Saturday
Feb122011
Why always the mother?
Saturday, February 12, 2011 
Researchers evidently think mothers are significantly more important than fathers. Perhaps I should be flattered, but I'm not. I'm annoyed at the amount of blame that gets explicitly and implicitly put on mothers and I'm annoyed at the way fathers are dismissed as insignificant influences on their children's lives.
In a post last week, I mentioned a study called Maternal Employment, Work Schedules, and Children's Body Mass Index by Taryn W. Morrissey, Rachel E. Dunifon and Ariel Kalil that was published in the Journal of Child Development. The study found that: "an increase in the total time a mother is employed is associated with an increase in her child’s BMI; additionally, the association between maternal employment and children’s weight is much stronger at 6th grade relative to younger ages". While the author has been quoted in several news articles as saying that the study is not intended to make mothers feel guilty and stated that "this is not a maternal employment issue; this is a family balance issue" (as reported by CTV), the data and analysis is very focused on maternal employment.
All of the data in the study looks specifically at the mother, the nature and duration of her employment, and its impact on the children's BMI. In addition to the data focusing entirely on mothers, the study also hypothesizes about possible reasons for the findings that focus entirely on the mother, e.g.:
Mothers who work nonstandard hours may not be available during key times in children’s days when they are not in school, including the weekends, late afternoons, dinnertime, the postdinner hours, bedtime, and wake time. These are times during which important family routines are typically performed (family meals, organized activities, bedtime routines, and physical activity). Given mothers’ traditional role as primary caregivers and managers of children’s time (Bianchi, 2000), it is possible that nonstandard schedules hinder mothers’ abilities to plan and supervise their children’s activities during these key times. This, in turn, could have implications for children’s BMI through children’s physical activity and TV time, suggesting particular impacts on children when mothers work nonstandard schedules as compared to mothers working standard schedules.
All of this is plausible, of course, but leaves me wanting to ask "who is caring for these children?" It is entirely possible that while these mothers are at work, that their children are in the care of their lazy fathers who are lounging around on the couch eating a bag of chips and passing on bad habits to their children instead of being actively engaged with their children and preparing nutritious meals for them. I'm not saying that is the case (because we do not know and the fact that we do not know is half of the problem). However, if we are going to place blame, perhaps we should put it on the person who is caring for the children while the mother is at work (father, babysitter, after school program, grandparent, etc.), rather than simply blaming the mother for being absent.
The study at least recognizes this gaping hole in part by saying that it "examined children's BMI in relation to their mothers' work status and schedules, but the role that fathers' work plays in children's physical health remains unexplored."
This is not the only study to do this. I have read numerous studies on various aspects of child development (sleep, discipline, etc.) that look exclusively at maternal characteristics and behaviours and their impact on child outcomes. These studies either:
- specifically seek out families where the mother is the primary caregiver and draw broad conclusions from the data that they then apply to the general population (where the mother is not always the primary caregiver); or,
- look at a broad range of families but still focus exclusively on the mother under an assumption that the father somehow doesn't matter.
A lot of these studies seem to rely, at least in part, on data that is collected through broad statistical surveys of the population. In some cases, when I've e-mailed the researchers, they have stated that they would have liked to have looked at the fathers too, but that the data simply wasn't available. In other cases, the researchers didn't seem to have a great interest in looking at the fathers.
I'd like to see a shift in child development research -- one that gives dads some of the credit and some of the blame -- or that at least realizes that in two parent homes there are, theoretically, at least two adults involved in raising the children. Of course that would only be the tip of the iceberg -- recognizing that there are single parent families, same sex parent families, families with more than two parents, and so on would really throw a wrench into the desire to put everyone into a nice neat box.
Image credit: Adapted from photo by Muffet on flickr
Reader Comments (64)
It has been traditionally the mum's role to look after the children and even though times are changing, it appears that research hasn't caught up yet. There is no doubt that dads play enormous role in the child's development and need to be included.
@Jake, that makes too much sense!
What you just heard is the sound of my jaw dropping! I'd drop that doctor fast, after giving him an education.
Great post, and great discussion -- and not a single troll among the commenters! Refreshing.
I'll just agree with previous comments pointing out that the research could/should look at "two-parent homes in which both parents work" and then not assume it's the working parent(s)' fault but the actual caregiver's fault (if "fault" we must find) for feeding the wrong things. Or not engaging the child in activities. Or being too poor and uneducated to know any better. Or having two TVs etc etc.
I had a mom who worked outside the home for most of my childhood and adolescence (way back in the dark ages; I was born in 1957). Some of the time we had a grandparent living with us. It was not easy, and even after she remarried my mom definitely got the responsibility for most of the childrearing and homemaking chores. Being the only girl most of the time (my stepsister only lived with us for less than 2 years), I got saddled with more than my share of household chores. My brothers got to concentrate on sports, friends, music, etc. I hope younger generations are coming to appreciate all contributions of both parents and as well as children, not just those that bring in money.
I have always wondered the same thing. It is insulting to my husband to think that he doesn't have jack to do with influencing our children.
Great post and comments! I have enjoyed following this. I did comment earlier.
I wanted to let you know that there is a parallel discussion on fathers going on over at Huffington Post (and cross-posted at the Good Men Project). I would love it if some of you would join the conversation!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrea-doucet/women-breadwinners_b_828285.html
ttp://goodmenproject.com/families/breadwinning-wife-defends-slower-pace-men/
(And please note, I did not choose the title.. it was an editorial decision!).
I think you are absolutely right that there are major confounding variables that went unexplored in this study. If my husband were a stay-at-home dad, my kids would be MUCH chubbier. There is no way he would take the effort that I do to stock and prepare fresh foods. Nor would the babysitter.
[...] This is not the first example of backlash against moms who spend a lot of time on social networking sites. I’ve seen articles about parents ignoring kids in favour of their smart phones, and I’ve witnessed an uproar when a mother tweeted, asking for prayers as paramedics worked on her dying son. And while dads do face questions about balancing social media and family, I definitely feel that the censure is focused mostly in the direction of mothers. I think that Annie at PhD in Parenting would call this another example of blaming the mother. [...]
I think that is a pretty outdated idea of families in which a father is present. Even in single parent homes fathers are present somewhere. I feel that a father's role in rearing his children is being taken a little lightly, even if they don't live with kids full-time, they still matter since they still influence a child's life
I would think that incarcerated fathers would be easy to pin down for research?
Andrea Ducet, I am afraid you are trapped in a self societal bias. The mere title of your book
"Do Fathers Mother" is insulting to men in itself. Perhaps a less bias title would be "Do fathers parent" to which the answer is obvious in and of itself. Being a mother or a father is being a parent of equal value. You are under a stereotypical myth that defines mothers as the nurturers and primary caregivers. Well anyone with there eyes open know that fathers instincts are equal to mothers as far as child rearing goes, including nurturing, love and the need to protect. The unfortunate part of this parenting dilemma aside from the obvious media painting the dad in a false negative light, is that society makes a dad feel awkward if he acts out his nurturing instincts in public, he is given an evil eye by women and made to feel uncomfortable. So this is a self fulfilling paradox created by women in society to keep men from being equals. Fortunately in today's world. It has been an uphill battle for us dads, but like other injustices and ignorance in the past, this challenge will be won for the sake of all children.
I wonder if they did that same study on bmi for father's employment. Is it the sex of the parent that really matters?
Perhaps these studies are conducted with an aim to improve maternity benefits, working/flex hours for mothers and other benefits that would great help the whole family. Maybe these studies will use their conclusions for the betterment of family social welfare.
Cynthia: That is great, but paternity (or just general parental) leave and flexible working conditions are also important for fathers. If more men were encouraged to take time off, fewer women would be overwhelmed by trying to do it all.