Reimbursement for Stay-At-Home Moms? | Sister Renée Mirkes | Catholic World Report
What the Church can contribute to the on-going debate
It all started during the 2012 presidential campaign. Ann Romney, reaching out to female voters—especially independents in swing states—publicly commiserated with their angst over job and economic uncertainties. In a terse, staccato tone, Hilary Rosen, Democratic activist, shot back on CNN: As a lifelong stay-at-home mom who “never worked a day in her life,” Ann Romney is the least qualified woman to champion the financial worries of working mothers.
Round One
Movers and shakers in high places quickly came to Ann Romney’s defense. President Obama, in one of his “let me be perfectly clear” pontifications, informed Rosen (and her think-alikes) that anyone who fails to grasp that “there’s no tougher job than being a mom…needs to rethink their statement.” Eager to underline the president’s insight, First Lady Michelle Obama and Vice President Joe Biden weighed in with similar sentiments.
Many thoughtful female bloggers in not-so-high places agreed with the federal hierarchy—the Rosen remark was demeaning, superficial, petty, and unfair. They were eager to steer the national conversation about women and work toward harder questions, moving it from the no-brainer conclusion—“A mother’s work at home is hard and worthwhile”—to substantive questions like, “How does a mom balance work outside the home with work inside the home?” and, “Is there any way to realize the stay-at-home dream of women with moderate incomes?” Against a backdrop of thoughtful questions like these, the Rosen/Romney kerfuffle morphed into a national conversation about a whole set of complex issues.
Round Two
The second round included a debate about how best to reward women for their work and their motherhood; how best to give those low-to-moderate income women who want to swap their jobs for home-work the opportunity to be stay-at-home moms (SAHMs), and how best to balance job and childrearing for work-outside-of-home moms (WOHMs).
I like the quote from JPII. The simple change in attitude toward stay-at-home moms would go a long way toward "compensation"! Personally, as a SAHM of 5 kids, I don't need monetary compensation. All my financial needs are taken care of by my husband. What I would really like is for society in general to stop the snarky comments and to recognize that what I do is important and worthwhile, and not the province of the "lazy", "uneducated", or "untalented". I don't necessarily need special recognition days or ceremonies or whatever. I'm talking about the general attitude that people have.
I also think there is another piece to this debate. The article mentioned debate about what to do for low-to-moderate income women/families so the woman can stay home if she wants to. I would suggest that more women could actually stay home who think they "have to" work to make ends meet. It is possible to stay home when your husband's income is "moderate". It takes sacrifice, yes, but it is possible. My husband's income is "moderate", and I stay home, yet we can pay our bills and we have all we need, and are still able to eat mostly organic food, send our kids to Catholic schools, and tithe to the church. How do we do that? We have a budget, we have one vehicle, we live in a small house, we have no cable, we shop second-hand, we have a garden, and we don't have most of the "gadgets" that people think they can't do without.....and we do just fine. Now, I realize that not every family can function with one vehicle or have a garden or whatever. But every family can look for ways to trim the budget. Perhaps if we as a society begin to rethink our definition of "need" and "prosperity", more women would realize that they CAN stay home.
Posted by: Laura P | Wednesday, February 06, 2013 at 07:50 AM