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

mini - i buy fairtrade where it exists. most my food is organic/fairtrade. most my nonwork clothes are organic/fairtrade.

lots of people choose not to. thats freedom. its far from perfect but it is better than the alternative.

'So how do housewives given the damage they do by staying home, ensure they right that damage? They should treat it like carbon footprint.'

'This thread is one too far. You actually sound like you are mentally ill, stuck with some repetitive narrative that you cannot stop spouting about.'

The system has got to Xenia. The Man has brainwashed her. It has become almost robotic, like a computer program spooling out a computer program, progrmmed by the Man.

What will happen if one of Xenia's daughters decides she wants to work in childcare or become a teacher in a comprehensive school. Lights will flash, arms will wave and there will be Dalek-like cries of "it does not compute".

claig

Yes, "Tie-ing women to their biology is the oldest trick in the patriarchal book". Men spend a lot of time with chidlren, love them and bring them up. It is just women with nothing much else in their lives to do who raise motherhood to a high pedestal - woman as Madonna. We need her kicked off there and have women as people, some who are bright, some not, some ambitious and some not and taking sexually neutral decisions.

Like Meta people say I am their role model. I have always pushed the fact I have children and you can have a large family and a lovely balanced life (just like a man does without any questions ever asked of him) and also I agree having your own hobbies too. What most adults of both sexes seem to need is fulfilling work, time with their families and hobbies. Working parents seem to achieve that pretty well on the whole. It's all good fun. If you can enjoy life and your work and relationships and families it's all a lot easier.

'So how do housewives given the damage they do by staying home, ensure they right that damage? They should treat it like carbon footprint.'

Although it wouldn't surprise me to to hear this soon from some venture capitalist 'boardroom' adviser, just as we have heard some advise the scrapping of a minimum wage and some maternity rights.

And of course, you know who that adviser works for and is paid by - the Man.

''So how do housewives given the damage they do by staying home, ensure they right that damage? They should treat it like carbon footprint.'

We have 50 days left to "save the planet", and you have 50 ways left to "right the damage".

That'll probably be the new slogan we hear soon.

i work for men but also an increasing number of women is senior roles. i also lead men.

This is a very emotive issue as illustrated by the pervasive use of the logical fallacy ad hominem.

SoMini the fact that my DH and many other men I know have contributed 50/50 in childrearing is nonsense is it ?
Its outrageous to say that men have no paternal feelings towards their DC.

Yes I breastfed both of mine but there is an awful lot more to childrearing and
I personally believe that that providing for my DC is as much a "Mothering" role as changing ,bathing and feeding them.
Denying the paternal role is an old trick and only serves those who are selfishly maintaining only they can possibly care for their DC.
My DH was brilliant with our DC when they were little , different to me but brilliant and he really enjoyed it .

My DP does 50% of the child care, as stated this is a political and historal materialistic point I am making, I am not talking about your husband, I am talking about class, the male class. good grief.

Perhaps Xenia is right after all women won't get anywhere if they boil every argument down to their own micro personal experiences. Hiding thread now.

mini so who are you talking about?

Don't give up Mini - I for one love reading your posts. I find them incredibly clear and insightful and you are as consistent as some have said Xenia is in your opinions - although obviously coming from a different standpoint. I think it is pretty clear your arguments should be seen in a historical context.

Sorry I misread what you meant - no need to "good grief" me

I think we all know historically the ways in which men have advanced themselves whilst knocking women down - your last sentence seemed to refer to the present time .

Mini, it sounds like a waste of your time studying 'social theory' as it bears so little resemblance to most people's experience of their partners' care and commitment to their offspring.

I would certainly not structure a society on it as it would just perpetuate the patriarchal hegemony, quite the opposite of what you want. Do you not see the irony?

@amillion I went to Cambridge so I'm not the right person to ask about social networks. I have an incredibly eclectic network of friends as a result of going there (and also as a result of my misspent geek youth). Where it used to be a hindrance but isn't any more is that I am quite obviously 'a bit common'. Well - lets say 'not posh' rather than 'a bit common'. But being a woman has always been more of a potential hindrance than being not posh, to be honest.

Thanks for that.You say being a woman has been a potential hindrance.Do you think you have been hindered personally?

"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."

Not every woman wants to go to the top, some are just happy muddling along in low paid work, as long as it pays the bills and they get enjoyment out of life, who cares if it's low paid???? Some people are just happy with this lifestyle as they're not interested in achieving lots academically!

Not every man wants to go to the top either. Why break it down to gender? Can it be just personal choice?

That last quote was about women, not men. Hence why I replied as I did. I would agree that men do not all want to be at the top either. But the OP was about women primarily.

We must not break it down by gender.We must not say men don't bring up children and love them and care for them. Many, many do and if some women on the thread have been silly enough to marry a sexist man who doesn't love or care for or bring up the chidlren 50.50 then more fool them but let them not taint all men with the brush of their aberrant men.

My dh works full time and I stay home, but he brings up and loves the kids just as much as I do IMO. Right now, I'm lazing in bed feeding our baby and he's preparing a roast/playing Lego with ds2/cleaning up. Later he will do ironing, decorate my birthday cake he and ds's made this morning and Hoover. When he's home he is fully hands on and loves it. We are a unit and that is how it should be. When I was literally floored by sickness bug he did everything.we don't look at life and view tasks according to gender and when the children are older I know I'll be in workforce unless my business ideas take off, which they very well might.

lovechoc I know, but generally I was thinking, why is this always that women are being limited. No one should be limits, everyone should be free and able to achieve to the fullest of their potential and choose whichever paths in life they wish. I hate feeling society is leading me to a particular box in which I should live. This is my life and may well be our only, I'm not going to waste it. Right now it is overflowing with richness from the joy I have of being home with my children, I will not look back and regret this time, but with regret that it was so brief perhaps

"This is my life and may well be our only, I'm not going to waste it. Right now it is overflowing with richness from the joy I have of being home with my children, I will not look back and regret this time, but with regret that it was so brief perhaps"

That's how I view my own life and DH also has lots to do with the upbringing of the DC and sometimes he's better at settling the youngest DC than I am. It's an equal role the parenting role, in our eyes. He does work FT, but he is also around for a large chunk of the week (as he does shift work) so is around to do the 'school run', take DC to appointments, do food shopping, etc. It's not all left to me just because I SAH!

If it's not all about gender, why bash stay at home mums? Why this constant need to put down those who make a choice of staying at home to raise their children for such a short time in their lives (let's face it, life is short in the grand scheme of things). I don't intend to sit around while DC are both in school full time, that will be my time to get back into the work force when they are both in school full time. I don't want others raising my children. Each to their own though. Why pay out money when I can do it myself.