Childrearing

The first article on this topic, written by Sharon Hays is entitled, "From Rods to Reasoning: The Historical Construction of Intensive Mothering."In this article Hays presents four historical stages of development in the cultural notions of appropriate mothering in America from the 17th to the 20th century.

"In the late seventeenth and early eighteenth century New England there was no notion of childhood innocence, no protected place for children and no separate children's toys or games. Small children were dressed in swaddling clothes, subjected to floggings and sedated with opium" (26). "There was a belief in early childhood as a special and distinct stage; it was the stage when the child needed to be "redeemed" through strict discipline. The young child was not ignored but consciously molded by means of physical punishment, religious instruction, and participation in work life" (27). "For Puritan New Englanders the purpose of such early obedience training was to overcome the "sin nature" of the child. The primary guide for child rearing was the Bible, supplemented by the sermons and speeches of church and community leaders" (27). Wives were valued for their fertility but not for their child-rearing abilities. "Once a child was old enough to help, a mother served as the overseer of their labor in the household, making little distinction between servant children and her own children" (28). Her task was to "keep the children in line; ultimately she obeyed her husband" (28). The Puritan model was the dominant cultural model of the prerevolutionary era.

The next historical stage is that of the nineteenth century mother. "For the middle class urban dweller during that period, ideas of appropriate child rearing shifted dramatically" (29). "The young child was no longer seen as an agent of sin in need of redemption but was instead proclaimed and innocent "redeemer". Increasingly, motherhood was valorized, parents went to great lengths to prolong the period of childhood innocence, and affection suffused the mother-child relationship" (29). "By the second half of the nineteenth century child rearing was synonymous with mothering. The overall image of both was one of pervasive sentimentality mixed with purity, piety, and patriotism" (30). "No longer were the fathers the shepherds and mothers the sheepdogs. Mothers, and only mothers, now moral and pure, were the shepherdesses, leading their children on the path of righteousness" (30). "Although the father was still the ultimate authority, the mother now had a much larger and more valued role to play in shaping the child" (32).

The third stage came into view toward the end of the nineteenth century. "Middle-class child-rearing ideologies took a somewhat curious turn. A mother's instincts, virtue, and affection were no longer considered sufficient to ensure proper child rearing. She now had to be "scientifically" trained. With the growing belief in child rearing as a science, mothers' status as valorized, naturally adept child nurturers was diminished" (39). "The mother now had to more than set a good example; she needed to keep abreast of the latest information on child development and to practice the methods experts suggested. This was the era of strict scheduling, regularity, and letting the child "cry it out" rather than calming him with affectionate nurture" (39). This era was known as the progressive era (39).

The fourth historical stage is called the permissive era. "The ideology of permissive child rearing that dominates contemporary advice and provides the cultural model used by present-day mothers had its beginnings in the 1930s" (45). "The primary objective was no longer the rigid behavioral training of the child to meet adult requirements; nurturing the child's inherent goodness was again the goal" (45). This may sound the same as that of early nineteenth century, but its not. "Although the family had become child-centered then, child rearing was then perceived as guided by parents, in line with adult interests. Not until the "permissive era" did child rearing become "child-centered in the sense of being explicitly determined by the needs and desires of children" (45). "Child rearing was no longer centered on the good of the family and the good of the nation. It was now centered on the fulfillment of the child" (45).

"Not only is home life centered on children, but child rearing is guided by them. The child is now to train the parent. This is what intensive mothering is" (46). "The recommended methods of child rearing have become fully intensified: not only have they become expert-guided and child-centered, they are also more emotionally absorbing, labor intensive, and financially expensive than ever before" (46). The concept of intensive mothering does apply to my mother. She left her job when I was born and has not gone back to work since, because she wanted to be there for me. She was not intimidated by feminists claims that the family is an oppressive institution. She felt more fulfilled being there for me all the time than she would have if she had a normal job in the workforce. This applies too most of my friends mothers as well.

The second article on this subject written by Ann Crittendon is the introduction to her book The Price of Motherhood: Why the Most Important Job in the World is Still the Least Valued. In the introduction she points out what she believes to be the main indicators that mothering is devalued in the United States.

"Even now, the lack of respect and tangible recognition is still part of every mother's experience. Most people take female caregiving utterly for granted. The job of making a home for a child and developing his or her capabilities is often equated with "doing nothing" (2). "Thus the disdainful question frequently asked about mothers at home: "What do they do all day?" (2). "A mother's work is not just invisible; it can become a handicap. Raising children may be the most important job in the world, but you can't put it on a resume" (3). A woman with a master's degree, when looking for a job, was warned to not mention the thirteen years of caring for her disabled child. "She was told instead to pad her resume with descriptions of volunteer work and occasional freelance writing" (4). "The idea that time spent with one's child is time wasted is embedded in traditional economic thinking. Economic theory has nothing to say about the acquisition of skills by those who work with children; presumably there are none" (4). This is one main indicator that mothering is devalued in the United States.

"The policies of American business, government, and the law do not reflect Americans' stated values" (5). Crittenden states, "Across the board, individuals who assume the role of nurturer are punished and discouraged from performing the very tasks that everyone agrees are essential. We talk endlessly about the importance of family, yet the work it takes to make a family is utterly disregarded," (5).

"First, inflexible workplaces guarantee that many women will have to cut back on, if not quit, their employment once they have children" (5). "Second, marriage is still not an equal financial partnership. Mothers in forty seven of the fifty states do not have an unequivocal legal right to half of the family's assets" (6). "Third, government social policies don't even define unpaid care of family dependents as work" (6). "A family's primary caregiver is not considered a full productive citizen, eligible in her own right for the major social insurance programs" (6). These are all primary indicators.

The devaluation of a mother's work extends to those who do similar work for pay. "Wages for child care are so low that the field is hemorrhaging its best-trained people" (6). "Increasingly, day care is being provided by an inexperienced workforce. Just because caring work is not self-seeking doesn't mean a person should be penalized for doing it" (8).

"The dominant culture considers child rearing as unskilled labor, if it considers child rearing at all" (11). "No one is stating the obvious: if human abilities are the ultimate fount of economic progress, as many economists now agree, and if those abilities are nurtured in the early years, then mothers and other care givers of the young are the most important producers in the economy" (11). "They do have, literally, the most important job in the world" (11).

I do agree with Crittendon's view. I believe that mothering is completely underrated in our country. It is so important in creating young adults who will move on to great universities, and then to great jobs. My mom was a stay at home and she loved it. I can vouch for her that it was no easy task. It requires limitless energy. She was just as busy, if not more busy, than my dad who had a typical office job. Our government's policies and laws definitely do not take the importance of mothering into consideration. I agreed with all of her examples and explanations.

The third article, written by Patricia Collins, is entitled, "Black Women and Motherhood." This article explains two types of mothering that black women tend to do. The two mother are bloodmothers and othermothers. "In many African-American communities, fluid and changing boundaries often distinguish biological mothers from other women who care for children" (178). "Biological mothers, or bloodmothers, are expected to care for their children. But African and African-American communities have also recognized that vesting one person with full responsibility for mothering a child may not be wise or possible. As a result, othermothers-women who assist bloodmothers by sharing mothering responsibilities-traditionally have been central to the institution of Black motherhood" (178).

Collins writes, "Organized, resilient, women-centered networks of bloodmothers and othermothers are key in understanding this centrality of women. Grandmothers, sisters, aunts, or cousins act as othermothers by taking on child care responsibilities for one another's children," (178). "In many African-American communities these women-centered networks of community-based child care have extended beyond the boundaries of biologically related individuals to include fictive kin" (179). "Othermothers can be key in helping bloodmothers who, for whatever reason, lack the preparation or desire for motherhood" (180). Othermothers not only feel accountable to their own kin, they experience a bond with all of the Black community's children.

"Motherhood-whether bloodmother, othermother, or community othermother-can be invoked as a symbol of power by African-American women engaged in Black women's community work" (192). "Moreover, much of U.S. Black women's status in African-American communities stems from their activist mothering as community othermothers. Some of the most highly respected Black women in working-class Black neighborhoods are those who demonstrate an ethic of community service" (192). "Black women's involvement in community work forms one important basis for power within Black civil society. This is the type of power many African-Americans have in mind when they describe the "strong Black woman" they hope will revitalize contemporary Black neighborhoods. Community othermothers work on behalf of the Black community by expressing ethics of caring and personal accountability" (192). "Viewing motherhood as a symbol of power can catalyze Black women to take actions that they otherwise might not have considered" (192).

The fourth and final article, written by Kathryn Edin and Maria Kefalas, is entitled "Unmarried with Children." The article takes a look at poor women's attitudes on and experiences with marriage and childbearing. It also addresses what society can do to help these women get out of poverty.

Edin and Kefalas write, "Promoting marriage among the poor has become the new war on poverty. And it is true that the correlation between marital status and child poverty is strong. But poor single mothers already believe in marriage" (17). A mother featured in the article, Jen, insists that she will walk down the aisle one day. "Most poor, unmarried mothers and fathers readily admit that bearing children while poor and unmarried is not the ideal way to do things" (17). When the authors asked mothers like Jen what their lives would be like if they had not had children, "they expected them to express regret over foregone opportunities for school and careers. Instead, most believe their children "saved" them. They describe their lives as spinning out of control before becoming pregnant" (18). "Children offer poor youth like Jen a compelling sense of purpose" (18). Jen paints a before and after picture of her life that was common among the mothers they interviewed. "Before, I didn't have nobody to take care of. I didn't have nothing left to go home for...Now I have my son to take care of. I have him to go home for...I don't have to go buy weed or drugs with my money. I could buy my son stuff with my money!" (18).

Few of these poor mothers have given up on the idea of marriage. "However, for the poor, marriage has become an elusive goal, one they feel ought to be reserved for those who can support a "white picket fence" lifestyle" (18). "These poor young women insist on being economically "set" in their own right before taking marriage vows" (18). "Jen measures her worth as a mother by the fact that she has managed to provide for her son largely on her own" (20). "Notably poor women do not reject marriage; they revere it. Indeed, it is the conviction that marriage is forever that makes them think that divorce is worse than having a baby outside of marriage. Their children, far from being liabilities, provide crucial social-psychological resources-a strong sense of purpose and a profound sense of intimacy" (21). In the end Jen believes Colin's birth has brought far more good into her life than bad.

The last thing this article addresses is what society needs to do to help these women get out of poverty. Edin and Kefalas write, "Until poor young women have more access to jobs that lead to financial independence, until there is reason to hope for the rewarding life pathways that their privileged peers pursue, the poor will continue to have children far sooner than most Americans think they should, while still deferring marriage. Marital standards have risen for all Americans" (22). "The poor want to marry to but they want to marry well" (22). Our society needs to create more jobs for these women so that they can pull themselves up from where they had the misfortune of starting. This might also include much better and readily available child care, as many of these young women will need to have their children looked after if they do get jobs.

My opinion is that I respect the attitudes these women have on marriage and childbearing. I thought it was inspirational that these women are able to acknowledge the fact that having a child may have actually helped them. It was not the attitude I expected to hear when starting this article. My opinion on what we should do for them is clearly stated in the above paragraph and i believe it to be incredibly necessary.