Stay-at-home or working mum? It’s the choice that matters most

The question of whether a parent – in most cases, mothers – can or should return to paid employment and in what capacity, is once again in the spotlight thanks to a recent study in the American Journal of Family Psychology. The researchers, Cheryl Buehler and Marion O’Brien from the University of North…

46j6g7sv-1327298632 — Parents under the most pressure are those who have to work but would prefer to be looking after their kids. Big Grey Mare Back But Barely

The researchers, Cheryl Buehler and Marion O’Brien from the University of North Carolina, followed mothers for five years after they gave birth and evaluated their parenting, levels of psychological well-being, work-family conflict, and time spent on housework and childcare tasks.

The authors compared three groups of mothers – part-time workers, full-time workers, and those who didn’t work outside the home – and found that both full-time and part-time employment produced similar levels of well-being. Working women were, overall, happier than non-working women.

All the mothers in the study performed more housework and childcare than the fathers, but the partners or spouses of employed mothers did more housework than the spouses of the non-employed mothers. Of course, if one parent is able to stay at home, they are very likely to undertake more childcare and housework than their working spouse.

Part-time workers were more involved in their children’s primary schooling compared with full-time workers. This is hardly surprising – any parent working part time will have more time available to be involved in their child’s primary school than a full-time working parent. And this is not a judgement of “better parenting”.

Full-time workers reported more work-family conflict, which was primarily caused by pressures on time, energy and feelings of guilt. Work-family conflict is an indication than life is complicated and more rushed, but the positives of being a working parenting often balance out the negatives.

Choice matters

Studies show that being in paid work increases your self-esteem and independence as well as bringing greater financial rewards, leading to higher levels of both psychological well-being and physical health.

The more important issue here, and one overlooked by Buehler and O'Brien, is choice. Parents in the position to choose not to work tend to have better outcomes than parents who would prefer to stay at home with their child but are forced to return to work.

Unfortunately, being able to choose is often not an option. A recent study I co-authored with Michael O’Driscoll and Amanda Biggs found the primary reason for new parents returning to work was financial.

Parents with no or limited access to paid parental leave returned prematurely to full-time employment. This had adverse consequences for both the parent (with issues around personal health, child attachment, and breastfeeding) and for their employer (with reduced job commitment and increased turnover intentions).

The Commonwealth Government’s 2011 introduction of statutory paid parental leave is recognition of the benefits of an appropriate period of paid parental leave. Most other developed countries (with the United States now being the exception) have also recognised the importance and cost-benefits associated with statutory paid parental leave.

The other crucial issue also overlooked by Buehler’s study is parental assistance. The availability of third-party assistance with childcare (either formal paid childcare or informal assistance from family members such as grandparents) and/or with housework (with paid cleaners) often contributes more significantly to a parent’s level of well-being and health compared with his or her employment status.

In cultures where extended family members assist with childcare and housework, parents who return to employment experience fewer health and social complications than those within individualistic cultures, where new parents tend to be more isolated and receive less family support.

The real issue, therefore, is not whether paid employment is good, bad or indifferent for parents – it is one of choice and opportunity. Whether you have dependents or not, choosing to work and working in a fulfilling job produces considerable advantages and benefits, especially compared with people who would like to work but are unable to. Similarly, choosing not to work (for family or other reasons) also produces personal benefits.

No one employment pattern is better than another. The parents really under pressure are those who have to work but would prefer to be looking after their children. This is the group that would benefit the most from access to “family-friendly” work places and services.

You are free to republish this article, as long as you follow some simple guidelines, which are summarised here:

You can’t edit our material unless you have the author’s express permission or you are adjusting for relative changes in time, location and editorial style. To make material edits, please contact us
You can run the first few lines of the article only, if you say: “Read the full article at The Conversation” with a link back to the article page on our site.
You must link to us and include links from our story, as well as our page view counter.
You can put our articles on pages with ads, but you can’t sell our material separately.
You can republish individual articles, but you can’t automatically republish all of our articles unless approved by us.
You have to credit our authors and partner institutions in the byline. We prefer “Author Name, Institution” (for example “Bruce Mapstone, CSIRO”).
You have to credit The Conversation and link back to our home page as provided in the HTML.

The full article is available here as HTML.

Join the conversation

Comments (5)

Permalink

3

3 months ago

Kelly Brough

(logged in via Twitter)

insightful unconstructive

The importance of choice cannot be highlighted enough. The ability to choose results in empowerment which in turn breeds success at home and at work. I hope that more and more companies can recognise this in providing flexibility and options for women to make a choice. Working mothers add more than just diversity to a work place. I've seen it within my own teams and hear it from women all the time.

Matt, I'm disappointed in your cynicism. A happy mother is far more likely to raise a happy child. And so is a happy father. I'm sure our author can point to studies that will empirically prove this. In the meantime, let's apply a little common sense.
Permalink

3 months ago

Paul Richards

(logged in via LinkedIn)

insightful unconstructive

WHAT CHOICE?

"The real issue, therefore, is not whether paid employment is good, bad or indifferent for parents – it is one of choice and opportunity." Paula Brough

This is the great irony of the whole equalising of the work place. There is no choice for most women who work to get one degree or more, then work. Finally bearing children handing the child to child carers after the degrees, putting most women in their early thirties raising children. This choice is largely “sold” on the belief…

show full comment

WHAT CHOICE?

"The real issue, therefore, is not whether paid employment is good, bad or indifferent for parents – it is one of choice and opportunity." Paula Brough

This is the great irony of the whole equalising of the work place. There is no choice for most women who work to get one degree or more, then work. Finally bearing children handing the child to child carers after the degrees, putting most women in their early thirties raising children. This choice is largely “sold” on the belief it’s ok to have children twenty years after menarche begins, any doctor will explain this is a not true. So the choice of having children during the best times for bearing them is literally gone form most university educated women.

Not only that, I asked my father what was the difference when he was raising a family compared to today, he said household goods were cheaper and there was great choice because of automation and economies of scale. He also said "his father" [1940/50s] had - one income - to raise a family, and so did he [1970/80s]. Now most family groups need - two incomes - to pay the mortgage, food, clothing and education. Where one income for a couple was more than enough in his fathers day and during his time.

Add the delay in child bearing for Generations Y and Z, to the fact the that female incomes haven't increased in real terms, but male incomes have fallen. Meaning banks now have two people working for a mortgage. Many male and female graduates face and increasing need for more education to keep up their value against emerging economies labour rate for graduates, putting further pressure on the family unit.

As of 2012 house prices in Australian cities are up to ten times that of US, yes the Australian dollar value is high. But the economic reality is either the dollar is low and the rate we work for is diminished as it is in the US or the banking system inflates housing. Either way the outcome is - two incomes - are needed to buy an - average home -, in Australia compared to the “silent” and “baby boomer” and most “X”generations.

We have a fundamental flaw in Australian economics, when the focus has been to either lower our income against the world by devaluing the dollar or increasing housing cost to raise a family in. Preventing the choice alluded in Paula Brough’s article here.   In reality women have little choice, unless a couples parents have been kind to them and given them a leg up financially to afford a mortgage. I wonder what the author of this articles parents have done.

The elusion of choice drives, universities, banking, vehicle, fuel, and child care industries, while keeping the retail economy ticking over with the dream of the white picket fence, filled with appliances, furniture, all to raise the average of just over two children.

Where is development of the child in terms of value systems and those of the mother to impart them in all this?

Ask any mother who works if their child is developing to their full potential, there will be a flood of guilt ridden excuses and rote learned “reasons” why child or after school care has benefits. Every mother knows these reasons aren’t true with an endearing look at the child, as they answer the interior question.

But do university educated women have a choice to start a family at the best time for their body?
Does she have a choice to give up work to develop a child or her children’s full potential from K1-K12?

Yes, if there has been a lot of financial help from “silent”, “baby boomer” or “X” generations. Why is it these previous generations could help if they have?

Because two incomes were not required to pay off a mortgage, buying an average home.
1. Permalink
  
  1
  
  In reply to Paul Richards, 3 months ago
  
  Petrina Reichman
  
  (logged in via Facebook)
  
  insightful unconstructive
  
  Thanks Paula Brough, this article highlights the fact that we are fortunate to have choice which greatly benefits the whole family dynamic, and the children are none the worse for it.
  
  Paul, I am not sure what you are getting at with your comments. A vast number of women across the globe have no choice in even the basic issues of life let alone whether they can go and work or not. It is a choice to seek study too. By the way, women are more than capable of having very healthy children after the…
  
  show full comment
  
  Thanks Paula Brough, this article highlights the fact that we are fortunate to have choice which greatly benefits the whole family dynamic, and the children are none the worse for it.
  
  Paul, I am not sure what you are getting at with your comments. A vast number of women across the globe have no choice in even the basic issues of life let alone whether they can go and work or not. It is a choice to seek study too. By the way, women are more than capable of having very healthy children after the age of 30! I do agree on your economic comments, but this is just a fact of our society, so we make the most of it.
  
  Your statement, "Ask any mother who works if their child is developing to their full potential, there will be a flood of guilt ridden excuses and rote learned “reasons” why child or after school care has benefits. Every mother knows these reasons aren’t true with an endearing look at the child, as they answer the interior question."
  
  This is a very broad generalisation about mothers and the "guilt" they feel. No doubt some mums do feel guilt, and there are a lot of mums who would prefer to stay home with kids (dads too), but there are a lot of mothers who work, and are happy to work, and their kids are normal, healthy and functioning optimally. There are women who prefer to work for peace of mind because it can be extraordinarily difficult raising kids in isolation. Not everyone has family support systems, and our individualistic society is geared towards this.
  
  We need to appreciate the gift of choice, because most of us are lucky to have choice and the capacity to work/study/mother successfully. There is more at stake than just being able to fund the desire for a mortgage and nice furniture. This is not the sole reason women seek work after having a baby. We can still rent a house and live fullfilling lives. Maybe if society shed the expectation that owning your own home is the ideal, we would be happier and healthier.
  1. Permalink
    
    1
    
    In reply to Petrina Reichman, 3 months ago
    
    Paul Richards
    
    (logged in via LinkedIn)
    
    insightful unconstructive
    
    I never said women were not capable of having children after thirty, but the fertility of a woman drops exponentially from the menarche. Accelerating after thirty and forcing many women to seek help of fertility treatment.
    
    The graph below tells the truth, it's about non growing follicle realting directly to fertility lose, between 20-34 lose is dramatic.
    
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Non-Growing_Follicles.png
    
    Some choice. Some gift.
    
    If you don't believe me pick up any medical…
    
    show full comment
    
    I never said women were not capable of having children after thirty, but the fertility of a woman drops exponentially from the menarche. Accelerating after thirty and forcing many women to seek help of fertility treatment.
    
    The graph below tells the truth, it's about non growing follicle realting directly to fertility lose, between 20-34 lose is dramatic.
    
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Non-Growing_Follicles.png
    
    Some choice. Some gift.
    
    If you don't believe me pick up any medical text book on the subject, it will verify this. Believe me there are women close to forty reading this now who know exactly what I mean.
    
    Yes, we hear stories in the press about conceiving later in life. But do we hear about the months of using fertility drugs, or visits to have in vitro or early hysterectomies? The sad fact that some have just left it to late even by their late twenties?
    
    Now both men and women need to earn, two incomes raising a family and paying a mortgage. The banks have made sure mortgages take both incomes.
    
    Instead of forty hours work to pay for expenses of house, provide food, clothing, furniture, education, etc.etc. There is eighty hours work, between both parents.
    Women are now faced with living less privileged lives than previous generations of women or, being educated and employed working during their best chance of bearing children.
    
    Some choice. Their mothers didn't have to rent or sacrifice their children's well being or risk miscarriages by leaving it later in life to bear children, or worse failure to ever conceive.
    
    Was it a leap forward culturally for society or a loss of choice?
    
    Naturally there are those who do have choice, but they have the privilege of being socially assisted by previous generations. Generations who derived their ability to acquire wealth during an era when women had unequal pay, so men worked by default and the banks made sure the monies earned, paid a mortgage.
    
    The fear of loosing the privilege of working means most working mothers live the lie of this being ok or appropriate, even though they feel torn inside.
    
    Not to mention, there also now a clear link between breast cancer and woman's childbearing.
    
    Women need to - earn more - , we have just equalised income by devaluing males earning capacity. Women have lost, the family has lost, men have lost, society has lost, it's an all illusion.
    
    To counter this we bring people into Australia who started child rearing earlier.
    
    Why do women raise children in isolation? We have children's play groups, parents's support networks, friends, community etc.etc. Isolation was not a choice for many women of previous generations, we now grasp socialisation is crucial and have evolved.
    
    The gift of choice, isn't the gift it is made out to be, many women simply have to work to start and continue to raise a family.
    
    If there was true equality, there would be the gift of choice.
    
    The mystery of happiness has been discovered, it is through our rich community of networks with people who matter in our lives that interconnect with our families that we find happiness.
    
    How can a woman build a rich community of people who are aids to her family and life network, just working in a corporate or education setting during child bearing years.
    
    Oh yes with others like herself during time off. Hardly much of a choice.
    
    Is that clearer Petrina?
Permalink

4

3 months ago

Matt Stevens

Senior Research Fellow/Statistician (logged in via email @gmail.com)

insightful unconstructive

This article is all about Mothers - what about the child? Oh, that's right, it is all about the woman's happiness...isn't it? I hope the study, as a whole is looking at range of things including the well-being of the spouse (of those that have one), the child, life expectations etc.

Happiness/well being is very much linked to expectation. This is not to say "lower your expectations and you will be happy", but understanding what you need and not what you want to be happy.

Hot Topics

Stay-at-home or working mum? It’s the choice that matters most

Choice matters

Republish

Join the conversation

Comments (5)

Kelly Brough

Paul Richards

Petrina Reichman

Paul Richards

Matt Stevens

Sections

Founding Partners

Strategic Partners

About us