Dads and babies

[BlingLoving]

This is kind of a thread about a thread, so sorry about that.

I see a lot of threads commenting on the mother's right to make ultimate decisions for her DC, particularly when they're babies. Lots of comments about "you are his mother, you know best" or "mothers' instincts are the best source of decision making" (I'm paraphrasing obviously).

I am still waiting for DC1 to arrive, so am interested to see how I feel after that, but this doesn't seem fair to me. Clearly, in the very beginning of course I can see how that is naturally going to happen on the basis that the mother tends to be with baby 24/7 - especially if she's breastfeeding - plus she has all those hormones washing around from pregnancy and birth and so on.

But surely there comes a point, fairly early on, where, assuming that DH/DP is involved and engaged, his opinions and ability to look after his child are pretty much equal to the mother's?

I am getting clearer and clearer in my own head that feminism has to be a two way process - that for it to work, both men and women also have to stop seeing men as less competant at certain tasks and that both sexes have to step up and take on responsibilities that were traditionally allocated to one or the other. And this seems like an obvious addition to that thought process. What are other thoughts?

[SardineQueen]

In the couples I know where the men are not hands-on (and there's only about 2 of them) the men are from different cultures which are much more "traditional". And the reason they are not hands on is because it's not "what men do", nothing to do with bonkers wives hiding the babies from them.

[SardineQueen]

As I said earlier, if I had someone around who I could get away with letting them do a lot of the childcare I'd take it in a flash. I am firmly of the view that the majority of men who are not hands-on with the children are that way because it is their choice.

[AyeRobot]

Exactly, SQ. The men I know who do next to nothing and complain about their wives being perfectionists etc don't really want to and they show it through their inactions. They are perfectly capable of negotiating what they want at work, so there is no reason why they can't sit down with their wives and say "Look, I'm missing out here and want to share the load with you and so want to do x,y and z and you are blocking me. What can we do so that I can be more involved?" As if that's going to be turned down!

[minxofmancunia]

I don't think they get turned down but sometimes they can be micromanaged to the nth degree. I'm as bad myself I sometimes have to really bite my tongue just because dh isn't really doing it "my way" but there's no point nit picking about it, most of the time "his way" isn't actually doing any harm, it's just different.

I don't think it's a womans right to completely dictate the whole families way of life after having a baby, adhering to some rigid routine is often just that and woe betide anyone who has any different ideas.

I wasn't saying what caused her to be ill Dittany just that she seems to have been very ill and the aetiology of that illness may be more complex than her dad and her ex. Believe it or not I don't have a medical model view of mental illness and I do think trauma plays a big part in development of psychosis despite you thinking I'm sexist .

I wonder if this is because I dare, and dare is the right word to have a different opinion which will sometimes high-light womens flaws, in childcare, in relationships. in life. Women DO sometimes make decisions that are to the detriment of their children, they are not the gurus, sometimes partners/grandparents/siblings may have valid suggestions that can be respected too.

[SardineQueen]

"I don't think it's a womans right to completely dictate the whole families way of life after having a baby, adhering to some rigid routine is often just that and woe betide anyone who has any different ideas. "

Who does, though?

"Women DO sometimes make decisions that are to the detriment of their children, they are not the gurus, sometimes partners/grandparents/siblings may have valid suggestions that can be respected too."

I haven't seen anyone saying otherwise?

[HerBeX]

I'm still scratching my head about the logic of women getting it wrong sometimes, implying that men never get it wrong.

As SQ says, no-one argues that sometimes women get it wrong. But that's not really what we're talking about, is it? I think anyone would take it as red that sometimes women get it wrong. As do men. And? How does that observation inform the philosophical question of whether women need to "let" men do their fair share of parenting (like men are banging at the gates for that right - did you notice that F4J march where they demanded the right to take charge of the baby's laundry and make all the lunches and ensure that PE kit was ready and taken to school on the right day? No, me neither...)

[minxofmancunia]

I am infuriated dittany because your view on mental illness is one dimensional, prejudiced, ill informed and simplistic. And you resort to petty insults when challenged like saying "projection much".

I happen to think some of the stuff on these threads (feminism) is pretty sexist, it's so blinkered.

but going back to the OP this statement

"But surely there comes a point, fairly early on, where, assuming that DH/DP is involved and engaged, his opinions and ability to look after his child are pretty much equal to the mother's?"

I agree OP, I think you can both contribute.

[HerBeX]

"assuming that DH/DP is involved and engaged"

Ah there's the rub.

How involved and engaged?

The bar is set very, very low, to consider a man involved and engaged - in many cases, the level at which a man is considered to be incredibly involved and engaged, is so low that if it were applied to a woman, it would be considered neglect.

That's the problem isn't it. As long as we live in a patriarachy, where there are such double standards about what constitutes a good father versus what constitutes a good mother, it's very difficult to assume that we all mean the same thing when we describe a father as involved and engaged. Imagine describing a mother in such terms. "She's a very involved mother". We don't. We simply assume it. An involved, engaged mother, is a bog-standard normal one. An involved, engaged father OTOH is lauded as uber-dad and is probably not as involved and engaged as the mother of his child/ren, who is merely bog standard.

[snowmama]

Dittany, that is a really interesting point about the liberal/ radical feminist divide, but I am not sure I entirely agree. I don't think that is that abstract an idea that men should take responsibility for their children or that it would be achieved by applying a few rules and hopefully waiting for the existing power structure will right itself.

Women in danger from controlling men, are in danger whether it is a cultural norm for men to actively involved in child care it not. In fact it could be argued that if men expected to share these responsibilities they would be less likely to view women and children as objects if their possession against which they can inflict violence etc.

And it not an overnight thing either....in our family boys were raised to expect to take equal responsibility in the household. And now this is what they do in their homes and they raising if their children...including flexible working to do so. Are they utterly non sexist male who don't benefit from patriarchy...sadly no.

But for me it is one step, one battle, one subversion at time to unpick the power balance. And it will be important to me to raise my son with the same ethos. What would be the radical feminist model for unhinging the power balance? I ask because I am genuinely interested and do not mean this in an aggressive way.

[Hereforlife]

I think the change since my father's generation to this generation with the involvement in their children's lives has been huge.

If this carries on for the next generations (and I can't see why it will not) parenting roles will be far more equal.

If I think what my Grandads were like and my father and Fil and compare to the Dads I see from this generation the differences are massive.

[InmaculadaConcepcion]

Agreed HTL, things are definitely changing for the better in respect of the division of childcare responsibilities between men and women. My own mum and dad were classic - he worked, played football at weekends, went to the pub a couple of times a week and did very little childcare. She stayed at home (when we were tiny, she went out to work when we were a bit bigger) and made sure we were bathed and in bed by the time dad came home, whereupon his dinner would be put on the table and he would put his feet up. This was in the 70s.

Nowadays my DH has made an effort to be in a job which gives him as much time as possible with me and DD, he does most of the housework, cooking and food-shopping and his fair share of the nuts and bolts of childcare. He is not Uber Dad, he doesn't expect praise for what he believes should be the norm.

Not all men are as enlightened as that, but among my friends, I can see a definite increase in engagement with bringing up the children among the men.

Shared responsibility is the way it should go and continue to go. But that doesn't men IMO that men then "take over" when it comes to important decisions concerning raising their children. I believe parents should decide together and where there are biological reasons (eg breastfeeding) specific to the mother, those decisions should therefore be deferred to her.

I agree with Herbex - men need to do the moving in this direction more than women and those that genuinely want to will do so.

[BlingLoving]

Lots of intersting things have come up since I logged off last night.

"Men are able to abdicate responsibility because the whole world is set up in their favour, not because of anything women do."

"As long as we live in a patriarachy, where there are such double standards about what constitutes a good father versus what constitutes a good mother, it's very difficult to assume that we all mean the same thing when we describe a father as involved and engaged. Imagine describing a mother in such terms. "She's a very involved mother". We don't. We simply assume it. An involved, engaged mother, is a bog-standard normal one. An involved, engaged father OTOH is lauded as uber-dad and is probably not as involved and engaged as the mother of his child/ren, who is merely bog standard."

These are both really good points and touch on what I was trying, unsuccessfully, to wrap my head around. I believe it's not just about decision making but about taking responsibility. In some cases, I think women do discourage men but agree that broadly, the issue is that men do choose to abdicate responsibility and for me, I feel that in the same way I will continue to push to be treated the same at work and to be given the same opportunities and responsibilities, I want men to step up and assume those some opportunities/responsibilities in the home. But, I suspect there's a long way to go on this because as has been pointed out, so many men are not exactly fighting for this right. I however, would fight to push men to start doing this. I know a lot of men who do the "oh, I don't know how to change a nappy/bath the baby/get him to sleep routine and that is them asserting power over women - we might get to make childcare decisions, but that's because no one else wants to. How is that a boon for us? It's a bit like the assistant at work who gets to make decisions about what birthday card to buy - it's not real power, it's that no one else wants to do it and we have the power to abdicate that responsibility.

"I'm really interested in this passive voiced "excluding men from childcare" - who is doing this so-called excluding exactly?
I seem to remember Cherie Blair for example having to put her foot down with a loud thump to get T. Blair to take one measly week off work on paternity leave. So who was excluding Tone there?
" - Another excellent example of what I was talking about above. I am glad that Cherie refused to accept his abdication of responsibility.

[charitygirl]

One thing I always (bossily!) tell friends expecting their first baby is NOT to fall into the trap pf becoming the parent who does all the thinking/planning/decision-making re: baby, just because they're on maternity leave. DON'T become the parent who is responsible for all the baby's physical needs, just because you;e the only ne who knows about them.

Because when they go back to work, that state of affairs continues, PLUS they have to do a job (and probably, more that their fair share of the housework). Unless your partner is GENUINELY incompetent/thick/cruel/abusive (in which case...), I strong recommend never saying 'Oh, I'm better at doing feeds/baths/changes' etc. ALWAYS ask them what meals the baby should be eating that week (once weaning begins etc) when you're shopping or whatever. Tell them you think the baby will need sandals for summer and when is one of you going to find time to get them? Don't let them off the hook! And anyway, why should they miss out on the proper business of parenting?

Obviously, this really only applies all other things being equal (ha!) and the relationship being basically sound.

[madwomanintheattic]

chg, that's how it works here - except one of us will say ''oo, do you think he/ she needs sandals?' or, ''oo, they look a bit small - we'd better get some this weekend'. 'i've found a cool dance school, what do you think?' 'omg that boy needs a haircut, can you take him tonight?'

usually on a dance day we call each other at work and work out who is less capable of doing the pick-up

but that's only possible now because of the way we started when they were tiny. from 6mos i went away one or two weekends a month completely for work and left dh to it, so he has always had lone time with 1,2, and then 3 of them. dd2 was more complex because of her additional needs, but y'know, i wasn't letting his denial give him any excuses. he had to take time off to attend some of the therapy stuff. and now he occasionally comes up with an idea or two of his own. that's taking it into the realm of caring, rather than parenting, per se, but equally valid when it's your child... and equally valid when traditionally women are expected to assume the role of carer/ nurse.

i don't see it as an overnight thing either. i'm really interested in the radfem solution to equal parenting though? anyone?

[madwomanintheattic]

[nooka]

Seems a bit daft to me to be having an argument about someones personal life and/or their emotional and mental state when in truth we all know very very little about it (nor should we).

I think that there is a difference between things like legal rights where I would in general agree with dittany that things like rights to maternity leave shouldn't be given away and the dynamics in individual relationships.

In my limited experience of watching other families I think that the person who is most likely to be damaged by holding all the power/responsibility for children is the mother. My sister for example seems to find it very difficult to let her dh do anything much with their children and then gets very annoyed and upset that he is disengaged, and I've seen that pattern being played out with a number of my friends too. Does it negatively impact on the children, yes at least a bit because of the tension between the parents and also if the opportunity to develop a good independent relationship with your father is lost (although I think that this would only happen at the extreme). The other thing that can happen is that the mother fixates a bit too much on the children which can be suffocating (my mother was a bit like this), a more balanced parenting approach where there is not one single way could mitigate this.

But this may well be my view because it's the approach dh and I adopted. Neither of us like babies very much so we didn't really compete at that stage (I did the feeding, dh did the getting to sleep) and then later on dh has been the SAHD for much longer periods than me as I prefer to work and he's happy at home. I think that the key thing is to (in an ideal world) parent with someone who has fairly complimentary skills and approaches.

[nooka]

Oops sorry - I typed that my last night might not make much sense any more

[charitygirl]

madwoman - spot on, same here. It's not the norm tho, even in supposedly 'equal' couples. Maternity leave can really fuck up a couple's dynamic, especially if the bloke is secretly happy to get away with doing the minimum with home and kids.

[SardineQueen]

The whole parental leave thing is a mess really. IMO (and financial considerations aside!) 2 weeks (pat leave) is nowhere near enough time to get to grips with such a huge change as a new baby, to get to know the baby and so on. And of course many men don't even feel that they can take that. I think also that women often need longer than that after the birth to get to grips with things - 6 weeks is the timescale on recovery after a CS, 6 weeks is also the time that things start to make sense a bit and the mother is over the shell shock! Getting the hang of BF and baby going longer between feeds, starting to sleep a little more reliably, that sort of thing.

At the moment the setup is that as soon as the baby is born everyone is shoe-horned into old fashioned and not terribly brilliant roles. The mother is left to fend for herself (possibly leading to emotional / psychological problems etc) while the partner is out the door and back to work as if nothing has happened. Not there to get to know the baby or to help the mother.

The whole thing's pretty rubbish frankly.

I would go for a longer period with the partner at home in the early days to give the mother a better chance of recovery and both getting the hang of the whole thing, also meaning that tasks are more likely to be shared and that will set a pattern. At the moment the pattern is set very early on that mother = doing the babies and father = back to work as if nothing has happened. Is it any wonder that things often pan out as they do?

[MrIC]

"The bar is set very, very low, to consider a man involved and engaged - in many cases, the level at which a man is considered to be incredibly involved and engaged, is so low that if it were applied to a woman, it would be considered neglect.

That's the problem isn't it. As long as we live in a patriarachy, where there are such double standards about what constitutes a good father versus what constitutes a good mother, it's very difficult to assume that we all mean the same thing when we describe a father as involved and engaged. Imagine describing a mother in such terms. "She's a very involved mother". We don't. We simply assume it. An involved, engaged mother, is a bog-standard normal one. An involved, engaged father OTOH is lauded as uber-dad and is probably not as involved and engaged as the mother of his child/ren, who is merely bog standard."

herbex you are spot on here; it's totally unfair and this assumption needs to be challenged. But I have to say some of the posters on this thread seem to want to have their cake and eat it. I'm mean - men can't win in this debate!

Look, to pick up from the point you're making above (an engaged-man is actually less engaged than a neglectful mother because society doesn't demand anything of men re:childcare) the only way to counter it is to give men responsibilities/rights in regard to childcare. [a couple of asides: can't men be charged with parental neglect? what about single fathers?] To extrapolate - when women wanted the vote, with that came greater civic responsibility. So if you want men to take responsibility and play an equal role in childcare, and be judged by the same standards as a mother would be, then you have to give them an equal say (with the caveat about breastfeeding...). This isn't a "what about the menz?" whinge, but if you want to change the situation and society norms you mention above, then this is what needs to happen.

Also, you keep going about "the patriarchy" as if it was one structure. it's not. it's a complex network of relationships and it's going to be brought down not by some Oct 17th storming of the Phallic Palace, but one relationship at a time. So every time a mother and father decide, as equals, on an equitable division of roles and responsibilities, that's one more link in the chain broken. So if I, or the OPs partner, plays a decision making role in the care of our children, that's not us taking away power from our female partners, but breaking the influence of the patriarchy within our relationship and saying "gender roles don't apply here". it's going to much easier to pick apart the patriarchy by getting men to help you do so.