Psychobabble

I agree with the previous brilliant bloggers - many children seem to be getting stuck in the present discrepency between antiquated social policies and the current practices of many American families. I was just thinking a little about how we might understand this practical gap from a theoretical perspective...

As America becomes more and more powered by corporations pushing consumerism and drifts farther away from Judeo-Christian values, social policies seem to be in a quandry. Present family-focused social policies stemmed from the Christian worldview of work, family, and overall purpose in life. Today, however, we live in a culture very much affected by mantras of materialism, where most people require a higher standard of living than ever before. Practically this means that many families cannot attain their minimum standard of living without both parents working. On a deeper level, Americans are very concerned with the "pursuit of happiness" which is now often conceived totally independently of spiritual purposes and ideas. As such, we want the option of working if our jobs make us happy and fulfilled, divorcing if our spouses make us miserable, and being a parent if we so choose.

I do believe in democratic government and consequently believe that it is "the (voting) people" who have to choose social policies that match their values. It will be interesting to see how people vote in coming elections. One thing I often have to remind myself is that the country is far larger than my scope. Those of us blogging, researching, and writing in academia and the folks I grew up with in Southern California think one way, but it may be that the values of the majority of America have not changed so much.

Ever since the 1970s the number of women entering the workforce in the U.S. has increased drastically. Unfortunately social policy has not sufficiently adjusted to this influx. Instead, American families are doing the bulk of the adjusting: parents split shifts (leaving one parent at home at all times to watch the kids, but little time to see each other), cram their work into 4-day work weeks (hoping to have a longer weekend), telecommute (working from home via computer while attempting to keep an eye on the kids), or drop off the kids at daycare. All this is much more possible for parents with the funds and social connections to do so. But what about lower-SES parents, who barely make enough money to pay the rent and utilities, let alone provide their toddlers with quality care? Their options are far more limited, and the majority of the time, they are left with little choice but to engage in a "patchwork of care": leaving the child with whomever is available that day-- a neighbor, a day care that may or may not be high-quality (and, as is the case with many low- or no-cost day care, often is not), an older child, etc. The case is even worse when families are headed by only one parent, often a single mother. She doesn't even have the option to stay home from work or take maternal leave.
American social policy needs to adjust to the changing times. Whether we like it or not, Americans (both moms and dads) are working harder, and longer hours, than ever. We need to encourage the creation and maintenance of high-quality day care for those parents who cannot supervise their young children during the day. We need paid maternal leave-- not simply "sick leave," or unpaid leave. We need (as Amy said) to encourage and research the best practices in early education and after-school programs. We need to institute more flexible work schedules and environments that facilitate family responsibility (whether to children, older parents, or other dependents), and not worker burnout, family stress, divorce, etc. Some high-profile businesses in the private sector (e.g., HP's more flexible scheduling options, Hotel Mariott's "worker hotline") are already experimenting with such measures. It's time for the federal government, along with other private institutions and research initiatives, to follow suit.

I would have to argue that the public schools aren't exactly doing a great job right now because of lack of funding, overcrowded classrooms, and underpaid teachers - what makes people think they will be able to provide for the developmental needs of more children? The fact is that both the school system and the child care system today need serious rethinking and only through compromise as a society - swallowing higher taxes and accepting more time off for parents - will we be able to bring about the reforms needed to live up the claim that we are a child-friendly nation.

I am taking a Work and Family class (Sociology 264) this term and we have been discussing this exact issue. It is very discouraging how many institutional road blocks there are in this country when it comes to letting the spheres of work and family interact, or even coexist. Women still feel pressure to be the perfect mom (enter the Baby Einstein videos), coupled with a new pressure to be the perfect career woman. There definitely need to be more benefits to help working moms, such as paid maternity leave, longer maternity leave, flexible working hours and schedules, so that women do not have to chose one over the other.

Most importantly, I think that policy makers and people in general need to think of child care of a PARENT's issue, instead of just a woman's issue. The kind of benefits I just mentioned should be available to working dads as well as working moms. I think this would help children the most.

On a related note, I have read articles that suggest lowering the age that public school starts from kindergarten to preschool. This might be able to relieve some time and financial pressure for parents. What affect might this have on kids?