Yet another article re: why mothers should return to work

[boogiewoogie]

Just snatching a couple of minutes during a coffee break, will come back. What do you think of this?

eleusis - so you don't think it is a child's right to be cared for by his/her mother?

but surely if a woman is divorced or widowed or her partner becomes ill her children are economically affected too. (Obviously they are also incredibly emotionally affected but that is unavoidable)

Economic security or lack of it affects the children too. Thus my point is it not just about the mother but the entire family.

If the only earner in the family becomes too ill to work longterm a family can lose their house if they can't afford to pay the rent/mortgage- This would most certainly affect the children.

There are obviously ways to shield against this - insurances etc but even if the home is kept, living standards could be much lower if the remaining partner is unable or unwilling to work.

Obviously things can happen that you can't control and both partners working does not mean that disater won't happen and that things will be economically fine after a divorce/death but if the remaining partner has some way of making a living things can be made slightly easier .

For instance my sister died at 31 years old (SAHM - never worked) my BIL managed to look after the children, keep them in the same school and with their friends in their same surroundings which gave them a stability they would never have had if he had had to move. This exactly what they needed when their mother died.

As it was they family were economically affected as my BIL had to pay for some part time childcare after school (my niece and nephew were 5 and 6 when it happened)but it was not catestrophic

If it had been my BIL who had died my sister left alive this would have been economically much worse. My sister would have had no means to pay the rent and would almost certainly have been in an incredibly precarious position which would have had emotional knock on effects.

eleusis - I presume on the 50% issue that you also think men should do half of all housework, half of all childcare, half of all domestic organisation etc?

lazycow - you have a point which is perfectly worth addressing, it just wasn't the particular point I am wanting to address.

I think that by women working you dont make men less responsbile. On the contrary, you make the role of a man and a woman less polarised and equal. Certainly in our family, me working frees my DH from the responsibility of being the sole financial provider and frees up more of his time to be with his kids. We have both made compromises in our careers so we can work flexible hours and spend as much time with our children as possible. I could have stayed at home, but it would mean that my DH would have to spend a lot more time at work and away from the children.

FM - sure, most responsible, intelligent people know how to manage their family lives given their own circumstances - like you, like me.

But I was responding to YOUR point about single mothers on benefits.

Of course by that I mean addition emotional effect to those suffered by losing their mother which were quite enough as it was without adding the worry of moving/having enough money etc.

lazycow - obviously your point has a particular impact for you given that it has happened in your family. I think it's very interesting, and it certainly illustrates that everyone, woman and man, must take steps to provide for themselves and be able to earn a living.

But it's a different point to the point I would like an answer to: how should a woman's economic risk in giving up work to care for children be covered?

anna8888 - the geneva convention on the rights of a cihld say it is the right of every child to have "a family life" not necessarily to be cared for by their mother. Yo umight not agree but that is the internationally accepted standard, I beleive.

Yes I absolutely agree that men must be made responsible for their children, but NOT necessarily for their ex-partner after a divorce. I am not sure I see your point.

And actually you do need certain rights in the workplace to arrange your family life the way you would like. You need the right to flexible working, time off when the children are ill, part-time, job share etc etc......You need family-friendly policies to avoid the scenario with children in daycare 40 hours a week.

suejonez - and how about the WHO recommendations that every child be fully breastfed on demand until 6 months and partially breastfed on demand until past their second birthday? Recommendations that the UK government, among others, endorses.

Actually Anna I think you have a very good point. Families in the past took up a lot of this slack. The problem is that the downside to this is that we need to accept the interference in our lives that goes alongside having large extended involved families. We also would need to stay closer to our maternal and paternal families.

And Anna - no I don't think it is a child's RIGHT to be cared for exclusively and soley by their mother (or father come to that).

FM - I wasn't actually thinking about post-divorce. I was wondering why we have so many single mothers with young children without partners in our society. Where are the men to share financially, emotionally and materially?

Anna, no- I don't think the child has a right to have his/her parent stay home and perdonally carfe for him/her.

As for 50%, yes man can and should do half the work (however the mother a father deem appropriate to split the load). For example, in my house, I tend to do more childcare, and he tends to do more laundry and dishes. This is fine with me because I much prefer hanging out with my kids to household chores. In fact, I hate laundry. Oh, and I tell him that ironing is very manly .

And these days we have to accept the interference of the state in our lives... which is better, family or state?

Anna, I wonder that too. Its very sad.

What is your point about BF. I bf exclusively for 6 months and continued to bf after work. I even used to bf on the tube. Its not incompatible with working. It is only incompatible with weirdly long working hours

eleusis (and probably daisymum and xenia) - that's the FUNDAMENTAL difference between your position and my (and yr's position)

I do think that a child ought to have the right to be cared for by its mother in its early years, to be breastfed and to spend most of its time with the mother. I know that not everyone feels that way. There is quite convincing evidence (look at the WHO site) that this results in better emotional and developmental outcomes for children, and that they will grow up to be healthier and better adjusted adults when they spend more time with their mother in their early years.

and how about the WHO recommendations that every child be fully breastfed on demand until 6 months - don't understand your point - I was just telling you the international position on what the rights of a child re parenting are. Recommendations on breastfeeding are recommendations and obviously not possible if you are not being cared for by your mother (or a wet nurse) but it is not a generally accepted right to be breast fed however highly advisable it is.

pamina - I think that depends on the line of work and the child. In my old line of work where I travelled a lot and also did long hours I doubt I would have had anything but a starving child.

Oh the WHO recommendations are not indisputable facts. If you want to breastfeed your kid for years, then that again is your choice. But, if you have a job to go to (and let's face it most of us do), then it is perhaps not practical. It is my opinion that a mother should breastfeed as long as SHE wants to. I personally think 4-6 months is plenty long enough. But, I accept that other have a different view. And that's fine. But it shouldn't be forced on people.

SueJonez - I am just pointing out that rights and recommendations on childcare are not always compatible or unanimous

eleusis - it is my opinion that a child should breastfeed for as long as he/she wants to

i SO want to stay home with my little girl but our finances are begining to look like this is not going to be possible for much longer. I will be DEVESTATED to have to leave her for the whole day in someone elses care, as i dont have the luxury of relatives able to step up to the plate, as i did with my DD1. This totally contradicts what i said previously in this thread about absolutely having no intention of returning to work. It will be a sad day for me if i have to return to work before i am ready (probably more for me than dd i suspect) and i suspect my heart wont be in the job

Cool, if that works for you than I think that's great. But, it isn't practical for everyone.