Parenting time on the rise?
-
There was an interesting article in the New York Times yesterday that reviewed a recent finding that there has been a dramatic increase in the amount of childcare time spent by parents today as compared with parents in the mid-90s. Having been a parent in the 90s (and still one today) I'm curious if those of you with small children feel that you spend significantly more time on child care than your parents, or older siblings, etc. The article claims that before 1995 mothers spend an average of 12 hours per week caretaking their children and by 2007 that number has risen to 21.2 hours. I find this astounding. :)
Apr 7, 2010
4 Answers
-
I read the Well Blog article. I can't say that I put much confidence into its statements about an increase in parenting time. In fact, I think its a bunch of hooey ! Sorry...... I'm old school on the parenting topic. Working parents, nannies, programmed kids, play-dates, driving to and from those overprogrammed activities and play dates -- surely that does not account for more time spent with children! Yes - I'll say it again -- I'm old school. Plus, I'm a Grandmother. What do grandmothers know, right? In my day, the majority of Mothers did not work and were the sole caregivers for their children. Fathers were less involved than they are today --- and this was not a good thing ! Over all, I believe that parenting time has decreased in the last 35-40 years or so. And, if this is so, I do not think it a healthy trend.
Apr 8, 2010
-
One possible interpretation (and I don't know if it's correct) is that the numbers reflect higher levels of stress and guilt on the part of the parents. The article sells the data as an answer to guilty parents, but it's as possible that it's guilty parents who don't feel like they're in touch with their kids' lives that are behind the change. This would account both for a decrease in overall time spent with kids and an increase in "quality" time spent with kids. If so, I don't know that it's a good thing. The times spent with my parents that I remember best from when I was a kid were often the times I was helping my parents around the house or something -- not times when my parents were explicitly focused on me.
Apr 14, 2010
Jeremy
WI
-
A lot of my parenting time is spent driving my kids places. When I was a kid, we played with neighborhood kids now I drive my kids to playdates (for which I may or may not stick around). I rode my bike to Little League and swimming and now I drive my kids. 21.7 hours a week on childcare? If you throw in driving, sometimes I feel like I spend that amount of time every day. So, yes, time intensive but generally not good, quality time.
Apr 8, 2010
Anonymous
-
Very interesting. The article certainly echoes our situation, and now that I think about it, we probably are spending a good bit more "child care" hours than my parents.
My mom worked full-time after I was 6 months old (minus some months maternity leave with my younger brother). I worked full-time after my son was 5 monhs, but now, after my daughter, am working something like 60-70% time. The time that I'm not working is about half quality child time.
My mom did the bulk of the childcare (she and my father both say it was virtually 100% my mom, although I do remember playing games with my dad). My husband and I share the child care equally (aside from the hours I spend with them while he's working full-time), and he's working fewer hours than before we had kids.
Adding that up, I'm guessing we're spending 15% more of my time and 85% of my husband's non-working time on kid-related stuff than my parents did.
Not sure how it shakes out vs. my husband's parents who were stay-at-home-mom, full-time dad. Stay-at-home-mom does not = 100% of the workweek in quality childcare hours (because of all the other household responsibilities), but I'd guess does add up to something more than my current 15%. My husband's dad also claims to not have done any of the childcare.
(Another confounding factor, we chose to have children close together, something my mom as primary caretaker and full-time employee would not / did not choose to do. One of our hopes in doing that was that it would give us more freedom sooner as the kids grow up - yet to be seen).
It's worth stating that both sets of parents are more than a little amazed by my husband's "co-primary" role in childcare. ;)
Apr 8, 2010
Anonymous
"In days of old" a parent who was a full time stay at home care provider for children must have, by circumstance, involved children in activities that may not technically be thought of as childcare. This is because without a nanny, housekeeper, repairman, gardener, or babysitter, the stay at home parent still had to complete all household chores with the child present! Years ago, there was also no ordering of household or grocery items from the internet. Everything was completed by the parent with child or children in tow! What this meant was that children at young ages learned to change sheets, dust, vacuum, do laundry, cook, clean bathrooms, shop, do household repairs, go shopping, do yardwork etc ---- because there was no other way to accomplish these tasks without their presence! Thus, all of those activities turned into times of education, play (and even fun at times! ) for parent and child. This being said, it took 2-3 times longer for the task to be accomplished ! Imagine if you will, a full time parent mowing the lawn with a crawling baby and a 4 yr old " helping" ! ( They couldn't be left alone in the house, could they?) I think I've made my point.... There is no wonder for me at all, that both of my grown children are very capable of completing almost any household or child care task they face. Their childhood trained them for this.... and they had plenty of time for " real" play too !
- Suzanne, Apr 8, 2010
Log in to answer this question.
Related Questions
- Blog
- |
- |
- |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Advertising
- |
- Feedback Always Welcome
images © babymoon photography, used with permission.
You make a good point, Suzanne. The article may be hooey, or it may be some careful definition of "child-centered time" (which may still be hooey ;). The authors of the study are not adding up *all* hours with children but only "child-centered" hours - so dinner, and housecleaning with the kids, and kids playing in the house but not playing with the parent, I gather would not be counted:
"Notably, the data in the Ramey study do not count the hours mothers and fathers spend “around” their children — at the dinner table, for example, or in solitary play. Instead, the survey tracks specific activities in which the parent is directly involved in the child’s care."
My read is that parents may be spending less overall time with their kids today (the point you made above) and still be spending more "child-centered" time with the kids - which, as mamapajama says, "astounds" me too. Especially they cite a change since the mid-90s? How is it even possible that there could be such a seismic change in 15 years?
- andrea, Apr 9, 2010