Jump to content

Working mothers


Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I assume and probably incorrectly that more than 50% of moms work.  But how do we know that this creates a problem?

That’s what I am asking. To me, it seems that a mother working is an exception and should not be the rule. So to me, if we see that more than half of mothers are working, it is obviously not being treated as the exception.

Would you disagree?

Edited by Fether
Link to post
12 hours ago, Fether said:

That’s what I am asking. To me, it seems that a mother working is an exception and should not be the rule. So to me, if we see that more than half of mothers are working, it is obviously not being treated as the exception.

Would you disagree?

Why?

  • Like 1
Link to post

I'd much rather see a mother that wants to be home with her children be there, and lucky them. For many it's not happening. Gone are the days of husbands, my dad did this, of working 2 to 3 jobs to keep the mom home. Nowadays men would not be good with it, since it's more common for a mom to work out side the home. 

But if the children have a good caretaker I can see it all working out if the mom wants to work outside of the home. But hopefully the parents won't leave the child/children too long, there's a line that can be crossed IMO. Again, back to the black and white thinking on this. 

I currently watch my granddaughter one day a week, and the other grandma tends one day a week, and daycare takes care of the other days. My daughter picks her daughter up at 5:30 from day care, but picks her up at my house closer to 7:00 sometimes. That's just too late IMO and I know it's traffic sometimes, but she should have my son in law pick up then.

Her husband is self employed and the first time he was in charge of picking my granddaughter up he came later than I thought he was going to and my husband was mad at me for not speaking up, so the one time I do, he arrived and at the door and all I said was, it's about time. And then he rebutted to me, "Well, that's what happens when you own your own business". So I kind of damaged our relationship because he hasn't been the same since. 

So I think there is a happy medium on how to manage your children's care when parents both work outside of the home. The children do have to take precedence. I guess I am a little old fashioned sometimes and look fondly on the "Leave it to Beaver" type home, but I know that's kind of not fair to women that want a career and a family.  

Link to post
16 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

My question is -- should we give fathers the same choice? Should fathers also have the choice to stay at home? I continue to notice that the discussion is focused on women's choices (which is a good thing), but do the same choices apply to men?

Perhaps to illustrate in a different way, I recall fatherhood being deprecated in a meme that said, "A woman without a job is a homemaker, a man without a job is a failure." Would there be value in encouraging men to consider their choices in relation to their families as well? Would there be value in getting men to consider being stay at home dads while their wives work?

As @Tacenda wrote, care of the children needs to be parents' first priority. As one who questions and even rejects complementarianism, why is it always the woman's choice that is focused on, and not the man's when discussing what is best for children?

I guess it depends on a man's income compared to the wife, sadly, or maybe the mindset needs to be changed and give the fathers a chance to be home no matter the income situation but sometimes that's not doable. Because I'm with you, a man should be given the choice to stay home with the children. I think they'd make great caretakers!! ETA: Many women make more than men, and many men are staying home, I bet I could find some statistics to show on this.

Edited by Tacenda
Link to post
1 hour ago, MustardSeed said:

I don’t think these two (working women and well adjusted children) are mutually exclusive, and I hear the emphasis as a way of keeping women limited to one option (so that men aren’t threatened? I personally assume so but am open to truth) 

What pisses me off is some women that want to actually stay home can't because it's so hard these days to live on one income. I know a couple women and one older guy who drive a school bus so they can get the health  insurance benefits. I hate my insurance bill !! 

     Personally, I think if we could work on figuring out how to become a society that understands not everything important in life is about work and being able to buy or have more than our neighbors we would be able to live with less stress. Ideally, one parent staying home is ultimately going to be better for not only the kids but the whole family. Most of our time is spent at our base of operation, our home. Having one person in charge of our base of operation in my life has worked out great. My wife is the CEO of our family, I'm just the dummy that climbs roofs and comes home and gets told what to do until around 9pm or so. 

    My wife also runs our business from the home, is payed a salary not only because she's invaluable, but also because of social security benefits in the future.  I'm too dumb to do what she does. 

   

    

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
13 hours ago, Rain said:

Why?

The concept of an exception to a rule suggests, at least to me, that the exception should be seen less often than the following of rule itself.

Link to post
On 6/10/2021 at 6:36 PM, Fether said:

That’s what I am asking. To me, it seems that a mother working is an exception and should not be the rule. So to me, if we see that more than half of mothers are working, it is obviously not being treated as the exception.

Would you disagree?

I didn't communicate well. I was asking why you on what you bolded. Why should a mother working not be the rule? Why is it ok for the father working to be the rule?

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
36 minutes ago, Rain said:

Why should a mother working not be the rule? Why is it ok for the father working to be the rule?

There are reasons for it, but I think both the letter and the spirit of the Proclamation explain this.

"By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children.

I know that several in this thread have said that mothers working can still nurture, but the reality is that the nurturing and the "mom time" is not the same when children are with others more than with her. And, mom gets home tired and spent --- what kids get from mom is completely different when being mother is her sole focus vs. a section of the pie chart.

There are spiritual intangibles for the mere presence of mom at home with the kids. President Kimball told of staying with a family during a stake conference, and he typed at the kitchen table all day while the children kept coming in and calling for mom. She answered them and they went on about their business; they never needed anything specific from her, they just needed to know she was there and reassure themselves. I think there are real spiritual and emotional/psychological benefits and advantages to mothers being home with their developing children, where possible. It is not at all the same level of nurturing if they are in day care or with babysitters (even extended family), or raised by father at home, in my opinion. 

I agree with @Fether that the exception has become the rule in the Church, and I think we're seeing the fruits of this among Millennials, GenZ, and GenAlpha. And it's just snowballing more. 

Link to post
9 hours ago, rongo said:

I think there are real spiritual and emotional/psychological benefits and advantages to mothers being home with their developing children, where possible. It is not at all the same level of nurturing if they are in day care or with babysitters (even extended family), or raised by father at home, in my opinion. 

This seems like a nice hypothesis that seems like it ought to be measurable/testable (if we can figure out how to test/measure it). I don't know about any studies that have been performed. A quick internet search found this one from Australia (https://aifs.gov.au/publications/stay-home-fathers-australia ), but it doesn't really look at outcomes. It's mostly demographic (how many and why are men staying home).

This paper was referenced in the prior link. I don't have access to the full paper, but the authors wrote this in the abstract: "Caregiving SAHF households share key traits with SAHM households."  https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0192513X13502479

I saw some stats on homeschooled children (assuming that most homeschooled children would often be cared for by a stay at home parent) that never made any distinctions between the gender of the parent/teacher. https://www.nheri.org/research-facts-on-homeschooling/

This look (I think this is the same Australia data) at the data specifically mentions a survey question about whether the respondents believed that it mattered whether the stay at home parent was the mother or father: https://aifs.gov.au/publications/stay-home-dads (The last section before the endnotes). According the these respondents, About half agreed that gender of the SAHP doesn't matter, and very few strongly disagreed. Of course, such an opinion poll doesn't establish truth, but it suggests that those of use who believe gender matters are in a minority.

I would point out that the Australian data did show differences between SAHD and SAHM families. Mostly things like age of the parents/children and division of housekeeping tasks. I'm not sure I would expect these differences to be significant in the actual outcomes, but I also did not see anything that discusses the implications of the differences.

In sum, it is a nice hypothesis, but my quick Google search failed to find anything that supports the hypothesis. Perhaps others with more knowledge of the literature may find more data that may support it.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
14 hours ago, Rain said:

I didn't communicate well. I was asking why you on what you bolded. Why should a mother working not be the rule? Why is it ok for the father working to be the rule?

That’s a different conversation entirely. I’m going off the basis that the Family Proclamation is inspired of God and true. My question is about why people go against this. Your question centers in the reality of the doctrines taught in the proclamation.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
5 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

I would love to see data on the direct correlation between mothers being employed and the bad fruit. 

I would too, but any “fruit” brought up can be argued that the issue comes from something else.

Mothers being out of the home dont create druggies or criminals. It’s matter of minor things like developing trust and opportunities to learn from the parents. A teacher, babysitter or daycare will never be even half as good as an attentive and loving mother

Edited by Fether
Link to post
6 minutes ago, Fether said:

That’s a different conversation entirely. I’m going off the basis that the Family Proclamation is inspired of God and true. My question is about why people go against this. Your question centers in the reality of the doctrines taught in the proclamation.

I think, again, it’s how things are interpreted. 

 

13 hours ago, rongo said:

"By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children.

For a father, it may be, the best way to provide necessities for life and protection for his family is to have his wife work. For many mothers, nurturing their children entails a healthy work/home balance. 


 


 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
13 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

For a father, it may be, the best way to provide necessities for life and protection for his family is to have his wife work. For many mothers, nurturing their children entails a healthy work/home balance. 

 

This essentially boils down to men and women not having gender roles. It ignores the principles of the FP that men and women have specific god given strengths and that there are roles for them to play on the family

Link to post
17 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

it’s how things are interpreted

Exactly, do you interpret the FP as being from God, or an outdated document written by old men?

Link to post
5 minutes ago, Fether said:

Exactly, do you interpret the FP as being from God, or an outdated document written by old men?

I find it an inspired document that families can read, seek the spirit, and interpret its counsel for their individual circumstances. You seem to be saying there is only one way to interpret this document and that your traditional view of gender roles is the only correct view, regardless  of realities within family life. 
 

You also seem to be saying, working mothers are inferior nurturers. I reject that characterization. 
 

 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
18 minutes ago, Fether said:

This essentially boils down to men and women not having gender roles. It ignores the principles of the FP that men and women have specific god given strengths and that there are roles for them to play on the family

Well, I don’t believe men birth babies. 😏

  • Like 2
Link to post
22 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

You seem to be saying there is only one way to interpret this document and that your traditional view of gender roles is the only correct view, regardless  of realities within family life. 
 

You either cannot read or have not read all that I have said. Or perhaps you feel you can only be right if I fit a basic sexist and misogynist identity. 
 

my view is this:
There is a rule and a preferred outcome in a family. The father presides and provides for the family, the mother focuses an nurturing the kids. Ideally, they stick within those roles and assist the other in those roles. I have no problem with mothers working when they feel it is necessary, nor do intend on judging them.

My concern is that we are all being taught that a career and making money is more meaningful than raising kids. And the sophistry that a woman can be more nurturing to their kids while at work. I don’t know a single woman who believes a day care or a paid baby sitter can raise their kid better than they could. Nor do I believe this, no matter how good or expensive said daycare was. If a mother had to work to help provide for their family, then by all means, work. I will be there to support them in their decision and will defend them should anyone belittle them in their decision. But if a mother hands her kids off to an inferior source of nurturing so they can work because it gives them a sense of meaning, gives them a break, or for money or luxury, than that is wrong, they are being selfish, and they are failing in their divine role

maybe this is happening, maybe it is not. But when I see that over 50% of Latter-day Saint mothers work, it suggests to me that something is wrong. If I can be convinced that 50+% of all Latter-day Saint mothers need to work to help provide for their family, I will give up this argument. But to me this exception is no longer and exception, rather just an individual preference that ignores divine roles

  • Upvote 1
Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...