work with no financial gain

Motek

Mon, Apr 04 2005, 2:37 pm

Mishpacha magazine, a publication for chareidim, saw fit to publish this letter to the editor. It also saw fit to place it in a special box, setting it off from the other letters. I saw fit to post it in this thread.

Surely the author of the letter is as entitled to her opinion as anybody else, or is it okay to be judgemental of her? Confused

Tefila

Mon, Apr 04 2005, 2:48 pm

I think not only should we find articles or letters that agree w/h our thoughts and actions but also articles or letters that don't and that will give us food for thought. Sometimes too the truth to something hurts but I don't see anything wrong if anything only good can come from this letter.

Twisted Evil

Maybe some fights in the process I'm sure the author was aware of controversy that would surround her letter to the editor, but the end is what counts Very Happy

P.S. I still plan on working half day come sept Exclamation

deedee

Mon, Apr 04 2005, 3:19 pm

Quote:

and knows that being home with kids 24/7 is too much for her, I.e. she will end up resenting being home all day, or she won't have patience for her kids, of couse it is better for her to go out for however long she needs, and when she comes back she is excited and happy to be with her kids.

so why have kids in the first place if you only want to be around them when its convieient to you or when you are in the mood to have them around? its ok for children to know that mommy has feelings too, not only happy (when she sees them after work).
there are ways to be a SAHM and find the "relief" you need. date nite, girls nite, bath time etc...

Quote:

she needs,

after you have kids it not just "she" anymore! its not only about your needs.

gryp

Mon, Apr 04 2005, 3:31 pm

Quote:

there are ways to be a SAHM and find the "relief" you need

very true, deedee! although its not easy to find what are substitute outlets for getting out of the house, a social life, and working, bh, I found it for myself. of course, I think that staying home with my child is more important to me then the other things which is why I found the substitutes to begin with.
I think that my childs needs of having his mother take care of him all day, is more important than any other need I can think of that I might have.
although if you really do need the money, I can understand a mother going to work, because in that case the needs change, and since children need food and shelter, the mother then needs to go to work also.
one of my friends used to always say, "I cant be home all day, I need to go out, see people, etc." and when she had another baby decided to stay home anyway because child care was too hard to arrange. now she says, "I cant believe I used to think I had to be out of the house every day. life is so much simpler when I can stay home, take care of my own kids, and do stuff around the house."

Motek

Mon, Apr 04 2005, 4:32 pm

and let's remember that this thread is called Work With No Financial Gain, and that the letter to the editor spoke of those who have a choice and can either stay home or work.

lucy

Mon, Apr 04 2005, 8:55 pm

Let's give an actual scenario to maybe help clarify for ppl. What if someone feels they need for their sanity to get out of the house for a few hours a day. So what if they teach for lets say 3hrs?What if it's during the time where their child sleeps for a majority or the whole time? In that case I don't think it would be bad. Everyone has to also realise yes the best thing is to have the mother home with the child, but if the mother needs those few hours for her sanity to feel that when they return to their children they have more patients etc., then maybe it's okay. Noticed I said a few hours, not a whole day that is plain selfishness (only in the case of working without financial benefit, not if they have to parnasah wise)

Pearl

Tue, Apr 05 2005, 9:09 am

freilich wrote:

Sometimes too the truth to something hurts but I don't see anything wrong if anything only good can come from this letter.

truth in the eyes of the beholder.........sorry, can't see anything good coming out of that letter, so far......

Tefila

Tue, Apr 05 2005, 10:28 am

Quote:

Would you work if it was not even worth it finacially??
Is it worth it to get a job which after taxes only covers babysitting?

Pearl this was the origin of the thread. We are not talking about those who need it. Confused

Pearl

Tue, Apr 05 2005, 10:37 am

minus of the written discussion is that sometimes I can't seem to get my point accross..
I know what the original topic is, but I just think that if a mother needs to work because they need her income, or if a mother needs to work in order to keep her sanity - then that's her business and that of her family! she is entitled to it either way.
it's a hot topic where I live (mothers here are very much against day care, although it could be an added value for a child to be in day care, even when the mother doesn't work full time), and I just think it's a shame women need to defend themselves to women for this choice.

Motek

Tue, Apr 05 2005, 1:28 pm

if her sanity is truly at stake, then perhaps she shouldn't have children, or more children

sounds like a question for a rav

1stimer

Tue, Apr 05 2005, 1:35 pm

Motek wrote:

Mishpacha magazine, a publication for chareidim, saw fit to publish this letter to the editor. It also saw fit to place it in a special box, setting it off from the other letters.

You yourself has said that u don't agree with everything they print...

Quote:

I saw fit to post it in this thread.

please explain why?

1stimer

Tue, Apr 05 2005, 1:40 pm

deedee wrote:

so why have kids in the first place ...

oh... I can provide my kids with a warm, loving jewish home, be there for them spiritually, physically and emotionally most of the time, but should I have kids b/c I can't do this 24/7 sometimes I need a break and need to get out to work? hmm, bettter talk to my dr about brith control then...

Tefila

Tue, Apr 05 2005, 2:13 pm

1st timer why can't a kosher letter to a kosher magazine be posted over here Confused

. It doesn't mean we have to agree w/h what she wrote you know.
Or is it b/c it might send some of us, incl me on a guilt trip . And whats wrong w/h that anyway Confused

Motek

Tue, Apr 05 2005, 2:20 pm

explain why? seems rather obvious - it's on the thread topic (more than can be said for lots of other posts on this forum! Wink

)

Wed, Apr 06 2005, 12:29 am

This is an interesting topic with good points on both sides.

The perfect mother :
I think that society and the media has somewhat brainwashed moms into thinking that they must be perfect- always happy, always understanding of their children and always available 24/7. If they are not - the children could be traumatized forever ! In real life, I think, moms can get tired of parenting, can get bored of it and can choose to read a book ( for example) instead of playing with the toddler once in a while. Or twice in a while, even.

The trauma of having a working mom:
Children are pretty flexible- in the olden days the women would run the shops while the men learned, for example. And where were the kids ? Was someone always with them ? Were they being watched 24/7 to make sure their every need was met ? By today's standards those parents were neglectful if not abusive. And it is true that their children were not traumatized by the working of both parents, for the most part. That said, I will agree that today's society is different, comparing is useless and so on. It's just that I don't think that having someone else watch your child is inherently traumatic. If your childcare arrangements are good, there is no reason to think your child will be damaged. In many cultures ( Russian, for example) it is completely acceptable to leave a baby with the grandparents for several months or even years ( !) while the parents finish up whatever they need to do. It sounds totally bizarre to Americans, but it is just a cultural difference and I don't think all those children have been traumatized. Now if the child is not loved, is really abused or in an orphanage- that's a different story.

Working vs. not working
Stay at home moms have chosen to make taking care of their family their main job and naturally, they want to excell at it, just like anyone wants to excell at any job. But some SAHMs feel that those who have not made that same decisions are obviously worse parents because they are not as dedicated to their job. In my experience, this is not true- there are stay at home moms whose children are out of control and houses are messy and they are way more stressed out than other working moms that I know. Each situation is to be taken on an individual basis and I do not feel comfortable positing that all sahm are better parents or some other such silliness.

Finally, the effects on the child : I think it is crucial for the child to know that although s/he is loved dearly, there are other things in mommy's life. Whether that is work or volunteering or a hobby or whatever. Kids without this awareness, kids who think they are the center of their parents' lives often run the risk of growing up into HUGE brats. So, whether you stay at home or not- make sure you have something else going on in your life, not only for your sanity's sake but also for your kids.

sarahd

Wed, Apr 06 2005, 3:32 am

Thank you, mp. I think you put that very clearly and I agree with you.

daisy

Wed, Apr 06 2005, 9:41 am

mp wrote:

Children are pretty flexible- in the olden days the women would run the shops while the men learned, for example. And where were the kids ? Was someone always with them ? Were they being watched 24/7 to make sure their every need was met ? By today's standards those parents were neglectful if not abusive.

Was that really the norm, anymore than kollel is today? And like you said, today's society is different. In those days, the shops were likely connected to the home and the kids were around and helping out. The parents were likely not entertaining the kids all day, but they were there to attend to needs as they arose. There was also a much better support system of extended family and older children who were not away in school all day.

Quote:

If your childcare arrangements are good, there is no reason to think your child will be damaged.

That is a big IF. There are some situations which could work, for example, if a child spends the day with loving grandparents it is quite different than many of the other options available. Do people really want a nonJewish or nonreligious caregiver with their children for most of their waking hours? Or what about the (nonlicensed) home daycares that have more children than can physically be cared for?

Just think about how trying it is for a mom who loves her kids dearly to spend 8+ hours a day with her children (as attested to by the posts here). Why would we think that for a mere $5-$10 an hour someone else is going to just be able to shower our children with the care, love, chinuch, and attention they need that we can't give them.

Quote:

kids who think they are the center of their parents' lives often run the risk of growing up into HUGE brats

I would say that for older children, but for infants under 1 year, that is not the case. Unless the mother is totally incompetent, there is really no one better than the mother to care for a child that young.

Gosh, MP, I really did not intent to rip apart your post. I was actually thinking about this topic all night, before I even read your post.

I also wanted to say that I agree with Motek printing the letter. It definitely belongs as a valid opinion in a discussion such as this. For people that it evokes a strong reaction, human nature dictates that strong reactions indicate something in oneself that asks to be addressed.

I've noticed that certain other topics also evoke this reaction, such as breastfeeding. I will not go into that here, as it is off topic. However, just because something is best, does not always make it popular. For example, we all know that diet and exercise help people lose weight and lower their cholesterol, etc, but how many people really do that? Imagine if it was not OK to express that fact because people don't like it and it doesn't work for them? And I guess that we will always find some people who live long, quality lives although they eat poorly and have sedentary lifestyles.

Pearl

Wed, Apr 06 2005, 9:46 am

mp, thank you for your post!

Tefila

Wed, Apr 06 2005, 10:49 am

And look at women who worked in those days Like Sara Schneirer, Rebbetzin Chana and Rebbetzin Devorah leah just to mention a few!!

So yes in those days you had women who worked to support their husbands in Torah study. However in those days everyone eighther had a Bubby, Zaidy looking after the Kids or great neighbors, aunts, etc. Nowadays we have strangers watching our kids like nannys etc.
Food for thought Confused

But agreed a women should have an outlet wether volunteer or working Exclamation

Pearl

Wed, Apr 06 2005, 11:11 am

Quote:

freilich wrote:

But agreed a women should have an outlet wether volunteer or working Exclamation

AGREED!!