What's a Mother to do?

In the article “From Rods to Reasoning: The Historical Construction of Intensive Mothering”, the author discusses the different transitions that the family has gone under over the years. More specifically, the author discusses the role of the mother that has undergone a variety of changes throughout the years. Sharon Hayes breaks down the transition of roles into four different categories. In the first stage, children were seen as innocent and pure. They needed protection from trifles from the outside world. Especially for upper class children, they needed to be protected and shielded from the dangers and temptations of the outside world. They were highly cherished and pampered. In the second stage, children were treated and viewed more like adults for they were given more responsibility and expected to be more mature. Instead of being pampered and cared for so delicately, they were expected to work and take on household responsibilities. Through negative reinforcement, like physical punishment, they were taught how to behave. Also, the use of religion to teach morals and proper behavior was used much more frequently and was an integral part of their upbringing. In the third stage, the role of the mother became much more glorified. The child was once again seen as sweet, angelic, and innocent and needed to be protected by the mother. She became a more integral and important role in the upbringing of the child. She not only became the primary caretaker of the child but had to punish and reinforce morals/rules to the child. In the final stage, parents have turned to outside resources to educate themselves to raise their own children. A lot more literature has been produced in the psychology and scientific worlds to what are the best methods to raising a child. These new theories support the roles of the father being the being the breadwinner and the mother being the domestic stay at home mother. I believe my mother has made the perfect balance between disciplining me, expressing affection, and giving me enough freedom. I think its important to make a balance between all three of these areas. A mother’s role in their child’s life never ends, but awareness to letting go must be made well aware of and executed.

In the second article the author discusses how the role of the mother has been devalued over time in the United States. There are a few different contributions that add up to the idea that motherhood is being devalued. Firstly, a mother’s work is unpaid and therefore is technically unseen. Because she is not being paid for her work, her contribution to the family and household is not deemed as important as the Father. He then holds more of the power because he beholds the wealth. A mother’s role is seen as not important in the overall contribution to society which is ludicrous. Because of the nature of a women’s biological clock, and women often being placed on the “mommy track”, a mother hardly has any chance to create a career for herself. She is expected to be the one to stay home and manage the household. In America, wealth equals power and the mother is not producing any money. She does not receive any reward or benefit for her 24/7 job that she beholds. I agree with the author that being a mother in the United States has been devalued over time. It seems that when children answer about what their mother does for a living, they simply say she’s “just” a mom. Or so many times, the child or the mother themselves have to justify that they are “just” a stay at home mom. I think a homemaker or being a 24/7 mother is the most important job out there. A mother is nurturing, caring for, and preparing the next generation of workers. Mothers should be more rewarded and seen as valuable towards society.

In the next article, Patricia Hill Collins, writes about the dynamics of motherhood in black communities. There are two types of mothers: bloodmother and other mothers. Bloodmothers are the actual biological mothers of their kin. Bloodmothers are expected to be the primary mother involved with the upbringing of their child. However, other women that are related to the child can become a maternal figure in the life of the child known as an othermother. These women form a centralized community that revolves around their own power and control of the community. This idea, that the women as mothers have an important role, greatly contrasts with the previous article about mothers being devalued in the United States. In these communities, it provides a positive and powerful image for children to grow up with when viewing their mothers.

In the last article, the authors discuss the notion that women wish to remain unmarried so they can reach economic stability and independence before marrying. For many middle and lower class women, they wish to remain financially independent because they fear their male counterpart becoming dependant on them. This can be attributed to drugs, alcohol, crime, not taking responsibility for the child, and more. Society could better assist these women who are battling against poverty and irresponsible male counterparts by providing easier access to jobs that are flexible with their schedules of taking care of their children. Business would be flexible with the mother needing to leave to pick up or be by their child. The place of employment should also provide day care to assist these women.

No Child Left Behind

In the first article, Hafner-Eaton and Pierce discuss the pros and cons to giving birth at home by means of a midwife or in a hospital. They compared and contrasted the different birthing traditions that occur within different cultures and countries. Many women choose to give birth at home because the low mortality rate of the infants. These women view birthing at home as a safe and natural way to give birth. They are also in the comfort of their home which is a naturally safe and familiar environment. There are many more risks and deaths that occur at hospitals. The majority of pregnant women in the United States turn to hospitals to give birth but there are far more infant deaths there than at home. I had always assumed that almost every sane woman gives birth at a hospital. Medicine and a handful of doctors surround you, so what could be so risky about it? I had always viewed birthing at home as such an archaic act that is selfish on behalf of the mother. After viewing this article, I think the decision of where to give birth is something that would take time and communication between parents to decide.

In the second article, Friedman sheds some light on the history and impact of formal adoptions. Adoptions used to occur to benefit the parents. In Europe, especially England and France, the blood line of the family is extremely important. Parents would adopt other family members into theirs to keep the family lineage alive. Adoptions changed overtime to accommodate orphans, children in need of a parental unit. However these children were taken in by farmers or others outside the city as they were seen as unwanted in a metropolitan area. Over the past forty years, adoption has changed even more. Adoption became a means for adults to have children, develop a family, even if it was impossible to produce children of their own. International adoptions have also become steadily more common. This notion was once revered as mixing of races within a family was a taboo.

In the welfare article, Sharon Hays discusses the reasoning behind the system of welfare in our nation. The conservatives and the liberals both felt the same way before our welfare system was revised in 1996. They both felt like it was outdated and did not support the needs of the citizens of the United States. The liberals see the welfare program has an absolutely necessary entity to support those who may not be able to support themselves. It is a way to assist poor families, single parents, and/or their children. The conservatives view the welfare system as a means to support lazy and unmotivated people. They see it as a free handout from the government. In 1996, the welfare system was reevaluated to include women and children. Single women support themselves and/or a family were now being included in the system. They were seen as equal to men. They had to seek paying jobs and received no more protection or support than men. This reform is a positive and negative step for our country. In one way, it shows that women are being treated equally to men and they have just as much of a contribution to our society as men do. At the same time, this puts a lot of pressure on women to find a job, find childcare, and support a household. It doesn’t provide any time off for her to have more children. Hays repeatedly says throughout the article that our welfare system showcases the values of our society.

In the fourth article, Block, Korteweg, and Woodward discuss the reasoning for why poverty develops and sustains itself in some countries over others. In the United States, the government and other economic classes view the poor as a failure to our society. They provide no positive contribution to society as a whole and it is their fault that they are where they are. They become too dependant on free handouts like welfare. Other countries like Germany and Norway view the poor as a group of people who are a direct result of how social and economic structures are set up. The individuals did nothing wrong to be in the poverty stricken place they are in. It is the country and government’s fault in the first place as to why there is even an impoverished class. The article discusses how to make the American Dream more accessible to every citizen of the United States. Ideas included making education programs more accessible, providing child care so that parents can work longer job hours, and lowering the price of health care.

According to Clawson and Gerstel the United States does not provide adequate and affordable child care to all of its citizens. In other countries like France and Denmark, child care is free because it is already paid for and supported by the government and public funding. In the United States, poor families are forced to pay for child care. It is just one more dent in their wallet. Providing national child care would alleviate the burden and stress of parents trying to work longer hours or maintain two jobs to support their family. If funding for child care was included in taxes and other public funding, families could be supported. They also suggested providing more after school programs, an extension of a regular school day, just like the French program. This provides a safe and meaningful environment to children, as well helps parents who then do not have to take time off from work to pick up or transport their children.

Violence Against Women

In the first article, Felson has divided the theories behind violence done to women into two categories: gender and violent perspectives. Felson describes his gender perspective reasoning as the attacker is motivated for gender specific reasons and differences. Violence is done to the victim solely because she is a woman. The motivation comes froma sexual, sexist, or male-superior drive. On the other hand, violence perspective entails the idea that the attacker is motivated solely by violence, the desire to destroy, destruct, and lose control. The attacker yearns to dominate and be in control, and it just so happens that the victim is a woman.

I do not think there is any one answer that can group together all attackers and all abusers into one category. I think there are different combinations of motivations and reasoning behind the madness. I think the age, socio-economic background, race, and socialization of the abuser needs to be taken into account. It is almost impossible to try to pinpoint one clear definition and physiological make-up of an abuser. I would more lean to the idea of gender perspective. I can see how so many men are raised and grow up thinking that they must always be in control, are superior to women, and the woman must answer to them.

In the second article, Jones poses the daunting question to her readers, “Why doesn’t she leave?” This is a question that I have found myself asking so many times when watching a news report or reading a novel about a woman being abused. It seems like such a simple question and what we all assume to be a simple solution. Jones first blames her readers for even pondering a question like it, but she goes on to try her best to answer it for us.

It seems that only answer that she can really provide for us, is that these women simply can’t. They know and believe that if they could leave the man would find them again. They will never be free. Even if distance is separating them, the man will find a way to get her back. Women also cannot leave for financial reasons, tied with their children, the fear of supporting themselves and their kids on their own, no one to turn to for support or financial assistance. More often than not, these women become male-dependant. Maybe these men made them this way or maybe that was the fate of their relationship. It seems that there are just two many road blocks to find their road to freedom.

In the last article, the author, James Ptacket, conducted a small and intimate study to try and get inside the mind of an abuser. Instead of conducting a mass study to have a large survey pool, he interviewed a small number of men in order to spend longer amounts of time with them and gain their trust. At first, most of the men denied responsibility for their actions and did not see any reason to justify their actions. The majority of men blamed their abuse in a loss of control. They lost themselves in a complete tirade and state of anger. Most of these men were under the influence of drugs or alcohol. They were close to blacking out or blacked out when they performed acts of violence. They didn’t know what they were doing. This category of men is similar to Felson’s idea of violence perspective. These men desire to become violent without really knowing why or who they are doing it to. The other category of motivation came from being provoked from their female counterpart. If she acted out, did not follow his command, did not act as his inferior partner, the male became enraged. This is similar to the notion of gender perspective. The male is motivated solely be the biological difference between themselves and what he believes the gender differences that come with it.