Read on Twitter
Every woman I know (that has kids) is the one taking primary responsibility for their kids education, during lockdowns. This means we *cannot* achieve what we normally can at work, or in our activism, or volunteering, or study. https://twitter.com/pregnantscrewed/status/1347817848006189056
This is ‘The Second Shift’ but *exponentially amplified* by a demand to work both shifts simultaneously: we can’t be as productive at both. So, do we let our own life chances suffer? Or do we let the life chances of our kids suffer? That’s the equation facing Mothers, today
Mothers working in high risk, frontline occupations (Medicine, Nursing and AHP, Teaching) are having to prioritise their jobs and send their kids to school (even though schools aren’t able to provide a full curriculum for the kids of key workers)
Mothers in working class jobs (supermarkets, Council administration, emergency trades) have no choice but to send their kids to school (even though schools aren’t able to provide the full curriculum)
Mothers that are unable to work because of sickness or Disability may have a choice between the option of having the kids at home, trying to do their online learning, or sending them to school, and allowing an additional vector of transmission into their homes
Some women are demanding that Fathers get more involved. There is resistance from men; I understand the argument that protecting one career in a family is best for the entire unit. (Men also frequently make this argument whether they make more money than their wife, or not)
Sharing all the parenting/education tasks between the parents is obviously more fair than having one parent take it all on: but we single Mothers don’t have a choice. We do the work of 2 parents, every day, whatever happens
What this situation highlights is that the nuclear family cannot provide everything a child needs, unless it has support from wider society. But because of the Pandemic, we can’t use the support of family and friends
What can the State do to support families? Make parental responsibility a justification to request furlough, perhaps? Give some form of incentive (tax breaks? Benefits?) for employers to offer part-time roles to all full-time employees? I’m sure economists have many ideas!
Ultimately, we have to ask searching questions about how best to raise our children. This is real work, and it takes time and effort from invested adults. I suggest that feminist experiments in new models for families might be reconsidered?
Because what most women need, to succeed at work (whilst having children, too) isn’t a husband. It’s a wife.
‘Wife’ can mean a support adult: the means of reproduction of Labour through cooking, cleaning, childrearing. Many men (and women) still have the expectation of this.
‘Wife’ can mean a support adult: the means of reproduction of Labour through cooking, cleaning, childrearing. Many men (and women) still have the expectation of this.
Is it possible to reconstruct our idea of ‘Wife’ to mean ‘equal but complementary partner, with expertise in child psychology, nutrition, education, administration, logistics, management’? Is it possible to get society to value this role as much as paid work?
(Gordon Brown tried to do this, through Tax Credits. One of the most significant achievements of the Blair/Brown years)
Could we see some form of payment made to offer women a real choice between staying at home and paying for childcare?
Could we see some form of payment made to offer women a real choice between staying at home and paying for childcare?
Given that extra £, paid for by general taxation, so that childcare becomes essentially free to the consumer, would most women choose to stay in full time work? Would more women choose part time work/childcare, and a better work/life balance?
