Study: Working Moms Don't Have a Negative Impact on Kids
RSSBy Lauren Barack
A new study may help ease some of the guilt felt by working moms. Researchers found that when it comes to emotional, social, or cognitive development, kids with mothers who had full-time or part-time jobs during the first 12 months of their lives fared just as well as those with stay-at-home moms. "The results show conclusively that the overall effect of 1st-year maternal employment for contemporary American children is neutral," wrote researchers, who tracked 1,000 American kids from birth to seven-years-old in this month's study, "First-year Maternal Employment and Child Development In The First 7 Years." With 80 percent of mothers now working in their child's first year of life-75 percent of whom work full-time-understanding how their work affects their child's long-term outcome is of great concern to many, researchers says. And interest in how American kids are faring, particularly as they approach school years, is growing if you factor in the conundrum that two-income families are increasingly the norm. While researchers found that working itself in the first year of life didn't appear to have a net negative effect on a child, other factors could sway outcomes, particularly the quality of child-care that a child received and when exactly a mother returned to full-time work. Depending on the quality of the centers, kids who attended daycare centers at the age of three appeared to increase cognitive development, which itself could be dependent on the financial ability of a family. Also, children whose mother returned to full-time work when their child was three-months-old did eventually show "more caregiver- and teacher-reported externalizing problems at age 4.5 and 1st grade," wrote researchers. American mothers typically return to work after three months to protect their jobs after the unpaid 12-weeks they're granted through the Federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) runs out. Researchers found that being able to push back on when a mother returned to work, whether full-time or part-time, could be key as the ability to stay home longer did have a strong positive influence on children, the study says. Researchers then concluded that policy changes ranging from greater extended leave for mothers to better child care could greatly influence the positive growth of a child. "This, while we must be cautious in drawing policy implications, our findings do support for the conclusion that outcomes for children might be better if the United States moved to a longer period of paid parental leave, offered parents the right to request PT or flexible hours and provided more support for quality child care and for preschool and prekindergarten programs," wrote researchers. Sorry, but longer, mandated (especially paid) parental leave will never happen in the United States. Working parents in this country have little to no support from employers and your lucky if your employer allows you to use up your vacation and sick time will on maternity leave in order not to lose your income entirely. I haven't worked for any public library that would be willing to give someone in my position flexible hours or return part-time unless I have leave available to me. You are expected to work during the hours the library is open, not what's convenient to your childcare situation. It doesn't end for working parents once their child enters school since school hours don't match most people's work hours and the 2 months off in summer don't help either. It's tough if you have to work and have kids that's why we're only having 1. These studies always start out rosy but end with the conclusion that unless you can afford quality (which never seems to be defined) care and can stay home longer you are doing harm to your child. All this so much depends on your situation. When my children were small, my husband and I chose to work opposite shifts so one of us would be home with the kids and no babysitter/daycare was needed. But, we were in the position where his workplace offered evening hours. I also made the choice to put myself in a position where I could make my own hours flexible by becoming a director in a small association library that was full of other working moms. I took a cut in pay and lost 10 years in the NYS retirement system by doing that, but I wouldn't change that decision for all the money in the world.
Family comes first no matter what, and I have made that clear in every single job interview I've ever done. If the organization doesn't share that value, I don't work for them, period. I've missed out on some sweet jobs, but, again, I wouldn't change my career decisions at all. I'm still waiting for a study that determines if working dads have a
negative impact on kids. What are we, as librarians, doing about this? A friend of mine works for a
publisher in midtown manhattan and was able to get a flex-schedule and
was provided with child-care onsite so that she could visit with her son
during her breaks until he was 4 or 5. Does anyone work for a school or
a library where this is happening? If most of us are women, why aren't we
organizing a push for this to be the standard? * = Required information
Reader Comments (4)
Posted by Mary on August 24, 2010 01:35:45PM
Posted by Patty on August 24, 2010 04:10:09PM
Posted by Cara on August 24, 2010 08:04:25PM
Posted by Jessica on August 26, 2010 03:55:55PM
