COMMENTS: 209
Mommies Opting Out of Work: A Myth That Won't Die
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.
But there is another serious problem with the media's fixation with the opt-out myth: Most stories on opt-out mothers gloss over the difficulties that many women have getting back into the job market after taking time out. It does a grave disservice to women to tell them that it's easy to transition back into work when it isn't. When reality hits and they can't find someone to hire them for a suitable job -- one that might offer the flexibility or part-time hours or whatever they need to balance their job with their life -- they may feel that it's all their fault. But really, is it?
Recently, a couple of stories have appeared arguing that it's actually not that hard to get back into the work force, especially now that employers are supposedly making it easy for women to balance work and family. Lisa Belkin writes in the New York Times ($$) that there is a "growing acceptance" of nonlinear careers and that corporations are developing new, innovative strategies to lure opt-out Moms back into jobs. And Leslie Morgan Steiner, the author of Mommy Wars, told Newsweek that in her research, she "did not find a single college-educated, aged 35 to 55, home with kids for three to 10 years -- who had significant trouble returning to full-time work."
The nice thing about these pieces is that they begin where most opt-out stories end. But, like the opt-out myth itself, the "opt-in" storylines are far removed from what we know about women returning to work after taking time off to have children. They rely on anecdotes from interviews with a handful of high-income mothers who most often hold professional degrees and, as a result, they come to conclusions that contradict the available research evidence. The stories are engaging to read, but one mother in a hundred transitioning easily back to work does not mean there's a national trend.
Research using nationally representative surveys that looks at all mothers who want to return to work finds that upwards of a quarter can't find a suitable job (PDF) and only 40 percent returned to full-time, mainstream jobs (i.e., not self-employment or consulting).
These facts do not hinder Morgan Steiner from coming to a very different conclusion. She interviewed a few dozen women who were actively seeking full-time work, a method that even Steiner, in her recent article in MORE magazine, noted was "admittedly unscientific."
That kind of research can be useful because, unlike large surveys, the researcher can ask the respondent open-ended questions and delve into why something is happening or how people feel about the trend. What it cannot do, however, is tell us what the trends are because the researcher isn't looking at a large enough -- or representative enough -- population.
What is striking about Morgan Steiner's article is how quickly she abandons reality by pointing to a mother whose experience contradicts the research-based findings. Steiner writes about a woman who solved her flexibility problem by opening her own business. Then, she notes that 95 percent (95 percent!) of all small businesses fail within the first five years -- but women shouldn't worry about these odds, she asserts, because starting a business can provide "easy entry" back into employment.
She does the same thing when discussing salaries. The Center for Work-Life Policy found a 37 percent salary decrease for women who had been out of the labor force for more than three years. But, here again, all the examples Steiner used are women who "doubled" their salaries -- or who didn't really need the income in the first place.
Everyone knows someone whose experience beats the odds. It seems that Steiner interviewed only women who were lucky enough to have found a decent job with good pay after opting out for motherhood. She hasn't documented a trend -- she's told some great stories of women who made it work, but as the research shows, it's not the typical tale.
Ms. Belkin's article looks at changes within corporations that are helping women to opt back in. She focuses on policies designed to lure highly trained professional women back into their jobs after they take some time off to care for very young children. There are a few examples of good policies -- shorter workweeks, eliminating billable hours -- but, as Belkin notes in her conclusion, a few examples of policy changes does not mean that the world of work is now in favor of those who want to combine work and parenthood in a sane way.
While Belkin recognizes that these anecdotes may offer only a glimmer of hope, neither author points to research on what we know about the prevalence of workplace flexibility. For example, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, only about a quarter of workers report having any on-the-job flexibility, and there are not indications that this has been growing. In fact, between 2001 and 2004, the BLS reported a slight decline in the share of workers reporting flexible schedules, from 28.6 to 27.5 percent. Women continue to be less likely than men to have this "perk," mostly because women are less likely to hold the higher status or managerial positions where flexibility is more common.
It's great that we're seeing stories on women returning to work after having children. But let's hope that these stories, unlike the stories about the nonexistent increase in opting out, will start to be based on facts and solid research, not only interviews with a few women who got lucky.
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Jun 9, 2007 4:49 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most women can't "opt out".
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Well
Posted by: MartianBachelor
» RE: Well
Posted by: Suz
Comments are closed-
Posted by: frosty86 on Jun 9, 2007 5:52 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And most employers have pathetic parental leave policies. Safe daycare is very expensive these days. In such a world, why do we want to force women into bearing unwanted children?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RESPONSIBILITY AND SEX
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: SPONSIBILITY AND SEX
Posted by: flakkerzmom
» I AM NOT YOUR ENEMY?
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» Excusing Personal Responsibility?
Posted by: writeval
» Thanks
Posted by: kepstein7777
» writeval: SILLINESS AND RATIONALIZATION WON'T CUT IT.
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: xcusing Personal Responsibility?
Posted by: EagleMB
» FROSTY: why do we want to force women into bearing unwanted children? WHO'S FORCING THIS????
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: TassieDevil
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
Comments are closed-
Posted by: patmorris on Jun 9, 2007 6:51 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think we should encourage our young people to be careful about debt and consumerism so that more moms can have an easier time seeing the option of being home with their childen.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: choices
Posted by: jennyfox
» RE: choices
Posted by: EJW
» RE: choices
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: choices
Posted by: jennyfox
» RE: choices
Posted by: poppop_schell
» Right on, JennyFox!
Posted by: asilsfable
» RE: choices
Posted by: tamsin
» dads can opt out too
Posted by: off-the-radar 2
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SekhmetsatRa on Jun 9, 2007 7:21 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: EagleMB on Jun 9, 2007 8:19 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First off, the article pointed out that woman reentering the workplace saw a reduction in salary. Why would we pay someone who has been out of the workplace for several years the same as someone who has stayed current in their industry?
Secondly, the article asks: “When reality hits and they can't find someone to hire them for a suitable job -- one that might offer the flexibility or part-time hours or whatever they need to balance their job with their life -- they may feel that it's all their fault. But really, is it?”
The answer is YES. A business exists to make money, not to accommodate their employees. Some companies have found it beneficial to hire mothers on a part-time basis (usually to save on the costs of benefits), but other companies find it cheaper to only hire full time employees. You will note that part-time hourly employees are normally cheaper, but part-time salaried employees are more expensive. Having a child is a choice that carries with it costs. If you don’t want to pay the price, don’t have children.
And finally the article argues that: “Women continue to be less likely than men to have this "perk," mostly because women are less likely to hold the higher status or managerial positions where flexibility is more common.”
But this argument is deceptive. Fewer women have managerial positions because they choose to leave the workplace to rear children. Studies have found that men are more likely then women to be promoted to management, but that the men who are promoted have an average of 8 more years of work experience. Woman who don’t leave the workforce to rear children are just as likely as men to become managers.
Another factor is the prevalence of women in government jobs. Women far outrank men in numbers when you look at government employers. But government employers have far fewer management positions than non-government employers. Government jobs make up a small percentage of the overall workforce, so this is only a contributing factor, but a factor nonetheless.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Yes and no
Posted by: kepstein7777
» RE: Yes and no
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: Yes and no
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Yes and no
Posted by: LPB
» Eagle: IT STAKEHOLDERS NOT ONLY STOCKHOLDERS THAT MAKE GREAT BSUINSSES THAT LAST
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: agle: IT STAKEHOLDERS NOT ONLY STOCKHOLDERS THAT MAKE GREAT BSUINSSES THAT LAST
Posted by: EagleMB
» SO BE KIND ONLY BECAUSE IT PAYS AND SHOWS UP ON THE BOTTOM LINE?
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: That is the philosophy...
Posted by: EagleMB
» EAGLEWEB: WELL THAT PHILOSOPHY NEEDS TO CHANGE IF IT IS TO BE ACCEPTED BY JESUS CHRIST
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: Why is that?
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: That is the philosophy...
Posted by: jingles
» RE: That is the philosophy...
Posted by: EagleMB
» eAGLE: WHAT IS CURRENTLY DOESN'T MEAN THAT WHAT IT SHOULD BE???
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: eAGLE: WHAT IS CURRENTLY DOESN'T MEAN THAT WHAT IT SHOULD BE???
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: eAGLE: WHAT IS CURRENTLY DOESN'T MEAN THAT WHAT IT SHOULD BE???
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: eAGLE: WHAT IS CURRENTLY DOESN'T MEAN THAT WHAT IT SHOULD BE???
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: eAGLE: WHAT IS CURRENTLY DOESN'T MEAN THAT WHAT IT SHOULD BE???
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: eAGLE: WHAT IS CURRENTLY DOESN'T MEAN THAT WHAT IT SHOULD BE???
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Why blame the employer?
Posted by: SatanicJamboree
Comments are closed-
Posted by: nherkowitz on Jun 9, 2007 8:22 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It amazes me that the unemployment rate goes down, not because there are more jobs, but because people just seemed to disappear from the job market. Now that wages have been going down (or eliminated) for years for many people, I would expect to see more people in the job market. The whole deal smells of Bush/Cheney.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Cooking the Numbers
Posted by: CharlieChicken
» RE: The data is accurate, you just have to take it for what it is...
Posted by: EagleMB
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Maggieb on Jun 9, 2007 8:28 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We've come a long way baby....what a joke. Two incomes raised the tax base and we all know the rest.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» As if!
Posted by: BlueTigress
» RE: As if!
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: As if!
Posted by: Suz
» suz: HOW MANY FEMINISTS DO YOU KNOW WHO ARE ADVOCATES OF SMALL, LIMITED GOVERNMENT?
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: suz: HOW MANY FEMINISTS DO YOU KNOW WHO ARE ADVOCATES OF SMALL, LIMITED GOVERNMENT?
Posted by: Suz
» That's garbage, and you must know it, poppop.
Posted by: Beck
» BECK: UDGE DEFICITS ARE NOT THE ISSUE? AND I WAS SIMPLY ASKING A QUESTION, NOT CLAIMING ANYTHING?
Posted by: poppop_schell
» powerful Gloria Steinem put the dry cleaners, milkmen, and home doctors out of business?
Posted by: Beck
» RE: powerful Gloria Steinem put the dry cleaners, milkmen, and home doctors out of business?
Posted by: Suz
» yes, you'd think Sam Walton and his ilk had far more power over milkmen than Steinem
Posted by: Beck
» RE: But you are missing the point...
Posted by: EagleMB
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mkrichardson on Jun 9, 2007 8:30 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» mkrichardson: You are a women of great wisdom and courage and havn't been brainwashed by Feminism
Posted by: poppop_schell
» poppop, you are a man who seems sometimes to posses decency, and I'm ashamed of you writing that
Posted by: Beck
» BECK: I TOO AM A "FEMINIST" BUT NOT A RADICAL FEMINIST WHO TEND TO HATE MALES AND HOMEMAKERS.
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: mkrmom
Posted by: lwbaby
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Calicat on Jun 9, 2007 11:09 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You would never mock a man who wanted to keep working after becoming a father -- and you'd be outraged if he stayed home for a few years with his child and found himself unable to work at his previous level. That a man would not want to be economically dependent on his wife, and would not want to spend his life taking care of kids and house seems normal. But when it's a woman, we hear how selfish and materialistic she is.
Maybe the people who post these hostile comments are conservative trolls. If not, there's an awful lot of sexism on the left masquerading as class consciousness.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Sexism is discrimination based on sex...
Posted by: EagleMB
» Mr. Mom
Posted by: kepstein7777
» RE: Mr. Mom
Posted by: MartianBachelor
» RE: Mr. Mom
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Mr. Mom
Posted by: Suz
» Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [1]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [1 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [1 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [1 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [1 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex Part 2
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex Part 2
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: thha
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: thha
» RE: Sexism is discrimination based on sex...
Posted by: SatanicJamboree
» RE: Sexism is discrimination based on sex...
Posted by: EagleMB
» This is alternet, where femiphobes and male addicts to feminism abound, along with normal folks
Posted by: Beck
» Thank you.
Posted by: frosty86
» Conservative TROLLS ? Y'think ???
Posted by: BenCaxton12
Comments are closed-
Posted by: poppop_schell on Jun 9, 2007 2:29 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. MATERIALISM AND 'KEEPING UP WITH THE JONES"
2. BRAKEDOWN OF LOVING, UNSELFISH MARRIAGES LEADING TO HIGH DIVORCE RATES
3. BIG GOVERNMENT WITH HIGH TAX RATES AND INDUCED DETERIOTION OF THE DOLLAR THROUGH INFLATION
4. MULTINATIONALS WHO PLACE PROFITS ABOVE THE NEEDS OF WORKING PEOPLE.
5. THE RADICAL FEMINIST/SELF SATISAFCTION MOVEMENT
I beleive except for the highly educated femisnist elite, most mothers would much prefer to spend their life
in their instinctive desire to nurture their children and make the world a better place with each new generation.
What say ye?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Materialsm, DIVORCE, and big government: WHY MOST MOTHERS "HAVE TO WORK OUTSIDE THE HOME." WORK
Posted by: lwbaby
» RE: Materialsm, DIVORCE, and big government: WHY MOST MOTHERS "HAVE TO WORK OUTSIDE THE HOME." WORK
Posted by: poppop_schell
» poppop_schell: "I am a feminist in a more conservative way. "
Posted by: fork
» fork: YOU OBVIOULSY ARE A RADICAL FEMINIST BECAUSE YOU DON'T RECOGNIZE GRADATIONS N/M
Posted by: poppop_schell
» You have no clue what feminism is. You wouldn't recognize a feminist if she sat on your face n/m
Posted by: fork
Comments are closed-
Posted by: poppop_schell on Jun 9, 2007 3:18 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Since a marriage is a partnership in raising children, why not also make it a partnership in a home based business?
With telecommuting, one can always have one parent at home if you work it right with your employer(s). There is a growing labor shortage of skilled workers. One can't go wrong in the medical field and one can often schedule hours to your liking.
IMO, the family is collapsing in American partly because of the lack of quality attention to both children and spouses. A Great Mormon prophet once said, "No success in life can compensate for FAILURE in the home.
My wife and I both committed to having Mom stay at home. Yes, we gave up many of the goodies that my faculty colleagues had when both spouses were working. Many, however, have ended in divorce and/or serious problems with their children.
Good luck to all that find it economically necessry for two working parents. I promise IF you that if you will make sure that your first priority is to each other and the children, God will GREATLY bless you. He wants you to be happy.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: IMPACT OF TELECOMMUTING AND HOME BUSINESSES
Posted by: astudent
» astudent: THANKS FOR THE VERY THOUGHTFUL AND INSIGHTFUL POST!!!
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: astudent: THANKS FOR THE VERY THOUGHTFUL AND INSIGHTFUL POST!!!
Posted by: astudent
» astudent: CORRECTION: HELP THROUGH NON-PROFIT CAHRITIES, NOT JUST6 CHURCHES.
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: IMPACT OF TELECOMMUTING AND HOME BUSINESSES
Posted by: ktm
» RE: IMPACT OF TELECOMMUTING AND HOME BUSINESSES
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: IMPACT OF TELECOMMUTING AND HOME BUSINESSES
Posted by: Libertine
» LIBERTAINE: CORRECTION: THE BEST NUTURING PARENT SHOULD STAY HOME WHETHER FATHER OR MOTHER
Posted by: poppop_schell
Comments are closed-
Posted by: altermom on Jun 9, 2007 8:28 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, fathers need to rethink their roles and shift from being "helpers" to being "co-parents," who share equally in the time commitments and daily hassles (and rewards) of raising children.
But we also need to restructure our world and thinking in order to make this happen: first, through a major reform of the healthcare system (since many parents are forced into working long hours simply to maintain health insurance that comes with full-time work), and second, by considering that when mothers work, it isn't a selfish decision--it's one that benefits us all.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Amen! Men can't brag about the job they've done in our world
Posted by: Beck
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Libertine on Jun 9, 2007 10:25 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But, for the most part, for men, it's still as it's always been. It's work, work, work, like it or not. We don't hear anything about Dads choosing to "opt out" of paid employment, no matter how dead-end and personally meaningless their jobs are. Except for the token stay at home Dads we see written up in the newspaper every Father's Day, men really have no choice -- men are expected to suck it up and work, regardless of what they'd really like to do.
Real equality will come when men have the same choices as women.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: What About Men?
Posted by: fork
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Callibrarian on Jun 9, 2007 10:27 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The truth of the matter is, most women have to work, either for economics or to preserve their sanity. We can't keep saying give-up-material-possessions-and-you-can-stay-at-home, because it's never about COUPLES giving up material possessions, it's about WOMEN giving up possessions AND careers. Instead of telling mothers, "Going to work when you have a baby is going to suck, so start sucking it up," we tell them it's okay to stay at home when they still owe twenty thousand in student loans. But they'll never cut the baby's budget. The husband will still need suits and shoes and have business lunches. It's the wife who will economize, who will wear clothes until they fall off her body and not get a haircut because she can't afford it. Instead of coaching mothers how to rejoin the work force, we need to start encouraging them never to leave in the first place.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Right For the Wrong Reasons
Posted by: mkrichardson
» RE: ight For the Wrong Reasons
Posted by: NoKidding
» RE: ight For the Wrong Reasons
Posted by: mkrichardson
» nOKIDDING: I respect your inward honety and your right minded decision. BUT you may think differen
Posted by: poppop_schell
» mkrichardson: more great advice!!!! Your a great addition to the dialogue!!!
Posted by: poppop_schell
» Blaming the moms!
Posted by: kmart35
Comments are closed-
Posted by: messedup on Jun 10, 2007 8:00 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Good times
Posted by: mememe
» I've had some men managers and they were just plain ruthless.
Posted by: Beck
» You've got me wrong..
Posted by: messedup
» Excellent response, Beck n/m
Posted by: fork
Comments are closed-
Posted by: dp2065 on Jun 11, 2007 9:36 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: tamsin on Jun 12, 2007 1:30 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Many parents contemplating this decision don't seriously consider the hassle of finding a job after being away for a while. They just assume it's all going to work out. In these cases it might be reasonable to say that they're likely making a mistake. But for parents who are smart enough to plan and think before deciding to have children & take time off, who's to say they don't know what's best for their family and themselves? Many "stay at home" parents go to school or attend some type of training that provides decent job placement, but this isn't possible or affordable for everyone. Perhaps this option to get educated while being a full-time parent should be made available to those who are very limited financially (like parents who struggle with chronically ill children's medical expenses, and can't work a regular inflexible job due to the demands of caring for a sick child).
The only thing wrong about choosing whether to opt in or out of work when there is a choice (I'm not talking about single parents who have to work) is making any decision with the romantic notion that there's no need for long-term planning because any problems they may encounter will just sort themselves out. Parents should be encouraged to research all their options & risks so they can make a decision that best meets their personal & family needs.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Opt-in vs Opt-out
Posted by: kmart35
» RE: Opt-in vs Opt-out
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Opt-in vs Opt-out
Posted by: kmart35
» RE: Opt-in vs Opt-out
Posted by: EagleMB
Comments are closed-
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Jun 9, 2007 4:49 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most women can't "opt out".
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Well
Posted by: MartianBachelor
» RE: Well
Posted by: Suz
Comments are closed-
Posted by: frosty86 on Jun 9, 2007 5:52 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And most employers have pathetic parental leave policies. Safe daycare is very expensive these days. In such a world, why do we want to force women into bearing unwanted children?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RESPONSIBILITY AND SEX
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: SPONSIBILITY AND SEX
Posted by: flakkerzmom
» I AM NOT YOUR ENEMY?
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» Excusing Personal Responsibility?
Posted by: writeval
» Thanks
Posted by: kepstein7777
» writeval: SILLINESS AND RATIONALIZATION WON'T CUT IT.
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: xcusing Personal Responsibility?
Posted by: EagleMB
» FROSTY: why do we want to force women into bearing unwanted children? WHO'S FORCING THIS????
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: TassieDevil
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce...
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [1]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: women can't return to the workforce... [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
Comments are closed-
Posted by: patmorris on Jun 9, 2007 6:51 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think we should encourage our young people to be careful about debt and consumerism so that more moms can have an easier time seeing the option of being home with their childen.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: choices
Posted by: jennyfox
» RE: choices
Posted by: EJW
» RE: choices
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: choices
Posted by: jennyfox
» RE: choices
Posted by: poppop_schell
» Right on, JennyFox!
Posted by: asilsfable
» RE: choices
Posted by: tamsin
» dads can opt out too
Posted by: off-the-radar 2
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SekhmetsatRa on Jun 9, 2007 7:21 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: EagleMB on Jun 9, 2007 8:19 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First off, the article pointed out that woman reentering the workplace saw a reduction in salary. Why would we pay someone who has been out of the workplace for several years the same as someone who has stayed current in their industry?
Secondly, the article asks: “When reality hits and they can't find someone to hire them for a suitable job -- one that might offer the flexibility or part-time hours or whatever they need to balance their job with their life -- they may feel that it's all their fault. But really, is it?”
The answer is YES. A business exists to make money, not to accommodate their employees. Some companies have found it beneficial to hire mothers on a part-time basis (usually to save on the costs of benefits), but other companies find it cheaper to only hire full time employees. You will note that part-time hourly employees are normally cheaper, but part-time salaried employees are more expensive. Having a child is a choice that carries with it costs. If you don’t want to pay the price, don’t have children.
And finally the article argues that: “Women continue to be less likely than men to have this "perk," mostly because women are less likely to hold the higher status or managerial positions where flexibility is more common.”
But this argument is deceptive. Fewer women have managerial positions because they choose to leave the workplace to rear children. Studies have found that men are more likely then women to be promoted to management, but that the men who are promoted have an average of 8 more years of work experience. Woman who don’t leave the workforce to rear children are just as likely as men to become managers.
Another factor is the prevalence of women in government jobs. Women far outrank men in numbers when you look at government employers. But government employers have far fewer management positions than non-government employers. Government jobs make up a small percentage of the overall workforce, so this is only a contributing factor, but a factor nonetheless.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Yes and no
Posted by: kepstein7777
» RE: Yes and no
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: Yes and no
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Yes and no
Posted by: LPB
» Eagle: IT STAKEHOLDERS NOT ONLY STOCKHOLDERS THAT MAKE GREAT BSUINSSES THAT LAST
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: agle: IT STAKEHOLDERS NOT ONLY STOCKHOLDERS THAT MAKE GREAT BSUINSSES THAT LAST
Posted by: EagleMB
» SO BE KIND ONLY BECAUSE IT PAYS AND SHOWS UP ON THE BOTTOM LINE?
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: That is the philosophy...
Posted by: EagleMB
» EAGLEWEB: WELL THAT PHILOSOPHY NEEDS TO CHANGE IF IT IS TO BE ACCEPTED BY JESUS CHRIST
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: Why is that?
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: That is the philosophy...
Posted by: jingles
» RE: That is the philosophy...
Posted by: EagleMB
» eAGLE: WHAT IS CURRENTLY DOESN'T MEAN THAT WHAT IT SHOULD BE???
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: eAGLE: WHAT IS CURRENTLY DOESN'T MEAN THAT WHAT IT SHOULD BE???
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: eAGLE: WHAT IS CURRENTLY DOESN'T MEAN THAT WHAT IT SHOULD BE???
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: eAGLE: WHAT IS CURRENTLY DOESN'T MEAN THAT WHAT IT SHOULD BE???
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: eAGLE: WHAT IS CURRENTLY DOESN'T MEAN THAT WHAT IT SHOULD BE???
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: eAGLE: WHAT IS CURRENTLY DOESN'T MEAN THAT WHAT IT SHOULD BE???
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Why blame the employer?
Posted by: SatanicJamboree
Comments are closed-
Posted by: nherkowitz on Jun 9, 2007 8:22 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It amazes me that the unemployment rate goes down, not because there are more jobs, but because people just seemed to disappear from the job market. Now that wages have been going down (or eliminated) for years for many people, I would expect to see more people in the job market. The whole deal smells of Bush/Cheney.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Cooking the Numbers
Posted by: CharlieChicken
» RE: The data is accurate, you just have to take it for what it is...
Posted by: EagleMB
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Maggieb on Jun 9, 2007 8:28 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We've come a long way baby....what a joke. Two incomes raised the tax base and we all know the rest.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» As if!
Posted by: BlueTigress
» RE: As if!
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: As if!
Posted by: Suz
» suz: HOW MANY FEMINISTS DO YOU KNOW WHO ARE ADVOCATES OF SMALL, LIMITED GOVERNMENT?
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: suz: HOW MANY FEMINISTS DO YOU KNOW WHO ARE ADVOCATES OF SMALL, LIMITED GOVERNMENT?
Posted by: Suz
» That's garbage, and you must know it, poppop.
Posted by: Beck
» BECK: UDGE DEFICITS ARE NOT THE ISSUE? AND I WAS SIMPLY ASKING A QUESTION, NOT CLAIMING ANYTHING?
Posted by: poppop_schell
» powerful Gloria Steinem put the dry cleaners, milkmen, and home doctors out of business?
Posted by: Beck
» RE: powerful Gloria Steinem put the dry cleaners, milkmen, and home doctors out of business?
Posted by: Suz
» yes, you'd think Sam Walton and his ilk had far more power over milkmen than Steinem
Posted by: Beck
» RE: But you are missing the point...
Posted by: EagleMB
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mkrichardson on Jun 9, 2007 8:30 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» mkrichardson: You are a women of great wisdom and courage and havn't been brainwashed by Feminism
Posted by: poppop_schell
» poppop, you are a man who seems sometimes to posses decency, and I'm ashamed of you writing that
Posted by: Beck
» BECK: I TOO AM A "FEMINIST" BUT NOT A RADICAL FEMINIST WHO TEND TO HATE MALES AND HOMEMAKERS.
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: mkrmom
Posted by: lwbaby
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Calicat on Jun 9, 2007 11:09 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You would never mock a man who wanted to keep working after becoming a father -- and you'd be outraged if he stayed home for a few years with his child and found himself unable to work at his previous level. That a man would not want to be economically dependent on his wife, and would not want to spend his life taking care of kids and house seems normal. But when it's a woman, we hear how selfish and materialistic she is.
Maybe the people who post these hostile comments are conservative trolls. If not, there's an awful lot of sexism on the left masquerading as class consciousness.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Sexism is discrimination based on sex...
Posted by: EagleMB
» Mr. Mom
Posted by: kepstein7777
» RE: Mr. Mom
Posted by: MartianBachelor
» RE: Mr. Mom
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Mr. Mom
Posted by: Suz
» Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [1]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [1 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [1 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [1 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [2 of 2]
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [1 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex [2 of 2]
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex Part 2
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex Part 2
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: frosty86
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: thha
» RE: Sexism is a system of privilege based on sex
Posted by: thha
» RE: Sexism is discrimination based on sex...
Posted by: SatanicJamboree
» RE: Sexism is discrimination based on sex...
Posted by: EagleMB
» This is alternet, where femiphobes and male addicts to feminism abound, along with normal folks
Posted by: Beck
» Thank you.
Posted by: frosty86
» Conservative TROLLS ? Y'think ???
Posted by: BenCaxton12
Comments are closed-
Posted by: poppop_schell on Jun 9, 2007 2:29 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. MATERIALISM AND 'KEEPING UP WITH THE JONES"
2. BRAKEDOWN OF LOVING, UNSELFISH MARRIAGES LEADING TO HIGH DIVORCE RATES
3. BIG GOVERNMENT WITH HIGH TAX RATES AND INDUCED DETERIOTION OF THE DOLLAR THROUGH INFLATION
4. MULTINATIONALS WHO PLACE PROFITS ABOVE THE NEEDS OF WORKING PEOPLE.
5. THE RADICAL FEMINIST/SELF SATISAFCTION MOVEMENT
I beleive except for the highly educated femisnist elite, most mothers would much prefer to spend their life
in their instinctive desire to nurture their children and make the world a better place with each new generation.
What say ye?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Materialsm, DIVORCE, and big government: WHY MOST MOTHERS "HAVE TO WORK OUTSIDE THE HOME." WORK
Posted by: lwbaby
» RE: Materialsm, DIVORCE, and big government: WHY MOST MOTHERS "HAVE TO WORK OUTSIDE THE HOME." WORK
Posted by: poppop_schell
» poppop_schell: "I am a feminist in a more conservative way. "
Posted by: fork
» fork: YOU OBVIOULSY ARE A RADICAL FEMINIST BECAUSE YOU DON'T RECOGNIZE GRADATIONS N/M
Posted by: poppop_schell
» You have no clue what feminism is. You wouldn't recognize a feminist if she sat on your face n/m
Posted by: fork
Comments are closed-
Posted by: poppop_schell on Jun 9, 2007 3:18 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Since a marriage is a partnership in raising children, why not also make it a partnership in a home based business?
With telecommuting, one can always have one parent at home if you work it right with your employer(s). There is a growing labor shortage of skilled workers. One can't go wrong in the medical field and one can often schedule hours to your liking.
IMO, the family is collapsing in American partly because of the lack of quality attention to both children and spouses. A Great Mormon prophet once said, "No success in life can compensate for FAILURE in the home.
My wife and I both committed to having Mom stay at home. Yes, we gave up many of the goodies that my faculty colleagues had when both spouses were working. Many, however, have ended in divorce and/or serious problems with their children.
Good luck to all that find it economically necessry for two working parents. I promise IF you that if you will make sure that your first priority is to each other and the children, God will GREATLY bless you. He wants you to be happy.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: IMPACT OF TELECOMMUTING AND HOME BUSINESSES
Posted by: astudent
» astudent: THANKS FOR THE VERY THOUGHTFUL AND INSIGHTFUL POST!!!
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: astudent: THANKS FOR THE VERY THOUGHTFUL AND INSIGHTFUL POST!!!
Posted by: astudent
» astudent: CORRECTION: HELP THROUGH NON-PROFIT CAHRITIES, NOT JUST6 CHURCHES.
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: IMPACT OF TELECOMMUTING AND HOME BUSINESSES
Posted by: ktm
» RE: IMPACT OF TELECOMMUTING AND HOME BUSINESSES
Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: IMPACT OF TELECOMMUTING AND HOME BUSINESSES
Posted by: Libertine
» LIBERTAINE: CORRECTION: THE BEST NUTURING PARENT SHOULD STAY HOME WHETHER FATHER OR MOTHER
Posted by: poppop_schell
Comments are closed-
Posted by: altermom on Jun 9, 2007 8:28 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, fathers need to rethink their roles and shift from being "helpers" to being "co-parents," who share equally in the time commitments and daily hassles (and rewards) of raising children.
But we also need to restructure our world and thinking in order to make this happen: first, through a major reform of the healthcare system (since many parents are forced into working long hours simply to maintain health insurance that comes with full-time work), and second, by considering that when mothers work, it isn't a selfish decision--it's one that benefits us all.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Amen! Men can't brag about the job they've done in our world
Posted by: Beck
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Libertine on Jun 9, 2007 10:25 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But, for the most part, for men, it's still as it's always been. It's work, work, work, like it or not. We don't hear anything about Dads choosing to "opt out" of paid employment, no matter how dead-end and personally meaningless their jobs are. Except for the token stay at home Dads we see written up in the newspaper every Father's Day, men really have no choice -- men are expected to suck it up and work, regardless of what they'd really like to do.
Real equality will come when men have the same choices as women.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: What About Men?
Posted by: fork
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Callibrarian on Jun 9, 2007 10:27 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The truth of the matter is, most women have to work, either for economics or to preserve their sanity. We can't keep saying give-up-material-possessions-and-you-can-stay-at-home, because it's never about COUPLES giving up material possessions, it's about WOMEN giving up possessions AND careers. Instead of telling mothers, "Going to work when you have a baby is going to suck, so start sucking it up," we tell them it's okay to stay at home when they still owe twenty thousand in student loans. But they'll never cut the baby's budget. The husband will still need suits and shoes and have business lunches. It's the wife who will economize, who will wear clothes until they fall off her body and not get a haircut because she can't afford it. Instead of coaching mothers how to rejoin the work force, we need to start encouraging them never to leave in the first place.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Right For the Wrong Reasons
Posted by: mkrichardson
» RE: ight For the Wrong Reasons
Posted by: NoKidding
» RE: ight For the Wrong Reasons
Posted by: mkrichardson
» nOKIDDING: I respect your inward honety and your right minded decision. BUT you may think differen
Posted by: poppop_schell
» mkrichardson: more great advice!!!! Your a great addition to the dialogue!!!
Posted by: poppop_schell
» Blaming the moms!
Posted by: kmart35
Comments are closed-
Posted by: messedup on Jun 10, 2007 8:00 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Good times
Posted by: mememe
» I've had some men managers and they were just plain ruthless.
Posted by: Beck
» You've got me wrong..
Posted by: messedup
» Excellent response, Beck n/m
Posted by: fork
Comments are closed-
Posted by: dp2065 on Jun 11, 2007 9:36 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: tamsin on Jun 12, 2007 1:30 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Many parents contemplating this decision don't seriously consider the hassle of finding a job after being away for a while. They just assume it's all going to work out. In these cases it might be reasonable to say that they're likely making a mistake. But for parents who are smart enough to plan and think before deciding to have children & take time off, who's to say they don't know what's best for their family and themselves? Many "stay at home" parents go to school or attend some type of training that provides decent job placement, but this isn't possible or affordable for everyone. Perhaps this option to get educated while being a full-time parent should be made available to those who are very limited financially (like parents who struggle with chronically ill children's medical expenses, and can't work a regular inflexible job due to the demands of caring for a sick child).
The only thing wrong about choosing whether to opt in or out of work when there is a choice (I'm not talking about single parents who have to work) is making any decision with the romantic notion that there's no need for long-term planning because any problems they may encounter will just sort themselves out. Parents should be encouraged to research all their options & risks so they can make a decision that best meets their personal & family needs.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Opt-in vs Opt-out
Posted by: kmart35
» RE: Opt-in vs Opt-out
Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Opt-in vs Opt-out
Posted by: kmart35
» RE: Opt-in vs Opt-out
Posted by: EagleMB
Vancouver's Games Will Be the Gayest Olympics Ever
Trial Begins for Activist Who Fought to Protect Federal Lands from Drilling -- Join the Protest
Starbucks' Cop-Out to Gun Nuts: Customers Served Coffee While Strapped




