I think that, as with most of what are considered "women's issues," it's going to take a lot of social change before men will stop thinking of child care as a woman's responsibility. And I'm talking on the micro level -- women refusing to take on the duty themselves without at least discussing why it is they, and not their husbands, who are responsible for it.

Of course, I'm one to talk. We recently went through a patch of time where we really could have used childcare for my daughter -- I needed to study for the bar, and DH wanted to go sailing on the weekends. He kept telling me "we should find a babysitter," until I called him on it, pointing out that what he really meant is "you should find a babysitter." Still, I was the one who ultimately spent my time schmoozing the neighborhood moms of teens, looking for a kid whose schedule would permit babysitting.

Another thought is that the reason politicians don't think much about child care is their age. By the time your old enough to be a politician, I think you passed that phase in your life of raising kids. It is easy to forget or minimize the issues of the day to day tasks of raising kids after you personally passed that phase. I really don't see child care as being anything but a women's issue, till it changes in homes across the US. Until ordinary men get forced to deal with the issue, it won't change on the macro level. I know in my own family, I was the one out there investigating day cares and sitters. I am the one making connections and finding unique solutions to our child care needs. Heck, I am the one on this blog. I really can't see DH actively participating unless I force him. I have to tell him to make an appointment or tell him where and when to pick up DD. I just think a lot of men do not take ownership in the child care duties. Most are willing to do anything you ask of them. But they just don't take charge of the job themselves.

Leslie:

"What do we need to do to persuade the men in our families, our governments and our companies that childcare affects us all?"

If I recall, this was well-discussed when the child tax credit was proposed and passed in 2003 [not that long ago]. The arguments, however, included the one that you seemed to dismiss: the idea of a parent choosing to stay at home full-time. The reason for instituting a tax credit to be applied to all parents [below an income cap] was that parents could then choose whether to apply that to the cost of outside-the-home child care or they could apply it to the cost of one parent staying home.

The fundamental question that many lawmakers asked was whether the USG should take a position of encouraging both parents to work outside the home [through exclusively subsidizing outside-the-home childcare]. The fact that this care already receives a tax subsidy [the childcare deduction] suggests that we've gone partially down that path -- the question is how much further we wish to go.

Is increasing the child tax credit a reasonable solution to address this funding issue?

I grew up in a home where my father was the primary caregiver. Didn't seem odd to me until I was in 3rd or 4th grade and my mom came to pick us up from the community center and the lady who ran it being very skeptical about this stranger asking for us. Dad was the one who went to all the parent/teacher conferences, drove for field trips and even went camping with my 6th grade class and brownie troop.

My sister is now pregnant with her first, and the first grandchild. Her husband is the one who is going to stay home. Luckily they live near the rest of the family and my brother, who is a firefighter and has a very open schedule is slated to help out.

Politicians lose sight of the need for child-care b/c when their kids were little, many of them were already on the campaign trails, in state congress, or even here in DC. With very little time at home, it fell to their wife/other family members to make sure the kids were seen to.

Why is it that women don't generally abandon their children in the way that many men do? Is it possible that we women have a different connection to our children, a different sense of responsibility to them? Could it be that in carrying them in our bodies we have a bond with them that is different than that of a father? Because we carry the burden or blessing (depending on your experience) of actually creating the child we do have a higher responsibilty for its care. I'm so completely bored of the women here complaining about the things the men that THEY picked don't do. Like they do everything perfectly. Please, if you want a man who is involved and equal and supportive then discuss that before you have his children - geeze. All it ever is here is: We're so misunderstood, we need more (insert benefit that someone else must give) yadda, yadda, yadda.

There's lots of cool things about being a woman - stop complaining about it. We get to make children (most of us), we can have almost any job we like. You can be a ballerina or an astronaut. You can be a SAHM and then Speaker of the House. What is so terrible - upset because society expects you to take care of your children - really, how terribly unreasonable of them.

I'm not sure it's helpful to aggregate individual level and group-level political behavior. In other words, the fact that there is currently no active interest group pressuring Congress for childcare is a separate issue from whether or not your husband handled finding a babysitter for Saturday night.

And the fact is that interest groups organize around special interests -- the people affected by that legislation will be the ones that organize and push it through. In other words, there will never be a national outpouring of support for more subsidized childcare as the next Great Society movement. What's needed is a strong lobby/interest group.

I think some type of organization might take a lesson from, for example, AARP in recruiting FAMILIES (not women) to join an organization which provides benefits to those who support their agenda. (I'm thinking of the way everybody in America gets a letter from AARP on their fiftieth birthday -- what if there was an organization which contacted everyone right after they had a baby and solicited their support for carefully crafted initiatives favoring childcare subsidies -- something like that. An actual lobbying group.)

I know I'm going to get attacked for this, but I feel that organizations like NOW have kind of missed the boat by focussing on other issues rather than this one. Unfortunately, they're out of touch with what FAMILIES (not women) really need today.

A Dad: Do you really see the child care tax deduction or the child tax credit subsidizing either choice. Clearly no one is choosing to stay home based on a $1K tax credit per child and the $5k tax DEDUCTION is really only a about $1250 tax credit for families. Less for others. I don't see either one of them enough to encourage people to make either choice. It just helps elevate the burden based on the choice you already made. Besides the tax credit for kids can be used for working or non working parents under a certain income.

"Every working woman I speak with, especially those with more than one child, suffers from never-ending worries about childcare. How much it costs, whether her caregivers are nurturing her children and keeping them safe, whether her life will fall apart tomorrow when her caregiver quits or falls ill or her day-care center closes or raises its rates."

You've never spoken with my wife. We have no worries about daycare. We can afford it. We know the employees keep our kids safe and nurtures them. The center will not close and when it raises rates, they are reasonable (and will remain so). Sure, the first day dropping off the first kid was terrible (worrying about the kid) but that quickly ended.

"Their wives' problem."

Only when the wives make it their problem. If my wife is specific about what we get in a babysitter, it is then up to her to find one. If she feels my choice is unacceptable, that's fine with me - but then I am no longer responsible for finding a babysitter. It's all her.

"What do we need to do to persuade the men in our families, our governments and our companies that childcare affects us all?"

Thanks for insulting every man that is here.

My husband is almost always the one who finds and calls the babysitters, and often observes her behavior to tell whether we should have her again. In the next few weeks we'll be arranging the childcare for the next year, and we are attending all of the places together-- and he's doing the phone followup. When I say "we need a babysitter" he assumes it's him who calls.

It wasn't always like this. Earlier, when I was the SAHM, it was mostly viewed as my responsibility. When he became a SAHD, he began to view it as his. We're both working now, but the patterns from being a SAHD have lasted.

When Leslie makes broad, sweeping generalizations about men and/or women or any other group of humans, I lose my temper. When Leslie states statistical results incorrectly, or picks bits of a study and twists the results to suit her agenda, she makes me crazy. I won't even try to point out what is wrong with her blog entry today. Maybe Leslie makes these crazy statements to create posts, but I for one am weary of her inaccuracies.

Childcare will continue to remain a woman's issue and here's why:

Aint no mother in the right mind that will let a man change there baby's diaper other than the father himself unless she is extremely pressed. Kids need their butts wiped until around 4 or 5 years of age, and that pretty much cuts out hands on care by men for a significant portion of their childhood. Of course, I can pitch in with my own kids, but when we talk childcare, I'm assuming it's the care given to children other than the parents themselves.

So the fact remains, women select other women to take care of their kids and there is very little men can do about it.

Sorry!

Father of 2, how nice for you to presume to speak for your wife and say you have no worries about daycare. There is no woman on the planet with children who doesn't worry about her kids when they're with a caregiver (including you) other than herself. If you say she doesn't worry, either you're lying or she is.

You can't play the daddy card here. Ballsy move, but like a lead balloon . . .

"I'm so completely bored of the women here complaining about the things the men that THEY picked don't do"

Women tend to mate with men that are a lot like their own (the womens')fathers. If there were fewer lousy fathers, there would be fewer lousy husbands,fewer lousy marriages and fewer broken homes, etc.

Foamgnome:
"A Dad: Do you really see the child care tax deduction or the child tax credit subsidizing either choice. "

That was part of the justification included within the congressional testimony -- both in 2003 when the child tax credit was passed and more recently as part of the discussion as to whether we should focus on increasing EITC or simply increasing the child tax credit [or making the child tax credit more progressive on income].

The question that many lawmakers asked was how to best provide financial assistance to families so that they could choose the best arrangement for them. The direct child tax credit was seen as the most expensive and most flexible -- the child care deduction is focused on subsidizing only those families in which both parents are employed -- while the EITC is somewhat mixed [pro-employment but not necessarily requiring that both parents be employed].

Agreed that the current amount is minimal - my question is whether people would be comfortable 'addressing' this issue by eliminating the child care tax credit and applying that same amount across the board as a broad-based child tax credit.

Women tend to mate with men that are a lot like their own (the womens')fathers. If there were fewer lousy fathers, there would be fewer lousy husbands,fewer lousy marriages and fewer broken homes, etc.

Posted by: | March 5, 2007 08:02 AM

Oh, that's right. No one is accountable for their own choices! It is always SOMEONE else's fault. WHere do lousy fathers come from? Not just fathers - apparently they aren't even raising them. So it must be mom's fault...geeze poor argument.

"If my wife is specific about what we get in a babysitter, it is then up to her to find one."

I find this argument bogus, unless your wife is insisting that the babysitter have some extraordinary qualifications. Seems like it's incumbent on both partners to decide what qualifications are important to them, then work as a team to find someone who meets those criteria.

And Armchair Mom, when I say that I think it's a problem that needs to be solved on a micro level, I don't mean to dismiss what could be accomplished by an activist group. I just mean that, in many cases, it seems like child care doesn't even appear on a man's radar screen as an issue at all, and that this won't change until we give those men a personal stake in the issue, too.

"What a Crock", what are you smoking?

The father is now a caregiver??? The mother is only comfortable with herself??? Man, do you have issues.

You don't know me. You don't know my wife. Don't tell me what I think or what my wife thinks. I know. You don't. Go away.

I deal with the big childcare issues -- what kind (au pair/nanny/center), who's the caregiver going to be, wracking my brains creating a list of questions, reading the books, making the calls, scheduling the visits, etc. I'm not saying my husband wouldn't be good at it, but I am much more picky (he would probably say "and fearful"). I see it reflected in all of our interactions with our kids. He's the one who lets them play on the playgrounds I wouldn't take them to, gives them food I don't like them to have on a regular basis, and roughhouses with them. I actually believe that it is good for the kids. If they had two parents like me, we'd need to start saving at birth for therapy.

I have never considered relinquishing my role as the primary person who deals with childcare. I like doing the research, feel I'm more thorough, and at the end of the day, I'm the one who worries more, so it's just as well that my questions are answered before I start worrying.

I wonder how many women, given the opportunity, would hand over the childcare stuff to their mate. I can't be the only one who thinks like this.

Father of 2, if you feel that the burden of child care in your household doesn't fall unfairly on your wife, that's great, but then why do you identify with men who *don't* step up and share the burden? I don't understand why you are feeling attacked, why you are identifying with men with whom (according to you) you have less in common with than the women posting here.

WorkingMomX,

I would hand childcare worries to my husband in a heartbeat! I'm sure he'd do fine, and we tend to be careful to the same degree when it comes to our daughter.

Alas, in our situation, all we need is an occasional, probably teenaged, babysitter. And he argues that it would be inappropriate for him to be calling the neighborhood girls for babysitting.

When I go back to work, however, all bets are off. He'll be helping whether he wants to or not.

ISTM that women worry more about childcare because, as the anonymous poster pointed out, it is women who are more intimately involved in their child's life. It's a fact of life; men help create the child, but it is the woman who carries it, delivers it, and (sometimes) feeds it from her own body. There's a bond there that men don't have, so it is natural that women would worry more about who's taking care of their child when they aren't doing it themselves.

I have friends with several children, and the first day they left the child with someone else (even for the youngest one of 3) was traumatic for them.

My wife and I have already discussed this issue (both of us engineers; we obsessively plan for the future) and if we go the daycare route later on in our child's life, it will be a joint discussion, joint decision, and joint participation between both of us. She'll probably end up dropping off the child, and I'll be the one picking them up thanks to our schedules. She intends to stay at home the first few years herself though, as we can afford to do so for that long.

Workingmomx,

I *guess* that a lot of moms feel the same way you do. And if moms stepping back would mean children suffering, then they don't really have a choice about it.

But why is that? Why do they feel they can't trust their husbands to make decisions in the best interests of his children? I think part of what this blogpost is getting at is that that's an unfortunate and unnecessary state of affairs.

both of my daughters baby sit. Dads call and make arrangements. We consider this to be normal. (They don't sit for someone I don't know, unless someone I know actually knows the new family rather well.)

Ah, that's good to know.

Anon at 7:51am -

I can't disagree that women who want children should consider the parenting potential of their future mates before creating them. But I think your spin on things puts way too much responsibility on women and way too little on men. Once a man is a father, his parenting responsibilities shouldn't depend on the children's mother's prior ability to predict the future.

I don't know that it's trust so much as probably a sense of control. I feel better knowing that I personally have selected what I believe is the best childcare option/caregiver for my kids. I think my husband would do a fine job of this if he needed to. But I actually WANT to do it.

I probably need to have my head examined.

"Once a man is a father, his parenting responsibilities shouldn't depend on the children's mother's prior ability to predict the future"

It depends more on the wife's manipulation of the father than anything else.

"Dads call and make arrangements. We consider this to be normal."

FWIW - I had this conversation recently with a number of neighborhood fathers - most of us independently had come up with a policy that calling / emailing to set up the arrangements was fine but none of us were ever the pick-up or drop-off person for babysitters who could not drive [so we were never alone in car with the babysitter].

"Seems like it's incumbent on both partners to decide what qualifications are important to them, then work as a team to find someone who meets those criteria."

Excellent point! Having one parent monopolize any area reduces the pooled wisdom of the couple.

Neither parent should be allowed to ignore an aspect of parenting just because the other parent "worries more." The essence of shared parenting is to decide as a team how to raise the kids and then divide the tasks necessary so that each parent has ownership of the result.

There is a SAH Dad in our neighborhood. I can't tell you how many men and women, both, wonder why he isn't working. He is a very hands on Dad. Their kids are elementary and middle school. The fact he is a hands on dad isn't an issue. The fact he is being 'mr. mom' is. I don't share the view of my neighbors, by the way. I'm merely reporting on middle america, aged between upper 20s and lower 50s, seeing the job of taking care of kids as being the mom's job, even if she is running a fairly successfully outside the home business.

Leslie is not making crazy statements to create posts. I agree with everything she says and I'm not crazy.

I am grateful to her for putting many of my thoughts into words. Her blog is thoughtful and balanced, IMHO. GO LESLIE

Father of 2, Methinks thou dost protest too much.

This is a very sad statement on our society "so we were never alone in car with the babysitter".
As a kid I babysat every weekend. It was always the dad who picked me up and took me back home.

Agree with experienced mom. My two teenaged daughters babysit, but only for people we know. For those people, it doesn't matter whether the Mom calls or the Dad.

For people we don't know, it also doesn't matter if Mom calls or Dad - the answer's 'no'.

(My teenaged son chooses not to babysit, but if he did the rules would be the same.)

Now, it MIGHT be the case that if someone was calling around having heard from a friend/neighbor/relative that my kids babysit, it would be more "normal" for that to be the Mom rather than the Dad. So making those initial contacts might be the only case it matters - but in our case, you're going to get the same answer.

Sort of "adjacent" to this topic- anyone see "March of the Penguins?" Now there are some dads who really do their part - if you haven't seen it, the movie shows how male penguins sit with the egg for a month in the middle of Antarctica in the winter while the moms go back to the ocean to find food.
I can't imagine trusting my DH to watch the kids for a month in Antarctica... lol

Tara, I don't know whether you intended it or not, but your comment about "... the women posting here" seemed off base. A number of us who post here regularly are men.

And to second another of experienced mom's points (I seem to be doing a lot of that today, and no, I have no idea who she is), Leslie's generalization today is somewhat offensive. "What do we need to do to persuade the men in our families, our governments and our companies that childcare affects us all?" Umm, Leslie, SOME women have already done that, long ago. Some men were taught that by their own parents and their wives reinforce it. The fact that your husband doesn't understand this, and that you apparently tolerate this and aren't willing to do something about it, doesn't mean that "the men" don't understand it. A lot of us do.

You lost me with the oxymoron "great article" and "in the Nation."

"It depends more on the wife's manipulation of the father than anything else"

Wow! So much nastiness so early on a Monday! Everybody take a deep breath.

The "women are closer to babies because we make them" arguement is complete BS in my opinion. This explanation is simply another way that we're brainwashed in this society. What about adoptive parents? Do the fathers take care of all the details then? What about moms who murder their kids? What about women who don't want kids? Do all of these women have their wires crossed or something? Does it strike anyone else as suspect that this little gem of wisdom *happens* to reinforce stereotypical gender roles? How convenient that what men want (i.e., for women to rear children) is "scientifically" supported!

Maybe women worry more. That seems to be instilled very early on. But there is no reason why men can't pick up the phone and make day care arrangements. Any man who claims to want children should want to ensure child care. The ones who don't help handle it are completely lazy in my opinion and ought to get a boot in the butt.

"I don't understand why you are feeling attacked, why you are identifying with men with whom (according to you) you have less in common with than the women posting here"

You attack one man, you attack them all. :)

What a Crock, methinks you don't think at all.

Ok, for all you mothers out there:

If your husband told you "I have made the childcare arrangement for our children, don't worry about it", how many of you would want to know all the details before accepting his judgement?

Whoever said this was a control issue is right.

The discussion so far has overlooked a crucial point, which could help to understand (amongst other things already pointed) why the "burden" of childcare arrangements tends to fall on mothers: when said arrangements fail (daycare is closed; child gets sick; no babysitter available), who's expected (by society, husbands and herself) to actually stay with the child instead of going to work?
I would like to add something I read about a study (Maryland University, "The Economist" April 15th 2006) that found that mothers spent the same time, on average, on childcare in 2003 as in 1965. The increase in work outside the home was offset by less housework - and less spare time and less sleep. So much for the nostalgic idea of the devoted mother...

In response to Armchair Mom regarding the need for a political/lobbying solution and the failure of NOW (and others) to focus on the family instead of "women's" issues:

We stumbled on a piece of news from a feminist group in Spain suggesting "public authorities take a new direction in both feminist and family policy that goes beyond stereotypes of maternal gatekeeping, which envisages shared care as a means of reconciling family and work-life balance". It certainly appears that there is movement around the world for a more balanced view of family life.

We blogged on it yesterday if you want more details.

http://www.equallysharedparenting.com/blog/blogger.html

John: Exactly.

As for handling kid/sitter sick days or doctor appointments, my husband actually does more of those than me. His job is more flexible that way.

When will we make childcare a parents' issue (rather than just a mother's issue)?

1. When we stop thinking of men as 'helpers' and give them equal parenting status in every way.
2. When we bust apart the cultural expectations and beliefs that have no grounding in evidence (like that women are better parents than men, or that a woman's career is the one sacrificed to raise children).
3. When we destroy the myth that being a hands-on parent is being less of a man, and build up the truth that this makes for a fantastic man.
4. When one, then another, then another man decides to ask for time off to take care of his kids, signs up to be 'room parent' and politely but firmly asks his wife to step aside so that he can parent HIS way.
5. There's more...but I have to go to a meeting...

Until then, we'll be stuck going the 'Mommy agenda' political route to change. It would be a lot more effective if we went at this from both the political AND the personal angle.

As Marc says, come see us at www.equallysharedparenting.com for a lot more on this topic!

Hmmmm, I agree with father of 2. We did lots of research to find good child care, and have no worries about our daughter while she's in their care. My husband was responsible for the actual selection of the facility after I did the research, since he's the one most likely to fret. We drop by, know the teachers, and have seen her grow from a tiny 4 month old to a happy healthy 4 year old, loved and cared for by many adults.

Ok, for all you mothers out there:

If your husband told you "I have made the childcare arrangement for our children, don't worry about it", how many of you would want to know all the details before accepting his judgement?

Whoever said this was a control issue is right.

Posted by: John | March 5, 2007 09:03

Of course I would want to know the details. Of course, even when I make arrangements, I generally discuss them with my husband before they're final so he has an opportunity to weigh in. I think both parents should be involved AT LEAST to that degree. Childcare should be a joint decision so that everyone's concerns are addressed.

Oops - I forgot to sign my post above (9:15)...that's me, Amy/equal.

We hire almost all babysitters from our church-- we don't always know the parents, but they've heard of us and there is some trust there because of values in common (we're Unitarian Universalists, which is noncreedal but has a lot of shared values).

The most creative thing we've done for babysitting is when we had a cousin's rehearsal dinner in another state. We were staying with my grandmother, who is also a UU. The rehearsal dinner went way past my kids' bedtime, and the only people we knew in the state would also be at the event. So we called up my grandmother's church and asked about babysitters-- and they gave us a few names of trained babysitters in the church that they had on call. The teenaged girl who showed up turned out to be one of the best babysitters we've ever had.

I don't think something like this could have happened without it being from my grandmother's church, and the connection of those shared values. It certainly was nice to be able to attend that important event without worrying about the kids.

Army Brat:
'the women posting here' wasn't meant to imply that only women post here. Rather, it refers to 'the women posting here.' Sorry about that, I hope that's more clear.

Oh yeah? No man ever?

Then why is Pat Roberts (R-KS) introducing legislation to help small businesses afford child care (S. 228). And why is the Child Care Development Block Grant a big issue in the House right now? And the WAGE Act (HR 239) in the House -- granted a woman introduced the bill, but there are a couple of men cosponsoring.

Maybe do a little research before you make generalizations.

"But there is no reason why men can't pick up the phone and make day care arrangements."

There is something weird about this. My husband won't call in sick to work, I have to make the call. I also have to make the calls when he reschedules appointments and social engagements. It is odd. And it's not that he isn't a telephone person; he yaks on the thing constantly. Maybe he's used to his Mommy making some calls for him. To my knowledge, he has called his Father less than 10 times in 20 years, and never just to chat.

"Their wives' problem."

Only when the wives make it their problem. If my wife is specific about what we get in a babysitter, it is then up to her to find one. If she feels my choice is unacceptable, that's fine with me - but then I am no longer responsible for finding a babysitter. It's all her.

Hmmm. But if you BOTH figured out what it is you BOTH want, and no one gets p.o'd when his or her choice is found to be "unacceptable," chances are you will work as a TEAM to come to an agreement. Why does it have to be your way or her way? Or all you or all her?

"If your husband told you "I have made the childcare arrangement for our children, don't worry about it", how many of you would want to know all the details before accepting his judgement?"

Well, of course, I'd want to know the details. But DH would also want to know the details if I were the one making arrangements. As far as I'm concerned, that's just good parenting/partnering, not a "control issue" as you seem to think.

Ok, for all you mothers out there:

If your husband told you "I have made the childcare arrangement for our children, don't worry about it", how many of you would want to know all the details before accepting his judgement?

Whoever said this was a control issue is right.

Yes, you are correct -- the person who thinks there's something wrong with me wanting to know all the details is the controlling one. Because wanting to know all the details is a good parent move, not a control move. And not a judgment rejection.

I think you're underestimating men here. Fathers sweat this little detail as much as any. The difference is that they make a decision and live with it. For whatever reason, mothers tend to have far more hang ups over daycare, where a father's concerns run as far as 1) fed, 2) safe, 3) amused. Relax mom, Harvard doesn't review daycare transcripts in its acceptance process...

Whoever posted that this is a problem potentially best solved on the "micro" level is right. And as grouchy as the earlier poster who wrote, "I'm so completely bored of the women here complaining about the things the men that THEY picked don't do" is - they are kindof right. I had all of these discussions with my husband BEFORE we even got engaged. When we had our first, we went to all day care open houses together, made the decisions and researched together, and we each even took time off weekly (we're both professionals and have the flexibility to do this) to care for our daughter. The amazing part has been watching other men he works with kindof take it as a lesson for themselves. On more than once occasion, his male colleagues have mentioned that watching him take flex-time have made them comfortable to do so.

NewSAHM, that's my point. A joint decision requires two people to agree to accept it. It's not one person making all the decisions and the other just going along with whatever was arranged.

If you're the one saying "I make the decision on childcare because I am better at it than my husband", then that's not a joint decision; that's a unilateral decision he's just going along with.

Nothing wrong with that as long as both parents trust the other's decisions, of course, but it then becomes YOUR responsibility, and not one equally arrived at.

Is increasing the child tax credit a reasonable solution to address this funding issue?

Posted by: A Dad | March 5, 2007 07:49 AM

A Dad- I think this is the key to help with this problem, or at least getting it started. People have an issue with subsidized and government run facilities for child care, but no one blinks an eye when you say "tax credit"

Let's say Sen. X proposes that the government will provide cheap and quality child care all over the country, or will pay businesses to set them up, subsidizing them.

or

Rep. X proposes increasing the tax credit to 2 or 3K/year.

No one would go for option 1. Tax cuts/credits are the way to go in these situations.

3K per year would cover all or most of the costs/month for after school care (250)
I know I would be a LOT less stretch with an extra 250/month in a high cost of living city such as DC.

And it would target just the right section of workers: those who make too much for the big standard deduction or free/reduced Head Start or financial aid packages up until you get to the six figures.

A Dad: I don't care if they restructure the child care credit into one lump sum. They would just need to raise the income levels for it to work as effectively. I still don't think an additional 1250 would make anyone choose to stay home to take advantage of the tax credit. I think people who choose to work are looking at much larger numbers.

John: I do think a lot has to do with control. I know that I choose to do a lot of the child care things because I want them done my way. But it would be nice if DH did take some initiative. But he really doesn't. It could be worse. He is a wonderful helper and does everything that I ask him to. But I think your wrong about asking details. There is nothing wrong with someone setting up a sitter and the other person wanting to know the details.

I don't think it is because women carry the babies. Adoptive mothers do not give birth to their children and they seem equally devoted to their children.

Perhaps it goes back to that "Doofus Dad" persona that Rebel Dad didn't like - the concept that men are clueless about how to be at all domestic.

Since child care is considered part of the domestic scene, ergo - arranging child care is a considered a woman's problem. If the stereotype has any truth to it and persists, then this will always be considered a woman's issue.

You obviously don't talk to many fathers - we worry about child care all the time - especially single fathers. Many of us restructure our entire lives to be with our children.

I am currently a working mother but was a stay at home mom for a couple of years. I concede that perhaps in 1965 SAHMs spent the same time on "childcare" as working mothers of today spend on childcare. I think maybe SAHMs in 1965 spent A LOT of time doing housework-- cleaning, ironing, etc. bu ti can tell you that SAHMs of today do not spend so much time generally speaking on housework and instead spend more time than there 1965 counterparts on "Childcare." ALL parents, whether SAH or WOH now realize the benefits of spending quality time with their children. But the fact is that if you are a current SAHM you will have more of an opportunity to do "childcare" than if you are WOH. And you get more sleep, which is likely to keep mom healthy and happy! I know you didn't explicitly say that SAHMs of today spend no more time on childcare than WOHM of today, but I have seen people -- even professional researchers who should know better- make this incorrect leap in logic. SAHMs of today most likely spend much more time on childcare than WOHM of today do and to suggest otherwise is ludicrous (being the parent who is listed as the first contact in case of emergency SHULD NOT count as hours spent being a caregiver-- only time spent actually in the same room as the child should even be considered!) That doesn't mean SAHM are "better" than WOHMs-- every family should do what works best for them. Some kids may not need as many hours of parental "childcare" as others-- some may actually benefit from receiving professional care in a child filled, focussed and friendly environment as many daycares are.

Right on, J. This qoute plain insults me:

"No man has ever mentioned childcare to me as a concern in his life or an obstacle to his career."

Funny. I'm a single father with 2 daughters (7 and 9) and their mother lives in California. I worry about daycare and daycare costs on a daily basis. It is an obstacle. I have to leave work a 1/2 hour early every day to get there before they close so I am not charged an ungodly by-the-minute amount and avoid the daycare calling the county and informing CPS.

Money-wise and career-wise it is an obstacle to me. Some of these people around here to need to recognize us single fathers as struggling just as much as the single mothers.

SMF,

It's great that your husband is not only involved himself, but is also serving as a role model for other dads. That's the kind of change I'm talking about.

Unfortunately, all of the pre-engagement talking in the world is no help if people change their minds later on. Before we got married, DH was totally into the idea of being a stay-at-home dad. At the time, I was in law school, and he'd just started his first post-college job and didn't really know what he wanted to do for a career. Seven years later, when we started wanting a child, he was finally seeing a direction in his career. Turned out at that point that he really didn't want to be a SAHD after all (though he was careful to say that he'd support whatever decision I made with regard to working or staying home.) So I'm the one who's taking the career hit so I can spend my days with my daughter. I suspect we both think we have the better deal now, but If you'd have asked me before I got married if I'd agree to this arrangement, I'd have said an indignant, emphatic "No!".

I think you tend to over-generalize when you ask when men will getinvolved in the childcare issues and why is it a woman's problem to deal with. I am the father of 2 young biys, 2.5 and 10 months. My wife does stay home full-time and we are lucky we could afford. She is planning on going back to work in the next year or two and I take a very active role in researching potential child-care. By no means have I or do I ever consider it my wife's responsiblity. I really get bothered by the stereotype that most men leave that responsibility to their wives. I know many stay at home dads and have many friends who are just as responsible for finding the nanny or getting the kids to day care as their wives are. I agree child-care as a whole is a worthwile topic but I would appreciate it if the stereotype of the uninvolved father. if you happen to be married to one of those typse, don't label the rest of us. Call him on it and make him more involved.

Father of Four-- you are wrong. i am considering hiring an au pair and I have specifically informed the agencies that I am interested in hiring the best qualified person and that I would CERTAINLY consider hiring a male au pair. I figure that because there are some families that shun males in caretaking positions, there is possibly a glut of over qualified persons on the market. I get along better with men than women-- I know men can be wonderful caregivers and I have some sence that I may have more of a problem with leaving my newborn with another woman-- like I'll be more jeoplus of her or fear my child will call her mommy. I'll take the best candidate, but I would certainly welcome a male au pair. Your comments about "wiping bottoms" is confusing to me and certainly unpersuasive. What's wrong with a man wiping a baby's bottom? As long as the caretaker is fully qualified and has beaucoup referrances, what difference does it make if the person has a penis? Are you suggesting pedophilia? Every man who is willing to wipe a baby's bottom is a likely pedophile?

"I can't disagree that women who want children should consider the parenting potential of their future mates before creating them."

Are we talking Frankenspouse here?

IMHO *Leslie's husband* doesn't worry about childcare, and it's easier for her to blame "all men" than to realize that these issues are specific to HER HUSBAND.

For the upteenth billion time, I say again - why does the WP let a woman whose marriage is so obviously UNbalanced write this blog??

It should be renamed. I propose "On Leslie Morgan Steiner's attempts to come to grips with the fact that Mr. Morgan Steiner doesn't do sh*t around the house."

To neighbor-- do you go to Silver Springs UU? I attend All Souls UU in DC and really love it!

Considering your posts in the past, it doesn't surprize me at all that you are UU! i think REbecca in AR is too.

The Uncommon Denomination may be pretty common on this blog! Guess we are pretty focussed on balance in our faith, so it carries over to other things.

"Father of 2, Methinks thou dost protest too much."

Methinks so, too.

"the movie shows how male penguins sit with the egg for a month in the middle of Antarctica in the winter while the moms go back to the ocean to find food."

Actually, I think it's closer to four months.

To What a Crock:

Are you kidding? I am a woman. I have three children and I work outside the home. I have arranged for my children to have great care when I am not with them. I do not suffer from "never ending worries about child care." When my kids are with their grandparents, their day care providers, or the weekend babysitter I do not worry about their well being. I know that these people genuinely care about my children and will keep them safe. If I wasn't comfortable with the care provider and had to worry about it all the time, I would never let them out of my sight.

My husband is an equal partner in raising our kids and he is fully capable of taking care of them all by himself. He is not a caregiver, he is their father. What kind of message would I be sending to him and my children if I didn't trust him 100% to take care of them in my absence??

OT: Took the DD to Go Diego Go Live show at the Hippodrome last Sunday. It was great show. DD loved it. It was broken down into two 40 minute segments. Great sets, costumes, puppets, music and dancing. I strongly recommend it. Much better then Sesame Street Live: Elmo makes music. Elmo show had the first segment about an hour long. Lost most of the kids after the first 45 minutes. Pricey show. I think Orchestra right seats were $140 for three people. But worth it. Hope some of you get out to see it.

"No man has ever mentioned childcare to me as a concern in his life or an obstacle to his career."

My experience is totally different - there are TONS of men in my office who have expressed these concerns. Are we living on different planets?

"What do we need to do to persuade the men in our families, our governments and our companies that childcare affects us all?"

Folks, I fear that this column too often turns to male bashing. I'm a new Dad who worked with my wife to choose a daycare provider and helps take turns dropping our child there. Among other things, I get to share the heartbreak of leaving my son with others who will be able to spend time with him all day. I wish the column would do more to mention guys like me.

If you expect the worst from people, that's what you are going to get.

IMHO *Leslie's husband* doesn't worry about childcare, and it's easier for her to blame "all men" than to realize that these issues are specific to HER HUSBAND.

For the upteenth billion time, I say again - why does the WP let a woman whose marriage is so obviously UNbalanced write this blog??

It should be renamed. I propose "On Leslie Morgan Steiner's attempts to come to grips with the fact that Mr. Morgan Steiner doesn't do sh*t around the house."

Posted by: | March 5, 2007 09:55 AM

ROFLLOL!!! Exactly. Today's is yet another sexist, male-bashing, entirely innaccurate column.

My experience is totally different - there are TONS of men in my office who have expressed these concerns. Are we living on different planets?

Posted by: Lily | March 5, 2007 10:01 AM

Yes, this blog is sometimes like a different planet.

"It should be renamed. I propose "On Leslie Morgan Steiner's attempts to come to grips with the fact that Mr. Morgan Steiner doesn't do sh*t around the house."

Now, now, Perry does take out the garbage once in a while. Don't know why the kids can't take out the garbage.

"Now, now, Perry does take out the garbage once in a while. Don't know why the kids can't take out the garbage."

And get their hands dirty?

This is a terrific article in The Nation that turned into a not-so-terrific blog post. Let's stop debating whether men or women are sufficiently invested in their personal childcare choices--and instead talk about what society or government, as a whole, can do to help families provide adequate care for their children. I've talked before on this blog about expanding Head Start, but there are other options, like providing tax credits or direct subsidies for child care, or figuring out ways for government and employers to work together to provide high-quality on-the-job child care. We could also require more certification for child-care providers. In my view, high-quality child-care is an investment that we should be willing to make as a society. There are powerful spill-over effects, both on gender equality and on the well-being of children.

Leslie just lives in a different class.
Her husband makes a lot of money and, therefore, is not expected to contribute to the household. Rather, their only contribution is money.

The few friends I have that are wealthy (meaning a million plus per year) their husbands have absolutely nothing to do with the childcare. They barely see their kids- they are certainly not interviewing babysitters and such.

"No man has ever mentioned childcare to me as a concern in his life or an obstacle to his career."

My experience is totally different - there are TONS of men in my office who have expressed these concerns. Are we living on different planets?

Posted by: Lily | March 5, 2007 10:01 AM

Yes. The planet must of us live on, and the planet Leslie and What a Crock live on.

My husband definitely does worry about childcare, so that's not really a part of our experience.

However I do agree that there are inequities - and some of them have surprised me even though my husband and I did have long talks about this before our marriage and for the ten years of marriage before we actually had kids. :)

In our case we are kind of poster children for economic inequities. I went to a liberal arts university to follow my dream; he got a more technical Masters degree which boosted his earning power. Although there have been points in our marriage when we were earning equally, the point at which I dropped to part-time work was not one of them and so it made more sense to lose half my salary.

When I did that I did become the de-facto go-to parent, and I have done the lion's share of the interviewing and selecting for our (very part-time) nanny. (Vs. the family or "in-home" care that was our only other option for part-time daycare.) Now that's a pattern we'll have to change later if we want to change it.

I think a lot of this stuff starts earlier - with our sons and daughters in high school - than one might think. At the same time, what works for our family works, even if it is divided along traditional lines. My goal is that this not be the case for our entire childrearing experience but to trade off later on.

Guys, how do you know Leslie is really that wealthy? Granted she does sound at least on the upper echelons of upper middle class: Three kids in private school in DC. But that may be just her priorities. I have friends here, government job, that have two kids in private schools. They just sacrifice other things. Like no cable. Don't get me wrong, they don't sound like they are hurting. But it doesn't sound like they are rolling in money. Because if they were, wouldn't they just have a nanny? Scheduling, snow days, summers covered with a nanny. Just my thought. But Leslie has certainly never disclosed her income and people are making wild assumptions about how much she has.

Father of 2 -- Nice to know we have a saint among our posters. Could I talk to your wife to see if she agrees? Because many times I talk to the husbands and they insist, our childcare situation is a breeze! And then their wives have a far different tale to tell.

But sorry for insulting you, specifically. Didn't mean to. But I think in general, my points have merit -- men do not consider childcare the critical issue women do.

foamgnome

"I think Orchestra right seats were $140 for three people. But worth it. Hope some of you get out to see it."

Jesus would rather have you help the poor than this obscene waste of money. That would be "worth it" and a better example to your child.

foamgnome-

there is NO way to have 3 kids in private school in DC area and not be wealthy.
Their tuition alone would be 75K/year. Plus after school care, summer camps, sports, a big enough house for 3 kids. I would venture to guess they make 300-500K/year, which is very very wealthy.

I think men are concerned about childcare. Maybe if their wifes have taken that on as their duty they just hesitate to bring it up unless something really egregious happens.

Since childcare is something most women think they know more about than men it does seem to make sense that they take that issue over when looking for someone to provide it for their child.

If I'm an accountant married to a doctor, should the doctor deal with H&R Block and the accountant deal with health matters?

That said, women can help men take more of a role in childcare by demanding that their spouse help. But that means that sometimes they have to back off, which isn't always easy to do, particularly with a little helpless baby.

For me, it's *totally* a control issue. When I worked, I took care of finding and communicating with the childcare providers (my ex-husband did some of the pick-up/drop-off but there's no way I would have been able to relinquish the rest.) My husband and I don't have regular childcare now but I arrrange the small amount that we do have and I can't imagine handing that over to him. It's not that I don't trust the men to do it (although I trust ex less than current ;o) ) but like WorkingMomX, I *like* to do it because I feel more in control of the situation that way. There's less to obsess and worry about when you personally know everything about the childcare provider instead of letting that information reside in someone elses brain. ;o)

I think that if a woman doesn't like it and she's not getting what she wants from her children's father re: childcare, then she should fix it. As with most things, change is going to start on a personal level and if we really need our politicians to consider childcare a unisex role, then people need to start changing their own lives and letting the trend work "upwards" instead of vice versa.

One thing I have learned in my life is that people only treat you the way you allow them to treat you. I agree with many posters here who say that if women want help, they should relegate. There will always be men who refuse to do what they consider "women's work," but most men nowadays are reasonable human beings who actually LISTEN to their wives. It may be all talk now, but when BF and I talk about our future, we are both equally involved--if not him more than me. I think this could be achieved in most modern families.

Women tend to have a hard time feeling that they are replaceable and dispensable. So they take so much on that they feel slighted when "dad duty" involves playing football with the kids while "mom duty" involves the drudgery of every day life. Maybe if we let go of our notion that we are absolutely necessary, it won't seem as important who does the work, but that it gets done.

"I've talked before on this blog about expanding Head Start, but there are other options, like providing tax credits or direct subsidies for child care, or figuring out ways for government and employers to work together to provide high-quality on-the-job child care."

There has been a significant amount of legislative activity in this area -- it's hard to understand the argument that 'nothing has been done'. There are now child tax credits, child care tax credits, dependent care flexible savings accounts -- all of these are relatively new structures specifically designed to ease the cost of child care.

One fundemental question that needs to be addressed is should the USG subsidize outside-the-home childcare only [child care credit and dependent care FSA]? Why not directly subsidize families with small children [child tax credit] and allow them to make whatever child care arrangements work best for them [which may include a SAH parent or relative watching the child]?

Discussions before, discussions after.

Discussing who is going to be responsible for what, before having a kid is informative; but it's AFTER the kid is on the ground that you find out what it takes.

Theory vs. reality.

In reality, someone is probably going to have to make more noise about getting involved and equitable distribution of a finite resource (parental time and sanity!).

You are unlikely to receive support in the form that you feel you need it, unless you ask for it.

Which isn't easy to do, sometimes. But well worth it.

I have a women who works in my office and has two kids in private school. I think she told me the tuition was over 40K a year. She has three bedroom house, and yes you could have three kids in a three bedroom house. The assumption is if you have three bedroom house, you have at least two kids bedrooms. Two kids could share a bedroom. Probably unheard of these days but still possible. I am just saying it is possible that their priority is education. So most of their income goes to that. Like my office mate. They don't have cable, they go camping for vacations, and they don't go out to eat much. But they firmly believe in the best possible education for their child. They also don't save for college. I guess they think K-12 private school will get them a scholarship. I am just saying it is possible she may be more upper middle class then filthy rich.

foamgnome

"I think Orchestra right seats were $140 for three people. But worth it. Hope some of you get out to see it."

Jesus would rather have you help the poor than this obscene waste of money. That would be "worth it" and a better example to your child.

We do donate a lot of money to charity and no, I don't think Jesus minds that we took our child to the theater.

"men do not consider childcare the critical issue women do"

Another generality; as several men have said already on this blog, they do concern themselves with finding childcare.

As for the "critical issue" statement atributed to women, could it be that mothers are more likely to "own" this concern and make it a "critical issue" when it may not really be one?

Like the earlier poster said, men are more likely to accept a childcare provider if they appear to be doing a good job with other children, the cost is reasonable and the kids are happy, and leave it at that. Assuming the mother is ok with it, of course :)

Hi Clarina! I don't live in the DC area anymore. But I met my husband at the Arlington UU church. My grandparents met at one, too, back in 1937. I owe a lot to the UU church!

I think that there are a lot of UUs on this blog-- and even more who might want to be UUs if they knew about it. If I had a nickel for every time I saw someone posting that they wanted a place that would provide moral values and respectful exposure to many religions without some of the dogma... well, I think I'd have at least a dollar. :)

To momof4 re: "I think that if a woman doesn't like it and she's not getting what she wants from her children's father re: childcare, then she should fix it. As with most things, change is going to start on a personal level and if we really need our politicians to consider childcare a unisex role, then people need to start changing their own lives and letting the trend work "upwards" instead of vice versa."
CLAP, CLAP, CLAP. WOOHOOOOOO. Yes.

Okay, first of all I will admit that I have no children and no plans for any, and I've only read the first few posts here. I'm not particular concerned or thrilled with trying to get the government concerned about doing or influencing parents to do their job unless they are going to prevent unqualified people from ever being parents.

However, I certainly agree that childcare is the responsibility of BOTH parents. And if women want a husband/father who's going to do his fair share, why is this not discussed before becoming a parents or getting married? Why does this become an issue after the child is born? If the guy doesn't have all the necessary or desired qualities to do his part as a parent, why become a parent with him? Or do we have a big problem with men saying they will do certain things and then failing to do their father job later? In any case, I don't see this as a government issue at all. It's an individual issue about choosing the person who's going to do his part.

To be honest, I don't think the government has a way to pay for universal preschool. We don't even have full day kindergarten in every school district. The staff to child ratio necessary for a preschool makes it almost impossible for the ps system to implement in their current budget. They would need to really raise taxes or god forbid, stop invading other countries.

A Dad:One fundemental question that needs to be addressed is should the USG subsidize outside-the-home childcare only
___________________________

That was actually a major issue in the last Canadian Federal Election. The Liberal Party promised to create a large number of day care spaces for young children; the Conservative Party promised tax credits/payments to parents.

(FWIW, the Conservatives won. From my view as an American watching the process, I don't think that was a major reason; it had more to do with Liberal corruption, but it was a major, major debate topic.)

It's going to take a complete change in mindset to make this an issue for both genders. It's not just about the politics of child care, but the metal processes of all citizens.

I know women (and I think that this is representative of most women) who are constantly stuck in the middle. When they have a sick child they feel guilty because they should be at home. When the child is sick enough that they do stay home, they feel guilty because they aren't at work. This train of thought never passes through thier husbands minds.

It's not that these husbands are bad fathers, they just aren't taught to worry about things like this. They can seperate their work from their home, women aren't there yet.

Fredia and I attended a wedding this past Saturday. The bride's mother had a kiddy corner for all the children there. Slinkys, coloring books, hand puppets and other toys were available. I had fun entertaining some of the smaller ones with the slinky and hand puppet. I do a mean "Mr. Wiggles."

"what difference does it make if the person has a penis?"

Clarina, the state recognizes differences between male and female sexuality. For instance, it is unlawful for a male doctor to examine a female without a female witness present, however, it is not the same with a female doctor and male patient.

Now, why is that?

If you hire a male that wants to persue employment and knows that he will have to deal with children's genitalia on a regular, unsupervised bases, I'm telling you: DANGER, DANGER, DANGER!

Of course, you could take a poll of how many mothers on this blog have ever let another teenager/ adult male other than close family members change their childs diaper on a regular basis.

"Jesus would rather have you help the poor than this obscene waste of money."

Did Jesus tell you that specifically? If so, can I have his phone number? I have a few questions for him.

It's not fair to assume that just because someone sends their kids to private schools that they are wealthy. My parents send 5 kids to private school in a large metro area making well under $100,000 combined for most of it. Private school doesn't necessarily mean one with a tuition of $25,000 per year per kid, even in D.C. Plus many school offer scholarships and discounts for multiple siblings.

And even if they do make $300,000 that is not exceptionally wealth in an area like D.C. where not so hot apartments rent for $1200 a month for two dinky bedrooms.

Women claim it as their burden as they do so much else in life, you are the "victims." If you look at the studies for the outcomes for children you have created a formula for failure.

Foamgnome -

Just teasing, not bashing - but I do think it's sort of funny that you posted about $140/2 adults-1 child show tickets in one post and then about how people just "cut out the cable" to afford private school for more than one child in the next. With that kind of math and money management skill, no wonder you needed to blog about how you will afford/handle more than one child! ;)

Georgia has universal preschool for 4 year olds - any body know how that is going?

I think it's unfair to generalize, because in my experience, I've seen both ends of the spectrum.

One set of friends, the father is very involved in childcare issues for his son. He's even the one who leaves early to pick his child up for appointments and illnesses. He also works farther away from the child care center, but I get the sense that he just wants to be the one to do it, not that he's being told or forced to by his wife.

On the other hand, we have another set of friends, where the man does absolutely nothing. Seriously. They have started arguments with us there as company over who needs to tend to the children. Of course, his maturity level has a lot to do with it. But it's a sad situation where he basically has the attitude that his work was done with providing the sperm. (No joke, he's even said as much.) And she wants more kids with him, too!

So, like most anything, there is a variety of truths. Just because one's husband is great or horrible with the kids doesn't mean it's the same across the board.

"... than this obscene waste of money. That would be "worth it" and a better example to your child."

It is her money and she is entitled to spend it as she wants to do so. How would you know what she gives to charity or how many hours she spends doing charitable work?

If you feel that bad or guilty about a person spending money on herself, maybe you can balance it out by sending money or your time to hurricane relief in New Orleans. So much is still needed here.

Before the spelling and gramer police jump on me - sorry that should have been sent and anybody.

hmm: I am not the one sending my kid to private school. I am just saying some people do that. I am saying you don't need to make 300-500K to afford private school if that is your top priority. The family that does that makes more like 200K a year. And my guess is they could also afford Go Diego Go tickets if they wanted to.

Ok, I don't know what my deal is today - obviously that should be grammar. Perhaps I'll just stop writing.

I totally agree with Leslie's depiction of many marriages and the male partner's role in childcare decisions. Most of my friends who are mothers make virtually all the childcare decisions in their families -- the fathers may weigh in once the mother has done all the legwork and presents the results, but as far as men taking the initiative and running with it, that's something I don't see AT ALL.

It could be attributed to women wanting control over that function, a lack of interest (or a feeling of incompentency) on the part of the fathers, or, maybe it's something else.

Whatever it is, I know when my husband says "let's get a sitter and go out", it means he wants me to find a sitter and make all the arrangements.

I think it's a good question--do we subsidize families with young children or child-care? I am inclined to think that as a matter of social externalities, there are some advantages to subsidizing childcare. First, I want a childcare policy that helps to facilitate gender equality. Because we still have a significant pay gap between men and women, in the majority of households, when one parent stays home with kids, it is usually the woman. (She's making less to start, so it's more financially practical for her to stay home.) A child tax credit would perpetuate this status quo. On the other side, if we subsidize out-of-the-home child care, it makes it easier for both parents to work, which ultimately puts women in a better employment situation, decreases interruptions to their careers, eliminates gaps in the resume, and may result in higher salaries.

This is just off-the-cuff thinking. But my sense is that there are some powerful, positive externalities that would result from a social policy that facilitates the gainful employment of both parents.

This is the first time I have ever written a comment on this blog. The article in the Nation was a good one. The main point was that there is a movement in this country to turn the child-care issue into a women's-only issue. This allows Americans, including corporations and politicians, to avoid dealing with the "care-crisis" - not just care of kids but of aging parents also. Ironically, one of the contributors to this movement cited in the article is the "mommy wars" idea itself. By making all "care" issues womens'-only issues we lack political power to change the status quo. The purpose of the article was to make all caregivers (female and male) realize this is happening and preventing caregivers from acquiring the rights they need in the workplace - more flextime, paid parental leave, etc..
Yes - there is a place for solving this on the "micro" level. Every family could benefit from an evaluation of how expectations at all levels (personal, societal, professional, familial) influence who carries the major caregiving responsibilitites. Every workplace would also benefit from the same evaluation. But the biggest solutions will have to happen on a "macro" level. The suggestion for a caregiver lobbying group, for further investigation into appropriate caregiver legislation - these are what are going to make a difference in this country.

foamgnome-I'm glad you and your family had a wonderful time at the theatre. I credit exposure to the arts as to why all 4 kids play instruments-even our 2 no longer in school. The family enjoyment, the wonder of it all...simply priceless.

Foamgnome -

Sure, everyone has different priorities and a family making $200K could afford Go Diego Go and might be able to afford some private schools. But you were the one worrying about how to afford more than one child, and the one who spends $200 on a couple of hours entertainment for one child, and the one who thinks that cutting out the cable (which would save, what, $1200 a year?) would make a family afford $75K of tuition a year?

We send our kids to Walter Reed
Where with rats they play, and from tubes they feed.
What else more could anyone need?

The care they give is really top notch
They gag you silent and give you a watch
So now you can count the seconds tick by
Before America will forget your cry.

All that they wanted was to serve the country
But who could afford their dignity?
Misspent taxes come with too high a price;
They make these kids suffer wounds not once, but twice.

Landscaping bases and layoffs aside-
Scandals abounding from which they hide;
Congress mourns soldiers home and forgotten-
Ignoring the fact that they are what's rotten.
The uproar for heads is just misdirection-
Be careful when you vote in the next election.

Can it possibly be that maybe there are differences between men and women. That maybe our skills and talents are varied and the magic is bringing two different, but complementary skill sets together? GASP....! Is is possible that people are confusing "equal" and "same"? Maybe, just maybe, men don't think like we do? I'm thinking that trying to change them and make them think like women and care about the same things to the same degree is as fruitless as me caring about NASCAR and grubs.

go diego go live is not the theater.
try a kennedy center show or a smithsonian program.

A completely commercialized production by Nickelodean based on a television cartoon in a huge collesium with the average age of the crowd about 5 is hardly "the arts."

My husband is a SAHD mostly, works 2 days per week. We actually just had a big "discussion" last evening about how much the TV is on while I'm at work, as it seems to be on a lot while I'm home. So as far as the childcare thing goes, it seems that even though he is obviously very involved with the kids, whether it's a control thing or a concern thing, we have different ideas/priorities concerning our kids. I would agree with an earlier poster who mentioned a guy's priorities as fed, safe, amused, because for whatever reason, it is not my husband who reads articles in parenting magazines about child development and so to him, his TV watching every evening doesn't affect the kids at all as long as it is not a "kid" show. Maybe too obsessive on my part partly, but it is just not even on his radar screen. Same with childcare. I don't think it would even occur to him that one needs to be calling months in advance to get a full time infant childcare spot, like I did for our first child before I had finished school. And he certainly has no concept of how many hours I spent on the phone finding the part time child care we have now so that he can work 2 days per week and preserve his sanity. I think it is great that there are men out there who do worry about child care, but I'm not married to one of them. We're fairly Midwestern traditionalists, all things considered. I don't think that makes him a bad husband, because I certainly never worry about mowing the lawn or cleaning out the gutters. We just are wired differently. So though I wish sometimes he'd do things differently, I'm sure he can say the same about me. The kids are happy, healthy, etc. But I do think that for whatever reason, most women I know are a tad obsessive compulsive about childcare issues and the men they are married to are more than happy to let them have at it. Maybe the phone thing, too? My husband won't even order a pizza unless I'm seriously busy doing something else.

A lot of mothers talk about changing laws and getting politicians to take child care seriously. Yet, it seems like they are unable to even get their husbands to take it seriously. That is their own fault. Men aren't the idiots you seem to imply. I fully expect my husband to help in child care decisions and trust his opinion. Treat your husband like he is competent in matters of home and children and you might be surprised with the results. Change starts at home...not necessarily in Washington DC.

me caring about NASCAR and grubs.

Maybe if Volvo entered its cars in NASCAR you would be interested!

Dotted: Thanks. I am surprised taking your kid to the theater is so controversial on this blog. Like you, I you said I think that the arts is a good thing.

RoseG wrote: "Since childcare is something most women think they know more about than men it does seem to make sense that they take that issue over when looking for someone to provide it for their child.

If I'm an accountant married to a doctor, should the doctor deal with H&R Block and the accountant deal with health matters?"

I don't want to start a fight, but I want to point out that this is not really an appropriate comparison.

In the first example, the woman only *thinks* she knows more about childcare. In reality, a few hours of researching my the man will level the playing field (unless you're saying that women have an innate sort of knowledge about that, which I disagree with). In addition, both parents have the same motivator (the child).

In the second example, the two fields are vastly different, they take several years of studying and practicing to acheive, and your children are not your motivator to be in either field.

It is up to the man to step up to the plate and do more of the child rearing. There is only so much "talking" a woman can do until she's "nagging." And no one wants to be the nagging wife. She just wants the stuff to get done.

jeeezzz...all you nay sayers are being really rather snobbish about the definition of theater. At the age of 3ish, it is all about things like ice shows, wiggles (gasp..but yes kids love it), clapping in rhythm, seeing and believing princesses really fly (or whatever is the fantasy). The music and fantasy of early childhood becomes appreciation for art later on...at least it did for our 4 kids. At the risk of being snarky, how many of you naysayers have the experience to know differently?

But back to the topic-it was me, the mom, who took care of exposing our kids to outside-of-the home arts and stuff. My husband has a wonderful repetoire of kid songs and stories that were our in-the-home entertainment.

I don't think foamgnome is being at all hypocritical or inconsistent. She's just pointing out that parents can have different priorities for their kids and find creative ways to finance them.

Her example of the couple who skimped on things to send the kids to private school is one kind of focusing on priorities. Her own example of taking her child to the theater demonstrates a different -- but equally valuable -- kind of priority.

Maybe foamgnome and her husband feel that exposure to cultural events is an important kind of education for their child.

The point is that different parents choose to enrich their children's lives in different ways.

Seems pretty admirable to me.

Anyone read the article in Sunday's WaPo on helicopter parenting?

Thought I recognized a few traits . . .

Leslie just lives in a different class.
Her husband makes a lot of money and, therefore, is not expected to contribute to the household. Rather, their only contribution is money.

I think this may be partially true. My sister told me about a book for men about male-female relationships. THe book argued that women see things in terms of points: you get one point for working, one point for doing the dishes, etc. So (the book said) a man may work all day long and be really tired, but when he comes home, the woman reduces his contribution to a single point, and feels he should equalize his contribution to hers by doing more around the house. I think the hidden other side of this viewpoint is that some men see things in terms of points too: each person contributes a number of points equal to their salary. Thus, if he makes lots of money, then he's contributed lots of points, even if they spend the same amount of time at work. Thus, at home, he feels like he's done his part and shouldn't have to contribute additional points by hellping with housework or childcare. I think the fair thing is to give each person a number of points equal to the hours worked: if they work the same number of hours then they get the same number of points, whether that work is low or high pay, or unpaid care of one's own kids.

Maybe foamgnome and her husband feel that exposure to cultural events is an important kind of education for their child.

I REPEAT- GO Diego GO is NOT culture!!

"Because we carry the burden or blessing of actually creating the child we [women] do have a higher responsibilty for its care."

I can testify as an adoptive mother that the pressure for women to be responsible for child care has nothing to do with biology, and everything to do with societal pressures and the dynamics of your relationship with your partner.

I feel the guilt burden on me to manage everyone's expectations about care for our daughter (my mother and my mother-in-law were SAHMs and rather think I should be, too). My husband doesn't take the lead in working out childcare initially, because I often tackle our joint logistical challenges before his more procrastinating work style kicks in. When I get too stressed, I have to take a deep breath and ask my husband to help.

It works for our personalities to have me to do the initial coordination (finding resources) and him to do the follow-up (setting up appointments, picking up sitters etc.)

Finding quality, affordable childcare is a huge issue and we'd be very happy to join in any lobbying effort that might be started. We have a modest income, but I can't see how other families managing with less can possibly figure it out.

you get one point for working, one point for doing the dishes, etc. So (the book said) a man may work all day long and be really tired, but when he comes home, the woman reduces his contribution to a single point.

Sooooooo TRUE!

Direct Dial the Nazarene at MUrray Hill 5-9975.

OT to foamgnome: I caught up on the blog yesterday -- I appreciated your guest piece. I am an only who never thought she was missing anything -- I had friends at day care and then at school, activities etc - I was loved but not the center of the universe. FWIW being an only child of a working mom as well as an Army brat may have helped me - I was exposed to lots of people and places and while I was generally shy at first once I got to know people you couldn't shut me up! Best of luck to you - both with the temporarily unpleasant work situation and whether you add to your family.

"Maybe foamgnome and her husband feel that exposure to cultural events is an important kind of education for their child.

I REPEAT- GO Diego GO is NOT culture!!"

Posted by: | March 5, 2007 11:06 AM
Maybe foamgnone is getting her child used behaving appropriately in public at an event geared towards children. Would you prefer she have a squirmy toddler next to you at the opera?

The point is that different parents choose to enrich their children's lives in different ways.

Seems pretty admirable to me.

Posted by: pittypat | March 5, 2007 11:03 AM

Enrichment does not include a show by Nick Jr.
If it's an animal safari you want- then take