There have been a couple of “media watch” items recently that I’ve been thinking about.
Single moms, married moms, “single married moms” – Round 2, and the Babytalk Survey
Seems to me that we’ve heard a variation on this theme before…There are some interesting tidbits in a recent survey of moms by Babytalk magazine, as reported by MSNBC.
Did you know that nearly 40% of moms today are “officially” single, according to US Census data? But just because they’re not married to their children’s fathers doesn’t mean they’re actually raising their children as “single parents;” while some are divorced or single by choice, many others live with a partner and don’t consider themselves “single” at all. And while around one-third of these women are perfectly fine with that, a majority would prefer marriage to their child’s father and believe it’s the best setting for raising children. A substantial majority of the unmarried mothers surveyed didn’t plan their most recent pregnancies, while most of the married moms did. And while most of the single mothers felt the heavy responsibility of being solely responsible for financial support and childcare, at the same time they appreciated not having to share decision-making regarding their children and their lives. That autonomy was what married mothers, even those who said they “felt” single because their husbands worked a lot or were away, seemed to envy most about single moms.
The surveyed women who were “happily unmarried” expressed a number of reasons for not marrying their partners, including the familiar “marriage is just a piece of paper.” Yes, it is, and it doesn’t usually have any effect on a couple’s feelings or sense of commitment to each other. But it’s a piece of paper that confers certain legal rights and privileges that unmarried couples just don’t have, unless they go to the trouble and expense of formalizing their arrangements in other ways, including official domestic partnerships where they are recognized (and even that won’t get them joint-tax-filing status). After my first marriage ended, I had felt that I’d be happy to be in a long-term, live-in relationship in the future, not necessarily marrying again. The ongoing legal struggle of the gay and lesbian community to obtain the right to marry is actually what prompted me to rethink this. When my current relationship became serious, we started talking about moving in together – and, after awhile, getting married. The sense of commitment was already in place, but the legal recognition of our relationship wasn’t until that license was filed, and we live in a society where that really does make a difference. But whether or not you’re married, if you’re working and raising a family, I really believe two sets of hands are better than one. I can understand why married moms might envy childless single women, but not single mothers – while it works fine for many, it is objectively a tougher path.
Time off for family stuff – or for anything, really
CNN’s back-to-school story about parents requesting, and being granted, time off from work for family matters raises the entirely valid question of whether this is fair to other employees who don’t have the same obligations. It highlights several companies who understand the value of work-life balance for all of their staff, and one way in which they show it – implementing policies that offer PTO (paid time off) without specific justification, rather than the traditional vacation/sick leave allotments. These policies are part of a more flexible approach to work, and are most effective when there are clear expectations about what, when, and where work needs to be done; this clarity helps prevent abuse of the time off and ensures the primary objective of getting the job done, period.
(E)quitable time-off policies…recogniz(e) that all employees, regardless of their personal circumstances, need a work-life balance. Encouraging an atmosphere of mutuality and goodwill among co-workers can also head off conflicts and resentments when one staffer leaves early.
Colleen Haviland, founder and president of Xsell Resources Inc. and Ready to Hire, two businesses in Willow Grove, Pennsylvania, sees no difference between giving parents time off for a child’s game and giving childless workers time to go to sporting or theatrical events. “No matter if it’s children or any type of other commitment, we all have a real life outside of work,” Haviland said. “Everyone needs to support each other in their real life in order to have synergy in the workplace.” She sees this kind of approach as an integral part of fostering good relationships with staffers.
At Kel & Partners, a Hopkinton, Massachusetts, a marketing services agency, “We don’t limit flexibility to parents,” President Ginny Pitcher said, noting that some staffers need time off to care for elderly parents or grandparents. “We’ve built a mutual foundation of respect between employees.” Pitcher said employees who need time away from the office make sure they get their work done, and they don’t dump responsibilities on co-workers. As a result, she said, when a parent takes time off for a child’s baseball game, other staffers are likely to be asking the next morning, “How did Justin do? Did he pitch well?” Similarly, another staffer who needs time to care for an ill grandparent is likely to be asked, “Can I help you out?” she said. Pitcher said staffers don’t try to take advantage of the situation — they’ll be checking e-mail later in the day to see what they might have missed. And, she said, “hopefully you hire the right people who understand what you’re trying to achieve.”
I’m inclined to think this works effectively in a professional workplace setting, and I’m all for it. My husband’s employer has this policy, and it’s very manageable. (My employer is more traditional; I’ve got tons of sick time I’ll – hopefully – never get to use for anything, and “vacation” days that get used for anything but.) I’ve been the single employee with “no life,” and it really isn’t fair to be expected to cover for your co-workers who need to be off with their kids (or their parents, or maybe both) when you don’t have similar needs that would balance things out. While there are many reasons why working parents may need more time away from work than their co-workers who don’t have families, we do need to be sensitive to the possibility that these co-workers could resent it if they feel overly put-upon because of it; “family first” doesn’t exempt us from pulling our weight on the job, and we owe it to our co-workers to make sure we’re doing that – and to recognize that they’ve got lives too, even if they’re different from ours.
