Common assumption:
"A mother who cares for her own children is isolated in her house with them all day, the monotony broken only by swim class and music lessons."
Common corollary:
"A parent (mother or father) who works to provide for the family's material needs is away from the home and the children all day."
Common conclusion made by folks who believe it's natural, normal, and right for mothers to care for their own children:
"It's natural, normal, and right for moms to be isolated in their houses with their own kids all day, the monotony broken only by swim class and music lessons."
Common conclusion from the corollary:
"It's natural, normal and right for dads to be away from the home and children all day."
Challenge the first common assumption and the rest falls to pieces.
And why should it hold? It hasn't always. The "farm family" paradigm didn't fit that assumption. The "nomadic family" didn't fit that assumption.
In other words, it takes a short memory and a simple mind to look to the 1950s for an idea of the "traditional family structure." Why not look back before the Industrial Revolution? Why not look back, even, before the Agricultural Revolution? I don't mean that we should become farmers or nomads, but that we should look at our lives and think how to structure our family roles, at least if we seek what's natural, normal, and right for human beings (all of us---mother, father, children, elders) to thrive.
Women care for babies, sure---look at our bodies and you can see that that's what we're meant to do, while we have babies. But are we meant to be totally in charge of older children? In a truly natural family model, women would be (mostly) in charge of the care of babies and the supervision and training of daughters, not necessarily just their own daughters. Men would be in charge of the supervision/training of sons, not necessarily just their own sons.
This isn't what happens today.
(Stop and focus for a moment on boys. We expect our boys to be raised almost exclusively by women. At-home mothers are women, of course. So are nearly all preschool teachers. So are nearly all elementary school teachers. So are most high school teachers. So are most religious education coordinators. So are an increasing number of athletic coaches and Scout leaders and other people charged with the formation of men. Exactly how is this supposed to work? Is it no wonder that boys fit in so much more poorly? Is it no wonder that we have a dearth of good men?)
It is superficially impossible to return to this deeper tradition. Modern schooling and even homeschooling is at odds with it. And Dad can't bring his boys (or girls) to the office to start their apprenticeships as fresh-faced young patent attorneys, nor can he ask his employer to flaut child labor laws and let them learn a manual trade at his side. Besides, children in a complex society have the opportunity to live a life that's different from their parents, which (though it can create family division) is not something I want to give up.
But we can return to it in spirit by following a key principle: Question, confront, and minimize modes of thought and behavior that isolate us. Replace them with mode of thought and behaviors that integrate us.
Must Dad be isolated from his family in a cubicle ALL DAY? Can the family come back together for lunch? Can Dad take care of some of the "homey" responsibilities, e.g. do the grocery shopping with the kids in the evening (a tradition in our home)?
Can Mom share her daily work with other sets of moms-and-kids during the day? Can older kids shadow Dad, working with him and learn from him when he does work around the house on weekends and evenings?
What else is possible in an essentially one-earner family?
Recent Comments