![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 6 of 6. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Grace on January 10, 2000, at 17:33:47
I've had something on my mind, and I almost feel that the web is the only place to discuss it since the subject is such an emotional trigger. It seems that our culture is moving farther and farther away from the concept of parental resposibility. I think this comes about because people think that having children is the normal course of events: it is "natural." Therefore, they are not fully resposible for the choices they have made. Personally, I think that having a child who you are not fully willing to take responsiblity for is very unatural. Love and responsibility toward a child are natural. The act of giving birth is unatural if a parent is not aware of this role. It sounds simple, but it seems that few people understand this. I am in my early thirties, and I have made a very conscious choice not to have children yet. I am not ashamed of having enough insight into myself to realize that I am not ready to make that tremendous commitment. If I get to the age when child-bearing is no longer possible and I have not had a child, I will accept that I made the wisest choice and sacrificed having a child. I am aware that I make my own choices, and that I live with the results (unlike irresponsible parents).
Sometimes I see women who are hostile and tired from dealing with their children. Some seem to have a venomous resentment for women like myself who don't have children, as if God had targeted them for a burden and didn't target me. It's such an irrational envy. My own good judgment has exused me from the responsibilities of child rearing. I think that Hillary Clinton's idea of "It takes a village" has made things worse. The idea implies that parents should be able to defer responsibility to others without society's consent. If I have wisely chosen to not have children before I am ready, should I really be burdened with the responsibility of other people's children. When did I agree to this? I care about children. I am very active in trying to prevent child abuse. I have reported child abusers when others were afraid to. I think my obligation is to report abuse or neglect of children; they cannot defend themselves, but I disagree with the opinion that I should be held responsible for raising someone else's child. Well, the way I see it, our culture sees conscientious women like me as the oddballs. I think sexism is alive and well when a woman's intelligent choices are demeaned as unatural. Irresponsible parents are considered noble while I am the freak for making wise choices.
Posted by Stacy on January 10, 2000, at 19:21:55
In reply to It Takes a Village?, posted by Grace on January 10, 2000, at 17:33:47
> I've had something on my mind, and I almost feel that the web is the only place to discuss it since the subject is such an emotional trigger. It seems that our culture is moving farther and farther away from the concept of parental resposibility. I think this comes about because people think that having children is the normal course of events: it is "natural." Therefore, they are not fully resposible for the choices they have made. Personally, I think that having a child who you are not fully willing to take responsiblity for is very unatural. Love and responsibility toward a child are natural. The act of giving birth is unatural if a parent is not aware of this role. It sounds simple, but it seems that few people understand this. I am in my early thirties, and I have made a very conscious choice not to have children yet. I am not ashamed of having enough insight into myself to realize that I am not ready to make that tremendous commitment. If I get to the age when child-bearing is no longer possible and I have not had a child, I will accept that I made the wisest choice and sacrificed having a child. I am aware that I make my own choices, and that I live with the results (unlike irresponsible parents).
> Sometimes I see women who are hostile and tired from dealing with their children. Some seem to have a venomous resentment for women like myself who don't have children, as if God had targeted them for a burden and didn't target me. It's such an irrational envy. My own good judgment has exused me from the responsibilities of child rearing. I think that Hillary Clinton's idea of "It takes a village" has made things worse. The idea implies that parents should be able to defer responsibility to others without society's consent. If I have wisely chosen to not have children before I am ready, should I really be burdened with the responsibility of other people's children. When did I agree to this? I care about children. I am very active in trying to prevent child abuse. I have reported child abusers when others were afraid to. I think my obligation is to report abuse or neglect of children; they cannot defend themselves, but I disagree with the opinion that I should be held responsible for raising someone else's child. Well, the way I see it, our culture sees conscientious women like me as the oddballs. I think sexism is alive and well when a woman's intelligent choices are demeaned as unatural. Irresponsible parents are considered noble while I am the freak for making wise choices.
Grace -
I admire your attitude. I agree that the "It takes a village..." philosophy seems to be making things worse in our society. I am a fulltime mom, & home school my children. My 16 year old has severe ADHD. When he was younger, we were told by various professionals that he would need special education, would always be a "problem child," & that we would never have a normal life. Although my husband & I love him very much, life has been extremely painful for all of us. It has been a constant struggle to keep our family in tact. Our son was 5 years old when my mother, the only person who would care for him while my husband & I worked, died suddenly. Because of our concerns about child care (no one would babysit because our son was so difficult to handle, & our newborn baby had to be put on an apnea/bradicardia [S.I.D.S.] monitor) I quit my job, & never did end up going back to work. When our 6 year old daughter became extremely ill 4 years ago, I decided home education was to be my calling. It has been rough; but we chose to bring them into the world, & are willing to face the consequences. I think responsibility is a privilege; but becoming a parent is a responsibility that one must be certain he or she is prepared for. Many times there are difficulties we don't forsee, & that others (outside of the immediate family unit) do not want to get involved with. I, too, feel like the odd man out. Our society seems to glorify mothers working outside of the home; but it looks upon mothers who choose to stay at home, regardless of the reasons why, as a mindless drudges who don't have what it takes to make it in the real world. I have learned to choose my own path, & do what is right concerning my own situation. I try not to be influenced by what people think & say. As the late Mother Theresa put it "In the end, it will be between you & God. It was never between you & them, anyway."
Posted by Noa on January 10, 2000, at 21:25:09
In reply to Re: It Takes a Village?, posted by Stacy on January 10, 2000, at 19:21:55
I don't see the "It Takes a Village" concept as being in conflict with either of your ideas. It is unfortunate that you feel invisible as a stay at home mom. To me, it takes a village means offering your family some support for raising your special child, and supporting you during the crisis/transition when you had to quit your job when your Mom died.
You deserve a lot of credit for following through on your responsibilities.
I agree there are lots of people who need to be more focused on their responsibilities, on what is important. But I don't see this as conflicting with the idea that our society needs to invest more in its children.
Posted by john on January 10, 2000, at 21:35:08
In reply to Re: It Takes a Village?, posted by Stacy on January 10, 2000, at 19:21:55
No one takes Hillary Clinton that seriously! She couldn't change American culture if she gave it her all. Wasn't she essentially talking about the breakdown of the extended family in North American culture anyway? My intuition tells me you are doing alot of projection. Don't take care of anyone's child if you don't want to. Were you abused as a child? Stacey, if I'm wrong about everything, this I know I right about, people are not thinking you are a freak because you don't have children.
Posted by Stacy on January 11, 2000, at 9:11:29
In reply to Re: It Takes a Village?, posted by Noa on January 10, 2000, at 21:25:09
> I don't see the "It Takes a Village" concept as being in conflict with either of your ideas. It is unfortunate that you feel invisible as a stay at home mom. To me, it takes a village means offering your family some support for raising your special child, and supporting you during the crisis/transition when you had to quit your job when your Mom died.
>
> You deserve a lot of credit for following through on your responsibilities.
>
> I agree there are lots of people who need to be more focused on their responsibilities, on what is important. But I don't see this as conflicting with the idea that our society needs to invest more in its children.I hear what you're saying, & appreciate your response. Unfortunately, as good as the idea of helping others with their children is, many people are too busy with their own lives to involve themselves when there are problems. At least this is what we have experienced. As for being an at home mom, I believe an underlying attitude does prevail regarding the value (or lack of it) of a mother who chooses to stay at home in today's society. It's not so much that I feel invisible as it is I (& other at home moms I've discussed this with) receive a lot of negative responses about their role. Even the media seems to uphold the role of working mothers, while downplaying that of staying at home. I have a great deal of respect for working moms - I was there once, & know how hard it is. However, I think at home mothers deserve an equal amount of respect. I hope I haven't rambled; this is an issue which is important to me. Thanks again for your reply. Take care!
Posted by Stacy on January 11, 2000, at 9:21:01
In reply to Re: It Takes a Village?, posted by john on January 10, 2000, at 21:35:08
> No one takes Hillary Clinton that seriously! She couldn't change American culture if she gave it her all. Wasn't she essentially talking about the breakdown of the extended family in North American culture anyway? My intuition tells me you are doing alot of projection. Don't take care of anyone's child if you don't want to. Were you abused as a child? Stacey, if I'm wrong about everything, this I know I right about, people are not thinking you are a freak because you don't have children.
It was Grace who posted with regard to these issues. I only replied to her about this.
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.