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

meta I think I have become more alive to the narrative as my DC grow.

I'm not a WOHM, so it's easy for me to brush it all aside. Ignore. But I have a DD who will be a woman one day soon. And, like most women, she will want to be a Mother. And, like most women, she will probably have to work, or want to. So I refuse for her to be saddled with these these negative narratives.

Simlarly, my DS may want or have to be a SAHD. You just don't know what the future holds. And I refuse for him to be saddled with a negative narrative.

x post with lots of posters.
metabilis3,do you think your dentist is icompetent? or are you just having a run of bad luck teeth wise.

The only people I think are low status are the sort of people who make things up on the internet and falsely put words in the mouths of others because they can't win an argument. I have never ever said I think SAHMs are low status, I have said repeatedly that if I won the lottery I would jack in my job that instant and SAH.

If you really think it's trendy to stay at home and that that's a Good Thing then there isn't much more to be said is there.

I don't think she meant "trendy, so it must be good." She was just admitting that being called damaging isn't much of an issue for SAHMs. Usually. But it is on this thread, and I think that's unfair.

But perhaps not as unfair as making up opinions and then attributing them to others? Or insulting WOHMs in the way that some posters in this thread have been doing? Hmmmm?

Actually though, I do think intensive micro parenting is damaging whether its done by SAHPs or WOHPs (I know some WOHPs who are incredibly micro and completely doing their kids' heads in and robbing them of any opportunity to learn how to take responsibility for themselves to boot). Some of the SAHMs in this thread have admitted to at the least intensive micro parenting tendencies. But that's their problem not mine.

I apologise to Metabilis3 if you didnt say that.
No,definitely dodnt mean "its trend to stay at home and that is a good thing".
Meant more women seem to be choosing or forced to stay at home,it is a trend that is happening.Then the media and advertisers and others,even Mumsnet, pick up on that sort of thing,hence cupcakes,more home furnishing and craft programmes,etc.

@amillion Actually you are completely wrong. ONS figures released last year showed that the percentage of working mothers was the highest it has ever been, at 30% and that 75% of 'middle class mothers' (whatever they are) were working. Clearly since the government cuts have begun to bite those figures will have changed especially as the cuts have been, purposely or otherwise, aimed at mainly female work areas. But people who are out of work because their job has been a victim of the cuts can't really be described as following a trend. And I seriously doubt these people are spending their money on cupcakes. Or 'craft'.

I farking love making cupcakes.

You can google for the reports of the ONS figures or indeed the official documentation from the ONS itself but heres a link to one report (they all say basically the same thing, I;m guessing the ONS released a fairly comprehensive press release quite late in the day) www.redonline.co.uk/news/in-the-news/number-of-working-mothers-rising

That was too my cupcake comment, not your very useful statistic! :)

@cheerful that's as may be (my DD2 loves eating them as it happens) but I've yet to see you post an 'argument' as inane as 'hence cupcakes'.

Yes, the number of working Mothers is at an all time high in the UK.

So the number of SAHMs is at an all time low. However, I think a recent trend is the emergence of industries targeting the SAHM £. So the profile of SAHMs is high.

I do sort of know what Million means though. I see so much more about decorating, gardening, baking, crafty, Martha-Stewart-esque things now than I aever did growing up. So why are advertisers aggressively going after women who are in the minority, as SAHMs are? Do they have more money? Or does someone have a personal interest in making SAHMs the "norm"?

I hope that makes sense, I'm only now having my coffee.

Ah well amillionyears that is a Trick of the Patriarchy - persuade women that they should be at home, and what's more that's it's quite the fashionable thing to do, what with all the cupcakes and Cath Kidston scatter cushions.

It's especially prevalent at times of economic difficulty, when there just aren't enough jobs to go around for the chaps.

(I am not accusing you of being the Mouthpiece of the Patriarchy by the way- but I find it interesting that you have picked up on it as part of the media narrative)

By the way we are nearly at the thread limit so if we don't resolve this within the next 8 posts we will need a new thread!

@word while Patisserie Valerie and its ilk are reasonably recent (well, a few years old now) Linda whatsername and Lawrence Llewellyn whosis were around what, 15 years ago? It's not recent is it. I think that the advertising push for yumminess is actually aimed at WOHMs who are supposed to be feeling guilty, getting us to buy all the perfect stuff to make our homes perfect despite us working - because of course, we can afford it, what with working.....

I honestly don't think these advertisers are targeting the women who are at home because their jobs have fallen victim to government cuts or because they can't afford to go back to work because their earning power is not robust enough to afford childcare.

Just another way in which our economy is hopelessly skewed of course. It should be easily possible to bring up a decent sized family in comfort on one average working wage. The fact that it isn't is a sad reflection on ......stuff. :(

I think that working mothers are at an all time high-very few have the luxury of choice-they can't afford not to work these days. It seems that it is the older women who are having to give up-sandwiched between childcare for grandchildren and caring for elderly parents.
There was a thread about Cherie Blair recently, who seems to have managed because her own mother was very 'hands on'. I wonder if Cherie will take a back seat and help her DCs with childcare and look after her mother if she becomes incapable of managing? (My guess is not, she would do money but not time-but I could be wrong.)

The Blairs live as an extended family. As is common around the world.

exotic, I'd prefer to leave Cherie Blair out of this discussion because of the rabid hatred she appears to arouse in readers of certain newspapers - it would be shame if she, Bob Diamond or any other high-profile person became associated on this thread with the concept of 'having an interesting job'.

Certainly most press is againt working mothers but never fathers. So if this is an all time high just as well we aren't in a low...laughing as I type. The stats by the way all show the housewife (thankfully) is on the way out. Also by 2020 I think women will earn more than men. Caitlin Moran in the Times who is a feminist was writing about that recently. We have now just discovered women's IQ is ahead of men for the first time too so the housewife and her no earnings thankfully are totally on the wane. Hand your pinny to your husband or someone who cannot get better paid work than scrubbing your loo.

I have never said I don't respect cleaners etc which is words constantly put into the mouth of working mothers on threads like this. I have said that some work can be done by just about anyone and is low paid or no paid and deservedly so.

It is certainly a myth spun by those who want to keep women down that it must be them at home and I hope all housewives and others work very hard to ensure that myth is firmly scotched. Perhaps they should wear t shirts as part of their housewife "off set" efforts saying - Working women rule.

She really isn't a feminist. She's an opportunist at best.

Am I not right in saying that,the population is higher now,so though there are more WOHMS,there are also more SAHMs in relation to WOHMs?

I haven't heard the WOman's hour programme ( as I'm abroad with some of the children, staring into their eyes for 8 hours a day... joke) but I think it is the duty of all women and particularly housewives who have the moral imperative to advance the cause of working women to make up for their damaging choice and its impact on other women, always to point this out. If a friend says she is staying home for the sake of the chidlren say - oh really? I think that's not correct. In fact children often do better if mother's work. Let us not continuous confirm untruths that children need mothers at home as that just keeps women in effect in chains who earn nothing.

Also be conscious how things change. I have had alittle children for more years than most mothers on mumsnet (as I had so many children over so long) but now the youngest are leaving prep school it is certainly easier. All yo uhave to do as a woman with a good high paid career (or man for hta tmatter) is get through the few years when it is hard (and it's harder at home anyway than working) and then it becomes much easier.

I got a week's notice today to do a business trip next week. I don't particularly mind as I get paid and like the work and more importantly the youngest are older now so there are not really any difficult issues over it. I certainly recognise people's comments above about unpredictability. It was certainly easier in my long marriage that by the end I earnd 10x so if there were a conflict of working and children unless their father had a ore imnportant immovable thing then my career would take priority and we knew from the start and he followed my career geographically as lower earners usually do.

I wonder how manyhouewives on the thread would be housewives if they had earned 10x their husband and had been asking him to give up 90% of family income so they could stay home?