families

Dear Barack and Michelle,

I’m writing to you as the parents of beautiful girls, and as people who hold the future of this country in your hands for the next four years. I know that you both take seriously your job as parents as well as the way you can shape public policy to improve your daughters’ lives. Michelle has talked about supporting working parents and Barack has talked about fighting workplace discrimination so Sasha and Malia will not have to experience it as adults.

George W. Bush was a father to daughters, and so was Bill Clinton. But your perspective seems fresh, new, and dare I say the “f” word? Feminist. I think our friends at Ms. Magazine got it right:

Hallelujah. You recognize that the personal is political, and vice versa. Parenting daughters has clearly made you think about how you lead, and about how your political choices and policy decisions will shape your daughters’ lives.

Our country needs this framework, and your “to do” list is long. For example, I’ve blogged about my wish for some federal leadership on curricular reform, and I hope you’ll take a look.

But for now I’m content to wait and see what unfolds under your leadership and your parenting. I’m also raising an 8-year-old daughter, and I know that we probably share some of the same hopes and ambitions for our girls. I know for sure that I’m hoping to create a more equitable world for her, and yes, a more feminist one, too.

Sincerely,
Allison Kimmich
Executive Director, National Women’s Studies Association

This post is part of a forum.

This post was first posted on February 6, 2009 at NCRW’s The Real Deal.

-Allison Kimmich

From “Why the Sting of Layoffs Can be Sharper for Men,” NYTimes Jan. 31, 2009:

As job losses reverberate across the economy, differences in “his” and “her” layoffs are beginning to take shape — revealing gender dynamics that may not have been as apparent when the Dow was at 14,000.

Dr. Louann Brizendine, author of “The Female Brain” and a psychiatrist at the University of California, San Francisco, says that women who lose their jobs “aren’t going to take as much of a self-esteem hit” as men. That is because the most potent form of positive social feedback for many men comes from within the hierarchy of the workplace. By contrast, she said, women may have “many sources of self-esteem — such as their relationships with other people — that are not exclusively embedded within their jobs.”

She said that over the past six months, her clinic has had an increase in the number of men seeking help for difficulties related to job loss.

Terrence Real, a family therapist and the founder of Real Relational Solutions in Arlington, Mass., said the difference in reactions could be explained by the idea of performance esteem.

“Everyone who has written about male psychology has acknowledged that men base their sense of self on the maxim that ‘I have worth because of what I do,’ ” Mr. Real said. The feeling is that “you are only as good as your last game or your last job,” he said.

In his practice over the past 12 months, Mr. Real says, he has seen a roughly 20 percent uptick in the number of men seeking help because of the economic downturn.

Interesting….More from me on all this to come.  (Check out Recessionwire.com, plug plug!)

I joined the Board of the Council on Contemporary Families this year, and we are currently soliciting nominations for the 2008 Media Awards for Outstanding Coverage of Family Issues, so if you’re a journalist and published something you’re particularly proud of in 2008, please read on!

Submissions are due Friday, February 6, and the form is at the bottom of this post.

This will be our Seventh Annual Media Awards competition, honoring outstanding journalism that contributes to the public understanding of contemporary family issues, in particular the story behind the story: how diverse families are coping with social and economic change; what they need to flourish; and how these needs can best be met.

The Council will present three awards for outstanding coverage of family issues during 2008:
*      two for journalism in text form (print- or web-based); and
*      one for broadcast journalism (audio or video)

The awards will be presented at the 12th Annual CCF Conference on Friday, April 17th, in Chicago, Illinois. (I’ll be there!)  Check out the conference program.  It’s pretty amazing.

Winners will receive up to $500 towards travel expenses (depending on employers’ contributions). At the plenary session where awards are presented, winners are invited to speak for five minutes on emerging issues affecting American families and how CCF members and supporters can help the media cover these stories effectively.

Here’s more schpiel:

CCF recognizes that America needs a balanced national conversation about the cultural, legal, and psychological issues that shape both private life and public policy. Essential partners in this process are the reporters and producers who present complicated family issues in their broader social context.

Past winners include journalists from USA Today, Time magazine, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Bergen Record (New Jersey), WUFT/WJUF-FM, Thirteen/WNET, AlterNet, the Associated Press and many other organizations. Subject matter has ranged from the effect of the AIDS epidemic on children in South Florida to hunger in Oklahoma and the role of religion in American family life. You can read about last year’s winners here.
more...

Yesterday, Paul Raeburn, who is in my author’s group, posted about some studies that might have naturally included fathers but which examined only mothers in Where are the fathers? over at his Fathers and Families blog. (Thanks, CCF, for the heads up!)

Paul and I were recently talking over cookies and tea about why it is that mothers are the more studied parent, and I offered some thoughts on history, psychology, and biology — from a feminist pov.  I suggested he go back and read some socialist feminism, and also Nancy Chodorow.  But I also felt like my response was incomplete and hence inadequate.

I’m interested in continuing the conversation!  If any GWP readers have thoughts to share on why this is so, I’m sure Paul would be interested as well.  And I assure you, Paul is by no means a men’s rightser kind of guy but a thoughtful journalist (his previous book is Acquainted with the Night, a memoir of raising children with depression and bipolar disorder.)   Please feel free to leave thoughts for me — and for Paul — in comments or at Paul’s blog. Thanks, ya’ll!

Ohmygosh how I heart this ad on fatherhood involvement, from the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearninghouse.  GO DADS!

This here’s one of my favorite conferences of all, and not just because Stephanie Coontz, Steve Mintz, Virginia Rutter, Lara Riscoll, and Barbara Risman are fun to dance with.  Though that part’s fun too.  I love the Council on Contemporary Families Annual Conference because of the caliber and savvy of its participants.  It’s the cream of the crop, bringing together researchers, practionners, and media types who are interested in the way public discourse sees and understands “family” in our day.  I joined the CCF Board this year, so I’m feeling very fancy and all grown up.

The gathering take place this year on April 17 and 18, 2009 at University of Illinois at Chicago (OBAMALAND!), and the theme is RELATIONSHIPS, SEXUALITY, AND EQUALITY.  What more could a girl want?

Deets:

Changes in American families have radically altered how we define ourselves as men and women. These changes have affected romantic relationships, power dynamics in same and opposite sex couples, and the way we parent. The 2009 CCF conference will examine the latest research and clinical findings about where the lives of boys, girls, men, and women have become more similar in recent years, where they continue to be different, and how these differences affect the prospects for each.  Nationally recognized speakers will address the dramatic ways these changes are affecting work patterns and political life, and in turn, how changing work patterns and social mores are affecting men, women, and diverse families.

Keynote speaker: Andrew Cherlin, author of the new book The Marriage-Go-Round: The State of Marriage and the Family in America Today.

The conference will also include a conversation between historian Stephanie Coontz, Ms. Magazine Editor Kathy Spillar, and Chicago Tribune columnist Dawn Trice, titled “Gender, Race, and Equality: What Has the Election Taught Us?”

A pre-conference workshop features media training for everybody. In sessions with Stephanie Coontz, Virginia Rutter, and Deborah Siegel (that’s me!), hone your skills in op-ed writing, get started turning your good work into a media message that makes an impact, or learn how—and why—to use the blogsophere. This conference workshop is free to conference attendees, but folks who are not attending the conference are invited to attend these practical workshops for a modest fee.

Click here for the full conference schedule.  Hope to see a bunch of you there, as I often do!

Introducing, Tallulah!

I rarely blog about this stuff, but I just HAD to kitten blog today because on Friday, the day after we learned our first attempt at IVF didn’t work, Marco and I brought home the sweetest little cat.

Our loved ones’ reactions to our news ran the gamut.  “Maybe you should have started sooner,” said a loving but disappointed mother-in-law.   Little did she know, bless her expectant heart, we did.  My mother responded with sympathetic tears.  The woman knows a thing or two about fertility woes (cue my book Only Child).  My friends responded with the requisite “oh shit,” “am so sorry,” and “there’s always next time.”  That’s what we Chicagoans used to say about the Cubs.

Marco and I mourned, each in our own way, taking a break from our 24/7 fixation on the election.  I miss those 12 cells, said my sentimental husband, who mourns a little each time he leaves a place he knows he won’t see again soon.  What happens to the embryo? he asked.  It gets reabsorbed into my tissue, goes back to the Mother Ship, I joked.  He found that reassuring.  I want a kitten, I said.

And after two days of sadness, we headed to Kitty Kind adoption center after work.  It was Halloween, and I happened to fall in love with the first black cat I saw.  Cliché, I know, but I felt uplifted by that purring ball of fur.  Its bear-shaped face and kittenish exuberance melt me, make it hard to feel self-pity.  Marco and I passed the adoption test with flying colors (thank you, Davy!) and brought the kitten home.

It’s not exactly a baby, but it’s ours.

I’m sad.  But we’ll keep trying.  I am a Chicagoan after all.  I’m grateful for the deep happiness I’ve found with Marco, for an incredibly satisfying career as a working writer, and for being born at a time in history where technology can sometimes work miracles–even if it can’t turn back the clock.

To all you other mid-to-late-30somethings-pushing-and-just-over-40-women-trying-to-have-a-child: solidarity.  Don’t doubt your choices.  There are good reasons we’ve lived non-linear lives.

Like Tallulah, to whom the world still seems new each day, I have little truck for regret.

And now, back to the election, and MSNBC.

The following is this month’s installment of Jacqueline Hudak’s column, Family Stories.  For previous installments, click here. Here’s Jacqueline! -Deborah

Amid the festive Halloween decorations I see the “McCain/Palin” signs on my neighbor’s lawn and resist the sudden intense urge to come back after dark and rip them up.

OK, I think, THAT’S not useful.  Maybe I should just knock on their door, and say, “Hello, and by the way, do you understand what their policies will do to me and my family?”

I am aware of how divisive the campaign has been; at times its hard to even imagine moving beyong the rhetoric of us/them to a real conversation in which I could share with my neighbor the impact of rendering my lesbian family unworthy and invisible. How might I convey the sense of grievance when we have been made ‘other?’  And yet, I want to hold a passionate position about the influence of McCain policy on my family without demonizing McCain himself. Or my neighbor.

What we do with these feelings was addressed for me last weekend, when  I attended a workshop on “Forgiveness” with Dr. Fred Luskin, author of Forgive for Good and Director of The Stanford University Forgiveness Project. His premise, that holding onto anger and grudges is bad for physical and emotional well being, is backed by a growing body of research.  Studies conducted at Stanford reveal that people who are more forgiving report feeling less stressed and fewer health problems, and people who blame others for their troubles have higher incidences of illess such as cardiovascular disease.

Dr. Luskin asked the participants to write something we were unable to forgive – our grievance story.  You know, the one  that can play endlessly in your head about the time you were wronged, the one you still get all charged up over. We were then asked to describe our thoughts, feelings and actions in relation to the grievance stories. This simple exercise was powerful in providing clarity about long held, repetitive patterns of thought and behavior that simply are not effective. It also opened up space for the grief and hurt beneath the wound. Using meditation and guided visualizations, Dr. Luskin pushed us to change our  “grievance stories, ” to make peace with what is, to shift attention from what’s wrong to what’s right and good. Suffering is normal, he pointed out, and life can be hurtful enough without inflicting further damage by holding onto grudges.

As a family therapist, I see what a powerful tool forgiveness can be. Family legacies can be built entirely around a grievance story, and the goal of therapy is often to rewrite the story as one of strength and resilience.  I do need to be careful about applying some of these principles without a larger contextual lens; for example, I don’t think women and men approach relationship in the same ways, and women might tend to ‘forgive’ too easily for the sake of maintaining the relationship. And if I, a white woman, can summon an interpersonal grievance with such ease, imagine the experience of women of color who, frankly, have a lot more to forgive in the face of institutional racism. The goal, it seems, would be to exist someplace between forgiveness and compassion while working to eradicate injustice.  A spiritual practice indeed.

One of my favorite lines from Luskin’s worshop was this: “How do we fill the gap between what we wanted and what we have?”

I will think about that, post-November 4th, as I fill the gap between what I hoped for this election season, and what I get. I will be profoundly disappointed if this country elects the McCain/Palin ticket.  I desire a leader who can embrace the complexities of an issue, as Obama has done relative to race.  And whatever happens, I hope we all end the divisive us/them rhetoric and fill the gaps with forgiveness.

–Jacqueline Hudak

In the current issue of Demography, researchers report that U.S. child poverty rates declined in the 1990s by a bit more than 7 percent (“Child Poverty and Changes in Child Poverty“). Similar improvements occurred in the United Kingdom.

But here’s the bad news: While the UK’s decline was thanks to government programs, the US’s decline was due to economic expansion. In other words, the US economy did well in the 1990s, so child poverty declined. In fact, when researchers looked more closely, they found that US government support for children in poverty had actually declined. Without economic growth, there would have been more, not less, child poverty.

So where does that leave us today? Jobs are disappearing and the economy is worsening by the minute. In the absence of government programs, children will do worse in this downturn, too. Will we see some of that “equity injection” for children’s well being?

For the impact of the economic downturn on families, take a look at Stephanie Coontz and Valerie Adrian’s briefing report to the Council on Contemporary Families, “Family Stress=Economic Woes.” Warning: it’s depressing.

Virginia Rutter

This morning, the debut of another of our new monthly columns, “Off the Shelf” by Elline Lipkin. Elline is a poet and nonfiction writer. Her first book, The Errant Thread, was chosen by Eavan Boland to receive the Kore Press First Book Award and was published in 2006. She’s currently working on a book about girls for Seal Press and will be a Visiting Scholar with the Center for Research on Women at UCLA in the fall. She recently taught at UC Berkeley where she was a Postdoctoral Scholar with the Beatrice Bain Research Group. And here she is! – GWP

Parenting, Inc. by Pamela Paul

Just six months ago I felt bombarded by my bedside stack of wedding guides. Each, under the guise of “must have to be happy on your Big Day,” proscribed things to wear, stuff to buy, favors to give, rituals to enact, details to watch, all apparently needed to fulfill the American wedding tradition. Without each one in place, they warned, The Wedding Dream just couldn’t be. Happily, I tossed most aside in favor of indiebride status (shared with you Deb! Mazel tov!), but the relentlessness of “to-dos,” all sheltered under the umbrella of “necessary for happiness,” was enough to make me question my every choice.

Moving quickly on to the next stage of later-in-life union, I was glad for journalist Pamela Paul’s preview warning about the lists of Stuff new parents are told they need — so I can know what not to do, or at least, to try to resist. The “new parents checklist” Paul is given before the birth of her first child starts her off on a consumer journey that exacerbates every anxiety, worry, and concern stewing about her impending parenthood.

In her new book Parenting, Inc., Paul fires back – by examining the multiple industries that launch both an avalanche of products at new parents (only sometimes aimed at their babies) and the landslide of guilt, obligation, and often enough, misinformation that accompanies these products. Paul outlines how confused, overwhelmed, and/or desperate parents feel and then how susceptible they become to overpriced wares and unnecessary “edutainment” programs that they’re told will give their babies a head start.

Paul’s research is thorough as she exposes the selling points of everything from Baby Einstein (experts can’t tell if a baby is really engaged or not and setting a tape on an endless loop often serves as a less guilt-inducing break for parents since their child is “learning”) to teaching signing to babies (results dubious) to exclusive NYC clubs tailored to well-heeled babies, nannies, and parents (tapping into peer pressure and celebrity allure). She visits “enrichment classes” that range from Little Maestros to Gymboree. It doesn’t take a critical eye to see most kids are actively disengaged and that often the only ones benefiting are the parents who are eager to be out of the house and connecting with each other.

Paul exposes the phalanx of consultants who stand at the ready to charge overstretched or just overly concerned parents, from sleep specialists to thumb-sucking experts to bike tutors to potty-training day programs. A through-line in the book is the loss of extended family for support and expertise and their replacement with a consumerist approach to parenting through a deluge of products each packaged with angst-inducing rhetoric: This will be the key to make your baby smarter, brighter, swifter in his or her head start to Harvard. Particularly revealing are Paul’s interviews with many of the business-savvy entrepreneurs (including some “mompreneurs”) who realized what a vulnerable and anxious customer the new parent can be and who are ready to market accordingly.

Paul’s writing is engaging, particularly as she candidly reveals her own needs and frustrations as a parent and partly researches the book while into her pregnancy with her second child. She uses her own experience as a measuring stick to look critically at what she finds.

One critique of the book is, in some sense, also its strength — its relentlessness. Paul reiterates the sheer velocity of products to buy, outsourced help to tap, and crushing sense of obligation that parents feel, but her point is made (and remade) as she debunks their necessity. There are “nameologists” who will provide naming packages, tot manner minders, expert baby-proofers; no corner of childhood is exempt from a product or expert to help a parent do it better. The sense of frenetic obligation is palpable.

After awhile, I would have found it more interesting to hear about alternatives – parents who resisted, consumer groups who called products out, DIY’ers who found a way around the monolith of consumer pressure. And while she makes it clear that the dilemma of too much stuff is a class-based issue, this seems a place to expand her argument. How many kids who had tutoring before age 2 really live up to the racing head start they were supposedly getting? How many geniuses came from humble beginnings where no educational accoutrements were available? And from what context do these parents feel “every opportunity” is truly necessary for a child?

The negative effects of “helicopter parents” are only touched on and I wondered from where and when did such class-based devotion to achievement spring? Towards the book’s end the text turns more reflective as Paul asks a range of experts what it even means to parent, never mind parent “well” and it’s a relief, finally, to tie together the economic and social forces that goad parents toward an ethos of inadequacy and a cycle of self-doubt that seem to make few happy, despite the consumerism that promises exactly that. A few startlingly refreshing voices practically sing through the madness, such as that of Elisa Sherona, a 63-year-old grandmother who raised five kids in the ’60s and ’70s and is unafraid to declare outright you just don’t need any of this stuff and questions how raising kids like this will affect them as adults. While the latter remains to be seen, at the book’s end Paul finally has determined that she doesn’t need these products or programs for her kids and that that doesn’t mean she’s a bad parent. She lets out a sigh of relief that echoes Sherona’s thoughts, and seems all the more relieved that she can finally release.

-Elline Lipkin