A Woman's Choice

I have never ever imagined that I would not work. When I'm studying languages and teaching others, I feel accomplished. I love being able to provide for myself and rely upon myself. That being said, I respect women who choose to stay at home and raise their children, too.

Some women choose to stay home. Others are forced into the "choice" by inflexible employers and husbands. But they are *not* conquering the world by staying home. I wish bloggers and journalists would stop trying to trick women into thinking they are all the more powerful for spending their days cutting the crusts off of sandwiches.

This article is pretty much pointing to the only good choice being to stay at home, the very thing it says was wrong with the early feminist movement to begin with. Not all women want to stay home with their kids, some are still good mothers but need to find fulfillment in a career. The key here is CHOICE - a women can choose to be a stay-at-home-mom or have a career. Articles such as this, which clearly push the "you can find fulfillment in the home" voice, is very one-way. Every women has the right to decide what is best for her & her family. More people need to respect that.

Every one should be able to choose the situation that is right for their family. There isn't a inherently right or wrong answer to this rhetorical question, and if everyone could walk a mile in each others shoes we could all make it very far. My personal opinion about child rearing, is that your children have two parents that should actively participate in their upbringing. I know there are many opinions arguing for and against the subject, but I want to mention that children are not always better off because they have a stay at home parent. Sometimes it can be just as beneficial to see their parents living, loving, and leading by example. I feel, at the end of the day, the values you raise them with are the most important.

we should also respect them, right?

Bravo! I applaud this article. REAL Feminism is allowing ourselves the freedom to be who we are. Not all women want or can have babies and raise families but, to those of us who do it is great to hear that this choice is also an empowered choice. Let the image of the Mother rise and replace the degraded feminist idea of the mother. Mothers are the most important people in our lives lets give them their due.

When she isn't WRITING for the internet or taking care of her family, Emuna TEACHES classes on Judaism, ORGANIZES gourmet kosher cooking groups and hosts many shabbos guests. Ann Coulter also talks about the importance of staying home, while she is on book tours . . .

It is interesting that the focus of early feminism was gaining access to the workplace. Women did achieve that in the 70's and 80's. The next wave of women's liberation was to be able to achieve family and workplace success. This was the era of my struggle. No man would voluntarily give up the possibility of marrying or having children in order to attain career success! However, that was the underlying assumption for most ambtious women until recently. In order for women to feel comfortble sacrificing economic viability for child rearing, society needs to create infrastructure to secure their economic stability. For example, women who divorce MUST be secure in the ability to reenter the work force. Why not be able to draw social security benefits during the time they are at home raising children? These are just some ways that our society can make the decision to stay at home with children a secure option for women.

I agree wholeheartedly with what the author wrote. I only wish it were considered a viable option for many young women in the Orthodox world. As a day school and seminary graduate, who is now in college, I know that it is common for many young men to want to begin their marriages learning in yeshiva, and I've heard many convincing arguments to defend this lifestyle. Basically, as I've heard it for many people: if you want to marry a talmid chacham you have to accept that he's not going to be working, at least not in the begining. It makes sense, but then, who IS making the livelihood? Unless the parents are supporting, the financial burden rests on the wife. This frustrates me, because wives are supposed to be raising the children,not giving them to nannies or friends to raise while they work. My complaints are usually met with a pitiful smile, and "yeah, well, you gotta sacrifice for some things." I suppose I'm incredibly niave...but I do wish we could have the best of both worlds.

My mother chose to stay home, and was worse off for it. I watched her fall into greater, more horrifying depths of depression year after year. I suffered abuse and neglect at her hands.I understand that this was a result of her mental illness, and I understand that my family's dysfunction was an extreme case. But I think I am qualified by my experiences to say that it is the emotional health of the parents that determines what kind of parents they will be, not how much they are home physically.

Beautiful article.

There IS NO higher profession than to raise the future. Staying home to grow your children IS a FAMILY BUSINESS.

One thing you failed to mention...
Not all women are able to stay home!! You assume that most men are able to support their families financially. This is just NOT the case for so many!

That's so much for writing about this. I work as a teacher and love my job, but when my daughter was young people often called on me to account for my reasons for working only parttime (I had to), and identifying myself as a mother first. I was always irritated by this as it smacked of a lack of choice. Seventeen years later, I am glad I stayed home as much as I could and if anything wish it were more. My daughter is a decent human being, and I am glad for her, for myself and for the rest of the world. Motherhood is no small contribution. Thanks again.

In November 2003, Donna wrote:
Donna wrote:
It breaks my heart to think of all the unheld babies in daycare centers. Even the most loving daycare workers do not have time to hold all the babies.

The "Daycares Don't Care" website shares her opinion for those that have a choice. Its URL is:
www.daycaresdontcare.org

It also contains an interesting perspective on daycares and religion...

Lisa, you said, "the father chooses to decrease his income immediately proceeding the divorce in order to lower the amount of child support and/or alimony he will have to pay"

You need a law like that in California---the father's support is based on his "earning potential" which is what the judge thinks he can earn based on his career-to-date. This rule is to prevent husbands from doing just what you described--becoming unemployed or low-wage, under-the-table employees in order to reduce support payments.

There must be some women attorneys out there who could help you change the law in that regard. Good luck.

I had a different experience with feminism in my life I am now 43,raised on Vietnam daily,race riots,free love,landing on the moon and Mr.Ed.When my father died working was not a choice but a necessity.With 2 older married sisters and 2 younger I felt obliged to make a good example (very hard at any age)My mother was a legal secretary and both my grandmothers had worked all their lives as cooks.Not glorious jobs but someone must do them.I raised 2 of my chidren alone for many years before meeting my husband.Yet choice was gone when I injured myself with some bad eqipment then fired after 2 surgeries.Now I'm a housewife.I found it very hard at first but have since reconciled to it and have never felt better or more at peace with myself and my life. Many are the women who resent the implication that there is a choice to work or not to work.I certainly never thought of it as one.Just something I must do.And they never did get equal pay for equal work.Most of the money is spent defending abortion rights which I cannot abide.It was many years of working with men every day before they realised there were far more woman like myself.Ordinary hard-working women.Like many generations before us!

I also read that Lisa Belkin article, but it bothered me (and several other Times readers as well) that she did not really discuss women who work because they need to.

My husband and I are both teachers with long days, and we do not have the "luxury" of raising our three beautiful (b'ah) children on only one income.

I don't believe this is what Ms. Braverman meant, but I don't appreciate being made to feel guilty when I drop off my children at daycare to go off to teach Torah each morning.

i am jewish on my greatgrandmothers side on my mothers side but i wasn't raised jewish...i was so happy to hear some of the things you said about wives and child rearing...grandma was right and it releaves alot of my guilt of staying home with my daughter when she was young...thank you....mary

I was saddened to see how the discussion of the article reverted back to the usual working mom vs. stay at home mom argument I see in every magazine. I am a professional woman and mother who was brought up by a stay at home mom. I never once thought that I wouldn't have a career, and I also never once thought about how I would feel when I had to go back to work after my daughter was born. No one ever suggested I think about that--I suppose that would have been anti-feminist. I was taught to suppress any instinct to do, and to devalue, the work that woman have traditionally done through homemaking and childraising. I applaud Emuna for bringing up the point that this devaluing is the real anti-feminism. If a woman wants to work outside the home she should have every right to do so, whether she is a mother or not. But to allow the traditional ideas, generated by men, of what work is worthy and what is not to continue is unallowable. That is the careerism she's talking about--teaching women that only work traditionally done by men is of any value.

I am the product of a mother who pursued a career and raised me with extraordinary warmth, nurturing, energy, and care. No, things were not always picture-perfect. The house was not always sparkling and dinner was often take-out. Sometimes I was picked up late at my various activities or didn't get school forms signed on time. But I had the privilege of watching my mother, who had no college education, achieve professional success and financial independence through sheer hard work and perseverance. And she did this without me - even for a minute - feeling insufficiently cared for.



I grew up with many children who had similar experiences. They often did their own laundry or put dinner on the stove before mom got home, but they are more self-sufficient and empowered people for it.



You claim that feminism glorifies careerism. I would argue that you glorify Donna Reedism! Not all homes have to look like Martha Stewart's to be positive places to grow up.



One last note: the reason that raising children well and achieving professional success often drives women to the insanity you speak of is NOT because women belong in the private sphere, but because men's roles have not changed sufficiently to make women's private and public success possible. Entering the professional sphere has not REPLACED women's private role, but merely ADDED to her responsibilities. 90% of working women still take care of the bulk of domestic chores. Sanity for families will come through men's equal or even near-equal contribution to domestic life - NOT women's flight from the world of work.

I honor women's choices; choices to enter the workforce or to stay home, to have children or not to have children, to alternate between being in the work force when the children are older and staying home when they are younger.
However, Ms. Braverman misses much of the picture when she claims that the contemporary women's movement was exclusively about "careerism." The mainstream media may have depicted it that way, but it was not.
It is also about helping victims of domestic violence--in Israel, the United States and all over the world.
It has also been about getting more effective and sensitive treatment for victims of the horrendous crime of rape.
And in the Jewish world, it has also been about utilizing the full capacities of Jewish women to contribute to vital Jewish communities.
Moreover, the fact that Ms. Braverman takes time from raising nine children (an impressive feat in and of itself) to write articles for the Internet shows that she is not exclusively staying home and raising children.
I wish that our economy structured part time work in a way that would have allowed me to have a decent salary and benefits while my daughter was younger.
That would have been ideal for me. But in my household, two full incomes were and are an economic necessity.
We need more generous and well paid family and medical leave options for fathers and mothers--and feminists are at the forefront of leading this battle.
So I do think it is premature and inaccurate for Ms. Braverman to dismiss contemporary feminism as mere "careerism." It is so much more than that.

Thank you for producing such a wonderful and encouraging article!

Emuna Braverman makes some very good points. I was also a stay at home mom for many years even though I too have a masters in psychology. Today, with the increasing divorce rate, the religious world not being exempt from this, leaves many women with large families, many of them with young children,left to fend for themselves and their children, often with little or no support. This happens either because the father of the children chooses to leave the country (this is common in Israel, where many are immigrants), the father chooses to decrease his income immediately proceeding the divorce in order to lower the amount of child support and/or alimony he will have to pay, the rabbanut aids the man in dragging out the divorce proceedings for years, complicating the financial agreement between the divorcing parties, etc., makes it necessay for women to work outside the home when they would rather be home raising their children. Divorce can be positive, there are many marriages which are destructive to the couple, with the fall-out landing on the children. There are also more destructive situation where divorce, for all concerned, is the best choice. When a women is head of a single (divorced or widowed) parent household she rarely has a choice, she can not stay home with her children unless she does not care if they have food to eat or if the electricity stays on. Sometimes even when she goes out to work she still does not have enough money to feed her children, keep the electricity on and clothes and shoes on them. Sometimes communities help, sometimes they do not, but this situation should not exist, and unfortunately it is all too common in Israel. Helping these single (divorce/widowed) mothers to feed their children should be the job of the children's fathers, given that this does not always happen the government (in Israel) and the rabbanut should ensure that funds do get to these women (where poverty is defined at below 3,300 shekels a month, and nobody can feed their family and keep a roof over one's head for that small amount of money). This also does not happen. Monies raised in America for Israel should find it's way to these mothers, but it does not. If we want to contibute to the future of Israel and am Yisrael then we, as a people, need to ensure the physical, as well as spiritual, well being of all the children of Am Yisrael.

True, it would be ideal to be a stay at home mother. True, it would be beneficial for the child. True, it would give huge satisfaction. BUT not all of us have husbands who earn enough to put food on the table. We are a young coupple expecting our first child. Believe me, I would love to stay at home with it when the time comes but as things are we pay our taxes, the phone and the gas, my wages pay for food and our parents help with the heating costs. How could I possibly stay at home?
Please for all the idealism, don't forget: not every working woman seeks a career.

I enjoyed Emunah Braverman's article immensely. It touches on a subject very close to my heart. I think that some women are programmed to stay at home and put all their talents and energy into raising their children (as one of my daughter's in law does with great success), and I think there are others who would mope, climb the walls and feel that they are wasting the best years of their lives engaging in child care exclusively. This type feel they are better mothers when they come home to a housekeeper or children who've just returned from their own framework, and can share with them their day's activities.
<

Having had my only child at 17, I have been a single mother from the start of my adult life. But I finished college. Took corespondence courses and had a Bachelor degree in Philosophy by the time my son was 3. I worked part time at the University daycare from the time he was 2 until I graduated. My son was never in daycare more than 15 hours a week and I saw him most of the time he was there. When I graduated I had planned to go to law school but put it on hold. Instead /i chose to stay home and it can be done even if you are a single mother. I opened my home to 3 other small children and raised my child in my own with company. I am very proud of this accomplishment, this sacrific and this service I supplied to other mothers who needed to work and wanted their children to grow up in a house not an institution. Last August my son turned 8 and now I am in my first year of law school. My child is having trouble adjusting to Mom not being as attentive at home, but I get home by 3:30 every day, the time he is home from school. I'm happy to have been able to spend Erik's early child with him and would like to let single mothers know they have options. The world has niches for everybody.

I chose to stay home and raise my children. When my first son was born I passed up a career opportunity to stay home. my husband and I have never regretted that decision.When my youngest son gets a little older, I will pursue a career. I won't be really young anymore but, I can take my wisdom with me. I won't feel guilty for not being home with my small children. My heart has always put my children first. I am very intelligent and sometimes wish I could use my intelligence to profit financially but, then one of my children call's for me from another room and I realize how important it is for me to be there.There have been alot of people to praise me for being home and people who I know look down on me. The people who look down on me are the ones that seem to have mixed up ungodly lives.Or no children.I think the benefits of a mother being home makes all the difference in the world. It breaks my heart to think of all the unheld babies in daycare centers. Even the most loving daycare workers do not have time to hold all the babies.I realize there are some people who financially can not stay home. I just do not understand how some do choose money over their children.When we are old and our children discard us it will be our own faults.We will have taught them that money and their own lives are far more important.To be important to our children tommorrow, they have to be important to us today. I truly love my children, that's why I chose to stay home.

I agree with everything you said about mothers staying home. My daughter is almost the sole support for herself and her 2 children. Although there are subsidies, she must contribute to her children's tuition at a Jewish day school, and give them a home, food and clothing. I would not advocate that she go on welfare to live. I think it is important for the Jewish community to give support and love to those who do not have this option.

Great article, Emuna. Believe me, men have to deal with this issue although with a slightly different take.

We are not considered "real men" if we forego a promotion because it would take us away from our families too much. In our society, a truly "masculine man" is devoted to climbing the corporate ladder and not to his family.

I can't tell you how many hundreds of people say to me that they can't understand why I "threw away" a career in law to be "just a drug rep". A lot of times those comments make me feel bad and "lesser than". But then, when I am able to see my daughter be Shabbos Ima (mommy)at her school and make the blessings over the candles at the play Shabbos table, I only feel grateful. Because had I been that "big shot lawyer" working 70 hours a week that everyone thought I should have been, I would not have been able to be there to share that moment in time with my little girl.

Unfortunately, most of us are not able to stay home to raise our children.

I'm now doing the work that is really making a difference in my life, that has meaning and is personally appreciated. I was 39 when I finally had my first and only son. I don't think I could have appreciated any of my life now as much as I do if I hadn't already lived the life I had for the previous 20 to know the what it means to make a difference. I teach religious school now to 4th grade. Now that's making a difference! I felt that working for the State Dept. didn't. I was lucky that I had a choice to stay home. You are lucky you could make that choice. If you could do it over, would you have NOT gone to college and instead, "just" had babies and been a housewife? You are also very lucky to have been blessed with so many children.

I'm going to have to agree with the comments of Ava Miedzinski - very well said. I have no choice but to work full time right now. I have two small children that I spend less time with than many other mothers can spend with their children. I make sure to set aside time every day to read with my children, color with them, sing with them, and to teach them things. Almost 2 & 3 1/2 years old, they "help" me in the kitchen, they set the table for me, etc. While I think staying at home can be wonderful for many children, and I applaud mothers that can handle that, I think this article seems to try a bit too hard to make those of us that either have to work or even choose to work feel more guilty than we might have to feel. I do not think my children are deprived - they are bright and happy children that receive lots of love and attention. I think they are better off than some children whose mothers do stay home but do not, even cannot, set aside part of the day to spend quality time with their children. In addition, they had/have the opportunity to play with groups of children their age which is wonderful for them emotionally and developmentally.

I usually agree with all that Emuna Braverman writes, including much of this article, but we cannot lose sight of the fact that not all women have a choice, and that of those that do, sometimes working out of the home might be the right choice. Like Ava Miedzinski said in her comment, it isn't about how much time you stay at home but about what you accomplish with it.

Betty Friedan was not a bored, oppressed housewife like she claimed in her book. She was an ardent, committed Stalinist with a full-time maid and an agenda. She wanted to destroy the traditional nuclear family. So when you say:

"Not all of the women in the much-maligned 50s were unhappy. Not all of the stay-at-home mothers spent their days trying to see their faces in their dishes."

You are validating the premise of her book, in that even if she was wrong in the numbers, there were still legions of unhappy women, and buying into the fraud. How many housewives in the 50s were really unhappy like she portrays? My guess is a lot fewer than we are led to believe today.

That is why the pendulum is swinging back. Since the whole premise of the modern feminist movement was based on a pack of lies, it is eventually doomed to collapse, and the process is gaining momentum.

Even though we have had financial difficulties because of our decision for me to be a stay-at-home mom, we have never regretted our decision. And, more importantly, our children have never regretted it. I knew that I would never hear, "Mom, I wish you had worked more when we were growing up", but for many years now I have heard, "Mom, I know it's been hard but thank you for staying home and always being there for us." Two years ago, when daughter #2 went to Israel and our son left for yeshiva, I went to college. God-willing, I will begin nursing school in January and we will be able to catch up on some bills. I realize that for some families, having a stay-at-home parent is not an option, but when there is an option, think about the impact on your children more than the impact of not having things that have no eternal value.

As a very well-educated woman who left her career to raise her children, I was frequently asked why I would "throw away" my education to stay home...I found the most effective response was to say that "I could never find anyone else with my values and my education who was willing to raise my children for me". If nothing else, I believe this response helped create a new way of thinking for many...

Sometimes I think that if I see one more article about the wonders of choosing to stay home and care for your children instead of persuing a career I am going to scream.
Not because I think that is a bad thing to do... but because it is a very good thing to do, but not a choice for far too many mothers.
I am a single parent with small children. I work full-time in an unsuccessful attempt to make ends meet and am out of the house at least nine hours a day, which this time of year means I barely get to see my children durning daylight hours. Mornings are a mad rush to get everyone off to their respective destinations; evenings are a blind fog in which I try to get them settled and do a bit of laundry or dishes before falling into bed myself. Forget about taking them anywhere - who can afford it? And the icing on the cake is having seen at least half-a dozen articles in the last year extolling the benefits of being a stay-at-home mom.
Feeling sorry for myself? You bet! Give me an article about how to feel happy and fulfilled in my situation and I'll be mighty grateful.

I had a dental practice to operate when I became a mother, and I was totally unprepared for my feelings of wanting to abandon it so that I could stay at home and mother my child. I had baby sitters in the office with us until she was nine months old. Then, I found her a play group, and I worked during those hours that she was in play group. I wasn't sure it would work, but on that first day, when my child saw the other babies and I put her on the floor, she crawled as fast as a baby can and went to play, forgetting all about me. Had it not been for her playgroup, I would not have learned what a sociable baby she really was and how much she needed the company of other little ones. I was lucky, because I could set my own hours, hire help and give my child something that was invaluable for her, even as it allowed me to work. I took on two associates to help reduce my load in the office. I have been lucky to be able to work and be available to my child as she grew up, and she is now in the tenth grade at the Bais Yakov High School of Denver.

Every shabbos, the Eshes Chayil, the Woman of Valor, reminds me that a Jewish woman is taught that she can do everything. No one ever told me, when I was growing up, that a woman was supposed to stay at home until she married off her children, -- my grandmother and my mother certainly did not. My mother worked full time and was very much available to us children as we grew up.

No one told me how I was going to feel when the time came, but I knew instinctively, when I became a mother, that I did need to be available to my child. I'm lucky that I could be, even as I also worked, but more than that, I'm lucky I could be an effective mother. Women who work can certainly be effective parents, and plenty of stay-at-home mothers fail to raise their children properly. It isn't about how much time you stay at home but about what you accomplish with it. I wanted to raise up a Jew, a daughter of Israel. That was my priority, even in all the years that I worked. I never needed to "have it all." I did need to do all that might help my child become a great Jewish woman.

That was not the priority of women I knew who were also raising children, some of them staying at home to do it, and, unfortunately, they didn't get the result I got. They didn't get results they like at all now, but their children never really were the priority. These women just wanted what they wanted, and you risk your own future as well as theirs when you put a priority of your own above what is best for your children.