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

No problem Narked I didn't think it was.

Flexibex that is definitely a factor but tbh, for me, I just prefer to be at home.

I got so much satisfaction and fulfillment from being with my son full time that going back to work has just been horrible.

I used to enjoy my job, now it leaves me completely empty. I'm not an Uber Mother by anyone's standards. I just loved being a full time mum.

I don't fell any need to justify that to anyone, it wouldn't normally occur to me to give this sort of thread head space. The OP has just managed to touch a raw nerve today that's all.

I certainly don't feel like I'm failing woman-kind by wishing I could spend more time with my baby.

In fairness Flexy "tosh" was aimed at the premise of this whole thread rather than at your comment about education (not that I agree with you)

What if I had given up my job to be a full time carer to a sick or disabled husband? Would that be wasting my education?

How would you measure what I should give back? Financially I presume? Well it might be possible that I paid more tax in my highly successful 10 years of work than someone else in an equally worth but significantly less well paid job does in twice that time.

It is then ok for me to give up (but not her?)

Since giving up I haven't claimed tax credits, nursery vouchers etc and next year I will probably lose by child benefit - so from that point if view I cost the state less than many working women.

Do you begin to see what nonsense this is?

Think of it this way - the state paid for my mother's maternity care and my birth. They don't obligate me to pay that back by abstaining from
Drink, fatty foods and risky activities which might cost the NHS money to fix?

Oh by the way I know four SAHDs at least one if whom gave up an extremely well paid job. I assume that everything in Xenias OP would have to apply to them too, sorry to report they are all terribly happy with their lot in life (and really according to Xenia's stats at least one should be miserable). I am quite happy with the idea of SAHDs - whyever not? It's not the decision we happened to have made for our family but growing numbers of families do it.

I really didn't understand why the OP suggests that SAHMs would think that only women can parent a child? There are plenty of working mums among the families where I've seen that attitude.

See, all I'm left with is the conclusion that the OP is indeed TOSH.

We can't reverse the sexes on the original post and say men shoudl never stay at home, until women have 50% of positions of power in the UK. It is not a gender neutral issue. As long as so many women give up work and hardly any men women do badly at work and make up so few positions of power in the UK.

However the basic point that most adults do not want to be housewives/ husbands because it's boring and unpaid holds true.

No, you're absolutely right.

As I was playing with DS first thing this morning, watching him copy my facial expression and learn a new word, I was just thinking, "god this is boring, I wish I was in the office".

Can I politely suggest that you stop obsessing about other peoples preferences and get on with your life.

I stayed at home and am one of the few of my mates who has never experienced depression Have several high flyers either knocking back wine or antidepressants to try and cope. But it is the telegraph

Xenia is hell bent on pushing this theory as it justifies her own choices and validates them. She doesn't get diversity and judges anyone who doesn't want to do what she has done. Big silver cup to anyone back in the office within 2 weeks of birth and a bronze doormat for those who choose otherwise

mothers and all those before....how many went about the house doolally because they were stay at home mothers? Get a grip. Actually ther's plenty of evidence of very high rates of depression in women during this era. The ratio of women to men suffering depression has decreased as women's roles have become somewhat more equal.

Strikes me as research from No Shit Sherlock University - all women are suited to being SAHMs, and for some it can damage their mental health, which can have a negative impact on children. Am looking forward to the follow-up study when the will be examining if bears shit in the woods.

sorry - post should read not all women

and quote should be "1940's mothers and all those before" - sorry!

HQ if this isn't a goading/trolling op then I don't know what is. Please will you do something about it?

I dont understand why the OP gets consistently so exercised about the choice of some parents not to outsource their childcare. Its sweet you are so concerned Xenia but as an intelligent sentient adult I feel confident in making choices that don't negatively affect my mental health thanks.

We left the City so I could be at home for a few years. Went up yesterday to meet up with friends who had made the opposite choice to me and went back full time to pay for private schooling, no judgements from either side as we are normal people who accept everyone is different and respect our friends. THe other friend I met up with has just been diagnosed with terminal cancer (aged 38). So all this seems rather pathetic to me - you make your choices you live your life we are all individuals make the most of it x

Well firstly the assumption that all SAHM's are "intensive" is wrong.

Secondly, the statement "the damage that being a housewife does to children" is really sweeping, not to mention, highly offensive. It is also directly contradictory to the research that follows which focuses on the mental health of the mothers. So which is it??

It could be neither. So how does this sit with you Xenia? My Mum worked full time during our childhood. We hardly ever saw her. She left for work the second we had breakfast, NEVER took us to school OR picked us up. She would come home after we had dinner. She never came to a parents meeting or a sports day. She was an exhausted stranger. Did she need to work financially? Yes to a degree. Do my sister and I wish that she hadn't worked so hard? Absolutely. Would we have given anything to have her cheering us on Sports Day? Yes. Did it damage our mother/child relationship? Oh yes.

oh xenia, xenia, xenia

i had a depressed working mother who worried more about status than her kids

go figure

flexybex - he educated SAHMs I know are giving back by creating huge amounts of social capital that many (not all) WOHMs sponge off and denigrate.

I am convinced Xenia is so eaten up with guilt about her lack of involvement with her children that she has to go here to justify it. There is no other explanation for her dismissal and criticism of a whole section of society she has never met!

pinkpeppa ditto!

give me a better reason to explain how being with your own kids, structuring your day how you please, getting plenty of time with them and yourself to read, educate, teach manners, see the outdoors, enjoy life at a slower pace, have time to cook nutritious food for your family, maintain a home, have time to hug your kids etc etc blah blah blah

not to mention the benefits of not having to outsource childcare for 2 mths of school hols, and of being able to use those hols as time to travel with your kids?

ditto Shakey, what you said. My sis and I have a very strange relationship with our mother now and our brother is closet gay. The perfect family life she wanted just didnt happen because she was never around for the emotional nurture that was needed to create secure, happy, confident children. Her kids are none of those things now - all of us have been or are currently in therapy. Sheesh.

Sorry, rambling.

As you were...

but note, that's just how it was for our family, not in Any way saying it's a blueprint for all working mother families at all

What whenyouseeitwaveorcheer said. There are so many variables. I am pretty sure that a child with two parents never seeing them is just as bad as a child having to spend all their time being parented intensively. Most households don't operate like this. Working parents make time for their children in different ways and SAHP are not hovering over their children all the time.

What pisses me off about all this is that these threads always pit people against eachother and the usual people crawl out of the woodwork to tell me I am a shit mother for having a job and vice versa.

I was going to write a long, intelligent response to the bollocks you're talking but I don't think you'd bother reading it so the biscuit will suffice

And for what it's worth MY idea of feminism is letting women make THEIR OWN choices, not telling them that they're shit or how to live their lives.

As it happens, I work part time. It suits our family. It doesn't suit all families. Because each situation is different. There are so many variables it's impossible to have any definitive answers. There's bound to be equally well researched gubbins that "proves" that working mothers have a detrimental effect on xyz. It's all bollocks. It doesn't apply as a blanket statement. None of it.

I don't understand this current obsession with trying to prove one choice is better than another. Why can't it just "be"??

Jesus Xenia, you're clearly happy with your life and your work and your children, why not just bloody shut up about how everyone else is wrong for 2 seconds at a time? You wouldn't like it at home, you wouldn't like to earn less money - fine, cool, get on with it!