|
Q&A With Bob
Levey
Washington Post Columnist
Tuesday, April 22, 2003; 1 p.m.
ET
"Levey Live" appears Tuesdays at noon ET.
Your host is Washington Post columnist Bob
Levey. This hour is your chance to talk directly to key Washington
Post reporters and editors, local officials and people in the news.
Today, Bob's guest is Ann Crittenden, author of “The Price of Motherhood.
|
Ann Crittenden
|
Crittenden argues that although women have been liberated, mothers have not. Drawing on hundred of interviews, and the latest research in economics, family law, sociology, history, and child development, this book shows how mothers are uniquely disadvantaged economically. Unlike most other nations, the United States systematrically refuses to value or support unpaid caring labor.
For example, a college-educated person who becomes the family’s primary caregiver stands to lose more than a million dollars in lifetime income. Crittenden further points out that almost two-thirds of national wealth is created by people, or “human capital.” The first and most important producers of human capital are mothers and other early caregivers, making them the greatest wealth producers in the economy.
Crittenden was a reporter for the New York Times from 1975 to 1983. She wrote on a broad range of economic issues, initiated numerous investigative reports, and authored a series on world hunger that was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize. She was also a financial writer and foreign correspondent for Newsweek, a reporter for Fortune, a visiting lecturer at MIT and Yale, a regular economics commentator for CBS News, and executive director of the Fund for Investigative Journalism in Washington, D.C.
Crittenden has a BA from Southern Methodist University, a masters degree from Columbia University School of International Affairs, and an “all-but-dissertation” in modern European history from Columbia.
Crittenden lives with her husband in Washington, D.C. Their son is a university student in Montreal.
Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control
over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests
and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
Bob Levey:
Good afternoon, Ms. Crittenden, and thanks for joining us today. Let's begin with a question about numbers. If you're right that motherhood is undervalued--and I believe that it is--why isn't there a decline in the American birth rate? Wouldn't you expect more and more women to avoid the "bad deal" that motherhood still represents in 2003?
Ann Crittenden: Hello, I'm happy to be in this forum, and love your first question! Actually, because motherhood carries more financial risks in the U.S. than in any other developed country, especially for educated women, we do have a higher level of childlessness than in almost any other developed country. We have a slightly higher birth rate, however, because of a higher level of immigration. Birth rates among Mexican immigrants, in particular, are the highest of any other group.
Bob Levey:
Do you think that American women who choose NOT to have children are social outcasts in any way?
Ann Crittenden: Absolutely NOT! That's what choice for women (and men) is all about.
DC:
Hi. I'm getting married next year, and I believe that if we have children, I will probably end up being the one staying home/cutting back my working hours to care for them (my choice, you understand, nothing I'm being pressured into).
Would you recommend a prenup? I trust my fiance, but I want to make sure my work raising the kids is seen as an economic, as well as an affectionate, contribution to the family, just in case the worst happens (Gods forbid...)
Ann Crittenden: You could do a prenup that says basically that the income earned by the two of you belongs to both of you, as long as any children are aunder a certain age (18 or 21 or out of college or whatever). But these are hard to talk about or do -- that's why good marriage and divorce laws are better.
20011:
I simply don't get it. So, I have a few questions:
First, what about fathers? I mean, takes 2 to make that kid. Why should mothers expect society to be their support system before they expect the kid's father to be their support system?
Second, having children is a choice. And that choice means other choices must be made. Why should employers, the government, etc, be expected to subsidize any particular personal choice? Why shouldn't parents recognize that if they have a child or children, they have commited their time and money and energy to that child? That they have made a choice to have this child, just as others have made the choice not to have children, but to commit their time, money, and energy to other things, people, projects, goals? Why should we pay for what you want?
Ann Crittenden: I'll answer that if your read The Price of Motherhood, it's about how BOTH parents have an obligation to do their fair share of care and financial support of their children. It's not just about mothers, although mothers do bear overwhelmingly the primary responsibility as things now stand.
Bob Levey:
Please discuss the role of husbands in all this. If motherhood is a burden for women, fatherhood is certainly one for men. They have immense financial responsibilities. They are expected to do their share at home. They can no longer expect "boys' nights out" or unending hours glued to ESPN. I'm not trying to reach for a phony comparison, but parenthood causes strains for both sexes, doesn't it?
Ann Crittenden: Bo, yes to this one for sure. The big problem, as far as fathers are concerned, seems to be divorced fathers, who not maried fathers. After divoce, too many fathers seem to divorce their kids as well.
Washington, DC:
Hi. Can you summarize what other countries do for mothers that the U.S. does not do? Thanks!
Ann Crittenden: Big question, has to be brief answer. ALL have paid family leaves after child birth, for on average ten months. Almost all have some modest child allowance paid to new families, for a couple of years os so, most have subsidized nursery schools, and so on. As a result, you have almost no child and maternal poverty anywhere else in the developed world.
Herndon, VA:
I agree with your statement that the work of wortherhood is undervalued in the US in comparrison to other countries but what is your suggestion? Are you suggesting that US companies should provide longer maternity leave, more flexible hours for mother, etc?
Ann Crittenden: Yep. One, join the rest of the world with some period of paid family leave, pay proportionate wages and benefits for part-time work, Social Security credits for anyone who cares for a dependent family member instead of getting a sero toward their retirement.
Bob Levey:
Let's dial back the clock 11 years, to the presidential contest between George 41 and Clinton. Hillary Clinton sent off a shower of sparks when she disdained Barbara Bush for being a cookie-baking kind of wife and mother. I was so surprised to see Hillary take it on the chin as a result, since more and more women are living "the Hillary way"--jobs, kids, husbands, all of it. Your comments?
Ann Crittenden: I wasn't surpirsed -- it was just a big inadvertant put-down of millions of women who were at home. Being an at-home mom is still a huge occupation, in fact the biggest among American women in their thirties. They deserve RESPECT!
Silver Spring, Md:
So, is your conclusion that we should raise taxes to pay for massive government day care programs? If so, how would you respond to right-wing critics who would say that American parents don't want their kids raised by leftist government bureaucrats?
Ann Crittenden: We pay for "massive" public education, so why not "massive" free public education beginning at age three? Every economist in the country now believes that this would be a fabuopus -- in fact the best -- investment the country could make. I can get into this more if anyone is interested.
Washington, D.C. Price of Womanhood:
Beyond the cases of mothers being penalized, society also stigmatizes women who do not have/want children. I can't tell you the number of people who seem to think my reproductive choices are their business. I also can't count the number of times people (especially in the work environment) have said "Well, Mary can do this extra work over the weekend since she doesn't have a family/child at home to tend to." I think the street works two ways. I agree that working mothers have issues they need addressed, but they also need to realize that the rest of the working world (male or female) should not have to give up their personal priorities either. Parenthood is a personal choice and should be made with the knowledge that it is yours and your spouses alone.
Ann Crittenden: I'm totqally in sympathy with your POV. But if you're getting extra work because of parents in your office, blame the proper person -- your employer -- not the parents. All of us are working too long hours and we need to fight back on thatone. The personal choice issue is another subject.
Divorced Dads:
I would agree that divorced dads do sometimes end up divorced from the children, but our divorce and custody system are as much to blame as the fathers. Non-custodial parents (be they moms or dads) tend to be viewed as giant ATM machines who are expected to dole out money yet are provided "visitation" as though they are going to the zoo and not really a parent.
Ann Crittenden: You're right. I hate that woprd "visitation." No parent is or should a be a visitor in their child's life. I haven't met a father or mother who thinks our divorce courts make any sense.
Chicago,Ill.:
Hi Ann,
Like many women, I will choose to be a stay-home mom when we have kids (sometime in the next year or so). I am 34 now and have had an okay career -- not a manager or a "star" at any company, but a good, hard-working well educated employee in purchasing.
I am scared that if I stay home for six-eight years, I will NEVER make a decent income again. Am I doomed to start all over in my 40s if I get involved in other projects like volunteering while a stay home mom?
Will all my hard work in my 20s and early 30s be gone?
Ann Crittenden: Tough question, and who can answer? You are definitely not "doomed" and you can definitely recreate an interesting work life after the kids are older. But of course you will lose income over those years, and a great deal of financial security. That's what I call the "Mommy tax" in the book.
Bob Levey:
Please discuss job-sharing as a way out of the "I'll lose my place in line" argument. This sounds like a natural to me. However, organized labor hasn't seriously supported it, and many bosses seem to think it's a way for one job to be done by two people half as well. Comments?
Ann Crittenden: Job sharing is OK, but as you know, every difficult to sell to employers or unions. I think a better way to go is with some sort of limit on mandatory overtime, and fair proportionate pay for flexible schedules. In some European copuntries an emplyee (any) has a right to a flexible schedule if they ask for one, unless certain conditions prevail. Europe also has a 35-horu work week,
Bob Levey:
Many American mothers between 21 and 45 still have mothers themselves. Many seem to think that Grandma owes it to them to help raise the kids. Does she?
Ann Crittenden: I don't know anyone who thinks Grandma doesn't have a right to life after she's raised her own!
Crystal City, Va.:
But is a child really like other forms of output in the economy i.e., an object which is produced or formed through labor? How are children different from commodities on the market? If they are assumed more similar to commodities than not, children then become a burden, not a choice. Do you see how your argument implies a degradation of children?
Ann Crittenden: I don't agree. Children are our most precisous assets. But don't let a romantic idea of children cloud the fact that they are the greatest source of our future welath. Economists call it "human capital" -- and it's more important than all other forms of capital combioned.
Reston, Va.:
While I agree with your beliefs that US companies should follow the lead of companies in other countries and provide longer maternity leave, flexible hours for mothers, etc, my HUGE concern is that this would be more likely to but employers in the position to be more likely to hire men than women (regardless of the legality). While employers in other countries offer greater flexibility to mothers, it is also true that most other countries are less likely to hire women for higher level positions. I fear there may be a correlation.
Ann Crittenden: Good question. But I concluded after my research that this is not a huge concern. Swedish economists told me that (and had data) that women there hold as many hgih positions as here, and they have an unbelievable aray of polciies supporting mothers' ability to earn a living, etc. This is complex -- one reason the US is in a good position to ward this off is relartively strong anti-discrimination laws.
Bob Levey:
Please grab onto the the third rail of motherhood politics--day care. Do you favor placing a child in a day care center when the child is, say, two months old? Do you believe that damage results? Do you believe that a child who gets "day-cared" at an early age undermines the family in any significant way?
Ann Crittenden: Another great question! yes, I think day care in infancy is NOT the best thing for for kids or parents. And guess what? The US has more infants under age one in day care than any other advanced country -- precisely because we have no paid leave. US mothers have to go back to work faster than moms anywhere else. Nursery school after age three is altogether different, and a very good thing in my view.
Virginia:
My husband and I have middle school aged kids and we've just made the decision that he will be a stay-at-home dad. I make a really good income, so it made sense for us financially, but he is getting grief from his father and brothers for being lazy and "what if we get divorced." I know that the social stigma is much greater for stay at home Dads, based on our experience. Do you have any information on the relative economic cost for stay at home Moms and Dads?
Ann Crittenden: Yes, the "mommy tax" is also a Dady tax" if the stay-at-home parent is a dad. I have section on this in my book, and some interesting comments by one stay-at-home dad. The big point is, the higher your potential earning power, the more you stand to lose is you do choose to stay at home awhile. That's why we do need better divorce laws, so that risk is more fairly shared.
Bob Levey:
We live in a selfish culture. People want traffic to get out of THEIR way. They want cable TV service 14 seconds after they call in their credit card numbers. So do you think we'll soon see politics that divide along the question of motherhood? That is, will we hear non-mothers say that they shouldn't pay as much in taxes because they don't have kids in the public schools?
Ann Crittenden: Well, I think we do see some of that. But I still think we'll do the smart thing, in our own uniquely American way. That is, it will slowly dawn on us that investing in people, and in the people who are raising our next generation, is a very smart policy.
Laurel, Md.:
While the employment practices of Europe may seem attractive to many Americans, Europe has experienced almost zero private-sector job growth in the last 20 years, and the unemployment rate has frequently been 10 percent.
Ann Crittenden: This is true in a country like Germany in particular, but it is not true of Europe as a whole. Swden, for example, whith the MOST generous family polciies, has been doing extremely well economically in recent years. A lot of Euopre's labor problems are due to rigid employment rules and regs, not due to family policy. These are two different things.
Taxes:
Back to the issue of paying for improved day care, maternity leave, etc. European countried provide these sorts of family friendly policies, and they pay much higher taxes (for these, and other, services). Have you estimated what the cost to the average taxpayer would be if we were to provide European-levels of child care?
Ann Crittenden: Yes, I have. first, not all European countries have dramatically higher taxes than the US. Secondly, universal preschool education for every three year old and over would cost maybe $50 billion a year -- peanuts compared to what we're spending now on other priorities. And the payback is huge. Also, you can have paid family leave with at no cost to employers, and a tax of maybe $27 a year on employees. This is what just passed in Calfornia, for paid family leave of six weeks.
Bob Levey:
This year, for the first time, American women have hit the highed education quinella. They comprise a majority of college undergraduates, med school students, law school students and business school students. What effect will this have on the worth-of-motherhood question in the next 20 years?
Ann Crittenden: Good question again! I think it will highlight the issue even more. The more women have "other options" the more they ralize that the work of raising children is a) as challenging and important as any other line of work and b) the more they realize that our society is anachronistic in not acknowledging this.
McLean, VA:
Wow - what an interesting topic. Do you believe that there will be significant progress towards flexibility in the workplace while we have a Republican administration (& Congress) in power? Not trying to start a fire here, but I have heard many Republican politicians (Kemp, for example) state that making it possible for the woman to stay home is a goal of the party.
Your distinguished host has been heard to say "a woman can have it all, just not all at once." Why not?
Ann Crittenden: Well. I'll styay out of politics, but keeping women at home is about as smart as modelling ourselves on the Taliban.
What About Other Caregivers:
My mom was just diagnosed with terminal illness. I'd like more than 12 weeks off to care for her but I don't get to. Aren't our parents just as great as asset as our kids? Shouldn't we value the knowledge we gain from our elders too, or are they too old to be of much value?
By the way, I predict in the next 10 years, with the population aging, elder care is going to be a more important issue than child care.
Ann Crittenden: Glad you giv eme a chance to say that when we talk about paid family leave, it includes leave to care for all dependent family members, including elders. And you';re right, that issue will loom larger in the future, although it will never be as large as the children issue for the foreseeable future in sheer numbers.
Bob Levey:
Here's my nomination for Biggest Unfairness: Pension rights. A woman can marry a Navy enlisted man, follow him all over the world, have four children by him, and yet expect nothing whatsoever in benefits if he divorces her. Ditto in much of the civilian world, too. Isn't this an easy one for Congress to fix?
Ann Crittenden: You know, I admit I don't know the militaryrules on this, but in civilian life a spouse has a right to a share of the pension if they were married for ten years or more.
Maryland:
Hello. In your book, do you list cultural differences? Or any trends between regional and geographic areas? Race, gender and class issues?
Ann Crittenden: I don't get into these issues that much, because it's my view that on these matters we are more or less all in the same boat. Culturally, there are more differences between the Hispanic population, perhaps than any racial difference, and I also believe that all mothers, rich or poor, share similar problems in having value placed on their work.
Alabama:
What role or influence do you think organized religion has had, now and historically, in shaping the current situation as far as mothers are concerned? Don't you think there's a possibility that our uniquely American religiosity has had some influence?
Ann Crittenden: Yes, I often think that the great obstacle to women's further progress, is fundamentalism of all religions.
Bob Levey:
Twnety years ago, it was extra-tough for working mothers because their bosses were almost always men. Not so today. Has the emergence of female bosses made it easier for a Mom to beg off a business meeting because her kid is sick with the flu?
Ann Crittenden: Bob, you give great questions! One of the findings of my reporting was that female bosses are definitly not better on any of this than male bosses. Sad but true. Women defintely have no corner on sympathy for other women.
Personal Choice:
I have seen several people say that having children is a personal choice, therefore society owes nothing to parents. Parenthood IS a personal choice in that nobody can make you do it or make you not do it. However, like some other choices, it affects other people! Therefore society does have an interest. Potentially the whole world and future generations ought to care about my doing a good job with my kids-- my child could grow up to be Nelson Mandela or Timothy McVeigh. And since they care, they might want to help me achieve the best possible outcome. Of course that assistance helps me. But it also helps everyone my child will come into contact with in the future.
Ann Crittenden: Thank you, personal choice,. My snetiments exactly. When someone implies that having a kid is a personal choice, like deciding whther of not to have a dog, I just say well, when my dog grows up it won't pay for your Scoial security.
Bob Levey:
Illegitimate pregnancy rates have pretty much flattened out in the U.S. Does this mean that more women have bought your argument about the economic burdens of motherhood? Or does it simply mean that birth control is easier to get than ever?
Ann Crittenden: I think that the decline in teen pregnancy etc. has a lot to do with what you reminded us of earlier -- girls now have many more choices in life, more education, etc., and having a baby young an dunmarried just doesn't seem such a great choice to many anymore.
Rockville, Md.:
I think many of the posters so far are missing the point you are trying to make. (I haven't read your book yet, so forgive me if I am misunderstanding what you are saying.) Because motherhood is not compensated financially, it is devalued in our society. The person (be it male or female) who performs the most important job of all -- raising our future generations, becomes treated as if they are lazy or selfish because they are not bringing in money to support the family. This phenomenon also crosses into the realm of education where teachers - the other people responsible for the upbringing of youth, are paid paltry sums and expected to perform the heroic feat of preparing today's youth to be tomorrow's future.
Mothers/Caregivers work just as hard, if not harder, than CEOs, but get paid nothing for it. Many women who would love to stay home and raise their children are forced to pass off their child's upbringing to the nanny or nursery school so that they can afford to support their families.
Ann Crittenden: Right, and it's not only that primary parents have no income; their work isn't even acknoeledged to be work, so they are not covered by the normal social programs that protect other workers. The bottom line is mothers are often poor in this country and are more vulnerable than any other workers. This does not make the job of bringing up the next generation easier or more effective.
Bob Levey:
Let's zero in for a second on the biological clock. Tick... tick...tick.... women can hear it. Does this mean that American women who are between 35 and 42 are making a more pressured decision about children (and the economic consequences of that decision) than women between, say, 21 and 30?
Ann Crittenden: Tick, tick. You;ve seen the old T-shirt of the women looking at her watch and saying OH, I forgot to have a child! Yes, the pressure is on, because when is there a good time to have a child and not get clobbered?
Arlington:
Why doesn't anybody ever ask the question:
Who is supposed to love children?
Ann Crittenden: Why is valuing a parent's work imply that those parents don;t adore their kids? I'd die for my son, but I don't think society should make me a financial dependent or poor because I do the right thing by him and stay at hoime for some years.
Reality of business:
The bottom line for bosses (and companies) is that the work has to get done. If someone can't/isn't pulling their weight and others have to constantly cover and/or pick up the slack to meet deadlines, that worker has to go. In reality, does it really matter why the person is absent or not completing their work? That's business.
Ann Crittenden: This "realityu of business" reminds me of soemthing an Ityalian journalist said to me: You American live to work We work to live.
Dupont Circle, DC:
Why should my partner and I (childless by choice) have to pay for someone else's decision to breed? You haven't made the case at all. Please convince me.
Ann Crittenden: Do you plan to refuse to accept Social Security? Who do youthink will be paying for it? Someone's else's kids. They maybe spending one million dollars in direct costs and another million in lost income, promotions, etc. to produce those kids, while you will be paying school taxes. You are getting a very good deal!
Bob Levey:
Your son is now an adult, but tell us what it was like for you and your husband when you decided to have him. Did you automatically assume that the Mom in your household would do the bulk of the child-rearing? Did you quit your job?
Ann Crittenden: This is personal, but I'll answer it. My husband had just started a company wand was working the proverbia;l 24/7. I was a reporter for The New York Times, a very hgih pressure, long hours, travel sort of job. Guess who quit their job?
Bob Levey:
Let's say that a woman gets elected president, and significant leadership on Capitol Hill belongs to women or the first time. Will you have to issue Volume Two, with major revisions therein?
Ann Crittenden: I wonder. There is some evidence that the more political power women have, the more family-friendly social polciies are. That doesn't mean employers will behave differently, though --that requires a greater cultural change. But anyhting's possible, In the Sixties Americans worked fewer hours than other countries, today we work the most. What happened?
F'burg VA:
Many people think they need two incomes becausue they think 2 BMW's and a country club house are a "requirement." After our second child I ran the numbers and realized that net of child care, lunches, travel expenses, etc we were really making about $100 a week on my wifes job. It was an easy decision for me to pick up a part time gig to make up the $100 and allow her to stay home with the kids.
Ann Crittenden: Right, things are really stacked against earning that second income, so it's mostly mtoehrs who qwuit. They wouldn;t have to if there were more and better partt-ime jobs, and fairer taxes. Why not end the marriage tax com-pletely by taxing everyone as an individual?
Washington, D.C.:
What if parents get paid leaves, SS contributions based on their unpaid labor raising their children, etc. -- and the kid turns out to be an unemployed addict and petty thief? If society has an interest in giving your tools to help you raise your children well, what happens when you're a lousy parent? Can we get our money back?
Ann Crittenden: You know, do you think parents will do a better or a worse job if they have more support? What do you think it's costing society TODAY for parental failire? Isn't it slightly possible that our failure to support parents may have something to do with the tens of billiosn we spend every yerar on prisons etc.?
Bob Levey:
For the first time in American history, we've just seen women serving in harm's way in the military in significant numbers, and paying the price--as POWs and casualties. Will we again hear that combat is men's work, and that women (especially women who are mothers) do not belong on the front lines?
Ann Crittenden: Re military -- I don't think it would be so terrible if a single parent in the military had a right to choose a non-combat role. Especially since the military attracts parents by offering the best, most heavily subsidized child-care system in the country.
Bob Levey:
If you ask young women what they want in their lives, they will almost always say they want a husband and children. Yet today's young women are often the products of mothers who worked. These young women have seen Moms do the "big juggle." They don't have anything to rebel against, the way women who are now 50 had, as they disdained their cookie-baking, stay-at-home Moms. Do you think today's young women will rebel against their mothers in other ways, or do today's 50-something Moms constitute role models instead?
Ann Crittenden: I think you do see some rebellion against mothers who had to work long hours. a lot of younger women say they want to have more time for their kids if they can. But they are going to have to fight hard against what has become an extremely workaholic, materialistic culture!
Bob Levey:
Many thanks to our guest, Ann Crittenden. Be sure to join us next week when our guest on "Levey Live" will be Dennis Owens, the recently retired morning host on WGMS-FM. Our visit with Dennis will begin at noon Eastern time on Tuesday, April 29.
Bob Levey:
That wraps up today's show. Thanks to everyone who joined the
discussion.
Stay Tuned to Live Online:
Future
of the Oil Industry, 2 p.m. ET
Keep up with the best Live Online has to offer and special breaking news
discussions. Sign up for the Live Online
e-mail
newsletter.
| |
© Copyright 2003 The Washington Post Company | 
