Low labour participation by mothers
- Thread starter arbitron
- Start date
Personally, I stopped working when my oldest was 2. Not because of financial pressure, because I just couldn't stand it anymore. We had 0 external support. I worked long hours in a career that I had worked to build for 10 years. My husband was great at home, collecting my son from childcare, doing everything until I came home to a sleeping child. It just didn't work, probably for me more than for him.It was never an aspiration or a life goal. I was at breaking point. There was no part-time available in my department. And in my position, part-time was not an option.
I’d tend to agree. Which makes the pursuit of equality of outcome a nonsense.
I've said many times that half of the best and most talented people are women (obviously) so retaining them in the workforce is important for the economy and society. That won't be done by giving them more of the things men want. It will be done by finding out what they want and offering those things to them.
Last edited:
I suspect your experience is not unique.
Equality of outcome is always undesirable as a societal goal. In fact it is evil.
Equality of opportunity is what we should be aiming for.
Women should not be constrained from participating in the workforce due to childcare issues. That doesn't mean that parents who choose to spend more time with their children and commit less to their job should get the same outcomes as those who sacrifice time with their children to concentrate on their job.
What's that got to do with anything?
The thread title refers to 'Mothers', unless there have been massive advances in medical technology, I think we can safely say it doesn't refer to men.
I struggle to believe that most women who give up work want to do so purely because they want to care for children full time. I would say it is the minority. Education rates are so high, labour market participate rates are so high in the early career stages. Being a stay at home parent is a tough job in itself, and is the polar opposite to a lot of the careers that women are seeking these days that involve an entirely different skill set and fulfillment outcomes. No one is choosing it lightly, I would argue that most women try everything to stay in the workforce before they eventually leave.
And that when the decision comes to have one parent at home more, it is almost always the mother as their career path has been interrupted by the very nature of mothers taking breaks from work and not being able to commit to career progression and therefore they are paid lower than the father of the same children.
And that when the decision comes to have one parent at home more, it is almost always the mother as their career path has been interrupted by the very nature of mothers taking breaks from work and not being able to commit to career progression and therefore they are paid lower than the father of the same children.
I don't think that's a secret.
So what?
Silversurfer
Registered User
- Messages
- 228
Like you I was a working (full time) mother. It was the general consensus amongst working mothers that it was unviable to work before the children started school. However it was very worthwhile (financially & career) to stay in employment. I chose to stay working. However many of the very educated women who gave up work while their children were young found it nearly impossible to re-enter the workplace later on.
That's correct. I still don't get how the gender of people posting is relevant.
I fully agree. I never went back fully, I am self-employed. I think that the fact I just could not manage the first time around made me wary of going back full-time. I tried to find a part-time position but ended up doing what I currently do. Financially, not a solution at all but for me, a balance. I work around everything else. My advice to my young self would be to plan a more flexible career before having children (or at least think about it more carefully) and pay for any support when you need it. I know I was naive and as I had always been very career-focused, it was a total shock. At the end of the day, I was lucky I had a choice and if I hadn't, I would have had to make it work. I am still lucky that I do something I like workwise, even if it is limited.
Last edited:
The evidence would strongly suggest otherwise.
Yes, as does anyone who spends less time in the workforce.
Enlighten me please. I certainly don't know the answer
Does this include the possibility of the father being the one to stay at home?
My husband did actually consider it at the time. I was more paid than him and more career-focused I suppose. I don't know if he would have committed to it. But he suggested it.
Indeed. Doesn't stop you opining though!
Yes. We considered all options, as do most families I am sure. Stay at home, part time, parental leave, mother at home, father at home. In the end my taking a sideways move that dramatically reduced commute times to facilitate childcare was the short term answer. And then Covid actually was what kept us both working as the workplace changed so much for us both and that increased flexibility got us over the hump of the early years and allowed us to work out a schedule to keep us both working while doing the things we do with our kids - albeit a very busy one!