<p>Eerything said here says that the Women’s Movement is working - the same thing doesn’t work for every woman. We at least can make out choices now, work at stay at home, work in a high pressure career, work in a less pressure career, or do what we CHOOSE. Everyone who has responded was made their own choices, and aren’t we lucky that it has worked out for each of us in whatever way we directed? More power to the Yalie who knows what she wants. More power to the other Yalie who doesn’t choose this path. Isn’t this what we have fought for for so long? We may not agree with someone else’s decisions, but don’t we have to respect their right to make them? That wasn’t available to us women years ago. I am Woman - let me make my own choices.</p>
<p>
Amen.</p>
<p>Let’s not try to make one another feel bad about those choices, eh? Tolerance would be real progress.</p>
<p>I relate to your nice post, SBmom. After 25 years of parenting, I am still surprised that this issues pushes so many buttons. I was a stay-at-home mother, and remember reading an article in the early 80s about the rancor between stay-at-home and working mothers. The article featured a researcher who put members of each group together for a roundtable, expecting sparks to fly. Instead–the group quickly found agreement: the working mothers wished for more time to spend with their children; the stay-at-home moms craved more opportunities to work part time or to at least exercise their brains! </p>
<p>. I do understand women who love to work full time, and whose children do well in day dare. Once I liked to believe that day care children were deprived–but that was the chip on my shoulder from imagining I was being looked down on by working moms! </p>
<p>I would be a stay-at-home mom all over again. How I wish this new generation of young women would feel free to make their choice without “shoulds,” and without feeling defensive about the choice!</p>
<p>I feel very much like you, SBMom. I don’t have an overpowering need to work; I don’t get my identity from it. I’d rather be writing, reading, volunteering, kayaking, biking, etc.We made a decision when my H started medical school that I would stay home for a few years, and then work part time, because let’s face it, a pediatrician’s hours suck, and somebody needed to be available. A few years ago, I went to work full time, primarily so my H could scale back his hours and eventually change careers. He’s happily student teaching right now, making zero bucks. So I’ll write in my spare time.</p>
<p>A couple points: one poster raised the idea that it might not be possible to maintain a comfortable lifestyle on one income in the future. That’s what our generation was told. To me, the non-considered variable is the comfortable lifestyle. We have chosen to live quite a few rungs down the ladder just so we could keep this flexibility. What’s comfortable to us might be unacceptable to many of you, but that’s a choice.</p>
<p>I would like to also add my dismay over those who think these women’s educations are wasted if they don’t get the high-powered careers. That is not why I went to college, nor why I sent my kids. We’re just not careerist. For us, college is for developing yourself and your mind–work is a separate issue (hey, I was an English major).</p>
<p>That being said, the other objection raised is that these women may need to work some time, through divorce, unemployment of spouse, etc. Well, most said that they will work before they have kids, so presumably they could go back to work. After all, they still do have those fancy educations, right?</p>
<p>I salute any one who can make choices and then find creative ways to make those choices work–no one says it’s easy or simple or will turn out the way they ideally want, but what’s so wrong about giving it a try, if that’s what they want?</p>
<p>As I was driving my daughter home from after-school daycare when she was 6 or 7, she asked me, “mom, do you think it’s harder to be a doctor, or a doctor’s kid?” As my beeper went off, and I reached for my cell phone I told her that at that moment, it was alot harder to be her than me.</p>
<p>My son asked me why I hadn’t chosen to be a surgeon (I am an internist), because “then we could afford for dad to stay home.” (a friend of his’ dad is a surgeon, and the mom stays home).</p>
<p>Neither kid will go into medicine, I’m sure. They perceive this on-call, up all night/work the next day at times, emergency-laden life as too much.
And I have a great husband, also an internist. We’ve really tried so hard to keep their lives well-balanced, and not to have too much focus on our hectic schedules. We’re lucky they’re fabulous, compassionate people.
It will be interesting to see what my daughter’s choices will be, and also my son’s!</p>
<p>Galway mom–I admire you guys for making it work. I know some wonderful doctor moms. </p>
<p>But i have to say, after watching their Dad as they grew up, the one career decision that both my kids are adamant on is that they will not be doctors.</p>
<p>A thought about the issue that y’all are skirting… the finances and one v. two incomes.</p>
<p>Your generation is different. You can raise a couple of kids on one income, having bought a house 10 or 15 or 20 years ago. College tuition is going through the roof, though… and the housing market is out of control.</p>
<p>My generation is NOT like that. I had undergrad paid for and I’ll still be in educational debt from law school until I’m in my mid-30s. Reiterating my point before about women now being MORE educated than men… I think we can start to see where living one, male, income is just not something to expect. Fine if these young sweeties think that they’ll stay at home while Hubby works a high-powered job - but they’ll be paying off (unless the 'rents are loaded) two professional school educations, a mortgage, car payments, and trying to save for their kids tuition, all at the same time. Let’s do the math:
Two professional school educations, no parental help,+ interest: $400,000
Cost of a small home in a nice suburb of MA, CT, NY: $400-$500k
Cost of two college tuitions for kids that they want to have: $200k each? $300k per kid? Safely say that they’ll have to cough up at least a half-million? Have we even started into the masters or professional degrees for these kids?</p>
<p>… and they are going to sit at home with a law degree for ten years? And Hubby is going to have a perfect, steady, lucrative job? Even if they get that, does Hubby see the kids at all, or is he too busy putting in 100-hour weeks with JP Morgan?</p>
<p>Just think it’s mental to want someone else to take care of you. </p>
<p>FWIW, I have a very strong aversion to small children and never want them. Never have wanted them - even as a kid, I couldn’t understand the appeal of strollers or what-have-you that people thought little girls should play with to pretend being Mommy. When I hit my teenage years, I couldn’t understand why I was supposed to coo over babies. After my little siblings were born, I’m better at relating to kids - but the it starts and ends there. Clearly, if I have a biological clock, it wasn’t made in Switzerland. Hence the reason why it upsets me so much that everyone assumes that my lack of male genitals means that I’ll run home at age 30. Too darn ambitious. </p>
<p>Finally - Reese! IMO, the same applies to women who are waiting to be taken care of.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>GalwayMom, I can guarantee that my D will never become a real estate agent. Writer, possibly. </p>
<p>When D was about 8, I had her with me when I ran into the office to pick up some papers. Some condescending colleague bent over and, in that sugary voice that some adults use when speaking to small children, asked, “Are you going to be a real estate agent too?”</p>
<p>D looked up and very matter of factly said, “No, it’s too unstable.”</p>
<p>Game, set, match vs. colleague.</p>
<p>LMAO! Score one for my little sis. ;)</p>
<p>Count me among the parents with wonderful memories of my 2 kids’ experiences among various day care settings – our lives were tremendously enriched by the various adults, young and old, men & women, who were at times involved in the care of my kids from infancy through school age. </p>
<p>As to the article: I think it is one more expression of the gulf between the elite & monied classes of our society (where women can choose to both stay home and maintain a high standard of living)… and the working class (where simple economics usually dictate that all able-bodied adults in the household at least work part-time, if not full time). I mean, the bottom line is that the kids we are raising need to eat. I’ll bet that a survey of young women at public universities would yield different results; our public colleges are probably filled with young women whose greatest hope is to make a better life for themselves economically than what they grew up with. </p>
<p>I’d also note that it seemed from the article that the future SAHM’s were themselves the daughter’s of SAHMs – the daughters of professional working women who were quoted seemed to look at their moms as good role models and want to follow their paths. So basically, you have the daughters of the elite, at an elite school, being interviewed – and when it comes down to it, their plan is to lead the same privileged elite lives they grew up with. If that is their desire, fine… but it is not the world that my daughter has grown up in or is likely to live in.</p>
<p>Aries,
Actually a few people have addressed that very issue. And for me, I’m going back to work for that very reason - to help pay for college. </p>
<p>I don’t think women that decide to stay at home have a wish to be taken care of. They wish to raise their own kids rather than put them in daycare - that choice requires being dependent, yes, but again I don’t think the motivation is to be taken care of.</p>
<p>It seems to me that there is an economic issue that has not been addressed. With the women’s movement, the workforce increased substantially. With greater supply, I believe that real income dropped. Are we really better off financially? I think business is the real beneficiary. </p>
<p>I’m lucky to have stayed home for most of my children’s lives, but many don’t have that option. Also, as many of you suggest, the spouse’s occupation makes a difference. My husband would just not have been available to pick up kids from daycare. He always had a long commute, and frequent travel. I often thought that I didn’t see how it made sense for me to return to full time work, when it just meant adding an additional job to my full plate. But what bothers me is the persistent current running through this discussion that any individual woman is letting the feminist movement down by choosing not to pursue a career. How does it hurt anyone else if a mom would rather raise her children herself? That constant battle, usually played out in women’s magazine’s of the '80s, of working mom vs. stay-at-home mom is alive and well. What ever happened to live and let live?</p>
<p>You can raise children on one salary too, aries. You wouldn’t want to, but it is possible.</p>
<p>The same was true for our generation. I could have raised the boys on one salary. No biggie. Take out private schools, world travel, five star restaurants and hotels, household help etc etc. </p>
<p>More moolah wasn’t my motivation for continuing to practice architecture though. I like being an architect and I like being a mother. Shoot me if you can’t stand it, but I tried to combine the two into one life–along with about a hundred and fifty great friends, a huge extended family and a few overseas postings.</p>
<p>So far so good.</p>
<p>This week.</p>
<p>Oh, but wait… having dated a lot, I can tell you that most men find “smart, but not as smart as me” to be the ultimate turn-on. Ugh. Welcome to 1953. Where’s my poodle skirt?</p>
<p>Maybe most, but still not all men. One of my sons will only date women he finds intellectually intimidating… his exact words. He first met his HS girlfriend at a science competition and then asked her out after she took first place at another science event. That was a really big turn on. Now that hes in college he scouts out classes and events where he thinks the smart women may congregate. He is bright and high-achieving himself and will definitely be going on to grad school but his hope is to find one of these high-achieving, intellectually intimidating women who will not only marry him but allow him to be primary caregiver to their childrenchildren he would like to home school, at least for the early years. Now, I have already warned him that he cant hold any future spouse to such an agreement if she changes her mind after the baby is born… . as SBMom so wonderfully describes and tell him I believe any new mother should have the right to stay home with her newborn or to go back to work asapher choice, no one elses. I do understand that all new moms don’t have that luxury of choice, but I don’t understand why this isn’t a right and not a luxury in our country. My choice was to stay home with my babies, and then to home school them until high school. I did it because it was, for me, incredibly enjoyable and rewarding. I did it for myself more than for my kids. Children have been successfully raised for centuries by primary caregivers other than their mothers. Mine did not need to be with me but I did very much want to be with them when they were young. (this didnt make me a helicopter mom but that is probably a matter of personality and luck more than sahm vs working mom parenting models) I do think most parents want their children to spend their formative years with as intelligent and well educated caregivers as possible. Who wouldnt love to have a Yale educated nanny? And I definitely am of the group who feel college is for an education, not a job. In my opinion good education makes good citizens as well as superior primary caregivers!</p>
<p>I had raised the point that worries Aries, about whether it will be possible for our kids to live a middle class life on one income, given the rising cost of housing and college education. Working class women have always needed to work. Middle class women have had some choice. But, the standard used to be that you spent no more than 25% of your income on housing and the public universities my husband and I both went to used to cost less than $1000 a year.</p>
<p>I note that the women who were interviewed at Yale are not talking about not preparing for a career, even if they are talking about full time motherhood later. So, as to Marite’s point, they should be able to take up the plow if needed. At least we are not back to the days when “senior panic” meant young women who had not yet found a husband before graduating college, rather than students worried about not getting into law school.</p>
<p>Now that I am older than dirt, I can safely say I was smarter than all of the men I dated.</p>
<p>I had four offers of marriage–out of the seven men I dated. I could have easily married two of the others–but chose the least needy fella with the best sense of adventure and English humour. </p>
<p>And I don’t look anything like Elle McPherson.</p>
<p>I don’t know how easy it is to re-start a law ore medical career after being out of the workforce for a while. I’m sure it is possible, but probably not at the high level the young women interviewed for the article are aiming at.
Some of these young women sound as if they are unwilling to settle for less than the very best. The best lawyer, the best mother. It’s the all or nothing that worries me and the a priori decisions</p>
<p>Many years ago, I met a woman who’d gone from upper-middle class to struggling in the blink of an eye. If I remember correctly she was a Wellesley graduate and had been married to a hotshot economist. After many years of marriage, her husband left her for someone else. She went from living in a house with 10 bedrooms to a bedsit in London, working for a pittance at 40+. Her many years of volunteering had not equipped her to hold a better-paying job. Would she have had better luck if she had pursued a law degree before getting married? I’d love feedback.</p>
<p>TheDad- I laughed so much about the “unstable” comment from your young dd- the same comment could have come from my kids about medicine, as many well-meaning people asked ours the same question! btw, I’ve got a writer, too. The other is an engineering kinda kid- hates blood, guts or illness.</p>
<p>Garland- we go crazy sometimes, but somehow I got to the point in time where I needed this forum, i.e. ready to launch one of these kids to college!</p>
<p>marite- the only reason I took only 6 weeks off before retuning to work fulltime with each child, is that one cannot leave medicine for any length of time and still be a practicing clinician (as opposed to an administrative job, e.g.). Six weeks was even long, although I was SO conflicted leaving those babies! I have an attorney sister who would say the same about law (interesting that she does malpractice plaintiff work!)</p>
<p>Thanks, Galwaymom. That’s what I was afraid of, as I thought as these young women’s plans.</p>
<p>Aries, the precursor was when D was 4 and TheMom was reading “Goldilocks.” D interrupted and said, “Goldilocks shouldn’t have gone inside that house…there wasn’t a sign out front!” One too many showings on the way home from daycare.</p>