On Demand
The High Cost of Full-Time Motherhood
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
Leslie Bennetts, author of The Feminine Mistake: Are We Giving Up Too Much? (Voice, 2007), explains her argument that women who choose not to work in order to raise children are giving up much more than a paycheck.
The Feminine Mistake is available for purchase at Amazon.com.
- About the Brian Lehrer Show »
- Staff Bios »
- Contact Us »
- Tapes and Transcripts »
- Latest Episode »
- Show Archive »
Features & Series
Podcast
Stay up to date.
Subscribe to the Podcast
YOU PRODUCE The Brian Lehrer Show
Be a listener-producer with facts, questions and people you'd like to hear on the air.
More
The Brian Lehrer Show Scrapbook
Visit the scrapbook for daily photos and miscellany from The Brian Lehrer Show.
More
Shop at Amazon!
The Brian Lehrer Show picks
Start your Amazon shopping on WNYC.org and a portion of your total purchase goes to WNYC.
More
Comments
Refresh
I do not wish to be identified but I agree whole heartedly with what she is saying. I was a stay-at-home mother for 17 years. Two years ago, my husband lost his job; after the COBRA ran out I got a job. I was amazed how difficult it was to find a job; finally found a low-wage job for the health benefits. My husband is working again (thank goodness because my wages could not support the family!)
The problem though is that there is not a good solution for childcare; also household management is still the realm of the woman - now I have to juggle household responsibilities and a full time job.
Although I fully endorse the idea that intellectual stimulation can and is found outside the home, not all jobs are as fulfilling as others. I enjoyed getting out of the house for my part-time employment when my children were young. And yes, there are economic risks, but it is an individual choice. It is not or should not be a hard and fast rule. I feel sure that some people are happy to be at home watching and caring for their family, on a full-time basis.
The attitude of your guest is so hostile and defensive that I have turned off my radio and will not read her book. I am a stay at home mom and it is none of her business. Her opinions are her own.
I am curious to know what Leslie's data and interviews revealed about women who are both professionals and mothers- is there a section in this book about the double burden of both motherhood and professional life? How does this impact emotional, physical health of the women she's spoken to?
How about the government supporting the at home moms a bit more so that we aren't so far behind when we return to the work force? I suggest that for our eventual social security benefits we are given at least the equivalent of a 40 hour a week minimum wage job.
I've been home 13 years with my kids and during that time was only able to contribute to my SS fund for 6 months. Were my neighbor and I to swap kids and pay each other to raise them, we'd both contribute to SS. After all, SOMEBODY has to raise my children. If not me, then the immigrant Mexican down the road. Can't afford childcare for more than one child unless you have a very well paying job.
I think that the value of this viewpoint is cultivating a sense of independence rather than co-dependence. Being raised in traditional Asian culture, women are often raised as "property" whose only survival is through marriage. I'm very thankful growing up and being educated in America, I can support myself financially and therefore choose my partner base on LOVE, not survival. And whether we work or stay at home, as long as we live based on self-reliance, we will prosper in all aspects of life.
I won't make a comment, because the guest said she's sick of hearing people making comments. Maybe she shouldn't go on talk shows, then?
By the way, I'm a stay-at-home DAD.
I respectfully disagree. We are entering a period where women recognize that we cannot be everything to all people. As a working professional, I decided to opt out to be here for my family. My husband (a wonderful partner in life) and I have consider the risks. Doing everything we can to raise our daughter is top priority. My priority is to be available, and encourage her in pursuits she is passionate about.-- As an aside, I am a product of working parents. I was not a happy camper being raised by nannies.
Why can't we have a work culture that accommodates women's needs rather than women accommodating the corporate culture? Why can't the working world - including small businesses - make it standard practice to provide meaningful jobs for 6 hours a day instead of 8? Why do school hours not coincide with work hours? Why do summer camp hours never coincide with work hours? Every time I have to take care of my child when she becomes sick I am terrified of getting fired for absenteeism. Our business culture should facilitate quality parenting which can only benefit society now and in the future.
I am so perplexed by the total lack of conversation regarding children. That is, the fact that children are being born and then raised by people other than their parents. I knew the economic risk I was taking and made the conscious choice to be with our children as they grew. Bennett herself said it goes quickly and there will be time to work and recover financially. She is also terribly underestimating the power women have to do what is needed in the event of divorce, death, etc. The real "danger" is that kids in this country are being neglected in favor of security and the almighty dollar.
I think that we are leaving out individual differences. Quite frankly, if I was still working in my profession (social work) I would not have the emotional resources to care for my daughter when I was at home. Nor would we have the financial capacity to live on my salary. My husband and I HAVE planned for myself and my daughter in the event of his death or job loss. Please don't assume that we are all unprepared.
(I have also done much in the way of volunteer work and am currently in grad. school studying to be a librarian--another low paying but very satisfying career choice for me).
Thank you.
Why does the guest think that being so hostile to callers is a good idea? The whole point of authors doing these interviews and book tours is to promote the book. Of course the majority of callers haven't read it. That's the point. Spark some interest in the topic, exchange some ideas, and then they'll by the book!
We are a two-career family. My husband often comments about how much pressure there is on men whose wives don't work and how grateful he is for the flexibility and freedom my career gives him.
Thanks.
I would bring up Elizabeth Warren, who has spoken on WNYC, who had argued the opposite point; People live up to the income they earn. If families could live on one income, the risks are less. If 2 parents work, EW's point, the family unit has twice the risk that one of the parents will face unemployment, ergo 2x the chances that the the income needed for bills won't be there.
I wish I had read Ms Bennetts' book when I was 35. My late husband was a VP on Wall Street when I married him. I quit my job and had a baby and loved staying home to raise my daughter. My husband lost his job, got sick and died suddenly 2 years ago. My daughter moved to Chicago to go to college and my entire life was shaken up. So, heed Ms. Bennetts' advice. She's absolutely right that the mothering years go by very quickly and then that stage is over. I NEVER expected my husband to die and for me to be a widow at 57. I have two Ivy League degrees but have to start figuring out what I'm going to do with them now that my nest is entirely empty. And I couldn't afford to stay in the apartment I'd fixed up for 15 years soon after my husband got sick.
I have never heard someone plugging a book be unwilling to discuss it with someone who has not yet read the book! Anyone who brings up another point of view is shot down by Ms. Bennett with defensive comments which severly undermine her argument.
PS My wife is a doctor and makes a lot more money than me!
When one lives in the city for a while and is witness to the nanny kids, anyone who can, should def. stay at home. No one will discipline your children as you would/ or should. The time you can inter-act and "teach" your children, on the trip from school to a sports practice, is invaluable. Yes, a good nanny can do this, but the dialogue will always be different. Kids learn how to play that system as well. Ms. Bennett sounds very defensive and doesn't want us to judge her adivce, but she is certainly judgemental for those who do not agree with her views.
It's interesting that many of those young women Ms. Bennett derides for opting out of the work are themselves the children of the first generation of women to opt *in* to the work force en masse. Could it be that there are some aspects of child-rearing that can't be summed up through scientific studies and the author's years of reporting?
#6 and #15--great points!
I think individual choice is very important. My mother worked and I came home to an empty house every day from the age of 8. As a teenager, I made dinner for the family most nights. It was a lonely childhood.
It is very hard to find a flexible job which will allow you to take the time to do things which need to be done. I am happy I can afford to look after the family. I am continuing to educate myself, so that I can go back to work at the drop of a hat.
It is important for everyone to have insurance in case of early death or disability.
Wow. What a defensive person! Hearing the author complain about people who haven't read her book does not make me want to read it - EVER.
I've never even heard of the author or her book, but in listening to Ms. Bennett, I will definitely read it. While I don't agree with everything she has said today - and I wish she wasn't be so defensive - what she is saying is something close to what I've been thinking about for some time. I've been trying to work out my career "master plan" while I am at home with my three-year-old right now. I am going to stay home for at least the next few years, but have been trying keeping my feet wet in my profession in terms of still working (very) part-time, participating in relevant conferences, and volunteering in the field. My 45-year old husband almost died recently in a work-related accident, and that more than anything drove the point home that one of the most important ways I can care for my son is to be able to provide for him in case of something exactly like that... almost an insurance policy for myself and my son.
Leslie Bennetts, comments to how other developed countries have better laws for working women, it is a little off. It is true that in some countries there are benefits for women, but they are balanced by lower wages or other type of adjustments to bring an overall equality.
I am so glad this viewpoint is finally getting attention. One of the things my grandmother (who worked all her adult life as a dentist) used to tell me again and again was that a woman should always have her own money and should never depend on her husband financially. (She also said, never marry a drunk or a miser.) The older I get, the more wisdom I see in her advice, and I intend to pass it on to my daughter.
How right you are. I gave up my career to be in Montreal caring for my son with a Fr. Canadian who had two daughters from a previous marriage. Not only was I rejected by the ex-family (the girls are currently encouraged to be stay at home mothers like their mother), I was not supported by the father and have had to return to NYC to get work while attempting to be a work at home single mom to my son in Montreal during the school year. The proud father supposedly took 'early retirement' while being laid off for not performing his jobs and am now on comfortable Canadaian pension without any financial/emotional obligations to our son. I have found it doubly difficult dealing both with being a professional and a 'work' at home single mother. It is more difficult than what most people not having to deal either of the situation realize. I really believe Ms. Bennett has some sound advice and warning for women, even those of us who thought we would be prepared for challenges to life, expected or unexpected.
Keep up the good work!
Thank you Ms. Bennetts! I am a young woman, months away from graduating with a professional degree. Thanks to a mother who understood Leslie's message, I was instilled from a young age with the importance of always being able to provide for myself through my own career. My mother herself almost became a statistic. She has been married to my father for over 30 years, but it has not always been easy. Though she does work full time, after meeting my father in college, she ended up dropping out of a four year school to get a two year degree in order to marry my father sooner. This has severely limited her mobility in the job market as well as the salary she could ever hope to earn. When my father was layed-off from his job years ago, both he and my mother were extremely anxious over how our family would survive on my mother's very small salary (roughly 1/5th of my father's income at the time.) Several years later when things got rocky and they considered getting a divorce, my mother felt that she could not financially survive a divorce, compelling her to do whatever necessary to keep the relationship together. She doesn't talk much about that time in their relationship and things have since gotten better, but the one thing she did tell me about was her fear of how she was going to manage to survive and provide for my sister and I on her salary alone. This is when she implored me to always be financially indepedent; to find a career that I was passionate about and that could sustain me emotionally, mentally and finanically. I am so lucky that I have found that career. I am so lucky to have a mother who taught me these things at a time when Leslie's book was not published. And I think we are so lucky to have a voice like Leslie's to help make us aware of potential pitfalls before we have to experience the pain of living them firsthand.
I think the author (Leslie Bennetts) is merely trying to emphasize that we live in a culture that is pathetically UN-supportive of families and children and that in order to have our children raised as we all wish, it is we, as women who are ultimately paying the price for it with our own financial and econimic futures. I had my first child in 2000 and did not return to work because the company I worked for went out of business, so I was inadvertantly thrust into the role of full time stay at home mom and I (along with great joy) also experienced the total disempowerment the author speaks of...this was quite shocking to me but still not as shocking as my attempt to re-enter the workforce after only a 2 year hiatus, advanced degrees, and a strong resume...I have now been working in a job I love for over 2 years and am currently on leave with my second child, however, I will CERTAINLY NOT give up my job although I am very sad to have to leave this child with a full time babysitter at such a young age. I simply hate having to trade in a piece of my son's childhood for increased marital happiness, and a pension---but this is the price I (and many others...all others) will pay, since our culture refuses to support non-wealthy women, children, and families.
As always, Brian's comments and questions are always so incisive, even when dealing with a hostile and defensive guest like Ms. Bennetts. Ms. Bennetts was trying to claim that she wasn't making any value judgments. Good for you Brian! Of course she is.
I have worked from home part time since my children were born. Does this give my personality the added dimension that she claims working women have? Does the fact that it's part time make me a bit sharper than at-home moms, but a bit duller than full-time working moms? This dichotomy a lot of nonsense. I have no patience for women who claim superiority based on their working or at-home status. (Thank God such women are rare.) Most women I know have been both, depending upon her needs and those of her family. It doesn't make you any better or worse than anyone else. I think Ms. Bennetts needs to get over herself. (And she cooks daily! Good for her.)
If she's really just trying to dole out sound financial advice, she should be talking about real financial planning. It is true. A man is not a financial plan -- but neither is a job. We all know people who devoted their lives to a company only to be tossed out 10 or 15 years before retirement, with no marketable skills. Everyone needs a real financial plan, which includes life and disability insurance, emergency savings, retirement plans, and lifelong career planning. Staying at home does not mean these things have not been considered. You can be the victim of a bad plan (or no plan) whether you are at-home or been working without a sick day for 50 years. And you will probably be ok if your plan is sound, even if you take time off for family care. Don't miss out on what you really want to do in life out of fear. And don't force yourself to sit in a cubicle everyday because you think the company will take care of you forever. They won't. And a job will not eliminate financial risk from your life. You can only mitigate risk with a sound plan.
I also don't see how a woman doing the very hard work of raising a family is "being cared for" any more than a nanny or a housekeeper is "being cared for" by the family that pays her. Both women are working at real jobs. One is being paid cash; the other holds a partnership stake in the operation. They each have unique financial circumstances and risks. Both need a financial plan (see above). Both should be working on getting more favorable laws passed to protect the important work that they do.
Thanks for another great interview Brian. You are fabulous.
By the way, I will read the book but only through my library. I read a lot, but rarely buy books. It's part of my financial plan.
I thought the author was being reasonable, NOT defensive, about opinions offered by those who hadn't yet read her book but thought they knew what she was going to say. They were the defensive ones, not Ms. Bennetts. It must be thoroughly exasperating to try to talk to people who've already decided they're going to disagree with you.
Her point seemed to be that you've got to be prepared for what fate might throw your way, since you can't control all aspects of your life. Makes sense to me.
PWM -- Parenting While Male. Yes, I stole it from DWB - Driving While Black -- the real syndrome wherein a black man, who may in fact be a professor at Princeton, will nevertheless still be stopped simply because he is driving a Lexus, and so fits some general profile of a criminal. Parenting While Male does not usually involve police, but instead, moms. PWM is about the mom who quickens her step at the playground if a dad interacts with her child. PWM is about calling again and again to set up playdates and NOT having phone calls returned. PWM is about moms actually turning their backs mid-conversation to talk instead to another mom. PWM is about finally connecting with a playdate, and the other parent never reciprocating. What's the point? The point is that if women want equal opportunity in the work world, they should give it in the domestic world, and that does not happen. I've been a full time father for 6 years in a small, upper middle class NJ town about 40 miles west of Manhattan. Moms I have encountered tend to be as exclusionary as the much maligned white men's clubs that dominate everything from corporations to congress. I've stopped trying to change moms' minds, and instead continue to focus inward on the one person I can influence - my child. My daughter's experience having a working mother and at home father will (hopefully) dramatically affect her adult choices, from the men she associates with to the career she pursues. She might not have to wrestle with the home vs. work dilemma because she might not hesitate to hand over the domestic reins to a competent, capable spouse. It's too bad that guy will still no doubt be part of a tiny minority ostracized by allegedly enlightened moms.
I turned off the show after the author rudely dismissed a comment to a phone call from a woman in Pelham who questioned her discounting of stay at home mothers, snapping "Have you read my book?" In the first place, she is on the show to promote book sales - it should not come as a surprise to her that not everyone listening has read her book, and coming across like a jerk is no way to get people to buy a copy. Secondly, she spent the first part of the show with BL defending her position to the point where, even if you haven't read her book, you got an idea of where she was coming from. Frankly, that was enough, no need to spend $35 or whatever it is to get the expanded version of what amounts to her opinion. Not everyone defines themselves by their jobs.
I am reading the book, and while I agree with many of the author's conclusions, the tone of her writing is so snide that I've put the book down more than once.
It came as no surprise that she was so defensive on the show today. Her attitude of superiority (I believe she told BL that the intellectual stimulation that she experiences through her paid work outside of the home adds another "dimension" to her, as if stay-at-home moms are incapable of reaching such depths), undermines her valid arguments.
I live in a very diverse community where there are a number of moms and dads involved in raising their children in a number of fashions. Some are full time parents; some work full and part time. I personally have been a stay at home mother for our four children (ages 4 to 14) for the last 12 years after working as a working full time for 12 years as a professional environmental consultant. I have seen many full time working fathers and mothers do excellent jobs raising their children. I have found that the most important fact of the matter is that there needs to be more acceptance and understanding of the decisions that each type of parent makes. The continual bickering and competition between parents on who is raising their children in the best way is not furthering the interests of any children. I am thankful that I have been here to shape my children's values and view of the world through our daily interactions at home, the store, school. It has also been very helpful to be home at the end of the school day to keep an eye on my teenagers. Being a "latchkey" child myself, I greatly value being here to monitor and mentor my older children even more than my younger children sometimes. Have we had to make financial and lifestyle sacrifices to live on one income? Yes. Is it scary to be living on one income when my husband has experienced actual and potential layoffs? Yes. But it is a choice that we made together ( we both had full time working mothers) and I can see the results in how my children are absorbing our values. I have also served in helping working parents by babysitting their children, driving them to activities and just being there when Mom, Dad, or the babysitter couldn't. They have in turn helped me by including my children in activities like skiing and day trips to the city that they know that we can't always afford. And guess who are the primary individuals who facilitate teachers and schools in putting on all those wonderful programs that all parents, working or not, want their children to experience. Bottom line, we have learned to help each other in the circumstances that we have chosen to undertake. Let's drop our defensiveness. After all, we should not be in competition for the best parent of the year award. PS. We did consider the economic consequences. That's why we have comprehensive life insurance policies and maintain savings for living expenses in the event of a lay off.
I find that this debate is depressingly one-sided. Why do we never refer to stay-at-home dads in this debate? As a woman in my thirties trying to build an interesting career, I often feel frustrated and exhausted. Does this mean that having kids is an easy way to justify leaving the working world? And why does my frustration mean that my husband now has to financially support me as well as any children that we have? Few people offer him the same option. I agree strongly that adults, both men and women, need to be financially independent and that it is our responsibility to society to fight for better working conditions for all parents.
Are boys and men actually being adequately counseled from an early age about what they might find to do in the work force? I don't think that they are. Nor are women.
Trying to shield young children from the frustrations of choosing an occupation is very understandable. And liberal education, which refers oddly to education divorced from considerations of occupational realities, has many advantages. BUT, if girls and boys were better exposed early on to the realities of work life that would be a very significant improvement on their education. They would, as they grow up, be able to make better choices about how to employ themselves. This would benefit the measured economy and make individuals more well-rounded and informed citizens, democratic participants in the genuine sense.
Why is this not the focus of discussion? Would this kind of education not make young men and women more empowered to conscientiously choose their occupations? Yes. Would it compromise the "general welfare" if they were? Let's hope not.
I can't wait to read Leslie's book. I'm a single mom who pined to be a stay at home mom in truth because I couldn't get a gratifying job. Currently, I have to juggle competeing primary responsibilities (job, child) and it's hard as hell. Thank you Leslie for writing a straight-forward, no effing flowers, book about moms and work.
Second, most men and women face the problem that they are not given a choice of occupations that well-educated people would consider adequate. Even the choices that most high-level professionals face are, for the reasons previously stated, not as informed as they could easily be. The problem that the author outlines is very real. But the underlying problem is that almost none of know occupational choices that allow us to reasonably believe that we are working for the "general welfare". Women may well rationally choose to stay in the work force rather than "stay at home" but if they have to do that (as the author rightly supposes) to avoid unanticipated risks of poverty then the underlying problem is the general lack of a safety net for our (not at all entertaining) social tightrope walkers!
I thought the show was so interesting and brought up so many complex issues. I think that in some families, having a working mom gives dads the opportunity to be more involved, either as full time SAHDs or by allowing them to work jobs with more reasonable hours but less compensation. My husband works for a non-profit (I am a physician working part-time, but still bring home an salary equal to his), with all the perks of non-profit hours, vacation, flexiblity etc. It would be much less likely that we could do this if I stayed home full time, and I see the enormous benefits that my two boys reap every day, since their dad will just as often cook dinner/read/play with/bathe them as I. I've seen plenty of SAHMs where the dad doesn't get in until after the kids are in bed.
The "who raises the kids if both parents are working" question irks me. Both my kids have benefitted tremendously from the various caregivers (both babysitters and daycares) they have had -- they've met people with different skills, cultural backgrounds, interests and perspectives from our immediate family, and their lives have been enriched by it. However, we've been incredibly lucky to have the money and time to invest in finding what we consider to be great caregivers.
I think everyone recognizes that these issues are totally differnt for moms going back to low wage jobs and leaving their kids in poor quality childcare. Certainly businesses and government in this country do not do nearly enough to offer women AND men the flexibility they need to be good parents. If your husband has reasonable hours, it makes being a working mom so much easier!
I am a 40 year old SAHM with a one year old. This was not "my way out" of an unhappy career! This was a choice by my financially secure 48 year old husband and I. Also, I must say that I am very happy and fulfilled:)
Moreover, some careers are very friendly to moms returning to work after a leave to raise children such as all the positions in public schools.
The following is a personal story:
My mother was a SAHM with me and two siblings. In a nutshell, she was a great mom. 17 years after my birth she had my youngest brother. With him she was different. She worked at a very stressful job and was much more short tempered, tired, and stressed.
As a student of human nature and a licensed therapist (who happens to be a black woman!) I assume that the hostile comments regarding Leslie Bennetts book which I HAVE READ are based upon the guilt most white women feel about the truth she is presenting. This is the first book written by a white woman regarding that feminist issues that most black women can respect and agree with --- what do you think our reality has been since we were able to get an education? We never had a choice expect to find a way to work out a career and children because we grew up knowing that was the only way to have a middle-class life. As Gloria Steinem recently said, "It's time for us to start thinkin like Black women." And it's only taken you forty years to get here. Leslie Bennetts is right, ladies. Grow up and get real. Otherwise, you're all still trying to be suburban Cinderellas.
Leave a Comment
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Back to EpisodeEmail addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. WNYC reserves the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the WNYC.org Comment Guidelines before posting.