to SAHM is ultimately a sham if you are relying on male earnings to facilitate it.

Mini, on men and paternal instincts, you are being facetious surely. Or a slave to your biology.

Mini, look at opportunities in UK today. Not the peanuts to women in the developing world. You and others have a choice, a luxury still denied to many women outside western developed economies, to make your mark.

Even if the road is harder than for men, why fall at the first hurdle. That's just giving up. No glory in that.

Tie-ing women to their biology is the oldest trick in the patriarchal book. But that is apparently what you want to hand back to women.

The answer is for men to enter the domestic sphere and for women to take up positions in the workplace. Not to 'allow' women to go back to mothering as their life's work.

Mothering is life's work. The most socially necessary and valuable thing we can do for future generations. What I might add, is that childhood has been extended under capitalism, from 5-12-14-18-21+ years, where your off spring is largely financially dependent upon you.

I agree, we need more women in the workforce, doing work that benefits the family and society, we need men doing more care but we need to challenge the existing mode of production.

I am not being facetious questioning men's paternal extinct. Having studied (indeed aiming to study social theory full time next year) I have found no evidence that men have been paternal at any time in human history. Paternity to men, is assured progeny and private property.