Today was the first day of school for our kids. We had
decided to let them cycle to school this year, honouring their Dutch traditions
despite the unhelpful roads and motorists of New York. But their map reading is
not great, so this morning I walked along with them.
This was a pleasure. The kids were a bit nervous, though
trying hard not to show it. We had robust debates about the value of cycle
helmets. But it was a beautiful day for walking, school passed without major
trauma, and I can reflect on another of life’s little milestones passing
successfully. Later, I also walked the kids to the dentist for a check up.
The start of the day was fun too. We have house guests, who
had read somewhere that Brooklyn bridge at sunrise was one of the sights of New
York not to be missed. Now, sunrise was 06.32, so I volunteered to get up early
and drive them, expecting little traffic at that hour.
The view was indeed spectacular. One World Trade glistened
like I had never seen it do so before. I received the familiar good feeling from
getting up very early. But motorway traffic was heavy even at that early hour.
Later, I read some Economist and some Guardian, both
including articles bemoaning the continuing lack of women in senior positions
in society. So many excuses have been made, reasons given. Sheryl Sandberg and
others have offered their diagnosis and advice, often conflicting. I wondered
if I might have missed something, and then made connections to the rest of my
day. My wife went to work in her regular office this morning. I imagined that
had been my routine as well.
The dentist would probably have been OK. It is close, the
kids know where it is, they had been treated there before, and no payment was
due. Still, the dentist is hardly a pleasure, and it would have been a bit hard
on the kids to go alone.
The first day of school would have been another thing
entirely. We could have practiced walking the route over the weekend. But it
would have been quite an imposition for the kids to have to go alone this
morning. Nerves would have been jangling. Some part of the hated uniform would
probably have been forgotten. The lecture about cycle helmets would have been
missing. But worst of all would have been the loss of insurance policy in case
the day went badly. As it happens, no hugs were needed, but things could easily
have gone wrong.
Then I thought of all the occasions in the last year when
being at home was really helpful. It started with looking for a house and all
the other labour intensive activities linked with moving location. Bank
accounts, driving licenses, medical registrations, phone accounts, getting cable
connected at home. Much of this is only available during office hours, and I
can imagine the overall time it would have taken and the number of half days
involved if both of us had been working full time.
Then there are the kid related things to add to the main one
of just being there when needed. Researching schools, visiting, securing
registration, negotiating classes, learning about selection processes,
tutoring, progress reports, parent conferences, medical requirements, events, school
uniforms, soccer practices. We were required to visit a specialist heart
practice half an hours drive away (three hours by public transport) simply to
confirm that the kids could do sports. If the soccer try out had been
successful, that would have involved a pick up every day at 5.30pm, or
subjecting a 14-year-old to a tough one-hour bus ride to add to the rest of his
daily toil.
Although I think I am supportive of the right to dual
careers, I am ashamed to say the scale of this had never struck me before. In
my previous life, I was the one taking the early commute on the European
equivalents of the Queens Brooklyn expressway to beat the traffic, and my
partner was not working. I only realized the sheer scale of this commitment
yesterday because I paused to think about it. Most of the time I just got it
done, with pleasure. After all, I have the time, and this is a good way to use
it.
I also suspect many of the people writing the articles do
not really understand the full story. We all see the obvious, headline issues.
Raising kids in their first years needs someone at home. Pre-school needs a
good local facility and a solution for fetching and carrying and the hours
outside pre-school. And it is clear that there is some sacrifice in the cliché
of missing the bedtime story or the school nativity play.
But it is so much more than that, whether you have kids or
not. Just managing the administration of modern life is complicated, before you
add in moving house, bringing up kids, or caring for sick relatives. It can be
done around work, sure, but at what cost? I can shop in peace on a weekday
morning, but the crowds on a Saturday are horrible. The same with things like
servicing the car.
For all the benefits of the internet and the much publicized
steps forward in things like maternity leave, I realize society is most
countries is still overwhelmingly geared to the former model. You had servants
if you were wealthy. You lived with your parents until you married, and close
to the grand parents afterwards. And one partner, usually the female stayed at
home, or at the most worked part-time. This paradigm seems hopelessly out of
date now, but living any other way is basically still very hard work, and
usually short-changes aforesaid kids and sick relatives.
For all their talk, I don’t think politicians actually
understand this. Nor do journalists. Sadly, most men choose not to understand
it. Business leaders choose not to understand it. Nor do Churches, with their
inbuilt conservative and masculine biases. Strangely, even stay-at-home Mums
don’t understand it, because, like me this year, they just get the job done
without reflecting on it.
Broadly, the only two groups who do understand it are the
young couples trying hard to juggle career and family, and the class who simply
have no choice – low paid couples and single parents. In the former case, we
listen but inwardly think they are moaning feminists exaggerating their lot and
trying to assuage their guilt. In the latter case, we don’t think at all, and
are oblivious to the sheer stressful misery such a life entails, especially for
the poor children, who grow up too quickly and can give problems later.
Is it any wonder that Mums choose to de-prioritise career
once the kids get to school? Surely it should sometimes be Dads, but in any
case it makes a lot of sense. Quite apart from the gift to the kids, the gift
to each other is significant. Who wants all that stress? We say we now offer
dual careers, but the reality is that we do little to make it work.
As with many issues, recognizing it and owning it are the
main part of the solution. Next time I hear a politician’s platitude or hear of
business friendly policies or observe the desperate face of a single mum, I
will bring a new, less complacent perspective. If we all did the same, society
could go forward.
What practical steps would make a big difference? Based on
my experience in the last year I can identify a few. Effective, affordable,
pre-school for all kids. School days that coincide with working days (even the
first day of school). Even more online provision of public services. Safer
streets for kids, with cycle lanes, lighting, pensioners paid to look after
kids. Caring recognized as a profession. Shorter and flexible working days,
with full acceptance of early finishes for family reasons. Only Scandinavia is
anywhere near some of these ideals, and much of the Western world lags
shamefully behind, and seems to be moving backwards.
But, most of all, more of us must accept the issue and
create authentic desire to solve it. Including men.
No comments:
Post a Comment