Housewives make better mothers than career women
Today we live in a busy demanding society.There is not enough time to accomplish many of our needs as individuals. And sometimes we must sacrifices a little to meet some of our goals.Some of the sacrifises we make are for our children and sometimes our children is what we sacrifices to make a living in this tough world.
Are today's children raised better with stay at home mothers or babysitters? Does having a great career pay off better than staying home and raise your children yourself?
You can also add to the debate by leaving your comment at the end of the page.
Children benefit from more time with their mothers
Research has shown that even as soon as a few hours after birth children benefit from contact with their mothers. Psychologists have spent a long time studying 'attachment' and child development and it is thought that the best form of parent-child relationship develops when the mother does not leave the child on a regular basis.and the mothers can give time to their childrens
they are best and better mothers
Undoubtably there are benefits from increased mother child contact, however attachment studies have actually shown that the best relationship is when the child accepts the mother will leave but also knows she will return, and welcomes her when she does. If the mother never leaves the child there is no time for this belief to develop and the process of developing healthy behaviour concerning the mother's absence will be delayed.
Where are your children while you are at work?
Stay-at-home mums are much more likely to be in touch with their children's activities and are thus better placed to supervise them or even just know wheen something is wrong.Many parents worry because they don't know where their children are while they are at work. Can they be sure they are in school? After school are they coming straight home?A parent at home is a source of security for the child to come home to, but can also sound the alarm when a child does not come home. With kidnappings being plastered all over the press on a regular basis perhaps it is important that there is someone at home that is aware of the child's whereabouts.
It would still be impossible to know your child's every move. You can't really control what happens in school, and out of school they need at least some time away from the mother in order to learn to become independent and develop their own personality. It is ridiculous to expect mothers to be able to constantly supervise children and to claim that this is necessary to prevent kidnaping is far fetched. There is a difference between negligence (i.e going out and leaving the children unsupervised in the evenings as was the case with the McCann kidnapping) and healthy levels of responsibility delegated by parents - i.e trusting children to come home after school. Modern technology such as mobile phones mean parents do not need to be at home for their children to be able to get hold of them, and similarly parents can contact their children to check on them when they are not there.
What is the benchmark?
How are we to define what makes a 'better' mother? If being a better mother is defined by having more contact with the children, more direct involvement in the childcaring and their activities then being a housewife makes the better mother.
How are we to define what makes a 'better' mother? If we define this based on the children rather than the contact between mother and child then it becomes difficult to measure. Are the children of 'better' mothers more successful academically? Or more sociable? Or perhaps the parent-child relationship is stronger for one type of mothering than the other? There are so many variables, and hardly any of these have been subjected to a comparative study so a statement such as 'housewives make 'better' mothers is nonsensical.
Housewives are better mothers than career women
Children, especially in their formative years, require a great deal of time and resources. The options for career woman, unable to stay at home, are not to leave the child unattended, but rather place him in the hands of another, whether at a daycare centre or with a nanny. Such a decision, often compelled, nevertheless provides the child with mixed messages, the parenting styles of the mother and the surrogate mother may conflict, leaving the child confused and unsure of the right way to act at any given time.
A housewive has no such issues, she is always there and offers a uniformity that leaves the child in no doubt as to the way he is being told to behave, what is good/bad, right/wrong.
Housewives spend more time with their children but that is not sufficient to declare such women 'better mothers'. There are numerous other factors that determine how 'good' a mother is, namely their ability to support their children, a factor that often determines a woman's choice in these matters.
Furthermore, if setting an example is an objective for a mother, there are few better than the hard work and determination of a career woman, fighting often in male-dominated industries and working to shatter the glass ceiling of gender discrimination.
Housewifes make better mothers than career women
Children benefit from more time with their mothers
Career mothers are better educated
Women with careers often have a higher degree of education. Even though they might not be home all of the time, they have the means necessary to educate their children better. A stay at home mother can only teach as much as she knows and if this is only the sphere of domestic duties the child will grow up knowing how to be a housewife and the circle will be perpetuated.
A major general finding from social science research is the strong association between children's well-being and families socioeconomic background consisting particularly of human capital; such as innate or learned skills, educational attainment, psychological and health status, personal or psychological resources; resiliency, positive outlook, motivation, and "social capital"; such as community ties, relations with neighbours and friends. This is also based to a lesser extent on income; in 1994-1995, for children aged 4-5 years in Canada mean family income in a two-parent family was $64,000 with a working mother and $46,000 with a "non-working" mother; in a single mother family, mean income was $26,000 with a working mother and $15,000 with a "non-working" mother. So therefore there is a good chance that those families with a career woman will be better educated and the better the socioeconomic group the better the prospects of the child.'Family Background, Family Income, Maternal Work and Child Development', Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, (Oct. 1998) http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/eng/cs/sp/sdc/pkrf/publications/research/1998-002345/page04.shtml%5D%5D
To say a mother without a career is a worse mother because she is somehow less intelligent is making a mockery of women's autonomy of choice. Many well qualified women stay at home to look after their child out of love and passion. A argument that career mothers are better because they are more capable to educate their child is not applicable anyway, as surely the level of education a child needs before entering schooling can be taught by anyone and certainly will not include complex accounts management or advance trigonometry!!!
This argument implies that a better educated parent will make a more intelligent child. That is ridiculous.As long as the child is well looked after, fed three times a day, given the opportunities to explore, with a warm shelter and a roof over their heads the parents are doing a good job.
Even if the career women are more intellectual and can be more stimulating to the child's mind, you must factor in having to work late into this complex equation. Many career driven parents won't be home until after the child has gone to sleep and as such the 'education' that they can pass on is already limited.
I wanted to state that I disagree on the idea that 'housewives' are less educated. I have worked when I needed to. Right now I can stay at home, and I love it. I teach my boys the alphabet,numbers,colors, shapes,we go outside and do various activities, cook,clean, and the list goes on. My children are learning responsibility within the home, and also enjoying their childhood; by having educational fun. My husband drives truck, and he is not home very often. We hope that as the children get older he can stay home longer. He enjoys that, and it shows the boys the "work side" of life as well. My boys can also travel with him when they are 10 years old. I was a Certified Nursing Assistant, and I am soon getting my Associates of Arts in Healthcare Administration (in case,or when I decide to work). We also have the internet, and a public library. I can teach my children about everything under moon. I read once that many people today are wishing they rent. Instead of having burden on their home, and mortgage. I don't mind renting, not having fancy technological gadgets, and not paying an expensive car loan. My children also don't get showered with presents during birthdays, and Christmas. Life is not about materialistic qualities. It depends on the parents views, and what the parents decide is best. I believe either decision can be worked out.
Families need financial support as well as pastoral care
Mothers inherently love their children and do what they believe is best for them. Career mothers work so that their children can have a better life whereas stay at home mothers endeavour to create the traditional image of home that we are taught from a young age.
The reality is, a household of 2.4 kids requires two incomes to support the family. If a mother who works to provide for her family is considered a bad mother, then surely a mother who stays at home but cannot help provide for the family is also a bad mother.
Providing for your children is a reality many women have to deal with. Women should not be judged for how they face this reality and there are many women out there that have no other choice but to be the sole providers for their family
Children inherently need their parents. No daycare provider can guarantee the safety, security, love, admiration, and education of a child like the parents. Children, in many cases, actually need their parents more as they get older. Middle school aged children are often affected by inappropriate peer influences, lack of parental involvement, and a lack of insight into the consequences of their actions. Parents are solely responsible for providing the most thorough, morally appropriate, and influential information that their children will receive on a daily basis and apply in their lives.
A stay-at-home mother is more capable of a quick response to a teacher's request for a conference, and is more available to work around her child's schedule of events. A stay-at-home mom is much more likely to participate in the daily learning and exploring activities of her child such as field trips and special events both during and after school.
Children who come home after school to a waiting parent are more far less likely to create problems or engage in misconduct or other inappropriate activities that may be harmful. This is especially true during the middle and high school years where stay-at-home moms are most likely to go back to work having assumed that their oversight is no longer necessary.
There is no evidence, research or data to suggest that stay-at-home moms reinforce traditional values towards their children.
In many cases, financial stability has little to do with who works or how many earners are present in the household, but rather with the specific job(s) actually worked, and the amount of time actually devoted to that job. If one wage earner is more likely to advance in his career, then he should focus on that aspect rather than further dividing his time among activities.
As indiciated in the original argument, "Providing for your children is a reality many women have to deal with. Women should not be judged for how they face this reality and there are many women out there that have no other choice but to be the sole providers for their family." Very true! However, men SHOULD be judged for not providing for their family, for not providing an adequate living for their family, for failing to teach their sons and daughters how to work hard, how to love, how to help others, how to dedicate themselves to being great spouses and parents, and for not fully supporting their offspring and women with whom they have had relations.
Men are to blame for the ills of so many unsupported single mothers, not women.
It is a man's responsibility to his family to be the sole provider. When this aspect of a man's role in his family is neglected, for whatever reason, a mother's rationale kicks in and she fills that role primarily to provide for her children. This is just human nature from a woman's perspective and her biological makeup. If allowed her natural inclination, the average woman would happily stay at home and look after the health and general wellbeing of her children. Science has proven that men's natural inclination is to be outdoors while the woman's, indoor. When there roles are reversed only chaos and disorder becomes the order of the day as can be seen in the behavior of children today. No one can care for a child better than its mother. She is the first teacher and knows her child better than anyone else, after all, she carried him for nine grueling months.
What do you think?