The Work It, Mom! Blog
with Nataly
Hi, I am Nataly and I am the co-founder of Work It, Mom!
I write the daily Work It, Mom! Blog where I talk about issues affecting working moms, goings on in our Work It, Mom! community, new site features, updates,and contests. I also share my own juggle between work and family and love to see members jump in with comments. Come and visit often!
Nataly's profile on Work It, Mom!
In October of 2003 Lisa Belkin wrote the now infamous article for the New York Times titled “The Opt-Out Revolution.” In it she talked about women who quit their careers to stay home full time after they had kids — thus opting out of the workforce. I’m a huge fan of Lisa Belkin and read her new blog, Motherlode, regularly (I was psyched when she invited me to write on my pet topic of having an only child.) But I’ve always treated this idea of the “opt-out revolution” with skepticism.
I became a mom when we lived in New York City and I did know many women who became stay-at-home moms after they had kids. They could do this because their husbands or partners made more than enough money to support the family financially. But this was New York City, a microcosm of wealth, and these families were in the top 1% in terms of their incomes. Did “regular”, middle and working class women have the same choice to stop working? I didn’t and don’t think so and this endless debate — mostly held in the media, but often in private conversations and mom groups — about making the choice to work or to stay at home full-time has always seemed strange to me. Most women in America have to work because their family needs their income. Myself included.
This is even more true today because of the economic recession, which is forcing more women into the labor force. The recession, it seems, is sounding a loud end to the opt-out revolution and what I’m also hoping it will do is once and for all end the stay-at-home vs. working mom wars. Working, earning an income, providing for our families financially and with benefits, is what most of us have to do. We may have choices about where and how we work, but working itself isn’t a choice, it’s our responsibility.
I was thrilled to read Judith Warner’s latest column titled Families to Care About. She writes about the stories emerging in the media about stay-at-home moms from well-off families heading back to work because their husbands have lost their high-income jobs or have seen their salaries and bonuses dwindle. She reminds us that while the upper-income families in our society are facing some new challenges, we need to remember that the other 95% of families are dealing with much more dire and severe stituations. “Wealthy families may be downsizing somewhat, but many others are living right on the edge.” Well-said.
How do you feel about the idea that women have a choice to work or to stay at home? Do you think the recession will change the dialogue and move away from the stay-at-home vs work debate, for moms?
Subscribe to blog via RSS
Based on what i’ve been reading in the papers and blogs and everything else, there is an upside of this recession for women. It might end the mommy wars as people may realize that’s it’s not always a choice to work or not to work.
The upside that I am seeing is that this recession may end the salary gap between men and women. Apparently more men are getting laid off than women because men make more money for the same work women do.
Also, another recent article in Crain’s NY Business, reports that many executive dads are staying home while the wife picks up more work, or hours.
So this recession may have some benefits for women. So 2009 may also be a good year for women. I wonder what women will fight about next. This is taking it to another topic but really many times I notice that it’s not the men that stopping us women, it’s us women standing in each other’s way, feeling threatened and stopping each other from growing. I notice that even more after I started running a business. I know you wrote about this too, “dealing with bitchy women at work.”
vera babayeva | March 30th, 2009 at 7:50 am
I really think that it depends on where you live and what careers each spouse has.
In our (large) circle of friends, I am only one of two Moms who work. Everyone else stays home while the husbands work. They make small sacrifices to do so, but not as much as they would if we lived in a big city.
I am thankful, however, that I have an education that most of these friends of mine don’t, and am able to return to work in a time where my husband’s industry is failing.
Angella | March 30th, 2009 at 9:30 am
I think the economic realities will force some families to change their decisions they’ve made about work and childcare, but I also think that many women, like me, work both because it provides economic support (and support that would out-last a divorce!) AND because it is important to me as a person. I like working and it’s an important part of my identity. I don’t work because I have to, I work because I want be engaged in my career and contribute economically to my family.
Some women and men really enjoy being stay-at-home parents, and I think it can be a good choice for some people. It does have costs, such as decreasing your earning potential in the event that you need to go back to work (say due to an economic downturn and loss of spouse’s job), but I don’t like to phrase the decision of work/home balance just in terms of “having” to work. In my family, we try to show our daughter that both kinds of work are important — “family work” and “science work” (our names for at-home vs. job-related work since my wife and I are both scientists.
Angela V-C | March 30th, 2009 at 9:53 am
Wish I could Opt Out!
I work because I have to. Not only for the money (which basically pays daycare, groceries, and cell phone bill) but for the health and dental insurance. Getting those benefits through my hubby’s work would be way too expensive. I really wish I had the choice, but I don’t. If I didn’t work, we would not be able to afford the house we are in, in a decent neighborhood with good schools. And we’d be eating mac & cheese and hot dogs every night of the week. : - )
I really wish I could stay home with my daughter, but I’ve crunched numbers, and daydreamed schemes, and its just not possible. Looking to the future though, this recession has made me want to downsize. Maybe when we buy another house, we could find a cheaper one, and find other ways to save money so that maybe I can eventually work part time, or stay home if I have another child since daycare for 2 would make it almost unrealistic to work.
Erica | March 30th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
I wish that gender were taken out of this equation, frankly. I think everyone should be able to fight for more flexible, family friendly workplaces, and I wish it weren’t always the women who “opted out.” (My husband, with the sole exception of the area of milk production, is just as competent to take care of our daughter and the household as I am, if not more).
I think the recession is moving the dialogue away from this, but with detrimental consequences. Family Friendly policies are one of the first things to go when employers feel like they can put the squeeze on their employees.
Kate | March 30th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
I agree with many of these comments here that it all depends–on the industries parents’ careers are in, on the # of kids people have, on how old those children are, etc. Right now my two children are both under five–i.e., not in school yet–and full-time daycare for two would make my going back to work pretty unreasonable. It’s very hard for my family to live on one income–we’re NOT one of those families where the dad earns a high salary–but we wouldn’t be much better off if we had to pay for daycare for two. Also, we’re lucky in that so far the economy is not directly affecting my husband’s job in a major way–although this is the 2nd year in a row he’s only gotten a 1% raise, less than the increase in cost of living.
I also think it all depends on whether a woman has really found her “vocational niche” or not. Though I have a Ph.D. and started a career in a competitive, prestigious field, I’ve never found one kind of work that is my true “passion” and the kind of thing I can’t give up because it brings me so much fulfillment in and of itself. Therefore, I don’t have that urge to work outside the home to maintain my identity or fulfill a passion. To be honest, I wish more than anything that my husband’s field did pay enough that I could EASILY choose to stay home, indefinitely. I’m good at it, and I like it–which isn’t to say it’s without challenges.
Shannon | March 30th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
I do think it’s a choice for most women. It’s a matter of priority. I have a step-niece whose husband is a factory laborer (not union) and not a very bright guy. He doesn’t make much money, but she stays home with their two kids. She has used her spare time to research on the internet to locate a house that they could afford to buy and would want to live in. She also uses her spare time to make stuff that most of us buy. For example, for Christmas gifts, she makes jellies and such. Their kids utilize the public schools and pre-school programs (at least one of them is a special-needs child who is thriving between school and home activities). Maybe they don’t have a college fund for their kids, I don’t know, but this too is a choice.
I don’t really understand why I should feel better or worse about my choices based on what percentage of women have no choice. I feel intelligent enough to know my kids’ needs and how to prioritize them. I assume the same of other women, absent clear proof to the contrary.
As long as women have extra time on their hands, there will always be mommy wars. That’s really not a factor of what our choices are / aren’t, but rather of how defensive we are predisposed to feel.
SKL | March 30th, 2009 at 3:08 pm
On a related topic, I am not sure of the logic that a lower employment rate means more women should be working. Fewer jobs => more workers? I can understand it on an individual household basis - if A’s pay gets cut then B might need to pitch in to make ends meet - but from a macroeconomic perspective it seems counterintuitive.
Moreover, I don’t think “most” households are suffering a material reduction in earned annual income - at least, not yet.
SKL | March 30th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Nataly, I don’t know…I think we “Mommies” will “war” forever. We all try to do the best for our families, and for whatever reason, we all think that what’s right for us is right for everyone else.
After my first son was born, I decided to cut back and work contract. Then after my second son was born, I “opted out” and decided to stay at home. After I determined that I was very bad at “opting out”, I decided to go back to work full time. I have to say that was the right decision for my family. It would not be the right decision for every family in every situation.
In this economy, I have been extremely thankful that I have a good job…because my husband was laid off from his VP job about six months ago. Because I have a decent job (that fulfills me) he is able to start a business that makes him happy (not so in his high paying VP job).
That’s what works for our family…doesn’t work for everyone else.
Karla E | March 30th, 2009 at 9:55 pm
I never believed in the so-called “opt out revolution.” I’ve always thought it was media hype that only affected wealthy women with professional partners who made at least six figures. That counts out most of us, myself included.
Though, has anyone else noticed that many “poor” women don’t work? It seems like this is mostly because the cost of childcare outpaces their earning power, so there’s not much point, which I also find distressing. How many families could be lifted out of poverty if only they could afford quality childcare?
Robyn | March 31st, 2009 at 9:11 am
I do know some middle-class families who have a stay-at-home parent as well. They are able to make it work by making different choices, as SKL said. And that’s okay. They don’t have college funds or dual retirement funds or savings accounts… The things that make me, personally, feel more secure about the future. They don’t go on vacation or pay for private school. But those are my choices, so that’s okay, too.
Robyn | March 31st, 2009 at 9:21 am
So the recession is pushing women back into the workforce. But what kind of jobs are they doing? There aren’t a lot of corporate jobs available these days and even if there are, they already have competition from all the husbands in this country who lost their jobs. I guess these women are working in retail or human services? I dunno.
I don’t think the recession will affect the SAHM vs. WAHM debate. It’ll always exist because even in a recession, there are still plenty of SAHMs and WAHMs to continue to debate.
I think women are lucky to have a choice to work or not. Men don’t. They HAVE to work even if they hate working. I have a male friend who hates working. He’s not married, but if he were married, he said he would rather be a house-husband than go to work. He would rather have his wife work than him. And for those women who have a choice, that means their family can survive on one income, and they are lucky.
Linda | March 31st, 2009 at 6:52 pm
This is a pet topic of mine. I have 3 kids, aged 5, 4 and 1, and I’ve been a SAHM for about 3 of the last 5 years. This is not because I don’t want to work, or I want to be a SAHM. But because I simply cannot afford to work.
My husband earns what our government (Australia) considers “high” for an individual, but “average” for a family.
For me to work, with 2 children in care, and one at school, I would be looking at $760 a week simply in child care fees. To bring that sort of money home I would be looking at a job paying over $50,000 a year. My last job paid just under $40,000 a year.
Now that simply is paying for child care, not any of the other associated costs with me working. Commuting, work clothes, lunches, a cleaner or any other services.
What we have had to do is look at where our money is going and reduce our budget, not blindly take on a job to bring extra money in. While I understand some people do need to work to make ends meet, with a larger family it’s virtually impossible.
I worked when I had one child, and I worked when I had two children, but now there is 3 it is completely beyond the realms of possibility, and so I have had to accept that I was told a lie growing up - you can’t have it all.
Kin | March 31st, 2009 at 7:01 pm