Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Ooh this makes me angry (working mums blamed again...)

44 replies

PlanetEarth · 27/03/2011 17:45

Daily Telegraph article.

"Working mothers spend 81 minutes a day looking after their children
Working mothers in Britain spend just 81 minutes each day looking after their children - including mealtimes - a report has found."

In summary: SAHM spend 2hrs 35 a day directly caring for their children
Working mums: 81 min a day
Non-working dads: 63 min
Working dads: 43 min

So, SAHMs only manage 1hr 24min a day more than working mums - what do they do the rest of the time, considering that working parents have to clean, shop etc. just like SAHMs.
But, worst of all, working mums manage more child-centred time than non-working dads, but just look at the headline - working mums in the dock yet again.

Let battle commence!

OP posts:
MummyDoIt · 27/03/2011 17:49

Where do they get their figures from? The SAHM figure looks wildly inaccurate to me. If you had primary school-age children, you'd spend about six hours a day with them outside of school hours (obviously depending on bedtime). If you had pre-schoolers or babies, it would be much more than that.

Original poster
PlanetEarth · 27/03/2011 17:55

Not sure how they arrived at the figures, but it's not just time spent in the same house, it's time "directly caring for their children ... dedicated to activities like meals, bathtime and playing games".

OP posts:
preschoolconcerns · 27/03/2011 18:00

Yeah the figures are crap. I assume they must mean school age children.

I have a 2.9 year old and a 9 month old and am a SAHM. I spend my EVERY waking moment with them (oh, the oldest is now doing 6 hours a week preschool actually). 2 hours 35 mins a day? No way, the chance would be a fine thing Grin

preschoolconcerns · 27/03/2011 18:01

Ah, planetearth. So right now, while the baby is in the jumperoo and the toddler is watching peppa pig whilst I mn, that doesn't count Grin

Original poster
PlanetEarth · 27/03/2011 18:04

No :). Well, not sure about the jumperoo, maybe it depends on whether you're talking to the baby at the same time (v. hard to quantify, surely).

OP posts:
noodle69 · 27/03/2011 18:37

Figures like these are stupid. Surely it varies from household to household. They have only done it so people like yourself worry about it and by more papers to read more articles. They focus on a certain demographic of mums as only mums would be bothered about this stuff.

'A lot of children growing up in Britain today have no concept of a traditional family life. '

Growing up I knew no ones mum except people on benefits in my area that had a stay at home mum. My friends have all grown up alright. I am married in an equal relationship with a job and degree. I am close to my mum and dad and my mum is my best friend. I see or speak to her everyday and love her more than anything in the world.

I am far from emotionally damaged. Loads of mums have been working for years and in my family for generations and we are all grew up 'normal'. This was never an issue to my mum or the generations of working class women before that worked. It is probably only an issue if you grew up with a SAHM yourself and worry that because you are doing different it will cause damage.Seriously dont worry about it.

Ciske · 27/03/2011 18:58

The headline should have been: "average working mother spends more time with child than non-working father", or "SAHM spends only 2h35mins with child". I don't understand why the working mother is focused on here, at least she has a plausible reason for spending less time with child. The surprise is surely that non-working parents dedicate so little time to their children?

Personally, on a working day, I probably get to 60-90 mins as well, I don't see how you could spend hours and hours with a toddler outside office hours unless you sent it to bed late (which isn't good either).

NormanTebbit · 27/03/2011 19:01

I sit on my fat arse on the sofa all day watching JK stuffing Pringles into my mouth while the kids run riot.

Everyone feel better now?

jonicomelately · 27/03/2011 19:04

If anybody is ever worried about being a working mum, just watch Dancing On Ice tonight (if you bear it Grin). Chloe Madeley's mum, Judy Finnegan, worked all through Chloe's childhood yet she seems like a lovely, well adjusted girl who has a fantastic relationship with her mother.

NormanTebbit · 27/03/2011 19:05

Actually spend alit of time walking to/from school/nursery ( only 2.5 hours of that) rest of time kids running about at friends houses, libraries, parks, toddler group, trailing me round supermarket, up chimney, that sort of thing...

I do some jigsaws, read stories every night, sometimes get play dough out, but slot of time they are just playing with their friends.

NormanTebbit · 27/03/2011 19:07

I don't understand what 'directly caring' means? Does it mean buying them an ice cream?

BelleDameSansMerci · 27/03/2011 19:07

Utter bollocks, as per usual...

"A mother's place is in the wrong", again as usual.

Grrrrrrrrrrrr.

jonicomelately · 27/03/2011 19:08

We believe you NormanTebbit Grin

NormanTebbit · 27/03/2011 19:09
Ciske · 27/03/2011 19:09

I sit on my fat arse on the sofa all day watching JK stuffing Pringles into my mouth while the kids run riot.

To be honest, the article has a very narrow minded of view of what 'spending time with kids' actually means. My toddler loves running after me and 'help' fold laundry and clean the house, or join us on the weekly shopping trip. But that doesn't count here, so that probably removes half of the SAHM's day as 'childcare'. Then if child spends another few hours playing with other kids while supervised by parents, that doesn't count either. These researchers seem to think that you only raise your kids if you sit next to them reading books or building block towers.

That's the only way I can explain these figures anyway.

jonicomelately · 27/03/2011 19:10

I knew it Wink

Original poster
PlanetEarth · 27/03/2011 19:11

Maybe the headline should have been "Children would be better off with two mums instead of a mum and a dad" Smile.

Mind you, I wonder if the study was only of resident parents, in which case dads would find it harder to keep up the average - or would they, if mum has the kids during the week when they have homework, etc, and dad has them at the weekend. So many unanswered questions...

OP posts:
NormanTebbit · 27/03/2011 19:14

It's a bizarre way of looking at childcare. Most children want yo socialise with their pals, whether at nursery/ daycare or under my lax supervision in the park.

Yes they like building towers but their friends are far more exciting.

nailak · 27/03/2011 19:45

but seriously isnt it obvious that workin mums will spend less time with their kids then no workin mums? when i was little we would et up and out of te house by 7.30, catch a bus and a train to my mums school, han around in the libary untill it was time for us to o to school, then walk ourrselves round the corner to the junior school, then after school we would o back to my mums school, han around aain until 6, be home and eat then be in bed by 8....

where is the time?

BertieBasset · 27/03/2011 20:13

What about my dd who yells "no" when I try and play with her? Is she squewing my figures? Grin

nailak · 27/03/2011 20:19

lol some kids are more independant then others its true

SardineQueen · 27/03/2011 20:28

What a silly study/article.

Drizzela · 27/03/2011 20:37

How Ridiculous. If those figures are accurate (which I seriously doubt) then the story is surely that working mothers have been getting a bad press and that SAHM don't really spend much more time caring for their children than working mums...

Anyway 81 minutes, so what? Is there a rule about spending week days with your child? Does it benefit them? I've worked full time since my DD was about 16 weeks old. Most week days I probably sepnt less than 81 minutes caring for her... She's cleveer, confident, affectionate, independant sociable.. all the things you want your child to be. What's the issue?

On a feminist note; what's the relevence of 'mum' why do they seperate like that? I dont think I've ever seen a newspaper article where the groups 'working' and 'Stay at home' aren't then further defined by 'mums' It really is stupid.

Further proof (as if it was needed) that we're a long way from equality.