Sandi was another woman in my circle of Mommy friends. Before her second baby was born, she had worked for a plumbers' association where she organized and ran conventions. As long as she had just one child, Sandi was able to keep going full-time, with a nanny helping out. She found pleasure and growth in her job, and enjoyed the autonomy she had as the head honcho in her office and as a breadwinner at home. But once her second child came along, the stresses of juggling work and childcare became unbearable. The nanny had made a few scary mistakes with the kids, and she felt an obligation to provide them with better care.
As much as Sandi had enjoyed work, there were new pleasures at home, and they were deep ones. Not everyone can relish these pleasures all day long, but taking care of one's offspring is one of the delights life has to offer. (Maybe that's because it's something that so unquestionably needs to be done. Yes, baby needs to be fed; there are very few things in life that are so certain.)
Sandi lost some kinds of autonomy when she quit working, but there was also a gain. Instead of spending her day doing someone else's bidding, she was spending her time as queen of her own castle. She was also discovering new things about her own identity; not that character traits reinforced at work were not her own; there were new ones that were revealed at home, so that she came into a more complete sense of self. There had been growth at work, but also, in new ways, at home: she was discovering all sorts of new abilities in herself and becoming an expert on her children's medical and educational needs (which were sometimes complex). In short, the supreme elements she had once found at work were now available in greater abundance at home.
These are some of the things that women feel, I think, whether they've exited jobs in academia or law or business, or anything else. They also feel pulled by the benefits quitting has for their children. Sandi's children weren't getting adequate care. No doubt Sandi could have found alternative childcare. She might have been able to reduce her hours. But she decided to step in and be her nanny's replacement.
An honorable choice, I think, but that's not to say mandatory. Staying home is seldom an obligation. There are some parents who really should be at home: their children have special needs, they're great at parenting, and there's a second breadwinner. There are some parents who should continue to work: they're irreplaceable, they have great childcare options, and would go out of their minds at home. Most cases fall in between.
When my own twins were born ten years ago, I decided to leave a full-time job for a variety of reasons. It wasn't what I had to do, for my children's sake, but that doesn't mean their well-being wasn't part of the picture. Staying home was the way of meeting their needs that was all around best, best in every respect, under the circumstances.
I've noticed, since my kids were born, that children have a tendency to grow up. They eventually go off to school, leaving a non-working mother in an empty house.
Ellen moved away several years ago, so I don't know if she ever finished her dissertation. Her work was an important part of herself for many years; I can imagine that it became central again when her child grew older. But if she is now spending her time arranging flowers or (worst case scenario) in a deep depression, that may not be for lack of wanting to resume her career. I know mothers who are no longer content as full-time mothers, but can't find their way back to employment. Their skills have rusted; they don't think they could survive in a competitive workplace that rewards long hours; they feel like the years they spent at home would be time unaccounted for on their resumes -- like a few years in prison or a psychiatric hospital, perhaps.
It's on this basis that a pro-work argument can be made most persuasively. If there isn't a road back to work, then a woman really had better not stay home to begin with. Even if the first few years are satisfying, eventually this choice may cost her in all of the important areas. She may wind up less happy; if marital winds shift direction, she may wind up in dire straits, with little autonomy; and she may find herself stagnating, not growing.
The bored housewives Betty Friedan talked about in the late 50's classic The Feminine Mystique were not caring for small children, but mothers trying to fill time while their husbands and children were away all day.
I'm not ready to pronounce that all parents need to go back to work; they certainly don't need to go back to what they did before. A person can acquire a skill or a body of knowledge and then realize that for the sake of something more important, it's going to have to be squandered. It turned out that teaching chemistry (or whatever), just was not you, did not make you happy, left you feeling like external expectations were determining your future…or whatever. Having a family is just the kind of life-changing event that can bring about a "course correction".
I've returned to full-time writing and teaching, but I no longer do the same sort of philosophy I learned to do in graduate school. That's wasteful, but the topics and type of writing and teaching that interest me now are more "me" and more enjoyable. I've lost something, but I've gained much more.
Perhaps the best path for some is no official work. It seems absurd to worship employment itself, and to rule out the possibility of flourishing outside the framework of a career or a job. For some people, the ultimate things may be in greatest abundance in the home not just briefly, but forever.
Many do need to return to work for their own well-being. It benefits everyone if they're able to do so, because the world needs women's contributions. We're also better off with women returning to work because we want women's interests to be represented in all walks of life. Whatever we'd like for our own selves in the immediate future, we want our daughters to grow up with a sense of unlimited possibility.
The outlook for work-bound mothers is cause for concern. One study says that out of the 93 percent of American mothers who try to return to work, 74 percent will succeed. A large number, but not large enough. And the way in which women return is not always all that they want. Just 43 percent will return to full-time, traditional jobs.
Assistance is sometimes critical. Bonnie is a friend with kids in high school and college. A paleobotanist who studies climate change, she is constantly flying off to places like Iceland and Ethiopia. She spent many years mainly at home with her children, though teaching part-time. Finally, she got back to doing research, with the help of a National Science Foundation grant set aside for women like her. Just recently she earned tenure, academia's coveted prize of a job for life. Good for her, but also for the rest of us: her data will add to our understanding of global warming, putting us in a better position to forecast a future catastrophe.
The assistance Bonnie received was unusual. That sort of help isn't going to become more common as long as the initial decision to stay home is regarded as an irrational one. If someone foolishly jumps into a ditch instead of falling in, we're just a little less motivated to make the effort to help her out.
It's no tragedy when a woman leaves work to be a full-time mother. It only becomes a tragedy when that initial decision closes off meaningful future options. Were that initial decision better understood and respected there might be far more "on ramps" built into the workplace. We'd all stand to benefit if there were.
Mmo : September 2007 |
