For people who are willing to listen to the Living God, I certainly recommend His family life pattern.
5
To all of those who say, "Having children is a choice... you had them now it is up to you to pay for them." I would like to challenge your position. For many women, the desire to have children is innate, it is instinctive, it is biological. It is not really a choice at all. We have been taught that gay men can not help who they love, it is not a choice for them. Well, for many women... motherhood is not a choice for them. Motherhood is innate, it is our biological destiny. Society benefits from this instinct and society should step up to support parents more.
21
I understand that many parents are having a difficult time (I see it in my siblings), but I tend to tune out when the same people complaining just happen to drive a car that's brand new, buy themselves and their children fancy new iphones, constantly buy "fashionable" shoes, clothes and purses, and have houses full of crap that they don't need (and probably bought at Walmart, Target, Homegoods, BestBuy & Pier 1) because they feel the need to constantly redecorate and always have to own the latest, greatest gadgets (i know, I know, you "deserve" it). And don't get me started on the ridiculous number of gifts they'll buy each other for the upcoming holidays. They'll complain they don't have enough time to spend with family, but they'll participate in Black Friday just to score "great deals" on more crap they don't need. Do these people understand the difference between a need and a want? I'm serious. I'd really like to know.
For the record, my husband and I don't have kids (not by choice). We both work, but he earns a paycheck and I don't (I left my job to care for my elderly parents). We've been married for 16 years and drive a 15 year old car (we bought it new, paid it off & take care of it). Last year, we moved (to a less expensive house) and had to finally buy a second car. Guess what, we bought one used (some idiot had leased for a year and then turned in with only 15K miles, and it's still under warranty)! Don't tell me choices don't matter.
For the record, my husband and I don't have kids (not by choice). We both work, but he earns a paycheck and I don't (I left my job to care for my elderly parents). We've been married for 16 years and drive a 15 year old car (we bought it new, paid it off & take care of it). Last year, we moved (to a less expensive house) and had to finally buy a second car. Guess what, we bought one used (some idiot had leased for a year and then turned in with only 15K miles, and it's still under warranty)! Don't tell me choices don't matter.
28
Where are the gays and lesbian couples in this conversation?
Even today, when hetero couples marry with the desire to have an equal partnership, we still think of marriage in terms of a woman’s role and a man’s role — that’s why we tend to have “his” and “her” marriages. And for the most part, we not only think that way but act that way. Thus, the struggle over chores an caregiving.
These are not conversations often heard in gay and lesbian households. They typically have more equitable partnerships when it comes to household and parenting responsibilities, making them role models for equality-seeking hetero couples.
If gays and lesbians can do that, why can’t heteros?
Even today, when hetero couples marry with the desire to have an equal partnership, we still think of marriage in terms of a woman’s role and a man’s role — that’s why we tend to have “his” and “her” marriages. And for the most part, we not only think that way but act that way. Thus, the struggle over chores an caregiving.
These are not conversations often heard in gay and lesbian households. They typically have more equitable partnerships when it comes to household and parenting responsibilities, making them role models for equality-seeking hetero couples.
If gays and lesbians can do that, why can’t heteros?
6
I think one reason that professionals have more difficulty in balancing is not just the hours worked but the cognitive load.
Raising children requires a pretty hefty cognitive load. It is mentally taxing and it often requires mental skills that drain the mind. Blue collar workers spend their days working but not taxing the mind as much, and so I think they make for better parents because they have more mental energy left at the end of the day for their kids' needs.
It is impossible to be a good parent if you are not on your mental game. You have to be in control. You cannot let them gain the upper hand on you. If you do, both you and your children will be miserable. You'll end up over punishing and getting angry rather than solving problems.
It takes a village, but most struggle to find a village. We end up being the village. That is mentally difficult.
Raising children requires a pretty hefty cognitive load. It is mentally taxing and it often requires mental skills that drain the mind. Blue collar workers spend their days working but not taxing the mind as much, and so I think they make for better parents because they have more mental energy left at the end of the day for their kids' needs.
It is impossible to be a good parent if you are not on your mental game. You have to be in control. You cannot let them gain the upper hand on you. If you do, both you and your children will be miserable. You'll end up over punishing and getting angry rather than solving problems.
It takes a village, but most struggle to find a village. We end up being the village. That is mentally difficult.
44
One of Ronnie Reagan's famous lines was/is, "Are you better off now than you were four years ago?" and in the '80's many families plunged into the two working parent luxury of having an additional income, so for many the answer was a resounding "yes". The die was cast. Corporations since have frozen wages, demanded more hours for low or no pay ("Be a team player! See you Saturday!") and both parents are, today, working to make ends meet toward maintaining a slippery middle class. Americans whine but, as yet, succumb to the workplace and social demands for fear of worse scenarios. They should read Elizabeth Warren's books to see just how it happened and why little is done to remedy the American Dream. They should also take a tip from the Baby Boomer generation and take it to the streets.
31
We all have 168 hours a week. We are all equally paid in the sense of gow many hours there are in a day. I recently made a spread sheet to try and find what I call the magical red unicorn of free time somewhere in my schedule. It exists in the tiniest of pockets:30 minutes maybe... I trace so many of our current sociological problems back to federally insured student loans which have allowed tuition to sky rocket., Even as wages stagnated. How long before our rulers will realize that it's not just people groaning under the servitude of these loans but the entire economy, with no one having any expendable income. I think of myself like the 1960s Help. I work for someone else 9-10 hours a day and come home to 5 more hours of labor. And I think to myself, God I wish I had someone to help me!
19
While no doubt this is a 'phenomenon' across the US and as well as Canada, alot of it is due to 'overparenting/overengineering/over social control' of their kids, as well as the lifestyle expectations Parents have for their family to keep up with the Jones and that have it all life.
I will say, getting only a couple of months of paid Maternity leave in the US is crazy. Here in Canada, you get a full-year. Mind you how much the company tops up can vary from nothing to but at least you get Gov't payment, and the company can't fire you (unless it's a reorganization). Makes a world of a difference in starting off right.
Being a recently new parent myself, I see Parents who make things more complicated and stressful than they should. It stems from everyday rigid habits, and often at the source, a large mortgage which is the source of 'forcing' the parents to take jobs and just be more stressed out. New cars also add to the costs (perfectly happy with our paid off eons ago 90s Corolla).
The driving everywhere to the sports thing. Too bad Parents do not let their kids out anymore to play naturally. I personally have made sure I am in a job situation where I've minimized my job worry. Lower pay? Sure. But life benefit = Infinitely greater.
I will say, getting only a couple of months of paid Maternity leave in the US is crazy. Here in Canada, you get a full-year. Mind you how much the company tops up can vary from nothing to but at least you get Gov't payment, and the company can't fire you (unless it's a reorganization). Makes a world of a difference in starting off right.
Being a recently new parent myself, I see Parents who make things more complicated and stressful than they should. It stems from everyday rigid habits, and often at the source, a large mortgage which is the source of 'forcing' the parents to take jobs and just be more stressed out. New cars also add to the costs (perfectly happy with our paid off eons ago 90s Corolla).
The driving everywhere to the sports thing. Too bad Parents do not let their kids out anymore to play naturally. I personally have made sure I am in a job situation where I've minimized my job worry. Lower pay? Sure. But life benefit = Infinitely greater.
22
This is 100% my life right now. It hit home so hard the other day- my wife and I have a newborn baby, about 5 weeks, our third. My first daughter, 3 1/2, was playing at the park with my wife and looking for colored stones shes said:
"These rocks are all the baby elephants and kitties. Lets pretend to be the Mamas and Daddies....No. I'll be Grandma and you can be Grandpa. Because baby animals Mamas and Daddies are working. They want to be with the baby animals but they can't because they have to work. So we can make them some pies."
I get up at 6:15 to get my son ready for school, pack a lunch, and get to the bus; then I help with my daughter, have a 1 hour and 20 minute commute 1 way to work, do my job, finish at 5, get groceries, commute an hour and 40 minutes home, make dinner, do baths, stories and bed, and then try to work a little after 9 pm, then wake up a few times with the newborn before the 6:15 buzzer. Something is always short changed- the kids, my wife, work, play time, or else the dishes pile up, the laundry isn't done, the fridge is empty, the car breaks down, or all of the above. Some months we are $100 in the black, some we are $100 in the red. I ask myself "how does this get better?" and I have no idea.
"These rocks are all the baby elephants and kitties. Lets pretend to be the Mamas and Daddies....No. I'll be Grandma and you can be Grandpa. Because baby animals Mamas and Daddies are working. They want to be with the baby animals but they can't because they have to work. So we can make them some pies."
I get up at 6:15 to get my son ready for school, pack a lunch, and get to the bus; then I help with my daughter, have a 1 hour and 20 minute commute 1 way to work, do my job, finish at 5, get groceries, commute an hour and 40 minutes home, make dinner, do baths, stories and bed, and then try to work a little after 9 pm, then wake up a few times with the newborn before the 6:15 buzzer. Something is always short changed- the kids, my wife, work, play time, or else the dishes pile up, the laundry isn't done, the fridge is empty, the car breaks down, or all of the above. Some months we are $100 in the black, some we are $100 in the red. I ask myself "how does this get better?" and I have no idea.
40
As often happens, this piece is really only about white, middle-class, educated couples. The ideal of the woman staying home was an ideal--it didn't happen in 40% of families in 1965, as this piece itself notes. Maybe these families can learn from low-income families how to balance work and family. They've been doing it forever. Nothing is free.
16
So don't have children, for goodness sakes.
32
Don't lie to yourself, there is no such thing as 'quality time'. You either spend the time with your children or you don't. I stepped off the hamster wheel onto the Daddy Track to see my son through 4 years of high school, so I could be there to make hot udon for breakfast for him, pack him off to school, see him to soccer practice, and be there for him. I was lucky, many people can't do that because of work, having to pay a mortgage, car payment etc. My career definitely did not advance in the way it might have had I worked, but I wouldn't trade those 4 years for anything.
19
We are tired. We have a 9 year old and a 2.5 year old. We work hard.
However, we know our limits. We divide up the duties as best as we can. When the white flag is raised, it is respected. My husband and I grew up extremely conservative, however, I will not quit my job or my career. He complains this that and the other. I get it. I will not quit. I make 6 figures. Our children are fine. Growing well. Smart. Special. I will not waste 4 years of grad school. I can't have it all. Wouldn't know what to do if I did.. We try our best. No delusions.. There are issues. The reality is that we have it okay. We have great jobs. Great kids. Good health. What else do you want? Yes. Child care rests on you ladies.. Get over it.. Stop living in lala land..
However, we know our limits. We divide up the duties as best as we can. When the white flag is raised, it is respected. My husband and I grew up extremely conservative, however, I will not quit my job or my career. He complains this that and the other. I get it. I will not quit. I make 6 figures. Our children are fine. Growing well. Smart. Special. I will not waste 4 years of grad school. I can't have it all. Wouldn't know what to do if I did.. We try our best. No delusions.. There are issues. The reality is that we have it okay. We have great jobs. Great kids. Good health. What else do you want? Yes. Child care rests on you ladies.. Get over it.. Stop living in lala land..
6
Although social "policy change" would help many families tremendously in cutting the cost and stress of finding good child care, it seems that some of the essence of this irreconcilable conflict is personal. My own husband said to me, " know one is going to go to the grave wishing they would have worked more". I agree. Money does help put food on the table, but if either or both parents work, work should not come between enjoying the blessings of having children and a loving spouse. After completing a medical residency program that necessitated 80 hours a week of work, I said enough, I choose not to work full time. It is not worth losing those precious moments. I have colleagues who are not married to physicians and have left their careers to care for their children or spouses, men and female alike. different ethnicities as well (the world is bigger than black,white, latina and asian by the way). Work can help life but work does not nor should, equal life.
8
No one raised in the 60's or 70's could predict the harried lives they would experience as parents during these times. How could we? We didn't see our parents fighting with the cable companies to keep their phone bills from increasing every 3 months, or changing their health insurance every year to keep premium cost down (and deductibles up!). They didn't have to drive us everywhere to keep us safe, or read a slough of teachers emails or monitor school websites for grades, teacher conferences, etc. They had downtime. We saw our parents relaxed and watching Mary Tyler Moore or reading in the evenings. Children actually had downtime then too. Now kids are mired in homework. It's insincere to pretend that parents could have possibly predicted these changes in technology, corporate abuse, criminal activity, increasing academic competition and exponential college costs…not to mention the GOP.
43
This sounds initially bucolic. I do find it interesting that when I look back to the 60's 70's and 80's my immigrant parents with the five of us they bred (they had no clue about birth control either), worked harder than any pair of people I have ever met and did a lot of taking us around to choir rehearsals, ballet classes (not with cars, but by public bus and walking) so that we had a chance at experiences and education that would breed more opportunity in life. Needless to say, we all worked hard and find the "juggling of work and family" with grad school loans to boot, trying at times, but a privilege. I think gratitude goes a long way, even as things get tough.
13
There are only 24 hours in the day. I don't believe it's realistic to 'have it all.' In many professions jobs today one is expected make a stronger commitment of time and energy, versus perhaps the past. Of course, parenting also requires a big commitment. So that's why there's a shortage of time. In most of the 20th century, men went away to work and women stayed home raising the kids. So neither 'had it all.' When it was an agrarian society, everyone including the children were working. I would guess that today, whichever parent (father or mother) with the less intense (which usually means less monetary reward) career is likely to bear more of the child responsibilities, naturally. The idea that one can 'have it all' is unrealistic.
14
Last time I checked, the only appropriate response to another's difficulties is to be empathetic. As I scroll through these comments, I see a significant number of people suggesting that families like this who struggle to balance their lives are "whining" or "complaining." Doesn't this kind of response miss the point - not just of the article but of basic decency? Yes, lots of people endure hardships greater than a middle-class family struggling to balance joy and responsibility. That fact does not therefore mean those people have no right to feel as if their lives are imperfect or to be dismayed by that feeling. The first fact any thinking person comes to understand about humanity is that we can, at best, mediate the struggle between desire and contentment. It is a failing we all have to endure. It's not like we have limited reserves of sympathy and understanding that must only be doled out to the most deserving cases. To suggest that some haven't that right to express sadness or frustration because they struggle differently or in a nicer house just seems so simplistic, so solipsistic and petty, that I wonder how it has become such a pervasive mode of thinking. I don't even feel like I'm a particularly sensitive or emotive person, but I sometimes worry that so many people have failed to grasp the basic fundament of goodness: to understand and feel for everyone.
62
Such a 1st world problem. Life is full of choices. Couples choose a lifestyle that requires two handsome incomes and they whine about how they are too busy. It can all be remedied by better, less expensive choices that allow them to have jobs that have shorter work hours.
16
That's partly true, but let's not forget the societal shift that has also led to this: women becoming more educated and entering the workforce. For the most part, the ability to work has been a huge boon to female independence and self-worth. Yes, smart choices need to be made - there are still only 24 hours in a day - but this modern-day juggling act is the byproduct of an overwhelmingly positive trend. I don't think it's fair to assume that people work only for material gain. What about intellectual stimulation? Or their sense of identity, which is enmeshed with many years of higher education?
16
The article and some commenters seem to believe that more progressive support for families with children (paid parental leave , free pre K etc) would be the solution to the stress that parents experience. if that is the case,why is it that the birth rate among European countries such as France, Italy, Germany, England etc is so low?
8
You're comparing apples to oranges ... no one in America is saying they would have more kids if they had more paid leave, pre-K, etc.
What they are saying is that they would have less stressful lives, because it is not easy to work 10-to-12-hour days, commute, maintain a house, care for even one child, plus have leisure life. My wife and I can vouch for this ... and this is what the Europeans, Canadians, Australians seem to have, and we most certainly do not.
What they are saying is that they would have less stressful lives, because it is not easy to work 10-to-12-hour days, commute, maintain a house, care for even one child, plus have leisure life. My wife and I can vouch for this ... and this is what the Europeans, Canadians, Australians seem to have, and we most certainly do not.
21
You have the cause and effect reversed. They have those policies to encourage people to have children because their birth rates are so low. We will most likely begin to see similar trends if our society does not become more supportive.
1
My husband and I try to share all the work and responsibilities but we still cannot find the time to do so many things - and rarely find time for each other. I even downgraded careers so I could work but still pick up my children, help them with homework and take them to sports and other activities. My day never seems to end until 9 pm - which is the time my husband usually arrives home from work. He helps out with laundry and cleaning and I do the bills, and then often does work from home. There is an endless stream of things to take care of - register the car, renew passports, shop for food, birthday parties, doctor appointments, thank you notes, taxes, and so on. Not to mention - not all kids are easy. Sometimes homework is confusing and needs to be explained and re-explained, kids get sick, etc. I haven't even mentioned assistance to aging parents. In short, sometimes I just want to scream. All in all, I am happy with my life and with my choices; but there seems to be a need for a better way, a better life for families! And not just for families - for single and childless people too! We have too much stress in our society and its not bringing out the best in many.
25
I agree that as a society we need better policies for families and all workers. When you have an empty nest someday you'll look back and really miss these days. Even though it's hard, you seem to really enjoy your children. You have them daily in your life and can have some influence with them. It is a gift. Sometimes exhausting, overwhelming, certainly unrelenting, but a gift nonetheless.
6
You are right - it is overwhelming and exhausting - but I wouldn't trade having children for the world. I live in a neighborhood where a family lost their children due to a tragic accident. It's a constant reminder how lucky we are, even on those days when we want to give up. I just wish for more time to relax and enjoy life with friends, family and my kids!
3
Is it possible to reduce the amount of sports? I find that's a big stressor in the parents lives.
12
"Stressed, Tired, Rushed" Rinse and repeat till death do you part. Are we all honey bees now genetically programmed to accept without question the notion that we must work in order to - insert any and all of the reasons cited in the article and comments?
I agree, from within the stressful, tired, and rushed world, it is impossible to see how else to do it, but you have to ask yourself is this all worth it? Do the rewards of acquisition really outweigh the benefit of a life well lived? Do we even understand the difference between the two?
I am an old fogey. I remember the golden years of consumerism after the second world war. All of our young hopes and dreams for the future embodied in that gleaming new refrigerator, that gorgeous yellow, pink, or turquoise bungalow.
For me, it was the bungalows that did it. I had nightmares about them. If I accepted to live in one, I would be trapped forever, forced to go to work, or be married to a husband forced to go to work while I lived a life of quiet desperation, staying slim through Ayds, raising the children to accept their place as a cog in the giant wheel of fortune. I would go on smiling, stroking my rewards, my beautiful new and improved products that stretched out before me in an endless line to the horizon and beyond.
I opted out. Anyone can. Children don't need quality time. They need your time. They need to see through your example that they can grow up and be whatever they want. Stressed, tired, rushed is not it.
I agree, from within the stressful, tired, and rushed world, it is impossible to see how else to do it, but you have to ask yourself is this all worth it? Do the rewards of acquisition really outweigh the benefit of a life well lived? Do we even understand the difference between the two?
I am an old fogey. I remember the golden years of consumerism after the second world war. All of our young hopes and dreams for the future embodied in that gleaming new refrigerator, that gorgeous yellow, pink, or turquoise bungalow.
For me, it was the bungalows that did it. I had nightmares about them. If I accepted to live in one, I would be trapped forever, forced to go to work, or be married to a husband forced to go to work while I lived a life of quiet desperation, staying slim through Ayds, raising the children to accept their place as a cog in the giant wheel of fortune. I would go on smiling, stroking my rewards, my beautiful new and improved products that stretched out before me in an endless line to the horizon and beyond.
I opted out. Anyone can. Children don't need quality time. They need your time. They need to see through your example that they can grow up and be whatever they want. Stressed, tired, rushed is not it.
50
Great option, opting out. This society is way too attached to the idea that consumption is the purpose of life.
15
The multiple hours per day wasted in commuting to and from work, while living in exurbs, is a large contribution to the lack of daylight living time. This destiny was cast in the late 60's and the time burden from driving worsens by the year. Yet we as a nation refuse to invest in pubic transit because it's not in line with the archaic definition of personal"freedom" that politicians hang onto.
46
I'm stressed to the max. I had to move away from my home state (and family) to find a good job. After being married 7 years, my husband and I had kids. We are stopping at 2 because we are stretched to the breaking point of resources (our own bodies - pregnancy, breastfeeding, sleep, sicknesses caught from kids, etc.; time; and money). I would love to be able to work part time or stay home full time with the children, but it isn't possible.
I just did a calculation, and the CEO of my company makes 112 times the field worker's annual wage, and 23 times the head office staff's annual wage. This is the problem - instead of contributing towards social programs to benefit society, these guys are raking in obscene amounts of money (there is no way they are worth that much) while the vast majority of other people - not lazy bums, but graduate degree STEM field educated professionals who did everything "right" - are.
Viva la revolucion!
I just did a calculation, and the CEO of my company makes 112 times the field worker's annual wage, and 23 times the head office staff's annual wage. This is the problem - instead of contributing towards social programs to benefit society, these guys are raking in obscene amounts of money (there is no way they are worth that much) while the vast majority of other people - not lazy bums, but graduate degree STEM field educated professionals who did everything "right" - are.
Viva la revolucion!
93
The smartest move my wife and I made when we got married and bought a house in 1985 was to CHOOSE to buy less than what we qualified for at the bank. We bought a small 2-bedroom passive solar new home for $68k. Even though we both worked full time and had good incomes, we qualified on my income alone. That meant that, a few years later when my first son came along, my wife could CHOOSE to quit her IT job and be the stay-at-home mom that we both wanted her to be.
For us, it was all about living below our means. We now have two lovely grown sons and, as we approach retirement, we have an average sized home with a $700/month payment, little debt, a half-million in our retirement accounts, and residual income that should allow us to live comfortably. We chose financial sacrifices earlier in order to have the intangibles of child-rearing and family life that the subjects of this article are now missing.
For us, it was all about living below our means. We now have two lovely grown sons and, as we approach retirement, we have an average sized home with a $700/month payment, little debt, a half-million in our retirement accounts, and residual income that should allow us to live comfortably. We chose financial sacrifices earlier in order to have the intangibles of child-rearing and family life that the subjects of this article are now missing.
51
That was a great strategy and we did it too. But don't overlook the fact that our generation enjoyed continuous full time jobs, generously subsidized health and dental plans, increasing real estate values, matched 401k saving plans, quality public education for our children, and much much more, all of which allowed us to incur little debt, save, and raise educated children. For the next generation to live below their means in order to save, they often live in unsafe neighborhoods, sometimes multiple families or couples sharing an apartment in expensive cities or have hours long commutes, forgoing dental care, quality education for their children, and the rest.
37
I made similar choices not to strap my life to a heavy mortgage but I was lucky to get something affordable in a good school district. Before we criticize parents for buying too much house, consider that for many the real investment is in the school district.
6
sounds great.....but what would have happened to your wife if you had divorced? many were not as lucky.
15
In this worked-crazed country a person has to take his/her own life in hand by making decisions that will lead to a more balanced life. Easier said than done of course, but still possible. If you put your career first you will suffer in the end. After all, what you do for a living is only a job. When you are done with it someone else will do it. How will you feel when you get old and look back on all those hours you put in at the expense of spending time with the people you love? Americans have a long way to go before they understand what happiness is. Now, happiness is financial and material. Live that life if you want to, but you are missing much.
32
Tsk, tsk. They make the choices, they reap the rewards and pay the consequences. The tenor of this article is suspiciously one that seeks increased benefits and government aid for these couples and single parents - at our expense. To these whining parents - words of wisdom from the ages, "you can't have it all", and "something's got to give".
14
You say at "our" expense. When you retire you will need younger people. Those are not just workers to fund Social Security and Medicare, but doctors, teachers, caregivers, bankers etc. etc. Someone must perpetuate the population and I assume you are not doing it all yourself. Society must not punish those who reproduce the next generation for doing so. A social system that gives structure and underpinning to childcare and parental leave benefits everyone.
56
We certainly do not, and should not, need to perpetuate a huge surplus of humans. Getting the earth down to a couple of billion would do wonders for everyone - and everything's - standard of living.
13
Swim lessons for an 11 month old baby! Is that really necessary?
37
The subjects of this article have government jobs with good benefits. They're unlikely to be fired or laid off. They shouldn't complain. They have it better than most.
18
Actually, in the present political environment, working for an agency with the word "environmental" in the title means a very good chance of being canned by anti-regulatory liberatrians who think life here should resemble that in China.
And yes, living cheaper is a good adaptation. Most of us have no practical need for the 36 thousand to 40 thousand dollar SUV.
And yes, living cheaper is a good adaptation. Most of us have no practical need for the 36 thousand to 40 thousand dollar SUV.
7
Why do all the comments mention Choice ?
Does one actually get to pick their stressful position ?
Does one actually get to pick their stressful position ?
13
Great piece.
I believe, however, that if you add up hours of paid work and hours of work at home, men put in more total hours per week than women.
I believe, however, that if you add up hours of paid work and hours of work at home, men put in more total hours per week than women.
4
The famous "women earn a fraction of what men make" studies do not take into consideration experience, hours worked, education or life choices. The hours that a man works is not relevant in today's society.
1
The article does not mention single parents - why not? I'm the single parent of three children ages 4-10 (the 24/7 kind, not the divorced kind) and the concept of having another pay check in the family, and another set of hands, seems absolutely LUXURIOUS. Do I work hard? To exhaustion. But parenthood was my choice, and it's a privilege. So . . . stop your whining two-person parents, especially those of you with good jobs and one kid. I mean, seriously?
17
Much of the reason is because young working adults know that corporations no longer have any loyalty to their employees. With the push for more H1-b visas , and The cost to employers for Obamacare result in more and more small to mid size companies putting people on a "contractor" basis whereby no benefits are required by the employer. I'm happily retired but fear for young families in today's society.
10
Finally, someone has pointed out the obvious, that Americans are burning the candle at both ends. To watch a typical commercial on TV, everyone is balanced, financially, socially, and has a great career. It used to be a choice if both spouses chose to work. Now, for all but an elite few it is a necessity.
11
They left out taking care of their elderly parents...
42
we do not need a "societal-wide" response. The number of hours in a day has not changed. Make your choices and quit whining.
8
This is what America has turned into...people can't even figure out how to raise a family. Bring back the 50s and my parents! The greatest generation was so because they didn't complain and rolled up their sleeves and did their job. I grew up in a small house with one car, very middle-class, and quite happy. I doubt if my parents had health insurance or a savings account, but they raised 5 kids and we found fun things to do. They worked hard and smart...both of which have disappeared in today's whiny America. America is no longer on the leading edge..we're a bunch of lazy followers with our hands out looking for freebies, and our elected officials promote this in order to pander to the masses.
12
All the comments that are some form of, "you can't have it all so stop complaining" remind me of the cranky old man saying, "when I was a kid we walked to school in the snow... up hill... both ways... and we NEVER complained!"
I'm glad that you had a perfect life, you made all the right choices, and you have no regrets. It's too bad all those right choices turned you into a sour person with no compassion or empathy for others.
I'm glad that you had a perfect life, you made all the right choices, and you have no regrets. It's too bad all those right choices turned you into a sour person with no compassion or empathy for others.
79
How much time are these family members mentally masturbating on facebook and other social media? Who is responsible for the facade upkeep? You've provided all of the links and icons, but neglected to mention the moments, minutes, hours twittered away - or ask. Well? Do the parents share their "third shift" equally?
6
The United States has become a country where no one feels that "society" has any stake in the lives of its people. Its interesting how many responses to this article say "well having kids is a choice, and you have to live with your own choices" as if the social structure we live and raise children in has no interest in the lives of those children.
All of us have a stake in the children we raise in this country. Crime, economic stability, health care costs...many many things that affect everyone in our country are impacted by how we raise children and educate children.
Yet so many people blindly assume that each individual is the only person who's life is affected by that individual's choice. We are in this sinking boat of a country together but instead of working to bail it out we're just yelling at each other and pushing people overboard.
All of us have a stake in the children we raise in this country. Crime, economic stability, health care costs...many many things that affect everyone in our country are impacted by how we raise children and educate children.
Yet so many people blindly assume that each individual is the only person who's life is affected by that individual's choice. We are in this sinking boat of a country together but instead of working to bail it out we're just yelling at each other and pushing people overboard.
52
And it's the people who insist on pumping out yet more humans who put the pressure on our resources, and expect us all to smile and keep putting out the cash for their tax credits, property taxes for the schools for their kids, etc.
8
One of the more interesting points of Jennifer Senior's book "All Joy and No Fun" was the historical change in how mother's not in the workforce characterized their occupation on the sensus. Back in the 1970s, non-working mothers used the descriptive terms "Housewife" or "Home-maker." On the recent census, the term of choice was "Stay at Home Mom." Words have meaning and reflect social change. For our mothers and grandmothers, raising kids was a subset of a larger enterprise: marriage, household management, and raising a family. For the demographic described, white, college-educated working woman, taking care of baby excludes all else. Economic feminism killed the cult of domesticity, not a lop-sided division of domestic chores.
11
Economic feminism, as you call it, is not about dumping the "cult" of domesticity. It is about expanding choices for females and males to include (not preclude) a career and/or a family. Men did not have to choose one or the other in the past because they had wives upon whose shoulders they could stand. Now, women want a piece of the pie, including decisions about the money, the kids and their own personal development as well as property rights and education. In order for this to happen, men have had to step up and shoulder some of the domestic chores, poor things. Would you want to stay home with the children and let your wife have 100% the economic power? What happens if she leaves you when you turn 45? Do you want to leave your career and education to be a house husband with no other choices? Just wondering.
25
I am so confused by posts like this, blaming women for ending the one worker family. The man is always welcome to stay home and become financially dependent on their wife. If it's that important to you, then do it.
9
Exactly. Those men of the past didn't have it all. They worked, and weren't involved in their children's lives. You can choose to focus more on career, just pick a spouse accordingly.
5
So the Center for Research on Gender in the Professions has found that there is 'stress' for working parents affecting life at home. And the Pew Research Center concurs, stating that parents feel stressed, tired, rushed and short on quality time with kids, friends, partners, and hobbies.
I hope we didn't spend too much time or money on these studies, the outcomes are more than predictable. But ask those outside the US and they will tell you the same. Bottom line: when you raise kids and invariably work to support them as well as yourselves, you will be stressed at times. Most give up the freedoms of being childless - that hasn't changed over time. What has changed in the last 40 years is that more families have both adults working. But for many, it's still a choice. I know stay at home moms that have purposefully decided to do more with less and forgo a career. Good for them. I know others that stayed in the workforce. Good for them.
In the end, it's a choice. No one has a family and continues to enjoy the freedoms they had when they were childless. That is a choice, and one that most of us feel are well worth it. Most of us recognize that when we have kids, we have new responsibilities - and that creates stress. Especially if you let it.
To suggest that the government has any role in relieving this 'stress' through new labor laws and demands on employers is a joke. It is not the government's job to ease stress for those that choose to raise kids.
I hope we didn't spend too much time or money on these studies, the outcomes are more than predictable. But ask those outside the US and they will tell you the same. Bottom line: when you raise kids and invariably work to support them as well as yourselves, you will be stressed at times. Most give up the freedoms of being childless - that hasn't changed over time. What has changed in the last 40 years is that more families have both adults working. But for many, it's still a choice. I know stay at home moms that have purposefully decided to do more with less and forgo a career. Good for them. I know others that stayed in the workforce. Good for them.
In the end, it's a choice. No one has a family and continues to enjoy the freedoms they had when they were childless. That is a choice, and one that most of us feel are well worth it. Most of us recognize that when we have kids, we have new responsibilities - and that creates stress. Especially if you let it.
To suggest that the government has any role in relieving this 'stress' through new labor laws and demands on employers is a joke. It is not the government's job to ease stress for those that choose to raise kids.
10
Isn't it strange how other societies choose to look at child rearing as something beneficial to all of their society? Some countries give generous benefits to parents when their kids are small such as paid parental leave, state supported childcare, really universal health care and good public schools. These societies are not saying families are not important. They are saying that they ARE important. Would you have been against child labor prohibitions, the eight-hour day, and other labor laws before they were enacted? If all companies had to meet a better standard it would not be unfair.
16
Currently the choice to have children is the one factor that puts people in the U.S. At the greatest risk of ending up in poverty. Is that the same choice my greatest generation parents made? Social and political circumstances changed -- it goes well beyond individual choice. Parents struggle now because policy changed not because they suddenly started making bad choices by wanting to have a family.
11
Don't have Children if you do not have the resources to raise them as you desire.
It is not societies responsibility to fulfill your desires. Social Conservatives don't get this. Those who are most dependent on society are those that are brought into this world without resources. Access to to those resources are not finite and if we wait on the divine to provide they would all starve. You choose to have children thanks to modern medicine and some basic understanding of reproductive science. Respect those who want a choice and live with your choices that is what personal responsibility is.
It is not societies responsibility to fulfill your desires. Social Conservatives don't get this. Those who are most dependent on society are those that are brought into this world without resources. Access to to those resources are not finite and if we wait on the divine to provide they would all starve. You choose to have children thanks to modern medicine and some basic understanding of reproductive science. Respect those who want a choice and live with your choices that is what personal responsibility is.
9
No-I agree, it is not "societies" responsibility. However, there are many nations on the planet that do recognize quality of life/family health and security as national priorities and manage the social policy structure in alignment with those values. For instance, if our broader social policies included quality child care for all families regardless of income much of the stress factors mentioned in the article might be alleviated and our national education numbers would likely improve. Family leave time for both mothers and fathers is of course a factor. Those who are most dependent upon society is everyone-we all benefit from social welfare policies-even corporations-even you-if you have ever claimed a tax exemption, attended public school, received unemployment benefits, drive on public roads, or eat grain (subsidized farming). I also agree that there are areas in ones life that require an absolute sense of personal responsibility. But there are also areas in which lives and interests intersect, commonly referred to as society. Which is why we have social policies. The ture problem is that in the US we give a lot of lip service to our family values-but when one examines the policies we create to support, organize and order our nations societal concerns, we do not "put our money where our mouth is". I appreciate your opinion-but you are way off base.
Regards MC
Regards MC
26
My wife and I were making a modest living in the arts in NYC when our son was born. Within a year we moved to the country to give him a cleaner, quieter, safer life. We settled in northwest Connecticut without a single job possibility, just the vision of being able to have a life that would be good for us all. It was hard at first, but 25 years later, we have a truly astounding life here. We were very fortunate that we had skills that were useful in the community, and found work teaching piano and voice both at home and in the local private schools, and slowly made a life for ourselves here. We're not wealthy by any means, but we have enough to manage. The blessing of being able to raise our son (and now our daughter) in a quiet, low-stress environment, cannot be measured in numbers. The fact that I am able to work at home a lot, though I have to travel from time to time, and that my wife's work is only a few minutes away, means that our children have had access to us that very few parents have. I made sandwiches for our son every day of his school years, and am doing the same for our daughter. Even though our son is 26 he still loves to travel with us during the summer, and has a wonderful relationship with his 5-year old sister. Are we tired? Yes, often. We meditate twice a day to sweep out the stress. Are we happy? Most of the time. Are we thankful? Always.
24
And the real culprit one which no one is willing to say out loud is womans lib. It was a disaster for families and a boon to corporations. Almost overnight there was an increase in the workforce which means corporations could pay people less. And the people who suffer the most are our children who do not have the benefit of a loving caregiver at home be that either mother or father.
Child care is not the answer, you need to have someone who has a vested interest in that child's welfare at home.
Child care is not the answer, you need to have someone who has a vested interest in that child's welfare at home.
16
Tony G believes " the real culprit one which no one is willing to say out loud is womans lib."
If that were only true, more people would understand what has happened to our economic system since the 70s. If you can, read Jeff Faux's book The Servant Economy.
Essentially, those of us old enough, remember when our wages stagnated;our productivity rose and our take home pay shrunk because we paid more into social security.
The reality was most of our wives had to work at least part-time to masintain the lifestyles we all wanted. The we started borrowing and borrowing.
Both of those cushions are now deflated. Faux conrtends that "The U.S. can no longer fulfill the dreams 0f Wall Street, the Pentagon, and the Middle Class. At least one dream must die. Despite partisan differences, both political parties have agreed to sacrifice the people. An economic recovery will eventually create more jobs, predicts Faux, but most will no longer pay a middle class salary. On our present track, real incomes by 2024 will be dramatically lower than they are today." His predictions are right on.
Outsourcing and the TPP will only make matters worse.
One think that would help would be to organize; join women's lib - join with Elizabeth Warren. Tax Wall Street. Take over our country from the crony capitalists.
If that were only true, more people would understand what has happened to our economic system since the 70s. If you can, read Jeff Faux's book The Servant Economy.
Essentially, those of us old enough, remember when our wages stagnated;our productivity rose and our take home pay shrunk because we paid more into social security.
The reality was most of our wives had to work at least part-time to masintain the lifestyles we all wanted. The we started borrowing and borrowing.
Both of those cushions are now deflated. Faux conrtends that "The U.S. can no longer fulfill the dreams 0f Wall Street, the Pentagon, and the Middle Class. At least one dream must die. Despite partisan differences, both political parties have agreed to sacrifice the people. An economic recovery will eventually create more jobs, predicts Faux, but most will no longer pay a middle class salary. On our present track, real incomes by 2024 will be dramatically lower than they are today." His predictions are right on.
Outsourcing and the TPP will only make matters worse.
One think that would help would be to organize; join women's lib - join with Elizabeth Warren. Tax Wall Street. Take over our country from the crony capitalists.
23
Tony G. - you have your facts wrong. Women were participating in the workforce to make additional money for their family long before women's lib. Women's lib was made possible by the increased participation in the workforce, and the exposure that gave to the inequities that existed such as separate "help wanted" parts of the newspaper for "male only" jobs and "female only" roles. Women couldn't be admitted to many professions. Men have children too, lest we forget. There is no reason why parents should not be able to work enough hours to support their family, and have family time - by working hours that are flexible, proportionate and fair. A 30/30 hour work week could allow both parents to spend time with their children, and make ends meet. But we don't have that here. In other aspects, our labor market meets demand for workers - jobs follow what the market needs in an employee, and the job market meets the benefit demands of its labor force to remain competitive. The force you speak of - women's workforce entry - wasn't the prime factor in the loss of wages in this country: it was the end of our manufacturing prowess around the world, jobs going overseas, and the labor market being flooded with hourly and service sector jobs as that was where the growth was...for services. The disaster for families is that with a few policy changes and a mindset that prioritizes our caregiving obligations and family life, it could be different.
24
Ah, yes, those pesky women wanting rights and all. Back to the kitchen girls, barefoot and pregnant. If your hubby deserts you for a younger model, too bad for you. Get a job scrubbing floors since you have no brain.
18
Yes, life is so difficult and stressful for two parent, higher, two income families today.
But could they ever imagine, even for a day or a moment, what it'd be like to be a single parent? One living in poverty? Some of these couples may need to stop at Whole Foods and stock up on a lot of cheese to go with their whines. I can't do my hobbies!! Baby swim classes! Please, how about I have to choose between food or gas or paying a utility bill. Life is hard people, for most everyone. You are not special.
But could they ever imagine, even for a day or a moment, what it'd be like to be a single parent? One living in poverty? Some of these couples may need to stop at Whole Foods and stock up on a lot of cheese to go with their whines. I can't do my hobbies!! Baby swim classes! Please, how about I have to choose between food or gas or paying a utility bill. Life is hard people, for most everyone. You are not special.
69
Amen!!
3
McMasions? Fancy cars? Exotic vacations? Do you all believe both parents work for discretionary income? Any parent works to keep food on their table and a roof over their heads.
And those that have a more comfortable lifestyle - don't judge them! Perhaps both parents have fulfilling careers and want to keep working, regardless of the income generated.
Not everything in life is about materialism.
And those that have a more comfortable lifestyle - don't judge them! Perhaps both parents have fulfilling careers and want to keep working, regardless of the income generated.
Not everything in life is about materialism.
27
To wit: you can't have it all.
17
Retirement has never looked or felt so good. I look at my kids who are educated and working, with young families, and marvel at how they manage the stresses of this new era. Work, daycare, school, commuting, shopping, driving to and from kids activities on weekends, and hopefully 6-8 hours of blessed sleep before doing it all again. As a baby boomer who got to retire 8 years ago at 55 I would never do it the same way again. I would have worked less, lived more simply, traveled more, and relaxed more...but...on the other hand I am doing it now. I hope the current crop of workers get some relief at some point. Maybe we all go to a 32 hour work week....or more telecommuting. Life is too short.
34
You know, no one ever said that everyone has to aspire to get married or have kids. I never planned on either and my life is much simpler, pared down, and gives me time to relax and write fiction. I chose this life over the standard-marriage-babies-worry-stress compendium that seems to be the #1 prize in society; the "right" and "best" and "most praised" thing to do.
Why want what everyone else wants? Take a clear and honest look at the possibilities of your life. Make your own decisions.
Why want what everyone else wants? Take a clear and honest look at the possibilities of your life. Make your own decisions.
103
Imagine the view from 30,000 feet afforded to the CEOs, the 1%, and the corporate politicians. We all look like a muddled, bickering mess that doesn't know which way is up. They are well protected from all this.
51
CEOs and 1% are protected from guilt, stress, and household responsibilities? What are you talking about? The job of a CEO is like three full-time jobs. I worked for a NFL owner, who had a HOUSEHOLD staff of five. There was plenty of stress and I would say most rich people still want spend time with their kids.
2
I worked for the entire time I raised my only child. I did not have a second child because I felt I would then have to give up my career. I paid dearly for the child care and household help I needed to keep working. I retired four years ago and fortunately I am healthy enough to help care for my two grandchildren while my daughter and son-in-law work. They also receive help from my son-in-law's mother. So far everyone pitches in to help and both children are now in school full-time. You do what is necessary to keep working if you are serious about a career.
22
Bernie. Now.
67
Oh geez. Bernie will solve our family dynamic problems? Doubt it.
8
Have to rethink the materialism. if its 100,000 with two parents working and 88,000 with one working part time...well thats a no brainer.
The only thing that it needs to be EITHER the mom or dad who work part time.
I worked part time when my kids were little. It made everything possible and enjoyable. Although my career took a hit, it was absolutely worth it.
The only thing that it needs to be EITHER the mom or dad who work part time.
I worked part time when my kids were little. It made everything possible and enjoyable. Although my career took a hit, it was absolutely worth it.
32
In response to the NYT Pick, India from the Midwest:
I would venture that the "things" most of today's families with two working parents choose to buy with their joint salaries consist overwhelmingly of food, shelter, clothing, child care, health care, education and transportation, as opposed to the luxuries you describe having foregone as a family with a single working parent in the 1970s. Even with both parents working full time, fewer and fewer middle class families can barely keep up with the basic cost of living. Then there's the matter of saving for college educations and retirements. Except for a privileged few, most American families no longer have the luxury of choosing, as you did, to have one parent stay home, or even work part time.
I would venture that the "things" most of today's families with two working parents choose to buy with their joint salaries consist overwhelmingly of food, shelter, clothing, child care, health care, education and transportation, as opposed to the luxuries you describe having foregone as a family with a single working parent in the 1970s. Even with both parents working full time, fewer and fewer middle class families can barely keep up with the basic cost of living. Then there's the matter of saving for college educations and retirements. Except for a privileged few, most American families no longer have the luxury of choosing, as you did, to have one parent stay home, or even work part time.
90
Not to mention the fact that having two jobs in the family is a kind of "insurance" against losing one of them in our just in time corporate society.
13
The article addresses serious problems but doesn't begin to approach real solutions. The USA needs to pass 2 basic pieces of straightforward legislation; 1, for liveable universal basic income, and 2 (a bill already in the House), for improved, expanded Medicare for All). These 2 bills would directly abolish poverty & give families the means to spend the needed time on their family life, while also providing room to make choices for either parent to do so, given the changes in our society related to gender roles. It's nice to think that women "can do it all," it's simply not the case for anyone, female or male. Families have known this throughout history; you can't reinvent the wheel. Children need the time and attention of parents - nothing can replace this love & care - certainly not institutions like schools, though indeed they play an important role. But children at all stages of development - including HS years - need the time & attention of their parents. People need to make choices based on what is truly important.
Real universal health care system coupled with liveable basic income addresses many issues that we are currently approaching in a very piecemeal fashion. Yes, it's true that "family leave" is a positive, and a number of other band aides being advanced -- but basic income makes all of them, not only possible, but even moreso! For ex., 3 months leave can now be even longer.
All things considered, this costs less too, and, everyone's happier.
Real universal health care system coupled with liveable basic income addresses many issues that we are currently approaching in a very piecemeal fashion. Yes, it's true that "family leave" is a positive, and a number of other band aides being advanced -- but basic income makes all of them, not only possible, but even moreso! For ex., 3 months leave can now be even longer.
All things considered, this costs less too, and, everyone's happier.
30
Your post reminded me of this video:
"We know how to end poverty. So why don't we?"
http://www.vox.com/2014/11/14/7220291/basic-income-poverty-plan
"We know how to end poverty. So why don't we?"
http://www.vox.com/2014/11/14/7220291/basic-income-poverty-plan
3
It is about quality time with your children. All children want is to spend quality time with their parents.
If we can't fit a couple of one-on-one hours with our children into our daily lives than we have morphed into aliens of the worse kind.
The best memories should be the ones we are laughing out loud with our children... silly, whimsical fun... full of imagination and jest. This is life lived to its fullest. This is not tiring, rushed or stressed.
If we can't fit a couple of one-on-one hours with our children into our daily lives than we have morphed into aliens of the worse kind.
The best memories should be the ones we are laughing out loud with our children... silly, whimsical fun... full of imagination and jest. This is life lived to its fullest. This is not tiring, rushed or stressed.
15
I agree with that and think that all statements about bad parenting because of hard work of both parents are exaggerated. While I agree that people have to work more hours these days, most still should have enough time to spend with kids if they really want to. All around I hear of people watching series and spending time in social networks, so why complain? Also, for some reason it's a favorite thing in many American movies when parents of 1-2 kids run like crazy in the morning trying to get ready for school and work. We manage with it with no issues and often are able to talk for breakfast, so this is more about how you take it, not what it is.
8
Yes, my heart agrees with you. BUT my mind is thinking about HISTORY. My mother did not spend that type of quality time with the first four of her five children. And she needed me, the oldest, to help her do the house-work and to a baby-sit. Yes, perhaps this was emotional neglect. But I think raising children in nuclear isolated units is not the norm based on history. Multi-gen groups or tribes, then extended families seem to have been the norm. , or very efficient or very effective. Children were working assets in isolated agricultural families. I do agree that quality time, reading together are important. So are quiet time, boredom, a few age-appropriate chores to be responsible for that contribute to the group. Parents who work are too tired and rushed to parent with discipline, personalized attention, and also to talk about THEIR days, work and needs. I do wonder if more extended family were participating in childcare, would they be doing some of this kind of "parenting"? Being in daycare in group settings is not all bad, provides some excellent experiences. But the mentoring and group dynamics within a multi-gen family structure is very very important, too- it is very collaborative. In the US there seems to be amnesia about parenting and family structures that is pervading our culture. And the work culture, being outside of the home, requiring more and more hours even when at home and flexibility to move away from support systems is a huge problem today.
12
This article is very white and upper middle class sided; Pew Research found that white parents were more than 10 percentage points more likely to express stress than nonwhite parents and that college educated parents and white parents were significantly more likely than other parents to say work life balance is difficult.
HA.I seriously doubt it. Pew Research needs to start knocking on some more doors because that survey was severely misrepresented.
We need to hear the experiences of minority families - Asian, African American, Indian, HIspanic, Native American. I'm sure we might hear how challenging income and education inequality is for them and how they struggle to pay the rent and just get their kids to stay in school.
But no, instead the article features a middle class white family who is tired and just can't quite balance it all. Paid family leave? Please. That's a privilege not a right. The majority of businesses can't afford that.
If you can't have it all - don't have it all. We don't want to hear you complain about it.
HA.I seriously doubt it. Pew Research needs to start knocking on some more doors because that survey was severely misrepresented.
We need to hear the experiences of minority families - Asian, African American, Indian, HIspanic, Native American. I'm sure we might hear how challenging income and education inequality is for them and how they struggle to pay the rent and just get their kids to stay in school.
But no, instead the article features a middle class white family who is tired and just can't quite balance it all. Paid family leave? Please. That's a privilege not a right. The majority of businesses can't afford that.
If you can't have it all - don't have it all. We don't want to hear you complain about it.
35
Businesses "can't afford" paid family leave? Please, give me a break. Companies have extended work-life into family life like never before. Between email and texting, companies have enjoyed a free second shift from their employees for over 20 years. If they had to pay overtime for all of the extra time they command, they really would be hard pressed to afford it. In any case, Europe has been doing just fine with paid family leave AND extended vacations, so who are we trying to kid. If the top paid executives forfeited just 10% of their outlandish pay and benefits, every worker in a firm could have fully funded paid leave. Indeed, I think we are reaching an inflection point at which Rank-and-file employees are going to become far more vocal about the perks enjoyed by upper management and how they compare to their own wage and benefit packages.
84
I'm not talking about companies like Amazon or Google. I'm talking about the thousands of small businesses that really can't afford to give paid family leave. Certain European countries like Denmark have a different tax structure than we do. I'm sorry, i don't need to be taxed more so that everyone family in America can have paid family time.
13
The U.S. Department of Defense recently wasted $43 million dollars building a single gas station in Afghanistan that no one will use.
Perhaps your taxes don't need to be raised at all.
http://time.com/money/4096655/43-million-gas-station-afghanistan/
Perhaps your taxes don't need to be raised at all.
http://time.com/money/4096655/43-million-gas-station-afghanistan/
9
A few days ago was the report about the significant mortality rate increase in middle-aged white American men. Now, a story about the stressed, tired and rushed American parents, in which both parents work outside their home, and both often full-time.
What happened to the time when living a middle class existence meant the income of one parent, the father in most cases, was enough to create a full-time nurturing and loving home for babies and children. Wasn't life, in general, less stressful, rushed and tiresome, or is that phony nostalgia. Sure, there were gender inequalities, but economic life for most in the middle class was satisfactory, or better.
Middle class Americans, and Americans of lesser economic means, have complacently and passively accepted what passes for economic fairness, but is anything but.
Our society is diseased from the inside; our problems are beyond superficial and pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps fixes.
America is rotting from the inside. The future, based on the human and natural environment, as it exists in the good ol' US of A appears less of much of what we have now. We produce the seeds of our own collective failure and collapse. Alas!
What happened to the time when living a middle class existence meant the income of one parent, the father in most cases, was enough to create a full-time nurturing and loving home for babies and children. Wasn't life, in general, less stressful, rushed and tiresome, or is that phony nostalgia. Sure, there were gender inequalities, but economic life for most in the middle class was satisfactory, or better.
Middle class Americans, and Americans of lesser economic means, have complacently and passively accepted what passes for economic fairness, but is anything but.
Our society is diseased from the inside; our problems are beyond superficial and pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps fixes.
America is rotting from the inside. The future, based on the human and natural environment, as it exists in the good ol' US of A appears less of much of what we have now. We produce the seeds of our own collective failure and collapse. Alas!
41
It is good to have a society where the income of 1 parent is sufficient. In those days, the tax rates were much higher on wealthier individuals, health care costs, much lower, and jobs more stable and plentiful. The problem for women was that they wanted more choices, and that they were financially dependent upon the men. Where we have gone since then is not the answer. As I posted separately from here, a liveable universal basic income with single payer would enable Americans to return to the pluses of the past while incorporating the gains of what has come to pass since. It would also eliminate many other problems in our society by directly abolishing poverty.
16
What happened? Divorce became common and women and children suffered significantly in divorce scenarios. Often left destitute and long-term, permanent inability to recover. Judith Wallerstein did landmark 25 year study of divorce effects on men, women, children in Mill Valley.CA. This effect is also seen in women procuring more educational credentials in marrying and bearing children later. Insurance and protection, hedging against a future that is insecure? If work-family stress is miserable, the alternative must be worse or women wouldn't choose it. Indeed, women in industrialized nations continue having fewer children.
12
Immigration, trade, inequality.
2
We have a wealth distribution and a labor distribution problem in this country. Just as we might redistribute some wealth from the haves to the have-nots, we should redistribute labor hours from the over-worked to the under-worked/unemployed. With enough imagination and creativity, these are solvable problems.
31
I was a working mother from birth until my son's junior year in high school. I agree that moms will be in charge of all the advance planning and scheduling. I was better at it and I found that fun! But I think many parents are holding themselves to unrealistic expectations. My son stayed up at night to spend time with me--so what if he wasn't on an ideal schedule? I spent every weekend doing things with him. Forget about adult-focused leisure unless it is exercise or a date night, or perhaps a casual dinner with other parents. Try lessons and sports for your child, but drop what they aren't really into. Eat simply and perhaps have groceries delivered. Kids will remember chiefly if you spent time with them and made them feel happy and safe. Read to them! Everything else is gravy.
29
Kids will remember chiefly if you spent time with them and made them feel happy and safe. Read to them! Everything else is gravy.
WELL SPOKEN!
WELL SPOKEN!
7
As the article says in the opening paragraphs, the difficulty of balancing it all is what most of us struggle with. I've found the ancient and simple practices of Ayurveda are proven and effective. Some of my favorite guides are the "Live in Balance" teachings and programs by Maria Garre. http://mariagarre.com/webinars/
Every few years I read a piece like this and chuckle. It seems that each generation that comes along thinks that their challenges are unique and special. They're not. Get over yourselves. If you don't want stress, don't have kids.
50
It's true. I work for someone without children, and she just doesn't get the challenges. I am in an arrangement where I only get paid for eight hours, but often end up working much later. I told her I had to leave today at a certain time (full eight hours) because my children were sick and my husband had leave on a trip. Five minutes before I had to leave (and I reminded her a half hour before, saying that if she needed me for anything, now was the time), she said she urgently needed my help on something that was not new. I like her and I like my job, but I can't be made to feel that I'm somehow shirking if I don't work time that I am not paid for.
51
That has nothing to do with kids. Your boss is just an inconsiderate jerk.
28
And, why do you like this woman who obviously doesn't have your interests at heart?
7
Let's be upfront with it, childrearing is never easy, even for the most pliable and sweetest kids. If you have monies to get all the hired help, you can have big families like the Romneys and won't miss a manicure or gym session, or run back to your office right when you check out from postpartum, as Marissa Meyer the superwoman expects all of us to do. (Don't even mention Kate Middleton.) But no, most of us, even those with six-figure salary, will have to make do. There will never be enough sleep. Even if you can work flexi-time, you can still be late picking up kids from daycare because of traffic (which happened to me very often back then). And you'll get trained by the kids to survive on 4-5 hour sleep because that's how you squeeze more time out of a fixed 24-hour day to get more stuffs done (and I don't mean just work, but personal stuffs too).
So yeah, of course it's stressful, even if your partner shares equally load, which is what my husband and I do, tag-team everything, learning to do everything efficiently. (I can still boost changing baby diapers on any relatively flat surface within 30 seconds.)
But let's admit it too, this is a personal choice we all make that we should have made with eyes wide open. The stress comes with the territory. You can forget about the romanticized olden times when women stay home full time to treat with a lovely baby because those times are no more.
So yeah, of course it's stressful, even if your partner shares equally load, which is what my husband and I do, tag-team everything, learning to do everything efficiently. (I can still boost changing baby diapers on any relatively flat surface within 30 seconds.)
But let's admit it too, this is a personal choice we all make that we should have made with eyes wide open. The stress comes with the territory. You can forget about the romanticized olden times when women stay home full time to treat with a lovely baby because those times are no more.
30
One thought. "DUH"
In our company we are, for the first time, considering offering benefits and PTO and paid holidays. It is a small (less than 50) growing firm but to attract & retain talent that is what we must do. The pass costs on to our clients. The boss's spouse is from Canada and is somewhat baffled at the fact that we even need to HAVE this discussion, as would most folks from other First World economies. Why is it that we are SO FAR BEHIND our peer countries when it comes to supporting our workforce?
As a mom who works outside the home as well as inside, I am well aware of "the second shift" and am not shy to say that now that all 3 of our sons are out of the house, I can finally work like I was always meant to. However, now I am old enough that I am simply exhausted by work. It is a no-win situation as we currently stand as a nation.
In our company we are, for the first time, considering offering benefits and PTO and paid holidays. It is a small (less than 50) growing firm but to attract & retain talent that is what we must do. The pass costs on to our clients. The boss's spouse is from Canada and is somewhat baffled at the fact that we even need to HAVE this discussion, as would most folks from other First World economies. Why is it that we are SO FAR BEHIND our peer countries when it comes to supporting our workforce?
As a mom who works outside the home as well as inside, I am well aware of "the second shift" and am not shy to say that now that all 3 of our sons are out of the house, I can finally work like I was always meant to. However, now I am old enough that I am simply exhausted by work. It is a no-win situation as we currently stand as a nation.
34
I feel so much outrage when I think of Paul Ryan demanding that he work less than a full work week so he has important time with his family (and lets face it, also his own personal hobbies I'm sure). Yet, he and his party have no hesitation whatsoever about making all other American families, except the 1%, have to work so hard to survive that they are too exhausted to give the family th time their children (and the parents also) need to have worthwhile fulfilling lives. When are American voters going to stand up for themselves and kick these hypocritical Republicans out of office?
103
Myth #1 - Life is easy. Myth #2 - "You're special". Myth #3 - You need to have everything.
#1 - Life is not easy, it has never been easy and never will be easy - get used to it.
#2 - You're not, get used to it so you can function in the real world.
#3 - If you want to try to have "everything" then stop complaining, get to work and keep little Johnny or Jill in an expensive school with expensive clothes while living in an expensive house. Back where your grandparents were starting out they "did without", ever hear of it? No, I thought not.
#1 - Life is not easy, it has never been easy and never will be easy - get used to it.
#2 - You're not, get used to it so you can function in the real world.
#3 - If you want to try to have "everything" then stop complaining, get to work and keep little Johnny or Jill in an expensive school with expensive clothes while living in an expensive house. Back where your grandparents were starting out they "did without", ever hear of it? No, I thought not.
41
workers of the world unite to abolish wage-slavery
13
Seems as if material goods are wanted more than good family relationships. That's okay, but such is a choice.
7
I would write something but I just don't have the time. :-(
16
I am reading this while my 15 year old drives us home from a band banquet after I picked up the 13-year-old at club soccer on the way home from my nine-hour day at work. I read the first third of the story but I am too stressed and tired to go on.
16
There is no turning back the clock and women will not be returning to the home full time and so we need to find a way forward. Women offer unique contributions to the work place and to the world as individuals. We are not just easily replaced placeholders, as many of the anti-feminism comments suggest. My daughters and my son all have professional degrees and satisfying careers and I would never suggest any of them stay home since it is a high risk proposition to lose your independence and earning potential. It would also be a shame to see them drop out after all the study, work and sacrifice it took to attain their positions in the world.
28
Not everyone has or will have children (which is seen by so many as a "personal choice" - what will happen if social and economic pressures bring down the birth rate so much that the society grows top heavy like Japan - especially to the Social Security system?).
However, everyone has parents, most of whom survive till old age.
Why is work-family balance so overwhelmingly seen as a parent-young child issue? There is as much if not more stress / juggling / expense issues for parent / elder care. It is more prolonged and expensive, complicated by the fact that parents may live far away, not under your roof like young children.
All care work and work-family balance patterns should be in the picture.
US society squeezes workers hard, does little to support families, and blames the workers for personal choices and lack of balance. The economy wants consumers, but doesn't want workers or families. Can't have it both ways.
However, everyone has parents, most of whom survive till old age.
Why is work-family balance so overwhelmingly seen as a parent-young child issue? There is as much if not more stress / juggling / expense issues for parent / elder care. It is more prolonged and expensive, complicated by the fact that parents may live far away, not under your roof like young children.
All care work and work-family balance patterns should be in the picture.
US society squeezes workers hard, does little to support families, and blames the workers for personal choices and lack of balance. The economy wants consumers, but doesn't want workers or families. Can't have it both ways.
49
This article is posted under the topic "Work-life balance", and mentions "work-family balance" several times. I dislike both of these terms. The first implies several things: 1) work is inherently stressful and the reason to work less is that otherwise you're not "alive", that is that working less is a selfish action despite being encouraged and necessary 2) Time spent working is balanced by time spent not working, and it's both necessary and sufficient for there to be time not spent working (and not asleep).
Neither of these implications are really true, and despite being an easy and unique phrase, the effect is to encourage dishonest thinking. Both time spent working, and time spent not working, can either be 'productive' or just a waste, and there's nothing wrong with working for unselfish reasons, and not working because society does not need you to work more. If there is a situation that requires more work from society, it's natural for people to work more without the idea that their "work-life balance" was not correct.
"Work-family balance" does not give people without families a reason to work less, which encourages discrimination against them at work. This creates an unnatural standard that people who do have families then try to meet, which is often only possible if they are male and don't take care of children, or discourages people from ever getting a family at all.
How to fix unemployment: http://pastebin.com/4ukwRxDG
Neither of these implications are really true, and despite being an easy and unique phrase, the effect is to encourage dishonest thinking. Both time spent working, and time spent not working, can either be 'productive' or just a waste, and there's nothing wrong with working for unselfish reasons, and not working because society does not need you to work more. If there is a situation that requires more work from society, it's natural for people to work more without the idea that their "work-life balance" was not correct.
"Work-family balance" does not give people without families a reason to work less, which encourages discrimination against them at work. This creates an unnatural standard that people who do have families then try to meet, which is often only possible if they are male and don't take care of children, or discourages people from ever getting a family at all.
How to fix unemployment: http://pastebin.com/4ukwRxDG
2
It's hard to hear the condescending and sometimes irrational comments. Most people I know wanted to have 1 or 2 children so it's not realistic to expect everyone to stop having children. As a 40-something wife and mother who was recently downsized, I am relishing the stay at home time but feel anxious about the future. I did not marry rich and do not expect to inherit much. It would be wonderful to "take time off" for a few years but there is future college and our old age to prepare for and if I stay out much longer, I will be unemployable. Most people don't seem to understand that. It has been very hard in general to find a job for years now, and if someone takes time off, they may never get a job again. Also, people my age expect to work until we drop dead because the large number of boomers may use up Social Security before us. So everyone is stuck working to earn enough to face unemployment and keep skills updated. Most people also do not have the amazing benefits given to congress members with the best insurance plans and pensions, etc. We could spend a little less on defense/warfare and more to help our middle class. My cousins in Canada paid very little for university and have quality universal health care, etc. The US current situation is not sustainable and I'm sure many divorces occurred from stress which affects children and society. Solutions are possible and we can get ideas from other advanced countries.
84
Seems obvious a lot of folks never give much thought to what they take on. Yes both people in an cohabiting arrangement usually have to work. Having children is a very very long term commitment and a major financial obligation. No wonder two issues are a reality. Divorce in the 50% range, and a declining birth rate.
15
The Fair Labor Standards Act governing what jobs receive overtime after 40 hours and what jobs don't has been the law of the land since the 1930's. 80+ years later, we clearly do not live and work like people did in the 1930's. The recent FLSA revision doesn't go far enough to address the work/life balance issues millions of Americans face today. Is a 40 hour work week still a realistic standard given that, in a two-earner household, no one is home to take care of cooking, cleaning and childcare? Should more "white collar" workers be eligible for overtime? We need far-reaching labor legislation that fits a 21st century existence, not a patch to a 80 year old law.
12
One of my children is marrying into an Asian-American family, and the plan is for his wife's parents to help out with the children, just as their own parents helped out with them. When our children were small, we had help from our own parents, but had to move away, since the economy in our area had tanked.
When my spouse and I both worked full time, I had the same feeling described in the article, or being pulled in several directions at once and not feeling that I was doing as good a job at anything as I would have liked. To top it off, as the secondary wage earner, I had to pay a much higher effective tax rate than people who were supervising me. Some association of tax rates with the number of hours required to earn that money is needed, I think.
When my spouse and I both worked full time, I had the same feeling described in the article, or being pulled in several directions at once and not feeling that I was doing as good a job at anything as I would have liked. To top it off, as the secondary wage earner, I had to pay a much higher effective tax rate than people who were supervising me. Some association of tax rates with the number of hours required to earn that money is needed, I think.
7
I think it's wonderful to have the grandparents help with the children. However, isn't the Asian standard having the parents work unreasonable hours, while the grandma is raising kids full time? Sure, at least everyone can focus on one thing but to me, taking it to the extreme is very far from an ideal.
3
Newsflash: parenting is hard work. Work is hard work. Oh, and housework is work too. A month of parental leave is great if you can get and take it, but parenting lasts for a lifetime. A more interesting article would delve into the creative ways people and other nations address this challenge. Personally, we rely on expert part time help for help with housework and childcare. I don't see legislation or government providing good solutions any time soon.
12
I hate to put it this way; but as more women enter the workforce and compete for jobs traditionally held by men, wages will go down (due to more supply) and the stress of raising a family will inevitably increase.
Social structure pins most of the household tasks and child care on the woman, while the man is left to pursue a career. Dividing household tasks will inevitably follow social trends, however as men and women reach parity in earnings, a more practical approach would allocate non-earnings tasks to the lowest paid partner.
Social structure pins most of the household tasks and child care on the woman, while the man is left to pursue a career. Dividing household tasks will inevitably follow social trends, however as men and women reach parity in earnings, a more practical approach would allocate non-earnings tasks to the lowest paid partner.
12
Wow. Wages are not suppressed because women are entering the workplace. The most qualified person gets the job, man or woman. Wages are suppressed because corporations over recent decades do not see the need to invest in human capital. Where businesses look to retain workers, wages go up.
As far as how tasks within a marriage are "allocated" that is up to the individuals. That said, people need to make a "value" judgement. Is it worth it to have the house, car, etc. and kid, and have two working adults? In today's consumer driven society the answer is usually, yes. So now we have people working who may be better off staying at home. Sure, they may have less material possessions but they may also have peace of mind and a normal child.
As far as how tasks within a marriage are "allocated" that is up to the individuals. That said, people need to make a "value" judgement. Is it worth it to have the house, car, etc. and kid, and have two working adults? In today's consumer driven society the answer is usually, yes. So now we have people working who may be better off staying at home. Sure, they may have less material possessions but they may also have peace of mind and a normal child.
13
Or, another option would be for both adult partners in the relationship to make a list of tasks/chores that need to be done, in order to run an household, and the two can decide which ones to hire paid help to do, and divvy up the remainder between themselves. Adults who work, regardless of the amount earned, are all capable of doing laundry, picking up after themselves, doing dishes, and other household chores. If the higher wage earning partner were single, he or she would either have to do housework all by themselves, or hire someone to do that work.
Smart husbands/partners know that the more household chores they do, the happier their partners are, and, the better their chances of having a contented partner, and a regular romantic life with their partner. Straight men take note - ask any straight woman and she will tell you that when her man cooks, cleans, does laundry, and takes care of the kids, even if it's only occasionally, his doing so increases his attractiveness - he is HOT.
Smart husbands/partners know that the more household chores they do, the happier their partners are, and, the better their chances of having a contented partner, and a regular romantic life with their partner. Straight men take note - ask any straight woman and she will tell you that when her man cooks, cleans, does laundry, and takes care of the kids, even if it's only occasionally, his doing so increases his attractiveness - he is HOT.
7
Ryan, if women entering the workforce was so damaging, why didn't men decide to stay home and keep the numbers balanced? I think we both know that having a job provides people with freedoms, powers, and rewards that aren't just appreciated by men. And that's ok!
And I have to say, I have never followed social trends when it comes to deciding who does what in my house. I am handy and handle car and home repair. My spouse sews and irons and arranges playdates. These divisions came about from personal preference, not what society thinks women ought to be doing.
And I have to say, I have never followed social trends when it comes to deciding who does what in my house. I am handy and handle car and home repair. My spouse sews and irons and arranges playdates. These divisions came about from personal preference, not what society thinks women ought to be doing.
4
and yet everyone found time to comment on this article...
29
Erin, you would need to experience the devastation of the never-ending hardships to be able to understand why time is made for the comments...I hope you never have the experience that would make you understand...
1
Parenting is stressful these days, even if the wife is a stay-at-home mother. When both are working outside the home during the day -- it's extremely stressful. Even when fathers do more than the norm. There is no way to develop one's career and be a great parent, at the same time. Whoever fed us the 'stuff' that made us believe we could "have it all" -- I would really like to have a long talk with them. They lied to us big time. //// It used to be that Mom worked PT outside the home for extra money. Now Mom works outside the home because she MUST work -- it's impossible for the middle class and lower middle class to live on one income.
8
I stayed home for 10 years. It is possible, but we lived in a tiny, tiny house, drove old cars, had no new clothes and no vacations other than vacations our parents paid for to make it possible.
I had friends who worked full-time and took their children to daycare so they could afford a nice house, even though that expensive house was empty all day and used mainly for sleeping at night.
As for being lied to, I was no MENSA candidate, but even I, at about 20, realized you cannot have it all at the same time.
For us, it was worth it to live very lean and forgo the stress. And guess what: the money took care of itself. We have enough, even though I was out of the workforce for 10 years.
I had friends who worked full-time and took their children to daycare so they could afford a nice house, even though that expensive house was empty all day and used mainly for sleeping at night.
As for being lied to, I was no MENSA candidate, but even I, at about 20, realized you cannot have it all at the same time.
For us, it was worth it to live very lean and forgo the stress. And guess what: the money took care of itself. We have enough, even though I was out of the workforce for 10 years.
15
Could this problem be rooted in our wages? We all have to work so hard, so many hours, simply because our employers have us over a figurative barrel. We need two jobs to have a decent life, but earning our income sucks the life out of the remainder of our life......we lose the part that really matters. One wage earner should be able to keep a family in the middle class or better.
14
This is all due to the feminist movement and technology. One thing bad about Capitalism, it doesnt look at the unintended consequences until its too late or there is a market shift and moves in another direction. Cellphones are a perfect example of this and what they have done to society and people who use them.
3
I just stated something similar in response to a comment thread below. I hate hate hate saying this. It's not in my character, but college educated White women really have a ton a responsibility for these results. We are constantly fed a false narrative that "men" in general or "White men" are to blame for just about everything since the beginning of the human species, but that's a blatant lie. It's just to appease the public. Feminism has gutted this country in so many ways. I would venture to say that 85% or greater of women who subscribe that that hate group, entirely fail to realize its true meaning (empowerment) and instead spew out entitlement. It's all wrong. I ask all on here to poll 3 women you know that work in a corporate or somewhat professional environment and I guarantee all will say they much prefer working with and around men and feel as is they are in a good place, yet, ask others that work around majority women and they're all miserable or spoken down too, etc.
7
It's really the fault of men in two ways. First, half of them should have stepped out of the workforce to become stay at home husbands or dads to compensate toward the move toward gender equality in the workplace. Your argument assumes only men have the right to professional jobs and women are somehow infiltrators or tag ons. Second, the anti-family policies in place in the US were largely established by male politicians.
11
Hogwash.
What happened is that the economics forced on the US by corporate interests and a hungry military-industrial complex resulted in families needing two wage earners just to maintain a bare middle class life. Half your federal taxes go to support the military and pay for past, present and future wars. And while corporate profits and CEO pay soars into the stratosphere, wages are flatlined.
Only a shallow and misogynistic intellect would blame feminism, the simple philosophy that women are human and deserve full political, social and economic equality, for the ills of capitalism, unfettered corporate greed and a political system that serves the corporations and the military. Do some reading.
What happened is that the economics forced on the US by corporate interests and a hungry military-industrial complex resulted in families needing two wage earners just to maintain a bare middle class life. Half your federal taxes go to support the military and pay for past, present and future wars. And while corporate profits and CEO pay soars into the stratosphere, wages are flatlined.
Only a shallow and misogynistic intellect would blame feminism, the simple philosophy that women are human and deserve full political, social and economic equality, for the ills of capitalism, unfettered corporate greed and a political system that serves the corporations and the military. Do some reading.
16
And social scientists are scratching their heads over the large number of suicides among middle aged whites? This group in the past made up the unionized middle class, many with a "mere" high school education, secure in jobs that were outsourced and sent overseas with the complicity of their friends in the Democratic party while the ghouls in the GOP sat back and laughed.
There needs to be a root and branch change to our current system before the entire country becomes Argentina. Or Bangladesh. We already have the floods in Texas or maybe that's just god's way of saying "Enough with these Bush family members feeding off the public." I could be wrong but I think not.
There needs to be a root and branch change to our current system before the entire country becomes Argentina. Or Bangladesh. We already have the floods in Texas or maybe that's just god's way of saying "Enough with these Bush family members feeding off the public." I could be wrong but I think not.
9
All tbe folks who suggest the solution is cutting vacations, living on less, etc, all that stuff already happened 20 years ago. Americans don't take vacations. Fifty million people on food stamps and you are talking about cutting out Mickey Mouse?! Disney stays in business because foreigners support it, not because Americans are spending the summer there.
33
Families' financial stability and well-being have been sacrificed for corporate profits. The last three decades have seen a systematic wealth transfer from middle class workers to upper class shareholders.
"Right to work" states take good union jobs on which you can form and grow a family, and turn them into less. Beneficiary: shareholders.
401Ks have turned into inadequate replacements for defined-benefit pensions on which a breadwinner could retire (making a position available to a rising worker). Beneficiary: shareholders.
Career-oriented positions have turned into contract jobs with few benefits, little stability, and broad uncertainty. Beneficiary: corporate profits.
We are ourselves to blame for allowing corporate leaders and corporate-oriented policymakers bankrupt the good of the family. We needed to fight for every union job, for pensions, for work-life balance, and for worker pay for value created.
Why wouldn't any politician who claims commitment to family values protect family finances so that families can grow and be happy?
"Right to work" states take good union jobs on which you can form and grow a family, and turn them into less. Beneficiary: shareholders.
401Ks have turned into inadequate replacements for defined-benefit pensions on which a breadwinner could retire (making a position available to a rising worker). Beneficiary: shareholders.
Career-oriented positions have turned into contract jobs with few benefits, little stability, and broad uncertainty. Beneficiary: corporate profits.
We are ourselves to blame for allowing corporate leaders and corporate-oriented policymakers bankrupt the good of the family. We needed to fight for every union job, for pensions, for work-life balance, and for worker pay for value created.
Why wouldn't any politician who claims commitment to family values protect family finances so that families can grow and be happy?
47
The only solution to this is to publicize it so people who are considering having children choose to have less, or none. Eventually, the birth rate will prompt the people who make these decisions to provide support in the form of paid leave, decent childcare, etc. This has happened in every country where the birth rate has been low. If families individually bear the cost and stress of supporting society, society will take what they give. Unless you want children desperately, for the good of the nation, don't have them. Eventually, the US policies will become hospitable - as opposed to hostile - to families. America only understands money, and a declining birth rate would dig into the pockets of the people who are in a position to set policy.
16
That is to a solution as long as the US has open borders and a steady supply of cheap labor is coming across. The crony capitalist government couldn't care less if you're stressed because they can replace you at the drop of a hat and probably save money.
5
At my old job at a transportation company, I came in contact with immigrants from Russia, Poland, Columbia, Mexico, Sierra Leon, and the MidEast. When asked why they though about living here they all said unequivicoly "Americans work WAY TOO MUCH". "Keep your money, I'd rather go home to nothing and have time with my family, then accumulate stuff I don't want or need"
25
That is an option, you know. Nobody is forcing you to work especially with all the government handouts available in 2015.
8
Once you are employed, your pay check demands your full loyalty. Recognition at work demands physical and mental devotion or otherwise one does not get "meet expectation" appraisal. Isn't this enough to put your family on the back burner? I was living like this for 2 decades and I've had it. My husband and I were either on our Blackberries or calls at night non-stop and even when out of office. I'm home now with my kids. Yes we are living on one income but everyone is mighty happy! Our society has been molded by what was taught by business schools for too long.
24
Nice article, but focusing on "gender neutral family leave"?! Really?! When there is no federal maternity leave?! How about we sort that out first, so that every baby can be properly nursed and cared for in those critical months?
21
Ivana,
Babies can be fed bottles of pumped breastmilk and be "properly cared for" by their fathers just as well as their mothers. The more we encourage men to have a 50% responsibility in the raising of their children, the better off the entire family is.
Babies can be fed bottles of pumped breastmilk and be "properly cared for" by their fathers just as well as their mothers. The more we encourage men to have a 50% responsibility in the raising of their children, the better off the entire family is.
1
I am rather amazed at all the people who want to be parents. WHy?
The future is already very bleak with all the climate change forecasts and we have some 7 billion people on the planet now. And we keep adding more. And keep adding more stress to the planet ... and to the lives of parents.
Again, WHy do people feel the great compelling need to become parents?
The future is already very bleak with all the climate change forecasts and we have some 7 billion people on the planet now. And we keep adding more. And keep adding more stress to the planet ... and to the lives of parents.
Again, WHy do people feel the great compelling need to become parents?
36
I dealt with that worry by adopting and have never looked back.
6
Because family, and the overpowering LOVE it brings, is the bedrock of humanity.
21
I wanted to have kids ever since I could remember. My sons are the best
thing that ever happened to me. Kids are my favorite people. I like
being around them. They are refreshing, positive, everything your not.
thing that ever happened to me. Kids are my favorite people. I like
being around them. They are refreshing, positive, everything your not.
10
become public school teachers and in spite of protests to the contrary you will have 3 months of vacation, a sinecure job and plenty of time to spend with your family. in nyc a teacher with 12 years experience makes 84k + benefits 2X to 3X that of the private sector.
go for it and enjoy life!
go for it and enjoy life!
7
Obviously, you have never taught in public schools.
19
If teaching is such an easy, overpaid, stress-free job, why do we have a national shortage of teachers?
My school in union-free Texas has a half-dozen unfilled positions. The kids sit with subs and do nothing.
My principal says the pool of applicants is awful because no one wants to teach.
My school in union-free Texas has a half-dozen unfilled positions. The kids sit with subs and do nothing.
My principal says the pool of applicants is awful because no one wants to teach.
8
You're clearly delusional. Teachers are basically CEOs (they have to coordinate and train 25-30 individuals) who still have to answer to administrators, parents, and the government. 50% of their review is based on how their kids test. We've made it so no one would want this job.
5
"Yeah... I'm gonna need you to come in on Saturday. That'd be great."
23
Gotta finish those TPS reports!
10
Perhaps the silver lining is that fathers now feel the same stress to be active, involved, hands-on parents. Perhaps the increase in joint ownership of parents' responsibility will help shift a majority of voters to act in their own interests and move to demand a more active support of families and their needs from local, state and federal governments, as well as employers. We can hope.
8
I can truly empathize with these young people raising families and especially with working moms. I've worked professionally outside of the home for over 30 years and raised three children. I can attest to all of the difficulties and sacrifices. Having come to the end of my career (retirement is in sight) I can honestly say that I so longed for the separation of roles that characterized the 50's through 70's. Although my mother in law and mother both had more children than I, their lives, through their own admission were much calmer and stress free. To have their kind of middle class lifestyle, many of us working women have had to sacrifice much more. Was it worth it? I don't know. I still feel much like the woman in the article, I always feel like everything is done but not to my best standards.
9
Ugh - speak for yourself. There is nothing more disturbing to me than the assumption that women should want to be housewives and men should want to be corporate titans and "secondary" parents.
If you loved that role so much, why didn't you take it on? Why does everyone want all of society to take on their personal preferences? Just do what you want and let other women have the opportunities they worked so hard for.
If you loved that role so much, why didn't you take it on? Why does everyone want all of society to take on their personal preferences? Just do what you want and let other women have the opportunities they worked so hard for.
2
Why oh why do parents not agree to "step down" the child-starring activities? It is not a complete answer, but it is, or should be, an easy start. As jizzy55 pointed out, it is absurd to have swim lessons for an 11 month old. Make a clean sweep and eliminate 9/10 of the ceremonies for little kids - such as kindergarten graduation, aka as photo-op that unnecessarily stresses parents. Cut way back on the command performances, recitals, theater nights. Sure, a few are ok, but they're not necessary for little kids to have fun. Parents DON'T need to attend every game or practice, either. My sister thought it scandalous that her son-in-law didn't show up to hear his son playing in the school band at the Friday night basketball game breals. I applauded his common sense. It was Friday night, the guy had worked all week, and he was tired. It's fine. The kid was fine.
Children can even - gasp - help. I made salads for dinners. I cleared the table and helped with the dishes. I helped with housecleaning.
Or is the competition to vault one's offspring ahead of other offspring so intense, so all-devouring that any parent not devoting 110% to arming his child for combat is going to see his child - dread words!! - fall behind ...
If 110% only will do, then prospective parents, think again about bringing a child into a world of unrelenting combat with your peers and the economy's demand for perfection - and prepare for burnout.
Children can even - gasp - help. I made salads for dinners. I cleared the table and helped with the dishes. I helped with housecleaning.
Or is the competition to vault one's offspring ahead of other offspring so intense, so all-devouring that any parent not devoting 110% to arming his child for combat is going to see his child - dread words!! - fall behind ...
If 110% only will do, then prospective parents, think again about bringing a child into a world of unrelenting combat with your peers and the economy's demand for perfection - and prepare for burnout.
54
Target. J.C. Penny and others are going to be open Thanksgiving Day! This deprives their employees the rare chance to celebrate and feast with their families.... all in the pursuit to put a few more dollars in the corporate pocket.
I, for one, would not think of shopping on Thanksgiving Day and giving up the
pleasure of being with my extended family. Shame on these stores... do not shop.
I, for one, would not think of shopping on Thanksgiving Day and giving up the
pleasure of being with my extended family. Shame on these stores... do not shop.
45
I work 2 part time jobs equaling 1 full time job. My wife has a part time job. We work about 60 hrs. a week total. We are blue collar and make around 15.00 per hour. It is not enough, but it is more than many others. My work schedule is formed around my family schedule, I will not have it any other way. We lose some potential income, but it is not negotiable. Our children come first. This is the choice that we have made, and we deal with it. By the way, we also care take for my wife's elderly parents and our 6 year old is a high functioning autistic. We are exhausted. I would not want it any other way. If the government wants to help out a bit, we would take it, but I don't expect it. We make our way loving and caring for one another. That is our choice. I won't have it any other way. Some "family values" group was not needed for us to learn to live like this. We learned it from our parents. Now our children do too.
26
Your choices will repay society many times over. Some sacrifices are worth the effort, well done.
9
How much are you working outside of work? This article states that many "white collar" workers are expected to be available at all hours. This is what causes so much stress and interferes with family time.
1
I have been a single working mother since my son was born, because my divorce occurred shortly after my son was born. I was often asked by other working mothers who had spouses if I felt guilty about working and placing my child in daycare. My response was 'no' since I had no other alternative. I didn't waste a lot of time being conflicted. I also made the decision early on that my child's needs would come first and was fortunate to find jobs and bosses that allowed me to stick to that decision. Being tired and not able to do it all came with the territory. It wasn't easy to raise my child by myself, but I did what I had to, and I learned to accept my limitations. Of course there are some things I wish I could have done differently, but everyone has those regrets. It's just not healthy to dwell on them, and nobody promised life and parenthood would be easy or perfect. Each of us plays with the cards we have been dealt.
40
There's only one way to handle this: Stop trying to do everything perfectly. Be a "good enough" partner, parent, and employee. Adjust your expectations, and you'll spread yourself less thinly, and lower your stress levels.
It also helps to keep the channels of communication open with your life partner, and reallocate the household duties as needed. Teach your kids to help you out in age-appropriate ways, too. The time and patience investments will pay off as they get older.
It also helps to keep the channels of communication open with your life partner, and reallocate the household duties as needed. Teach your kids to help you out in age-appropriate ways, too. The time and patience investments will pay off as they get older.
16
Et voilà... I always knew the French had it right. They have a much better quality of life. They always believed that spending more time with family and friends are much more important than stressing out at work. Americans should follow their example.
19
Outside humans in the fertilized egg form, actual young human parents who work hard get no sympathy or economic breaks from our conservative philosopher-legislators hung up on purity and power. Planning a family with religious zealots aiming to make parents carry even a totally damaged child to term is not a joke, and lord help you if you get pregnant and cannot support another child. Off with your head!
My kid is in school in Australia - she said the culture supports generous parental leave. Reasonable gun law make a scenario where you can maybe raise a healthy child who won't be gunned down while righteous fanatics whine about their rights over everyone else's and are indulged by law. Something to think about.
My kid is in school in Australia - she said the culture supports generous parental leave. Reasonable gun law make a scenario where you can maybe raise a healthy child who won't be gunned down while righteous fanatics whine about their rights over everyone else's and are indulged by law. Something to think about.
20
This has nothing to do with conservatives or abortion.
5
The only liberal meme you failed to cram in there was global warming. As for the false dilemma you offer up regarding not being able to support another child, umm...adoption?
Your wide-ranging diatribe appears bitter and more focused on defending the liberal agenda than on thoughtfully considering the challenges families face in seeking a proper work/life balance. Personally, I think it's sad that so many of today's parents feel so driven to provide the best "stuff" to their kids (and of course for themselves as well) that they end up too busy to spend much quality time with them. We could dissect the reasons for this endlessly, but I think it really comes down to today's incredibly self-centered, narcissistic society.
Our society today is infinitely cruder and ruder, many parents are selfishly focused on "having it all" rather than on sacrificing for their kids (and that's if they're not just treating the kids as pets or additional possessions to be shown off), and in the ultimate expression of depravity far too many view unwanted or "inconvenient" children as a "thing" to be callously disposed of while their vestigial conscience is soothed via the euphemism of "choice."
The only way to work ourselves back toward stable happy families is to apply the proven values of faith in God, love and sacrifice for others, and making proper distinctions between what is truly important in this brief life and what are just empty distractions. You can't "have it all."
Your wide-ranging diatribe appears bitter and more focused on defending the liberal agenda than on thoughtfully considering the challenges families face in seeking a proper work/life balance. Personally, I think it's sad that so many of today's parents feel so driven to provide the best "stuff" to their kids (and of course for themselves as well) that they end up too busy to spend much quality time with them. We could dissect the reasons for this endlessly, but I think it really comes down to today's incredibly self-centered, narcissistic society.
Our society today is infinitely cruder and ruder, many parents are selfishly focused on "having it all" rather than on sacrificing for their kids (and that's if they're not just treating the kids as pets or additional possessions to be shown off), and in the ultimate expression of depravity far too many view unwanted or "inconvenient" children as a "thing" to be callously disposed of while their vestigial conscience is soothed via the euphemism of "choice."
The only way to work ourselves back toward stable happy families is to apply the proven values of faith in God, love and sacrifice for others, and making proper distinctions between what is truly important in this brief life and what are just empty distractions. You can't "have it all."
8
Mike:
FYI: many young folks are not amused by the wasteful Boomer generation and consider them the ones who are "entitled". Probably not a smart idea to hate on the young people who will undoubtedly be stuck caring for geezers in their dotage.
FYI: many young folks are not amused by the wasteful Boomer generation and consider them the ones who are "entitled". Probably not a smart idea to hate on the young people who will undoubtedly be stuck caring for geezers in their dotage.
8
I sometimes feel that in discussions of the modern family that we forget that while there has been an increase in the number of women working 'outside the home', both full and part-time, women have held jobs while caring for families for many years.
Different reports on this recently released Pew study make this clear. This is from a Huff Post article (and squares with Gail Collins' well-done "When Everything Changed") : "Nearly half of two-parent families, or 46 percent, have both parents working full time, up from 31 percent in 1970".
Thirty-one percent is no small number. That means that, in 1970, supposedly the era of women-still-in-the-kitchen, close to one-third, or one out every three, of all two-parent families consisted of two full-time bread winners.
This should square well with the memories of many aging Boomers; many women worked outside the home, many of them full-time (or more), during our childhoods.
This is both interesting and important.
Important because the contributions of women to society are so often forgotten and misrepresented. And interesting because the struggles of families to raise kids while working full-time is not new.
Different reports on this recently released Pew study make this clear. This is from a Huff Post article (and squares with Gail Collins' well-done "When Everything Changed") : "Nearly half of two-parent families, or 46 percent, have both parents working full time, up from 31 percent in 1970".
Thirty-one percent is no small number. That means that, in 1970, supposedly the era of women-still-in-the-kitchen, close to one-third, or one out every three, of all two-parent families consisted of two full-time bread winners.
This should square well with the memories of many aging Boomers; many women worked outside the home, many of them full-time (or more), during our childhoods.
This is both interesting and important.
Important because the contributions of women to society are so often forgotten and misrepresented. And interesting because the struggles of families to raise kids while working full-time is not new.
23
@Cam: I'm glad you brought up that point. I went to primary school in the 50s, high school into the 60s, and I spent many afternoons, after school, with my friends. Many of their mothers worked, but at what? Some were school teachers, who came home at the same time as their children. Others had "full-time jobs", but they were undemanding; the mothers were home in time to make dinner (yes, their "second shift", but that is not the point here). None of the mothers had to stay late, to finish reports or prepare for important meetings. They had well-defined time to devote to their family - and their children's friends.
What was the social cost of this? Many women with fine minds did not have the opportunity to use them in any interesting way. They were largely barred from law schools, from medical schools, from higher positions in industry. It was great for the children, but at what expense to the mother?
This has not changed enough. My mother, who, given the encouragement and opportunity, perhaps could have run the world, had the actual choice of becoming a schoolteacher and staying home to raise me. She stayed home. It was a great advantage for me, but what a sacrifice for her.
When my time came, I had more options and I chose not to have children, because I did not believe that an egalitarian world existed to complement the enahanced opportunities for women. History (and this article) seems to have proved me right.
What was the social cost of this? Many women with fine minds did not have the opportunity to use them in any interesting way. They were largely barred from law schools, from medical schools, from higher positions in industry. It was great for the children, but at what expense to the mother?
This has not changed enough. My mother, who, given the encouragement and opportunity, perhaps could have run the world, had the actual choice of becoming a schoolteacher and staying home to raise me. She stayed home. It was a great advantage for me, but what a sacrifice for her.
When my time came, I had more options and I chose not to have children, because I did not believe that an egalitarian world existed to complement the enahanced opportunities for women. History (and this article) seems to have proved me right.
13
When so-called "salaried" workers get an assignment for "8 hours" of work, when the supervisor knows full well that it will easily take 12 hours to complete it all at the level of quality that is expected, not to mention regularly being asked/told to actually do 10 hours of assignments in a day (plus the other 5 needed to actually complete the work at the level of quality expected, totalling 15 hours a day) -- then that basically means that one is working 15 hours a day instead of 8, and those extra 7 hours are hours taken away from the time one would spend with their children (homework, soccer, reading, exercise) or their spouse or friends. This quickly expands to weekend coverage on top of the Mon-Friday schedule -- and a so-called 40 hour week is really an 80 hour week. The paycheck comes, and it "says" for a 40 hour-a-week job, that one is making Y dollars per hour. But is really one-half x Y dollars per hour, with no overtime laws kicking in either for the extra 40 hours that would have been called "over time". It is bad faith by the employers and supervisors who deliberately do this -- knowing the time is most fundamentally being robbed from the children.
14
"Modern" family problems? Now, imagine as best you can, how extraordinarily difficult it is for (single-parent) families who are poor, under-employed, "living" in violent communities, on food stamps, and a "minority"... Ever have to deal with the shabby "commerce" (if there is any nearby, and open), the poor quality of food (and lack of choice) if there are any markets around, and the attitudes of underpaid employees' at the registers, and when they "bother" to help you? The "list" goes on... We are in great need of having REAL leaders in positions of leadership, who would correct these and all the other problems that exist due to not having leaders in leadership positions. Find these leaders, and elect them. If you REALLY care about your community/country, get out there and prove it with action, not lip-flapping, shallow, slogan-filled rhetoric. AND, help those who are willing to help themselves, but TRULY have no idea of how to do it (regardless of how simple, obvious, and easy YOU think it is). Stop making "gadgets", and making never-ending, sophomoric entertainment, more important than the people in your country. Get actively involved, and make positive change that will help ALL people. Replace the do-nothing politicians with people who have proven with on-the-ground results that they are competent, and care. You have to fight hard for what you need, when you have people who are supposed to fight FOR you, fighting only for themselves.
18
"The median household income for a family in which both parents work full time is $102,400, according to Pew, compared with $84,000 when mothers work part time."
The median household income in the US is a bit more than $50,000. Thus, typical families with both spouses working full time make a clear trade-off to earn much more money than average ($100K+), in return for having less free time and stress. That's their choice to make, and I don't understand why we'd feel sorry for them.
The median household income in the US is a bit more than $50,000. Thus, typical families with both spouses working full time make a clear trade-off to earn much more money than average ($100K+), in return for having less free time and stress. That's their choice to make, and I don't understand why we'd feel sorry for them.
22
Spot on! The voice of reason, thank you!
6
May I point out that many colleges cost as much as the median household income? Even the cheaper state schools cost (per year) half of the median household income. So, people with kids who want their kids to go to college simply cannot save for that on $50k per year, and they don't want their children saddled with $100k of loans. It's not quite as "easy" as you make it seem.
8
I think that's an interesting point. But according to a 2014 Sallie Mae study, the average parental contribution to college expenses from middle-income families, including contributions from parents' income, savings, and borrowing, is a little less than $6500 per child, per year. Even though the "sticker price" of college may be as high as you are suggesting, it is clear that typical families are not paying anywhere near that much after grants, awards, and student contributions. And unless a family has many children, or chooses to live in a very expensive area, a total of $26K tuition expenses per child is probably affordable if it's spread over a long enough period of time, even on an income of $50,000 per year.
4
What surprises me is that many other industrialized countries have adjusted to this by shortening the workweek to 32 hours (something the article omits). Unfortunately, this gets derided by folks like, say, Jeb Bush (who's worked how many hours since he was governor?), as a "French workweek," as if having more time with your family and community, is a bad thing. For some reason in America, where we suffer far higher rates of stress-related disease, being miserable and putting oneself at risk of an early grave is perplexingly seen as an admirable trait.
32
Sorry, I meant to add in the first sentence that it surprises me that the writer didn't mention that other countries do that.
1
Ah, the problems of first world households. And by the way to those who think that same sex households have it better, think again. I'm here to tell you that there's always the one spouse (or ex-spouse in my case) who did way more of the household chores and raising the kids than the other spouse.
3
Why does an 11 month old need swim lessons? Eliminate those and related non-essentials (it's a BABY!!! jeez) and suddenly life might get 10-20% less stressed.
21
As a matter of fact, we once belonged to a country club where they would not give swim lessons to any child under age 5 (!) because they didn't want parents to have a false sense of security about their child's safety around swimming pools.
People should ask themselves how much they remember from when they were 11 mos old and save their time and money.
We traveled extensively when our children were under 10; they hardly remember any of it. We thought we were giving them experiences and a broader perspective.
People should ask themselves how much they remember from when they were 11 mos old and save their time and money.
We traveled extensively when our children were under 10; they hardly remember any of it. We thought we were giving them experiences and a broader perspective.
11
we have a pool and learning early is considered the way to go.
1
Yes. Not to mention all the soccer, gymnastics, play dates, etc. Many parents feel they must keep their kids occupied 24/7 but the only thing they gain from it is more stress and less free time. What's wrong with sitting in the yard and playing with the neighbor kids ? Used to be enough and may have been much more fulfilling for the kids.
7
Government has a responsibility to enact legislation that helps working parents. As a single, childless person, it is as much in my interest that children grow up healthy and well-educated as it is in their biological families' interests. Why? Because when I am elderly, my nieces and nephews, and their generational cohort, are going to be working, deciding, and leading. I would like to be assured that they have ALL had the best possible start in life.
18
Finally! White people know what it's like to be African-American.
16
Wasn't there a time when just the man could support a family of four?
10
Still can if you emulate the lifestyle back then. 900 sq ft house, 1 bath. And check out the size of closets in those houses; people didn't own many clothes.
Maybe one car. One shared landline. No flying vacations, very few people going to college, no worthwhile treatments for cancer or heart disease. Much less variety in food choice. Little if any dining out.
You get the idea. Live like that and it is eminently possible to support 4 on one moderate income.
Maybe one car. One shared landline. No flying vacations, very few people going to college, no worthwhile treatments for cancer or heart disease. Much less variety in food choice. Little if any dining out.
You get the idea. Live like that and it is eminently possible to support 4 on one moderate income.
11
Exactly.
We once sold our house of 5 years--which housed 2 adults, a baby and a preschooler--to a just-married couple.
They sold the house within a year because it was "too small."
It had 2 bathrooms, a laundry closet inside the house, 3 small bedrooms and a detached garage. It was built in 1948, I think.
The only reason we sold it was that its value was more than double what we paid--it wasn't too small.
We once sold our house of 5 years--which housed 2 adults, a baby and a preschooler--to a just-married couple.
They sold the house within a year because it was "too small."
It had 2 bathrooms, a laundry closet inside the house, 3 small bedrooms and a detached garage. It was built in 1948, I think.
The only reason we sold it was that its value was more than double what we paid--it wasn't too small.
2
So, the lifestyle of "father knows best", Mayberry etc...wasn't so bad after all?
Thanks to the "womens lib" movement of the 60's, progressives, welfare and the like, they have broken down the traditional family to the point kids fend for themselves after school, mom and dad come home tired, then it's take the kids to their soccer, ballet, swimming, gymnastics, scouts etc, grab a burger at McD's, get home go to bed, no family sit down meals, rush rush rush.
Then, also we have the "gotta have everything new, now" crowd that thinks to be accepted in their social circle, they have to have the newest cars, clothes, tv/computer/cell phones. Everyone is stressed out, kids are out of control. Maybe if parents made the SACRIFICE for their kids, one of them stayed home during the day, not having to live in gated communities with a huge house, things would get back to more of the nuclear family, where things were much nicer, AND PEACEFUL.
Thanks to the "womens lib" movement of the 60's, progressives, welfare and the like, they have broken down the traditional family to the point kids fend for themselves after school, mom and dad come home tired, then it's take the kids to their soccer, ballet, swimming, gymnastics, scouts etc, grab a burger at McD's, get home go to bed, no family sit down meals, rush rush rush.
Then, also we have the "gotta have everything new, now" crowd that thinks to be accepted in their social circle, they have to have the newest cars, clothes, tv/computer/cell phones. Everyone is stressed out, kids are out of control. Maybe if parents made the SACRIFICE for their kids, one of them stayed home during the day, not having to live in gated communities with a huge house, things would get back to more of the nuclear family, where things were much nicer, AND PEACEFUL.
6
30 years ago...
Monthly telephone bill including indestructible phone made in America: $15/month.
TV service: Free (antenna)
Cellphone hardware: 0
Cellphone service: 0
Computer hardware: 0
Internet service: 0
Garage door opener: Free (open using hands and back)
Burglar/security alarm hardware: 0
Burglar/security service: 0
Dinner for family of 4: $14.50 w/tip at Joe's Spaghetti Joint
New York Times home delivery: $15/month
Rake, broom and snow shovel in lieu of leaf blower, snow blower and associated gasoline, and hearing and eye protection..
Monthly telephone bill including indestructible phone made in America: $15/month.
TV service: Free (antenna)
Cellphone hardware: 0
Cellphone service: 0
Computer hardware: 0
Internet service: 0
Garage door opener: Free (open using hands and back)
Burglar/security alarm hardware: 0
Burglar/security service: 0
Dinner for family of 4: $14.50 w/tip at Joe's Spaghetti Joint
New York Times home delivery: $15/month
Rake, broom and snow shovel in lieu of leaf blower, snow blower and associated gasoline, and hearing and eye protection..
15
There was some wisdom in the way our Grandparents and even earlier generations lived. We've sacrificed so much of that in the name of progress, it seems we are now reaping what we've sown.
7
What's a hobby?
11
This is crazy! I am so sick of everyone complaining about living a normal life and having a job, family, home, etc. I don't even want to hear two parent households complaining! I am a single mother and have been for 10 years (yes, it was my "decision" to have a child that wasn't planned, never realizing that one day I'd be raising her solo without help from the father who tried to kill me once he got addicted to drugs and without help from my family because they disowned me for having a child out of wedlock). Anyways, I have worked a full time job, part time job, went to college full time, all while being a single mother for over 5 years!!! The only people that helped me were people I paid and church food banks. I didn't get help from the government, the state of CA actually let my daughter's father out of paying me child support, and had NO FAMILY SUPPORT!!!! Americans have become so lazy and complacent and want to live outside of their means and have someone else foot the bill for it. Who is going to pay for all of this stuff??? That is right, the employer, or the American taxpayer. Either way, someone else has to pay for it. Totally ridiculous! People now a days think that the internet, cable, a fancy car, a quarter of a million dollar house, name brand clothes, eating out, etc. are necessities, guess what??? They AREN'T!!! Live within your means and work your way up to better paying jobs and nicer things. Stop complaining and GET OVER IT or don't have kids!!!
22
Well it is admirable that you have dedicated every drop of blood to surviving. Churches do get tax breaks so you do get some help there. Not everyone has the wherewithal to find the job and school opportunities that you describe, and it is great they were available to you and you took advantage.
Yes, or course, live within ones means. Yes, of course, accept responsibility. But many cultures talk the talk about valuing family and structure their culture accordingly. It is not a sin to point out/critique that the talk and the walk in America are 2 different things. This is a rich country that can rearrange priorities if we wanted to. There is no will to do that.
Yes, or course, live within ones means. Yes, of course, accept responsibility. But many cultures talk the talk about valuing family and structure their culture accordingly. It is not a sin to point out/critique that the talk and the walk in America are 2 different things. This is a rich country that can rearrange priorities if we wanted to. There is no will to do that.
9
Thank you for your comments. It's nice to know there are still people out there like you who can make hard choices and persevere to success. Keep up the good work.
6
It sounds like your daughter has a fabulous mother and role-model, ThisChick. If only every child was so fortunate!
5
"The survey also found that white parents were more than 10 percentage points more likely to express stress than nonwhite parents." Isn't this racist? Black people don't work? Are you implying they're welfare queens? And this from the NY Times. If Rush Limbaugh repeats this line there will be mayhem.
It's data.
4
Maybe blacks are more grateful. Or realistic. The operative term is "express" stress. We all have stress. We all don't choose to whine about how tough our lives our with two big salaries and a healthy baby. And they worry about taking who is taking out the trash. What a world.
5
Who has time THESE DAYS? People are so constantly rushed and overburdened that they only have time to view only four hours of television per day, on average.
11
Here's a novel idea.
Don't have kids.
Mother Earth will thank you.
Don't have kids.
Mother Earth will thank you.
31
Thank You For This! It's gotten to be such a competition and the Earth is crushed!
8
There is a room in NYC apts. built at the turn of the 20th C that have something called a maid's room.. Guess why? Hire a nanny... or give a someone who needs it room and board in exchange fr a certain amount of child care. (Or do with less and have one parent stay at home - or or or -- my18 month niece and her three year old brother are being toilet trained at Montessori.
So SILLY -- these women's magazine articles in the NYTimes. (Why does the Times need to put Ladies Home Journal or Family Circle out of business? They sometimes had great knitting projects and the gingerbread houses to die for!!)
So SILLY -- these women's magazine articles in the NYTimes. (Why does the Times need to put Ladies Home Journal or Family Circle out of business? They sometimes had great knitting projects and the gingerbread houses to die for!!)
5
I live in NYC. I don't have a "maid's room." I would be considered rich in many parts of the country, but my child sleeps in a very small room (probably the size of the maid's room, if I had one).
Also, newsflash, since your comments indicate you are ancient: Men and women are both involved in parenting nowdays. This is NOT a "woman's issue."
Also, newsflash, since your comments indicate you are ancient: Men and women are both involved in parenting nowdays. This is NOT a "woman's issue."
7
The children are cheated. Being a coach for 25 years I think children have it worse today. Parents are more selfish, always on their phone. When their with
their kids they really arent with them. Staying home to raise your children for
even a few years will build a bond with your child. Unless youve done it you
really dont know how great it can be.
their kids they really arent with them. Staying home to raise your children for
even a few years will build a bond with your child. Unless youve done it you
really dont know how great it can be.
11
Black families have been living like this for well over a century. This is one of the things that contributed to the breakdown.. Where was the concern before?
14
Maybe it'll be like the huge increase in white addiction rates and drug overdoses--suddenly we will have to have kinder and gentler policies because now it is a problem for white people, too.
7
I am single. I don’t have kids or a spouse and can’t speak to that balance, but what I can speak to is how we are all continuously pitted against each other for the gain of somebody whose hands are on the purse strings. I am expected to take up the slack in the office because I don’t have familiar obligations. I am expected to pay a single supplement at hotels/vacations so that kids can stay or eat free. I do all of the work a couple might split, of course minus childcare. Any way you slice it, kids or no, most American families (and yes, this includes families of one) aren’t making the headway or living the life we might be able to because of the public and corporate policies stacked against us. I don’t see a light at the end of the tunnel. As long as the policy makers in office have theirs, and they do, changes for the rest of us are just not a reality that will come to pass.
25
I wish more would speak up about this. Single people are the most discriminated against group in this country. And we pay for everyone else. Good comment on kid's meals, single supplement travel, etc. I am so sick of subsidizing the rich who want to have clones of themselves. I pay for them. No one pays for me.
11
So what are we saying? That you really can't have it all unless the government steps in to help you? Do we really want that? More government dependence? No thank you. As for me, I will cut back, make deliberate decisions about time and money, and live accordingly.
5
I don't want the government to help me so much as I want the government to stop pandering to the 1%...
5
And one doesn't get any easing of it all in retirement. You find yourself taking care of grand kids and senior family in poor health. Gosh, wish the resources were not hoarded by the 1% for it surely would help.
8
Mom and Dad HAVE to have all the conveniences moeny can buy - big house, right car, expensive vacations. Ironically, they rationalize that somehow the kids will benefit from this excess.
Kids just want to spend time with their parents. They could care less about any of that crap.
Kids just want to spend time with their parents. They could care less about any of that crap.
8
For a lot of us, more like mom and dad HAVE to pay the mortgage, college tuition, health care costs since deductibles are crazy high, and maybe try to save some for retirement. That quickly turns into two people working full time, whether they want to or not.
15
"Saint Peter don't ya call me, cause I can't go. I owe my soul to the company store." Yup, we are all prisoners of the capitalist machine that drains us of every bit that we have to feed its own coffers.
7
Oh, I love when Hollywood tries to portray working parents in TV shows and movies. It's a scramble out the door everymorning, but everyone's had breakfast, hair is styled, lunches packed, etc. In my world, it's more like wet hair, shoving a pack of oreo cookies at my daughter while I drink a can of Diet Dr. Pepper, and she barely makes it to school on time. That's real life!
I just came back from a workcation, where I worked for 3 days and took off 2. Honestly, remote work policies (if they could be implemented everywhere) would go a long way towards balance and a sense of knowing that you don't always have to be rushed, especially in a time where technology is aimed at making our lives easier.
3
Thank you thomas bishop for putting this entire article into perspective when you stated . . . "meanwhile in former syria, many are wondering if they will live to the end of the day."
It's comments such as that which makes me feel ashamed and embarrassed for complaining how stressed, tired and rushed I get at times. I am sure Syrian refugees would trade places with any of us for even one day.
11
Stressed, tired, and rushed? Sounds like medieval Europe with its lamenting Lords and Bishops. The more things change the more they stay the same.
2
People bring this on themselves. They live well beyond their means. House too big/too expensive. Car too expensive. Everything is financed which usually means you can't afford it. Kids in a thousand activities. Paying for daycare. On and on and on. Live simpler. Downsize. Do without. Slow down. Wait to buy. I did. Now my wife stays at home with the kids. We have done with less for 6 years now and are much happier. Not stressed or rushed.
13
The solution is not more government regulation, it's an economy where one spouse earns enough to go to work and allow the other spouse to stay at home and take care of the kids.
5
I see a lot of comments about "making choices." I sincerely believe the problems stated in the article go beyond just dealing with the consequences of choices. We are pushed into this rat race - aka unbridled, unchecked capitalism - with very few supports or relief. The failure and corresponding unhappiness, illness, etc., are by design. There is no way to "win" this battle in its current state unless you are exceptionally wealthy.
13
I don't understand. Who is pushing you to have kids, keep up with the Joneses, be a perfectionist about parenting, etc? This is absurd. I'm betting that wealth has nothing to do with it. The higher up you are on the socioeconomic scale, the more likely you are to think you need to do a bazillion things to be a good parent. I think the more both parents are ambitious career-wise, the more they will feel stress. That's a choice. It sucks we have to make it but it's ridiculous to deny it.
4
I'll bet the goobmit workers in that picture paid $500K for that house with the micro-kitchen. Up where I live, far from the rat race, there are a lot of families which only have one parent working, especially among the Mormons, who seem to pull it off quite well.
7
"...and in nearly half of all two-parent families today, both parents work full time, ..."
I am surprised that both parents are not working full-time in more two-parent families. Given the high costs of housing, education, and saving, I find it impressive that so many families can, and do, manage without both parents putting in more time. Sure, it's next to impossible to balance all that must be done. But that's old news.
What is more interesting to me is how the heck over half of all two-parent families can manage without both parents working full time!
I am surprised that both parents are not working full-time in more two-parent families. Given the high costs of housing, education, and saving, I find it impressive that so many families can, and do, manage without both parents putting in more time. Sure, it's next to impossible to balance all that must be done. But that's old news.
What is more interesting to me is how the heck over half of all two-parent families can manage without both parents working full time!
7
Funny, isn't it, Ms Cain Miller never writes about them.
5
I agree . we don't run debt, we live within our means but we have a kid to get through college, we have our own retirement to consider and my latest shock is just how incredibly expensive it is to go to assisted living or a nursing home if needed. It's shocking and I had no idea until I started helping out my mom.
we're lucky, we have the money for college and for retirement because we haven't run wild with our incomes but we make plenty and I still have to watch the budget like a hawk. I have absolutely no idea how families who are making 40-60K are doing it.
we're lucky, we have the money for college and for retirement because we haven't run wild with our incomes but we make plenty and I still have to watch the budget like a hawk. I have absolutely no idea how families who are making 40-60K are doing it.
2
I would like to blame it all on Republicans but I can not think of a single thing that Obama has done to help middle-class families, like mine.
6
Thank you for saying this. I was going to write something similar. While I am all for universal healthcare, the ACA is a spectacular failure. It backfired for all middle-class families, which, let's face it, is who this article is targeting. Ironic this comes a day after a report of how "White middle-aged folks are dying more frequently." Anyway, for all Obama's praise, now 7 years in, the guy has done absolutely zero that has benefited this country. We really couldn't have elected a worse candidate (twice!) than we did with him. Whatever...
3
Yes. I think it backfired because a universal plan and also a public option were both blocked mostly by Republicans along with the pseudo-centrist from Conn. (Lieberman) and some other dribbling Dems. Nonetheless, if we all demanded the heath care that they have (and we pay for), now that would be a plan!
4
I don't think he did nothing. II would give Obama a B. I think he tried but our country, in total, has let laborers go and this has been a bipartisan failure. then the folks sell meth or something to put food on their table and then we incarcerate them. and then they get addicted, we don't care and they die.
we don't have jobs for the laborers, the hardest working folks out there. This infuriates me.
we don't have jobs for the laborers, the hardest working folks out there. This infuriates me.
3
I guess it's a matter of perspective. Today's 'pressure' and 'stress' is much different than in previous generations. My grandparents only had to deal with the occupying forces of the Axis Powers in Europe during World War II when they were raising their children, and most of them worked from home - because they had no jobs!
11
I blame television in no small part. Somewhere along the line, people started believing that the claptrap on TV shows constituted what life should be. Easily duped Americans were shown a life on the boob tube that was hopelessly unrealistic yet somehow it became everybody's idea of what actual life should look like. Steadily eroded funding for and cultural valuation of education played a role as well; a lack of critical-thinking skills is the reason TV starts to look real to us. There are no mysteries here. Only choices that people need to make on an individual basis in order to improve their circumstances. Get real and focus on the things in life that actually matter!
4
Meanwhile, electronic gadgets are "bringing up baby" and their older sibs virtually live on their phones and Mom and Dad are also consumed by phones, computers, etc., and the US families' deterioration rate continues to rapidly increase. It won't be long before we've all lost all memory of social skills and the zombies have won.
11
I'm trying to understand why people think all of a sudden family life is stressful.
For thousands of years, parents were almost always next to their children working on their land. No commutes, no boss, just rain, weather, crops, and livestock maybe. Kids were walking distance away in the home or helping parents on the land.
Women started working and that made families more stressed as childcare is now done after work. There is also more social pressure on appearances than before. In agrarian society, people were mostly equal being landowners mostly. Now there's so much push to "look" wealthy and keep up w/the Joneses.
In-laws were also more involved in raising grandkids than today. Now it's enjoy your retirement, vacation, forget the kids. Parents, forget about in-laws or grandparents, kick them to a nursing home. The attitude's changed making less help available.
Coupled w/women working, society is less about next generation and more about "now" in the moment, and me, me, me. Kids are an afterthought now and people want to live "good" lives. And there are a lot more concerns, worries, distractions today than before. How much "stuff" is too much? Simplify my life has been a great way to reduce stress and channel focus.
For thousands of years, parents were almost always next to their children working on their land. No commutes, no boss, just rain, weather, crops, and livestock maybe. Kids were walking distance away in the home or helping parents on the land.
Women started working and that made families more stressed as childcare is now done after work. There is also more social pressure on appearances than before. In agrarian society, people were mostly equal being landowners mostly. Now there's so much push to "look" wealthy and keep up w/the Joneses.
In-laws were also more involved in raising grandkids than today. Now it's enjoy your retirement, vacation, forget the kids. Parents, forget about in-laws or grandparents, kick them to a nursing home. The attitude's changed making less help available.
Coupled w/women working, society is less about next generation and more about "now" in the moment, and me, me, me. Kids are an afterthought now and people want to live "good" lives. And there are a lot more concerns, worries, distractions today than before. How much "stuff" is too much? Simplify my life has been a great way to reduce stress and channel focus.
10
sometimes reorganizing your schedule helps, too. my husband gets our daughter to school in the morning and I pick her up. I now leave a half hour earlier so I don't have to deal with the buses which was, alone, a huge stressor and instead of picking up my daughter at the beginning of the pick up line, I pick her up at the end giving me a glorious 40 minutes in my house before leaving as I no longer have to get there a half hour early to get on the front of the line. simple changes can make a huge difference. I have a very busy hospital job but these 2 things have changed my life!
1
Cherry picking research to encourage women not to work full time (and gain all the power that goes with that) is disingenuous.
Plenty of research has been shown that working women are happier, healthier, and have more satisfying marriages than women who do not work.
And studies have been reported in this paper that shows children of working women being more successful.
Certainly things are not perfect and we need better leave for men and women, but articles like this one tell the wrong story. In fact, it is highly misleading.
Just a handful of examples:
"The researchers say the findings show the short-term stress of juggling roles is outweighed by long-term benefits." http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4765411.stm
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/kids-benefit-from-having-a-working-mom
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/02/opinion/sunday/coontz-the-triumph-of-t...
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMoodNews/busier-job-make-happier-marria...
Plenty of research has been shown that working women are happier, healthier, and have more satisfying marriages than women who do not work.
And studies have been reported in this paper that shows children of working women being more successful.
Certainly things are not perfect and we need better leave for men and women, but articles like this one tell the wrong story. In fact, it is highly misleading.
Just a handful of examples:
"The researchers say the findings show the short-term stress of juggling roles is outweighed by long-term benefits." http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4765411.stm
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/kids-benefit-from-having-a-working-mom
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/02/opinion/sunday/coontz-the-triumph-of-t...
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMoodNews/busier-job-make-happier-marria...
12
This article is simply sharing and analyzing survey results of eorjing parents. The takeaway is that families are finding it stressful to balance between work and family. There is little support and assistance the parents get and jobs are not offering much to help parents.
1
"The time men spend on paid work has decreased to 38.5 hours a week from 42 hours in 1965"
Misleading at best. The statement muffles the fact that a lot of people are salaried which means that they are working many hours without compensation.
Misleading at best. The statement muffles the fact that a lot of people are salaried which means that they are working many hours without compensation.
10
I wonder if we as consumers have become our own worst enemy. I am employed by an insurance company based in the US and find the workload is never ending. Our customers expect us to be available 24/7 to answer every last question and concern at all hours and expect instant answers. When I joined this company in 1991 most of our correspondence came in via US mail, or, on occasion, via fax and nobody expected an instant answer to their questions. Whereas most of us carry company issued iPhones to keep with us at all hours to provide immediate responses.
You want to go buy that pair of Uggs on Thanksgiving night? Sure. Expect up to the date news on your favorite website? Ok. Want to check into life insurance rates at 2am? Absolutely. But those of us on the other end of that phone/computer or cash register are paying the price for your instant gratification.
You want to go buy that pair of Uggs on Thanksgiving night? Sure. Expect up to the date news on your favorite website? Ok. Want to check into life insurance rates at 2am? Absolutely. But those of us on the other end of that phone/computer or cash register are paying the price for your instant gratification.
21
It's time for optional, flexible, 4-day/8 hour day work weeks. Lost income would be offset by reduced commuting costs, daycare costs and wardrobe costs. Businesses would benefit by fewer employee absences and a happier, more rested workforce.
And it isn't just families who are stressed; single people working 5, 10 hour days also feel very stressed trying to fit in healthcare visits, cook healthy meals, manage a household, run errands, have a social life, workout, and, maybe sleep!
One more benefit of 4-day work weeks is that businesses would need to hire more people which would help the economy.
And it isn't just families who are stressed; single people working 5, 10 hour days also feel very stressed trying to fit in healthcare visits, cook healthy meals, manage a household, run errands, have a social life, workout, and, maybe sleep!
One more benefit of 4-day work weeks is that businesses would need to hire more people which would help the economy.
11
Pew, where are the same-sex couples?
Even today, when couples marry with the desire to have an equal partnership, we still think of marriage in terms of a woman’s role and a man’s role — that’s why we tend to have “his” and “her” marriages. These are not conversations often heard in same-sex household. Same-sex couples, especially lesbians, typically have more equitable partnerships when it comes to household and parenting responsibilities, making them role models for equality-seeking hetero couples.
If gays and lesbians can do that, why can’t heteros?
Even today, when couples marry with the desire to have an equal partnership, we still think of marriage in terms of a woman’s role and a man’s role — that’s why we tend to have “his” and “her” marriages. These are not conversations often heard in same-sex household. Same-sex couples, especially lesbians, typically have more equitable partnerships when it comes to household and parenting responsibilities, making them role models for equality-seeking hetero couples.
If gays and lesbians can do that, why can’t heteros?
6
I'm looking forward to being laid off soon (my choice, they offered the job back but I'm prego and my hubby needs help with his booming side business). It seems hard for us to have quality time together, but thats a personal choice, ie when I get home from work, I make dinner, maybe get something cleaned up, feed the animals, then when he gets home an hour or two after me, he is spent and all we do is eat dinner and watch tv. If we didnt do that, I'm sure we could do a whole lot more, and with my nesting kicking in, I am getting more done. But its priorities. even if we had more time in the day, I'm certain most people would still make similar choices. As for a personal business, my hubby saved for his while working an entry level job at wally world. He quit school at 8th grade and got his GED. We now have multiple investment properties, enough for me to leave work and take care of Charisma and next, we want to get more properties so he can quit his job as well. It's doable, and I am blessed enough to have a hubby that is a stickler for researching and using his brain. All I can do is support him and be the best wife I can. As for paternity leave, I am a conservative and am all for it :)
3
This is a "social problem" that requires a centralized "societal response"?
One can also implement decentralized responses, one person at a time. And that's what's happening globally: People are having fewer kids, even in Africa.
If folks have over-extended themselves, then they might want to reconsider their private choices and make some adaptations.
One can also implement decentralized responses, one person at a time. And that's what's happening globally: People are having fewer kids, even in Africa.
If folks have over-extended themselves, then they might want to reconsider their private choices and make some adaptations.
4
When my daughter is sick, my wife sometimes needs to rearrange some of her work schedule more than me. But I will also accommodate her in some other way, getting home early to relieve her or make a special dinner. There have been a few times when I've been the one to shuffle my schedule when she can't, and the big difference has always been her need to be there. She actually has expressed a physical and emotional need to be there when my daughter is sick, and not just a 50/50 split of power. This is just one example, but also extends to the period when she chose to work part time instead of full when my daughter was young. My wife had an emotional need to be there for my young daughter over work. We're lucky our incomes could manage it, though it was hard.
While I consider myself a good father, I'll admit that I've not had that strong emotional need to work part time to raise our child. It's just different at the core. I think a lot of our habits and work balances reflect this.
While I consider myself a good father, I'll admit that I've not had that strong emotional need to work part time to raise our child. It's just different at the core. I think a lot of our habits and work balances reflect this.
4
As a father of two children, 7 and a half and four and a half year-olds, our lives have changed a lot. I work full time, though i have the advantage that i only work mornings and i leave my job at 2.30 pm. However my wife has differnt shifts at work if she worked full time. She was allowed to reduce her working hours by 60% ( also with a correponding reduction of her salary) and she works only in the morning. By the time our elder son is eleven she will have to work 1 week in the morning ( 10 am-4 pm) and two weeks in the afternoon-night (4pm-10 pm). Where we live, there are public schools for children aged 0-3. They are not totally free, because education at these ages is not compulsory, and parents pay according to their family income. The maximum is 370 euros a month ( max of kids per class is 8, ages 0, and 12 ages 2 and three, where there is a support teacher). Apart from having been very lucky in our jobs, especially my wife because she was allowed to change shifts, life at home is busy, yes, because I think we do waht we have to do. We don't have any external help from family or nannies or help at home. We do everything. We clean up, we cook, we make beds, we do the washing up, we iron,... I have the impression that we do what our parents did with the exception that mothers didn't work. Busy? Very. Stressed? Sometimes.
I think thats the price we have to pay to be with our children and take care of their upbringing
I think thats the price we have to pay to be with our children and take care of their upbringing
3
I wonder why there is no childcare availabke in the premuses if all major corporations , with access open to all other smaller businesses nearby . In short, parents shoukd have their children just steps sway. Furthermore, the corporation can be a substitute family, with afterschool activities and routine and emergency medical care. The place of work can become the communal village of old. All this beyond parental leaves. The health if bith children and parents will increase productivity and hapiness.
5
Parents, what is more important to you? Your job or your child? That is what this comes down to. I decided that my career was to bring up my children - not daycare. I wanted to see all the milestones. I didn't want to juggle my work schedule with my children. Our children need us and it usually isn't just when we are home from work. When they come home from school, they want to come home with mom or dad there so they can talk about their day or problems they had. I did not want someone else bringing up my children. They learn from example - by what they see and hear. I was determined it wasn't going to be a daycare helper. I sacrificed my career, but now that my kids are in college, I wouldn't change a thing. I can't count on how many times their friends would come over after school or how many times they needed me for support, or learning.
Again - What is more Important? When you finally retire from work, is your company going to remember you and the time you put in? "NO"! I know my kids will remember me and all I did for them.
Again - What is more Important? When you finally retire from work, is your company going to remember you and the time you put in? "NO"! I know my kids will remember me and all I did for them.
12
Well, it's really nice for you that your husband's job supported that. Not true for most Americans. But it doesn't sound like you spend much time talking with parents who don't have it exactly the same way you did.
4
Must be nice that you can financially afford to stay home. Not all couples can afford that. The median family income in America is $52,000 a year. Try living on that and get back to me.
And there are a lot of single parent families. What should they do? Go on welfare? Whoops, sorry, can't do that anymore because the federal government has cut that program to the bone AND requires you to work or go to school. So even then, those mothers can't be "stay at homes," even if they want to.
PS: Get over yourself. Just because a kid hangs out at your house for a couple of hours doesn't mean that they were "parented" by you.
And there are a lot of single parent families. What should they do? Go on welfare? Whoops, sorry, can't do that anymore because the federal government has cut that program to the bone AND requires you to work or go to school. So even then, those mothers can't be "stay at homes," even if they want to.
PS: Get over yourself. Just because a kid hangs out at your house for a couple of hours doesn't mean that they were "parented" by you.
10
Surely someone is financing you and your children. Strange that you don't challenge your spouse in that manner.
8
"If you put out the paw and insist that the rest of us owe you something, you need a better argument than "because it's mean if you don't.""
Here's the argument: If you don't pay now, you will pay later. In other words, it's better to support families when they are young then support the future delinquent who became that way because he lacked proper care early on.
Most of the developed world understands this, which is why you don't see a million nonprofit organizations in other countries like you do here, whose job it is to lift people up after they've fallen through the cracks. Over there, they make sure you don't fall through the cracks in the first place, and they understand that a stable childhood goes a long way toward this.
I think in America what's behind this "your kid your problem" theme is that people don't want to help people who look different from themselves. When people say "I don't want to pay for your kid", they are largely saying that they don't want to pay for black and Hispanic children. THOSE people.
Here's the argument: If you don't pay now, you will pay later. In other words, it's better to support families when they are young then support the future delinquent who became that way because he lacked proper care early on.
Most of the developed world understands this, which is why you don't see a million nonprofit organizations in other countries like you do here, whose job it is to lift people up after they've fallen through the cracks. Over there, they make sure you don't fall through the cracks in the first place, and they understand that a stable childhood goes a long way toward this.
I think in America what's behind this "your kid your problem" theme is that people don't want to help people who look different from themselves. When people say "I don't want to pay for your kid", they are largely saying that they don't want to pay for black and Hispanic children. THOSE people.
14
I have no problem helping children born to ignorant, indigent mothers. But that is not what this article is about. It's about demands for more wealth redistribution so that people who have better incomes, better educations, better jobs and live in more desirable areas than me (and many other taxpayers) don't have to make as many sacrifices to fulfill their personal desire for kids.
I (and many others) don't happen to think their kids will benefit us enough to make it worth additional sacrifices on our part. I already pay a disproportionately high share of my income in taxes compared to the childed, depriving me of thousands of dollars each year compared to childed at the EXACT same income level. Thousands. I don't care to give up more so that people of the same or more-advantaged demographics can get more subsidies and aren't so "stressed." There is no shortage of info on the difficulties of rearing young children and those who choose to do so must accept the consequences.
Those who don't think it's a big deal being the cash cow of the federal tax system, here's a suggestion: Even if you have children, file your next tax return as though you don't. There's no law that says you must take all those deductions and credits. See how it feels to pay more than your neighbors at the same income level. Then do it in 2017, and for the next couple of decades. And think about what you could be doing with that money if you weren't subsidizing others' choices with it.
I (and many others) don't happen to think their kids will benefit us enough to make it worth additional sacrifices on our part. I already pay a disproportionately high share of my income in taxes compared to the childed, depriving me of thousands of dollars each year compared to childed at the EXACT same income level. Thousands. I don't care to give up more so that people of the same or more-advantaged demographics can get more subsidies and aren't so "stressed." There is no shortage of info on the difficulties of rearing young children and those who choose to do so must accept the consequences.
Those who don't think it's a big deal being the cash cow of the federal tax system, here's a suggestion: Even if you have children, file your next tax return as though you don't. There's no law that says you must take all those deductions and credits. See how it feels to pay more than your neighbors at the same income level. Then do it in 2017, and for the next couple of decades. And think about what you could be doing with that money if you weren't subsidizing others' choices with it.
6
Bohemienne, since you feel like the "cash cow of the federal government", and since you talk about how people should take responsibility for their so-called lifestyle choices, here's an idea: Why not move to a tax shelter country? You don't want to pay "disproportionately", go to the Caymen Islands or something. And I'm not saying this to be rude, as I actually know a few Americans living in the Bahamas precisely to avoid taxes. Maybe we parents, in return, would prefer not to have our children, whom you and your ilk despise so much, have to support you in your old age. Which, unless you plan to expire prior to taking social security, you know they will.
3
I'll give up the Child Tax Credit when you give up your Social Security.
3
Do the math:
Cable is $100.00. That is $1200/yr net. So you need to earn about $1800 gross to cover it.
Driving a car is $0.60/mile no matter what you drive. That is about $0.90/mile pre-tax.
Add on lattes, lunches and dinners out, cell phones, internet, tolls, tattoos, vices, HBO, etc and you have about $50,000/yr of fat.
If you want to have a nice house and kids who know you then you may have to make sacrifices.
Cable is $100.00. That is $1200/yr net. So you need to earn about $1800 gross to cover it.
Driving a car is $0.60/mile no matter what you drive. That is about $0.90/mile pre-tax.
Add on lattes, lunches and dinners out, cell phones, internet, tolls, tattoos, vices, HBO, etc and you have about $50,000/yr of fat.
If you want to have a nice house and kids who know you then you may have to make sacrifices.
11
A car is a luxury? Ever try to ride a bus and get to work -- on time?
A cell phone is much less expensive than a land-line these days. So, someone with a cell phone is a smart consumer.
Lunches and dinners out tend to be fast food. Not fine dining. And if you think cooking is easy and non-time consuming, I bet you've got a wife cooking for you.
A cell phone is much less expensive than a land-line these days. So, someone with a cell phone is a smart consumer.
Lunches and dinners out tend to be fast food. Not fine dining. And if you think cooking is easy and non-time consuming, I bet you've got a wife cooking for you.
15
Thank you!! Don't forget over-buying of homes that are unneeded, that you need to fill with more stuff, pay more to heat and cool, along with the higher mortgage.
2
To get your kids into a good public school district, you'll have to cough up bucks to buy a house in that good district. It won't be a house that you can afford on a single paycheck in most cities and suburbs. Those small affordable houses are in crappy school districts.
5
Quit complaining! It's your jobs to work long, highly productive hours so that your corporate overlord can have his Gulfstream to fly to Davos, his helicopter to fly to the Hamptons for the weekend, his villa while he's there partying with his friends, and a yacht to really get away from it all when things get too hectic. His creativity, his hard work, his brilliance -- and most of all, his humility -- are the only reason you have a job. Be grateful. Stop your whining. Your children will have no problem finding a job at McDonald's.
40
You forgot, "so he/she can donate money to his/her politician to do his/her bidding."
4
Unplug and unwind. Sad to see parents out with their children and looking at their phones, not the beautiful faces looking to them. Get off the internet, there is nothing more fascinating than your children.
14
Either you are retired or one of the idle rich because you apparently aren't working in the CURRENT workforce.
Because most workers are now expected to be available to their employer 24/7, many of those people are looking at their phones because they know their boss may be texting/emailing them and asking them a question or asking them if they can work (with little notice). And if you don't answer? You are out of job, real quick.
You can't "unwind" anymore because you can't "unplug."
Because most workers are now expected to be available to their employer 24/7, many of those people are looking at their phones because they know their boss may be texting/emailing them and asking them a question or asking them if they can work (with little notice). And if you don't answer? You are out of job, real quick.
You can't "unwind" anymore because you can't "unplug."
4
It's worse. When you do have the time you feel so guilty and restless you invent things to do.
2
I remember my mom staying home and raising us kids. Not anymore. Inflation and increased taxes forced both spouses to work just to survive. The government loves it, huge jump in taxpayers .
7
The workers have to pay for those that choose to live off of the labor of others
1
Sorry, but you're simply wrong. Take a look, for example, at this report:
https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/113th-congress-2013-2014/reports...
Almost all Americans are paying a smaller share of their income in federal taxes than at any time since 1979. As a society we're growing less willing to pay for things our parents and grandparents were happy to pay for, such as education, and we're also less willing to pay for things needed by new social realities, such as help for kids in families like those described here. We're not an overtaxed society; we're a stingy one, and the weight of that stinginess falls most heavily on the young.
https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/113th-congress-2013-2014/reports...
Almost all Americans are paying a smaller share of their income in federal taxes than at any time since 1979. As a society we're growing less willing to pay for things our parents and grandparents were happy to pay for, such as education, and we're also less willing to pay for things needed by new social realities, such as help for kids in families like those described here. We're not an overtaxed society; we're a stingy one, and the weight of that stinginess falls most heavily on the young.
6
A little more time off, a realistic cost of living adjustment, paid maternity/paternity leave, access to affordable and convenient health care, childcare...any or all of these would make for a less stressed, tired and rushed modern family.
Sadly, any or all of these are not on the agenda for the large majority of legislatures even though they ARE the reality of the majority of Americans.
Wake up Washington
Sadly, any or all of these are not on the agenda for the large majority of legislatures even though they ARE the reality of the majority of Americans.
Wake up Washington
14
How about things like living in a smaller house, waiting a little longer and saving up before having a child, eating out less, not having cable TV (providing more quality time with loved ones), etc.?
There are a lot of people that do not have and will not have children and they are the ones that pick of the slack and pay the price for their coworkers with children.
There are a lot of people that do not have and will not have children and they are the ones that pick of the slack and pay the price for their coworkers with children.
7
Who will pay for their Social Security?
The Pew Research Center survey in question demonstrates that in two-parent families more than half did NOT have 2 full-time working parents. So for now, it appears that the vote is in on where parents decide to spend their time.
Though income is greater when both parents are working full time, it appears we all have the same 24 hour day. If you expect to have the same lifestyle after as before your childless self, and this is not the case, then there may be some unhappiness, some stress. Raising children is a job. Maintaining a home is a job. Your personal standards on how that job is done also is a factor in the equation. Satisfaction levels are the result of how outcomes meet expectations.
There are many comments from readers sharing how they raised or are raising their children. Local communities have different resources. Ask around, get help. We did. We always lived within our means. But our children are priceless.
Though income is greater when both parents are working full time, it appears we all have the same 24 hour day. If you expect to have the same lifestyle after as before your childless self, and this is not the case, then there may be some unhappiness, some stress. Raising children is a job. Maintaining a home is a job. Your personal standards on how that job is done also is a factor in the equation. Satisfaction levels are the result of how outcomes meet expectations.
There are many comments from readers sharing how they raised or are raising their children. Local communities have different resources. Ask around, get help. We did. We always lived within our means. But our children are priceless.
2
Simple fact- people use their kids as a way to rationalize buying a nicer home or car they may not be able to afford. We have to keep up with the other parents on the sports teams and showoff our granite counter tops on our Facebook posts. We live in a very materialistic society and these days kids are a ticket to live out of your means - I see it all the time
5
who lives like this? The competition thing is just weird.
1
I am perplexed by comments that keep rattling off it’s about choices, it’s your choice to have kids, etc. Who said it wasn’t, of course it’s my choice. But why should government get involved, why should society care about family leave, flexible schedules, parental stress, the difficulty I am having juggling full time work, trying to pay for after school care, trying to raise my kid right? Because I am raising a future citizen. The future citizen that will pay taxes to care for your aged self and keep this country going. And the sacrifice in money, time, energy, effort, stress that I am making to do that, although it has tons of personal joys and rewards, concerns society at large. It is in EVERYONE’s interest that families are supported so as to be able to give their kids the best possible upbringing. Children are the future citizenry of our country, hello!
13
We can import better-quality citizens full-grown and at lower cost, to infinity. No need to subsidize the production of home-grown ones.
4
I think the key words here are "best possible upbringing." That sounds like an impossible - and expensive - standard. Few of us had "the best possible upbringing," yet here we are, managing to function. How about a "good enough upbringing?" The compromises, unmet wants, imperfect efforts - that's life, generally. It's not usually "the best possible" anything.
3
"Stressed, Tired, Rushed"
Ah yes, life on Uncle Sam's Plantation! Tote that bale!
Ah yes, life on Uncle Sam's Plantation! Tote that bale!
3
having children is like voluntarily having an anchor chained to your leg
th vast majority of those whom i know did not have that terrific a set of genes worthy of carrying on into th future - no beethovens, darwins or van goghs, certainly
if youre driven to take care of something and spend big chunks of your income doing it, adopt a kid
if you want to keep your money and sanity and have a companion worthy of kings and philosophers, buy a labrador retriever
th vast majority of those whom i know did not have that terrific a set of genes worthy of carrying on into th future - no beethovens, darwins or van goghs, certainly
if youre driven to take care of something and spend big chunks of your income doing it, adopt a kid
if you want to keep your money and sanity and have a companion worthy of kings and philosophers, buy a labrador retriever
6
Look at the conditions the migrants into Europe are facing right now: homeless, hungry, embarrassed, and just downright in a hard place. How happy would these migrants be, particularly the parents, to have a simple one room shack to call their own, to be able to just hang out with their kids in a safe, stable environment? Then why can't we Americans - especially the uppity ones amongst us (and we know who we are) - just be satisfied with a similar kind of frugal existence, one that allows us to happily indulge hanging out with our kids as much as possible? Probably because there is too much pressure to live a high society life, to be in the right zip code, to drive the right cars, to send our kids to the right colleges, etc. We all feel that pressure. But then what is it all worth if in our striving we sacrifice our happiness, and the short change the raising of our kids? As a final point, everybody knows a rich kid, or two or three, who grew up to be a total derelict. So why chase the money game, why not just stay home, sacrifice income, but make up for it with a happier family?
2
I never felt peer pressure regarding stuff. never. I don't care.
3
Work ten times as hard as you whine and everything will be all right.
4
There's some irony embedded in the process by which a few couples started the two-income thing years ago and were able to afford a better life...then lots of others did it...which increased incomes...which meant rents and house prices could go up...which meant more couples NEEDED two incomes to meet rent/mortgage...which meant...etc. Perhaps rents/mortgages would have stayed more reasonable if the norm became more the equal #s of stay-at-home moms vs. dads rather than the norm becoming dual-income households. Wonder what an economist might know (or learn) about this.
Also...Claire, is there any information on how all of this is affected by the tendency for folks to move further from grandparents/help? We just had a set of grandparents retire and move 2000 miles to live near their grandkids (our kids) and it has been an incredible gift in terms of our sanity.
I'm curious about how parental stress levels vary by proximity to extended family in an increasingly mobile society, especially with some commenters taking the tack that parents should move to cheaper areas, which may be away from family and in many cases require taking lower-paying or otherwise less-desirable jobs. Does such a move pay off in most cases, or do the downsides outweigh the benefits?
Also...Claire, is there any information on how all of this is affected by the tendency for folks to move further from grandparents/help? We just had a set of grandparents retire and move 2000 miles to live near their grandkids (our kids) and it has been an incredible gift in terms of our sanity.
I'm curious about how parental stress levels vary by proximity to extended family in an increasingly mobile society, especially with some commenters taking the tack that parents should move to cheaper areas, which may be away from family and in many cases require taking lower-paying or otherwise less-desirable jobs. Does such a move pay off in most cases, or do the downsides outweigh the benefits?
2
My husband and I have two kids and busy careers but we also live near both sets of grandparents in New Jersey. While they don't help us with day-to-day activities (they work, too!), they give us many weekends to relax without the kids. But even more so, they give my kids the gift of their love. I would never move to a cheaper area because the gain and support from my family means more to me than an easier lifestyle. Also, I admit there is no way I could do what I do without their help.
1
Oh wahhh. Nobody is perfect. If you have kid's your going to have stress, all the time, for life. Be grateful if they are healthy. The house doesn't clean itself, the baby doesn't change itself, the food doesn't cook itself. Just be happy if anyone picks up after themselves. There is no such person who can maintain a home, raise children to be perfect, do well at a busy job, and have a perfect marriage. If someone says they can do it all, they are lying. Too many thing's go wrong on a daily basis. When it's your last day on this earth, you won't be worrying if the roast is too dry, or the wine glasses have water spots, or even if your daughter got a tattoo on her butt. Don't sweat the small stuff. Life is too short and go's by way too fast.
5
There are moments in life that come out of nowhere and jerk you to consciousness. They are generally personal, but often can be shared, for they are universal in their impact.
One of those moments occurred for me 30 years ago. My first son was 2, my marriage stressed, and--of course--I was tired and broke. A friend visited. His son was a few years older than mine, his marriage a mess. He said, "Some day people will look back at this time period and wonder why we put up with this insane life style" (60 hour work weeks, child care fears and concerns, and marriages that can't handle the pressure). He continued, "This can't go on."
That truth drenched me like a fire hose full open. But, really, I was stuck. There wasn't much I could do. The realization wasn't particularly helpful. The problem was so wide spread that running to the next town or job or wife wasn't the answer.
I did divorce, retired over ten years ago, and moved to a small town, where I am happy. Most importantly, my son is sane, has found a wonderful woman, and likes his work. So, this could be scripted as a success story.
But, I am positive my friend was spot on correct: This life style (American, modern, call it what you want) can't continue. Test driven public schools, SAT driven Universities, and the illusion that upward mobility is for the masses will only collapse culture. Tim Leary didn't have the solution, but he recognized the disease. It is a giant disease...and needs a giant solution
One of those moments occurred for me 30 years ago. My first son was 2, my marriage stressed, and--of course--I was tired and broke. A friend visited. His son was a few years older than mine, his marriage a mess. He said, "Some day people will look back at this time period and wonder why we put up with this insane life style" (60 hour work weeks, child care fears and concerns, and marriages that can't handle the pressure). He continued, "This can't go on."
That truth drenched me like a fire hose full open. But, really, I was stuck. There wasn't much I could do. The realization wasn't particularly helpful. The problem was so wide spread that running to the next town or job or wife wasn't the answer.
I did divorce, retired over ten years ago, and moved to a small town, where I am happy. Most importantly, my son is sane, has found a wonderful woman, and likes his work. So, this could be scripted as a success story.
But, I am positive my friend was spot on correct: This life style (American, modern, call it what you want) can't continue. Test driven public schools, SAT driven Universities, and the illusion that upward mobility is for the masses will only collapse culture. Tim Leary didn't have the solution, but he recognized the disease. It is a giant disease...and needs a giant solution
12
It seems to me that the real problem here is not having kids as many commenters are suggesting. The problem is conflicting priorities resulting in spinning too many plates at once and praying they won't come crashing down. I believe it is the opposite of balanced to have a full-time demanding career, a great marriage, and plenty of time with your kids, no matter how many people say that it's possible. We're only human. If you want children, prioritize your children, and expect to have career second and adjust your lifestyle expectations. Children don't care how many toys they have or what kind of house they live in. They care about loving parental attention in a non-stressful atmosphere. While paid family leave is a must and we should certainly have it, after-school child care would just make it worse - that's even *less* time with the parents.
5
Surely there is some correlation between our collective expectations of our happiness, appearance, careers, children, houses, cars. etc. that have spun out of control in the last few decades and the fact that everyone feels so stressed, and ultimately dissatisfied and unhappy?
We are first generation immigrants. Both of my parents worked, and my older sister and I were latch key kids, but we didn't see this as an exception, just a normal fact of life where both parents had to work to make ends meet. We did housework after school in addition to homework. My parents never came to a school play, swim meet, or school open houses. They were too busy working. Do I wish it were different? Sure. But I am grateful for the sacrifices they made daily, and I find gratitude is the key to happiness. May we all stop and consider what is truly important and necessary in life.
We are first generation immigrants. Both of my parents worked, and my older sister and I were latch key kids, but we didn't see this as an exception, just a normal fact of life where both parents had to work to make ends meet. We did housework after school in addition to homework. My parents never came to a school play, swim meet, or school open houses. They were too busy working. Do I wish it were different? Sure. But I am grateful for the sacrifices they made daily, and I find gratitude is the key to happiness. May we all stop and consider what is truly important and necessary in life.
6
Calm down people - the government is here to help.
I'm going to do this bullet point style:
* Paid family leave is not the only issue. Both my husband and I had generous paid leave for our two daughters. Then what?
* It's not just about better childcare. Parents WANT to spend more time with their children. My husband and I have a good childcare situation but I don't want childcare raising my kids - we want to raise our own kids.
* Yes, many of us make enough for one spouse to stay home, theoretically. But what happens when the working spouse loses their job? My husband is the primary "Breadwinner", but he also has a cancer that he has been waging an on and off war with for the past 10 years that may or may not kill him. Or he could get hit by a bus. Then what? We forget that back in the good old days, widows and orphans often starved.
One solution: more opportunities for part time professional work, and respected boundaries between work and home.
* Paid family leave is not the only issue. Both my husband and I had generous paid leave for our two daughters. Then what?
* It's not just about better childcare. Parents WANT to spend more time with their children. My husband and I have a good childcare situation but I don't want childcare raising my kids - we want to raise our own kids.
* Yes, many of us make enough for one spouse to stay home, theoretically. But what happens when the working spouse loses their job? My husband is the primary "Breadwinner", but he also has a cancer that he has been waging an on and off war with for the past 10 years that may or may not kill him. Or he could get hit by a bus. Then what? We forget that back in the good old days, widows and orphans often starved.
One solution: more opportunities for part time professional work, and respected boundaries between work and home.
20
I hate reading the judgmental comments. So many people with so many solutions. "Don't have kids." "Move away." I'm not sure what the answer is, but my friends without kids don't seem to be any more happier or carefree. The bad part of struggling with work and kids is outlined here because the families are who help build long-term, stable communities so that those who are so much more evolved to not have kids can enjoy those stable communities! There is so much reward in raising a family and participating in your community. I made the decision to do that late in life and I have no regrets and fully understand that my husband and I chose this. But, I based the decision (good and bad) on my own upbringing where my parents experienced less pressure overall. They loved me and clothed me and we had fun, but they weren't caught up in every aspect of my life. I was expected to do my best and accept my consequences. In today's world, parents are supposed to provide quality time with kids, monitor their social and academic lives and groom them for wealth and prosperity. I grew up with extended family to help. I don't have that. The family I do have are elderly so I'm helping them both physically and financially. And every single time you sign you kid up for anything, including Sunday school, there are a ton of people asking you to volunteer! My mother signed me up for stuff and dropped me off. We just don't have that extended village in our existence because everyone is stretched thin.
19
What claptrap.
Stable communities. An elderly woman on my block lived alone well into her 90s. Guess who changed her cat litter, brought her groceries and drove her to the town concerts? Her nearby adult children? Her adult grand daughter? Why no, it was good old selfish childfree me. Who also spent as many as six hours with her in ER (three times) when her son wouldn't answer his cell phone, and mowed her lawn for years & got the telemarketers to stop calling her & shooed away the predatory door-to-door solicitors.
Guess who raked her leaves and shoveled her snow. The stable childed people in the neighborhood? Why, no, oddly the people from three childfree houses on the block took care of all that, as well as taking out her trash and recycling and otherwise helping with the heavy lifting. The only time the childed families bothered with her was when their kids were selling overpriced fundraising junk for scouts or sports or band.
Guess who is available to drive one another to the auto repair shop or collect mail for traveling neighbors or other aid? Who voted yesterday? Who drives fuel-sippers and who drives gas guzzlers? The only people who fill their giant trash bins each week are the childed -- while four childfree households (8 eight adults) share ONE of those trash bins. And gee, the same 8 people volunteer at the arts council, the women's shelter, take urban kids out to farms & drive poor pple to polls.
Who exactly is "participating" in our community?
Stable communities. An elderly woman on my block lived alone well into her 90s. Guess who changed her cat litter, brought her groceries and drove her to the town concerts? Her nearby adult children? Her adult grand daughter? Why no, it was good old selfish childfree me. Who also spent as many as six hours with her in ER (three times) when her son wouldn't answer his cell phone, and mowed her lawn for years & got the telemarketers to stop calling her & shooed away the predatory door-to-door solicitors.
Guess who raked her leaves and shoveled her snow. The stable childed people in the neighborhood? Why, no, oddly the people from three childfree houses on the block took care of all that, as well as taking out her trash and recycling and otherwise helping with the heavy lifting. The only time the childed families bothered with her was when their kids were selling overpriced fundraising junk for scouts or sports or band.
Guess who is available to drive one another to the auto repair shop or collect mail for traveling neighbors or other aid? Who voted yesterday? Who drives fuel-sippers and who drives gas guzzlers? The only people who fill their giant trash bins each week are the childed -- while four childfree households (8 eight adults) share ONE of those trash bins. And gee, the same 8 people volunteer at the arts council, the women's shelter, take urban kids out to farms & drive poor pple to polls.
Who exactly is "participating" in our community?
12
In the old days, that was called "being a good neighbor."
3
The real estate market and classism/racism is the elephant in the room here. Once people achieve a certain level, they want to live around others on their level, their kids to date others on that level, and their kids to go to school with others on that level. If the parents grew up in a rural area that maybe a little more easy to achieve because you have less dual income, dual college educated families to keep up with. If you grew up in an urban or suburban setting you are constantly surrounded by messages pushing materialism and asking you how could you put a price on your childs security and development? That's why you need that Audi SUV, and the $500,000 house on the cul de sac, your kid to play travel sports because that will keep your kids away from the questionable ones (or so you think) and those hater chicks at your work eating their hearts out when they see your granite counter tops on Facebook . So basically we use our kids to rationalize a life we cant afford
7
Raising the minimum wage would go a long way in decreasing stress for people who fall way below these families incomes. What about health care aides? restaurant workers ? retail workers? There are families in lower middle class families living hand to mouth,week to week even though both work. Worrying about housing, food,education etc. is common to all classes of families. But the stress probably rises with less money coming in.
4
Minimum wage has absolutely nothing to do with this. It's a flawed argument. Any additional monies will not improve anyone's like. It might make them buy more low hanging fruit (i.e TV's, etc), but overall, these people will not experience a better quality of life. There is still the big three: housing, healthcare and education. Housing is probably the only sound investment. Food is cheap these days. It's scary when you go into Whole Foods and stuff is cheaper there then the local grocery store. General products are very inexperience. Sure, mass market consumerism is socially unhealthy, but what's suffocating people is health insurance, health insurance, health insurance and health insurance. We should condemn all health insurance companies effectively immediately. Stand in front of every single for profit hospital with pitch forks. That's our problem, folks.
2
I think what a lot of people fail to consider is the people who don't care about living off of the government programs to raise their children. The have 2,3,4 children when they couldn't afford 1. Then those kids do the same and so on. Next thing you know, there is a large population accustomed to living off of government aid. Now you take a college educated couple desperately trying to save and balance work and life in order to be able to have 1 kid who doesn't have to go into 100,000's of thousands of dollars in debt to get a decent education; or decent secondary education in which private school is necessary. Point being, it's almost impossible without large amounts of debt and/or government aid. The world is in need of talented and educated youth to continue carrying the torch. What we don't need is a surplus of free loathers looking for hand outs. The system needs to be adjusted to help the educated raise families with out giving up time to raise their own kids(as suppose to the system/day care), going into debt, forcing their kids into debt or welfare. If not, I fear of being plagued with a future of an ever expanding population of an uneducated welfare class. I'm tired of hearing educated couples saying it's illogical, irrational and uneconomical to have babies.
9
We have to stop beating the drum of possible freeloaders when in reality corporations and our military industrial complex receive the lion's share of handouts (well beyond any social programs).
12
It's more geared towards the future population as supposed to where money goes and who pays for it. However, with your comment, that semi proves my point even more. Not only does tax payers money go to paying government officials who give handouts to their corporate acquaintances it also goes to subsidizing people who live/populate irresponsibly and allow society to pay for it. Then, not only does your taxes go towards this that and the other, you end up paying 2,100 in rent when the person across the hall gets government aid with their 6 kids and pays nothing or 400 a month. Further, with the population not getting any smarter, how will people vote in politicians with campaigns geared towards our own economic crisis, better education and working on decreasing a massive national debt when they don't even know what economics is? People who easily believe we are all in danger and we should all hide in our houses do to terrorists and people of opposite race trying to bring harm to us? I think there are things we can control and things that we can not. I personally think society as a whole taking care of their own and making it easier for everyone else to make a family is more likely then changing greed and the 1%ers thought process on how trickle down economics actually works...
You can’t help but feel for the little boy in the picture. He’s picking up on his parents’ stress, and may likely suffer some consequences because of it.
They really should try to take the tension down several rungs. For example, why is it necessary for both parents to be in the kitchen at the same time… and with the child??
Why doesn’t one play with the kid in the living room, while the other cooks a simple, but nutritious meal?
Make plenty so that there are leftovers for lunch, and maybe also for another night’s dinner.
Relax.
They really should try to take the tension down several rungs. For example, why is it necessary for both parents to be in the kitchen at the same time… and with the child??
Why doesn’t one play with the kid in the living room, while the other cooks a simple, but nutritious meal?
Make plenty so that there are leftovers for lunch, and maybe also for another night’s dinner.
Relax.
7
Where's the "dislike" button?
7
Yes, clearly, spending time together is the crux of the problem.
2
I see lots of preachy comments about how well the commenter handled things and how these stressed, tired, rushed parents just want too many things or want to have it all. Just settle for less, the commenters preach.
Reminds me of an article I read in my 20s about reducing stress by living more simply. The author self-righteously described how he had been able to simplify his life by working part time and discovered he could get along on half his former salary if he just lived frugally.
Then he revealed his current "reduced" salary, which was nearly twice what I was making working full-time.
A lot of things are easier when you have plenty of money.
Reminds me of an article I read in my 20s about reducing stress by living more simply. The author self-righteously described how he had been able to simplify his life by working part time and discovered he could get along on half his former salary if he just lived frugally.
Then he revealed his current "reduced" salary, which was nearly twice what I was making working full-time.
A lot of things are easier when you have plenty of money.
56
This is how Corporate America want things to be. There isn't any respect for family life these days. As a single, working parent, I have been up close and personal these last 30 years or so. I would think that things might have changed, in that last 30 years, sadly things have not. You cannot even think of retiring any more. Most of my friends that are 68 and 70 are plowing through, very scared that they will be laid off. NO ONE I know lives very extravagantly. We should not have to not or put off having children because we are being worked to death. Come on people! How d you think you got here??!!
8
What a horrible lifestyle, Glad my Gen X Brain told me to never have kids, and meet a woman who did not want to have kids. We now have freedom, we are child FREE, not stressed, not tired, and not rushed.
Sorry but in today's world, having a child means inviting the government into your life while making you run around in circles. No thanks
Sorry but in today's world, having a child means inviting the government into your life while making you run around in circles. No thanks
6
It is hard for me to imagine that family leave or after-school child care will wipe away the stress of a working family. Paid leave might help when you first have a baby. What about those five years before that baby starts school? What should the government do then? We already expect the government to babysit our kids for twelve years - and teach them something once in a while.
What about the teen years? Aren't those important as well? Yet, all too often, I see kids going home alone, or hanging out in the backyard smoking....in our ghost-town neighborhoods.
My husband and I made the decision to live well beneath our means when we were first married. When my first child was born, I retired. (Self-selected myself out of an engineering job I didn't love.) We are raising four kids, now 16 to 23. The decision to quit my job wasn't difficult because we planned for it. We don't have a big house, but we now own it. We didn't take elaborate vacations or go out to dinner, but we had plenty of family fun. Mostly, however, we had a managed family, which meant less stress for everyone. We could enjoy meals together, where some of the best teaching of the day took place. We could also manage homework, activities, etc.
Limiting spending, saving, and budgeting enabled us to send our kids to private schools and pay for their college educations. No loans.
What about the teen years? Aren't those important as well? Yet, all too often, I see kids going home alone, or hanging out in the backyard smoking....in our ghost-town neighborhoods.
My husband and I made the decision to live well beneath our means when we were first married. When my first child was born, I retired. (Self-selected myself out of an engineering job I didn't love.) We are raising four kids, now 16 to 23. The decision to quit my job wasn't difficult because we planned for it. We don't have a big house, but we now own it. We didn't take elaborate vacations or go out to dinner, but we had plenty of family fun. Mostly, however, we had a managed family, which meant less stress for everyone. We could enjoy meals together, where some of the best teaching of the day took place. We could also manage homework, activities, etc.
Limiting spending, saving, and budgeting enabled us to send our kids to private schools and pay for their college educations. No loans.
11
Was your income at, below, or above the median for a family? Even if you got a house for free or were given free rent, I'm guessing it took above the median income just in expenditures to live like you did.
7
Absolutely yes.
Life is too short, to have regrets about missing your children's childhoods.
If you know you are doing a grave disservice to family life living the lifestyle you do, have the guts and the courage to look at things straight up and CHANGE the lifestyle. Find a new job, downsize, stop spending so much, and get off the hamster wheel. If your child isn't worth it what is? We also decided early on to live on a single income and sometimes that income started out below poverty level. Don't tell me you can't do it-we did it. It took sacrifice and hard work, but I knew exactly who was wiping my child's bottom, feeding them, comforting them, and putting them to bed.
I see WAY too many stressed out young parents trying to live this ridiculous lifestyle of splitting careers and splitting childcare and making sure it's all equal. And I'll tell you who I see coming up short-the kids who get shuffled here, there and everywhere, not knowing whether they are coming or going, all for selfish parents.
Life is too short, to have regrets about missing your children's childhoods.
If you know you are doing a grave disservice to family life living the lifestyle you do, have the guts and the courage to look at things straight up and CHANGE the lifestyle. Find a new job, downsize, stop spending so much, and get off the hamster wheel. If your child isn't worth it what is? We also decided early on to live on a single income and sometimes that income started out below poverty level. Don't tell me you can't do it-we did it. It took sacrifice and hard work, but I knew exactly who was wiping my child's bottom, feeding them, comforting them, and putting them to bed.
I see WAY too many stressed out young parents trying to live this ridiculous lifestyle of splitting careers and splitting childcare and making sure it's all equal. And I'll tell you who I see coming up short-the kids who get shuffled here, there and everywhere, not knowing whether they are coming or going, all for selfish parents.
2
I don't know what the median income was 27 years ago when we first married. I would guess we were at or slightly above the median. We both had good jobs prior to marriage. I lived at home, while my husband had an apartment. We had enough saved for a downpayment on a home. WE determined what we thought we could afford - not what the realtor told us we could afford. We refinanced twice over the years and also paid a little extra toward our mortgage each month. We also started investing in mutual funds regularly, which is what we used to pay for our kids' schooling. I think the job market right now is terrible and that it is not easy to find jobs, let alone good paying jobs. Our health insurance has gone up $2000 in the past three years plus we have a $6000 deductible. So that is $2000 we removed from our discretionary budget.
2
Life is about decisions. Some excel at making good ones, and others do not.
Why do people have children if they can't spend time with them and often can't even financially support them? I have no patience with self-centered single women who produce children that will live in or near poverty.
Why do people have children if they can't spend time with them and often can't even financially support them? I have no patience with self-centered single women who produce children that will live in or near poverty.
8
Clearly a problem restricted to the more affluent. Working two jobs to pay for your kid's participation in the Sports Industrial Complex year-round every weekend; a family cell phone plan; a car for every driver who is old enough for a license; an oversized home with media for everyone; and at least one vacation per year involving air travel.
Sure, worker wages have stagnated - but our expectations of what life should include has accelerated. And in the meantime, an increasingly larger group of Americans are impacted by food insecurity.
I have no idea how to fix this, but something is seriously wrong here.
Sure, worker wages have stagnated - but our expectations of what life should include has accelerated. And in the meantime, an increasingly larger group of Americans are impacted by food insecurity.
I have no idea how to fix this, but something is seriously wrong here.
14
I didn't read about any of those things in the article. Am I missing something? We are a dual income family above the median. We have tracfones and rent and an old car. Vacations to tent camping in driving range. No cable. The kids do play sports though. Yes the top 10% have more but most people don't have what you describe.
3
No one forced any of these parents to have kids.
13
No, but they are America in 10 years, so would it kill us to support them in their quest for adulthood? They will fly your planes, operate on your heart and maybe start the company you will work for. Or they will be in prison or in the county hospital on your dime.
5
I feel for these families. They are not greedy whiners, they are trying to build a middle-class, American family life. There is now a disconnect between what middle-class life in America is supposed to be and what it can be. Owning a home or even renting a family-sized apartment, feeding and clothing yourselves and your children, and providing child care just can't be done in most middle-to-upper middle economic areas with one income unless that parent is earning well into six figures annually.
And throw in saving for college--some state schools now cost almost as much as private ones.
The price of the imagined middle-class lifestyle is time--time to enjoy your family, time to reflect, time to grow in your work. The only way to get more time is to live more simply. It may not be the traditional middle class life, but it's a life.
And throw in saving for college--some state schools now cost almost as much as private ones.
The price of the imagined middle-class lifestyle is time--time to enjoy your family, time to reflect, time to grow in your work. The only way to get more time is to live more simply. It may not be the traditional middle class life, but it's a life.
9
Kids are gifts from the Heavens...you must treat them as such
5
No, kids are not a gift anymore, kids are a burden, and it essentially is an 18 year sentence. In the days of "seen and not heard" kids were a blessing, now its run your kid and yourself around in circles while you never seem to get ahead financially because of bills shooting higher every day.
8
I have to say I don't feel that way at all.
1
Again the tired old saw of encouraging the government to protect all of our collective selves from our feelings (whatever they are). No one seems to research the fact that as the government takes over the role of "parent" to the various invented factions, such as "harrassed" families, ("harrassed" being an individual choice. Move to a rural area, live simply on one salary. Eliminating harassment is easily accomplished.) This entire family of "research" is designed to spend federal research funds in expanding the hold of government over "We the People" and creating harassment to conquer.
Http://www.periodictablet.com
Http://www.periodictablet.com
4
So many commenters here expressing the need to have someone else take care of their needs.
12
Yet another reason to think twice (or 10X) before having kids.
13
Ah yes, it was so much better in those olden days .... Disinterested parents ; undiagnosed pathologies ; spankings and beatings ; father knows best ; homophobia and racism ; children seen not heard ; feminine mystique. Parents are stressed today but there is no way you can deny the quality of parenting and of parent child relationships is overall better.
25
100% right!! Trust me I grew up in the 50's
2
It actually WAS better, because none of those perceived liberal talking points were true. Parents were not helicoptering over their kids 247 in kindergarten hoping they end up in Yale and then stressing about how to pay for it.
4
Not everyone grew up in a miserable family. My mother stayed home, we weren't abused. Dad had every Th off and off we went on some adventure. I too stayed home with my children and am proud i did. My own daughters (college educated) are stay at home Moms. They said they value what I did for them. I have one son in which both are working and this article describes their lives to a T.
2
marriage and child rearing are stressful. period. you should not expect to get 8 hours of sleep with an infant or a toddler while working full time. in addition, you should not expect to maintain a clean house with an infant or a toddler and while working full time. if you expect something else, then you should not get married and have kids or you should not work full time.
meanwhile in former syria, many are wondering if they will live to the end of the day.
meanwhile in former syria, many are wondering if they will live to the end of the day.
239
Really helpful, thank you. Great comment, really taught me something.
1
If this were an article about families in China, all the comments would be about overpopulation, climate change, the dying earth. "American family life" can be improved by more Americans doing what we like to tell developing nations to do: have less or no children.
1
Please use capitalization at beginning of sentences. It makes sentences easier for your readers to read.
1
If I could do it over, I wouldn't spend a minute at either of my kids' sports practices, then only attend about 10% of the games, then the playoffs. That time I should have spent with my wife with both kids out of the house.
Spending that practice and game time with the kids was not "quality" time. It was just waiting around for them to finish. Both kids were great little athletes, but what I could have done with the spare time . . . .
Spending that practice and game time with the kids was not "quality" time. It was just waiting around for them to finish. Both kids were great little athletes, but what I could have done with the spare time . . . .
17
Funny to read the comments about NYC and the surrounding areas being so expensive and causing financial stress trying to just survive there. How about moving somewhere more affordable? Pick any place in the US and it will likely be a lot cheaper.
I have lived in San Diego, Princeton, NJ and Chicago and I can tell you that my life in suburban St. Louis is so much easier than those places. It's just so much cheaper, people are way nicer and frankly, I might lose out on some cultural riches, but...I can afford to travel all over the world because I'm not spending all of money on a mortgages and overpriced everything.
Sorry, just my two cents. Seriously, consider moving anywhere and your life will be so much easier and better.
I have lived in San Diego, Princeton, NJ and Chicago and I can tell you that my life in suburban St. Louis is so much easier than those places. It's just so much cheaper, people are way nicer and frankly, I might lose out on some cultural riches, but...I can afford to travel all over the world because I'm not spending all of money on a mortgages and overpriced everything.
Sorry, just my two cents. Seriously, consider moving anywhere and your life will be so much easier and better.
12
Moving from NYC does not necessarily mean that the labor market or CPI is any different. Wages are much less in suburbia and the cost of consumer goods is still outweighing the avg salary. Just my two cents.
5
One big change in all this is men who give up their careers for their wives and children. The generalizations about women always doing more gets in the way of seeing that some men are in the position women were in years ago. We move for our wives, we sacrifice our careers for them, and when the kids come along we spend more time with them than our wives do. We also do more of the house work. I know stories are all based on generalizations, but it isn't like that for everyone. And lots of women and men still look down on fathers with less than stellar careers who sacrifice for their wives and children.
5
"The survey also found that white parents were more than 10 percentage points more likely to express stress than nonwhite parents."
Maybe white parents should not aim to micromanage their children's play time. Let up on the over involvement in structured afterschool and weekend activities; and let the kids just spend time with the family.
Honestly, it seems like a crazy horse race to out do the Joneses.
Oh, and while you are at it, do you really need to keeping buying ever more expansive homes just because you qualify on paper?
Maybe white parents should not aim to micromanage their children's play time. Let up on the over involvement in structured afterschool and weekend activities; and let the kids just spend time with the family.
Honestly, it seems like a crazy horse race to out do the Joneses.
Oh, and while you are at it, do you really need to keeping buying ever more expansive homes just because you qualify on paper?
10
Very stereotypical comment if I may say. I'm white, was a Jones and do not micromanage anything other than the balancing act of raising a child and making ends meet financially. Unfortunately, even us white women Joneses with college degrees can't all have the big house with the white picket fence. I would be happy owning any house rather than renting, which is all we're able to do at this point.
4
Growing up I was the only child of a single working parent. From a young age I had responsibilities for helping with yard work and helping to clean the house. As I grew older I got after school jobs and still had my other responsibilities. Through it all we still had quality time.
My wife and I got married when I was 23 and she was 20 and we both had full time jobs then and still do. We had one child and we also had our parents and extended family that lived in the area. All helped in the raising of our daughter and were the babysitters even when we did not need one.
Because we had a "family" support system we did not feel the stress that this article speaks of. We did pay for preschool, but we both had flexibility in our jobs to be able to chaperon field trips, handle sick days, etc.
Even now with our daughter out of the nest I still help with things around the house including cooking.
Life is what you make of it, but it is far better when it is shared with friends and family; they help take the stress away.
My wife and I got married when I was 23 and she was 20 and we both had full time jobs then and still do. We had one child and we also had our parents and extended family that lived in the area. All helped in the raising of our daughter and were the babysitters even when we did not need one.
Because we had a "family" support system we did not feel the stress that this article speaks of. We did pay for preschool, but we both had flexibility in our jobs to be able to chaperon field trips, handle sick days, etc.
Even now with our daughter out of the nest I still help with things around the house including cooking.
Life is what you make of it, but it is far better when it is shared with friends and family; they help take the stress away.
7
It doesn't matter what you write here, NYT only puts comments they agree with up.
6
I guess that must be true, as they put your comment up.
I'm increasingly frustrated by people chastising others for their "choices." There are systemic problems that make it difficult if not impossible to choose not to work for one parent, or to work part-time, or to not go for that bigger, better-paying job. College loans must be paid, mortgages acquired. Cars and transportation aren't cheap. Pretty basic stuff costs a lot of money; and I know a lot of people who don't take Disney vacations. And it is not a poor choice to have a family. Why we get angry with each others' choices instead of the systems that create miserable lives, I'll never know.
51
I know plenty of great parents who both work, but I'm glad my parents made the decision for my mom to stay home with us when we were kids. Sure, I wore hand-me-downs and our vacations were car trips to relatives' houses instead of flight to Disneyland. But when I left school every day I had a parent there to pick me up, make me a healthy snack, help me with homework and listen to me vent about whatever was stressing me out without being distracted by the fact that she still had dishes and laundry to do and a report to write after she sent me to bed. Stuff comes and goes, but childhood isn't forever either.
7
I would comment here but I've got to run.
8
I still haven't figured out what we're rushing for or toward.
We've created a pace and lifestyle based on what, that benefits who?
We've created a pace and lifestyle based on what, that benefits who?
12
Well to clarify for you dear, what most of us are rushing towards is getting our child from daycare before they close. Then getting home to cook dinner,feed our child dinner, bathe our child, bedtime story and pray that this can be done before 9pm so that maybe we can enjoy an hour with our spouse who also works full time. To then get at least maybe a solid 6 hours of sleep to wake up and start all over again so that we can pay the rent/mortgage, utility bill, car insurance, car note, cell phone, credit card, cable/internet, daycare and have barely enough left to purchase groceries to keep us all alive.
I'm a female, 34 years old with a college degree and a full time career. I simply couldn't do it all. I'm in a city with no family to help and have lost contact with pretty much all of my friends bc there is no more time left during the week to sit back and wonder why we're all rushing around. I don't mean to sound bitter, but I wanted to experience motherhood and have a comfortable life. Unfortunately, it doesn't matter how much income you're bringing in when the cost of living still outweighs your net salary. It's horrible and I'm disappointed in America's system of all work and no play, with very little pay to even make it worth it!
I'm a female, 34 years old with a college degree and a full time career. I simply couldn't do it all. I'm in a city with no family to help and have lost contact with pretty much all of my friends bc there is no more time left during the week to sit back and wonder why we're all rushing around. I don't mean to sound bitter, but I wanted to experience motherhood and have a comfortable life. Unfortunately, it doesn't matter how much income you're bringing in when the cost of living still outweighs your net salary. It's horrible and I'm disappointed in America's system of all work and no play, with very little pay to even make it worth it!
7
Children are not accessories you show off to your social circle, or little luxuries like gym memberships or any other discretionary budget item..
If you have any capacity at all to think beyond your own needs every breathing minute, you may find that having and raising a child enables you to discover the finest parts of yourself, and that knowledge will continue to enrich your life long after they are grown and living their own independent lives.
If you don't want children, no one should try to persuade you otherwise. But to use the "overpopulated planet" argument as a reason for not having a child, or to harangue someone who does want to, is profoundly shallow. I've accomplished plenty in my life, but nothing is more meaningful to me than being a mother. We do have the right to have children, if we can. And to have them be our own biological children, if we can.
If you have any capacity at all to think beyond your own needs every breathing minute, you may find that having and raising a child enables you to discover the finest parts of yourself, and that knowledge will continue to enrich your life long after they are grown and living their own independent lives.
If you don't want children, no one should try to persuade you otherwise. But to use the "overpopulated planet" argument as a reason for not having a child, or to harangue someone who does want to, is profoundly shallow. I've accomplished plenty in my life, but nothing is more meaningful to me than being a mother. We do have the right to have children, if we can. And to have them be our own biological children, if we can.
94
We also have the right to not need to have biological children and have those (adopted) children be treated the same as anyone else's kids.
2
1. TV dinners.
2. Boxed mac and cheese.
Convenient, cheap, and pretty dang good. No more than 6 days per week though. Moderation in all things.
2. Boxed mac and cheese.
Convenient, cheap, and pretty dang good. No more than 6 days per week though. Moderation in all things.
6
We need better economic choices, but even if we had them, I am not sure how many parents would elect to raise their own kids over working full-time as professionals.
3
The two couples you chose to portray both have a combined income of over 200K per year. I do not think their "struggle" is at all representative of what many families are dealing with today in the US. They have chosen their harried lifestyle. Perhaps they would do well to dial back their ambition and spend some time with their children. And lets save our angst for those that are really hurting.
33
What else can you expect, the way things have gone since the early dasys of the Reagan administration? First the unions were destroyed (Remember the air traffic controllers' strike?), and then came the relentless corporate media propaganda barrage reducing our culture to Bods, Bucks and Brainlessness - a society that makes heroes out of anorexic 'supermodels', celebrities with money to burn and a sense of taste and decency that's inversely proportional, and finally sports figures and politicians who'd belong on a $3 bill. Would you believe that a straight-A student with sports team and community involvement got wait-listed by a state university because her athletic credentials were not deemed strong enough? An intended HISTORY major? I know this young lady and her family, and she's now in university - across the pond.
The upshot? With all this image craziness, especially now fueled by social media, who has TIME for family life? Or, for that matter, thinking?
The New Gilded Age. Glittering on the surface, but rotten underneath.
The upshot? With all this image craziness, especially now fueled by social media, who has TIME for family life? Or, for that matter, thinking?
The New Gilded Age. Glittering on the surface, but rotten underneath.
8
Don't make this political. It's primarily about personal choices people make. But since you've gone there, the U.S. economy started on the skids in the late 70s. Globalization and new technologies throughout the 80s and into the 90s left a lot of people in the dark. They weren't prepared for what was happening.Labor unions began to decline with the advent of technology and the service and information economy coming along larger than the manufacturing economy.
4
Slowly kids are becoming luxury which only rich folks can afford. Middle class down will eventually give up having kids as it is very expensive.
15
Based on some of the comments here, it sounds like non-affordability could be a blessing in disguise for many couples.
4
I'm stressed, tired, and rushed *without* kids. And that's just one reason (one of many) I'm not going to have any.
12
Thank the Republicans.
9
It's interesting how we think that both parents working full time "is a sharp increase from previous decades." We like to think the "Leave it to Beaver" lifestyle that used to be on TV was always the norm.
In reality the norm for hundreds if not thousands of years has always been for both spouses to work typically on a farm and support their family. Nobody had it easy. Additional housework in those times was very hard so staying in the home was many times harder than today and with no birth control families were large. During WWII women worked outside the home to keep production going. So it may be that post WWII "Leave it to Beaver" was an aberration.
Having said all that the work week and hours are not family friendly. What happens to kids once school is out and both parents work? Businesses certainly don't care.
In reality the norm for hundreds if not thousands of years has always been for both spouses to work typically on a farm and support their family. Nobody had it easy. Additional housework in those times was very hard so staying in the home was many times harder than today and with no birth control families were large. During WWII women worked outside the home to keep production going. So it may be that post WWII "Leave it to Beaver" was an aberration.
Having said all that the work week and hours are not family friendly. What happens to kids once school is out and both parents work? Businesses certainly don't care.
4
Both of my grandmothers (born 1917 and 1920) worked fulltime their entire adult lives. My mother worked for all but 8 or 9 years of her adult life. All of them were married, no single mothers forced to support the household.
Two-income households are hardly the new paradigm today's bizzy mawms would portray in their endless quest for victim status.
Two-income households are hardly the new paradigm today's bizzy mawms would portray in their endless quest for victim status.
4
American society is unsustainable.I am about to pay 12, 000$ for a health care program that gives me nothing but a 12, 000 deductible. Our politicians yell and scream about food stamps while 5 aircraft carrier groups sail around the world . When a person sits down an actually looks at the current world the absurdity is astounding.I don't know what the tipping point is but we might be getting close.Our youth is in debt up to their eyeball for a degree that is worthless. These views seem extreme but the truth is they are reality.When society collapse it happens fast " Great bodies move slowly great events rapidly". The Berlin wall fell in a day .
15
I remember back when Ike was president. We had families, church, stay at home moms, no wars, little crime. Good times for most people.
5
Stella, no wars? The US was involved in many wars, coups, occupations, including Vietnam. And what about that segregation? Lynchings of teenagers? Pay inequality?
7
I think you mean most white people, no?
12
As long as you were white, male, and straight, of course.
5
Why are articles always written with the parents being executives for well known branded companies? Why can't articles truly show what its like for families both working full-time & making less then 85,000 per year? Show how they miss the mark on all subsidies because they are $100-1000 over the benchmark for assistance. Or how families can't use flex spending towards child care because they can't go with the extra pay out of pocket waiting for that reimbursement. I had two kids in day care that were 5 years apart and paid nearly 10,000 in costs all out of pocket with no help from family, govt or work. I worked for healthcare benefits for 3years because I fortunately or fortunately carried a better plan. My pay that year was $25,000 my husband made 48,000 we still live pay check to pay check all these years later trying now to get the kids through college. Stop representing families who most likely can still take a vacation and drive a new car and start focusing on the real middle to lower class who must nickel and dime and barely if at all save any money. I also feel family time should carry to both parents when they have kids or sick relatives that need help and be paid. My first child my husband had that evening off and went back to work the next day. When our son was born he had 3 days thanks to Labor day weekend. Things have been broken for so long and so few people vote narrow minded people out of office that change seems out of reach we might as well just deal with it.
19
This is how the 0.1% win. They watch the lower and middle middle class start attacking the upper middle class (which is really who you are talking about) and stand back. Yes, people like this family in the upper middle class don't have to worry about the lights being turned off or putting food on the table. They still do have to worry about student loans, retirement, and college for their kids, though. When your argument is that someone who can take a vacation and drive a new car is no longer "middle class" but now "rich," the goalposts have moved way too far. This used to be the norm for a one earner middle class family 30 years ago. Now, it takes a two earner upper middle class family to do so, and they are derided as unbearably wealthy. You know who is rich? The few families in this country who control the majority of the wealth and live in unimaginable luxury. Not the guy who can take his kids to Disney World once.
7
“This is not an individual problem, it is a social problem,” said Mary Blair-Loy, a sociologist and the founding director of the Center for Research on Gender in the Professions at the University of California, San Diego. “This is creating a stress for working parents that is affecting life at home and for children, and we need a societal-wide response.”
Yes, we need a societal-wide response. There was a time when one income could do what it requires two to do today. Lets do what is necessary to return to that so one parent can handle responsibilities at home while the other goes to work. That would eliminate fighting a battle on two fronts and the constant stress that comes with it. Less divorce, properly raised children, and the elimination of outsourcing them to daycare in order to go to some stupid job would be positive results. This country has really went down the wrong path in the past 50 years on several issues and it's long overdue to reverse course. What we are doing now isn't sustainable and we will collapse as a nation if it continues.
Yes, we need a societal-wide response. There was a time when one income could do what it requires two to do today. Lets do what is necessary to return to that so one parent can handle responsibilities at home while the other goes to work. That would eliminate fighting a battle on two fronts and the constant stress that comes with it. Less divorce, properly raised children, and the elimination of outsourcing them to daycare in order to go to some stupid job would be positive results. This country has really went down the wrong path in the past 50 years on several issues and it's long overdue to reverse course. What we are doing now isn't sustainable and we will collapse as a nation if it continues.
6
My parents had 9 children between the years 1940 through 1957. Two of which died at birth, one sibling was born with one kidney and two other siblings had clubbed feet. Needless to say, their financial, emotional and mental plates were full. However, they never complained or whined or felt sorry for themselves - they just kept going forward, dealing with whatever came their way. This stoic outlook was as common then as is so many folks complaining today about being "stressed, tired and rushed". A major difference is that folks like my parents did what was needed instead of looking for "solutions" to not being stressed, tired or rushed.
Mary Blair-Loy, a sociologist and the founding director of the Center for Research on Gender in the Professions at the University of California, San Diego stated “This is creating a stress for working parents that is affecting life at home and for children, and we need a societal-wide response."
My response to Ms. Blair-Loy's societal-wide response would be "grow up and start acting like an adult instead of talking about everything to death".
15
The reason we "talk" to each other on the internet, like right here on this forum, is because we largely have no one else to talk to anymore. You don't think in the old days that mothers sat together on the porch watching the kids play and kvetched about their lives? Now they're all at work and management sure doesn't want to hear about it. So we complain online.
7
Maybe the mothers who lived in town were able to gather on the porch and watch the wee ones play but we lived on a farm and all of the mothers besides my own were busy making dinners from scratch, making clothes, quilts, etc. from scratch, and doing barn chores in between the plethora of other daily routines they did. The only opportunities for yapping was after Sunday services, over coffee and cake in the church basement. But I do agree with your notion that a lot of conversing is done online - it's fast, effective and often times helpful. Nice comment f.s.
4
Why must there be two incomes to sustain family life and provide essentials? I stayed at home 15 years. How could we possibly afford that? We practiced living on one income long before having children, then qualified for a mortgage on one income.
If you want to live comfortably, live on one income until the stay-at-home parent can work part-time during school hours. Real estate was a perfect fit for me after being at home with kids for 15 years. I did listings in the morning and cold-calls/appointments for listings while the kids did homework.
Why work when the kids need you?
If you want to live comfortably, live on one income until the stay-at-home parent can work part-time during school hours. Real estate was a perfect fit for me after being at home with kids for 15 years. I did listings in the morning and cold-calls/appointments for listings while the kids did homework.
Why work when the kids need you?
7
These days women are the breadwinners and can't afford to even work part-time. So they work to provide for their kids. Slowly kids are becoming luxury which only rich folks can afford. Middle class down will eventually give up having kids as it is very expensive.
6
Part of the issue here is the toll that modern parenting trends are taking on families. Children used to be pushed out the door to play on their own after school - now, they are ferried about for lessons and play dates. Homework loads have blossomed, swallowing up quality time. "Rec" sports are now "all in" feeding to time-intensive travel programs. Everything is hyper scheduled and supervised. Maintaining this break neck pace requires greater parental time investment. It's taking a toll on everyone - parents and kids alike.
22
I agree with this. BUT I also believe that the hyper-structured life-style of kids today is partially the RESULT of more mothers being at work. It is also the result of globalization adding competition to access to selective college/universities and to higher-paying jobs. Vicious cycle. Globalization has also made willingness to travel to new place for work a requirement, and has obsoleted for many the multi-gen family approach to raising children. Yes, consumerism is a part of this, But college costs and many others such as health care have risen much much faster than wages for the majority. And areas with good supply of jobs tend to have higher costs of living- an other vicious cycle. The hamster wheel is there for the middle class.
2
Exactly right, the job scope has increased by our own doing. Everything is leagues, uniforms, stats, trophies, schedules, etc. Parents feel like they are doing a disservice to their kids if they don't sign them up for every AAU team, piano lesson and social group. I too fall for all this and often find myself wondering what the end game is, how much of this time/$$ will I ultimately deem to have been wasted?? Further, how many of these activities are driven by parents projecting their own perceived failings on their children??
3
The nightmarishly high cost of living in many parts of the country today, especially the NYC metro area, means that both parents MUST work just to survive. The only other option is food stamps. So a 2-parent working home for many families is not a mere lifestyle choice. It is an absolute necessity. Further, proper daycare is so exorbitant it eats up almost 1/3 or more of a family's disposable income. And just finding one that works around an 8-6 schedule (remember NY metro area has 1-hour+ commutes) is like finding a needle in a haystack. To say that middle class American parents have the short end of the stick in our society is a gross understatement. Something must change or hundreds of thousands of working class and lower middle class mothers will just throw their hands up in the air and join the millions of people in our country living off Uncle Sam.
11
Economics coloring my viewpoint, I truly believe that the rise of the two-earner family is the reason real estate costs (rentals and purchases) have gone through the roof----because people will buy into "bigger and better" for some insane reasons.
6
I've read several commenters stating that "it's all about choices," and I agree. I was a FT working single parent, and my daughter (born in 1989) did not participate in a lot of classes or sports; I think I limited these activities to one type per semester. I didn't have the time to do more. And yes, she went to full time day care and after school daycare until she was old enough to stay home on her own. I owned my own homes, and did all the housework and yard work myself -- good exercise, cheaper than a gym membership, and I didn't have to leave home! Since I'm a vegetarian, I cooked most of my meals at home. For vacations, we played at home or went to local attractions or visited relatives out of state. Did my daughter suffer from lack of "extracurricular" activities? I don't think so; she has a good job and wonderful career prospects, and lives on her own. I don't think it's possible to "do it all" or "have it all," nor do I think that's necessary. What is important is to make wise choices.
8
This was a bleak read. The writer delivers what she promises- a reflection on today's families- and relays a slurry of facts and figures that I've heard before. We know it's a systemic problem. We know workloads are not equal between genders. We know that 'balance is hard' (I didn't need a statistic to tell me that) and that 'we can't have it all'. So, what's the point? I agree that acknowledging that this is a problem is the first step, but that's been done ad nauseam. It's time to have a more productive conversation about this.
How are new business models (e.e. startups) affecting work life balance? What are some companies that are doing it right? Are there innovative childcare options emerging? You mention Amazon Prime- have these new technologies done anything to ease the burden or are they just adding to our to-do lists? Paternity leave- what are the barriers to making this widespread?
Tell me that and maybe I can start changing my decisions. That's more productive than pointing out that I'm going to continue being miserable for at least the foreseeable future.
How are new business models (e.e. startups) affecting work life balance? What are some companies that are doing it right? Are there innovative childcare options emerging? You mention Amazon Prime- have these new technologies done anything to ease the burden or are they just adding to our to-do lists? Paternity leave- what are the barriers to making this widespread?
Tell me that and maybe I can start changing my decisions. That's more productive than pointing out that I'm going to continue being miserable for at least the foreseeable future.
8
They do it to themselves. Guess they never heard the expression, "can't have it all."
4
Finding myself confused by the people here with the attitude of, "life is full of tough choices, deal with it".
Promoting secular family structural integrity is absolutely something this country should be invested in; happy citizens are more productive.
What would you have to lose from being afforded additional paid maternity leave? If it doesn't directly affect you, can't you at least recognize the incredible impact something like this may have for the majority of other Americans?
Promoting secular family structural integrity is absolutely something this country should be invested in; happy citizens are more productive.
What would you have to lose from being afforded additional paid maternity leave? If it doesn't directly affect you, can't you at least recognize the incredible impact something like this may have for the majority of other Americans?
9
All you gurus of simplicity wagging your fingers at the supposedly blindly materialistic drones here who just need to slow down and recalibrate their values: Most of us are not the people who always get profiled in these sorts of articles.
Many of us supposedly middle-class people working two jobs could just barely afford new shoes every time our one child or at the most two outgrew the old pair. Many of us heard about a spouse's pending promotion and wondered how we'd pay for the new suits he'd need for it. Many of us took simple vacations we could drive to and felt like Cruella De Vil because we couldn't turn off the cassette-like response of "we can't afford that" when our kids wanted simple souvenirs that cost a tenth of what some people pay for their Starbucks for a week.
Many of us felt like the worst parents in the world, because we began telling our kids in middle school that they'd better earn good scholarships, since there wasn't going to be any money for college.
I don't know about you. But in order to keep my now-former spouse in Men's Wearhouse suits and my kid in sneakers from Walmart, I wore my kid's outgrown sweats and t-shirts around the house because I couldn't afford to buy unnecessary clothes for myself. And now I'm grateful to live in a town where the local thrift shop gets donations from rich people, so I can get that LandsEnd winter coat for ten bucks and the LLBean embroidered fleece top for $3.75. A
Many of us supposedly middle-class people working two jobs could just barely afford new shoes every time our one child or at the most two outgrew the old pair. Many of us heard about a spouse's pending promotion and wondered how we'd pay for the new suits he'd need for it. Many of us took simple vacations we could drive to and felt like Cruella De Vil because we couldn't turn off the cassette-like response of "we can't afford that" when our kids wanted simple souvenirs that cost a tenth of what some people pay for their Starbucks for a week.
Many of us felt like the worst parents in the world, because we began telling our kids in middle school that they'd better earn good scholarships, since there wasn't going to be any money for college.
I don't know about you. But in order to keep my now-former spouse in Men's Wearhouse suits and my kid in sneakers from Walmart, I wore my kid's outgrown sweats and t-shirts around the house because I couldn't afford to buy unnecessary clothes for myself. And now I'm grateful to live in a town where the local thrift shop gets donations from rich people, so I can get that LandsEnd winter coat for ten bucks and the LLBean embroidered fleece top for $3.75. A
8
None of what you have described is a hardship or even all that noteworthy; we didn't get souvenirs on vacation or at the circus growing up, or popsicles from the good humor truck, or much in the way of new clothes. Because my parents had decided to live on one income. I barely remember any of that.
Many couples' financial struggle could be ameliorated by spending several years living on one income and banking the other before choosing to bear children. (And please don't say that's impossible; many of us have supported our own households on one income for years or decades with no option of a second income to bank or fall back upon.)
Many couples' financial struggle could be ameliorated by spending several years living on one income and banking the other before choosing to bear children. (And please don't say that's impossible; many of us have supported our own households on one income for years or decades with no option of a second income to bank or fall back upon.)
9
We did exactly that, then passed on our savings to the kids when they were born, even though I was a stay-at-home Mom for 15 years.
5
Paid family leave is badly needed, but what would ease the tension for a lot of families is the option of part-time professional jobs, which are ridiculously rare. For those of us raising young kids, two incomes are needed but maybe not two FULL incomes. Also, for those of us in the "sandwich generation" this would allow more time to help aging parents.
5
Around my 25th birthday, 4 or so years ago, I decided to forgo children and keep life simple. Small apartment, focus on my career, travel when I can and enjoy life. So far, so good. Kids and family, households, etc are time killers and I can say there is nothing more satisfying than having 5-7 hours to myself a day without expensive toddlers, diaper refills, broken plumbing, etc. If one decided to go ahead and have children and a spouse with a household, well, that lifestyle is very busy and expensive.
17
Check back with us when you're 70, and alone.
2
Same here. No kids and lots of free time and low stress. I travel at least twice a year. I'll take my life over theirs any day!
6
Great - more power to you! Hope it wears well for the next 50 years.
4
Parenting has always been stressful. Stop whining. Imagine being a parent in Europe in the 1940's Or during the Depression. Or in Stalinist Russia That's Stress! Do your best, trust your gut, love your kids and move on.
16
How very un-compassionate. Who can hold a fire in his hand by thinking on the frosty Caucasus? My (Depression Baby) mom had to walk uphill to school both ways, but that really didn't help me learning to cope by imagining that somewhere, other people had it tougher. To talk about how things are nastier in other parts of the world doesn't solve the problems in the U.S.
8
A California state job, both of them, and still struggling? Answer: COL. The California norm is two solid incomes to afford a house. In Mass. in the '70s and '80s, my brother's wife stayed home during the first few years of their kids' lives. 'Same with my sister. 'Different ballgame now as Boston-burb rents equal Cali's, and if homes are any less, you have your heat-A/C bills.
I blamed Californians when I was out there, until I went to Alabama and found the real estate industry pedaling the same garbage of buy-and-swap up. And within a year of moving to southeast Virginia my rent was the same (not in Virginia Beach, either).
The real estate industry has evolved with women-in-the-workforce and then some. It doesn't care how you live, or even if you can pay for the home. Without wages going up, it became a second stock market, over which people thought they had some control. We bought in hook-line-and-sinker, and here's the result.
I blamed Californians when I was out there, until I went to Alabama and found the real estate industry pedaling the same garbage of buy-and-swap up. And within a year of moving to southeast Virginia my rent was the same (not in Virginia Beach, either).
The real estate industry has evolved with women-in-the-workforce and then some. It doesn't care how you live, or even if you can pay for the home. Without wages going up, it became a second stock market, over which people thought they had some control. We bought in hook-line-and-sinker, and here's the result.
4
Don't worry - it's only an artificial real estate bubble happening yet again, and it will crash and there will be lots of screaming and yelling [again] when hard working fools and their advance degrees once again loose their life savings and real estate investments and have to move on yet again. The key word here is "again" - - -
The portrait of stress of the modern family I see is one of disillusionment - where the mother sees no need or desire to work-
A four day work week must become the norm.
3
Politicians in Washington are quick to proclaim their support for family values, but quicker to oppose higher minimum wages, universal child care and funded after school programs. Programs that support families are great, so long as the families themselves pay for them. Even with white collar two parents salaries this is becoming increasing difficult for all and impossible for many.
Americans now work longer hours, take fewer vacations and use less sick leave than their counterparts in Western Europe. They have dramatically increased corporate productivity and corporate profits but their wages have been basically flat for that last thirty years. Tax cuts are too little too late to make up for this predicament, especially since the greatest benefit goes to the tip 1 or 2%.
The only thing that has saved the middle class from economic disaster has been the increased number of working wives and that has come at a price to family stability and personal health. It's time for the middle class to wake up. We are being lied, used and abused by policies that treat us like machines. we need political representative that respond to human needs. not just cooperate greed. Enough is enough.
Americans now work longer hours, take fewer vacations and use less sick leave than their counterparts in Western Europe. They have dramatically increased corporate productivity and corporate profits but their wages have been basically flat for that last thirty years. Tax cuts are too little too late to make up for this predicament, especially since the greatest benefit goes to the tip 1 or 2%.
The only thing that has saved the middle class from economic disaster has been the increased number of working wives and that has come at a price to family stability and personal health. It's time for the middle class to wake up. We are being lied, used and abused by policies that treat us like machines. we need political representative that respond to human needs. not just cooperate greed. Enough is enough.
2
I asked a father here in town "do you really feel like you have to go to every soccer game", or track meet, or birthday party? Our local Senior Center has monthly birthday celebrations, with NO presents. But every weekend a party, or traveling across this vast state to stand around and be "supportive". I guess. Why not stay home, have a personal day and fix a nice supper when the kids get home and talk about the day. I don't know, I feel sorry for my younger friends. Doesn't sound like much fun. Oh, And the father said, "Yes" he had to go to these events in far flung places. Pressure.
7
Why must both parents work 40-60 hours/week to make ends meet? Because our federal government has grown to approximately 10,000% larger than it is supposed to be. Cut the federal government by 95%. Force them to follow the law (the Constitution) where they are only allowed to do the 18 things enumerated in Article I Section 8.
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/article-i-section-8
After all, it's the law.
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/article-i-section-8
After all, it's the law.
I work full time, as does my husband. We love our kids and our jobs. We say no to things to spend as much family time together in evenings and weekends as possible. No, we do not want our five year old in soccer. No, we can't make interstate visits to relatives on weekends. We spend time together when we're not working and appreciate it all, the good and the bad. It's not always perfect, and I'm often tired, but I recognize where I have choices and make them carefully.
4
re The survey found something of a stress gap by race and education. College-educated parents and white parents were significantly more likely than other parents to say work-family balance is difficult.
really - poor poor white people.
really - poor poor white people.
3
...so do college-educated white parents complain too much? Or do uneducated, non-white parents not complain enough (expect more for themselves and their offspring)? Educated parents are more likely to 'plan' to have children. They are more likely to have savings before embarking on starting a family. So imagine their surprise when after all that planning, it's still incredibly hard to make ends meet.
Compare that to uneducated parents, who are less likely to have 'planned' to start a family, and who often have little to no savings. How could they 'complain', when their poor planning created the situation? Maybe if uneducated, non-white parents had higher standards for themselves and their kids (the notion of a better life?), they might be less likely to produce kids and bring them into an already-compromised living situation. But then that would require a belief on the part of the adults, that their lives could be filled with anything but financial stress, 'drama', etc.
Compare that to uneducated parents, who are less likely to have 'planned' to start a family, and who often have little to no savings. How could they 'complain', when their poor planning created the situation? Maybe if uneducated, non-white parents had higher standards for themselves and their kids (the notion of a better life?), they might be less likely to produce kids and bring them into an already-compromised living situation. But then that would require a belief on the part of the adults, that their lives could be filled with anything but financial stress, 'drama', etc.
4
yes yes - the only people that count - the only people that are capable etc are us white people - how wonderful we are.
The best work arrangement I had when my children were young was a 4 day work week. I worked four 10 hour days, and was home on Wednesdays. Everything at work could keep from Tuesday to Thursday. Wednesday was a great catch-up day for things at home that needed attention.
I cannot imagine having student loan debt, day care costs and saving for retirement or a home the way young families do today. The burden is far greater than it was when I had small children. Hats off to all parents these days, especially single parents.
Perhaps part of a solution is co-housing options to provide more community support for families.
I cannot imagine having student loan debt, day care costs and saving for retirement or a home the way young families do today. The burden is far greater than it was when I had small children. Hats off to all parents these days, especially single parents.
Perhaps part of a solution is co-housing options to provide more community support for families.
3
One level of this study I'd like to see is what parents and especially working parents are worried most about getting done. The article mentions mothers are still spending more time with household chores and child care, especially the mental organization of schedules. I would bet a poll would show those are a bigger portion of mothers concerns than fathers'. Not because they are left to them but because some of the household tasks originate with them where dads may be okay ignoring them without a worry.
I've further read that dads sometimes feel the same burden about work, especially in families where the father may still be a higher earner. Thus some of the burdens are still self originating on both sides.
I've read studies that describe how a baby's cry, particularly a mothers own baby, is the most initiating sound she can hear able to awake her from any sleep. Yet the same sound was lower on fathers' lists, behind things like barking dogs or car alarms. What does this suggest about our strive for equality of gender roles in the face of differing bases of worry and concern. Are dads actually "helping out" more than we give credit for in the face of the differences in gender concerns, despite that being dismissed decades ago as sexist double standard?
I've further read that dads sometimes feel the same burden about work, especially in families where the father may still be a higher earner. Thus some of the burdens are still self originating on both sides.
I've read studies that describe how a baby's cry, particularly a mothers own baby, is the most initiating sound she can hear able to awake her from any sleep. Yet the same sound was lower on fathers' lists, behind things like barking dogs or car alarms. What does this suggest about our strive for equality of gender roles in the face of differing bases of worry and concern. Are dads actually "helping out" more than we give credit for in the face of the differences in gender concerns, despite that being dismissed decades ago as sexist double standard?
2
I agree with the 'self-originating' notion. Many women go into relationships with men 'assuming' the men won't do their fair share, or that anything the men do household/childcare-wise, will never be quite as good as how she does it. Men hear this message loud and clear, and it becomes self-fulfilling. The men get tired of being thought of this way...they get tired of the little comments, and the women often take everything upon themselves, while complaining out of the other side of their mouths, complete with little comments to other women about how they have 'three children' to take care of (two kids + the husband). And then head-nods from the other women all around. I (female) see this all the time, and don't find it one bit amusing. I find that these women reap what they sow. They find exactly that which they believe to be true about men. I on the other hand have never had this issue with any of the men I've lived with long-term.
3
This laudable fails -- for men like me, and for countless women -- by overlooking just how much worse these things are for single parents, especially those who split co-parenting duties 50/50. Not only have employers typically not adjusted their demands to mitigate the consequences of both parents working full time; it has failed to acknowledge the shambles into which the lifeworlds of so many working parents have fallen, often for reasons at least associated with work and money. Talk about feeling like you're not doing anything right: the single parent has to be willing to cut out of work at moment's notice that a child is ill; has to die inside when time better spent with a child is instead occupied in tasks that advance the interests of the rich and which have no civic value to speak of, nor offer any nourishment to the human spirit. Single parents have to bottle up stress and mime happiness in a frantic and often futile effort to avoid infecting their offspring with their own discontent. There is a special loneliness that comes with caring for a helpless little person without any other adult person to intercede or assist in any way. All the mistakes are yours; whatever good you do is overshadowed by what you perceive as your own failures. Everyone loses.
The expression "work-life balance" suggests wage labor is distinct from, maybe even antithetical to, life. Yet Rousseau's remark that "man is born free, and is everywhere in chains" remains true. When will it change?
The expression "work-life balance" suggests wage labor is distinct from, maybe even antithetical to, life. Yet Rousseau's remark that "man is born free, and is everywhere in chains" remains true. When will it change?
3
I read the article in the opposite way: that the plight of these relatively well-off and fortunate folks (who are in the middle class) is not great. It is a story that does not demonstrate entitlement or self-pity; it is just a picture of how people with these characteristics are living today. By induction, the implication is that many many others (single parents, lower income, lower education, poor health, etc etc) do have it worse. We need to look at the whole picture- how are the people doing in all sections of the economy? If this life style is what many are aspiring to in this country, what does that mean? No lack of awareness or sympathy t those who have it worse.
1
Sadly, this actually impacts only those families where the parents still work, remember almost half of working age adults who could work choose not to work, so there are millions of families juggling only a lot of free time and welfare entitlements. So yes it is harder on the rest who still work to earn enough to pay their own bills and also pay the high taxes to support all those who choose not to work
5
If people with children both want to work outside the home, fine. That's a choice. If one parent wants to stay home, that is also a choice. People need to understand that all choices come with pluses and minuses. Regret is not a productive state of mind.
14
It's easy to say that such things are choices when one hasn't been sufficiently poor to worry about whether one might be homeless or hungry if a day of work is missed. Someone working at Walmart needs food stamps in addition to a pay check to feed one's family. God forbid that either parent is without a job.
3
This will hardly be news, or at all surprising, to most readers across the country. The strata of society I reside in is suburban, middle class, both parents working, one child in college and another about to, and we have college degrees. We are deep in (mostly) college debt, can hardly afford a vacation, and although I am in my seventh decade, I am still working because I have to.
The disconnect between the lives we lead, and our friends and neighbors lead, and elected officials at the state and federal level couldn't be more profound. No one speaks to our situation, or the frustration and anxiety we feel about the future. No one holding office lives like we do or relates to our situation. No one in Congress is there to represent us, but instead to represent the desires of those who paid to put them there.
They spend their time fighting over abortion, Planned Parenthood, immigration, Benghazi, Kim Davis, Hobby Lobby, and assorted other subjects that have very little or nothing to do to our daily lives. The roads we drive on are a safety nightmare. Air travel is a joke -- if you can afford it. College costs are obscenely high. Drug use is rampant and growing, as is home break-ins and petty robberies. There are towns and villages within blocks of where I live where seemingly all the teenagers are stoned almost the entire time.
So, yes. Pew's latest survey only confirms what millions of Americans already know. Because they are livng in a state of perpetual angst.
The disconnect between the lives we lead, and our friends and neighbors lead, and elected officials at the state and federal level couldn't be more profound. No one speaks to our situation, or the frustration and anxiety we feel about the future. No one holding office lives like we do or relates to our situation. No one in Congress is there to represent us, but instead to represent the desires of those who paid to put them there.
They spend their time fighting over abortion, Planned Parenthood, immigration, Benghazi, Kim Davis, Hobby Lobby, and assorted other subjects that have very little or nothing to do to our daily lives. The roads we drive on are a safety nightmare. Air travel is a joke -- if you can afford it. College costs are obscenely high. Drug use is rampant and growing, as is home break-ins and petty robberies. There are towns and villages within blocks of where I live where seemingly all the teenagers are stoned almost the entire time.
So, yes. Pew's latest survey only confirms what millions of Americans already know. Because they are livng in a state of perpetual angst.
6
Republicans make it hard to get things done.
1
this is a fascinating study, well reported. it would really be interesting to know how much the two parent households were also invested in a higher standard of child care, for example in terms of the number of scheduled activities, parent-child activities, parental help in education, and distance of school from home.
there are also huge infrastructure issues hidden here -- commute times, crowding, work related travel, and 24/7 teleconnectivity in urban and suburban vs. rural environments.
to be more stressful, the decreased male work week (from 42 to 39 hours) has to imply a greater amount of "take home" work. also, the fact that households prioritize the male career, given the known gender disparity in wages and salaries, starts from a rational allocation of resources. the first priority is to pay the bills.
though we have no children, for several years after our marriage my wife and i made a list of every chore, large and small, and then picked and swapped until we both felt the division was preference and labor equal. then we just did "our" chores each week. this made me more aware of what "equal" really meant, and also made my wife aware that, even when she agreed the split was equal, she still at times felt she "wasn't getting enough help."
there are also huge infrastructure issues hidden here -- commute times, crowding, work related travel, and 24/7 teleconnectivity in urban and suburban vs. rural environments.
to be more stressful, the decreased male work week (from 42 to 39 hours) has to imply a greater amount of "take home" work. also, the fact that households prioritize the male career, given the known gender disparity in wages and salaries, starts from a rational allocation of resources. the first priority is to pay the bills.
though we have no children, for several years after our marriage my wife and i made a list of every chore, large and small, and then picked and swapped until we both felt the division was preference and labor equal. then we just did "our" chores each week. this made me more aware of what "equal" really meant, and also made my wife aware that, even when she agreed the split was equal, she still at times felt she "wasn't getting enough help."
Parents have always worked. The difference is that on a farm ( a dangerous place to work by the way) the supervision of the children and close proximity contribute to the psychological health of the family. We are losing whatever cultural wisdom we may still have to pass on, if children grow up without this physical closeness, and have to work to find meaning in school work that is driven my test measurements and is not of practical benefit until they are adults.
2
Over 25 years ago, I was driving and listening to a talk radio show about this very topic; the radio host said that after you take out for child care, gas, tolls, new work clothes, work lunches, assorted dry cleaning or other items, it made more sense for the mother to stay home and be with her children than keep whatever extra was left over after you did the math.
At the time, I was married and working in NYC in a fulfilling career with great benefits and a nice salary, no children. After my kids were born, I took pencil to paper and found that radio host was basically right. I stayed home.
While the loss of my salary was missed, and I spent less, ate out less, shopped less, didn't move into a larger home, I shaved $40.00/week from the lone husband salary to put aside for vacations and gifts.
We didn't live a large life like we used to, but I was grateful I had the time with my children.
At the time, I was married and working in NYC in a fulfilling career with great benefits and a nice salary, no children. After my kids were born, I took pencil to paper and found that radio host was basically right. I stayed home.
While the loss of my salary was missed, and I spent less, ate out less, shopped less, didn't move into a larger home, I shaved $40.00/week from the lone husband salary to put aside for vacations and gifts.
We didn't live a large life like we used to, but I was grateful I had the time with my children.
23
"While the loss of my salary was missed, and I spent less, ate out less, shopped less, didn't move into a larger home, I shaved $40.00/week from the lone husband salary... "
What is out of place in your scenario is that today, while BOTH parents are working they are spending less, eating out less, shopping less, not moving into a larger home ... etc.
What is out of place in your scenario is that today, while BOTH parents are working they are spending less, eating out less, shopping less, not moving into a larger home ... etc.
3
Nice for you, and I mean no disrespect; but would that have been possible if your husband was making minimum wage?
2
Hmmm I've been pressuring husband to start trying for a kid sooner rather than later. Maybe I should stop. We both turned 33 recently and look (and probably feel) far younger than these people pictured here. We both work mostly a 40 hour week, have enough time to work out, get to watch tv and read and cook a nice meal at home on most nights, and get good sleep. And right now we have enough disposable income to go out to a nice dinner now and then and do some traveling. Perhaps I am insane to want to spawn..stupid biology working against all reason.
10
You just wait, NH. Parenthood ain't for sissies. But watching the Twilight Zone with the boy makes it all worth it. Those swim meets with the girl not so much but my wife handles most of that.
The Progressive dream of a Big Government Nanny State has produced this result. The demands to fund this out-of-control behemoth has turned ths traditional nuclear family, where the father was able to provide and the mother raised the children at home, into a two parent working household that can barely make ends meet, and impoverishes the children for their patent's time.
The tax burden is outrageous for what used to be the Middle Class, but now struggles.
Thanks Democrats. You have destroyed the American dream for the producers of the country.
The tax burden is outrageous for what used to be the Middle Class, but now struggles.
Thanks Democrats. You have destroyed the American dream for the producers of the country.
6
Bull roar. We have less government and more inequality, less hope and more bleating about free-dumb, and worse health outcomes than any other industrialized democracy. Our experiment of laissez-faire social policy and reflexive obeisance to St. Market has crashed and burned. Thank you, Reaganites and fellow-travelers. You and the haters that you enlisted have nearly destroyed the American dream for the 99%.
5
Another overlooked issue is having to move for employment. When a family is forced to move to another state for work, formerly nearby extended family that provided free daycare and extra help becomes unavailable. Move! Move! was urged by politicians when jobs were scarce after the Bush real estate bubble burst in 2008, but no one seemed to understand that losing an extended family support system is a big expense.
8
It's a new world and it's time to make new plans for the life we/you want. We've been in this soup for long enough to stop crying about it. Make new plans for yourself and your kids, start now and VOTE.
5
After the collapse of Communism in 1989, there's no need for the ruling elites to treat people nicely anymore. It's only going to get worse from here, until people got sick and tired of being ripped off and elect some lunatic socialist like Allende and start over again.
6
Well, if we hadn't given up on unions, one parent could afford to stay home or we could have the six hour work day, especially given the gains in productivity that have not raised wages in 30 years.
18
umm, we lost manufacturing because of the unions and their henchmen, not "greedy corporations" whose stock you hold in your retirement funds.
1
It's called "capitalism" Ms. Cain Miller, AKA "the free market", "for profit enterprise". In more critical worlds, such as the circle I choose to travel in, it is "exploitation of the worker class". To criticize it, is a greater sin than criticizing God, the Pope, Jesus, Jews, Muslims, war, militarism, or just about anything else. In fact, many evangelical religious systems equate Capitalism with Godliness, and Socialism with Satan worship..As Coolidge said: "The business of America is business." All the while, of course, running a country rampant with child labor, unsafe workplaces, low wages, no health care and very limited public education. In other words, we are heading back to the days of non-union wage slavery orchestrated by your local Republican Tea Party, who still have dreams of abolishing Medicare, Social Security, Workers Comp., Unemployment Comp. and enjoy the support of many who benefit, have benefited or will benefit from these "Communist" programs. The folks in the story, in many cases, voted for the very ugly situation that they are in. But, like all Americans, they remain adept at shooting themselves and their children in the foot for ideological, religious, and patriotic nonsense.
11
For college-educated workers, the only option is to work 50+ hours/week or not at all. There simply are no options to work 30 hours/week for most professionals. Hence the time crunch, where you cut corners at work, in your marriage, with the kids, and of course with yourself.
Feeling trapped in the prime of life.
Feeling trapped in the prime of life.
10
My spouse and I both worked full-time while having two children. I didn't find it stressful because I just didn't care if the house was kept clean nor did I keep track of hours spent with the children nor the hours they spent in daycare. I didn't worry about meals either as long as no one went hungry. Somehow, everybody survived. I didn't try to meet some "standard" of parenting, so I never felt guilty at all, too. I think the Pew survey is mostly about finding out about people who feel guilty because they compare themselves to the wrong models. In a two-parent household with children, if neither parent feels guilty, then I can imagine that the stress level goes way down, everybody is relaxed, and no one is rushed.
12
I agree that many of us succumb to the pressure to keep up with the perceived achievements and advantages of others. As parents, we are particularly vulnerable as we feel our way through the process, knowing that every choice we make can have unpredictable and lasting effects on our children. In fact, that is why some of these couples are both working in the first place--to maintain the middle-class standards they assume are necessary to raise a family. It takes a strong sense of individual values to avoid internalizing this pressure. However, with all due respect, I can't help wondering if your spouse felt the same lack of stress.
2
My spouse is a worry wort, so I am sure my spouse is not as relaxed as me, but she would be stressed even if not married and without children. :) I was relaxed enough to cut back at work to half-time when my children reached their teen-age years when they asked me to help coach their sports teams. Now that our children are out of the house and in college, my spouse is still stressed and I am enjoying retirement.
1
If you feel the need to one up your friends/siblings/coworkers by having your own bundles of joy to post about on Facebook, you buy all of it, not just the fun parts.
Consider spending that energy making the world a better place for the unwanted kids already on the planet. Help animals. Invent things. Travel and have some fun.
Too many people forget that having kids is optional. We'd all be a lot better off if more people chose to pass.
Consider spending that energy making the world a better place for the unwanted kids already on the planet. Help animals. Invent things. Travel and have some fun.
Too many people forget that having kids is optional. We'd all be a lot better off if more people chose to pass.
22
Too simplistic. It's optional individually, but not as a society.
2
" It's optional individually, but not as a society."
True. But so long as there will continue to be people who mindlessly spawn (and that doesn't look like it will change anytime soon), there are plenty of kids already in the world, to go around (be adopted), and therefore to maintain sufficient population levels.
True. But so long as there will continue to be people who mindlessly spawn (and that doesn't look like it will change anytime soon), there are plenty of kids already in the world, to go around (be adopted), and therefore to maintain sufficient population levels.
7
I'm single. Until recently I worked for a boss who had children and who frequently and proudly proclaimed that her ethnicity required her to put her family first, to the detriment of staff who were not of her ethnicity and who did not have children.
A previous commenter added "and has no friends of family" to the single status qualifier of those who are able to work all hours of the week, but I'm annoyed and frustrated by the double standard. I might not have kids, but until recently I helped with a father dying of cancer. I volunteer with other organizations, play sports, participate in community events, and have many ways to spend my free time rather than be constantly "volunteered" to work late or on weekends merely because I do not have a spouse or kids at home.
I love and respect my other coworkers with kids and I marvel at how they make it work. This boss may have been a bad egg, but our dysfunctional work relationship has made me want to avoid "super mamas" in the workplace in the future.
All that said, the US needs to move away from this burnout practice of forcing people to work and/or think about work all hours of the day. I'm not a doctor, nurse, lawyer, politician, or scientist, but I'm expected to be available 24/7 365 should an emergency arise. Our staff of 50 consists of people with very different ideas on what might constitute an emergency, and as a result, the only time I can truly escape work is when I'm at the gym or on the sports field.
A previous commenter added "and has no friends of family" to the single status qualifier of those who are able to work all hours of the week, but I'm annoyed and frustrated by the double standard. I might not have kids, but until recently I helped with a father dying of cancer. I volunteer with other organizations, play sports, participate in community events, and have many ways to spend my free time rather than be constantly "volunteered" to work late or on weekends merely because I do not have a spouse or kids at home.
I love and respect my other coworkers with kids and I marvel at how they make it work. This boss may have been a bad egg, but our dysfunctional work relationship has made me want to avoid "super mamas" in the workplace in the future.
All that said, the US needs to move away from this burnout practice of forcing people to work and/or think about work all hours of the day. I'm not a doctor, nurse, lawyer, politician, or scientist, but I'm expected to be available 24/7 365 should an emergency arise. Our staff of 50 consists of people with very different ideas on what might constitute an emergency, and as a result, the only time I can truly escape work is when I'm at the gym or on the sports field.
23
Back in the 1950's - early 1960's my mother worked nights when I and my siblings were small. When we got to school age she got a full time day job and worked her way up to manager at an insurance company. When I got home from school I would start preparing dinner and assisted her with other housework. We all had meals together as a family. My brothers would assist my father with yard work, etc. My father told her she didn't have to work but she wanted to. With the extra money we got to take vacations, etc. She never complained. My father never complained. None of us complained. I have no sympathy for these couples today. This is not rocket science.
11
Yeah, what did a house cost back then, $18,000? And your mom had a full time job? Lot of people stuck at 20 hours a week (with an erratic schedule) dream about full time.
Since our day, worker productivity has gone through the roof, but wages have stayed flat, or gone down. All the gains have gone to the top, fewer jobs offer benefits, and a retirement pension is something your grandpa tells you about, like hand-crank phonographs. Billy helping dad rake the yard ain't gonna change that.
So spare us your judgement. We're all busy working three jobs to pay your Social Security (which won't be there when we retire).
Since our day, worker productivity has gone through the roof, but wages have stayed flat, or gone down. All the gains have gone to the top, fewer jobs offer benefits, and a retirement pension is something your grandpa tells you about, like hand-crank phonographs. Billy helping dad rake the yard ain't gonna change that.
So spare us your judgement. We're all busy working three jobs to pay your Social Security (which won't be there when we retire).
5
Good thing single and/or child-free people aren't stressed, tired, or rushed. Glad my married child-bearing friends have cornered this market.
19
This is an article about the lifestyles of families with jobs and children. It is not a comparison of child free familes versus families with children. It is a snapshot of one type of family.Just because single and child free people aren't mentioned in this particular article (but are in many others, even sometimes exclusively) does not mean they don't matter. Everyone has the right to live their lives the way they want, and has a right to refuse to explain or justify their decisions. And an adult really should be able to read an article about a lifestyle they do not have without replying "but what about meeeee" in response. Especially when reading the article to begin with was totally optional.
6
Yes, oh boy, but when was the last time the NYT expended any resources examining the plight of the single/chidlfree, our excessive taxation vis a vis benefits received from public services, discrimination in the workplace, second-class citizen when it comes to myriad legal rights, etc?
More and more people are choosing to remain umarried and childfree -- we are a growing economic cohort, a growing voting bloc, generally net contributors rather than net takers from the common coffer and provide the horsepower for a lot of volunteerism and private philanthropy, not to mention eldercare and other "benefits to society." But one seldom hears about that in the NYT or elsewhere. Overtaxed and overlooked is rather a recipe for umbrage.
More and more people are choosing to remain umarried and childfree -- we are a growing economic cohort, a growing voting bloc, generally net contributors rather than net takers from the common coffer and provide the horsepower for a lot of volunteerism and private philanthropy, not to mention eldercare and other "benefits to society." But one seldom hears about that in the NYT or elsewhere. Overtaxed and overlooked is rather a recipe for umbrage.
8
@ Bohemienne - "Net taker"? Who do you think pays your social security if not the next generation? And who do you think will take care of you if not the younger people, whom you think should never have been born? Net taker indeed.
5
Can the judgmental, critical people who don't have kids or had them long ago please spare me the "Everyone makes choices" or “Stop choosing ‘things’ over time with family” speeches? What an ignorant bunch of bologna (using “bologna”, since I want this published). My mother stayed home because it was possible. My father didn’t make a lot of money. Things were tight, but we got by and had a lovely childhood. I remember being so grateful to have my mother at home, and feeling genuinely sorry for those who did not. My daughter cries and asks me to stay home. My days are full of guilt and very little joy. We don't take vacations, I don’t have a cleaning lady, I don’t get manicures, I wash and iron instead of dry cleaning, and try to cook most nights even though I get home late and it means ignoring my kids for the 2 hours we have together before bed. The fact is that it is not economically possible for most middle class families in the NY / Tristate area to pay the bills if they have children. It’s pretty convenient to tell people they need to “make a choice” and maybe forgo having children, but it’s pretty ignorant and short-sighted. That seems to suggest that only the wealthy should have children; chalk that up to one more luxury they are permitted. I guess the rest of us can just stop procreating and let society wither away rather than doing anything to try and encourage society to make some concessions that make sense with the changing nature of work and family.
96
Or people could move to cheaper parts of the country before deciding to have children.
It is not exactly news that the Tri State area is expensive, as it was even 30-40 years ago.
It is not exactly news that the Tri State area is expensive, as it was even 30-40 years ago.
4
Jo Ann - But you did CHOSE to have kids. You talk about how one parent staying home with the children in important but then you made the choice against that by having kids when you weren't able to stay home. Own your choices.
And it's "only the rich should have kids" but instead, only people who can afford to have kids should.
And it's "only the rich should have kids" but instead, only people who can afford to have kids should.
4
Thanks for that helpful fact. I also take issue with the "Move if NY is too expensive" suggestions. Sorry - some of us have elderly families that need caring for with Alzheimer's or worse, and some of us also rely on them for child care. Can't always move the whole village.
2
Every day there are times in which I feel stressed, tired, and rushed and the kids are all grown up and long gone! It's called living in today's society. The more conveniences at my disposal, the more overwhelmed I sometimes become. As one commenter wrote, it's all about choices. I might add it's also all about attitude. There may be some truth to the saying, "Be careful what you wish for."
15
Yes, bottom line -- life is hectic for most of us. So what is the point of these repeated "analyses" about the plight of modern households? It's hardly news that human existence is a bit of a struggle and I defy anyone to credibly assert that it's harder today than it used to be.
Yes, we work harder to pay for health care -- but there also are more options for people who get cancer or heart disease than there were in the 1970s, or earlier, or even more recently. I know families where every single member goes to allergist, dermatologist, nutrition/diabetes counseler, shrink -- their 1970s counterpart was lucky to get an annual physical. People who whine about the complexity of today's life forget how affluent they are compared to their mid-20th-century counterparts.
We are not as hard done by as Ms. Cain Miller likes to portray in her Upshot columns. And we all certainly have, or had, the choice to streamline. I'll head home tonight to enjoy the utter absence of diapers, scrunched cheerios, daycare bills and screeching kids as I stroll my renovated perennial beds and new greenhouse, perhaps with a glass of wine. Those who are emptying potty chairs or whatever could be doing the same thing but they chose otherwise.
I have no problem paying taxes to help people who truly are disadvantaged through circumstances beyond our control. But most of us are not interested in paying even more in taxes just to make optional lifestyle choices easier for our economic peers.
Yes, we work harder to pay for health care -- but there also are more options for people who get cancer or heart disease than there were in the 1970s, or earlier, or even more recently. I know families where every single member goes to allergist, dermatologist, nutrition/diabetes counseler, shrink -- their 1970s counterpart was lucky to get an annual physical. People who whine about the complexity of today's life forget how affluent they are compared to their mid-20th-century counterparts.
We are not as hard done by as Ms. Cain Miller likes to portray in her Upshot columns. And we all certainly have, or had, the choice to streamline. I'll head home tonight to enjoy the utter absence of diapers, scrunched cheerios, daycare bills and screeching kids as I stroll my renovated perennial beds and new greenhouse, perhaps with a glass of wine. Those who are emptying potty chairs or whatever could be doing the same thing but they chose otherwise.
I have no problem paying taxes to help people who truly are disadvantaged through circumstances beyond our control. But most of us are not interested in paying even more in taxes just to make optional lifestyle choices easier for our economic peers.
9
Well Bohemienne, maybe you missed out on crunched Cheerios on your pristine floor but you also missed out on LOVE. This is something not quantifiable or easily analyzed by Pew and its ilk. Family is the bedrock of civilization and most human beings (and other mammals) prefer living in a family unit. That's why we reproduce. We may complain about our children but we love them more than you and your childless peers could ever imagine. And don't tell me about how your dog gives you the same love because it's not comparable. And in a few short years the dog will be dead. The children, meanwhile, will grow into adults who will become your FRIEND. Enjoy your empty home. Most of us, the world over, don't want that for ourselves. And had your parents shared your sentiments, please remember you would not be here.
1
LOL, f.s.
I have many family members, friends and (one at a time) lovers -- no shortage of love in my life, or people in and out of my home, and I am sure the same can be said for most other childfree people. We just didn't need to pump someone out of our uteri to experience love, at the expense of other humans and other inhabitants of planet Earth.
I have many family members, friends and (one at a time) lovers -- no shortage of love in my life, or people in and out of my home, and I am sure the same can be said for most other childfree people. We just didn't need to pump someone out of our uteri to experience love, at the expense of other humans and other inhabitants of planet Earth.
6
But according to JEB! we're not working hard enough.
22
Hillary wants to open salt mines, just like the model country she idolizes.
Jeb was talking about the 94 million Americans who could work but choose not to work, so he is correct, those people need to work much harder than no work
2
Shoshanna, please provide a source for the figure you listed here.
1
Choice. Some commenters suggest that the beleaguered parents mentioned in the article made their own beds, so to speak. Indeed, people are choosing to assume the responsibilities of family and children. But does that mean that they have no right to complain? The truth is that in today's America, earnest labor no longer, by itself, produces the compensation necessary to maintain even a frugal lifestyle. Unskilled labor is no longer felt to deserve a living wage. So, when people choose to procreate, they also need to hold competitive, better paying jobs in order to make ends meet. Not the case a few decades ago. So, while individuals are still free to choose, the packages available come with less and less. Kind of like health plans. And apparently, according to a recent study, white Americans are starting to choose paths that lead to early death. But at least we don't have big government meddling with our freedom to choose!
8
"Mr. O’Malley was able to take a month off, and Ms. Mercogliano said: “I honestly think that was the biggest gift I’ve ever had, just having him home. It’s great that people are focused on more family leave, but I absolutely believe it should be gender-neutral'."
Here here.
Welcome to the love-fest of a Capitalist workplace, where the enormous majority of us work *for* wages *for* some entity. Reagan-loving free marketeers would have the inconveniences of having a home and family frittered away as much as possible in order to siphon the benefits of economic growth straight *up* to the irreplaceable "shareholder."
GOP presidential contenders preaching to everyone how we can all be small business owners and pay little taxes, or be impoverished under-class. Commodify everything and make sure 1 in a million Zuckerbergs, Musks and Jobs's are able to make their ungodly sums, and let the rest of us figure out how to live our petty insignificant worker lives. Who doesn't love America in the post-Industrial Tech Age? It's really like Nirvana, without the pesky inconveniences of spending time with one's family.
The problem noted in this article isn't the stress itself. The problem's that it's not working right. We just need to get neuroscientists and Big Pharma to bio-engineer and recalibrate our stress response, which, after all, is only designed for fight of flight out on the wild savannah. I look forward to seeing the next fortune made by an Ivy League dropout.
Here here.
Welcome to the love-fest of a Capitalist workplace, where the enormous majority of us work *for* wages *for* some entity. Reagan-loving free marketeers would have the inconveniences of having a home and family frittered away as much as possible in order to siphon the benefits of economic growth straight *up* to the irreplaceable "shareholder."
GOP presidential contenders preaching to everyone how we can all be small business owners and pay little taxes, or be impoverished under-class. Commodify everything and make sure 1 in a million Zuckerbergs, Musks and Jobs's are able to make their ungodly sums, and let the rest of us figure out how to live our petty insignificant worker lives. Who doesn't love America in the post-Industrial Tech Age? It's really like Nirvana, without the pesky inconveniences of spending time with one's family.
The problem noted in this article isn't the stress itself. The problem's that it's not working right. We just need to get neuroscientists and Big Pharma to bio-engineer and recalibrate our stress response, which, after all, is only designed for fight of flight out on the wild savannah. I look forward to seeing the next fortune made by an Ivy League dropout.
5
"In a 1989 book called “The Second Shift,” the sociologist Arlie Russell Hochschild described the double burden employed mothers face because they are also responsible for housework and child care. Last year she said that despite some changes in society, the workplace had not changed enough to alleviate the problems."
The workplace is not going to change, either, because women compete with men at the office and it is that competition that drives the equation. If women do not work as hard as the men at work, they will produce less and fall behind. If they work as hard as the men, and get no respite on the home front, they are doing double duty.
The change needs to come at home if it is going to be there at all.
As always, choose your spouse carefully!
The workplace is not going to change, either, because women compete with men at the office and it is that competition that drives the equation. If women do not work as hard as the men at work, they will produce less and fall behind. If they work as hard as the men, and get no respite on the home front, they are doing double duty.
The change needs to come at home if it is going to be there at all.
As always, choose your spouse carefully!
5
I'm not sure of any complete solutions but I would support a 4 day work week and don't think productivity would truly suffer - technology has allowed us to be far more productive and an extra day would really get us closer to real work life balance... especially if the kids are still in school 5 days (sorry teachers)
8
Ironically, married white couples with children are solidly Republican, and the Republicans are of course against things like more generous parental leave which might make life easier for working parents.
I don't have children, and while I would be supportive of policies that make life easier for families with children, if only out of enlightened self-interest, if people with kids want to vote Republican, I'm not going to shed tears for them as the lives become more and more stressful and economically strained. These are the "family values" they apparently want.
Of course, I may be jumping to simplistic conclusions about voting patterns. The only data I've seen are for all families with children; it would be interesting to know if families in which both parents work are as Republican as those in which only one parent does.
I don't have children, and while I would be supportive of policies that make life easier for families with children, if only out of enlightened self-interest, if people with kids want to vote Republican, I'm not going to shed tears for them as the lives become more and more stressful and economically strained. These are the "family values" they apparently want.
Of course, I may be jumping to simplistic conclusions about voting patterns. The only data I've seen are for all families with children; it would be interesting to know if families in which both parents work are as Republican as those in which only one parent does.
14
Another reasonable conclusion is that working families vote Republican because they are not dependent on government for a handout and desire to see less people become dependent on welfare. Thus benefiting future generations and everyone really.
5
Well Ken, the reason people vote Republican is because the Democrats are delusional with their nefarious tax and anti-company policies. They want to make everything public and it destroys competition and jobs, which results in a stagnant economy. The reason both parents typically work in a "Republican" household as you call it, is because they pay their way through life rather than riding the backs of people through government handouts. If we could get rid of the liberal handouts, maybe "republican" households wouldn't require both parents to work. The people who work the hardest and play by the game are the ones who end up suffering, regardless of how they vote. The problem is, the Democrats plan further worsens this trend while Conservative/Libertarian plans take us away from it (I hate to use the term Republican because 90% of them are just as dumb as the Democrats).
4
They are not solidly Republican. More apt maybe. But I live in a Blue State.
Good points, but no specific mention of one big stressor: the current societal expectation that children must be ferried from one activity to another (think soccer teams for 5 year olds) and parents must attend every event--including those held during the parents' working hours. Enough already!
164
And this primarily pertains to sports, in most cases. The obsession with sports in this society is ridiculous.
9
Sports is not the root of all evil. It's all about balance for families and some strike this balance better than others. And the imbalance can come with many activities - dance, music, theatre, etc. Participation in sports has taught my kids about teamwork, goal-setting, time management and much more - including an appreciation for overall health. And in the process they have made great friends and have a lot fun, too.
2
They can also learn that and more at the playground. Let them out of the house (or car) and accept that you shouldn't be controlling their every waking moment.
2
Globalism and its discontents...
2
America is NOT the greatest country on earth, far from it. Since 1980 when the Republican everything has to be a business racket mentality took hold among a moronic public, America has been one big ripoff. We get next to nothing for our tax dollar, it all goes to the wealthy and connected. Lazy dumbed down Fox addled Americans should get up the nerve to travel abroad and see the middle class quality of life in all those European "socialist" countries they are so quick to deride. They'd be shocked.
Getting the Republican Criminal Organization out of American politics entirely is the first prerequisite to restoring anything resembling family values in this country. Republican liars, hypocrites, thieves, and racists belong in jail not running a government they profess to hate.
Getting the Republican Criminal Organization out of American politics entirely is the first prerequisite to restoring anything resembling family values in this country. Republican liars, hypocrites, thieves, and racists belong in jail not running a government they profess to hate.
73
Amen. Well said. I have lived in four different countries abroad during my working years. To be honest, I feel that America is in a serious state of decline with its focus on money, money, money and winners take all. My first visit to Europe was in 1953 when I was in high school. On my recent trips there, I observed the European lifestyle far exceeds that of the average American in terms of quality of life. What happened? America has become obsessed with war, the military and power. Eisenhower posted the warnings. And, ever since Reagan, the country has gone down, down, down. One only has to look at the current slate of Republican candidates and their messages for President. That says it all.
9
For one, the European countries have 'mooched' off the U.S. for their own defense responsibilities for years. How's that Muslim invasion of Europe now going to work out? Many European countries, while very homogeneous--they just don't have that special sauce of "diversity"--have class systems that will basically not allow a "blue collar" person to move out of that class. I disagree--I'll take the U.S. any day of the week and twice on Sundays.
1
And who will speak for those parents in the workplace now that the full-scale assault on collective bargaining is underway? How many of the workers in your article are organized?
6
The guilt needs to be shed, full-stop. Your kids will be fine in daycare. Quality time a reason we have weekends. You just can't reasonably expect to work full time, keep your house in perfect order, cook a perfect scratchmade meal every night, take care of all the miscellaneous tasks that add up, AND spend a couple hours of undivided attention with your children every single day. Compromise is the name of the game.
16
Day care is not as good as a committed parent.
Compromise is the name of the game.
We refused to compromise on this point, and did without the extra income.
Compromise is the name of the game.
We refused to compromise on this point, and did without the extra income.
2
Exactly. You can always make more money, time you will not get back.
@Hooey: that is entirely not true. a good day care is worth more than Lehman Bros. ever was. my child is so much smarter, better socialized and just al around wonderful than if she had stayed at home. I have zero guilt- not that I had much choice. I don't have to be some kind of fanatical, obsessive parent. I just have to love, nurture, keep her healthy and make sure she has the resources to succeed and stay out of the way.
2
Women will always do more of the home workload than men. Even in an ideal circumstance where the Dad is super helpful, the Mom still has to ask and think and decide what has to be done. You don't see men running around anticipating chores and needs. Their brains are not wired that way. Men will do this at work but not at home. Although even at work, it is always the women who are stuck with planning social events, parties etc. The men just stand there with their hands in their pants. Although if you ASK them to do something, they do it well. But you have to anticipate and ask. Studies show that men's brains compute one thing at a time, do not multi-task well, and don't worry as much as women. So why do these studies keep happening? I say shame on women's naivete. You knew what you were getting into. If you don't like it, buy a smaller house or share a house. Get rid of all your expensive stuff and stay at home.
I am not generalizing. I am 65, two kids, married with many past relationships with varied types of men. I have never had a different experience. My current SO is wonderful. He's neat, clean, helpful and will do anything asked. He jumps up after dinner and does the dishes. However, its up to me to make sure the frig is stocked and sneak in and wash his pillowcase so my expensive pillows aren't ruined.
I did not work when my kids were young. My daughters work. And they are stressed.
I am not generalizing. I am 65, two kids, married with many past relationships with varied types of men. I have never had a different experience. My current SO is wonderful. He's neat, clean, helpful and will do anything asked. He jumps up after dinner and does the dishes. However, its up to me to make sure the frig is stocked and sneak in and wash his pillowcase so my expensive pillows aren't ruined.
I did not work when my kids were young. My daughters work. And they are stressed.
9
Even if people are in fact "wired" a certain way (which is scientifically debatable), any adult should be able to have a conversation with their spouse and divide tasks up in a way that they both find equitable.
If it's drawn to someone's attention that (e.g.) they need to take on more responsibility for tracking doctor's appointments, etc., there are any number of tools they can use to make that happen. (Like cell phone reminders, Google calendars, etc., etc.) The fact that a particular task doesn't "come naturally" to someone is a lazy excuse.
"I am not generalizing."
Saying "all men are bad at [X]" is exactly what generalizing means.
If it's drawn to someone's attention that (e.g.) they need to take on more responsibility for tracking doctor's appointments, etc., there are any number of tools they can use to make that happen. (Like cell phone reminders, Google calendars, etc., etc.) The fact that a particular task doesn't "come naturally" to someone is a lazy excuse.
"I am not generalizing."
Saying "all men are bad at [X]" is exactly what generalizing means.
3
Wow, what a bigoted and stereotyping post!
Do you think it would be helpful if someone had posted that's no wonder that families can't handle modern stress, because career women just don't have a head for business. They can file and type if their boss looks over their shoulder, but don't expect those dames to have the initiative to play in the big league.
Of course, you wouldn't... because it's a stupid and antiquated generalization, much as your post is.
Do you think it would be helpful if someone had posted that's no wonder that families can't handle modern stress, because career women just don't have a head for business. They can file and type if their boss looks over their shoulder, but don't expect those dames to have the initiative to play in the big league.
Of course, you wouldn't... because it's a stupid and antiquated generalization, much as your post is.
4
Shame on women's naivete? So you expect that a newly married woman in her 20s would have the same insight on men that you have...with 40+ more years of experience with life, relationships and kids?
Generalizing is exactly what you're doing when you imply that a working woman could just get rid of her "expensive stuff" and then magically just be able to afford to stay home. Some working women are working to pay for rent and utlities and insurance and food. Some have a SO who makes significantly less than them. Some don't have a SO at all. To imply that women work so they can go diamond shopping every Friday after work is a bit preposterous in this day and age. In the last 40 years the incomes people make have not gone up enough to compensate for the rise in the cost of living. What was once a choice to stay home with your kids is now, for many, a dream they file in the "when I win the lotto" folder.
Yes, having children is your choice. But it is also a choice to be the sole fridge stocker and pillow case washer in your house when you have a SO that you acknowledge as someone who "does anything asked".
Generalizing is exactly what you're doing when you imply that a working woman could just get rid of her "expensive stuff" and then magically just be able to afford to stay home. Some working women are working to pay for rent and utlities and insurance and food. Some have a SO who makes significantly less than them. Some don't have a SO at all. To imply that women work so they can go diamond shopping every Friday after work is a bit preposterous in this day and age. In the last 40 years the incomes people make have not gone up enough to compensate for the rise in the cost of living. What was once a choice to stay home with your kids is now, for many, a dream they file in the "when I win the lotto" folder.
Yes, having children is your choice. But it is also a choice to be the sole fridge stocker and pillow case washer in your house when you have a SO that you acknowledge as someone who "does anything asked".
1
"...policies like paid family leave and after-school child care would significantly ease parents’ stress. Yet today, families mostly figure out the juggle on their own."
I've always lived among conservatives whose incomes were higher than mine, and who could afford having one parent (most often the mother) stay at home with the kids. And it's these people who determine public policy through their votes. In yesterday's election, the candidate who would increase spending on child care and other family-friendly programs did not win because the people who would benefit the most did not vote. Shame on them.
I've always lived among conservatives whose incomes were higher than mine, and who could afford having one parent (most often the mother) stay at home with the kids. And it's these people who determine public policy through their votes. In yesterday's election, the candidate who would increase spending on child care and other family-friendly programs did not win because the people who would benefit the most did not vote. Shame on them.
14
This article emphasizes the division of labor between parents and will surely produce many discussions and arguments between two people being squeezed to their wit's end. This is a distraction that keeps us from doing something about the fundamental problem. Instead of dividing us, this issue should be bonding us.
To maintain our standard of living as real incomes fall, both parents have to earn. As the middle class sinks lower, the pressures are increased. But now there is little more that parents can give. Our only choice is to become comfortable with increasingly lower standards of living, or fight for labor and government spending for the 99%.
Or we can bicker on a sinking lifeboat.
To maintain our standard of living as real incomes fall, both parents have to earn. As the middle class sinks lower, the pressures are increased. But now there is little more that parents can give. Our only choice is to become comfortable with increasingly lower standards of living, or fight for labor and government spending for the 99%.
Or we can bicker on a sinking lifeboat.
14
Old Yeller says "To maintain our standard of living as real incomes fall, both parents have to earn."
Not true. The problem is your desire to "maintain" your "standard of living." You define standard of living incorrectly. Standard of living includes lifestyle. People with two incomes are choosing more expensive vacations, a nicer kitchen, a nicer car, etc., instead of the better lifestyle that comes with less income and one parent working.
Not true. The problem is your desire to "maintain" your "standard of living." You define standard of living incorrectly. Standard of living includes lifestyle. People with two incomes are choosing more expensive vacations, a nicer kitchen, a nicer car, etc., instead of the better lifestyle that comes with less income and one parent working.
1
The supreme irony is those who would be the most passionate advocates of the social policy changes to support 2-wage earner families--which almost every other developed nation in the world manages to provide because they don't spend in government dollars what we do on wars/defense & healthcare--are the ones who have the least amount of time to devote to the necessary politicking to bring it about--the families themselves.
7
I think the problem is that the price of admission into the American middle class has risen so much. For many families, working two full-time jobs is necessary just to maintain a basic standard of living. The alternative is reliance on assistance from public agencies and a lack of access to the kind of education and opportunities that will allow children the opportunities to become successful. We are increasingly becoming a nation where the interests of the few are served at the expense of the many.
23
This article did not address the main issue. Does all this stress result in less children? If it does result in less than the replacement number of 2 children per woman per lifetime then the system must be abandoned. Nothing else matters more than this one fundamental concept.
2
There is nothing imperative about the population. Our population could decrease to 250 million and it doesn't matter. So what if total GDP goes down. GDP per capita might actually go up.
3
No, all this "stress"does not result in fewer children. Regrettably.
Those clamoring for more handouts from the pocketbooks of fellow citizens need to get back to us when the lack of human procreation becomes a real problem.
And I don't think that's about to happen any time soon.
NG: "New population projections shatter earlier estimates."
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/09/140918-population-global...
So what if clean air, potable water, elephants, rhinos, Monarch butterflies, dolphins etc. become a distant memory, eh? Every human baybee is a mirakul!
Those clamoring for more handouts from the pocketbooks of fellow citizens need to get back to us when the lack of human procreation becomes a real problem.
And I don't think that's about to happen any time soon.
NG: "New population projections shatter earlier estimates."
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/09/140918-population-global...
So what if clean air, potable water, elephants, rhinos, Monarch butterflies, dolphins etc. become a distant memory, eh? Every human baybee is a mirakul!
3
The survey's findings perfectly mirror my own experience as a full time practicing lawyer, mother of two and wife of a full time professional. All this just so we can stay afloat financially and save money for college and retirement. It is not a fun way to live.
21
If we went back to the good old days, when women were content to stay home and raise children, then the topics raised in this article would not be a problem. Women's liberation is the cause of these problems. When women wanted a so-called career, the family suffered. Isn't raising children enough of a career? What could be more fulfilling than to raise a family? Yes, times have changed, and not necessarily for the better, especially for the children because of female ambition.
8
I hope this is a troll and not a serious comment. NYTimes, I thought you moderated comments?
2
I don't think there's a better response to this than the comment from Richard B immediately below.
2
What could be more fulfilling than raising a family?
Raising a family AND having a career. Raising a family AND not living in poverty. Raising a family AND being able to help out with college. Raising a family AND demonstrating to my daughter that she, too, should pursue her dreams. Raising a family AND improving the world with my profession. Raising a family WITH a man who believes in equality and doesn't "help out" with chores or childcare, but simply does his share.
Raising a family AND having a career. Raising a family AND not living in poverty. Raising a family AND being able to help out with college. Raising a family AND demonstrating to my daughter that she, too, should pursue her dreams. Raising a family AND improving the world with my profession. Raising a family WITH a man who believes in equality and doesn't "help out" with chores or childcare, but simply does his share.
7
My mother, 1922-2000, did not work after her children were born, 1948-1960.
She was home all the time, frustrated and abusive.
Oh, she did the greatest job of housekeeping, cooking, management of the household in general, but she was physically and mentally abusive, and forgive me, a monster.
Oh to have been neglected, just a little, instead of under the constant scrutiny of such a tyrant.
She was home all the time, frustrated and abusive.
Oh, she did the greatest job of housekeeping, cooking, management of the household in general, but she was physically and mentally abusive, and forgive me, a monster.
Oh to have been neglected, just a little, instead of under the constant scrutiny of such a tyrant.
33
My mother was like this too. It made me suicidal. Luckily for me, I got through it and will not repeat her mistakes.
1
One point that's often forgotten:
Even though many parents today wish they could spend more time with their kids, time-use surveys show that modern parents actually spend FAR more time with them than stay-at-home moms did back in the '50s and '60s.
Back then, most of the time that women spent at home was focused on housework, not one-on-one interaction with children. Telling kids to "go out and play, and don't bother me" was basically the parenting norm among my grandparents' generation.
Parents feel guilty, in part, because parenting standards have changed so much in favor of one-on-one time. Parents didn't really play *with* their kids so much 40-50+ years ago.
Even though many parents today wish they could spend more time with their kids, time-use surveys show that modern parents actually spend FAR more time with them than stay-at-home moms did back in the '50s and '60s.
Back then, most of the time that women spent at home was focused on housework, not one-on-one interaction with children. Telling kids to "go out and play, and don't bother me" was basically the parenting norm among my grandparents' generation.
Parents feel guilty, in part, because parenting standards have changed so much in favor of one-on-one time. Parents didn't really play *with* their kids so much 40-50+ years ago.
40
True. I had a stay at home parent and most of the time we did spend together was until I was around 8 and too young to be left alone, I had to be taken along shopping and on errands. Otherwise, I was usually playing on my own or with friends.
1
Don't forget that parents who tell their children to go out and play are in danger of having the authorities called on them.
5
I stayed at home until my youngest was in school full time. If I agreed to play with my children, they were thrilled, as it was a rare treat for them.
Parents who act like their child's BFF are doing them a huge disfavor. To see a child demand their parents 'come and play' is bizarre, as the child is considered the authority in the household.
I considered myself to be primarily their teacher. Being their 'friend' never entered into the equation, as BFFs are not treated with respect, which explains what is wrong with many Millennials.
Parents who act like their child's BFF are doing them a huge disfavor. To see a child demand their parents 'come and play' is bizarre, as the child is considered the authority in the household.
I considered myself to be primarily their teacher. Being their 'friend' never entered into the equation, as BFFs are not treated with respect, which explains what is wrong with many Millennials.
3
Ah, the mythical "Living / Life Balance!" I put that up there with the most popular conspiracy theories. ;o)
5
We chose not to have children. It allows us flexibility in terms of both finance, location, schedule, etc. If there is an emergency, it is just easier to deal with. At almost 40 years old, I know that there may be a time sooner rather than later where I may need to help out my mother as she gets older, and I'm spread too thin to care for myself, an aging parent AND kids. This country seems to be in a downward spiral, it it seems irresponsible to bring new life into it.
18
Good article that repeats the same theme that has been going on in the US for decades...bow to the corporate capitalist system and and sacrifice any help for minorities, poor, and families. Want this to change? Vote! There are more women in this country than men so if women want better family leave/maternity leave policies then vote. Lastly Claire Miller always includes women as victims/feminist issues in her articles and like many writers in the NYT cherry picks her studies and sources. As another commenter mentioned maybe the reason when do not do more or equal in the household is due to societal norms and biases and negative consequences at work for men who take time to help at home. Many men also work in physically demanding industries that are brutal and exhausting. But Claire Miller will not mention the "why" reasons but just spew some study that shows men still not doing enough or equally at home. Look up Claire Miller's archive articles and you will see a theme. Women = victims, Men = bad.
6
Women have *always* worked in fields that were physically brutal and exhausting, too. I frequently see people suggesting that only men have taken on these types of risks, which is completely inaccurate if you do any historical research.
Back in the early days of the Industrial Revolution, women were working 12+ hour shifts in dangerous factories, were hauling coal underground in mines, etc.
Many traditionally female jobs are also physically exhausting. Healthcare workers (for example) frequently lift patients and have huge rates of back injuries. Retail workers are typically on their feet all day, with all the musculoskeletal issues, swollen ankles, etc., that come with that. And so on.
Since the late-20th-century decline of the manufacturing sector, not that many American men are really doing physically dangerous work anymore. They're far more likely to be working on Excel spreadsheets in a cubicle than mining coal.
Back in the early days of the Industrial Revolution, women were working 12+ hour shifts in dangerous factories, were hauling coal underground in mines, etc.
Many traditionally female jobs are also physically exhausting. Healthcare workers (for example) frequently lift patients and have huge rates of back injuries. Retail workers are typically on their feet all day, with all the musculoskeletal issues, swollen ankles, etc., that come with that. And so on.
Since the late-20th-century decline of the manufacturing sector, not that many American men are really doing physically dangerous work anymore. They're far more likely to be working on Excel spreadsheets in a cubicle than mining coal.
4
We raised our kids with one working parent (me) and lived in a small, inexpensive home in an area where taxes are low so that we could afford the SAHM and I think that it was quite worthwhile in that my wife did get to spend a lot of time with the kids. Of course I was often working 80-hour weeks so I saw much less of them but I somewhat made up for that when they were in their upper teens as I helped them through the college process (my wife doesn't have a college degrees where I have two).
There's a ton of stress whether you have a SAHM, one parent working part-time or both working full-time. There is always financial pressure (unless you happen to have a boatload of assets from some kind of windfall) and there's career pressure and competitive pressure. Flexible working arrangements are great as you can do your kids stuff while still getting the hours in but you still have to get the hours in. The modern professional workplace is brutal on your time.
There is an argument for more services for parents but I think that you have the problem of paying for it in terms of local taxes which increase your expenses which causes stress. I understand that child-care expenses are a huge burden these days - and a stressor in that high-quality child-care is a non-trivial expense. I think that even low-quality child-care is a big expense. The other approach would be low-services and low taxes so that you could pay for services out of your tax savings.
There's a ton of stress whether you have a SAHM, one parent working part-time or both working full-time. There is always financial pressure (unless you happen to have a boatload of assets from some kind of windfall) and there's career pressure and competitive pressure. Flexible working arrangements are great as you can do your kids stuff while still getting the hours in but you still have to get the hours in. The modern professional workplace is brutal on your time.
There is an argument for more services for parents but I think that you have the problem of paying for it in terms of local taxes which increase your expenses which causes stress. I understand that child-care expenses are a huge burden these days - and a stressor in that high-quality child-care is a non-trivial expense. I think that even low-quality child-care is a big expense. The other approach would be low-services and low taxes so that you could pay for services out of your tax savings.
3
This is what you get when you soak yourself in the blood of the debt lamb, when you're convicted by your vanity, and when you run out and buy things in an effort to match your neighbors whim for whim.
7
No, this is what happens when the employers and policy makers decide that the needs of the many are nothing compared to the needs of the few to enrich themselves in every possible way.
Wages have declined since the 1970s. Costs have gone up. Maintaining a modest middle class lifestyle with one wage earner is simply not possible for millions of Americans. As a result the middle class is shrinking. In most cases it has nothing to do with extravagant spending. There are working people out here who were middle class and now barely cover the cost of food, shelter and medicine.
Wages have declined since the 1970s. Costs have gone up. Maintaining a modest middle class lifestyle with one wage earner is simply not possible for millions of Americans. As a result the middle class is shrinking. In most cases it has nothing to do with extravagant spending. There are working people out here who were middle class and now barely cover the cost of food, shelter and medicine.
5
This is the price of being the world's on-call police force. What we have prioritized over social services is, by far, having the world's largest military. The reason countries in Western Europe can afford to spend so much money (in total and as a % of GDP) on child care, paid leave, free medical care etc...is because they know the US Armed Forces will show up should their countries ever face an actual existential threat.
How badly do we REALLY need that extra aircraft carrier?
How badly do we REALLY need that extra aircraft carrier?
16
I don't have time to read this.
20
Very apt, Max D.
How about organizing unions again? It worked for my grandparents.
46
Maybe we should bring back a Day of Rest when no work is done by anyone and all time and all energy, and much love are showered on friends, family, and our inner souls.
18
Yeah we had one; it was called the Sabbath, until Republican economic policies destroyed it.
Day of rest. Funny. I would *love* to have a day of rest, but Sunday afternoon is when I run to the grocery store and catch up laundry. Oh, it's when my husband mows the lawn and rakes leaves in the fall (because it is too dark to rake leaves when we get home). It's when we find those items for the projects my daughter is doing that can't be snagged at the grocery store. It's when I restock my elderly mother's refrigerator (thankfully my husband does help with that). And if we are lucky, at the end of our Sunday, we cook with our neighbors and enjoy an hour or so of being social while our kids hang out together.
It is hard to maintain a full-time job and be a parent. That said, why do parents believe that they should be paid for work when they aren't there? Unless "paid family leave" is available to all working people, whether parents or childless, it's a form of discrimination. We pay lots of taxes to help educate your children. Parents take a lot of time off for school activities, doctor's appointments, kid's games while their co-workers pick up the slack. Parents who make these demands are the most entitled, me-first folks around.
16
Absolutely employers should provide paid family leave for all workers. Many workers ages 40 and up have responsibilities for their aging or chronically ill parents. Some workers find themselves with a chronically ill partner or spouse who needs significant help getting to doctors' appointments, etc. The point is that all employers need to begin respecting the fact that workers have a life outside of work, and stop penalizing those who have the audacity to actually attend to that life.
12
You could equally ask, why do people think they should receive *any* benefits at work (e.g., sick days, health insurance or retirement benefits)?
Employers offer those types of benefits because (a) it makes them more attractive to qualified applicants, (b) increased quality of life actually makes workers more productive, and (c) it cuts down on expensive employee turnover and retraining.
All of those things (especially c) are equally true of family leave. It's a fact of life that many employees will become parents at some point in their careers. (Or have to care for aging parents). Many of them are talented people who will be able to contribute many more years of valuable work, if they're given some accommodations in the short-term.
It makes financial and practical sense for companies to encourage employees to stay in their jobs (with some allowance for paid leave), rather than losing their expertise and having to train someone else.
Employers offer those types of benefits because (a) it makes them more attractive to qualified applicants, (b) increased quality of life actually makes workers more productive, and (c) it cuts down on expensive employee turnover and retraining.
All of those things (especially c) are equally true of family leave. It's a fact of life that many employees will become parents at some point in their careers. (Or have to care for aging parents). Many of them are talented people who will be able to contribute many more years of valuable work, if they're given some accommodations in the short-term.
It makes financial and practical sense for companies to encourage employees to stay in their jobs (with some allowance for paid leave), rather than losing their expertise and having to train someone else.
4
Just give up on having a "perfect" lifestyle. No time to cook healthy food? Pick up McDonalds. Canning, composting, repurposing, living "local," breastfeeding/pumping, making your own cleaning products, etc all dragging on your time? Just cut that stuff out for awhile, and maybe take it up again when the kids are more independent.
Kids in too many activities? Why, exactly?
As one frazzled parent to another, give yourself a break. The kids will be fine. It's hard enough without trying to be a virtuous consumer.
Kids in too many activities? Why, exactly?
As one frazzled parent to another, give yourself a break. The kids will be fine. It's hard enough without trying to be a virtuous consumer.
5
Having a family is a decision you make. You look at the life options available and you decide- can I afford this option? I don't cry because given the decisions I've made I can't afford a Ferrari (roughly the same cost as raising a child) therefore one shouldn't be upset if the choices they've made do not afford them the luxury of raising a family in the way they think they should be able to (and yes, it is a luxury, not a right). No one owes you anything- you made the decision! Dissatisfied with the options available to you? Move in with extended family, move someplace cheaper, get an education and get a better paying job, work overseas and send money home like millions of people do worldwide- because that's what you do if you have to. The world doesn't need more people; the value of each person is really only in the eyes of the immediate family.
13
Rule 1: Anyone who ever told you that "You can have it all" is a liar.
Rule 2: Edward Abbey is right, whether the individual or the society, "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of a cancer cell."
Rule 3: You will die. Find something meaningful to do with your life.
Rule 4: No matter how meaningless much of your life may seem most of the time, you can find something to do, at least some of the time, that does have meaning. Watch Tim Minchin's video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5RBG1PadWI
If you can stand religion, fine, be religious. But you will probably be let down, if not now, then at the end of your life. Be tolerant.
Rule 5: Connect with nature.
Rule 6: Eat mostly at home. You can make tasty healthy food economically at home and freeze it in batches so you don't have cook every night. And the main problem with beef isn't that it will kill you (see Rule 3). The main problem with beef that it mostly unnecessary, expensive, polluting and is killing the planet (but see Rule 7). And if you are religious, you may have a problem since the planet is but a bounty to be exploited for the religious.
Rule 7: When you eat out, eat a real restaurant, and since you are paying more, eat something you want eat.
Rule 8: Read. See movies & concerts in theaters. Less TV.
Rule 9: Stop hating everyone is who different from you. Try to treat everyone with respect as much as you can (someone you won't be able to; that's life). In other words, grow up!
U R welcome.
Rule 2: Edward Abbey is right, whether the individual or the society, "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of a cancer cell."
Rule 3: You will die. Find something meaningful to do with your life.
Rule 4: No matter how meaningless much of your life may seem most of the time, you can find something to do, at least some of the time, that does have meaning. Watch Tim Minchin's video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5RBG1PadWI
If you can stand religion, fine, be religious. But you will probably be let down, if not now, then at the end of your life. Be tolerant.
Rule 5: Connect with nature.
Rule 6: Eat mostly at home. You can make tasty healthy food economically at home and freeze it in batches so you don't have cook every night. And the main problem with beef isn't that it will kill you (see Rule 3). The main problem with beef that it mostly unnecessary, expensive, polluting and is killing the planet (but see Rule 7). And if you are religious, you may have a problem since the planet is but a bounty to be exploited for the religious.
Rule 7: When you eat out, eat a real restaurant, and since you are paying more, eat something you want eat.
Rule 8: Read. See movies & concerts in theaters. Less TV.
Rule 9: Stop hating everyone is who different from you. Try to treat everyone with respect as much as you can (someone you won't be able to; that's life). In other words, grow up!
U R welcome.
9
Sage advice. Thanks.
2
My mother, in the 1950s, worked full-time starting when I was two. She had a salaried job that I'm sure nowadays would impinge on her nights and weekends and be extremely stressful, but then it didn't: she worked 9 to 5 with an hour for lunch and was home for family dinner like clockwork.
We required so much less of her than kids require now. We took ourselves to school from first grade on. We entertained ourselves and went off with our friends on foot or bus. We did not have organized activities that made demands on her. She always had time to read and do things she enjoyed. She always slept eight hours.
I don't know how raising kids became so demanding, but I know it didn't used to be, even for working mothers.
We required so much less of her than kids require now. We took ourselves to school from first grade on. We entertained ourselves and went off with our friends on foot or bus. We did not have organized activities that made demands on her. She always had time to read and do things she enjoyed. She always slept eight hours.
I don't know how raising kids became so demanding, but I know it didn't used to be, even for working mothers.
239
"We required so much less of her than kids require now. We took ourselves to school from first grade on. We entertained ourselves and went off with our friends on foot or bus. We did not have organized activities that made demands on her. She always had time to read and do things she enjoyed. She always slept eight hours."
That's for sure.
I had a college professor (Urie Brofenbrenner) in the late 1960s, when fear of street crime was at an all-time high, who suggested that the way to make the streets safe was to get people back out on the streets. It turned out he was right. A corollary would be that the way to get kids to be trustworthy is to trust them to manage their own activities, like we did in the 1950s and 1960s when I was growing up. This would certainly result in less harried parents and kids.
That's for sure.
I had a college professor (Urie Brofenbrenner) in the late 1960s, when fear of street crime was at an all-time high, who suggested that the way to make the streets safe was to get people back out on the streets. It turned out he was right. A corollary would be that the way to get kids to be trustworthy is to trust them to manage their own activities, like we did in the 1950s and 1960s when I was growing up. This would certainly result in less harried parents and kids.
8
One critique of your excellent contribution--please don't call mothers who are employed "working mothers." ALL mothers are working mothers--the most demanding job on the planet--some are also employed. Language matters. And, of course, the no one ever uses the phrase "working fathers."
2
Kids can still be like that. Kids can still walk to school. Kids can still entertain themselves. If they don't know how, it's because they weren't given the opportunity to learn how.
And not everyone has a job where they work 80 hours a week to keep up with the Joneses.
And not everyone has a job where they work 80 hours a week to keep up with the Joneses.
This survey just confirms what I, and many of my friends and work colleagues, live each day. While caring for pre-school age children has its challenges, including the abysmally high cost of care, it doesn't get much easier when the kids are in elementary school. My school district has so many days off during the school year, including three days next week. When you add religious holidays, state/federal holidays, Christmas break, February break, April break, and the Friday before Memorial Day I need to find care for 29 days! And this doesn't even include the half-day Fridays in June and various snow days. Good forbid any one get sick. And don't get me started on homework.
7
This is going to be unpopular to say, but the current norm of two working parents isn't healthy. Not for kids, not for parents. Kids grow up obese; nobody to cook healthy homemade meals. Kids grow up fearful and insecure; nobody around to give them free time to roam on their own. Kids are drugged into submission. Tightly constricted schedules stress all involved.
I know it is said that the two income family is an economic necessity, but somehow the cost of living has risen over the years to accomodate an unprecedented level of discretionary spending. The average home size in the 50s and 60s was about half of new homes today. And somebody's filling these homes with all that Made in China stuff you see at Walmart, Target, Macy's, Bed Bath and Beyond, etc.......and it's not the 1%.
Single workers shouldn't be expected to fill in or receive fewer perks than working parents. It's not like people have to have children, and with world population out of control and Americans as top consumers of resources, it would be better if they didn't. But if you must, it's far better to have someone home to take care of the kids. And this isn't sexist, as either parent is better than none.
I know it is said that the two income family is an economic necessity, but somehow the cost of living has risen over the years to accomodate an unprecedented level of discretionary spending. The average home size in the 50s and 60s was about half of new homes today. And somebody's filling these homes with all that Made in China stuff you see at Walmart, Target, Macy's, Bed Bath and Beyond, etc.......and it's not the 1%.
Single workers shouldn't be expected to fill in or receive fewer perks than working parents. It's not like people have to have children, and with world population out of control and Americans as top consumers of resources, it would be better if they didn't. But if you must, it's far better to have someone home to take care of the kids. And this isn't sexist, as either parent is better than none.
21
While I agree with most of what you say, I think that parents are much healthier (and better parents) if they have a life away from their kids.
3
CCM articulates the 50% of families describing the WLB as "stressed, tired and rushed". Wonder what the other half describe it as?
2
In the greatest The changing the The profound demographics change for the United States where women were entering the workforce in levels not seen since their employment to fill "gaps" while men were off fighting WWII, was met with.....zero legislative measures to help newly stressed families.
For all the talk about 'family values' on the right, not one program to help out families has been instituted that would help families and by extension, communities cope.
Midnight basketball was widely successful where instituted....it was one of the first victims of that nasty anti-minority and poor period known as the Reagan years.
Just as with pro-life activists, once the person is birthed, they have no more interest in their care. None. Zero. Zip.
How can they call themselves pro family and yet do nothing to help out those children, those mothers,those families so time impoverished and bedraggled that everyone is at wit's end.
I'm a vet but I'm still shocked that we can always afford a new bomber yet can't come up with a program for kids to do something after school with supervision???
It's inexcusable. And it's a damning judgment against our vapid, valueless US politics.
For all the talk about 'family values' on the right, not one program to help out families has been instituted that would help families and by extension, communities cope.
Midnight basketball was widely successful where instituted....it was one of the first victims of that nasty anti-minority and poor period known as the Reagan years.
Just as with pro-life activists, once the person is birthed, they have no more interest in their care. None. Zero. Zip.
How can they call themselves pro family and yet do nothing to help out those children, those mothers,those families so time impoverished and bedraggled that everyone is at wit's end.
I'm a vet but I'm still shocked that we can always afford a new bomber yet can't come up with a program for kids to do something after school with supervision???
It's inexcusable. And it's a damning judgment against our vapid, valueless US politics.
6
Wouldn't more government programs means more taxes means even heavier burden on working parents? Why are American family dynamics a government responsibility? Women entering the workforce did something else that I think you've missed. It decreased the value of men's labor.
1
Why do people like you (liberals) expect government to do everything? All the things you mention could be done with absolutely no government involvement. It just takes people who actually do things instead of just sitting around and whining about everything.
1
As a mother, I also always felt I was always doing a terrible job. But I had four children and homeschooled them until the oldest was 16 and the youngest was 8, when I went back to work.
We made the financial choice to live with mother-in-law (for 10 years) so I could stay home. I'd never give up the hours I had with my children, nor would they and they are now adults. But you never get back the salary you would have made in those years. When I wasn't working, we always lived on the edge of a bad neighborhood: One direction was safe to walk, the other wasn't. Our status as middle-class was definitely challenged, and we focused more on expressing strong moral character than strong economic standing. This was a little easier since we homeschooled and they didn't face daily peer pressure regarding their wardrobes, that consisted largely of (good quality) t-shirts from Goodwill.
If working, it helps an incredible amount if you can live close to work and eliminate the stress of a long commute.
It's important to let your children know you are on their side, no matter how many hours you are able to spend with them. You need to find the words/actions that help them understand that love means you've got their back, and when you say "no" it is for their protection.
When they are small it is important to stay with them until they fall asleep. You will find out what is troubling them, if you are there in the darkness. It develops trust that lasts through the years.
We made the financial choice to live with mother-in-law (for 10 years) so I could stay home. I'd never give up the hours I had with my children, nor would they and they are now adults. But you never get back the salary you would have made in those years. When I wasn't working, we always lived on the edge of a bad neighborhood: One direction was safe to walk, the other wasn't. Our status as middle-class was definitely challenged, and we focused more on expressing strong moral character than strong economic standing. This was a little easier since we homeschooled and they didn't face daily peer pressure regarding their wardrobes, that consisted largely of (good quality) t-shirts from Goodwill.
If working, it helps an incredible amount if you can live close to work and eliminate the stress of a long commute.
It's important to let your children know you are on their side, no matter how many hours you are able to spend with them. You need to find the words/actions that help them understand that love means you've got their back, and when you say "no" it is for their protection.
When they are small it is important to stay with them until they fall asleep. You will find out what is troubling them, if you are there in the darkness. It develops trust that lasts through the years.
8
More of these stories please. Helps to keep the national dialogue going and it's so important for our society that we put these issues on the table. Let's find more solutions!
6
Boo hoo! Is this anything NEW? No its not.
4
We have a 2.5 year old son. And haven't been to a movie for 2.5 years now.
Both of us work long shifts as doctors and spend any time we can with our son.
We aren't rich - we have only a 850sq foot apartment. We cannot get married even though marriage is a "fundamental right" according to the S.Court because the tax system discriminates against us simply we have decent jobs - we would get taxed $10,000 PER year if married.
But apparently Sanders considers us "rich" and would like to raise our taxes even more.
Both of us work long shifts as doctors and spend any time we can with our son.
We aren't rich - we have only a 850sq foot apartment. We cannot get married even though marriage is a "fundamental right" according to the S.Court because the tax system discriminates against us simply we have decent jobs - we would get taxed $10,000 PER year if married.
But apparently Sanders considers us "rich" and would like to raise our taxes even more.
2
I can help. There are people called babysitters who will watch your children for a few hours for a modest fee. I assume that you can afford a babysitter if you make perhaps >300K/year together. I think you also should learn a little more about the tax code. You have many options as far as filing is concerned and there are lots of ways to shelter some of your income from taxes. I assume that in NYC you can get some advice on this. I guess overall I find your post confusing.
11
You are not getting married because of the taxes??
3
It seems to me that "housework" is a rather generic term that centers upon household and child care tasks. However, every man I know who owns a house does a truly significant amount of work on the house and property itself that may not be counted. This is especially true of the working class men I know. The list of things they do on weekends and after work is pretty complicated, and runs the gamut from extensive yardwork, putting in new roofs when necessary, working on simple (or very extensive) electrical and plumbing problems, troublshooting garage door openers, maintaining or building decks, painting (outside and in), grouting tubs or sinks, etc, etc., etc. The list goes on and on, and to say that these men do not do their fair share of "housework" is not only inaccurate, it is insulting. But stories like this usually focus on "professional" families who contract out all the heavy work. Simply put, working class men I know work their tails off around the house. Always have, always will.
That being said, Americans work far too many hours at their jobs, with onerous commutes, and reducing stress has to begin with new employment practices that work for workers more, and less for corporations. Nobody ever died wishing they had worked more and spent less time with their families. We know that this is a universal truth, but we do nothing about it.
That being said, Americans work far too many hours at their jobs, with onerous commutes, and reducing stress has to begin with new employment practices that work for workers more, and less for corporations. Nobody ever died wishing they had worked more and spent less time with their families. We know that this is a universal truth, but we do nothing about it.
20
In addition to the usual & customary stresses of working, caring for family & home, adding in a long (and costly) commute increases stress levels enormously. Many earning at (or even above) the median incomes noted here live far away from where their jobs are. The ordinary respites of gym, yoga or some added time with family are gone as a result of longer commutes, work obligations, and of course, a wee bit o'sleep thrown in once in a while. The overall quality of life is declining at an increasing rate.
4
I've often wondered why Manhattan firms with many commuters don't purchase or lease branch banks to serve as satellite offices in New Jersey, Connecticut, Long Island, Staten Island. Perhaps one supervisor and a talented group who can work as efficiently in the satellite office as they can in the city. And a sign on the door: "No cash on premises -- this is not a bank!"
2
Imagine a world where the working class did not have to support a ballooning population of "dependent" citizens. I want to believe the Dems have the interests of the working class at heart, but then they ram through Obamacare which is the biggest tax on the working class in the modern era. Obama also exploded the disability and entitlement culture that further burdens the working class. I imagine a workable solution does include higher taxes on the "rich." The problem is, "millionaires" is simply code for small business, and families that earn 250k are not rich. A workable solution should also include massive reforms to entitlements, because if you pay people to not work and have kids they cant afford...they will....and they are.
5
And massive public subsidies for birth control and abortion, starting in middle and high school.
3
If only the truth were as simple and clear as you've painted to be.
2
Double-income families come about for financial need, fulfillment, covering oneself for the future, etc. Single-income families happen for just as many varying reasons -- desire to stay home with kids, kids who have special needs and require more "work," ease of financial burdens from a well-paid parent, etc.
On one side or the other, no one can deny that to make it work, sacrifice is part of the deal. But, chances are the vast majority of people in parenting situations are affected by a corporate culture that has become an American culture -- hard work, more work, more hours -- sometimes for more stuff, sometimes for more "opportunity," sometimes just to make ends meet. Work has become primary with everything else secondary, unless you are willing to fight upstream to make it otherwise.
On one side or the other, no one can deny that to make it work, sacrifice is part of the deal. But, chances are the vast majority of people in parenting situations are affected by a corporate culture that has become an American culture -- hard work, more work, more hours -- sometimes for more stuff, sometimes for more "opportunity," sometimes just to make ends meet. Work has become primary with everything else secondary, unless you are willing to fight upstream to make it otherwise.
4
The issue is broader than family leave, "gender-neutral" or not. Those without children are stressed out by work demands as well. Holidays and vacation time, paid and unpaid, are a joke in America compared to other advanced economies. The absence of a strong labor moment and of a genuinely "left" political party has meant that, in America, employers basically have the Freedom to walk all over employees, demanding increasingly more work of fewer and fewer workers, for the same or less pay, with no end in sight. As a people, we have accepted a labor market in which all workers, from blue collar to career professionals, are in a competitive race to the bottom. This is perhaps the most important respect in which America is truly "exceptional," though you won't find any flag-wavers thumping their chests about it.
33
I was incredibly fortunate that when our two children were growing up, I was able to leave the job market and we lived on my husband's income. There were plenty of lean times under this model, but we always had what we needed. I knew even before we had children that I wasn't capable of doing a good job simultaneously in the workplace and raising children, so we opted for me to stay home with them. I've been forever thankful that we had this option; the majority of people don't. I don't even know how, as a society, we can create saner lives.
5
The malaise and discontent described in this article stems from greed. It is greedy to think that one can or should "have it all": be a competent and ambitious employee, and caring and present spouse, an involved and attentive parent.
The fact is - no, it is NOT possible to have it all. Even if women (or men) were given a "parent" leave, even a paid one - the one who stays home still loses out as an employee: by being absent from a company for a year one loses one's place in the company's structure, one's duties ARE, in fact, performed by someone else - and what if this "someone" is better at the job?
The fact is - one has to choose. Being an engaged parent (rather than a nanny's employer) requires time, effort, and energy. Excelling at work requires dedication and pulling one's weight (or more). Having a lot of spare time (for traveling, hobbies, being in a band, or raising children) requires sacrificing on other fronts.
Women, and men, have choices, and it is wonderful. But they should not assume that they can choose everything and succeed. Something has to give.
The fact is - no, it is NOT possible to have it all. Even if women (or men) were given a "parent" leave, even a paid one - the one who stays home still loses out as an employee: by being absent from a company for a year one loses one's place in the company's structure, one's duties ARE, in fact, performed by someone else - and what if this "someone" is better at the job?
The fact is - one has to choose. Being an engaged parent (rather than a nanny's employer) requires time, effort, and energy. Excelling at work requires dedication and pulling one's weight (or more). Having a lot of spare time (for traveling, hobbies, being in a band, or raising children) requires sacrificing on other fronts.
Women, and men, have choices, and it is wonderful. But they should not assume that they can choose everything and succeed. Something has to give.
13
I'm sure there are many retirees who would agree with me that, no, we had it better. We did have it all, 40-hour weeks, two-week vacations, the ability to build a nest egg providing funds for international travel, enough for nursing home care toward the end. Our children -- not so much.
9
"Something has to give."
Yes, and the procreators want it to be even more of other people's hard-earned income than is already diverted to them via the tax code.
Yes, and the procreators want it to be even more of other people's hard-earned income than is already diverted to them via the tax code.
2
Exactly. My SAHM friends have wonderful time with their children, but watch their bills. My working moms enjoy nice vacations and opportunities for their kids, but miss out on events. My husband never gets to see her at the gym, or storytime, etc.
i am so blessed to have a great, flexible job, but I don't have it "all." I miss some story times, and my career is not on the rocket path it once was. But I'M happy. I want a sort of half and half mix. Honestly I would love to stay home too, I don't need the money. Hopefully I can for the next baby.
i am so blessed to have a great, flexible job, but I don't have it "all." I miss some story times, and my career is not on the rocket path it once was. But I'M happy. I want a sort of half and half mix. Honestly I would love to stay home too, I don't need the money. Hopefully I can for the next baby.
Ironically, the two-income family and the economy's reliance on it has made life impossible for single people with one income - we chase the same apartments, houses, cars, furniture and other consumer goods, but with half the income. The price of a hotel room has doubled under the assumption that there are two working adults to occupy it. And so on.
32
I keep seeing articles addressing work/life balance and they all inevitably say that it is a societal problem--that things are still operating as if one parent stays at home. So now that we have established that, what can be done to resolve the problem? Paid maternity and paternity leave are a great start, but the stress doesn't end after the newborn phase.
Personally I would love to take a part time job, but have been able to make it happen if I want to stay in my chosen career. I could certainly do my current full time job in 30 hours a week, but when I proposed that to the powers that be (offering to take a pay cut) I am simply told that it is a full time position--end of story.
Personally I would love to take a part time job, but have been able to make it happen if I want to stay in my chosen career. I could certainly do my current full time job in 30 hours a week, but when I proposed that to the powers that be (offering to take a pay cut) I am simply told that it is a full time position--end of story.
9
A couple of things: 1. Do we need a Pew Survey to tell us this? and 2. If this article was written 30 years ago, it may have been somewhat insightful, even though the extended family and the "two parent/only one working family" dropped out of the equation long before that and certainly society never picked up the slack, by then or now. Frankly, the debate over equal work in the family is kind of odd, when skill level or role differential doesn't seem to be a consideration. The more meaningful question would be, "Is everything that needs to be done, done?" To do a really good job, it's practically impossible, and how a single parent manages is beyond comprehension. A lot doesn't get done, and that's America today. What we are seeing is the drifting of child rearing and the family in to an oblivion of sorts from which only a significant effort by the government could help us prevent. The "private sector" comes up way short in this category, doesn't it! Worse still is distant parenting, where parents can be parents at a distance is economically feasible and often selected by choice due to the pressures outlined in this article. The child reared in that kind of situation, although maybe not wanting for material goods or opportunities, does not make out well on the "Warmth Scale." The latter become the executives that drive the economy and put the drain of unearthly demands on the modern family. We've got problems, and this article barely scratches the surface.
3
The comparisons regarding full time, part time, and stay-home household income should also consider the costs of working full time. Nannies, day care, commuting, wardrobe costs, etc are not inconsiderable. Are these costs figured in?
If America is truly serious about solving our myriad social problems, we need to massively increase our support of pregnant women and young families, like the Scandinavians do. The first three to five years are incredibly important to a human lifetime. The "set point" of a human mind is developed in childhood, programmed by early experiences. Just as ACEs (adverse childhood events) cause negative impacts over the entire lifespan, a nurturing childhood characterized by security, stability, and attachment pays life-long dividends. For every dollar spent on babies we save a great deal of money down the road.
If America is truly serious about solving our myriad social problems, we need to massively increase our support of pregnant women and young families, like the Scandinavians do. The first three to five years are incredibly important to a human lifetime. The "set point" of a human mind is developed in childhood, programmed by early experiences. Just as ACEs (adverse childhood events) cause negative impacts over the entire lifespan, a nurturing childhood characterized by security, stability, and attachment pays life-long dividends. For every dollar spent on babies we save a great deal of money down the road.
9
And I dare say, your formula to "massively increase support of pregnant women and young families". would produce more extroverted sensory stable kids, rather than introverted intuitives. Of course both have lots to offer (I am INTJ from a dysfunctional family), but its easier to corral folks that are basically trusting and nonjudgemental (especially if that is what they are raised with) than the other.
You cannot have a winner-take-all, win-at-all-costs economy and also have strong families.
You cannot have a winner-take-all economy and also a strong democracy.
If we care about strong families, and about restoring a strong democracy, then we have no choice but to put an end to this bizarre form of winner-take-all capitalism that we have allowed to take root in America.
Even more bizarre is our worship of sociopaths like Steve Jobs and the other stunted, bizarre boy-man billionaires who dominate the tech industry.
We need another wave of reform similar to the reform waves that put an end to the first robber baron era.
We need many new regulations, new employment laws, new restrictions on capital flows especially offshore tax-dodging mechanisms.
You cannot have a winner-take-all economy and also a strong democracy.
If we care about strong families, and about restoring a strong democracy, then we have no choice but to put an end to this bizarre form of winner-take-all capitalism that we have allowed to take root in America.
Even more bizarre is our worship of sociopaths like Steve Jobs and the other stunted, bizarre boy-man billionaires who dominate the tech industry.
We need another wave of reform similar to the reform waves that put an end to the first robber baron era.
We need many new regulations, new employment laws, new restrictions on capital flows especially offshore tax-dodging mechanisms.
153
Thank you for publishing this latest chronicle of the economically collapsed American Middle Class. This story, and the story the Times published Nov. 2 about the rising death rate of American middle-aged White Americans due to drug overdoses, substance abuse, and suicide, should be wake up calls to "We, the people," about the grossly inhumane nature of modern American society.
The ongoing economic destabilization of American society was triggered by the American-greed driven collapse of the American economy as a whole in 2007-2008 and the gross economic inequality of the American economy's "recovery," which has benefitted greatly those at the top of our society's economic Ponzi scheme, while the great masses of Americans below struggle to survive—if they survive at all. We will not navigate our way through these dire straits until we realize that the corruption of the United States' democratic society has been due not to any foreign attack for invasion, but by our own misguided social policies that have been legislated by an American political class in thrall to the democratically corrupting element of American Big Business.
The American people's historic support for our too-often-exploitative economic system has now come full circle: In addition to the weapons we've trained elsewhere, we have been shooting ourselves squarely between the eyes for as long as our own politicians have voted supported the shipment of well-paying jobs overseas by American corporations.
The ongoing economic destabilization of American society was triggered by the American-greed driven collapse of the American economy as a whole in 2007-2008 and the gross economic inequality of the American economy's "recovery," which has benefitted greatly those at the top of our society's economic Ponzi scheme, while the great masses of Americans below struggle to survive—if they survive at all. We will not navigate our way through these dire straits until we realize that the corruption of the United States' democratic society has been due not to any foreign attack for invasion, but by our own misguided social policies that have been legislated by an American political class in thrall to the democratically corrupting element of American Big Business.
The American people's historic support for our too-often-exploitative economic system has now come full circle: In addition to the weapons we've trained elsewhere, we have been shooting ourselves squarely between the eyes for as long as our own politicians have voted supported the shipment of well-paying jobs overseas by American corporations.
16
Our family has been a two income earner family since I can remember. Essentially because we can't afford to live on one income. It's just not feasible or possible.
If we rented, the rents in our part of the country are appx $1,500 to $2,000 for a 2 bedroom in a decent area. If we purchase a house, prices are $300,000 and up again for a decent home.
With only one person working making $65,000, you do the math. We are middle class only because both work.
This is a problem that has been here for over 3 decades and not getting any better and getting worse.
With corporations downsizing, laying off and then rehiring as independent contractors at little or no benefits, it gets very hard and the stress on family life is unimaginable.
If we rented, the rents in our part of the country are appx $1,500 to $2,000 for a 2 bedroom in a decent area. If we purchase a house, prices are $300,000 and up again for a decent home.
With only one person working making $65,000, you do the math. We are middle class only because both work.
This is a problem that has been here for over 3 decades and not getting any better and getting worse.
With corporations downsizing, laying off and then rehiring as independent contractors at little or no benefits, it gets very hard and the stress on family life is unimaginable.
16
Or you could move from one of the highest-cost locales in the nation to an area where a 4BR house on 1/4 acre lot is readily available for about $1000 a month -- which is many, many parts of the country.
But you want what you want, when and where you want it, without making any trade-offs. Life doesn't work that way for anyone, parent or not.
But you want what you want, when and where you want it, without making any trade-offs. Life doesn't work that way for anyone, parent or not.
4
@ Bohemienne-
There are a limited number of jobs in most low-cost-of-living areas, so it's not really a viable solution for everyone in expensive cities to relocate somewhere cheaper. Maybe if you can telecommute 100% of the time, but that's still fairly rare.
I grew up (and currently live) in the Rust Belt, where houses are admittedly pretty cheap. However, it's VERY difficult for most people here to find a decent full-time job with any benefits. We've lost a ton of jobs (e.g., from Kodak, Xerox, et al.) as the manufacturing sector collapsed, and the same thing's happened in many other parts of the country. The jobs that are replacing them are mostly low-paid retail positions.
I was one of the lucky ones who found a good job here, but most of the people I grew up with (who are college-educated) have had to leave to find work.
There are a limited number of jobs in most low-cost-of-living areas, so it's not really a viable solution for everyone in expensive cities to relocate somewhere cheaper. Maybe if you can telecommute 100% of the time, but that's still fairly rare.
I grew up (and currently live) in the Rust Belt, where houses are admittedly pretty cheap. However, it's VERY difficult for most people here to find a decent full-time job with any benefits. We've lost a ton of jobs (e.g., from Kodak, Xerox, et al.) as the manufacturing sector collapsed, and the same thing's happened in many other parts of the country. The jobs that are replacing them are mostly low-paid retail positions.
I was one of the lucky ones who found a good job here, but most of the people I grew up with (who are college-educated) have had to leave to find work.
6
A number of years ago, when my children were little and my parents
ailing, I was fortunate enough to be able to choose, for wont of a better term,
to be a 'stay at home mom'. I was asked more than once, quite
condescendingly I thought, what I did all day. I doubt I'd get that
question now.
ailing, I was fortunate enough to be able to choose, for wont of a better term,
to be a 'stay at home mom'. I was asked more than once, quite
condescendingly I thought, what I did all day. I doubt I'd get that
question now.
7
Right? The question often was, "Do you work or do you stay at home?" Hah!
3
The Pew numbers cited in this article do not track with Fed or Census Bureau numbers for median household income.
According to the Fed, median household income was $51,939 in 2013, and the Census Bureau estimated real median household income at $53,657 for 2014. But these numbers already factor in the two-income households.
So I am puzzled by Pew's contention that the median income for households with one working parent is $55,000, but $84,000 when the mother works part time, or $102,400 when both parents work full time. What, then, does Pew claim to be the overall median household income?
According to the Fed, median household income was $51,939 in 2013, and the Census Bureau estimated real median household income at $53,657 for 2014. But these numbers already factor in the two-income households.
So I am puzzled by Pew's contention that the median income for households with one working parent is $55,000, but $84,000 when the mother works part time, or $102,400 when both parents work full time. What, then, does Pew claim to be the overall median household income?
6
I am a 17 year old girl, and I could not imagine adulthood without working. I want to make good use of my education and my talents, and I shouldn't be forced to throw that away if I one day want to have kids. Both my parents worked when I was growing up, and because their employers allowed them to have flexible schedules they were able to raise my sister and I while also having being personally independent, societally productive, and intellectually fulfilled. Just because I am a woman doesn't mean I should have to choose children over a profession I enjoy. It is crucial to the advancement of our society that we allow all parents to choose whether to work or not, instead of the devil's bargain many working parents make now.
61
I completely agree - but public policy and opinion need to catch up with this reality.
2
You don't have the life experience yet so you don't understand.
2
@ AC-
I'm 35, and that gibes pretty well with my life experience to date.
I'm 35, and that gibes pretty well with my life experience to date.
2
In our house both parents work demanding jobs, just to pay the bills. I often wonder why we do that when it seems like we could get divorced, transition to a cash under the table job like bartender or babysitter, work down our reportable income, get ourselves and the kids on welfare, Medicaid, and food stamps, and have a lot more free time to pursue "our passions." It seems the quality of life would be pretty close to the same. That is what is happening and it will destroy the country.
12
Parents need an "identity group" of their own. At one time, parenting was the norm and everyone supported it. Now, it is rare and society wants to ignore and dismiss it. This is sad because good parenting is the key to our mutually successful future. It should be supported and affirmed by society.
7
Four million births a year in the United States, half out of wedlock and half to Medicaid Moms -- is not rare. And society spends hundreds of billions of dollars per year to support and affirm these children -- and that's not even counting the demands on the health care and education systems.
7
Funny that the nation which so loudly proclaims its attachment to family values is also the one whose form of capitalism is the most hostile, of all the advanced democracies, to family life.
We have come to worship market values, especially efficiency.
But families are not efficient. The financial returns are terrible. You can't flexibly move the family assets around, because families need the security of being tied to one place, for years.
We need to put families first.
That means sacrificing some efficiency for the sake of social stability, and specifically, accepting some constraints on corporations when it comes to their employment practices and their deployments of capital.
The Germans and other north Europeans have much to teach us in this regard. By the way, the Swedes have achieved higher GDP growth than we have for the last 15 years, all while protecting and nurturing strong families and communities.
We have come to worship market values, especially efficiency.
But families are not efficient. The financial returns are terrible. You can't flexibly move the family assets around, because families need the security of being tied to one place, for years.
We need to put families first.
That means sacrificing some efficiency for the sake of social stability, and specifically, accepting some constraints on corporations when it comes to their employment practices and their deployments of capital.
The Germans and other north Europeans have much to teach us in this regard. By the way, the Swedes have achieved higher GDP growth than we have for the last 15 years, all while protecting and nurturing strong families and communities.
125
Could not agree more!
One point this article misses, most unfortunately, is the lack of time for civic engagement, politics, social issues. Community involvement is rare nowadays--who has time to go to a council meeting or really look at what our elected representatives are doing? Why are over half of Americans unhappy with how our country is doing economically? Who's behind the big systems that are creating this lack of time for anything but work?
6
That's the plan ... and we are fulfilling it for "them."
Divided we fall.
Divided we fall.
Of course there is added stress in the modern family (ones with children)... the world is getting smaller and more competitive. But thankfully we still have choice -- a choice to work or not, work for this company or that one, have children or not or how many, spend to keep up with the Joneses or not (as another commenter mentioned) or even move to another state, country with more accommodating policies. Will we be able to bend companies or legislate them locally? Unknown. Maybe we can't have it all anymore?
5
What many people here are overlooking is the result for a wife who decides to stay home with the kids if her marriage ends in divorce. Without job experience, she will have to take a low paid entry job and she and her children will often live below the poverty level.
Look at the statistics of children living in poverty in the US. In this day and age, it is a huge risk for a woman to give up a career.
Look at the statistics of children living in poverty in the US. In this day and age, it is a huge risk for a woman to give up a career.
298
absolutely! I hate to think where I would be was I not educated and had I not stayed in the workforce after my husband died when our child was a toddler.
6
Not just divorce - what if she stays married, but her husband has a stroke? Is disabled in a car accident and can't work anymore? Is mentally ill?
2
I agree. I should have added "or if anything else happens to the breadwinner." I have a friend whose husband developed schizophrenia and she, while very pregnant, had to go looking for a job to support the family.
1
Without minimizing the issues families have, truly, work life balance for ANYONE is difficult at this point.
24
There should be some control over crazy job requirements. Right now the only recourse is to quit, which someone I know did. The job started out with reasonable hours but then things got busy and rather than pick up additional staff, they just expected existing staff to work 8AM to 9PM or so, and work all day Saturday and Sunday, too. Some were grudgingly allowed to work from home on some weekends. Fine for someone who is single and has no friends or family, or interests outside work (it did pay time-and-a-half for overtime) but really? This person did have family so she quit after a few months.
175
Think about it.
Not so fine for singles either, whether they have friends and family or not.
Not so fine for singles either, whether they have friends and family or not.
8
Very similar story with my husband, he just quit, too.
2
There is an alternative. Don't quit but don't give in and work the extra hours. Many companies get this but they don't have to change if the employees accept it. There are lots of options - the employee must advocate for their needs and negotiate. No matter how large the company it is always up for discussion.
1
I'd suggest looking to the party that pays lip service to "family values" while breaking unions and voting against a raise in the minimum wage and paid family leave. They're called Republicans but they bear little resemblance to the party of Eisenhower or even Nixon. Reagan himself would look like a flaming pinko next to most of today's Republicans.
That, and Democrats who don't vote and so have allowed this lurch to the right to go on for over 30 years.
That, and Democrats who don't vote and so have allowed this lurch to the right to go on for over 30 years.
41
the USA is a globalized ranch for human livestock, operated by BigBusiness, which seeks to cram as many immigrants and worker/consumers as possible into this ranch called the USA. More workers, more consumers, more profits...women, thirdworlders, whatever, Capital is greedy and wants them all....and the more diverse, the more heterogeneous, the larger this nation becomes, the less united it becomes....less united means the populace is less able to control the government, and thus BigBusiness is more able to control the gov't, and thus big business is more able to use laws and policy to create an even more cruel race to the bottom
25
SCHOOLS have also not kept track with sociodemographic changes in working families. My kids go to school from 7:30 - 2:30, and they have atleast one day off per month for a teacher workday or some other event. In addition to all the days off, parents are expected to volunteer their time, give money to the schools, give holiday and teacher appreciation gifts to all their teachers (for 2 kids, that's 4 teachers), and even provide school supplies for the class. All of that takes a ton of time and money. I 100% agree that it all makes you feel like you are terrible at everything because you can't possibly be great at anything when pulled in that many directions at once.
68
feminists got what they wanted, women in the workplace. There was a reason women were usually caretakers however..a good evolutionary reason.
Now they get to reap what they sow. increased unhappiness amongst women, increase unhappiness amongst men, higher stress for everyone, children deprived of a caring parent.
Such is the cost of your "equality." Instead of making women be men maybe they should have changed the value structure so "women's jobs" were treated with the same respect and monetary value as "men's jobs" rather than destroying the family unit..but i'm a guy, so my opinion apparently has no value at all.
Now they get to reap what they sow. increased unhappiness amongst women, increase unhappiness amongst men, higher stress for everyone, children deprived of a caring parent.
Such is the cost of your "equality." Instead of making women be men maybe they should have changed the value structure so "women's jobs" were treated with the same respect and monetary value as "men's jobs" rather than destroying the family unit..but i'm a guy, so my opinion apparently has no value at all.
18
The abject mysogeny here is astounding, as is the blatant absence of even a shred of causal data between feminism and a stressed middle class.
Women wanting to be treated equally. The nerve!
Women wanting to be treated equally. The nerve!
41
"Evolutionary" theories about women's inherent characteristics are complete bunk.
FYI, there was *plenty* of unhappiness among women in Ye Olden Days, when they were banned from studying or working in fields that interested them, when they were completely financially dependent and had to get their husband's permission to open a bank account, when divorcing a terrible spouse was next to impossible, and when domestic violence and sexual assault were routinely ignored.
FYI, there was *plenty* of unhappiness among women in Ye Olden Days, when they were banned from studying or working in fields that interested them, when they were completely financially dependent and had to get their husband's permission to open a bank account, when divorcing a terrible spouse was next to impossible, and when domestic violence and sexual assault were routinely ignored.
43
I'm proud to be a feminist, aka as a working mom because I have to be.
The rest of your lamenting is just that, lamenting.
Women wanted the same opportunities as men and as we all know, there is a reason for evolution, nothing stays the same.
Employers wanted more from their employees and so they laid them off, rehired some as independents and paid less.
Blaming women is a short-sighted view considering men control almost everything. And although women are now in better positions than before, they have yet to fracture the glass ceiling.
So forgive me if we destroyed the "family unit", but it is a figment of your myopic imagination.
The rest of your lamenting is just that, lamenting.
Women wanted the same opportunities as men and as we all know, there is a reason for evolution, nothing stays the same.
Employers wanted more from their employees and so they laid them off, rehired some as independents and paid less.
Blaming women is a short-sighted view considering men control almost everything. And although women are now in better positions than before, they have yet to fracture the glass ceiling.
So forgive me if we destroyed the "family unit", but it is a figment of your myopic imagination.
11
Instead of building more McMansions we should be building more co-housing where families can help and support each other.
24
Yes!
I wouldn't dream of suggesting we all return to the commune era, but a little bit of co-housing and shared goods and services (does a street with 10 houses need 10 lawn mowers, for example?) would bring down costs, give kids more "aunties" and "uncles" (the way they have in other countries) and playmates, and reduce the stress caused by money problems and loneliness.
If they found a way to include the elderly, too, it could be amazing. The fitter seniors could help with small chores, do neighborhood watch, that sort of thing. And they wouldn't feel as left out as they do now.
I wouldn't dream of suggesting we all return to the commune era, but a little bit of co-housing and shared goods and services (does a street with 10 houses need 10 lawn mowers, for example?) would bring down costs, give kids more "aunties" and "uncles" (the way they have in other countries) and playmates, and reduce the stress caused by money problems and loneliness.
If they found a way to include the elderly, too, it could be amazing. The fitter seniors could help with small chores, do neighborhood watch, that sort of thing. And they wouldn't feel as left out as they do now.
1
None of this will change unless we make it change.
Look around, voting time is coming.
Who do you think will support working families.
Who do you think will take on corporations?
Who will work hardest to promote quality of life for not just a very small percent?
Who?
Look around, voting time is coming.
Who do you think will support working families.
Who do you think will take on corporations?
Who will work hardest to promote quality of life for not just a very small percent?
Who?
9
I hear what you're saying - (I assume you're a Democrat) but I disagree. It seems like Democrats say they're for working families, but also want to give all the illegal aliens amnesty. That doesn't mesh. Someone has to pay for all the goodies.
4
38.5 hours per week? I don't know anyone who works less than 50. Yes, technically, on the books, most career people (e.g., exempt employees) are paid according to 40 hours a week, but in practice they work much more. They simply can't charge overtime. You are given projects to finish and nobody cares if you have to work nights or weekends to get everything done. Your annual salary remains the same, though. The fact that such employees (myself included) are reported as 40-hours-a-week employees is a spit in the face to working Americans.
32
Have you seen this proposal? I think it may solve some of these problems, at least for people like me who make less than $50k! http://www.dol.gov/whd/overtime/NPRM2015/factsheet.htm
I am quite proud that my wife and I both have professional careers.
While it can be stressful, the payoff is stability, savings, economic power and personal independence.
Also, a working wife provides a wonderful role model for children, especially for daughters. I want my daughter to be strong, hard-working and striving. I don't want her to be complacent, dependent upon government help and reliant on easily-removed family leave laws.
While it can be stressful, the payoff is stability, savings, economic power and personal independence.
Also, a working wife provides a wonderful role model for children, especially for daughters. I want my daughter to be strong, hard-working and striving. I don't want her to be complacent, dependent upon government help and reliant on easily-removed family leave laws.
18
At least you're keeping up with the Joneses, (below).
What we need is less competition & more sustainability.
What we need is less competition & more sustainability.
WBarnett, my point is about striving to do one's best in many realms and teaching your kids to do the same. I try not to directly compete with others or compare relative situations, as that's counterproductive. I try to teach this to my children as well.
I'm not sure that parents who ratchet down their careers instill these values.
I'm not sure that parents who ratchet down their careers instill these values.
1
My wife and I used to slog almost 9 hours a day ie 54 hours a week and pay was good.Homecoming would be greeted by a nanny with a half asleep child .Unwashed laundry ,dirty faucets ,toy littered carpet full of dust would end up in a shouting match due to office politics and frustration.At last we looked at the whole thing.What are we working for..to keep with joneses.To hell we said and wifey quit to be with the child.Remember money may or may not come back but the best years will not.I do not want to live poorly to die a rich man
28
Unfortunately, whenever a new survey like this comes out, with data over and over again revealing the same struggles families have been facing for decades, instead of getting new policy, we get "opportunities" like Lunchables and Amazon Prime.
7
The squeezing of the middle class requires more out of house work time for women, who may no longer have a choice about being home, and additionally forces men to work less away from home. Too many men and women seem to suffer this squeeze, which for some reason is supposed to be better for our country.
This choice is decided by unelected business executives and their stockholders. Should elected representatives make the decisions as to what is a good, if not more productive (what that means is the question) lives?
The people who say government is too intrusive seem fine with important decisions made by unknown and faceless people. But is that good for the people who lead relentless lives? Hmmm.
This choice is decided by unelected business executives and their stockholders. Should elected representatives make the decisions as to what is a good, if not more productive (what that means is the question) lives?
The people who say government is too intrusive seem fine with important decisions made by unknown and faceless people. But is that good for the people who lead relentless lives? Hmmm.
4
The answer is profoundly simple; don't have kids.
36
My husband and I don't have kids. My husband is self-employed and works at home with a focus toward our long-term financial position, while I have a full-time job outside our home earning the majority of the income that we live on now.
While I can't imagine how much more stressed and tired we'd be if we had kids, there's plenty of stress, tiredness and rushing even without them. In part, because my workload is impacted by the fact that most of my colleagues who have kids work a more-or-less 9 to 5 schedule and I and a few others are the ones who get the complicated assignments because we "can juggle it better."
There's no simple answer.
While I can't imagine how much more stressed and tired we'd be if we had kids, there's plenty of stress, tiredness and rushing even without them. In part, because my workload is impacted by the fact that most of my colleagues who have kids work a more-or-less 9 to 5 schedule and I and a few others are the ones who get the complicated assignments because we "can juggle it better."
There's no simple answer.
4
My wife couldn't keep her hands off of me
1
Well Paul, too bad you didn't remain an egg.
5
We all make choices; to have kids or not; to work or not to stay home with kids or not. These are all personal choices why should industry or the government get involved in a person's free will? Life is full of choices some hard, some easy; If you have kids sacrifices will have to be made. Stress and being a "grown up" is part of the "choice " one makes.
68
This doesn't account for the fact that some choices have a bigger impact on society as a whole. If it gets so difficult to raise children in the U.S., people will simply stop having them or more than one. Then you wind up in the unenviable position of Japan or other countries struggling with declining populations just at the time that elderly are booming and need more care. Government, including ours, rewards some choices more than others all the time. Right now, our government rewards big businesses all the time with tax breaks and looser regulations while claiming there's not enough money to help working families. I get so tired of hearing Republicans drone on about personal choice all the time when broader systemic forces are always at work on all of us.
Dear 1515732, You ignore the most fundamental issue that you highlight. If having children is optional and we create a system that discourages parenthood and people decide not to have children what then? 56% of humanity now lives in countries that do not replace themselves and that is growing. Look no farther than japan for what that future looks like. Our own economy is 80% consumer driven, what happens to that economy when people have less children.
"We all have choices". Really? Where do you think humans come from? Some one has to make us humans and all the training and education it took to make someone a fantastic worker and economic driver shouldn't be thrown away due to inflexible schedules and crazy expectations.
Could we learn from other countries? Nah, we're exceptional.
201
@Frank Walker....nail on the head my friend.
Are we re-enacting the phrase "we found the enemy, and it is us", when referring to the sore status of our family life, in a society defined as having an unrelieved chronic distress distinction? A place where 'having' is never enough, and 'being' an impossible task? Are we the new poor rich, lost in our own techno-digital brew, were we can't find even ourselves? Close enough.
7
A full and involved family life can't be had if both parents are employed full-time. Someone has to be at home to wrangle homelife, it doesn't have to be the wife (for all of you planning to respond women shouldn't be shackled to the stove) but someone has to step off the career treadmill and deal with the children, housecleaning, cooking, 4-hour cable appointments, 8 hour delivery windows, etc.
9
Why does it have to be this way, though? I think it's nuts to suggest that one parent should stay home with the kids. As a child of the 80s whose parents both had/have demanding careers, I spent my early years in daycare and school years in before- and after-school care. I played with other kids, did my homework, etc., and am none the worse for wear. Weekends were family time. What I got out of this was an immense appreciation for my parents' hard work and great models for how to build a career and raise a family.
6
Simply not true. You can have both parents working full time and have a happy family.
Every parent I know believes that parenting is hard, and it is.
That feeling that you're doing a horrible job at everything? Be ready to live with it.
Because if it's not guilt over not spending enough time with your baby, it's guilt because you were in a meeting when the call came in that your dad had an accident and is in the ER two hours away because he refuses to give up his "independence." It's guilt that your family's diet isn't healthy enough, your house isn't clean enough, you're ghosting your friends, an important client deadline got missed because you were taking someone (child, parent, spouse) to an equally important appointment, etc., etc.
The only way anyone can have it "all" is to redefine "all" to include only those things that really matter to you, whatever they are. Figure out what's really important and then figure out how to change your life to focus on them.
That feeling that you're doing a horrible job at everything? Be ready to live with it.
Because if it's not guilt over not spending enough time with your baby, it's guilt because you were in a meeting when the call came in that your dad had an accident and is in the ER two hours away because he refuses to give up his "independence." It's guilt that your family's diet isn't healthy enough, your house isn't clean enough, you're ghosting your friends, an important client deadline got missed because you were taking someone (child, parent, spouse) to an equally important appointment, etc., etc.
The only way anyone can have it "all" is to redefine "all" to include only those things that really matter to you, whatever they are. Figure out what's really important and then figure out how to change your life to focus on them.
58
You can also work on changing how our society values real family time & what we can do to share our GDP more equably.
Go Bernie.
Go Bernie.
"Of full-time working parents, 39 percent of mothers and 50 percent of fathers say they feel as if they spend too little time with their children. "
I just read an article this morning that said that kids spend an average of 9 hours a day on movies, music and other social media, so combine that with school and they don't seem to have time TO SPEND WITH their parents.
And, of course, you treat this subject as thought is were something new--which it isn't . I was born in during WWII, and I actually don't remember a time when BOTH of my parents didn't work. And they worked until they retired. But we did do many things as a family, didn't own a tv until the late 50's, had 1 car only after we moved to California.
It is NOT the problem of working that is the problem--it is all the extraneous stuff. Too many people want to do everything and that is what is not possible. I could say that one of the benefits of having both parents working is that I learned to cook, sew, do house chores and be a bit more independent than I might otherwise have been, and it didn't stifle my personal or academic growth--I have 2 graduate degrees and had a successful career. Now I'm retired.
I just read an article this morning that said that kids spend an average of 9 hours a day on movies, music and other social media, so combine that with school and they don't seem to have time TO SPEND WITH their parents.
And, of course, you treat this subject as thought is were something new--which it isn't . I was born in during WWII, and I actually don't remember a time when BOTH of my parents didn't work. And they worked until they retired. But we did do many things as a family, didn't own a tv until the late 50's, had 1 car only after we moved to California.
It is NOT the problem of working that is the problem--it is all the extraneous stuff. Too many people want to do everything and that is what is not possible. I could say that one of the benefits of having both parents working is that I learned to cook, sew, do house chores and be a bit more independent than I might otherwise have been, and it didn't stifle my personal or academic growth--I have 2 graduate degrees and had a successful career. Now I'm retired.
13
All that video time is what replaces missing family time.
2
My kids were born in the early 80s. I have always worked outside the home and often held positions where I know I was paid less than male colleagues. I have struggled with daycare issues...when kids were ill etc. This country is not friendly to working women nor mothers. The "family values" mantra is a fat lie...always has been.
152
Every parent thinks they are failing at everything. One needs just to embrace the chaos and try to enjoy the wild ride that children bring, for you will miss them when they are gone.
8
In the United States we are stressed out because there are 7 Billion people on this planet who who want to come here and want to take away our jobs and our life style. Don't want to work 60 hours this week?..... I can find someone who can do your job and will and most likely would be willing to accept less. They are queued up at the border .... they are a click away on the internet. They are hungry and have nothing. Be grateful for what you have.
9
I felt it very painfully that I couldn't be home with my kid for half his childhood. I refused to continue working full-time when he entered middle school.
But now I thank God I did work full-time all those years. I'd be utterly impoverished, post-divorce, if I hadn't. As it is, Social Security will not cover my needs, though I've worked since I was 17, and I can't afford to take it til I turn 70. My mother died at 87 and my father is still ticking at 94, and I need to plan for the long haul.
I was frugal, a saver, and I always tried to plan for contingencies. Unfortunately my former spouse was the opposite and decimated most of my assets.
For every half of a couple who believes it cannot happen to them and that the person they love will not betray them in every possible way--there are too many of us who can attest otherwise. Love, trust--but have a backup plan.
But now I thank God I did work full-time all those years. I'd be utterly impoverished, post-divorce, if I hadn't. As it is, Social Security will not cover my needs, though I've worked since I was 17, and I can't afford to take it til I turn 70. My mother died at 87 and my father is still ticking at 94, and I need to plan for the long haul.
I was frugal, a saver, and I always tried to plan for contingencies. Unfortunately my former spouse was the opposite and decimated most of my assets.
For every half of a couple who believes it cannot happen to them and that the person they love will not betray them in every possible way--there are too many of us who can attest otherwise. Love, trust--but have a backup plan.
301
Unfortunately, you chose poorly in the father of your children, as have many women.
I raised my daughter to know that she must always be able to support herself. Not the government, not a man, but with her own labor, as if she depended on others, she would wind up being old and poor.
This is not news, but women continue to make the same mistakes over and over, generation after generation, yet seem shocked that it all did not 'somehow work out'. FYI: It does not.
I raised my daughter to know that she must always be able to support herself. Not the government, not a man, but with her own labor, as if she depended on others, she would wind up being old and poor.
This is not news, but women continue to make the same mistakes over and over, generation after generation, yet seem shocked that it all did not 'somehow work out'. FYI: It does not.
5
Very powerful letter, thank you.
2
It's a good idea to make sure you financial goals and habits mesh well with anyone you plan to marry. I'm sorry you learned that the hard way.
2
Both my husband and I are freelancers and work essentially part time (or on off hours) and it is STILL so hard. I don't think I could handle going back to work full time and really don't know how families manage when both work though that is the reality for most in this city. I was full time until I had my 2nd and then four days a week until they were 4 and 6 in a very demanding agency job but we had a full time sitter which made it somewhat doable. Now that they're 8 and 10 it's almost harder because managing all the after school and sports is such a juggle, not to mention orthodontists and middle school tours (my current nightmare). The term "mental checklist" in this article really resonates with me -- it is a constant running list of what I have to do/buy/show up for/schedule/re-schedule/clean/etc., which is all about the kids and the household and doesn't even include my to-do list for work. But the difference is that I can choose when I work for the most part, and most companies I know in New York in my former field still expect you to drop everything when they ask, which is just not something I'm willing to do anymore. Now of course we have the stress of less secure income and paying for our own insurance, but to me it beats waking up worrying about a presentation when you still have to make breakfast and pack a lunch and get on the bus before 8, and then don't make any more money for staying at the office till 3am.
99
How about cutting out some of the "all the after school and sports"? Just because everyone else is doing something doesn't make it right for your family our situation.
2
Thanks to the radical feminists who insulted and demeaned women in the 1960's and 1970's who wanted to stay home and raise their kids. So mom and dad started working, and real estate values now reflect two incomes instead of one income. So both mom and dad have to work.
Too bad he can't go back to the days when mom (or now dad) could stay home and do all the stuff that can't be done when you work 40 hours or more per week.
Too bad he can't go back to the days when mom (or now dad) could stay home and do all the stuff that can't be done when you work 40 hours or more per week.
15
Yup, it was definitely the fault of the feminists and not AT ALL globalization, corporate greed, or pure economics. Thanks for pointing this out, bro!
4
Radical feminists?? Um, no. It's all a matter of economics. Trickle down economics only benefit the rich. Wage stagnation, exploding home and rent prices not to mention healthcare. Work , work, work to survive .
8
You have a very warped conception of feminism if you think it involves "insulting and demeaning women".
You're also apparently ignorant of the many women back in the '60 and '70s who argued that housework and childcare should be valued and compensated accordingly.
Women were actively *barred* from many jobs and many fields of study for centuries. Feminism, equality, and similar terms merely mean allowing women to make the same choices that men have always been able to make.
You're also apparently ignorant of the many women back in the '60 and '70s who argued that housework and childcare should be valued and compensated accordingly.
Women were actively *barred* from many jobs and many fields of study for centuries. Feminism, equality, and similar terms merely mean allowing women to make the same choices that men have always been able to make.
5
The great misconception and misperception is that we lack choices, as if someone or something outside of us is in control, in an endless set of justifications and excuses. Outside of sickness and poverty, what we do, where we live, how we eat and sleep, how we spend our time and money, is all within our control. The whining about it is deafening.
18
Thank you for the insight. Since I know that now have control, our family will all pack up and move to Bel Air immediately. Since we have control.
4
I don't think Bel Air is the right choice for you...
1
Maybe its time for America to disaggregate itself from its rural past and ways, maybe even using China as its new role model, where everyone works without exception and children are an unnecessary luxury on to be had by the elite. In corporate America (not too unlike Communist China) the individual with their own hopes, aspirations, dreams and desires is a myth. We're all now just working cogs in a big machine whose only purpose in this world is to world for some capitalistic "greater good" of the top .1%. We might all just as well forget about the white picket fence life once dangled before our eyes to lead us into this inescapable trap.
2
Once again we have an article that talks about the division of responsibilities in the household, and mentions that women do more housework than men...without mentioning the fact that studies have also found that men work more paid job hours than women. When you add up total working time (paid employment hours + unpaid household chore hours), what you find is that men and women work just about an equal amount of time.
This article also fails to mention the fact that time use studies have found that Americans' leisure time is going up, not down. And despite the fact we're all so "busy," and don't have time for socializing and hobbies, the amount of time Americans spend watching television also continues to rise.
Finally, the reason white educated folks feel more stressed than blue collar folks, despite the fact the latter likely have more actual pressure in their lives, is because white people have much more "shadow work" -- all those unpaid daily tasks from shopping online to pumping our own gas that corporations have outsourced to us. Such tasks eat up your willpower until you feel mentally exhausted and perceive your life to be super busy, when it in fact is not. More explanation can be found here:
http://www.artofmanliness.com/2015/08/31/shadow-work-and-the-rise-of-mid...
It is with good reason research professors Daniel Hamermesh and Jungmin Lee have called middle/upper class complaints about busyness "yuppie kvetch."
This article also fails to mention the fact that time use studies have found that Americans' leisure time is going up, not down. And despite the fact we're all so "busy," and don't have time for socializing and hobbies, the amount of time Americans spend watching television also continues to rise.
Finally, the reason white educated folks feel more stressed than blue collar folks, despite the fact the latter likely have more actual pressure in their lives, is because white people have much more "shadow work" -- all those unpaid daily tasks from shopping online to pumping our own gas that corporations have outsourced to us. Such tasks eat up your willpower until you feel mentally exhausted and perceive your life to be super busy, when it in fact is not. More explanation can be found here:
http://www.artofmanliness.com/2015/08/31/shadow-work-and-the-rise-of-mid...
It is with good reason research professors Daniel Hamermesh and Jungmin Lee have called middle/upper class complaints about busyness "yuppie kvetch."
11
Unfortunately, the overwhelming concept used -- like a cudgel-- to beat back change in work is still that "American exceptionalism" is fundamental to "our great way of life" -- and it works. This means each worker, each family, is on its own -- to make work somehow work, to find day care, to take care of family and self and job. People can be easily sucked in with the "you have to take personal pride and initiative and do it on your own" argument -- for a while. But after a few years of running around this track, most couples, families are flat-out exhausted and not working all that well.
The business community will remain relatively unbending until the workforce insists on change. Absolutely, totally insists. That means no passive reliance on beneficent CEOs or friendly bosses. Ask, demand, insist. This is the one life we each have. There are no do-overs. How are you living your life? And doing you work? And how are you caring for your family? Right now?
The business community will remain relatively unbending until the workforce insists on change. Absolutely, totally insists. That means no passive reliance on beneficent CEOs or friendly bosses. Ask, demand, insist. This is the one life we each have. There are no do-overs. How are you living your life? And doing you work? And how are you caring for your family? Right now?
9
By the time we get our 2 young children fed, dressed, and to daycare and then make it to the office, it's 8:30 - we have to pick them up by 5, so someone has to leave work at 4:30. We're expected to work more than 40 hours a week, but it's hard to get in more than 35 hours without working after the kids go to bed, which we both do. The precious hours we have with our kids, we focus on them. So, what suffers? The marriage. It's the only thing that "can" give, and so it does -
I like to think this will change when my children are in elementary school, but looking at my friends who have elementary-aged children, it doesn't.
And why do we have to work so much? Our healthcare costs $1200/month, full-time daycare for 2 kids is a minimum of $2000/month, and we have a mortgage and student loans. Without buying food or gas or utilities, we're out $6,000 a month.
I wouldn't mind paying all the money for healthcare and childcare to the federal government if it meant everyone had access to excellent healthcare and childcare, and I could spend more time with them and my husband in these fleeting years!
I like to think this will change when my children are in elementary school, but looking at my friends who have elementary-aged children, it doesn't.
And why do we have to work so much? Our healthcare costs $1200/month, full-time daycare for 2 kids is a minimum of $2000/month, and we have a mortgage and student loans. Without buying food or gas or utilities, we're out $6,000 a month.
I wouldn't mind paying all the money for healthcare and childcare to the federal government if it meant everyone had access to excellent healthcare and childcare, and I could spend more time with them and my husband in these fleeting years!
19
Then again I know a couple with two young daughters and their total household expenses are $1,000 a month.
They took responsibility for themselves without whining or putting out the paw to "society." Discussed their reproductive & other goals, both obtained nursing BAs, chose an affordable location, worked throughout their 20s to eliminate debt including the mortgage on their 2,000 sq ft home in a safe exurban locale. Mortgage/debt free, they had two little girls and the woman became SAHM. Man works as an ER nurse and pharma sales rep; they bank about 80 percent of his pay.
All four are slim, fit, active, happy. They use the library, go for long nature walks, don't really watch TV or shop for recreation. The girls go to a good school and the mother volunteers in the school and with other community groups. She keeps her license current and takes RN refresher courses regularly in case her spouse is disabled or otherwise loses his earning power.
They thrive on one income not because they are "lucky" but because they planned, exercised deferred gratification and didn't expect to live in NYC or San Francisco, drive luxury vehicles, send kids to expensive private schools, AND make no career sacrifices. They weighed their options and did it with dignity and prudence.
I know blue-collar people who worked opposite shifts to avoid daycare costs and otherwise made the best of limited resources. Instead of begging others to subsidize their choices. It can be done.
They took responsibility for themselves without whining or putting out the paw to "society." Discussed their reproductive & other goals, both obtained nursing BAs, chose an affordable location, worked throughout their 20s to eliminate debt including the mortgage on their 2,000 sq ft home in a safe exurban locale. Mortgage/debt free, they had two little girls and the woman became SAHM. Man works as an ER nurse and pharma sales rep; they bank about 80 percent of his pay.
All four are slim, fit, active, happy. They use the library, go for long nature walks, don't really watch TV or shop for recreation. The girls go to a good school and the mother volunteers in the school and with other community groups. She keeps her license current and takes RN refresher courses regularly in case her spouse is disabled or otherwise loses his earning power.
They thrive on one income not because they are "lucky" but because they planned, exercised deferred gratification and didn't expect to live in NYC or San Francisco, drive luxury vehicles, send kids to expensive private schools, AND make no career sacrifices. They weighed their options and did it with dignity and prudence.
I know blue-collar people who worked opposite shifts to avoid daycare costs and otherwise made the best of limited resources. Instead of begging others to subsidize their choices. It can be done.
5
And in Los Angeles, throw in two hours a day commuting. The traffic out here is just getting worse. Now, navigating certain unavoidable intersections can take 10 minutes here and 10 minutes there.
2
The real price is paid by the children. Child rearing is extremely demanding and unrewarded.
Give families tax credits for staying home and raising their children. Tax credits for both working fulltime and then the child is raised by day care low paid workers. And we wonder why all the shootings, etc. by this generation of children. Raised by video game mentors. Duh. The road to hell is truly paved with good intentions.
Give families tax credits for staying home and raising their children. Tax credits for both working fulltime and then the child is raised by day care low paid workers. And we wonder why all the shootings, etc. by this generation of children. Raised by video game mentors. Duh. The road to hell is truly paved with good intentions.
2
You're seriously blaming mass shootings on both parents working? Get a grip.
3
No, the last thing we need to do if give people a financial incentive to stay home with their kids.
How about not having kids unless you can afford them?
How about not having kids unless you can afford them?
5
The notion that children are "raised" by daycare (rather than their parents) is plainly absurd, and there is no evidence whatsoever that children in daycare turn out any differently (in terms of education, health, well-being, etc.) than those with stay-at-home parents.
My parents both worked when I was young, and I attended daycare. I had a great time there, and I'm still friends with some of those kids 30+ years later. I can tell you without any doubt that my parents are the ones who raised me, and I think they did an excellent job. I'm particularly proud of the work my mother has done as a nurse.
(Also, if you think kids with stay-at-home parents aren't watching TV and playing video games... well, you might be very surprised).
My parents both worked when I was young, and I attended daycare. I had a great time there, and I'm still friends with some of those kids 30+ years later. I can tell you without any doubt that my parents are the ones who raised me, and I think they did an excellent job. I'm particularly proud of the work my mother has done as a nurse.
(Also, if you think kids with stay-at-home parents aren't watching TV and playing video games... well, you might be very surprised).
5
Large corporations have squeezed the joy and life out of most jobs by their relentless pursuit of every half penny. While the CEO and a handful of others get rich, the rank and file work longer. Benefits get cut, there are very few pensions, work goals and targets get unrealistically raised. Then these large corps, insurance companies, banks, etc., use their out-sized profits to buy Congress, further eroding protections. We're in a bad place....
24
I don't want to chime in and say that today's fathers are perfect, egalitarians beings, and I'm sure there's more that fathers in general can be doing, especially regarding childcare. But I have yet to see an article like this take into account all the traditionally masculine house-hold chores (mow the lawn, change the tires, spray WD-40 on things, etc). When you take these into account, I'm sure the balance looks a whole lot better.
9
It's fair to factor those in. But a lot of those types of chores are done very infrequently, versus the in-home chores that need to be done on a daily or weekly basis-- e.g., changing diapers, bathing kids, dishes, laundry, etc. How often do you really have to change tires?
(And many women do those "masculine" chores, too!)
The article makes a very good point about the mental efforts that often fall on women, in terms of keeping track of daily schedules, doctor's appointments, birthdays, etc. That kind of thing can be mentally draining, on top of the physical efforts of doing household chores.
(And many women do those "masculine" chores, too!)
The article makes a very good point about the mental efforts that often fall on women, in terms of keeping track of daily schedules, doctor's appointments, birthdays, etc. That kind of thing can be mentally draining, on top of the physical efforts of doing household chores.
5
Change the tires? That is what AAA is for or your mechanic
Mow the lawn - landscaper
Spray WD-40 on things? Are you joking? That takes 5 seconds and any idiot can do it.
Mow the lawn - landscaper
Spray WD-40 on things? Are you joking? That takes 5 seconds and any idiot can do it.
3
What is new is that prospective parents seem clueless about how much work and time goes into raising a child.
They seem to think a child is like a pet and you just drop them off in doggie daycare and all issues are resolved.
Anyone who works with younger parents knows they have no plan for a child being sick or a school closing...it is bizarre how little real planning goes into bringing a new human being into the world.
They seem to think a child is like a pet and you just drop them off in doggie daycare and all issues are resolved.
Anyone who works with younger parents knows they have no plan for a child being sick or a school closing...it is bizarre how little real planning goes into bringing a new human being into the world.
18
I highly doubt that any real-life parents think that way. Certainly none of the parents I know thought that way before they had children.
The reality is that options are often limited, if you're a working person who wants to have kids at some point. There often aren't any *affordable* options for higher education, for daycare, for health insurance, etc., in a particular area. And there may not be any substantial differences among employers, in terms of the benefits or flexibility they're willing to offer.
The US makes it ridiculously hard for middle-class people to be parents, and there's no good reason for this. Many other countries seem to make it work, but we consistently refuse to study or learn from them (because, I guess, it makes us less "special").
The reality is that options are often limited, if you're a working person who wants to have kids at some point. There often aren't any *affordable* options for higher education, for daycare, for health insurance, etc., in a particular area. And there may not be any substantial differences among employers, in terms of the benefits or flexibility they're willing to offer.
The US makes it ridiculously hard for middle-class people to be parents, and there's no good reason for this. Many other countries seem to make it work, but we consistently refuse to study or learn from them (because, I guess, it makes us less "special").
4
Hahaha! Planning... my parents planned on having one child, two decent jobs, and picking up extra tutoring for money. They didn't plan on complete country-wide upheaval/unrest, their money becoming worthless almost overnight, and having to start over in foreign country with a 6 year old child and two suitcases. If it's one thing I have learned in my short, but eventful life, the Universe takes your plans, and declares, "You can go shove it!"
4
There is NO help for the emergencies like a sick kid - daycare won't take them, back up care won't take them - it is NOT for lack of planning, it is lack of access. Schools closing during the week for teacher training etc are dreadful for working parents because of the lack of back up care.
4
just last night my husband and i got home from work, fed the dogs, fixed dinner, cleaned up and did a few chores around the house.
i plopped on the chair and said,
" how did we do this for 20 years with kids?"
we arei n our 60's now, raised 2 girls, and i can't believe how difficult it is to have both parents working and attempt to maintain the american dream of a " happy family".
i plopped on the chair and said,
" how did we do this for 20 years with kids?"
we arei n our 60's now, raised 2 girls, and i can't believe how difficult it is to have both parents working and attempt to maintain the american dream of a " happy family".
6
Schools/PTA do not help. With 3 kids and a fulltime job, 10:30 am is not a good time for the school play, I can't bring snacks in Friday at 1 pm. Daily class volunteers is ridiculous. My parents never had to leave work to be in the classroom. I find it very stressful.
71
I couldn't agree more with this comment. Schools and PTAs do not help by scheduling events in the middle of the work day when working parents can't participate. It would be incredibly helpful if they could accommodate the new reality. The only person who I've seen highlight this issue is Anne Marie Slaughter. More attention should be focused on this point.
4
Frankly, the phenomenon you are experiencing is often an artifact of passive aggression by stay-at-home moms. Many resent mothers who try to balance all the stuff they do with a career and will intentionally try to undermine that balance.
It's cynical and mean and shouldn't happen, but it's unfortunately the world we live in
It's cynical and mean and shouldn't happen, but it's unfortunately the world we live in
9
When my daughter was in second grade, she encountered the passiveness aggressiveness of stay at home Moms. There was some read-aloud thingy that I missed and a mom asked her if she was sad that I wasn't there. Her response was priceless - "Nope, she's in Paris and will probably bring me a present or chocolate."
7
"paid family leave and after-school child care would significantly ease parents’ stress"
So would cutting income taxes so that more families could get by on one income.
So would cutting income taxes so that more families could get by on one income.
8
As a mother of four who has been employed full-time forever, I can attest at just how hard it is to juggle it all. My job requires travel, sometimes extensive travel, long hours and a lot of stress. Fortunately my husband is only slightly more flexible but we have patched things together over the years. I would say the easiest years are when they are small to about 10 - the routine is more or less set and the biggest issue is finding the right child and after school care. It gets hairier when they are older and have activities, homework, social issues and general growing up stuff that needs attention. My recommendation to all parents of small children - don't sweat it now, find good childcare focus on doing what you can at work because when they hit teen years that is when it is really important to spend as much time with them as you can. When they are small they love you all the time and treasure the time you spend with them, when they're older they want to talk when they want to talk and truly resent when you're not around. It seems to me the time to ramp down at work is when the kids are teenagers so you can be around more....just my 2 cents.
22
Thank you for this comment. I wish other, more experienced parents, would chime in on this topic as well, so we can get their views. We are parents of a very young child, and we feel very guilty about not having a stay at home parent. I have convinced myself that I would like one of us to be home once the children are around 10-- precisely for the reasons you gave. But I was never sure if it made sense. Thanks for sharing your experience.
Like many other couples my wife and I downsized our lives. Wife worked part time at kids school, I took a small part time job. Used cars. Fixed up house rather than buying new etc.. It is not the governments or societies responsibility to pay for peoples decisions. It is the peoples responsibily.
As time goes on things get better financially. Kids get older and the spouse who chose to care for the children will be able to re-start a career. This is called taking care of your own business and responsibilities without burdoning others.
Also, welcome to the Obama economy.
As time goes on things get better financially. Kids get older and the spouse who chose to care for the children will be able to re-start a career. This is called taking care of your own business and responsibilities without burdoning others.
Also, welcome to the Obama economy.
6
They won't be able to "re-start" a career nearly as easily as you've said.
10
Obama has nothing to do with anything. Real wages and purchasing power have been stagnant since the '70s, while the costs of health care, higher education, and daycare have been steadily rising. And nothing improved under Republican leadership, either.
10
People make choices and for many years now, people have chosen "things" over time with their family. When I was raising my children (the 70's), only one woman in my middle class neighborhood worked. She was an RN and worked night duty (then it was 11PM to 7AM) so she could do homework with her children, get them to bed, be there in the AM to get them off to school, and then she went to bed.
We all were one-car families - our husbands rode the bus downtown to work, or we drove them. Eating out? Something for one's anniversary. Fast food? An infrequent treat. Vacations? That meant a car trip to visit relatives, not a trip to DisneyWorld. Clothes? Hand me downs for children and most clothes budget for working husband.
Were we stressed? Of course - small children and their sleep schedules (or not!), illnesses, and just general caregiving, was exhausting! But we could take a nap when they did and we put our children to bed by 7PM as father's were usually home before 6PM. If I had to imagine factoring a job into all this, plus a much longer day, I'd say "just shoot me now"!
I would never have chosen "things" over the time I had with my children. Recently, I was talking to a woman from the city where I lived at that time. We met at an infant swim class and became good friends. We would have each other over for lunch, including children, or take them to the park together. I wouldn't trade that for trips to Disney World. It's about choices.
We all were one-car families - our husbands rode the bus downtown to work, or we drove them. Eating out? Something for one's anniversary. Fast food? An infrequent treat. Vacations? That meant a car trip to visit relatives, not a trip to DisneyWorld. Clothes? Hand me downs for children and most clothes budget for working husband.
Were we stressed? Of course - small children and their sleep schedules (or not!), illnesses, and just general caregiving, was exhausting! But we could take a nap when they did and we put our children to bed by 7PM as father's were usually home before 6PM. If I had to imagine factoring a job into all this, plus a much longer day, I'd say "just shoot me now"!
I would never have chosen "things" over the time I had with my children. Recently, I was talking to a woman from the city where I lived at that time. We met at an infant swim class and became good friends. We would have each other over for lunch, including children, or take them to the park together. I wouldn't trade that for trips to Disney World. It's about choices.
365
In 1975, median household income in the U.S. was about $38,000. Average income for men was about $36,000. This means that an average income for men in the 1970s was just about equal to household income.
Median household income is now about $54,000, while the average income for men is about $43,000.
Average car prices, adjusted for inflation, are much higher, too. So even if your hypothetical shallow consumerist family has only one car, it costs them much more than it would have in the 1970s.
In order to attain the (very modest) median household income in this country, women have to work. No one is eating bonbons at this income level. They are paying for daycare, not nights on the town or vacations in France.
Median household income is now about $54,000, while the average income for men is about $43,000.
Average car prices, adjusted for inflation, are much higher, too. So even if your hypothetical shallow consumerist family has only one car, it costs them much more than it would have in the 1970s.
In order to attain the (very modest) median household income in this country, women have to work. No one is eating bonbons at this income level. They are paying for daycare, not nights on the town or vacations in France.
17
There are other "things" which cost more money today than in the '70s. The cost of healthcare rises 10% to 15% each year; college tuition is going to cost 6 figures for each child; 100% of retirement is funded by the individual or couple. Wages have not kept up with the costs of raising a child and funding your retirement. It often takes two "breadwinners" to keep pace with the basic costs of a modern family.
To morally pontificate that it's a choice between going to Disney World or one parent staying at home is naive.
To morally pontificate that it's a choice between going to Disney World or one parent staying at home is naive.
25
I appreciate your viewpoint, but raising kids in the 21st century is (I imagine) quite different from back in the 70s. These days, housing prices are astronomical, mortgages and property taxes are barely manageable, food costs are high, health insurance stinks and I don't even think there's a word for how much college tuition has -tupled since those days. I want to send my kids to college and possibly grad school without them assuming hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt. Even state schools will cost over 30K a year by the time by kids are ready to go, private schools, probably around 100K a year. For perspective, my mom went to an Ivy League school in the 60s for $500 a semester. Sometimes I wish we could move to a farm in some remote area, but that fact of the matter is my husband's work is focused almost exclusively in the city we live in. Public transportation options are nil. It would be nice to stay home, with one car, but for families living in large cities (and there are a lot of us) this simply is not an option in many cases. I'm glad you had a wonderful experience raising your very lucky children, but please don't denigrate my generation for dealing with the circumstances of our time.
31
As first time parents, my wife and I are constantly re-evaluating our work/life situation and I think it'll be an ongoing plan. My wife has dropped down to part time and we were lucky enough to scale down our expenses appropriately but its still difficult finding time to raise a child, enjoy our social lives, work and find time for ourselves as husband and wife. I don't know how people of less means do it and its opened my eyes to those that have multiple children and far less support (financially and otherwise!). I think this will manifest itself in fewer children being born rather than the right pressures being put on corporate America to help their employees. That social contract has been one sided for too many years and I don't think they will agree to fixing it anytime soon.
15
This is a product of the tension that exists between wanting to have a family and raise children well, and pursing a rewarding career with progression potential. As society (and companies) demand more of their workers - more education, more training, more time - it exacerbates the tension for those of us who want it all.
The fact is that society dis-incentivizes (albeit indirectly) people having a family, and this begins with the birth of a child through either the lack of sufficient (if any) parental leave, or the opportunity cost of taking extended parental leave. This continues as children grow, and parents feel the pressure of meeting the demands of their careers against the need to expose their children to appropriate and necessary enrichment activities, whether through preschool or other, often costly ways.
Couples compensate by delaying having children in order to focus on and establish themselves in their careers. Many of these couples live and work in desirable but expensive cities. In order to afford a home in an urban environment with good public schools, families have to work and save for years.
While the article describes some policy prescriptions that may alleviate this issues, the root of this problem is a societal paradigm that incentivizes the bottom line and total buy-in from employees, even among top tier companies (see the Times' investigative report about Amazon from a few months ago to see what I'm talking about).
The fact is that society dis-incentivizes (albeit indirectly) people having a family, and this begins with the birth of a child through either the lack of sufficient (if any) parental leave, or the opportunity cost of taking extended parental leave. This continues as children grow, and parents feel the pressure of meeting the demands of their careers against the need to expose their children to appropriate and necessary enrichment activities, whether through preschool or other, often costly ways.
Couples compensate by delaying having children in order to focus on and establish themselves in their careers. Many of these couples live and work in desirable but expensive cities. In order to afford a home in an urban environment with good public schools, families have to work and save for years.
While the article describes some policy prescriptions that may alleviate this issues, the root of this problem is a societal paradigm that incentivizes the bottom line and total buy-in from employees, even among top tier companies (see the Times' investigative report about Amazon from a few months ago to see what I'm talking about).
8
I agree with most of that, but it doesn't just apply to white-collar employees who are on a demanding career path. Even employers who pay very low wages (e.g., in retail or fast food, etc.) are making it increasingly difficult for employees to have families.
In the past, you were given a set schedule for these types of jobs (e.g., Monday-Tuesday-Wednesday from 8 to 3). The big thing now is "on call" scheduling, where employees are expected to drop everything and come into work on short notice, whenever their employer calls them. The lack of a set schedule makes it extremely difficult to arrange childcare, to attend college part-time, etc.
In the past, you were given a set schedule for these types of jobs (e.g., Monday-Tuesday-Wednesday from 8 to 3). The big thing now is "on call" scheduling, where employees are expected to drop everything and come into work on short notice, whenever their employer calls them. The lack of a set schedule makes it extremely difficult to arrange childcare, to attend college part-time, etc.
17
We try to maintain the traditional approach, with one full-time earner and one parent caring for children and home. This is financially difficult, to say the least, and we can only hope that our kids will benefit over the long run. The costs are high: we cannot save all that much for retirement, for example, and things like vacations and dining out are rare pleasures. We worry about even routine items like vehicle maintenance, home repairs, eyeglasses and contact lenses, and veterinarian bills and, not infrequently, we run a little bit short on groceries and start to run the cars on fumes before the next paycheck comes in.
We often remark on the ever-increasing cost of living and Washington's general indifference to the needs of families. Children need their parents. We don't mind the economic sacrifice, but we do mind that our country seems not only uncaring, but hostile, to the notion that we should write laws aimed at improving their economic and social security, not undermining it.
We often remark on the ever-increasing cost of living and Washington's general indifference to the needs of families. Children need their parents. We don't mind the economic sacrifice, but we do mind that our country seems not only uncaring, but hostile, to the notion that we should write laws aimed at improving their economic and social security, not undermining it.
14
Sing it, sister !
4
Hundreds of billions of dollars -- not from some magical money pot but from the pockets of fellow citizens -- flow from the childfree to the childed each year in the form of preferential tax credits for parents, tax deductions, the EITC welfare, about $80 billion in early childhood education subsidies, the USDA school nutrition program, Medicaid, WIC, SNAP, TANF, housing assistance, gas/electric utilities subsidies, and much more. NONE of which (except a tiny amount of SNAP to destitute elderly) are available to the childfree.
And billions upon billions more in Social Security survivors benefits to minors, benefits to minor caregivers, benefits to disabled children, and so on. The childfree pay for these but incur zero liability to these programs and have no corresponding benefits. Single and childfree people cannot bequeath their benefits to siblings or other deserving parties who may depend upon them, for example.
But Social Security and Medicare benefits are paid out in retirement to stay-home spouses, most of whom were parents. Effectively giving a 50 percent boost in SS retirement income to the household with a stay-home non-contributor v. the household of a solo earner who made equal contributions. Not to mention employment benefits & perks that favor the childed during the working years.
How dare anyone overlook all that & say that our country is uncaring or hostile to the childed. Try being a childfree low-income adult with cancer or other dire need.
And billions upon billions more in Social Security survivors benefits to minors, benefits to minor caregivers, benefits to disabled children, and so on. The childfree pay for these but incur zero liability to these programs and have no corresponding benefits. Single and childfree people cannot bequeath their benefits to siblings or other deserving parties who may depend upon them, for example.
But Social Security and Medicare benefits are paid out in retirement to stay-home spouses, most of whom were parents. Effectively giving a 50 percent boost in SS retirement income to the household with a stay-home non-contributor v. the household of a solo earner who made equal contributions. Not to mention employment benefits & perks that favor the childed during the working years.
How dare anyone overlook all that & say that our country is uncaring or hostile to the childed. Try being a childfree low-income adult with cancer or other dire need.
19
Jeez, that is the basis for the tax-payer system. Stop this! Wealth is re-distibuted among many disparate sections of the population. And what about Medicare, the military, education, social security? And the government itself takes plenty to "run itself". So, tough luck, I say.
1
My wife is home with our four kids. At 45 years old, I make less than 100K in a (expensive of course) NYC suburb.
We rented cheap apartments for 16 years precisely so we wouldn't have to struggle as much later when we had a family and wanted a house. We did without new cars, nice vacations, col stuff - but we were happy.
And it has proven very worthwhile to us. We're still very busy as any family is and live simply - but we're not harried, overtaxed, and frantic.
I really feel for parents who both work. Can't possibly know everyone's situation - but I hope people out there who really can afford to cut back and have one parent stay home take advantage of it. Good for marriage, good for the kids.
I would add, as a student of history - that for eons of human society - and still in many parts of the world today - BOTH parents are home. In the village, on the farm, in the shop, etc.
Couples and children are "built" to spend most of their day - and lives - together.
Going out to work and school separately for most of the day is a very recent social development. Not sure we fully understand it's consequences yet.
Something to consider at least.
We rented cheap apartments for 16 years precisely so we wouldn't have to struggle as much later when we had a family and wanted a house. We did without new cars, nice vacations, col stuff - but we were happy.
And it has proven very worthwhile to us. We're still very busy as any family is and live simply - but we're not harried, overtaxed, and frantic.
I really feel for parents who both work. Can't possibly know everyone's situation - but I hope people out there who really can afford to cut back and have one parent stay home take advantage of it. Good for marriage, good for the kids.
I would add, as a student of history - that for eons of human society - and still in many parts of the world today - BOTH parents are home. In the village, on the farm, in the shop, etc.
Couples and children are "built" to spend most of their day - and lives - together.
Going out to work and school separately for most of the day is a very recent social development. Not sure we fully understand it's consequences yet.
Something to consider at least.
181
One thing you are overlooking is the vulnerability of the wife and kids in this situation. It works if the parents stay married. If the parents divorce is often the case, the wife with no work experience and children are often plunged into poverty.
57
Well done...well said...well played, Publius.
An inside-the-park home run.
An inside-the-park home run.
4
Not only are both parents home, but lots of relatives are also around and available, and kids are raised by and in the local village. Century-old houses are usually large, with extra rooms for spinster aunts and the like.
7
We have allowed this to develop, this ridiculous, shallow consumer culture which demands both constant work and constant consumption.
The only thing worse than our work culture is the existence of the executive post occupied by the director or VP of "Work/Life Balance". What do these people do all day and do they see the irony in their title?
In every domain there are leaders and followers. Some subset of our populace has set up the way things are in our corporate work world, driving ever harder to work more hours, juggle more gadgets, take more meetings, host more conference calls, because they love it, or have some compulsion to be this way. The rest of us must go with the flow; we're powerless to shift the paradigm unless we're willing to radically downsize our lives.
After 39 years in the workforce, I'm so very grateful to the tech world for my retirement app, which I can't stop looking at frequently throughout the day. 4 years, 12 days...
The only thing worse than our work culture is the existence of the executive post occupied by the director or VP of "Work/Life Balance". What do these people do all day and do they see the irony in their title?
In every domain there are leaders and followers. Some subset of our populace has set up the way things are in our corporate work world, driving ever harder to work more hours, juggle more gadgets, take more meetings, host more conference calls, because they love it, or have some compulsion to be this way. The rest of us must go with the flow; we're powerless to shift the paradigm unless we're willing to radically downsize our lives.
After 39 years in the workforce, I'm so very grateful to the tech world for my retirement app, which I can't stop looking at frequently throughout the day. 4 years, 12 days...
8
Many parents in the US face a financial burden that's unique among developed countries-- paying astronomical amounts for childcare, on top of substantial monthly student loan repayments. Those two items alone can be a huge strain on families.
We make it harder for working- and middle-class folks to have children than pretty much any other developed country on earth. There's a prevailing attitude that you MUST do it alone (without any practical societal or governmental assistance) that simply doesn't exist in most other countries. No wonder parents are so stressed and exhausted!
We make it harder for working- and middle-class folks to have children than pretty much any other developed country on earth. There's a prevailing attitude that you MUST do it alone (without any practical societal or governmental assistance) that simply doesn't exist in most other countries. No wonder parents are so stressed and exhausted!
16
Because we don't need homegrown new citizens as much as other nations feel that they do.
There are 6.5 billion other people on the planet outside the US and many of them would be willing and able to come here to keep the American economy going. It makes no sense to rob some citizens and corporations to make life eeeeeasier on would-be parents when the offspring of said parents are of no particular benefit to the people whose wages you are so eager to redistribute.
I'd just as soon have the next generation of US citizens be interesting, educated adults from India, Eastern Europe, Brazil or China than pay more taxes to subsidize the creation of more US-born Disney addicts or waddling Walmart shoppers who can't even find the nearest NASCAR track on a map let alone speak a second language.
There are 6.5 billion other people on the planet outside the US and many of them would be willing and able to come here to keep the American economy going. It makes no sense to rob some citizens and corporations to make life eeeeeasier on would-be parents when the offspring of said parents are of no particular benefit to the people whose wages you are so eager to redistribute.
I'd just as soon have the next generation of US citizens be interesting, educated adults from India, Eastern Europe, Brazil or China than pay more taxes to subsidize the creation of more US-born Disney addicts or waddling Walmart shoppers who can't even find the nearest NASCAR track on a map let alone speak a second language.
5
This is the wealthiest country on the face of the earth, and we waste plenty of money on useless things every day. We can most certainly afford modest measures (like paid leave) that make life less stressful for a significant percentage of our population.
Those types of measures will likely have little or no impact on fertility rates or immigration policy-- they'll just increase well-being for the percentage of the population who are planning to have children anyway.
It's entirely appropriate for the government to spend money to ensure the health and well-being of citizens, regardless of whether it "increases productivity" in a widget-factory sense. People are not widgets, nor should they be treated as such. (And, if you insist on considering purely financial considerations, paid leave would cut down enormously on employee turnover-- something that costs companies millions of dollars every year).
I'd also argue that making wealthy people and corporations pay their fair share is hardly "robbery", but I doubt we'll agree on that point...
Those types of measures will likely have little or no impact on fertility rates or immigration policy-- they'll just increase well-being for the percentage of the population who are planning to have children anyway.
It's entirely appropriate for the government to spend money to ensure the health and well-being of citizens, regardless of whether it "increases productivity" in a widget-factory sense. People are not widgets, nor should they be treated as such. (And, if you insist on considering purely financial considerations, paid leave would cut down enormously on employee turnover-- something that costs companies millions of dollars every year).
I'd also argue that making wealthy people and corporations pay their fair share is hardly "robbery", but I doubt we'll agree on that point...
2
I don't think we should enact policies aimed at "increasing wellbeing" for only a segment of society. We already spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year on programs that categorically exclude the childfree* and now you want more?
I would be all for paying more taxes for universal health care (instead of Medicaid which only the childed can get -- although perhaps that's ameliorated a bit since ACA) or a guaranteed min income or mandated gov't paid annual leave or many other programs -- as long as they were 100 percent available to the childfree as well as the childed.
Also the SS system needs to be adjusted. Multiple spouses dipping off one-wage earner's account is absurd. My BIL has two ex-wives and one current wife, plus himself -- all will be collecting on his account because he was a high earner. If we allow that, as well as the stay-home spouse payouts based on partner's account, then married people should pay higher SS rates to begin with and childed people should pay in more to account for potential survivors' benefits, minor caregiver benefits, disability payouts to their minors. Or let single childfree bequeath benefits to siblings or friends. Instead of 2nd-class status.
Tired of the single, childfree as cash cow of all programs while benefiting from few. We need to correct this inequity before thinking up new perks for parents.
*WIC, SNAP, TANF, EITC, tax credits & deductions, Medicaid, early-child education, USDA school meals, Section 8, etc.
I would be all for paying more taxes for universal health care (instead of Medicaid which only the childed can get -- although perhaps that's ameliorated a bit since ACA) or a guaranteed min income or mandated gov't paid annual leave or many other programs -- as long as they were 100 percent available to the childfree as well as the childed.
Also the SS system needs to be adjusted. Multiple spouses dipping off one-wage earner's account is absurd. My BIL has two ex-wives and one current wife, plus himself -- all will be collecting on his account because he was a high earner. If we allow that, as well as the stay-home spouse payouts based on partner's account, then married people should pay higher SS rates to begin with and childed people should pay in more to account for potential survivors' benefits, minor caregiver benefits, disability payouts to their minors. Or let single childfree bequeath benefits to siblings or friends. Instead of 2nd-class status.
Tired of the single, childfree as cash cow of all programs while benefiting from few. We need to correct this inequity before thinking up new perks for parents.
*WIC, SNAP, TANF, EITC, tax credits & deductions, Medicaid, early-child education, USDA school meals, Section 8, etc.
4
Interesting the difference between college-educated workers and non-college-educated workers. This probably has to do with how the latter can leave their jobs at the job.
I am disappointed to see so many comments focused on reaffirming the sole breadwinner and union agendas.
I understand that many people think that if the father is paid to take care of the child, via paid parental leave, he will do this, when he otherwise would not do it. I think this presents a child welfare problem. Women have been paid to have children and take care of them for centuries, and this has caused A LOT of problems.
Instead I think a closer look at how our federal tax and benefit systems are subisdizing, often with debt that is passed to future generations, the sole or primary breadwinner and stay-at-home parent (or parent who works just a few hours a week).
For people like me, for whom the 2-earner/2-parent model is important because of how it meets the child's needs better, supports the child's development, prevents emotional problems, etc., what I really need is a constitutional ruling that a child is baseline the equal responsibility of both parents and all federal tax and benefits systems should be built around this baseline. Paternity is provable now and it would be easy to give every child the right to have his/her bio parents identified at birth. You can still have adoptions, single parenting, but the adoptive parent or single parent has to consent to this responsibility.
I am disappointed to see so many comments focused on reaffirming the sole breadwinner and union agendas.
I understand that many people think that if the father is paid to take care of the child, via paid parental leave, he will do this, when he otherwise would not do it. I think this presents a child welfare problem. Women have been paid to have children and take care of them for centuries, and this has caused A LOT of problems.
Instead I think a closer look at how our federal tax and benefit systems are subisdizing, often with debt that is passed to future generations, the sole or primary breadwinner and stay-at-home parent (or parent who works just a few hours a week).
For people like me, for whom the 2-earner/2-parent model is important because of how it meets the child's needs better, supports the child's development, prevents emotional problems, etc., what I really need is a constitutional ruling that a child is baseline the equal responsibility of both parents and all federal tax and benefits systems should be built around this baseline. Paternity is provable now and it would be easy to give every child the right to have his/her bio parents identified at birth. You can still have adoptions, single parenting, but the adoptive parent or single parent has to consent to this responsibility.
3
I know that if my ex-husband had been given parental leave, paid or unpaid, he would have been just one more person for me to make lunch for. Perhaps some of today's younger guys are not like that. Hopefully!
3
It is depressing that with an increase in technology and material comforts, life does not get easier, but more stressful. Part of the reason is that we surely do not have the social protection and benefits (generous paid parental leave, long vacations, low or no tuition, availability of free or low-cost childcare) that France and northern European countries have. It always baffles me that we don't take a page from their playbook, when their lifestyle is clearly more humane than ours. Separately, I spent a few weeks with a family in the Thai countryside. A bunch of kids running around, the wife a teacher, the husband basically a subsistence farmer. Life is quiet and relaxed, people have plenty of time to sit and talk, and not do much of anything. The family is not destitute poor, but neither middle class, yet they seemed to be happy and unstressed. No social calendar, no non-stop work demands on mobile devices, endless worries about achievement, playing hard, shuttling the kids everywhere, using every free minute, careers. I do not want to idealize, the medical care is poor for people without money, though they do have a single payer government scheme that takes care of the basics. But no rat race, and I was amazed how easy it was to lower my standard of living, but also lower dramatically the stress level. My point is perhaps a lot of the stress is self-caused, by simply emulating what everybody else does, and not at times contemplating about life's basic priorities.
27
Many issues in play here (some have been at least alluded to in other comments):
- Ongoing eradication of the "middle class", i.e. well-paying jobs for folks with HS diploma.
- Impractical wants of the populace a/k/a keeping up with the Joneses.
- ***De-communalization/Downsizing of the American Family*** - Used to be far more common to have several generations of a family closeby/in the same town. Used to be far more common to have larger families, i.e. more siblings/other family members to assist with family care.
- Health care expense burden - Health care costs have been going up double digit percentage points for years.
- Stagnant Wage Growth - Despite a return to low unemployment rate (at least as reported by US Gov't), wage growth is nominal.
- Ongoing eradication of the "middle class", i.e. well-paying jobs for folks with HS diploma.
- Impractical wants of the populace a/k/a keeping up with the Joneses.
- ***De-communalization/Downsizing of the American Family*** - Used to be far more common to have several generations of a family closeby/in the same town. Used to be far more common to have larger families, i.e. more siblings/other family members to assist with family care.
- Health care expense burden - Health care costs have been going up double digit percentage points for years.
- Stagnant Wage Growth - Despite a return to low unemployment rate (at least as reported by US Gov't), wage growth is nominal.
7
Yes, this is a social problem. It's not slavery, but what it is shows some critical weaknesses in how our society does capitalism. We've given all the power to corporations, and more fundamentally, to this belief that money must take precedence over everything else. So now we're convinced that we don't have the right to make demands on behalf of ourselves, our families, and our communities if those demands require ANYTHING from our system of corporations and our system of government. Families suffer; schools suffer; daycare suffers; healthcare suffers; infrastructure suffers; our mental health suffers.
Currently our nation is experiencing a political disconnect between what a majority of people want and how our government serves us. More voters vote Democratic across the nation, yet Republicans increasingly control every aspect of our government, from local governments to the Capitol. The only office Republicans seem to have a hard time capturing is the White House, and that's because it's a nationwide contest. But if a party controls everything else, there's absolutely nothing to prevent them from just taking the Presidency. Nothing.
The conservative agenda is to get government out of every aspect of our lives, which means we don't get served by anyone. Corporations have carte blanche in controlling the economic landscape and we are at their total mercy, because they control the money and we need money to survive.
Currently our nation is experiencing a political disconnect between what a majority of people want and how our government serves us. More voters vote Democratic across the nation, yet Republicans increasingly control every aspect of our government, from local governments to the Capitol. The only office Republicans seem to have a hard time capturing is the White House, and that's because it's a nationwide contest. But if a party controls everything else, there's absolutely nothing to prevent them from just taking the Presidency. Nothing.
The conservative agenda is to get government out of every aspect of our lives, which means we don't get served by anyone. Corporations have carte blanche in controlling the economic landscape and we are at their total mercy, because they control the money and we need money to survive.
17
My husband and I were both working parents. When our daughter and son-in-law had their first child we decided that we needed to pitch in to help them. So we helped our daughter stay home through financial support for children's activities and we also decided to spend as much time as possible with our grandkids. They are small for a very short period of time. We want the legacy we leave them to include memories of their time spent with us. We have many friends who have made similar decisions to stay active in their grandchildren's lives.
8
First a disclaimer: My wife and I are firmly middle-class--perhaps 'middle-middle' class and I tend to be very 'liberal' and progressive.
Having said that I think a lot of financial problems most people face could be traced to keeping up with the Jones-es: Buying a bigger house than needed, buying a $500 iPad when a $200 Nexus would be do, buying--or worse--leasing brand new cars when a few year old used would do... We see it all the time, don't we?
As to having children, we chose not to have any of our own. Perhaps it was 'selfishness' on our part but we so no point in introducing extreme stress by having children in our economic situation; a pet has been just fine.
My wife and I are working on simplifying life. Reduce, reuse and recycle in a metaphorical sense. We are working on reducing dependency on the 9-to-5 routine. And my plan is to come to stage where even $1000/month take home money is enough to cover the basics--we saved hard to pay off our mortgage in 8 years, so that helps a lot.
Short of medical catastrophe, we should be fine on $1000/month. And so should be most other Americans.
Having said that I think a lot of financial problems most people face could be traced to keeping up with the Jones-es: Buying a bigger house than needed, buying a $500 iPad when a $200 Nexus would be do, buying--or worse--leasing brand new cars when a few year old used would do... We see it all the time, don't we?
As to having children, we chose not to have any of our own. Perhaps it was 'selfishness' on our part but we so no point in introducing extreme stress by having children in our economic situation; a pet has been just fine.
My wife and I are working on simplifying life. Reduce, reuse and recycle in a metaphorical sense. We are working on reducing dependency on the 9-to-5 routine. And my plan is to come to stage where even $1000/month take home money is enough to cover the basics--we saved hard to pay off our mortgage in 8 years, so that helps a lot.
Short of medical catastrophe, we should be fine on $1000/month. And so should be most other Americans.
36
That's great if you can economize, but many families do need a second income just to cover the basics-- e.g., utilities, daycare, ever-increasing health insurance premiums and deductibles, etc.-- not because they insist on having fancy houses and cars.
If you look at financial data over the last 40+ years, household wages and purchasing power have largely remained stagnant while costs of living (especially in health care and education) have skyrocketed.
Many people struggle to pay off student loans, on top of their other household bills. That can be a huge burden, especially if you have young kids who require full-time daycare.
(To provide an example, my own student loan repayments are almost $1,000/ month. That's higher than average, certainly, but it's not that unusual among salaried workers like the article mentions with graduate or professional degrees).
If you look at financial data over the last 40+ years, household wages and purchasing power have largely remained stagnant while costs of living (especially in health care and education) have skyrocketed.
Many people struggle to pay off student loans, on top of their other household bills. That can be a huge burden, especially if you have young kids who require full-time daycare.
(To provide an example, my own student loan repayments are almost $1,000/ month. That's higher than average, certainly, but it's not that unusual among salaried workers like the article mentions with graduate or professional degrees).
3
I used to think this was the case as well. But if you look at the research, spending on clothing, consumer goods, luxury items etc. has actually gone up very little over the last few decades. Yes, we may spend on iPads but many consumer goods have dropped dramatically in price. What has gone up tremendously are housing expenses and that increase has been driven less by a desire for more space and more by an arms race of desperate parents trying to gain access to a few good school districts. (Elizabeth Warren has a good discussion of the data on these developments in one of her books.) Parents are seeing their own standard of living slip away and are fighting hard to secure a better life for their kids in an increasingly competitive world.
11
Nice for you, but a little smug.
Perhaps others have college loans, medical catastrophes, other family members to support, do not make quite as much as you and can't pay off their mortgage in 8 years.
Perhaps others have college loans, medical catastrophes, other family members to support, do not make quite as much as you and can't pay off their mortgage in 8 years.
6
Many of the educated parents with adequate income want too much out of their lives. That's a choice they make, and the children suffer. The parents don't want to temporarily postpone personal career fulfillment of one. On the other hand they also know their children ae not raised in the best possible manner. Nannies can never replace mother. But, selfishness takes over good of the family.
There is nothing like a free lunch or raising children easily.
There is nothing like a free lunch or raising children easily.
14
This is a very old and tired argument, and one that's been studied again and again. The results: there is absolutely no difference in outcomes between kids who have a stay-at-home parent vs. those who attend daycare or have a nanny.
Parents who use paid childcare are not "selfish". Parents who opt to stay home are not "selfish". Everybody is making the best decisions they can, based on their own particular circumstances, and their kids will be just fine either way.
Parents who use paid childcare are not "selfish". Parents who opt to stay home are not "selfish". Everybody is making the best decisions they can, based on their own particular circumstances, and their kids will be just fine either way.
18
Sure, "the best decisions they can", but then they shouldn't complain when the "have it all" goal proves unattainable!
2
@ A-
Working and having kids at the same time shouldn't be some fanciful, impossible-to-reach goal for an average middle-class couple.
Practically EVERY other developed country on earth has figured this out, with far less stress. There's no reason for it to be so difficult in the US. Apparently we prefer to be stubborn and keep shooting ourselves in the foot, rather than admit we can learn anything from the rest of the world.
(As an aside, I always get annoyed when the media uses the phrase "having it all". It's an inherently dumb term that I've never heard anyone use in the real world. Most parents aren't out for riches or fancy corner offices at work-- they mostly just want reasonable hours, the ability to maybe buy a nice meal occasionally, and to not have to panic if they get an unexpected medical bill).
Working and having kids at the same time shouldn't be some fanciful, impossible-to-reach goal for an average middle-class couple.
Practically EVERY other developed country on earth has figured this out, with far less stress. There's no reason for it to be so difficult in the US. Apparently we prefer to be stubborn and keep shooting ourselves in the foot, rather than admit we can learn anything from the rest of the world.
(As an aside, I always get annoyed when the media uses the phrase "having it all". It's an inherently dumb term that I've never heard anyone use in the real world. Most parents aren't out for riches or fancy corner offices at work-- they mostly just want reasonable hours, the ability to maybe buy a nice meal occasionally, and to not have to panic if they get an unexpected medical bill).
7
I wish the term "work" in this article were instead changed to "work for pay." I am a stay-at-home college-educated parent, and the activities I spend my day engaged in are "work" in my mind. If a person who stays at home with children does jobs that parents would otherwise have to pay someone else to do, thereby employing someone else to work for them, then that at-home parent should also be considered as a working person. When I am asked what I do, or if I "work," I prefer to answer that I do not work for pay. I certainly call what I do work.
63
Very true. But this article was about the stresses of both parents working outside the home - away from the children. Your children are fortunate that you are able to be at home with them: Working.
2
The thing is, a lot of working parents can't afford to pay for someone else to do what you do, so they work for pay outside the home and come home to work some more. I don't know anyone that doesn't think being a parent is hard work. Semantics is not a big deal; this article points out the ways in which working parents-that is those who work outside the home in addition to working to raise children-are especially burdened in our modern American society.
5
This problem is a manifestation of the type of stress of an economic system purposely rigged to create an artificial state of scarcity. The main reason for this is that a captured government and regulatory system implement policy preferences of the wealthier 10 percent of the population (according to recent studies), while ignoring policy preferences of the other 90 percent.
If history is any guide, I would venture to guess that most of the comments about this article will focus on pointing out the wrongs of the system, with an emphasis on complaining; that's understandable.
But I argue that unless a significant-enough segment of the population gets beyond that point and moves towards the concept of "participatory democracy," or taking a lot of these quality of life issues into their own hands, things are going to keep getting worse, and social dysfunction will continue to increase.
First, defund the corporate state by shifting your spending to locally-owned businesses (as much as humanly possible), and away from corporate chains. Second, free yourself from the effects of corporate media propaganda by limiting your exposure to TV programming, especially corporate news. Third, reach out to members in your community and form grassroots groups and discuss best ways to address all issues, housing, work, education, promotion of arts. Fourth, do not expect local and/or national government officials to do the right thing. They don't work for you, in the final analysis.
If history is any guide, I would venture to guess that most of the comments about this article will focus on pointing out the wrongs of the system, with an emphasis on complaining; that's understandable.
But I argue that unless a significant-enough segment of the population gets beyond that point and moves towards the concept of "participatory democracy," or taking a lot of these quality of life issues into their own hands, things are going to keep getting worse, and social dysfunction will continue to increase.
First, defund the corporate state by shifting your spending to locally-owned businesses (as much as humanly possible), and away from corporate chains. Second, free yourself from the effects of corporate media propaganda by limiting your exposure to TV programming, especially corporate news. Third, reach out to members in your community and form grassroots groups and discuss best ways to address all issues, housing, work, education, promotion of arts. Fourth, do not expect local and/or national government officials to do the right thing. They don't work for you, in the final analysis.
57
Excellent comment. Unfortunately, I suspect that the remedy you suggest will be kept in check in perpetuity by the same forces that we've allowed to put us in this predicament. That propaganda you reference is pervasive and powerful. It will make sure it convinces enough people to maintain a mindset that keeps our corporate system in power. I'm not sure what the answer is.
Mississippi, where I live, just defeated a referendum that would have guaranteed full funding for public schools. We have the worst schools in the nation, Republican administrations have been channeling funds earmarked for public education to their pet projects, and when we have a rare opportunity to fix the problem, we vote it down, thanks to the propaganda that told Mississippians that Initiative 42 will hurt schools and put the money for public schools in the hands of a single liberal judge. That's all it took. A well-crafted prevarication. Apparently, Mississippians believe in the axiom ignorance is bliss.
Mississippi, where I live, just defeated a referendum that would have guaranteed full funding for public schools. We have the worst schools in the nation, Republican administrations have been channeling funds earmarked for public education to their pet projects, and when we have a rare opportunity to fix the problem, we vote it down, thanks to the propaganda that told Mississippians that Initiative 42 will hurt schools and put the money for public schools in the hands of a single liberal judge. That's all it took. A well-crafted prevarication. Apparently, Mississippians believe in the axiom ignorance is bliss.
7
I've been thinking about these issues for many years now and have determined that the effects of corporate propaganda in the U.S. is the number one problem we face as a nation. It's very insidious, perverse, and ubiquitous. It's so powerful that I consider it some sort of psyops cognitive weapon being used against the population.
Nevertheless, you allude to something that I believe is also a symptom of this powerful cognitive weapon: TINA. The number one mandate of this propaganda regime is to instill in people a sense that "there is no alternative" to the current system; to the status quo. So, even when people try to point out the root causes of the system dysfunction, we are programmed to accept the fact that the problems are too big and there is nothing we can do about it anyways.
That is the way those who control the corporate media conglomerate control the population, by and large. It's some sort of mental shackles, mental slavery. The most powerful kind.
I reject that notion, totally. And on a daily basis I reach out to one person at a time asking them to also reject that mindset.
The biggest threat to this brutal corporate-controlled system is to have a large-enough segment of the population join forces to create parallel social structures (via participatory democracy).
Nevertheless, you allude to something that I believe is also a symptom of this powerful cognitive weapon: TINA. The number one mandate of this propaganda regime is to instill in people a sense that "there is no alternative" to the current system; to the status quo. So, even when people try to point out the root causes of the system dysfunction, we are programmed to accept the fact that the problems are too big and there is nothing we can do about it anyways.
That is the way those who control the corporate media conglomerate control the population, by and large. It's some sort of mental shackles, mental slavery. The most powerful kind.
I reject that notion, totally. And on a daily basis I reach out to one person at a time asking them to also reject that mindset.
The biggest threat to this brutal corporate-controlled system is to have a large-enough segment of the population join forces to create parallel social structures (via participatory democracy).
6
The corporate culture that professionals work in have a common expression "you gotta give 110%". Parents would like to "do what it takes" to raise a family and secure a good future for their children.
If you go all in on every responsibility in your life, the 110 percents don't add up to the hours available in a day. Another factor is that professionals in the top economic bracket are more mobile, they likely started their careers somewhere distant from their parents and families, and have no local support system, to fall back on.
Any support has to be paid for, and this seems to be fueling the proliferation of low paid service jobs. Childcare could be a good profession, if it were a government sponsored service. Parents would have certainty of childcare being available, and the care workers would have a permanent job. Instead we have childcare as a job of last resort, and parents having to entrust their children to people with little or no experience, and "nanny cams" to figure out if they are treating their kids well.
Most women I work with do not want to go back to a "traditional" (aka 50's) family structure where the wife stays home. A dual income is the only "safety net" in lieu of any substantive US government programs.
If you go all in on every responsibility in your life, the 110 percents don't add up to the hours available in a day. Another factor is that professionals in the top economic bracket are more mobile, they likely started their careers somewhere distant from their parents and families, and have no local support system, to fall back on.
Any support has to be paid for, and this seems to be fueling the proliferation of low paid service jobs. Childcare could be a good profession, if it were a government sponsored service. Parents would have certainty of childcare being available, and the care workers would have a permanent job. Instead we have childcare as a job of last resort, and parents having to entrust their children to people with little or no experience, and "nanny cams" to figure out if they are treating their kids well.
Most women I work with do not want to go back to a "traditional" (aka 50's) family structure where the wife stays home. A dual income is the only "safety net" in lieu of any substantive US government programs.
45
This story is spot on! Modern parents are torn apart between work and family. Work takes precedence because of economic reasons. The quality time being spent with children has decreased, although parents desire or I should say these days aspire to spend time with kids. I think parents' ambitions have to give in but there are certain pragmatism with two jobs household. Bills need to be paid!
3
" Bills need to be paid! "
Actually, things need NOT to be bought and then there will be fewer bills to pay. We live in a world of "gotta haves" and that is the problem.
Actually, things need NOT to be bought and then there will be fewer bills to pay. We live in a world of "gotta haves" and that is the problem.
5
"The quality time being spent with children has decreased"
That's not actually true, though. Parents spend far more time one-on-one with their kids now than (say) 40 or 50 years ago, as borne out by time-use studies.
Stay-at-home parents used to spend the majority of their time on housework, cleaning, cooking, etc., than on personal interaction with their kids (who were probably playing outside by themselves).
That's not actually true, though. Parents spend far more time one-on-one with their kids now than (say) 40 or 50 years ago, as borne out by time-use studies.
Stay-at-home parents used to spend the majority of their time on housework, cleaning, cooking, etc., than on personal interaction with their kids (who were probably playing outside by themselves).
5
This article hits a tender spot for me because I chose to stay home with our three kids and while it was not the best financial decision I ever made and put all kinds of economic stress on our family and my relationship with my spouse, I felt that kids don't raise themselves and directly benefit from the presence of a nuturing adult figure and I was the only one available. Now that the kids are mostly grown and flown I am working again- I will probably never make the money I once did in my previous life but I think it was worth the investment in our kids. I feel fortunate that I was able to choose to stay home- single parents are not allowed this "luxury".
http://curbappealinsleepyhollow.blogspot.com/
http://curbappealinsleepyhollow.blogspot.com/
31
I did the same. With only one child left in the house, I've gone back to work FT. But, I know I will never get to the level I was when I left working. The trade off was worth it, but our family economic level suffered. I often wonder if there had been viable part time options in my field if I would've gotten back in the game earlier.
4
@ALL: I read an interesting article years ago, that said most mothers would prefer to work PART TIME -- keep their careers going and their skills up to date, as well as interact with colleagues and other adults -- but part time jobs in the US are just terrible. You can rarely be a "part time lawyer" or a "part time tech professional". Usually the choices are things like Walmart cashier or temp worker (secretarial).
Those jobs are so crappy and pay so little, that it becomes easy to just stay home full time, and avoid the runaround of trying to find day care for floating shifts of work. But the trade off is that 5-10 years out any job field, and when you WANT to go back, you are rusty and lack recent experience. I know women who made the transition very well, but others who were permanently sidetracked and in only their THIRTIES -- a long time to have no career when your kids are mostly grown and in school all day.
Those jobs are so crappy and pay so little, that it becomes easy to just stay home full time, and avoid the runaround of trying to find day care for floating shifts of work. But the trade off is that 5-10 years out any job field, and when you WANT to go back, you are rusty and lack recent experience. I know women who made the transition very well, but others who were permanently sidetracked and in only their THIRTIES -- a long time to have no career when your kids are mostly grown and in school all day.
2
It's portrait of everyone's lives whether they are parents, couples, or single. Everyone is stressed out, hasn't got time, or is in need of something to make their lives easier.
66
Do less...
Sounds uncompassionate and facile, I know, but it certainly works for me. Do a careful, objective financial analysis and you may want to rethink following the crowd into debt and servitude.
The internet is a wonderful tool. It allowed me to discover that much of what I had been taught was wrong.
For example, did you know that having two incomes makes families financially *less* secure?
Did you know that most people who go bankrupt due to medical debts were insured when they became ill?
Did you know that, in many households, the entire second income is eaten up by higher taxes, transportation expenses and child care costs?
Did you ever seriously consider trying to set up a one-income family model? Limit the size of your family?
Live substantially below your means even though you're comfortably well off?
People have options but they're not availing themselves of those options because they're following a life prescription that has been promoted by establishment interests and reinforced by peer pressure. Fact is, you do not have to do what everyone else is doing nor should you, because it is simply not working for most of them and it is unhealthy.
Sure you need money to live, but do you need a new car or a vacation to some exotic place or an ivy league degree or a ten thousand dollar wedding or a big house or much of the stuff in it?
Do you?
Money is a seductive lure and debt is a trap...do the math and think it over.
Sounds uncompassionate and facile, I know, but it certainly works for me. Do a careful, objective financial analysis and you may want to rethink following the crowd into debt and servitude.
The internet is a wonderful tool. It allowed me to discover that much of what I had been taught was wrong.
For example, did you know that having two incomes makes families financially *less* secure?
Did you know that most people who go bankrupt due to medical debts were insured when they became ill?
Did you know that, in many households, the entire second income is eaten up by higher taxes, transportation expenses and child care costs?
Did you ever seriously consider trying to set up a one-income family model? Limit the size of your family?
Live substantially below your means even though you're comfortably well off?
People have options but they're not availing themselves of those options because they're following a life prescription that has been promoted by establishment interests and reinforced by peer pressure. Fact is, you do not have to do what everyone else is doing nor should you, because it is simply not working for most of them and it is unhealthy.
Sure you need money to live, but do you need a new car or a vacation to some exotic place or an ivy league degree or a ten thousand dollar wedding or a big house or much of the stuff in it?
Do you?
Money is a seductive lure and debt is a trap...do the math and think it over.
412
A lot of fallacies in your statements; sounds as though your research is just confirming a bias you have that you as the man want to control the resources and have access to the paid work.
The people who want two-earner/two-parent families don't want it just because it provides their child with more financial security, it also gives the child two adult parents and supports the child's development much better, giving the child emotional security as well.
The people who want two-earner/two-parent families don't want it just because it provides their child with more financial security, it also gives the child two adult parents and supports the child's development much better, giving the child emotional security as well.
16
Live wisely and frugally? In America? You've got to be kidding! If there ever was a land of living large, this is it.
Now where did I park my Ferrari.....
Now where did I park my Ferrari.....
9
Excellent points! Stop chasing "material things" your life
will be much happier!
will be much happier!
7
Welcome to the Industrial Revolution.
We had a brief period in which we got used to things being different and came to think of it as "normal". We are actually returning to something more like the real historical normal. Abundant "good jobs" has been rare in human history. Extreme income inequality has also been the norm, especially between the First Industrial Revolution and the height of the modern labor movement. (By that, I mean only to designate a time period, and I am not suggesting that the solution to current woes is as simple as an increase in union membership).
The new normal isn't fun. It isn't pretty. It isn't fair. It isn't healthy. But if we can't figure out some way to reverse the trend, our brief (1950-2000) holiday will be over, possibly never to return.
We had a brief period in which we got used to things being different and came to think of it as "normal". We are actually returning to something more like the real historical normal. Abundant "good jobs" has been rare in human history. Extreme income inequality has also been the norm, especially between the First Industrial Revolution and the height of the modern labor movement. (By that, I mean only to designate a time period, and I am not suggesting that the solution to current woes is as simple as an increase in union membership).
The new normal isn't fun. It isn't pretty. It isn't fair. It isn't healthy. But if we can't figure out some way to reverse the trend, our brief (1950-2000) holiday will be over, possibly never to return.
52
You nailed it.
3
Well, with a global population careening toward 13 billion by the end of the century, methinks the trend is not going to be reversed any time soon. Maybe those Zero Population Growth people back in the 70s -- ironically the midpoint of those halcyon economic days you hard back to -- weren't such kooks after all, eh?
Humans have bred themselves into commodity status and are paying the predictable price. Technology is fast replacing the need for human capital, the economic boundaries of a single nation are irrevocably gone and there are billions and billions of people trying to eke out a livelihood who would be grateful to trade places with all these poor stressed-out American whiners. As our standard of living seeks equilibrium with the average on the planet, there is going to be less and less incentive for caving to the foot-stomping demands of those who want to be rewarded for adding to global population woes. Indeed, they already are starting to seem like caricatures, oblivious to the reality of the planet they are a part of.
Humans have bred themselves into commodity status and are paying the predictable price. Technology is fast replacing the need for human capital, the economic boundaries of a single nation are irrevocably gone and there are billions and billions of people trying to eke out a livelihood who would be grateful to trade places with all these poor stressed-out American whiners. As our standard of living seeks equilibrium with the average on the planet, there is going to be less and less incentive for caving to the foot-stomping demands of those who want to be rewarded for adding to global population woes. Indeed, they already are starting to seem like caricatures, oblivious to the reality of the planet they are a part of.
7
"Humans have bred themselves into commodity status and are paying the predictable price."
Excellent!
Excellent!
4
"She said policies like paid family leave and after-school child care would significantly ease parents’ stress. Yet today, families mostly figure out the juggle on their own."
This is a sign of a society that is oblivious to the social needs of its citizens. Most modern advanced societies provide support for its citizens through policies that include pre-K child care, paid paternal vacation, more liberal sick days, etc. We in America are left to figure out solutions on our own. Basically government has abandoned its fundamental duty to its citizens.
Moreover, all we hear are snarky remarks from the likes of Jeb Bush who spoke disparagingly of the "French work week" while admonishing Marco Rubio. And we have to suffer through the irony displayed in Paul Ryan's unwillingness to compromise on his own family time but offering no support for that in his budget.
It is high time to throw out of office those who do not support social programs that benefit Americans across the board. It is high time America joins other advanced societies and enters the 21st century.
This is a sign of a society that is oblivious to the social needs of its citizens. Most modern advanced societies provide support for its citizens through policies that include pre-K child care, paid paternal vacation, more liberal sick days, etc. We in America are left to figure out solutions on our own. Basically government has abandoned its fundamental duty to its citizens.
Moreover, all we hear are snarky remarks from the likes of Jeb Bush who spoke disparagingly of the "French work week" while admonishing Marco Rubio. And we have to suffer through the irony displayed in Paul Ryan's unwillingness to compromise on his own family time but offering no support for that in his budget.
It is high time to throw out of office those who do not support social programs that benefit Americans across the board. It is high time America joins other advanced societies and enters the 21st century.
549
I agree with the fact that we need to add more benefits to working parents but I feel that we can't due to the large population, and the border with Mexico, as these immigrants are hard working but would get more out of the system than they put in.
1
"This is a sign of a society that is oblivious to the social needs of its citizens. Most modern advanced societies provide support for its citizens through policies that include pre-K child care, paid paternal vacation, more liberal sick days, etc."
I think you have confused the word SOCIETY (the collective form of the people) with the people who have needs (the individual part of society) with the government they elect for whatever reason. The elected government is the scapegoat for our own stupidity. We are the government AND the society.
It would appear that at least 50% of the voting part of "society" don't want what you want, and wish to see it flushed down the drain.
"we have found the enemy , and it is US" Pogo (aka Walt Kelly).
I think you have confused the word SOCIETY (the collective form of the people) with the people who have needs (the individual part of society) with the government they elect for whatever reason. The elected government is the scapegoat for our own stupidity. We are the government AND the society.
It would appear that at least 50% of the voting part of "society" don't want what you want, and wish to see it flushed down the drain.
"we have found the enemy , and it is US" Pogo (aka Walt Kelly).
What you're describing may make life easier for individuals such as yourself who made a decision to have children and now find life stressful. But it doesn't benefit individuals who have chosen not to have kids and now find themselves being asked to subsidize your life choices.
You say that "we ... are left to figure out solutions on our own". If you are not mature enough to figure out your own solutions in life then it's unlikely that you were mature enough to be having children to begin with.
You say that "we ... are left to figure out solutions on our own". If you are not mature enough to figure out your own solutions in life then it's unlikely that you were mature enough to be having children to begin with.
1
I am always amazed that people protect "family values", usually, by opposing same sex marriage or abortion or by bemoaning the direction modern society is taking things. One practical way these folk could really support the family, the real family, not some Leave it to Beaver construct, would be to increase the child tax credit; provide more tax deductions for daycare; and require full or at least partial pay during maternity and paternity leave. Put you money where your mouth is!
If the family really is important, and most say it is, financially support it, much the same way the tax code supports corporations.
If the family really is important, and most say it is, financially support it, much the same way the tax code supports corporations.
156
Or we could - gasp! - subsidize childcare across the board. We subsidize tons of other industries, why not the childcare industry? High quality service for the most vulnerable members of our society (and our future) while also helping working families out on a daily basis. And yes, paid family leave. Every American deserves paid family leave - whether for a new baby, sick child or sick parent/relative. This shouldn't be a revolutionary idea.
14
It's a conflict over definition of family. People define a family as group including man + woman + children.
Yes, imagine how many families could have been helped if the big buy-out in 2009 had gone to child care instead of the banks.
It still boggles my mind that the big energy corpoations get subsidies!
It still boggles my mind that the big energy corpoations get subsidies!
1
Other countries do it differently and much better. I know, I know, "The U.S. isn't Denmark." No way we could ever give both parents paid family leave. How could a corporation ever afford that? Subsidized child care and debt free public education. Nope. And that's before we get to employers expecting their slaves, I mean, employees to work 24/7.
Life is short. Having children is necessary for a society to survive. But in the U.S., it is just one more economic nightmare making it hard to argue with people who rationally conclude they cannot afford children.
Life is short. Having children is necessary for a society to survive. But in the U.S., it is just one more economic nightmare making it hard to argue with people who rationally conclude they cannot afford children.
159
They call those Scandinavian countries egalitarian for a reason. They don't have millions of two-income couples earning $200K, $300K, $400K. Their McMansions don't spread out across vast tracts of the landscape.
The people there are willing to accept much lower salaries, and much higher taxes, in return for the goodies they get. Here in the US, there isn't a sufficient level of social trust for that to work.
The people there are willing to accept much lower salaries, and much higher taxes, in return for the goodies they get. Here in the US, there isn't a sufficient level of social trust for that to work.
149
@ Jonathan-
Most Americans don't actually live a McMansion existence, either.
I've had experience of living in both the US and the UK. While my taxes are somewhat lower here in the US, I end up paying FAR more out of pocket for medical services, health insurance premiums, deductibles, prescriptions, and higher education costs than I paid in taxes over there. I'd say I'm significantly worse off financially.
If you really look at the costs, I doubt that the slightly lower taxes and higher salaries in the US make up for the ever-increasing amounts we have to pay for out of pocket.
Here, I also get to worry constantly about financial ruin if (e.g.) I get cancer or get hit by a bus, which is not an issue in most developed countries. I think that particular stress is often seriously downplayed when people compare countries.
Most Americans don't actually live a McMansion existence, either.
I've had experience of living in both the US and the UK. While my taxes are somewhat lower here in the US, I end up paying FAR more out of pocket for medical services, health insurance premiums, deductibles, prescriptions, and higher education costs than I paid in taxes over there. I'd say I'm significantly worse off financially.
If you really look at the costs, I doubt that the slightly lower taxes and higher salaries in the US make up for the ever-increasing amounts we have to pay for out of pocket.
Here, I also get to worry constantly about financial ruin if (e.g.) I get cancer or get hit by a bus, which is not an issue in most developed countries. I think that particular stress is often seriously downplayed when people compare countries.
17
@SD - Nevertheless, IRS statistics show that there are about 7 million households with an Adjusted Gross Income of over $175K. These are mostly two-income professional couples. While most people are not at that level, they set the tone for society, which is not surprising because they run all the major institutions of society. Egalitarian we are not.
5
Pew makes huge errors regularly in its coverage of parents at home, particularly fathers. This latest report is no exception. Please see: https://twitter.com/JoshLevs/status/661932283276955648
I explain this in talks and in my book, All In.
In this case, Pew pretended that full time working mothers and full time working fathers are an apples-to-apples comparison -- ignoring the reality that full time working fathers put in many more hours at the office on average. So of course women are doing more at home. But overall, men and women are putting in equal hours on behalf of their families.
I explain this in talks and in my book, All In.
In this case, Pew pretended that full time working mothers and full time working fathers are an apples-to-apples comparison -- ignoring the reality that full time working fathers put in many more hours at the office on average. So of course women are doing more at home. But overall, men and women are putting in equal hours on behalf of their families.
5
Yes, but part of the point, is that since women have to pick up the slack of the home duties, their career and longterm earnings suffer.
4
The ladies will never be happy, it seems.
3
Josh, you are assuming that every father is working late at the office because he wants to provide more income or security for his children. SOME are, but many (if not most) are simply A. following obscure and arbitrary rules, based on archaic ideas of "face time" and/or B. they actually enjoy or prefer work to being home doing chores and child care, and may even be using work as a way to AVOID those unpleasant tasks and dump them on their partner.
I'm not saying women are immune to this, only it is more common in men and in the professions that are dominated (even today) by men.
I'm not saying women are immune to this, only it is more common in men and in the professions that are dominated (even today) by men.
1
Interesting quote - “They’re doing more than their fathers ever did and they have a belief in egalitarianism, so of course they want to interpret it as equal.”
It assumes that fathers are simply wrong. But there are no facts in the story that support this conclusion. Could it be possible that the mothers are wrong in their interpretation of how the work is divided?
It assumes that fathers are simply wrong. But there are no facts in the story that support this conclusion. Could it be possible that the mothers are wrong in their interpretation of how the work is divided?
14
Oh, please, EHed....it's no secret that women almost always shoulder the burden of both housework and child-rearing in America and likely the world over.
While there will always be exceptions to the rule, the idea that women simply don't know what they're talking about in regard to their daily lives is nothing less than wretched misogyny.
I say this as a man.
While there will always be exceptions to the rule, the idea that women simply don't know what they're talking about in regard to their daily lives is nothing less than wretched misogyny.
I say this as a man.
12
Silly. The presumption is always that women are wrong - or overreacting - or hysterical - or unreliable - or generally poor judges of their own experiences. You really don't need to bother to go out there and argue for this.
5
As couples marry later in life the men have the "opportunity" to learn how to cook and clean for themselves during years of bachelor life. No adult woman is going to marry a slob, so men have developed at least modest skills and non-aversion to these tasks.
Sharing housework "equally" is a tricky balance. There are things one person likes to do, is OK to do, or hates to do. One person's opinion of "clean" is different than anothers, and then there's "priorities". What has to get done first. Try "You're sitting on the couch watching TV. Shouldn't you be vacuuming?", for starting a domestic argument.
It's complicated.
Sharing housework "equally" is a tricky balance. There are things one person likes to do, is OK to do, or hates to do. One person's opinion of "clean" is different than anothers, and then there's "priorities". What has to get done first. Try "You're sitting on the couch watching TV. Shouldn't you be vacuuming?", for starting a domestic argument.
It's complicated.
2
I wonder what the 'family values' party has to say about parental leave rights, worker rights, universal daycare, preschool and aftercare, a living wage and the other real-life everyday issues that affect the vast majority of Americans.
Perhaps 'the Lord will provide'..........absolutely nothing.
Perhaps 'the Lord will provide'..........absolutely nothing.
602
you know exactly what those " family values " folks say!
depressing .
i will be supporting bernie sanders.
depressing .
i will be supporting bernie sanders.
4
Correct. The "family values" party continues to spew a lot of hot air promoting the american family while actually opposing those very policies that would help the american family.
8
You are a communist! I just slapped a label on you, and a negative one at that. Now I would like you to have my job and let me go into debt to you. In fact, my boss insists that you have my job.
Family-flexible policies for men and women are important to the work-life balance. Even more important is a well-defined 35- to 40-hour work week with no "on-call" work once the workday is done. Also, for families with 2 people working full-time, it really helps to pay someone to clean your place once a week. In NYC, by the time you pay for detergent and the basement washing machines, it really doesn't cost much more to send out the laundry. In other words, if you delegate tasks that other people can do, you have more time to spend with the people (for example, children) and activities you enjoy.
16
And I'm sure those cleaners and laundry workers are supporting their families handily on that same stress-free 35-40-hour workweek, eh? Especially if their labor rate compares favorably to a $10 jug of Tide and $10 or $15 worth of quarters for doing a week's worth of family laundry.
The hypocrisy of the privileged & entitled white-collar childbearer knows no bounds.
The hypocrisy of the privileged & entitled white-collar childbearer knows no bounds.
11
Laundromats are thriving businesses. They do lots of loads simultaneously. It's an assembly line. A lot more efficient than each family doing his own. Cafeteria eating is more efficient than each person preparing his own meal from scratch. Educating children in schools is more efficient than home-schooling. When you do everything yourself, you deprive other people of a chance to earn a living also. Pump your own gas? Fewer gas station attendants. Check yourself out at the store? Fewer cashiers. There's not one single thing that's hypocritical about paying someone else to help you.
5
As men continue to take on a significant role in parenting, we as a society need to invest in teaching and socializing our sons about parenting and caring for children. My husband is the best father ever (and was even a stay at home dad for a few years), but he had a very steep learning curve when our first child arrived because he had no experience with small children.
In her book & tv special "Free to Be You & Me!", Marlo Thomas was really onto something with William Wants a Doll. (For those not old enough to know this, William wanted a doll so he could learn to be a father.)
In her book & tv special "Free to Be You & Me!", Marlo Thomas was really onto something with William Wants a Doll. (For those not old enough to know this, William wanted a doll so he could learn to be a father.)
8
I have noted that while men and women are tending to a similar mean of paid and family work, there appears to be sympathy and support for mothers who want to "have it all", while the social and work norms for fathers seem to be aggressively opposed to finding a balance.
As a professional father of young children, I feel constantly barraged by work demands that unfairly conflict and interfere with my responsibilities at home (not to mention my personal aspirations as a father). I will be called onto conference calls during dinnertime or when I need to help with my kids' baths or storytime; I get brought into issues over weekends or late at night; I don't get to attend school plays or parent-teacher conferences; and don't get me started on the Blackberry. It is all just expected and any complaints or pushback are met with insults and condescension (and , even worse, with silent judgment reflected at promotion and compensation time).
On the other side, I (along with many other fathers) are met with irritated criticism that we are not doing more around the house; that not participating in our kids' lives the way we would like to is lazy and shirking our responsibilities; that we are falling down on our jobs at home by having to prioritize work over family obligations.
I don't know what the solution is, but will say that the position that we have put parents in is unsustainable and that dads are going to need as much support and sympathy as mothers in finding a solution.
As a professional father of young children, I feel constantly barraged by work demands that unfairly conflict and interfere with my responsibilities at home (not to mention my personal aspirations as a father). I will be called onto conference calls during dinnertime or when I need to help with my kids' baths or storytime; I get brought into issues over weekends or late at night; I don't get to attend school plays or parent-teacher conferences; and don't get me started on the Blackberry. It is all just expected and any complaints or pushback are met with insults and condescension (and , even worse, with silent judgment reflected at promotion and compensation time).
On the other side, I (along with many other fathers) are met with irritated criticism that we are not doing more around the house; that not participating in our kids' lives the way we would like to is lazy and shirking our responsibilities; that we are falling down on our jobs at home by having to prioritize work over family obligations.
I don't know what the solution is, but will say that the position that we have put parents in is unsustainable and that dads are going to need as much support and sympathy as mothers in finding a solution.
317
My experience is that mothers get little to no sympathy either...and often at a lower salary.
9
JSD: Implicit in this comment is the idea that working fathers should be compensated as well as, or promoted as quickly as, their child-free brethern. I don't get that. (And I don't get it for mothers either.) I'm a working father too, but it seems to me that my unencumbered colleagues who are willing and able to work more than I am are entitled to be paid more. Doesn't that seem fair?
3
The solution to being met with irritated criticism that [you], along with many other fathers. are not doing more around the house was to have married much nicer women.
1
The silence about shortening the work week is deafening. Come on! The industrial revolution, over a century ago, gave us today's 40-hour week. Did we not get more efficient with the information revolution of the past century? Can't most of us do our jobs in 30 hours instead of 40 now? Come on!
254
Who works 40 hours per week now? My husband, including time spent doing work at home after the kids go to bed, easily work 65-70 hours on a typical week. If there is a deadline, it may be 80-90. I work "part-time" and put in about 40 hours per week.
192
Er, do you want to make a salary of $150K or not? If you don't want to do the work, there are a lot of people who will for that kind of money.
8
If there was single payer, and companies did not have to pay for their employees health insurance, maybe they would be able to split each job in two.
How do they do it in France? Employees there have great vacation time and work much less time.
How do they do it in France? Employees there have great vacation time and work much less time.
9
There's a lot more we can do for working families. But the article notes that the people who feel the least balanced are college-educated and white. I wonder how much of this frenzy is based on cultural expectations. In particular, I find the "attachment parenting" model pushes impractical extremes. ("Parents should not put their child down for the entire first year. They must breastfeed. They must enrich. They should never let a child cry.") I suspect that blue collar families don't have the time to worry about that nonsense, so they torture themselves less about not measuring up.
We can meet the needs of families without buying into the idea that every child of working parents is going to suffer from lifelong trauma. Two involved, loving parents -- whether they both work or not -- are usually doing fine at parenting.
We can meet the needs of families without buying into the idea that every child of working parents is going to suffer from lifelong trauma. Two involved, loving parents -- whether they both work or not -- are usually doing fine at parenting.
104
I doubt these people are interested in attachment parenting. That is an extreme in parenting. But they probably would like some time to just be with the child helping it and watching it explore the world, figuring out how things work like the little scientist every baby is. That takes time focused on the child, not glances at the child as one is walking through the room carrying laundry while planning the next day's work related events. Family life is not just time spent in the same room with family members while doing home related work or work related work.
4
@Rachel -
Of course, the examples you give ("Parents should not put their child down for the entire first year. They must breastfeed. They must enrich. They should never let a child cry.") are silly straw men that don't apply to 99.99% of any parents, including college-educated, white parents.
I imagine it is pretty easy to dismiss the real and reasonable needs of parents when you throw it threw an absurd lens of comical over-parenting as you do.
Your views also display a stunning ignorance and stereotyping of the character of, and challenges faced by, "college-educated and white" parents. Racial caricatures are unacceptable regardless of the race targeted.
Of course, the examples you give ("Parents should not put their child down for the entire first year. They must breastfeed. They must enrich. They should never let a child cry.") are silly straw men that don't apply to 99.99% of any parents, including college-educated, white parents.
I imagine it is pretty easy to dismiss the real and reasonable needs of parents when you throw it threw an absurd lens of comical over-parenting as you do.
Your views also display a stunning ignorance and stereotyping of the character of, and challenges faced by, "college-educated and white" parents. Racial caricatures are unacceptable regardless of the race targeted.
6
I appreciate this article as it articulates very well the current state of so many families today. My wife and I often feel overwhelmed and that we are just barely balancing all of the pieces... It is comforting, in a way, to know that others struggle with similar feelings.
47
That's the secret...everyone thinks they are failing. Embrace the chaos, ignore guilt, and have as much fun with your children as life allows! Our sons are 20 & 23 and how I miss those boys and times of them growing like weeds and smelling up my house!
6
As the conservative agenda marches on this will be more and more the case.....people struggling just to pay for basics and now having to pay for things that used to be routinely part of the public sector. More for participation in extracurricular activities, more for university, more for utilities that have been privatized and now provide less for a higher price, more for Medicare courtesy of the pound of flesh conservatives just extracted from our parents in exchange for not bankrupting the nation through an unnecessary default....and always the downward pressure on wages and benefits because we no longer have basic legal protections and unions to protect working people from the rapacious greed of the owner class
194
The article said that the average income of two-income couples is $102K. If you can't pay for the 'basics' with that, how are the poor people getting by?
11
The basics when one makes $102K include perhaps laundry service, housekeeping service and, biggest of all, child care costs. Poor people are barely getting by and are using low paid or no paid child care.
4
That was both working full time. When you see an average of 102K, it really is meaningless, as it really depends on where you live. 102k in NYC, is probobly like 50k or less. While 102k in Tucson would be pretty good.
8
What happened to the labor union that protected me? What happened to the pension benefits I was promised? What happened to my overtime rate of pay? How did I become a contract worker if I do the same job, at the same place, for the same employer, under the same supervisors, and for the same pay? What happened to the paid vacation I got when I started working? What happened to the paid holidays and paid sick time I had? How come I have to work from home during weeknights and weekends? How come I'm "on call" all the time? Why aren't I paid for working at home, on weekends, and while "on call"?
An answer might be that politicians have aligned their interests with interests of corporations. Politicians, starting in the Reagan years, have systematically altered the social contract that my parents and their parents fought hard to secure for themselves, for me, and for my kids.
The only chance that American families have at restoring a life with happiness is to identify and support new leaders who understand how far we have gone backwards and who pledge to move us in the right direction.
An answer might be that politicians have aligned their interests with interests of corporations. Politicians, starting in the Reagan years, have systematically altered the social contract that my parents and their parents fought hard to secure for themselves, for me, and for my kids.
The only chance that American families have at restoring a life with happiness is to identify and support new leaders who understand how far we have gone backwards and who pledge to move us in the right direction.
884
When we all have nothing left to lose, I'll meet you at the barricades. If I don't just kill myself by numbing the pain with alcohol or drugs first. Said every middle aged middle class American left in 2015.
6
Identifying new leaders who will save us is how we got into this mess in the first place. Expecting others to save us is naive. We can elect leaders who intend to save us but they will go to DC to do good, but they tend to stay to do well for themselves. Either we save ourselves , or we're lost.
I think one of these new leaders lives in Vermont.
15
This article speaks to the challenges of maintaining a sane and low stress family when just two working parents and young children are involved. It's even worse for the family when you add in complicating factors such as aging/frail grandparents, medical/behavioral health issues and occupations where long days and travel are required. Employers are remarkably insensitive to these situations, disqualifying many otherwise strong professionals from work critical to maintaining their careers/livelihoods. It is a valid criticism of American employers and culture that we continue to allow this as acceptable treatment of workers.
431
Reply to "Willie".
Are you really surprised that your employer is "insensitive" to your complicated life? His is as complicated as yours, and he knows, (and should you), that there are twenty, thirty, a hundred, qualified (or over qualified) people lined up to take your job.
Become an activist for more real capitalistic competition, so there are more companies competing in the market, vote Democrat, and for God's sake, stop your whining!
The problem with Willie is that if his employer is treating him badly he should be able to work for any one of his employers competitors and get (maybe) better treatment, pay, hours. The economy is so bad that he has to just take his lumps. The politicians have allowed corporations to have regional and sometimes global monopoly over any competition, completely subverting the classic positive argument for capitalism. There should be for example ten or so cable companies in every region competing for the market, hiring employees, and building structure for their companies. Instead, we all have just one company providing internet service and if we don't like it we are exactly in Willie's situation.
Are you really surprised that your employer is "insensitive" to your complicated life? His is as complicated as yours, and he knows, (and should you), that there are twenty, thirty, a hundred, qualified (or over qualified) people lined up to take your job.
Become an activist for more real capitalistic competition, so there are more companies competing in the market, vote Democrat, and for God's sake, stop your whining!
The problem with Willie is that if his employer is treating him badly he should be able to work for any one of his employers competitors and get (maybe) better treatment, pay, hours. The economy is so bad that he has to just take his lumps. The politicians have allowed corporations to have regional and sometimes global monopoly over any competition, completely subverting the classic positive argument for capitalism. There should be for example ten or so cable companies in every region competing for the market, hiring employees, and building structure for their companies. Instead, we all have just one company providing internet service and if we don't like it we are exactly in Willie's situation.
10
Yes. My daughter and her husband, with two little ones, are stressed much of the time as they try to balance time with their kids and time for professional life. Socialize with friends? Rarely. I am hiding an illness of mine from them because they don't need another anything on their plate. And, frankly I worry about their health in the future.
5