babble » blogs » Strollerderby
Strollerderby
Maternity Leave, Childcare and the Battle Against Moms
Nobody really declared war on moms in America, it only feels like it. No one knows this better than the people Sharon Lerner interviews in her first book, The War on Moms: On Life in a Family-Unfriendly Nation.
If you’re a mother in the U.S., you know it well. Too-short maternity leaves, paid only after cobbling together sick time, vacation time and the few weeks that only the most generous of employers bestows on its most valuable workers. Expensive childcare and preschools that you clawed at a waiting list to get into. Higher health insurance premiums. A no-win choice of 40+ hours or no work at all.
This is modern life as a middle-class (and working-class and upper-class) parent in the U.S., falling especially hard on mothers. What’s funny is that Americans were once so close to having government subsidized childcare for all (passed by Congress! Vetoed by Nixon!). We were once this-close to having maternity insurance, which would have covered lost wages during time off after a birth, at the turn of the century – the last century!
Mothers have already hit rock bottom and things, believe it or not, are looking up. Lerner explains how in an interview with Strollerderby.
MH: What’s really striking about your book is that it seems to be the first book that takes seriously the idea that there are moms who didn’t attend Ivy League schools and aren’t on the track for being CEOs and partners in law firms. What made you see it from this perspective?
SL: If people with huge incomes are falling apart, what about everybody else? Because admittedly, it’s very interesting and we’d love to see ourselves that way, as if we have lots of options.
MH: Linda Hirshman’s Get Back to Work, bloggers, essayists and writers everywhere have spent the past seven years sort of admonishing women who left careers for their kids. I’m one of them, but it’s not as if I opted out; I didn’t have a whole lot of choice, considering the cost of childcare, the logistics and the fact that when I returned from maternity leave, I really didn’t get to spend enough time with my baby. I was a first-time mom!
SL: There is so much castigation going on, “You should do this! You shouldn’t do this!” … as if there are so many options. The point isn’t the individual decisions that individuals make, but the context in which we make them. We don’t have a whole bunch of choices. Anybody’s choice is made under real constraints — those are the problems, not the choice they wind up making.
MH: Maternity leave is really screwed up in the U.S. What is the reality of maternity leave?
SL: We don’t have paid leave. Our unpaid leave only applies to half the private sector workforce and many of those people can’t take it because they can’t afford to take it. And yet, this situation makes us an outlier in the world. We’re the only industrialized nation without paid leave. And we are one of the tiny handful of countries that don’t have it. And still there’s all this resistance. I just got done with this radio interviewer, a male interviewer, who said something like, “my wife stayed home and that’s a good model.” People are very defensive about our model, which in the international context is really nothing. Because we don’t have paid leave and because so many people can’t afford unpaid leave, we have the majority of working women going back to work before 12 weeks. They’re going back five weeks and four weeks and three weeks — sometimes days after giving birth. How are they doing that? Days after birth, you’re not sitting up, you’re nursing all the time, you’re not smiling.
I think we’re just used to the way it is in our country. We’re sort of nose to the grindstone just enduring in a way that doesn’t allow us to pick our heads up and look around and say “wow, it doesn’t have to be this way.”
MH: We also get push-back on paid leave with “personal responsibility” rhetoric. If you can’t afford time off from work, don’t have kids, that kind of thing.
SL: That’s what this interviewer was saying to me. “We figured out how to do it, so what’s wrong with that model?” Of course the answer is, not everyone can afford to to it. Of course, having paid leave as an option doesn’t mean you have to take it. It’s really about, if you want to do this and you can’t find another way to do it, then you’ll be able to do it.
MH: Do we just hate moms in the U.S. that we’re so comfortable with this?
SL: No, no we don’t hate moms. I think we’re in denial about the reality of life for a lot of people. On some level, we’re not acknowledging how tough it is for some people. If we did, there’s no way we could go on in good conscience. We’re all so inured to it. We can’t imagine that it could be different. But it can, we can. I’ve seen it in other places. The way it is right now is like holding a mirror to our own lives. It doesn’t jibe with our notion of a family-friendly nation.
MH: Toward the end of the book, you lay this at the feet of feminists.
SL: Oh, oh, let me clarify. We were discriminated against in such fundamental ways that feminists had to focus on what was directly in front of them. Getting into the workforce, ability to retain own last night, ability to own property in their names, not be raped by their husbands, get divorced. We were getting out of a pit. But we were so focused on that there wasn’t really time — you couldn’t really say, “Oh and by the way, you need to accommodate our care-taking responsibilities.” Now, ideally, these shouldn’t be women’s care-taking responsibilities, it should be split. But the reality is women are the primary caregivers most often. Men who take on the work of primary care-taking, they’re going to hit the same obstacles.
MH: What would it look like, knowing the U.S. like you do?
SL: People like to trot out Sweden as the example. They get 18 months off, paid. After that, they’re entitled to work part-time until that child is 8. They also have a month of use-it-or-lose-it time, which is for fathers. The 18 months can be split between men and women. That other month can’t be split; if the father doesn’t take it it goes away. That’s one end of the spectrum. We’re on the other. There’s so much in between.
The reality is when children are little, there’s often a need for reduced hours and flexibility. I know better than to think we’re going to wind up with 18 months paid. But zero time paid? There’s a huge sea between us and Sweden and we just need to start swimming that way.
MH: What do you think we could tolerate here? We barely got healthcare passed.
SL: I think some people think of my book as depressing. But I’d like to talk about it as inspiring. Healthcare bill was a huge deal — big for moms. We just need to keep going. I think as these things get in place — as healthcare becomes the law of the land and it’s put into action — I think people are going to appreciate it and it’s only going to help.
The truth is, things like childcare — when you get these policies out in front of people, the public overwhelmingly supports it. The battle is just overcoming the rhetoric. Like the 1971 Comprehensive Child Care Act. Both houses passed it.
MH: That was an incredible story you included in your book. We were so close to universal childcare! In the 70s!
SL: It had the support of the general public. That’s the kind of thing that did pass in other countries. You get to the end when I talk about paid leave. We had this incredible momentum … in 1919! I just feel like it’s a matter of time — an incredibly long time — but I think we’re headed in that direction. It’s about getting fired up again and realizing that it’s possible. Women are already at their limit. Our workforce numbers are very high, relative to men. Women just can’t do it all and we can’t keep progressing and not supporting the work of care-taking. Women can’t keep doing what they’re doing without some help.
More Posts
School Banned Driving Kids to School
Bristol Palin on Levi: He’s a Stranger to Me
Post C-Section Hysterectomies Increase Death Risk
9/11 Caused Boys to be Miscarried
Epidural Shortage a Pain for Laboring Women
Children’s Books are Killing the Earth
Single Fathers Different, Dad Says
Swedish Docs Stop Circumcisions
When Dad-to-Be Thinks Birth is Nasty
Parents Group PO’d About Twitcom
Nursing Mom Criticized for Making Kids as Questions
3 Ground Rules for Eating Out with Kids
Babies in Bars, Strollers on Sidewalks: Urban Culture Clash
Sleepovers and Gay Parents — Bad Idea?
Mom Who Dropped Kids at Mall Lived Criminal ‘Justice’ Hell
2 Biggest Mistakes Parents Make with Their Kids’ Teeth
Is It Sometimes Wrong to Keep Preemies Alive?
Blogger’s Son Survives; Now a New Reality
Did ‘Babies’ Filmmaker Break the Law?
10 Best, 10 Worst Cities for Moms
Girl Catches Disney’s Grammar Error
Go Back To Strollerderby
0 Comments
[...] [Also, here's an interesting read about War on Moms] [...]
Dads, Moms and Swedish Envy | Strollerderby commented on Jun 10 10 at 3:12 pmcheri commented on May 26 10 at 1:50 pmGood interview Madeline….
I am so mixed on all of these mom issues, work issues, childcare issues….on one hand, of course the quality of childcare needs to be improved, and quality childcare needs to be accessible to everyone, regardless of income level. And, some families need dual incomes in order to provide enough money to feed/clothe etc their families, and so maternity leave and support needs to be improved. But…..at the same time, I really think that kids do better at home than in daycare. So, the Sweden model is great, because those mom’s are, in fact, opting out of the work force for long enough to get their kids raised. They are, stay at home moms….who are supported financially by the society. Any half compromise we Americans come up with is going to send moms back to work at 3 months, or 6 months…and kids will end up in day care, bottle fed instead of breast fed, and cared for by low paid, not attached and not educated “care takers” who just do not do as good for our children as moms (or dads) would do.
So, the current system sucks, but any compromise is not going to be the best we can do for our kids either. And maybe I am one of those people who are saying…..if you cant afford to take care of your kids, dont have them. Or, really….wait until you can. Dont pop them out at 18, or even 24….but wait until you have saved up. Don’t buy the newest gadgets and cars, save. Invest. Be smart, and you would be surprised what you can afford.
And, yeah, I know not everyone will be able to take a couple year off their careers to stay at home with their kids…but many can. Many more than currently do.
And I also know there are a bunch of women who are saying that they want to work, and want kids too. Hmm. Having kids is a big life changer. If you cannot sacrifice a few years of your life for them, maybe you should reconsider. No matter what the commercials say…you cannot in fact have it all. Be a good mom, or have a great career. Or, be a good mom, and then have a great career. Just not at the same time. Let the flames begin.
GtothemfckinP commented on May 26 10 at 2:41 pmI could not have said it better myself, cheri.
Beverley Smith commented on May 27 10 at 7:12 amI strongly agree that we should now address the care issue in the feminist and women’s rights struggle. However this, like the civil rights movement, will take a revolution bigger than the one to get women into paid work. Actually it will start with language. Just like we now ban certain words that demean people of color or people with lower intelligence or who use wheelchairs or come from other countries, removing the veiled insult to women in the care role is step one. Where is this insult? IT is in the term ‘work’ itself, which men and economists have reserved for men and for roles men do. It is in the term ‘childcare’ which oddly enough is now used to for care of children that is PAID but ignores the traditional location and style of care. It is in the expression ‘maternity leave’ which like ‘sailor’s leave’ suggests a holiday, a break and time off, when in fact taking care of a newborn is one of the most exhausting and labor intensive times of one’s life. The revolution will require redefining ‘working mother’ to recognize a mother, mothering, is already working. It will require recognizing unpaid labor’s value in the GDP and counting it since right now it is ignored though it in fact is about one half of the GDP. It will require pensions that recognize all contributions you made over your adult life, not just your paid work. It will require funding for children that ‘flows with’ the child and it will require funding for care of the sick, handicapped, elderly or dying, all vital roles someone has to do, that ‘flows with’ the person needing care. It will require delinking criteria for funding from the paid labor force. When the US does set up maternity benefits to match those in most of the world, it will require basing them not on how much the mother earned last year, but on the fact there is a baby to take care of. This is a big revolution. Most economic systems have no clue how to adjust to it. There are economists who are urging we move there though- including Dr. Isabella Waring in New Zealand, Dr. Mary Mellor in the UK, Dr. Isabella Bakker in Canada. It is time.
NoHo Mom commented on May 27 10 at 11:34 amCheri, I know people in their 40′s who can barely afford it. How much longer should they wait? When you factor in insurance, (car, house, health), taxes, cost of living increases, no one can really afford it.
GtothemfckinP commented on May 27 10 at 11:51 amWith all due respect, Beverley Smith…who is going to pay for all this? It sounds so nice, but very unrealistic.
And NoHo, I really kind of think that is you can’t afford “it” by the time you’re in your 40s, you’ve had a horrible run of bad luck or are just doing something really wrong. I mean, it took me extra time to graduate college, which I had to pay for all on my own, been on my own since 18 YO, my husband came from humble beginnings, too, and we are doing “it”. You just have to be smart and frugal (and we are not ridiculously “frugal” either). We DO NOT however pay to watch television nor do we have fancy cell phones (we share one phone) and my husband and kid get most of their clothes from thrift stores (I get mine from Target and Old Navy…) the point is, what the hell are people doing with all their money all the years they are working? I bet they are pissing it away on bs…
mccn commented on May 27 10 at 12:48 pmI’ll tell you what I was doing with my money, if you like. I’m just one example, and I’m fortunate and come from privilege, so mileage will vary greatly.
After graduating from college (Ivy League! On scholarship!) with $50,000 in student debt, I worked for several years at the only job I could get, and made $25,000. I used that money to pay down my debt and pay for rent, groceries, and medical bills (juvenile diabetes is expensive! so is shoulder surgery!). This didn’t seem very doable to me – I couldn’t save for retirement on my salary, and I couldn’t see good opportunities for advancement, despite the degree. So, I went to graduate school, and incurred another $150,000 worth of debt (+$30,000 left over from college) to earn my JD, but at least now feel that I have the opportunity and skill set to attain a high paying job. I am currently making six figures! Which is much more than $25,000 and will allow me to plan for my future years. I expect to repay my debt in about 10 years. The size of the debt means I can’t get a mortgage on a property that will appreciate, so I rent with my spouse. However, my medical bills have decreased as my current job offers better insurance. I save 30% of my gross income for retirement (20%)as my job does not offer a 401K so retirement planning is on me and emergencies (10%). I currently have a nice savings account for emergencies, but could not realistically expect to take off a full year of work for another five or seven years, because I would need to save money for emergencies, child expenses, medical expenses (if I gave birth), and COBRA payments so I could continue my insurance. (That’s $3,000+/month. My husband is on my insurance.) I am not sure that this is “BS” or “frivolousness” – I could barely make my rent out of college, and pay my debt. Now, I can pay my rent and medical bills, and save for retirement. I buy clothing at Goodwill and food at Costco; I don’t go to movies, I don’t go on vacation, and I spend less than $1,000/year on entertainment. So I think I have done as well as anyone can with being careful with money! But I still don’t have near enough to support myself for a year, let alone buy diapers and pay for insurance and food and clothing for an infant.
So, as per Cheri’s suggestion, I am not going to have children – I don’t think I can afford it, and in 5 years I will be 41. So if I did wait, I think it would be pretty late. I am fine with this decision.
But, I have had every good opportunity, have been careful about finances, and I’m a white woman working as an attorney. If I can’t afford to save up for a year off – not to mention the opportunity cost of leaving the workforce for a year or two and then having to go back in with no experience during that year and a terrible economy – I wonder who can?
GtothemfckinP commented on May 27 10 at 2:12 pmSounds like you are fine and just exceedingly risk-averse, mccn. It’s always the lawyers! I’m glad I am just a middle of the road worker. Does your husband have a job? He sounds kind of like dead weight. You don’t have to say, of course, and thanks for laying it all out…for my money, to have young children it seems like the traditional set-up where the man is the main earner and the woman the secondary works best (my husband and I made about the same before I took time off for my kid, so it was a wash for us). I do plan to work full time when my kid is older and in school. What I just don’t understand is who people expect to pay for all these things people are proposing?
LP commented on May 28 10 at 9:37 ammccn-Could your husband stay home with the children? I’m curious about what GP and cheri think about dad taking over the traditional “mom” role.
GtothemfckinP commented on May 28 10 at 10:11 amI think it’s fine, if that’s what you choose. Although, my personal taste is for me to do it…the whole extended breastfeeding thing for the first 2-3 years…but I realize not everyone is into that. I think a Dad could give great love, too.
michelle commented on May 29 10 at 10:25 pmCheri, you did not understand a single thing the author said. I personally would be embarrassed if I mindlessly defended the status quo like that. To each her own, I guess, but sheesh. The author’s entire point was that for most parents in America it’s not possible at ANY age to have children without extreme economic insecurity. Why on earth would the answer be “don’t have kids”? Oh, so is the right wing ready to tell women to go out and use birth control? Didn’t think so. But they also don’t really want to help anyone who’s already a mother. Fundamentally this is all about people getting upset that someone somewhere maybe getting a “handout” (meaning they might benefit from a rational social policy) and people trying to force women back into an idealized version “traditional values.”
GtothemfckinP commented on May 31 10 at 4:21 pmI don’t know, Michelle, there are plenty of people that *are* doing it–having one parent stay at home while the other works. So, it *can* be done…I would advocate for rational social policy, but many of the things being proposed go beyond rational. We are operating at an extreme deficit already, so I just don’t know where people expect funding for these sorts of things to come from…also, the more you take from government programs, the more hold they have on your life and the choices you make. I would hate to see a system where people are taxed so much that people, like myself, who, through proper planning and choices, can take 3-5 years off (part time) with no gov assistance have to go back and put my child into some gov care program at a younger age just to subsidize this 1-year paid leave for all women. Especially when there are people who think they are so very special that they should have as many children as they want, while people like me limit themselves to the number of children they feel they can afford to raise well (one!)
Rosana commented on Jun 01 10 at 10:33 amI love it when people assume to know every detail of other peoples’ lives and judge. hahaha, and they are home with their kids all day feeding them this kind of thinking. Judge others decisions, even if you don’t know anything about them, poor babies.
cheri commented on Jun 01 10 at 11:05 ammichelle, nothing about my comment is mindless, and you must have mindlessly skimmed it….because I am saying that kids do better at home than in daycare, so providing more daycare is not a good idea. That is not the status quo. And, in the midwest, living on one income is not that hard to do, if you do not produce an entire pack of children, over consume, or have unrealistic expectations. My husband and waited, worked and were a bit more financially secure before we bred, it can be done. If my husband lost his job, it would be scary, but we would survive. We are careful.
And, Dad’s can stay at home, but mom’s give birth, and returning a mom to work 4 weeks, 4 days, whatever after giving birth is unreasonable. So, both parents need to plan to stay home for some amount of time. And I am a fan of breastfeeding, but people can make it work.
I love the sweden model, but in so many ways….this is not sweden.
GtothemfckinP commented on Jun 01 10 at 12:13 pmRosana, these are not the kind of ideas you “feed” a 0-3 year old. These are high-level social issues. What you do feed a 0-3 year old, when you are home with them, rather than farming them out to someone else to care for them, is that THEY MATTER, they belong to YOU, to YOUR FAMILY, that they are not adrift. You teach them that they have a right to their own ideas, their own space, and the freedom of unscheduled time to BE, to learn freely, to be cuddled by the one who loves them most when they need it most…so many things.
GtothemfckinP commented on Jun 01 10 at 12:15 pmcheri, I agree wholeheartedly
Rosana commented on Jun 01 10 at 1:37 pmWhy do you assume that a kid will not learn that they have a right to their own ideas, their own space their own freedom at someone elses home? unscheduled time? how do you know that is the best for every kid you do not spend time with everyday? Believe me, if my babysitter’s environment was not good for my kids, they would not be there still. However, my son is a very outgoing toddler with a mind of his own and very good social skills that knows who his mom is and that loves me they same way I love him, unconditionaly. It is not about quantity is about quality and I am sure I spend more quality time with my kids than some stay at home moms. Believe me, being at the home all the time with the kids in some cases is not being present in their lives.
GtothemfckinP commented on Jun 01 10 at 1:51 pmOK, well, I’m glad you feel that that is working out for you. Don’t ask me to pay for it, though. Thanks.
Rosana commented on Jun 01 10 at 2:33 pmYou do not have to pay for any of my stuff because I work. I just hope you can talk all that smack when you get old and social security is not around to cover your and your spouse life. Who will pay for that? Because like mccn, I also went to graduate school and have to pay my student loan, however, I also save for retirement, shop at gymboree and children’s place, (only when they have sales and I can get brand new clothes for the same price as in good will) cook at home everyday (which my son helps me with, by the way) and the only thing we do for fun (other than taking the kids to the park, playing with the kids in our big backyard or going to the boardwalk) it to travel every year to see my family in Puerto Rico. Belive me it works for me and I pay for it.
Rosana commented on Jun 01 10 at 2:36 pmHowever, I do not assume that every mom in America live under the same circumstances and make it work. To each their own and if you do not know the real circumstances, it is maybe because it is not your business.
GtothemfckinP commented on Jun 01 10 at 3:47 pmWell, keeping with the pattern of taking care of our own business, saving our money, and planning, we don’t plan on depending on social security for our retirement. I am guessing I won’t get any at all. We are saving our own money for that. Your graduate degree may not have got you great reading comprehension, though, since the whole point of the post was that the US government needs to be doing more to help moms, which means subsidizing their personal choices, i.e. paying for stuff. And so, when we don’t believe that young children belong in daycare, we are not going to be on board with the government paying for it.
Add your take:
Note: Babble is a supportive, diverse community. We encourage a range of opinions,
but any unduly hostile comments will be removed.
Comments are delayed up to 15 minutes
Joslyn Gray 
Amber Doty 
Julianna Miner 
Monica Bielanko 
Sierra Black 
Meredith Carroll 
Carolyn Castiglia 
Sunny Chanel 
Madeline Holler 
Wendy Michaels 
Rebecca Odes 
Danielle Smith 
Danielle Sullivan 
Katherine Stone 
The Walt Disney Company supports Babble as a platform dedicated to honest, engaged, informed, intelligent and open conversation about parenting. However, the opinions expressed on this site are those of individual parents/writers and do not reflect the views of Disney. In addition, content provided on this site is for entertainment or informational purposes only and should not be construed as medical advice, diagnosis, treatment, or safety advice.
0