mothers with young children are the most discriminated against at work

[paddingtonbear1]

I haven't actually found this in my company, and it's very small - only 18 employees. But I can imagine if I looked for another job, I might find it hard to get one, being a mother still under 40. I couldn't believe some of the comments in the 'have your say' on the bbc website though - most people seem to think that women who can't afford to stay at home shouldn't have kids at all! That would be me then! I don't think in this day and age, with mortgages and other rising costs, that's practical. I don't take advantage though, fortunately dd isn't sick very often, and dh does his share.
I think most of the people making the comments were men, or people with no kids...

Men and women are different whether we like it or not. Obviously some women seem to have an issue with that, which I find very hard to understand since I love being a woman and have never wanted a man's life.

I DON'T think that because we are different we have "to put up with it", whatever you mean by that. I think we have to accept it and that government policy should recognise that women have a different, and often heavier, workload for biological, not cultural reasons. I of course believe (and know) that men can do household chores (though I believe on average from observation and from what I have read that women are better at some household chores and men at others). But men cannot be pregnant, give birth and breastfeed and women need to receive adequate financial support and security to reflect that time in their life when they are caring for others who need them. I don't have the answers to what that policy should be (perhaps we could have another thread with ideas?).

Anna, I have concerns voer those pharam tests too. they also need to them on racial bases sometimes as well (sickle cell issues and also more diabetes in Southern Asians etc) and even worse most pharam tests are done on adults so you don't get research on effects on children either.

We rarely are allowed as full time working mothers to talk about how that can benefit children and be best for them so I like to expound that point of view as we get the opposite rammed down our throats my many stay at home mothers and newspaper articles all the time so yes I love to write about the damage done by mothers staying home but I try to restrain myself and at heart I respect people's choices although sadly the sexism remains and what many women regard as a choice in its essence if male exploitatoin of women, women giving sex in return for money in essence but clearly a lot of women like that so fine, I will let them be..... laughing as I type.... but never stay home because it's better for children because it isn't. Stay home because you love it. If you don't love it work and don't rely on men financially because that's dangerous and ultimately damages your children too.

Xenia - agree with all you say on pharmaceutical tests. Lots of crucial differences between human beings are not acknowledged, for reasons both of ignorance and political correctness... both unacceptable.

You obviously felt happy with the childcare arrangements you had and have. I have real issues with the childcare arrangements I see around me. I do like being at home (for now) but I do think some women have real issues choosing between financial security for themselves and their children's emotional security and I don't think this issue is discussed enough.

Ah, so I am not stupid afterall!

You have not been able to find one example of your postings on this thread that are pro choice, unless it is your choice!

Many women do 'men's work'[yuck at even writing that term] either through choice or necessity and many would like to be renumerated ona like for like basis. That has nothing to do with evolution or physiology; it is to do with fairness and justice and equal opportunities.

I'm trying hard to keep this from being personal, but I struggle to see how someone with such biased views of gender and the workplace could ever have given executive coaching to businesses. You wouldn't last two minutes in my office, possibly not even 30 seconds!

but soapbox you forget - her executive education was "racy"

I agree that men and women are different, but I fail to see how that difference is relevant in the workplace.

Specifically I can see that pregnancy and breastfeeding may preclude women from certain jobs at certain times, that physical strength may be an issue for certain jobs, and sex may be relevant in some jobs (I was a bra fitter once - no men allowed!) but what is the relevance of different skill sets of men and women in the workplace?

Not seeing the relevance in this discussion?

Most marriages last so my comment about women not relying on men financially aren't usually a concern. Even if they don't in the UK it's usually the higher earner like me who loses out financially although some men just disappear abroad. But some parents just can't cope with a child at home. It can be dull and boring and they get depressed and fed up and if instead your child is with someone who loves children like our nannies have been then that's better all round. My oldest are 18, 20 and 22 and I really can't see any emotional damage done to them through my working and lots of gains and genuinely and honestly our divorce was nothing to do with the work of either of us.

There are differences between men and women but also differences between women as much as between men and women and that is clear at work too so generalisations are hard. It is porbably women have better verbal skills which is perhaps why they now outearn men at age up to 25 in the UK and may be why there are more female millionaires under 40 than men in the UK. We also find a lot of young under-educated boys can't get people skills jobs in call centres etc because women have the skills the workplace needs and we no longer need their brute strength either. If boys could then become the main carers of babies fine but that doesn't always happen. So I suppose women are coming to the force they always should have had given our superiority and the male chromosome is dying out anyway although over a long period but we shall tolerate men for now as I suppose they have occasional uses. They do make upt 85%+ of the prison population and make most of the war on the planet so I'm not that sure what overall good they do.

Sorry only just caught up with latest on this thread and read in one of 'Anna888's posts that''only a child's biological mother can take true and proper care of a child''.
I am stunned !! Fathers can do this if they want to and have the opportunity. My DP has always displayed far superior childcare skills to myself. What an insult to all the single fathers out there to imply they are second best. This sort of thinking doesn't help women at all as it lets the men (who wish to be) off the hook.

Surely that's the prevailing view over much of the globe and the unspoken view of many housewives even in the UK though. I don't think she should be criticised for expressing it. Also if you work for 20 years, then have a child which will become your full time thing it becomes more like a second career rather than parenthood slipping into the rest of life and a lot of later in life mothers make almost a job of it, they "over job" it in my view, specify it, make it into more than it is to vindicate their decision but they're a minority anyway. Most couples in the UK both have to work for financial reasons and they don't have any help at home with cleaning and as has always been the case in the UK and was with my grandmother and great grandmother children just have to fit around a life's work.

soapbox - well, you wouldn't have lasted for a minute where I worked either, your analytical skills just wouldn't have made the grade. But fortunately we both seem to be good at the careers we chose and I am very fortunate in that I have a body of published work behind me that provides royalty payments and on the strength of which I have no doubts about my ability to restart work - only on my ability to keep my other commitments (which is the point of this thread). I am also fortunate in that my research interests are ongoing. To be honest, when I gave up work, I felt a bit "written out" but my career break gives me lots of time to spend looking at the world and refuelling and I am getting new ideas all the time for topics to write about.

I believe that ignorance, denial and political correctness, all of which this discussion thread is rife with, are the great barriers to human advancement.

Xenia - on your point about women having better verbal skills than men, a point on which I concur, there is plenty of evidence that boys' verbal skills improve dramatically if mothers (only mothers) provide intensive one-to-one verbal interaction with them. Mothers naturally and unconsciously talk more to their daughters because they respond more. So that would be an argument for mothers staying home with their sons...

Splutter

Fortunately, my analytical skills have never been in question Anna, otherwise my rather handsome salary might be under threat

So let me see, who was it that couldn't support their statements on this threat

hi i haven't read the full thread but...

i work at a school on a night 4-6 obv because i'd rather not pay for childcare and my mum willhave them

during the hols they make every one come in earlier on in the day and so all their hours overtwo days ie 5 hrs a day

i can not do this as i have no one to look after my kids which is why i took the job in the first place as it was an eveing job

after i got let down by my mil during the last hols they have said that i can work term time only and not get paid duringthe hols (i don;t if i don't go in anyway) but then i don;t get any hol pay at all

which obv makes me worse off as at least for 4 weeks of the hols i can take it as holiday

can they make me do this

I was coming from the pov that for an individual in the workplace, it is their own skill set that matters, and therefore the general differences between men and women are irrelevant.

For example, I am an engineer - traditionally something that is a 'man's' job. But to my employer, as long as I am a good engineer (which I am), my sex is irrelvant.

Also, I can't spell. Maybe I have a man's brain

Why is it that specifically mother's can increase their son's verbal skills with one-to-one communication? Is it because women traditionally have better verbal skills? Genuinely interested because DH is a lot more verbal than me.

potoroo - the research about improving boys' verbal skills compares mothers as primary carers versus outside professional help. Don't have any info about fathers, mostly they aren't the primary carer. But if you want to improve your child's verbal skills, you need to speak to it frequently in good correct clear English (or whatever your mother tongue is). Common sense, and the trouble with childcare is that children don't get so much (enough) verbal stimulation.

I hate political correctness to stifle any debate about anything. ONe of the nice things about England is so many of us would almost want to die than lose the rights of others who view we abhore to express them.

A whole series of factors determine how our children turn out. I think they're 50% their DNA for a start. Then there's how their parents treat them whether the parents work or not. Both working and non working parents abuse their children sadly, verbally and in lots of ways. For many parents children are a huge strain and going back to work ensures no one person is placed under that strain. If I have mine for up to 2 hours I know that's fine. Much longer and it's hard. I found taking all 5 skiing on my own for example in December my most difficult week for 6 months. Another sort of parent or either gender would love all that contact. Then there are parental separations or rows which obviously have an impact on chidlren too, loads of factors and to single out one - like mother at home as some sort of panacea is just wrong.

You could just as easily pluck out the figures that children whose parents are married stay together more often (which is true) and divorce may harm children (which I am sure if often does) therefore having a child out of wedlock is a pretty nasty thing to do to it and to risk or 60% of second marriages/partnerships break down so it's unfair to get together with someone who already has children and have a child as you're exposing the child to those dangers which are probably much worse of it's life/outcome than whether mummy is with it 24/7.

But in real life we make compromises all the time and do what is best.

I would however never like to say all parents can choose and they make the right choices. Some parents are hopeless and need the state to intervene in their parenting as it does every day in the UK in many families in crisis.

Anna - thanks. So from your summary, as long as the primary care giver is speaking frequently to the child, their verbal skills should improve.

I wonder if older siblings also play a part? But that is off the topic...

I can confirm that my 4 year old son has always had verbal skills far beyond his years. I and all other members of my immediate and extended family have always communicated thoroughly with him. He had a large vocabular at the age of 13 months. Approximately 20 words. When I told the HV what he could say, she laught and said 'don't be so ridiculous, he's a boy.'

This is the child who already knows what verbs and nouns are, can count to 30 in french, 100 in English etc!!

By way of summary then, we're all agreed that mothers with young children are the most discriminated against at work

my kids cant speak.

ROFL Custardo

Although it may be true about the discrimination, the evidence presented was shambolic.
The causul link between discrimination and effects was very weak, and seemed to take the form of "if you don't employ mothers, you owe us for the benefits they get".

The government sees intent on a job destroying compulsion for everyone with kids to get the right to "flexible hours".

Many jobs cannot be done this way sensible, and many of the rest wojld impose serious burdens on other staff.

The governent doesn't like small employers. Big ones get invites to 10 downing street and laws framed to suit them. A big firm can slosh people around ,but if you only have one or two people who can make the machine do the thing, then both of themn deciding that they need to pick up their kids from school at 3:30 will screw you big time.

It will make women harder to employ.
The government needs to make them easier.
That means skills like Excel, accountancy or even plumbing. It does not meen anything taught by arts grads like macromedia flash or Urdu.
If women aren't in emplotyment they shold be trained, since it's by far the cheapest way to do it.
Ah, but that means spending money, and there's no large company set up to provide it.

I was really lucky that when i requested flexible hours after having ds, they were agreed to as my employer did not want to lose me so they thought part time was better than no time. It took a lot of hard work and organisation but we are juggling the two fine now. I feel like i work harder than i did before and that there is more to prove now that i am working reduced hrs but i love my job and i want to work so i put up with it. I don't see why having a child should change my career aspirations etc. I know there are people in my dept that see it unfair that I was able to change my hrs and that there have been times where I have had to leave as I've had to attend to a sick ds but i just ignore it. It's my right to work but also my right to be a mother and i wish society would make its mind up on what they want. One minute we've got an obligation to work and contribute, next we should be at home if we're gonna have kids or not have them at all!!! Enough of my colleagues have time off for lengthy docs appts or family crisis or sickness etc but noone moans about that so why is it different for women who happen to have kids too. They should be grateful that we are contibuting to the tax coffers whilst providing a future generation to look after these moaning morons at the same time!!!!

potoroo - I have absolutely no scientific information about the impact of older siblings on children's general verbal skills. The only thing I do know, from personal observation and hearsay, is that in bilingual families where both parents are careful to give equal emphasis to both languages (ie mother speaks her language, father his, they choose one language to speak together) and the first child speaks both languages to the same extent, subsequent siblings find it much harder to learn the father-tongue as siblings generally adopt the mother-tongue between them. So I suppose we can conclude that siblings have an impact in reinforcing the mother tongue (and the mother culture).