article on opting out of parenthood for financial reasons

Parent Cafe
101

<p>“Why are they leery? Has someone or society led them to believe that motherhood is an unpleasant condition?”</p>

<p>Like ahl pointed out, only one of your three reasons was a choice, that’s already a pretty big reason to be leery, no?</p>

<p>Otherwise, what was established in this thread already, that poor people tend to have more children, means that society has indeed conditioned us all to (consciously or unconsciously) assume that children mean a diminished, troublesome lifestyle. </p>

<p>I personally believe that financial reasons may be the main reason why men don’t want children, but for women, I believe it’s foremost a matter of feeling respected for what they have achieved (instead of what they have ‘produced’) and the feeling of independence and choice.</p>

102

<p>

</p>

<p>No, absolutely not. If you are unwilling to raise your own child, then of course you should never have children. Women should not be raised to be “leery” of motherhood if they want children. They should understand that if they have children, they will likely end up the primary caregiver, which is an wonderful (not unpleasant) condition.</p>

103

<p>Bay, if I were 20 something, well-educated and wanted to have a child, but did not want to be primary caregiver, I would either (1)choose to partner with someone who did want to be primary caregiver, or (2) hire live-in help to raise my child or (3)work out some sort of arrangement for another single mom, providing her with room and board in return for childcare for all the children or (4) some other scenario </p>

<p>I would not just end up being primary caregiver if that hadn’t been my plan. I do not take it as a given that ending up primary caregiver is the most likely scenario for today’s young women. I would not see it as a wonderful condition if I hadn’t freely chosen it. I see choosing to be a mother as completely separate from choosing to be primary caregiver.</p>

<p>I don’t think only well educated 20 something yr olds should have children! However, well educated and affluent have more options and choices. Most of the country doesn’t waste time siting around debating such things.</p>

104

<p>I find your perspective interesting, Bay. And I don’t doubt that you’re right that women generally “take the reins” with regard to raising children. But the vast majority of mothers and fathers I know participate equally in raising the children, though the breakdown of tasks might vary from family to family. You may be right that this participatory model is not the dominant one. I honestly can’t imagine my daughter being comfortable with a spouse who wasn’t prepared to play an equal role in parenting. Maybe she’ll surprise me and herself when the time comes! :)</p>

105

<p>Well, I see the hiring of help and arranging for the single mom to be the role of the primary caregiver. I noticed that you didn’t include: “Leave it to the father to figure it all out.” See what I mean about what women do? :)</p>

106

<p>“Ending up” as anything that one didn’t chose freely and getting told that one just has to accept that, is patriarchal thinking and probably the answer to why women (especially those well-educated) are opting out of parenthood.</p>

107

<p>Kitty,
In my experience, we parents “end up” in a lot of situations and roles we didn’t plan for, because we did not know what exactly was going to happen after our kids were born. It is not a result of patriarchy nor is it a reason to opt out of parenthood. It is actually very exciting and makes life interesting.</p>

108

<p>Bay I didn’t mean to sound condescending, if I did, but it IS patriarchal to expect women to just accept that they will be the primary care-giver and to not expect the same of men. </p>

<p>Obviously, if someone is ok with that outlook, then everything is fine! Though, it’s not too surprising (I feel) that quite a few women do not love the idea.</p>

<p>Obviously, I’m not an authority on the topic, seeing that I’m childfree, but it was one of my (many) reasons for sure.</p>

109

<p>I don’t think I ever said that women must “accept” that they will be the primary care-giver; rather I said they should “expect” to be the primary care-giver. Those are two separate things. I also tried to emphasize that being the primary care-giver, whether one wants that role or ends up with that role is not a bad thing! It is a wonderful role that should be valued more by our society.</p>

110

<p>Bay - Are you encouraging your daughters to have children? Do you think they could have happy fulfilled lives without children? </p>

<p>And how do we get society to value the primary caregiver role? Do you think a man in that role is more respected than a woman?</p>

111

<p>I don’t know, if I’m told to expect a certain outcome, I’m kind of expected to accept it too, especially when it’s added that the outcome is most likely enjoyable.</p>

<p>Regardless, I do agree that motherhood (and the potentially consequential SAH life) has a problematic status but I don’t see how that can be changed without converting back to times where childlessness was seen as a flaw either. </p>

<p>Someone earlier mentioned how there is more child support and protection in Europe, I’m German and it’s true that compared to the US, we seem to have more support… we also have lower birth rates. So financial and governmental support doesn’t seem to be the answer, but what is then? (Not an actual question, just a thought, thought out loud)</p>

112

<p>alh,
Regarding my Ds and children: I don’t think I have ever “encouraged” them to have children. I think that is their choice. As I said, I have told them to pursue their educational/career dreams, but be prepared to sideline their careers if they have children, because based upon my own experience and observations of nearly every family I know well, the mother ends up in the primary care-giver role (granted, to different degrees).</p>

<p>I don’t know how we get the role to become more respected. I do think women harm themselves by not respecting it, if they are doing that.</p>

113

<p>

</p>

<p>I don’t understand why this statement is about motherhood and not parenthood. I realize that this was non-traditional, but my mother is now very senior working at the same place that she worked at when I was born. My father let his career take a back burner for a few years and worked part time when I was little before getting a masters degree and making a career change. I am fine and I have great relationships with both of my parents.</p>

<p>I think that the expectation that the mother is one who will make career sacrifices to be there for kid events or the one that has to cook dinner every night is a big part of the problem-- if household and parenting responsibilities are shared equally, or discussed before deciding that one parent by default is going to do everything in the house, I think that this would be less of a problem of women feeling like having children forces them to make sacrifices. Having children is a family decision. I’ve also learned just as much about cooking from my dad as from my mom because feeding the family at night was not a responsibility for one person. My brother or I often cook meals for the family ourselves when we are home.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree with this statement. Marrying someone is a huge thing in your life, and why teach your daughters to tolerate their spouse not being an equal partner and wanting to have an equal role in the lives of his own children? In my opinion that should be a dealbreaker. I’m not saying there should never be stay-at-home moms, but there should be a discussion, not an assumption, about which parent takes that role. And it’s pretty immature for a member of a couple to come home from work and put their feet up while their spouse cooks dinner every day. It’s a question of basic respect and a question of wanting a role in the life of your child.</p>

<p>That said, I also agree with the people who have said not to have kids unless you really want kids.</p>

114

<p>I wanted to be the primary caregiver to my kids, even though I also worked. It was so much fun, that I was actually happy H didn’t want an equal role. I have seen some families where the partners are equal, and that’s great. However, I think when one decides to have a child, whether one is the father or mother, one needs to be prepared to do 100% of the work. We never know what might happen along the way or how our partner will fare at parenting.</p>

<p>Two years ago D was in law school and her boyfriend wanted to be a stay at home dad. Now D has quit law school, is in a history PhD program and has a boyfriend who wants to be an earner. She love a college teaching job, but if she only finds adjunct work they are both good with that. I think she feels she could be happy with either set- up as long as there was enough money.</p>

<p>I don’t think my 23 year old son has thought that far ahead.</p>

115

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree with this. If it ends up being the mom that takes the time with the kid, that’s fine, I’m not criticizing families where that happens. I do think there are a lot of dads who assume it’ll be the mom and are never prepared to do 100% of the work and that’s where my issue is. I think my parents actually managed to do it pretty equally but I didn’t have a stay-at-home parent past early toddlerhood.</p>

<p>I have a co-worker with a young child. Her husband is very traditional, but when it comes to their child, they both have wonderful relationships with him and split their time when somebody needs to be home with him or when he needs a parent for a special event or something pretty equally.</p>

116

<p>For the article: </p>

<p>Our class thought it had some really great points and then some that some of us agreed with and some of us disagreed with. </p>

<p>The biggest issue that I personally had with the article was the fact that she seemed to blame herself for her son’s behavioral issues. First of all, most 14 year olds are going to act with or without perfect parents. Not all, obviously, but many, even most. She talks about how she has this near-perfect spouse who primarily raised the kids, but then when things got rough, it was mom who felt the need to instantly step in. Which is fine, but she kind of makes it seem like it’s a universal given. I don’t know if that’s a generational gap or what, but it just kind of rubbed me the wrong way. </p>

<p>Then she talks about the importance of picking a partner. This we all agreed was crucial. Too many young people, I think, are getting married without really thinking this part through. I made it clear early on in my relationship that I wanted a SAH partner or at least one who would make our children his primary responsibility in life. That, or we’d have no kids, because I refused to be defaulted in to the role of primary caregiver. I know myself. That is NOT where I’d be happiest. </p>

<p>I disagree with the author that you need to be superwoman to have it all. I truly think it comes down to your choice of partner. I also think the workplace is changing, but it is my hope that it’s not changing so that women can be encouraged to work from home while really doing their “work” <em>nudge nudge, wink wink</em>. In other words, encouraged to telecommute so that they can be home with the kids, still continue with their “career”, and don’t take away from the man’s job. Now, I think telecommuting could be a WONDERFUL resource for both men and women who want more flexible hours and work jobs that can afford this luxury (mostly the upper middle class). BUT I don’t want it to become a substitute mommy track. </p>

<p>We then launched into a discussion about how our society, from the federal government on down, has measures to keep women from being too successful, whether consciously or subconsciously. It also discourages men from being too involved (rarely paternal leave, “family emergency” is generally not an acceptable excuse to miss work for a man the way it is for a woman, etc). However, we do see this changing in some progressive work places with the adoption of family leave policies rather than maternity leave. We’re hopeful that companies with these family friendly policies will attract the most highly talented women and other companies will follow suit in an attempt not to lose the top talent.</p>

<p>The way I was raised, I was never taught to believe that the woman was the default caregiver. If anything, my dad was far more involved with raising me than my mom was. Both of my parents worked 1-3 jobs while I was growing up, alternating so that someone was usually home with me. Until I was in 7th grade, my dad owned his own business so it would usually be him that picked me up from school and took me to work with him. Then after his accident, he became a SAHD. Both of my long-term significant others have wanted to be the primary caregivers for our children and I honestly could not see myself having children with someone who was career focused because I am afraid I would be forced by default in to that primary caregiver role (now, stars forbid, something were to happen to my partner, I would definitely be willing to become the 100% parent, but it’s not my path if I can help it).</p>

<p>(I think this was legitimately the longest CC post I’ve ever written. I apologize for the length.)</p>

117

<p>

</p>

<p>I was not espousing this, and I apologize if it sounded like I was, because I agree that in a perfect world, parents should decide between themselves what role and level of commitment they are willing to give to care-taking (while at the same time I agree with mythmom - if you cannot fathom giving 100% if need be, then do not pursue parenthood).</p>

<p>In my world up until now, and granted things could be different by the time some people reading this become parents, women have generally ended up in the primary care-taking role because the world is not perfect yet. Possessing this knowledge can help you plan. And please don’t plan for parenthood to be a “step-down” in life, or a compromise, or something unpleasant or to be leery about. Being the primary care-taker of others who will be influenced by most everything you say and do can have much farther ranging implications than someone who diagnoses a bad case of hives, for example.</p>

<p>Relationships and family are the most important thing in life, imo, although I know some disagree.</p>

118

<p>

</p>

<p>I think this is a really nice way to put those. It is ultimately a good thing, not an unpleasant duty, and I don’t think either parent should think of it that way or they really shouldn’t be having kids. It seems to me that society has already come pretty far in the equal parenting direction, but there is definitely still room to go further.</p>

119

<p>Partners can surprise us. And before we have children we may not understand which traits are crucial. And people change. I think it’s idealistic to assume we can rationally choose our partners.</p>

<p>My first H was perfect in my eyes. But he left me. He’s been a devoted parent, but he’s had to be. His second wife died when their kids were 4 and 6. He didn’t think I’d be a fit mother, or so he said, but he ended up parenting alone.</p>

<p>I ran into a nasty case of the biological clock. My second husband is a bit of a mess but very loyal. My hippie self surprised all, and I turned out to be a competent parent and wage earner. No one got what s/he expected.</p>

<p>Studies show we couple with those whose immune system best offsets ours, and thus produce the healthiest children.</p>

<p>Nothing in this process is rational. We do our best and muddle along.</p>

<p>I did get healthy, awesome children and someone by my side to help lighten my load. However it all plays out, given all the conditions facing humans I’d say that’s a lot. Very little is perfect in this world.</p>

<p>I gather some if the posters here are in ideal situations. I don’t think that’s the rule for human experience.</p>

<p>I had children because I was compelled to do so from deep inside</p>

<p>I work for both a living ( compelled to do so) and because I can’t imagine a life in which I don’t talk about literature to young people.</p>

<p>I’d like more money and a more responsible spouse, but I am glad I didn’t make having children conditional on those. I would have missed the central relationships of my life.</p>

120

<p>Being a stay-at-home mom (for 18 months when my daughter was a baby) was a terrific gig (my best gig ever). The reasons I went the stay-at-home route rather than my husband doing it are a long story, though I must say that I personally can’t imagine letting anyone else take care of my baby in those first months of her life. I don’t know when I would have gone back to work full-time if I’d had a choice, because I had to take over 100 percent of the duties of raising a child after my husband died. (So, yeah, the life you plan even with a spouse who is 100 percent committed to his role as a parent is not always the life you get.)</p>