
Evidence of Advantages for Children of Working Mothers - senith
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/17/upshot/mounting-evidence-of-some-advantages-for-children-of-working-mothers.html
======
rayiner
I never understood the idea that having mom (or dad) at home is the best thing
for kids. When our daughter is at daycare, she's in a very stimulating
environment staffed by energetic 22-year olds on 6 hour shifts. When she's at
home with me my instinct is to bribe her with some ice cream and park her in
front of her iPad. My wife has slightly more desire to engage with the kid,
but no more energy for it--she's pretty spent after 2-3 hours.

~~~
ams6110
Nobody will care for or about a child more than that child's mother (barring
psychological abnormalities in the mother). Father a close second.

Even the best daycare is going to devote only a fraction of the
instruction/attention to any individual child.

If your approach as a parent is to give "the kid" ice cream and electronic
distractions, I think you should seriously reevaluate your priorities.

~~~
rayiner
Caring is a separate issue from having the aptitude and temperament for the
_labor_ of child care. I'd do _anything_ for my daughter, but let's face it,
she's _boring_. She's slightly smarter than a puppy, and while it's all
magical a couple of hours a day, I can't imagine engaging with her day-in and
day-out, any more than I can imagine being a factory worker who just does one
movement all day long. I'd go crazy.

The daycare worker certainly wouldn't run in front of a bus to protect my kid,
which I'd do in a heartbeat. But that's not a day-to-day need.

~~~
meric
While I agree with you I'm not sure that is a good use of "certainly"...It
depends how many kids the worker is with and which one is her favourite, as
well as the character of the daycare worker. There were plenty of strange* men
volunteering to die in frozen waters to save women and children when the
titanic went down, for example.

* in the stranger sense of the word.

~~~
__z
Also Wesley Autrey, the "Subway Hero" who dove onto the tracks of the oncoming
1 train in order to save a stranger who had a seizure and fell onto the
tracks. He held the man down in a drainage trench and the subway cars passed
over them. That's about as literal as "jumping in front of a bus" as it gets.

Plus all the teachers at Sandy Hook who gave their lives protecting their
students.

Those two are just off the top of my head. The willingness to put one's self
in danger for others isn't exclusive to parents.

------
posnet
For basically the entirety of my childhood. Both my parents were working. I
can honestly say I am a better person for it. And not just because of the
material benefits it afforded me (better education, got to travel a lot).

Through out my childhood both parents had jobs with varying amounts of time
requirements, with both having periods of stay a home spouse (I believe my
father found this particularly eye opening) and both periods of 9-7 working
time.

They always took the time to explain to me and my sister about why they were
doing the things they were and ensuring that we were comfortable with their
decisions. Now it may be that it was this honesty that had the greatest
benefit. However I do think I have a much greater appreciation for the
importance of a purposeful work life balance.

Mind you, not necessarily a highly even balance, just ensure that if you are
working 50 hours a week, there should be a goal in mind. In fact every
decision about lifestyle should be carefully thought about.

------
smackay
The article does not mention it but where are the kids when the mother is at
work? More than likely this is in day-care rather than in the home of another
family member (most likely the grandparents). The likelihood is that the kids
are in a richer environment, materially and socially. When you mix in the
added benefit of parents not having spent all day dealing with the childens'
needs then it's no surprise that generally they are able to devote more
attention to them.

None of this is the direct benefit of a parent being at work. You would
probably see all these advantages if one of the parents simply stayed at home,
while the kids were in day-care. But where is the money going to come from for
that.

~~~
fulafel
This is also a good argument for providing free or heavily subsidized daycare
to children whose parents are unemployed or outside the workforce.

~~~
danieltillett
What argument?

~~~
fulafel
This:

> [In day-care] the likelihood is that the kids are in a richer environment,
> materially and socially.

Think single parent suffering from mental health issues and unable to work, or
other disadvantaged stimulus poor domestic environment.

------
mathgeek
“Was it really her mother working who did this, or was it her mother getting
an education?”

I'd personally wager on the latter. We have plenty of studies on the topic of
"being educated increases the average education level of your children."

------
ganarajpr
Would be quite interesting to have a Hacker news poll to see the distrubution
of hners whose mother went to work!

I dont seem to have enough karma to create one unfortunately. Can someone else
do it please ?

------
facepalm
It just says daughters of working mothers are more likely to become working
mothers themselves. They consider working moms to be a good thing, and prove
it by showing that working moms have working daughters, which is in their
opinion a good thing.

A bit circular. I am not against working mothers, just saying one should be
clear about one's judgement. For me it is not a given that working is a good
thing. At least not in general (not for any kind of work).

------
m-i-l
"it is difficult to know whether a mother who worked caused her daughter to
work, or whether other factors were more influential" \- reminds me of the "An
Eleanor is 100 times more likely to go to Oxford than a Jade" study from last
year, i.e. the names themselves might not cause the difference but rather
other factors which the names represent.

------
danieltillett
Take this personal anecdote for what it is worth. My office used to be next
door to a childcare centre looking after around 40 children. I was able to
watch what happened throughout the day and what the staff and children did.
After a few months I swore no matter what the financial cost I would not let
my children ever end up in childcare.

~~~
Jem
For me, not using childcare == not working, which means I'd probably lose my
home. I'm not sure that risk is worth it.

~~~
danieltillett
Would you be homeless or just living in a less ideal home?

I am lucky to live in a country where my choice really is just a trade in the
level of material comfort, but I understand this is not the same for everyone.

~~~
Jem
I would be homeless, first and foremost, because I wouldn't be able to pay my
mortgage and the bank would seize my assets.

Eventually I would be eligible for state benefits and placed on a waiting list
for a council owned property, but waiting lists are long. I might be able to
get shelter in a women's refuge in the mean time, but I'm not sure that's an
ideal place to raise my children just so that I can claim the moral high
ground on childcare use.

~~~
danieltillett
If you could not pay your mortgage could you not sell and rent privately?

Please don't take this as a critism of your decision - I made mine and I am
happy with my choice, but I don't expect that what is best for me is best for
everyone.

~~~
Jem
Private renting in my area (as with a lot of places in the UK) would be more
costly than my current mortgage.

I didn't think you were criticising parents who use childcare, least of all
me, but I do feel it's necessary for people to understand that the "I'm too
good for daycare" argument comes from a position of massive privilege.

~~~
danieltillett
Sounds like a crazy situation if a mortgage and all the associated costs is
less than renting - here in Australia it is considerably cheaper to rent.

I don't think the choice of not using daycare is one that can only be made
from a position of massive privilege, but it does involve material sacrifices
if you are middle class.

~~~
Jem
My mortgage is £477 p/m on a small 2 bedroom semi-detached house. To rent I'd
be looking at ~£600p/m for a small 2 bedroom flat (apartment). I'd still have
to pay the same utilities etc so wouldn't be better off by any stretch of the
imagination.

~~~
danieltillett
Wow your mortgage is low - mine is more than 10 times the size and I live in a
flat! Australian housing is expensive especially where I live.

When I owned a house the maintenance cost was quite considerable. You can put
it off for a while, but eventually it comes due. My guess is that it was
around $750 a month plus I had council rates to pay on top of this which were
another $250 a month.

------
Jem
Are there any studies on working father's impact on children? (A quick google
returns a few studies on father's impact but not working ones specifically.)

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. If you work, you're a neglectful
parent. If you don't, you're sucking off the state. (UK stereotypes)

I have done the 3 main variants of parent-work balance (staying at home,
working at home, working out of the home) with my 2 children and I'm not
convinced that any one is better than the other, personally. But what does one
little anecdote mean in the grand scheme of things...

~~~
danieltillett
To answer your first question there is little incentive to look into this
question as no one with serious money wants to know the answer.

Which of the three options was best for you?

~~~
Jem
Hard to say. As a stay at home mum I felt unfulfilled and lonely. In the early
years of returning to work full time I felt guilty for leaving my child in
daycare. Working at home (with a mix of juggling kids and some daycare) I felt
isolated and over-worked.

I'm actually in the process of working my notice at my current job so that I
can return to working from home, but as it stands I have no intention of
reducing my son's hours in childcare.

I'd like to think that I can find a balance between working (for mental
satisfaction as well as financial reasons) and time with my youngest outside
of childcare, but this depends on my success in the coming months. If nothing
else my son starts school in September 2016 so at least I won't have a ~£645
childcare bill each month :)

------
arethuza
I was quite delighted that my mother worked - she was the part time librarian
of our village library. So from about 10 or so she would let me take the key
of the library and get books as often as I wanted - providing I stuck to the
limits of the number of books I borrowed at one time and kept record of what
books I had borrowed in the same way as everyone else.

------
Shivetya
perhaps some are spending more quality time with their kids because the are
not home and feel more obligated to do so. throw in the idea that children
learn from the actions of their parent and so success is more likely from
seeing parents already in the workplace the outcome becomes expected

------
carsongross
And yet, and yet... Female happiness marches relentlessly downward.

[http://www.nber.org/papers/w14969](http://www.nber.org/papers/w14969)

------
snickerdoodles
"In a new study of 50,000 adults in 25 countries, daughters of working mothers
completed more years of education, were more likely to be employed and in
supervisory roles and earned higher incomes" \- TLDR, children will imitate
what you do, not what you tell them to do. This is good for certain values of
good (depending on how you define a 'good' adult).

The title of the article (Mounting Evidence of Advantages for Children of
Working Mothers) seems to define having a career as an advantage, but is it
really?

~~~
danieltillett
How about we rephrase this. Daughters of those mothers that earn enough to
make putting their children in childcare are more likely to earn more than
mothers who's wages are too low to afford childcare. Phrased this way we come
to the startling conclusion that the children of the middle class grow up to
be middle class. I am shocked.

~~~
fulafel
This doesn't explain why the relationship holds true even in countries with
free or heavily subsidized daycare. Or why only daughters are affected, along
many variables.

Picked these from the HBS post @
[http://www.hbs.edu/news/articles/Pages/mcginn-working-
mom.as...](http://www.hbs.edu/news/articles/Pages/mcginn-working-mom.aspx)

Anyone have a link to the paper?

~~~
danieltillett
Even when childcare is heavily subsidised it use will still be dominated by
the middle classes. If you are unemployed why go to the effort to cart the
children you love down to some strangers even if you don't have to pay
anything.

~~~
fulafel
You were talking about low wage mothers, I responded to that. They are anyway
more numerous than unemployed-for-reasons-unrelated-to-parenting mothers.
(This can also make financial sense to subsidize, as otherwise they'll have a
larger probability to go unemployed and permanently fall out of workfroce
later when kids go to school)

