Posted on 17. Mar, 2004 by Brian Reid in General
Time has made the online version of its “The Case for Staying Home” story available only to subscribers, so I can’t weigh in until I drag myself to the newsstand and buy the damn magazine. But it did make available an accompanying essay titled “Men Want Change, Too.”
It was as frustrating a piece to read as any I have seen in quite some time. The thrust is that the author (journalist Michael Elliott), a product of the anything-is-possible late 1970s, is trying to figure why he didn’t have the all-roses, egalitarian parenting experience that seemed promised by the era of Alan Alda and Marlo Thomas. Instead, his wife stayed home and he “allowed work to take over my life.”
Why men never become equal partners is childrearing is an excellent question, one we struggle with over here on a daily basis. And Elliott seems to have ignored all the obvious culprits. The worst problem is clearly that despite two decades of efforts to make work more family-friendly, it’s less family friendly than ever. Innovative proposals like the Four-Thirds Solution and Joan Williams’ constant push for pro-rated benefits for part-time work have gotten nowhere, despite their promise of giving guys like Elliott what they claim they missed: the opportunity to have work and family.
Elliott asks “Why did we get it so wrong?” His answer: labor-saving household technologies stopped being introduced in the 1960s. This is as right-field an argument against men staying home as I have ever heard. Did he assume that technology would allow more parenting in less time, as if there was a childrearing equivalent to the large-load washing machine? (Of course, the idea that no labor saving devices have been introduced since the 1960s is a bit strange, too. I have a microwave oven — perfect for chicken nuggets — an a TV/VCR/DVD hooked up to cable TV. Parents who have never ever used that device to grab a moment of calm are much, much better people than I.)
And then he complains that the unit cost of information is dropping, meaning it is easy to bring work into the home, extending the hours that work life can reach us. But this has been a boon to the numbers of at-home fathers, making it easier to be a freelance computer programmer, consultant or journalist. But until we realize that the new technological realities mean nothing without a work culture that pays more than lip service to work-family balance, we’re likely to keep churning out more men like Elliott, who never realize exactly how their youthful idealism slipped away.
He ends by writing “Thirty years ago, we dreamed of something different. Pity it didn’t work out.” I feel bad for Elliott. He didn’t get what I have. And he doesn’t seem to understand why.
Michael Weber
17. Mar, 2004
That Elliot piece was full of weak arguements and just reeked of a guilt-ridden father who’s upset that he didn’t slow down and enjoy his children while he had the chance.
Why do we have to blame society for our guilt? I made a conscious decision when my first daughter was born to put my children first. And that doesn’t mean working my ass off so I can have all the latest toys or a big house or a nice car. What that means is that I make an effort to make sure, every day, that my family comes first…before pride, before money, before anything else.
Michael Weber
17. Mar, 2004
I don’t want to end up like the author of this piece in 15 years. I want to look back and realize that my children and family came first. If that means, I drive a crappy car, have a small house, don’t have cable, don’t have professional accolades, so be it.
However, I think it is ridiculus to blame society for letting work take over your life. Take some responsibility yourself, Elliot. Meanwhile, I’m going to log off and go color pictures with my daughters! Ha!
Chad
18. Mar, 2004
I immediately thought of you and your blog when I saw the cover today. How sad that the concept of letting dad stay home wasn’t even mentioned.
Russ Louch
18. Mar, 2004
I think it boils down to our priorities and the choices we make. Are you, as a parent, willing to sacrifice all the benefits of fulltime employment in order to stay home and raise your children?
Having a stay-at-home parent may not be the answer for every family, but my wife and I think it’s best for us. And I am grateful for the opportunity to be a stay-at-home dad.
What really bothers me is that I don’t think having Dad stay home is even considered an option by most families. It’s just not on their radar; it’s either Mom or daycare.
Da Da Da
18. Mar, 2004
Main article literally has a half-sentence about dads: “For most mothers—and fathers, for that matter—there is little choice…”
Pretty disappointing, and not at all what I’d expect from Time. They could’ve at least thrown in a couple of sentences or a quote or two from a SAHD. I think it’s letter-to-the-editor time!
There’s also a sidebar that discusses the two-income trap. Basically says that in most families two incomes are required because of the astronomical rise in housing costs over the last two decades. It’s a better argument than many others I’ve seen (i.e., two incomes are needed because people are just so darn materialistic), but doesn’t provide a lot of new info for those of us doing our best to make it on one income.
amyknight
18. Mar, 2004
What a lot of baloney. Every artist manages to figure this one out: Live somewhere cheap, then get job that requires minimum time to pay bills and insurance; reserve rest of time for your ‘real’ work. Most of us artist types manage to support ourselves on part-time work; I lived pretty well on less than $15K most of my adult life.
If you’ve got two parents, you’ve got two part-time workers, and two people sharing the work of raising the child and taking care of the home. I don’t want to hear anything about college savings, either; $200/mo in an ESA starting from birth will take care of the in-state tuition.
amy
amyknight
18. Mar, 2004
Just want to point out — we live (and save) fine on one fulltime salary/benefits income. And both parents have time for their own work & fun as well as childcare. It took some yelling on my part, but my hub’s job is no longer a 60h/wk deal; we split evening and weekend childcare, and hire babysitters if we want more time for our own work. It’s a matter of scheduling, is all.
amy