Whispers | 
|
please read our book submission guidelines.
Here is important news for the millions of parents struggling to manage work and family, says Ellen Galinsky in this extraordinary study--the first comprehensive study ever conducted that asks children and parents for their views on work and family life today. The responses she has gleaned from in-depth interviews and nationally representative surveys of children and parents are surprising, useful and guaranteed to break the frantic cycle of guilt and stress that often traps parents. Five years in the making, the Ask the Children study questions accepted thinking on such issues as quality time vs. quantity time, how mothers parent their children compared to fathers, how much children really know about the daily lives of parents at work, how much parents like their work, what messages we're sending children about work, and much more. For example, while many parents worry that they may not be spending enough time with their children, time is not at the top of children's lists when they are asked to name their one wish for changing how their parents' work affects their lives. And while the debate rages about whether mothers' working is good or bad for children, it turns out that children learn more about the world of work from their mothers than they do from their fathers. For the first time, parents will hear children's perceptions and opinions--both reassuring and insightful--on these and many other topics. They'll see stereotypes blown and politically correct ideas challenged. They'll hear parents and children talking about what works to keep families close and why. They'll find practical advice for a better family life and a brilliant new set of operating principles to help them feel more in command and control at work and at home. As the century closes on a generation of working parents, we have a unique opportunity to view how far we have come as families and to chart the course ahead. Ask the Children provides a positive basis for understanding our past and is a point of departure for our future. Author Excerpt
Refraining the Debate about Working and Children Why have we never asked children about how they feel about working parents? Yes, of course, they tell us, from time to time, whether we want to hear from them or not. But why is it that whenever I mention that we are studying children's views of their employed parents, parents inevitably respond, "I wonder what my children would say?" They wonder because they have never asked. Why has a book like this one never been written, a comprehensive study like the one I have conducted, never been done? After all, increasingly dual-earner families have become the norm. In all this time, have we not wanted to know what our children think? The parents who first wonder what their children would say, just as inevitably stop short and add, "I don't know if I want to know." "I would feel too guilty." "My child might say awful things about me." And for many mothers: "My child might tell me to stop working--to stay home." Yet there is curiosity: "Don't tell me about what my own children say, but do tell me about what other people's children think." Although many of us probably have not asked our own children, we are ready to listen. Over the years that I have worked on issues of work and family life, I have seen an evolution in our interest in understanding social change. At different times, there is a "societal readiness" to take on certain issues. I believe that we are ready to listen because it is finally the right time. More importantly, we are ready to listen because we really do need to know. Recently, the Families and Work Institute cohosted a meeting of business leaders at which a leading neuroscientist, Harry Chugani of Wayne State University, presented an overview of what we know about the brain development of young children. He showed slides revealing that the brain of the child is wired by experience, both positive and negative. There were several other presentations, and then a strong discussion among the business leaders present. As the meeting was wrapping up, the moderator asked the audience, "What should the business community do in response to this information about the brain development of young children?" The room stilled; the heated discussion of moments before seemed frozen in time. Finally, Faith Wohl, president of the Child Care Action Campaign, broke the silence. "For the twenty years that I worked for a corporation," she began, "whenever the topic turned to the business community's responsibility for young children, we would say, 'That's the government's role.' Then I went to work for the federal government, and there we would say, 'It's the business community's role.' This subject is a hot potato, passed from unwilling player to unwilling player. And it is because we are still ambivalent about whether or not mothers should work." Yet our feelings about whether or not mothers should work have changed over the past 30 years. They have changed because of what I think of as a national conversation about mothers' and fathers' roles in work and family life. Including children and their views of their working parents is the logical next step in this conversation. Why do I call it a conversation? Essentially because the debate about the changing roles of women and men has taken place publicly. A controversial or tragic occurrence--a school shooting, a study, a book, a television show, a custody case, a trial--will arise that captures the public's attention because it presents a topic about which we are unsure or strongly divided. This topic will be widely discussed--at gatherings at work, around our kitchen tables, at parties with our friends and neighbors. One can almost chart the course of evolving public opinion by looking at these incidents. Importantly, the conversation thus far has hinged on an either/or premise. I've found, however, that bringing both children and parents into the picture moves us beyond a black-and-white view. THE ONGOING DEBATE ABOUT CHILDREN AND PARENTAL EMPLOYMENT Is having a working mother good or bad for children? The debate in the 1960s centered on the question, Is having a working mother good or bad for children? It was first fueled by studies of children in orphanages showing that children separated from their mothers for long periods and raised in environmentally depressed conditions failed to thrive, even though they received adequate physical care. Some social scientists and experts drew the conclusion that therefore mothers' working was bad for children.' This opinion was countered by a number of researchers who said that the prolonged separation from mothers of children in an orphanage and the daily separations involved in child care could not be compared; therefore the jury was out on working mothers. Between the 1960s and the late 1980s, a number of reviews of the research showed that there was little reason to be concerned about older children whose mothers worked. Although the public didn't necessarily agree, the public debate then shifted to infants. In 1988--perhaps not so coincidentally the very first year that a majority of mothers of infants were in the work force--Jay Belsky of Pennsylvania State University reported that a few studies indicated that infants whose mothers worked more than 20 hours a week in their child's first year of life were less likely to become securely attached to their mothers? Since insecure attachments have been shown to lead to developmental problems in older children, and since some studies indicated that children with early experiences in child care were more aggressive, a public alarm was sounded. Researchers immediately lined up on both sides of this
issue on the talk shows, and articles were published pro and con. Ultimately,
the National Academy of Sciences convened a meeting bringing together what
was informally called "the warring parties in the debate." This meeting
led to a longitudinal study in the 1990s of approximately 1300 children
from ten communities by ten teams of researchers funded by the National
Institute of Child Health and Human Development(NICHD).
Can mothers who work have just as good relationships with their children as mothers at home? How do working parents feel about this issue? In our Ask the Children study, we asked a representative group of employed parents how strongly they agreed or disagreed with the following statement: "A mother who works outside the home can have just as good a relationship with her children as a mother who does not work." Overall, 76 percent of employed parents agree somewhat or strongly with this statement. One would expect employed parents to endorse their own lifestyle, but it is noteworthy that one in four parents disagrees. Who are these parents who disagree? Fathers are much more likely to disagree (30 percent) than mothers (18 percent). However, there are no differences between fathers and mothers in dual-earner couples on this issue, whereas--as one might expect--there are large differences between fathers with employed spouses and those with spouses at home. Among all family types, employed mothers who are single parents are the most likely to agree that mothers who work can have just as good relationships with their children as mothers who are at home. In fact, 90 percent agree with this statement. Thus, mothers who have little or no choice about working are the most adamant in their belief that mothers' working doesn't harm the mother-child relationship. Over time, there has been a steady increase in the number of people who feel that employed mothers can have just as good a relationship with their children as at-home mothers. I attribute this largely to the gradual social and cultural change as women have moved into the work force in larger and larger numbers and as families have become more dependent on their income. Twenty years ago, the same question was included in the 1977 Quality of Employment Survey conducted for the Department of Labor. Among all employees--whether or not they are parents--the number climbed from 58 percent who agreed in 1977 to 67 percent in 1997, according to the Families and Work Institute's 1997 National Study of the Changing Workforce conducted by researchers Terry Bond and Jennifer Swanberg, and me. In fact, one working mother we interviewed for the Ask the Children study said: "I've seen growth in [my daughter] and I think a lot of that has to do with my own growth, and I think a lot of my own growth has to do with the fact that I had that extension of my life in the world of working I may have had other interests and done other things had I not worked and been a stay-at-home mom, but I think I gained more and was able to give more to her as a result of having that amount of independence in my own life." Is this mother speaking from experience or is this wishful thinking? The research shows that parents are speaking from experience. The most definitive study on the subject, conducted by the NICHD research team, found that mothers' working and a child's being in child care in themselves do not affect the bond between the mother and the child. It is very simple. Infants are more likely to be securely attached to their mothers when their mothers are warm and responsive. And mothers can be warm and responsive whether they are employed or not. A parent we interviewed put it well: "I think you can be just as good a parent working or staying at home. It depends on where the parent is coming from and what their skills are." The NICHD study did find cases in which mothers' working had a negative impact on the mother-child bond. This was more likely to occur when mothers were less warm and responsive and when the children experienced one or more of the following conditions: poor-quality child care, more than minimal amounts of time in child care, or more frequent changes in the child care arrangement. These nuances have been largely lost in the public debate, however, dismissed by the people who want to see maternal employment as an either/or proposition: A working mother is either bad or good for children. They are also dismissed by the people who see this finding as an indictment of mothers who stay at home: If working doesn't harm children, then what's the justification for staying at home? Mothers at home will say that they know that their being at home has been good for their children. And typically they are right' Typically, so are the mothers who say that their working has been good for their children. Because it is not an either/or proposition. It depends on the people and the circumstances of their lives. And what's right for one person may not be right for another. So, although the debate to this point has assumed an either/or
stance, the research indicates that "it depends"--on the quality of care
the child receives at home and on the child's experiences in child care.
Is it better if men earn money and women care for the home and children? Breadwinning is another highly charged issue in the debate about parents' roles. So we asked parents to respond to the statement 'It is much better for everyone involved if the man earns the money and the woman takes care of the home and the children." Fifty-one percent of employed parents somewhat or strongly agree. Again, employed fathers are more likely to support this statement than employed mothers. The difference, however; is not between fathers and mothers in dual-earner families. It is fathers with wives at home who feel most strongly about this statement. One might ask, Why is there such strong support for the traditional family when fewer and fewer families are living that way? Among married fathers in the labor force, the proportion with employed wives had climbed from 49 percent in 1977 to 67 percent by 1997. Arlene Skolnick, a family historian at the University of California at Berkeley, argues that in any period of social transformation such as the one we are in at the advent of the twenty-first century, people look at the recent past with nostalgia. They grasp at old images before developing new ways of handling reality. I believe that the views of employed parents are more
complicated than those who would interpret this finding as a call for mothers
to leave the work force and return home realize. Why? Because my study
also finds that more than seven in ten employed mothers and fathers agree
that it would be OK for the woman to be the economic provider and the man
to be the nurturer. Most employed parents are not simply endorsing the
traditional family; add up to 100 percent due to rounding. rather; they
seem to be yearning for a less stressful life. It certainly seems as if
both mothers and fathers would like someone at home who cares for
them and the children.
MOVING BEYOND THE EITHER/OR DEBATE As you can see, our national debate about working and children has been conducted as if the answer is either yes or no, as if one path is inherently good and the other bad. But more than four decades of research has shown that reality is not so simple. Outcomes for children "depend" primarily on what parents do with their children when they are together and secondarily on what happens to the children when they are away from their parents. Until now, the language that we have used to describe work and family life similarly has been either/or language. Implicit in this way of speaking is the notion that work and family are "separate, non-overlapping worlds." In 1997, Rosalind Barnett of Brandeis University wrote that we have to move beyond the notion of separate spheres toward understanding that work and family are inextricably interconnected, and that, in fact, multiple roles can energize rather than deplete us. There is also an either/or notion of balancing work and family, which has been endlessly promulgated in books and other media. Balancing connotes a set of scales. If one side is up, the other side is down. The goal, as working parents typically see it, is to keep both sides even or equal. Although the notion of balance is correct in considering both work and family on the same continuum, the connections are more dynamic than balance implies. Both sides can be up and both sides can be down. What works for one person doesn't work for another. Finally, there is the concept of quality time versus quantity time. This concept implies that either the amount of time or the quality of time is more important. Yet, as you will see, this study of parents and children makes it very evident that one can't separate the amount of time from what happens during that time. When we ask the children, not only are we able to see what we do in a new way, we also reframe the debate. In the chapters that follow, I will suggest a new language to describe today's realities and new ways of handling them. Asking the children is clearly the next step in what has been an ongoing national conversation. From my many discussions with parents across the country, I believe that we are ready to listen to children and in so doing to embrace a more accurate and more empowering view. Copyright © 1999 by Ellen Galinsky IMPORTANT AND SURPRISING FINDINGS FROM ASK THE CHILDREN
ASK THE CHILDREN is the first book to ask children what they really think of working parents. Based on a nationally representative survey of more than 1,000 children 8 through 18 years old, author Ellen Galinsky explores the key issues of work and family life today with children from all kinds of backgrounds – children in dual earner families, single parent employed families and traditional families. In addition, she conducted a representative survey of more than 600 employed mothers and employed fathers with children birth through 18 as well as in-depth interviews with close to 175 children and parents in 15 states. Their answers are illuminating, not frightening, and help us reframe the debate about work and family and offer new ways to think about and "live" work and family that are more successful than many of our current attempts to balance the two. ASK THE CHILDREN is filled with hundreds of remarkable insights and findings about work and family life in America, many of them good news for working parents. However, some of the findings really stand out and will make headlines when the book is published. Included among these important and surprising findings are: More time is NOT on the top of children’s wish list for employed parents Employed parents were also asked to guess what their children’s wish would be. Most employed parents (56%) guessed their children would want more time with them. Surprisingly, most children didn’t wish for more time. Most children wish their parents would be less stressed and less tired by work. 34% of children make this wish for their mothers and 27.5% make this wish for their fathers. Surprisingly, only 2% of employed parents guess that their children would wish that they be less stressed and tired. In contrast, only 10% of children wish that their mothers would spend
more time with them and 15.5% say the same thing about their fathers.
67%, of children ages 8 through 18 feel they have enough time with their employed mothers and 60% say they have enough time with their employed fathers. It is older children more than younger children who don’t feel they
have enough time with their parents and they especially feel they don’t
have enough time with their fathers.
Throughout the study, Galinsky found that having a working mother is never once predictive of how children assess their mothers’ parenting skills. Children say they worry because they care, but also because their
parents are very stressed.
42% of children think their mothers like their work a lot compared with 69% of mothers. That is not only because many parents tend to tell their children
bad things that happened to them at work but also because they do not explain
the reasons – other than financial – why they work.
There are some areas of concern. Less than one third of parents are seen very positively by teenagers when it comes to controlling their tempers when their child does something that upsets them. Perhaps this is an indication that the stress at work is spilling over into family life. About one third of teenagers also feel that their parents don’t really
know what is going on in their child’s life – an issue that is also cause
for concern.
These parents are also more likely to have parenting energize them at work. 71% of employed parents say that they have been in a good mood at work because of their children. While we tend to focus on the harm that negative experiences can have, when work is positive it affects parents’ mood and energy, their interaction with their children and even their children’s development. The bottom line is that good experiences at work flow into good experiences at home, which pay dividends back at work. Travel| A&E| Chat| Forums| Frames| Contact Us| Subscribe To subscribe to this magazine simply type subscribe or unsubscribe in the body of the email Cyberpathway Web Design |
