Archives: Motherhood

How Will the Death of Disney Moms Shape our Grief?

01.24.2012 12:18 PM

Today’s Obit.com re-posts a piece by David Jays on Disney movies and death, and aptly points out how mothers are most likely missing in Disney movies.  Does Ariel have a mom? Does Belle have a mom?  Does Jasmine have a mom?  Pinnochio has no mom.  Cinderella’s mom is dead and replaced by an evil Stepmother who competes with her.  Snow White’s mom is dead and replaced by an evil Stepmother who competes with her. In Tangled, Rapunzel is kidnapped by an evil, faux mother who uses her magic hair to stay eternally young. Sleeping Beauty has a mom, but she also doesn’t really have a name (can you think of it? It’s Aurora…) and she is in a coma. And of course, Bambi’s mom dies:

“Disney’s films are undeniably weird about mothers. Dumbo’s mother is locked up, Pinocchio lacks one entirely, while the maternal instinct curdles in stories drawn from fairy tales. Snow White’s villainous stepmother is both icy beauty and cackling hag, intent on murder. Bambi, however, is full of anodyne mothers – a herd of Stepford beasts contentedly putters along with their cubs and chicks (where are all the fathers? Do they commute to hunt and gather?). But the maternal bond truly interests Disney only when under threat. The little deer’s mother is less a character than an enveloping maternal instinct – a vague presence but an awesome, aching absence.

The studio was already preparing Bambi when Flora Disney died from carbon monoxide poisoning in 1938. According to biographer Neal Garber, “it may have been the most shattering moment of Walt Disney’s life … he was inconsolable.” He refused to discuss the death, but instructed the artists creating Pinocchio to delete all references to the wife of woodcarver Geppetto, making him a bachelor. Bambi’s trauma may have been Disney’s own.”

Granted, now a days kids are inundated with all sorts of movies and TV but for my generation Disney and Charlie Brown (no parents!) were it.  The very words “limited release” and “Disney vault” still spark anxiety in me.  Makes me wonder how Disney depictions of mother and death will shape our future caregiving and grieving practices.  Will we be looking for escape a la coma, dwarfs, balls, and beasts?  Will we be alone?  I am always struck by how despite being reunited with family and future spouse, the Disney Princesses are always depicted alone, staring off into space.  No one shares their reality, not even what they are looking at!


Dr. Oz on Childbearing after 40

01.21.2012 12:08 AM

Jennifer Lahl debated a fertility doctor, and FamilyScholars bloggers Alana S., Amy Ziettlow, and I were there. The episode airs Friday, January 27th. Check local listings for times (and the producer tells us that if the show airs twice daily in your area then the new episode will be the second one).


‘Reclaiming Dignity in a Culture of Commodification’

01.14.2012 9:34 PM

…is the topic of the next conference at the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity. FamilyScholars blogger Stephanie Blessing and I presented at their conference last summer. Check it out.

Human dignity, once a cornerstone for bioethics, is increasingly obscured by a contemporary culture of commodification. Myopic fixation on sexuality, fertility, and reproduction reduces the female body to a resource for medical exploitation and reproductive tourism. Procreation is being engulfed by the reproductive imperative and the child of choice. Without neglecting the ongoing emphases on beginning- and end-of-life issues, our task must include attention to prenatal discrimination, the neglect of the girl child, worldwide disparities in women’s healthcare and maternal mortality, and the objectification and exploitation of the female body. Responsible Christian bioethics embraces her dignity as essential to her community and foundational to our common humanity. Join us as we explore important ethical considerations surrounding developments in reproductive practices and global women’s health through the lens of reclaiming dignity in a culture of commodification.


How Many Mothers?

01.05.2012 11:30 AM

I agree, both women are biological parents — and not only that they had and raised the child together, so they are both rightfully legal parents.

Of course, the child has a third biological parent as well, the man the mothers and the court refers to as the sperm donor. A story by Susan Donaldson James at ABC News:

Tina’s biological daughter turned 8 this week, but she has not seen the girl since Dec. 22, 2008, because of a custody fight with her former lesbian partner. The partner is unrelated to the child, but gave birth to her.

“I thought I’d have her back on her birthday,” said Tina, a law enforcement officer, whose name was never on the birth certificate and who has been denied parenting rights under Florida state law.

For 11 years, the Brevard County couple forged a committed relationship, living together, sharing their finances and raising a daughter. Tina’s egg was fertilized with donor sperm and implanted in her partner’s womb.

But when their romance fell apart when the child was 2, the Florida courts had to decide, who is the legal parent, the biological mother or the birth mother who carried the child for nine months in her womb?

A trial court summarily sided with Tina’s ex-partner, citing Florida statute.  “The judge said, ‘It breaks my heart, but this is the law,’” according to the birth mother’s lawyer, Robert J. Wheelock of Orlando.

But on Dec. 23, a state appeals court rejected the law as antiquated and recognized both women as legal parents.


Father’s Little Dividend

12.20.2011 7:41 PM

Late Saturday night while working on a craft project (ask me if I’ve learned how to wallpaper a dollhouse) I tapped around on the Netflix instant queue and found 1951′s Father’s Little Dividend, starring Spencer Tracy and Elizabeth Taylor. Apparently the inspiration for the more recent Father of the Bride movies starring Steve Martin and Diane Keaton, the earlier version similarly features a father (Spencer Tracy) sauntering home on a sunny afternoon, realizing that his mortgage is paid, his daughter is married, his younger sons are well on their way to graduation, and perhaps he can revisit those dreams of young manhood before responsibility weighed him down. He comes in the front door, gives his wife a big wet kiss, and suggests a trip to the islands.

But alas, that evening the married daughter (Elizabeth Taylor) and her husband have all the parents over and announce their joyful news — they’re having a baby. Everyone bursts with surprise and joy, hugging, exclaiming — all except for the Spencer Tracy character who sits shell-shocked. “Congratulations, Grandpa!” someone says as they clap him on the back. “Grandpa?!” Spencer Tracy says to himself. “Grandpa??!!” The next day he hits the gym, only to wake the following morning with a pulled back and a wife already in high gear preparing for the great day still months away.

This movie, sixty years old, struck me as incredibly contemporary. From the new Grandpa’s reactions to aging, to his stumbling attempt to reassure his son-in-law that the new baby will not replace him as top dog in his young wife’s heart (well, not for long anyway, well, not much) — echoing themes explored in our recent report, “When Baby Makes Three” — to the Elizabeth Taylor character happily telling her increasingly alarmed father that (paraphrasing here) her doctor has “new ideas, that when a woman is in labor she should really feel the labor, and Dr So-and-so thinks that when the baby is born the mother and the baby should not be separated, not ever, and when Dr So-and-so was practising medicine in Polynesia, why, the mothers there would wear their babies on their backs and when they were hungry, well, they would just flip them around, feed them, and then flip them onto their backs again…,” foreshadowing all the debates about natural childbirth, attachment parenting, baby-wearing, and nursing that got going approximately two decades after this movie appeared and still rage today.

Maybe it’s true that there is nothing new under the sun. We just re-tell ourselves the same stories for our own time, but the story stays the same.


Motherlode: “Do working moms really prefer part-time jobs?”

12.17.2011 11:36 AM

At the popular NYT blog, KJ Dell’Antonia takes up this question, reacting to our new report “When Baby Makes Three.”

But why do so many women say they’d prefer to work part time in the first place? I spoke briefly to W. Bradford Wilcox and asked him how the question was phrased. What 58 percent of women responding to the Survey on Marital Generosity really said was that that they preferred to work, not “part time” per se, but 34 hours a week or less (only 20 percent of men said the same). That’s not a result that’s unique to this survey: a 2009 Pew survey on workplace demographics found that 61 percent of mothers with young children would prefer to work part time. My former colleague at Slate’s XXFactor blog, Jessica Gross, was momentarily surprised by those numbers. Why, she asked, the huge contrast between what married men and women with children want?

Could it be the way they’re phrasing the question? read more


Some Thoughts On The Parenting Report from a Young Parent

12.08.2011 4:34 AM

Tonight I am sitting in Columbia Hospital’s Emergency Room reading the State of Our Unions. Amidst the family medical emergency that brought me here, I’m surprised to find myself smiling. I’m smiling because despite what all my friends, and my parents, and my in-laws, and my extended family have been telling me for years about my life choices, the brilliantly done, nation wide research, (and thoughtful commentary I might add) says that I should be just fine.

Between the charts and statistics and numbers it was as if a hope I had always held was given a voice for the first time. I gleefully raced through the pages. “All along I have been right!,” I exclaimed to no one. Perhaps the most delicious satisfaction was the bit on martial happiness leveling out for childless and parenting couples. Many onlookers into my ‘parental emergencies’ as the report called them, have wondered why two attractive, educated, and vocationally successful couple in their young twenties would inflict themselves with the perpetual crisis’s of parenthood. (Are you allowed to publically refer to yourself as attractive? My daughter thinks I’m pretty when I wear things that twirl. I’m going to go with it.) I’ve always had this gut feeling that while my childless married friends were reading in central park, and going to concerts in Brooklyn, and out to dinners alone, that our beautifully chaotic family adventure would land us not far from them given a few years. That my days filled mostly with wiping things would be what Elizabeth Marquardt so wonderfully described as “a dip in marital happiness” that is simply “more sudden for parents…whereas nonparents experience a more gradual decline in marital quality.” Our serial hobbying friends might argue that our choices to parent young haven’t turned out so well, because to be honest, a lot of days are hard. A lot of days I don’t feel so happy. It’s true that happiness is a truthful indicator of a life well lived— but an important distinction must be made between a deep undercurrent of happiness and a daily, more circumstantially based happiness.

A year or so ago New York Magazine published an article: All Joy and No Fun Why Parents Hate Parenting. It was a national embarrassment. Parenting, they announced, decreased your level of happiness but increased your joy. Um, duh. Similar headlines could have read: recent study shows that watching movies on your sofa is more enjoyable than jogging. Or, experts show that going to a party college is more fun than an Ivy League school. Yea, in a sense. But there are different types of happiness. There is the happiness of eating a really amazing burger with a milkshake. And there is the happiness of being healthy, energized, and slender because you choose every day to eat nutritionally. If you take a snap shot look at two people respectively and ask who is happier and more satisfied, it’s an obvious answer. But is it? For years I’ve come up on the short side of what always felt like an unfair comparison. I’ve never been the person who went with the hamburger.

It’s no surprise to me that the study outlined how one of the most significant predictor of martial happiness is a college education. Perhaps part of this is because college is one of the first major endeavors a young person is expected to complete. I know when my employers have taken a cursory glance at my degree all they really cared about was the fact that I finished. I had what it took to finish the degree. That says something about you as a person, how strong your will is, how capable your follow-through is, to what extent you are capable of being motivated by things other than the human appetites.

People who have what it takes to delay gratification and to sow in anticipation of reaping, are people who have found deeper undercurrents of happiness that are rooted in the human experience of loving relationships and the discovery of their fullest identity and purpose. It’s no surprise that the report found a strong valuing of having meaning and significance among parents. Now, I’m a very ambitious person. I wasn’t one of those ‘I just want to be a mom when I grow up’ kind of girls. I am pure determination. I had my sights set on Harvard grad school when I first got pregnant. I am an author. I bring research projects to the beach. And yet, as I sat next to my two year old during the new Muppet movie I found myself quietly resonating with Kermit the Frog: “Maybe you don’t need the whole world to love you, you know? Maybe you just need one person.” It was humbling to admit that if something were to happen to me, it would not be my academic colleagues or readers who would miss or honor me. It would be my children. I am irreplaceable to my family in a way I could never be to anyone else in my life. Perhaps an even quieter, more vulnerable thought, was the realization that maybe I was starting to be ok with that.

 


Commenter ‘Anna’ on surrogacy and the law

11.17.2011 9:51 AM

At this post she offers a very interesting comment:

Elizabeth, I agree with what you say about surrogacy, but I think you can even go further.  Those who express indignation at the law interfering in these arrangements are somewhat misrepresenting the situation.  The fact is, surrogacy needs positive laws to support it – i.e., it needs the state to step in to enforce a contract about ownership of a human being, over and against biological kinship, in any case where the egg donor or surrogate wishes to dispute custody.  In a legal vacuum, surrogacy couldn’t exist, since the contracting “parents” couldn’t count on getting a baby for their money and trouble.  So advocates of this form of reproduction are not just asking the law to leave them alone; they’re asking our legal system to allow and uphold contracts about the buying and selling of human beings, something that since the end of slavery at least, our legal system has not considered acceptable.


The logic of a child – the voice of reason for adults?

10.31.2011 2:09 PM

A couple of weeks ago I watched Style Networks “Sperm Donor” about a man who had produced over 70 kids through sperm donations. There was one conversation in the documentary that really stuck with me. It’s a dialogue between a single mom by choice and her daughter, about 6 years old I would guess. The mother says she always has been open with, and talked to her kids about how they were conceived.

This is a transcript of the talk the mother has with her daughter the day before they are going to meet the dad/sperm donor for the first time.

Mom: I wanna talk to you about going to meet Ben in Boston. Do you think that something might happen with mommy and Ben? Because he’s marrying another lady, who’s a very nice lady and he loves her a lot.  

Daughter: So he’s gonna break up with you?

Mom: He’s not with me silly. Remember?

Daughter: So you already broke up?

Mom: Ok sweetie, so is he in our lives? 

Daughter: No.

Mom: So how could we break up if he’s not in our lives?

Daughter: ‘Cause you’re married.

Mom: We’re not married. Why would you think that we would be married?

Daughter: Because you got the sperm!

Mom: How did mommy get the sperm?

Daughter: Google.

Mom: Google, that’s good. 


‘In their own way, these girls may be doing the best they can’

10.30.2011 10:21 PM

Below I posted an excerpt from a BioNews story about women as young as 18 looking for sperm donors. There are some very thoughtful comments; be sure to look at all of them.

In the meantime, I wanted to highlight this comment from a commenter who signed in as “Hello.” Even if you don’t agree with what she/he has to say (I suspect it is she, so I’m going to use the feminine), it strikes me that she has her finger on something. Something big, having to do with gender distrust and mother-daughter relationships and aging societies and much, much else in this strange 2011 world in which we find ourselves:

Many a girl and young woman are coming of age and spending their lives in dysfunctional neighborhoods and regions where marriage-worthy men are few and far between.  Many, if not most, of these guys are chronically unemployed, addicted, in prison etc. Even if they want to marry these girls see their chances as slim, and if they wait until marriage for motherhood they’ll probably never have children.  18 may seem young, but these girls’ mothers, aunts, and grandmas are not so young.  And since they’re the ones these girls will rely on for childcare and support they’re better off having kids before Mom and Co. start breaking down in their 50s and 60s due to smoking, unhealthy diet, sedentary lifestyle etc.  Having a kid at 18 won’t hinder a girl’s career prospects if (pre-baby) she finds high school too difficult get a diploma.  If she don’t have a career that gives her life meaning and purpose kids are the only thing she can produce that will give her life meaning.  And if she can’t rely on a husband for love and companionship her kids will be even more important to her because they’ll be her only family after the older generation passes.  So, in their own way, these girls may be doing the best they can.


‘Women as young as 18 searching for sperm donors online’

10.29.2011 10:11 PM

From BioNews:

‘I’m ready in every way possible to be a mum. The only problem is you need a male and female to make a baby and I only have the female part’, read an appeal by a 21-year old on an online forum.

These forums, such as babydonor.com, bring together prospective parents and potential sperm donors, and women under 25 account for up to a quarter of their advertisers.

A 20-year old care worker from Moray, who found a willing donor via online advertising, says of her experience: ‘He [the donor] has donated several times before and has stayed in contact with those families. I don’t want to just meet men in bars and sleep with them, I’m not that kind of girl.


Is it Possible to Have Three Biological Parents?

10.21.2011 2:11 PM

I think so.

Since about 1985, it has been possible for a woman to conceive and carry a pregnancy conceived with another woman’s egg. When the woman carrying the embryo not conceived with her own egg intends to be the mother, we call her the “mother” and the other woman the “egg donor.” But when the woman who gives the egg intends to be the mother, we call her the “mother” and the woman carrying the embryo conceived with that egg the “gestational surrogate.” (It is confusing. Women who do the exact same things are legally determined to be the “real” mother or “just” the egg donor or surrogate, depending on how the adults in question wish it to be.) Either way, the result is an embryo and—ultimately—a child conceived from one woman’s egg, fertilized by the sperm of a man (who we call either the “father” or the “sperm donor”), and carried in another woman’s womb.

In part as a result of these innovations, scientists are learning a great deal about how the process of gestation affects the genetic development of a fetus. Apparently, during gestation the embryo’s genetic markers are switched on and off in reaction to the environment experienced in the womb. In other words, the woman carrying the embryo physiologically shapes the resulting baby’s DNA, even if her egg was not used to conceive the child, and thus she can be said to be a biological mother of the child as well. (And in fact, in the U.S. most state statutes say that the woman who gives birth to a child is the biological mother—these are among the statutes that must be circumvented to allow for the legalization of surrogacy).

Read more, starting on page 45 of One Parent or Five: A Global Look at Today’s New Intentional Families.

UPDATE: Also see Part II of this post.


Hymowitz: ‘Don’t believe the hype, college educated women are still getting married’

10.21.2011 1:45 PM

Kay Hymowitz pens an excellent response to the Kate Bolick Atlantic cover story:

…Like most marriage-is-dead arguments, Bolick’s  hinges on two statistics badly in need of deconstruction. One is that only 48%  of American households are headed by a married couple compared to 78% in 1950.  That’s a striking decline but it has little to do with any loss of interest in  the institution.

Most of the unmarried households are made up of  young immigrant men, elderly women who, thanks to modern medicine, are out  living their husbands for many years, and young singles who are marrying at  historically late ages.

In reality, a little more than 80 percent of women  and men marry at some point. This represents a decline from the 90 percent of  marrieds in 1950, but it is similar to many other periods of American  history.

The second statistic that is used to prove the end of marriage  is the over 40% of American children born to unmarried mothers. This is also a  number that hides as much as it reveals.

The vast majority of women who have children outside  of marriage are low income and working class women. No doubt the “stigma against  single motherhood” has eased, yet college educated women like Bolick continue to  do what their mothers and grandmothers did; they tie the knot before having  children. The latest Census shows that percentage of college educated women who  have children outside of marriage is only about 6%. That’s an increase from  previous years, but a very small one…

In other words, women like Bolick  are the most likely to marry, to have children within marriage, and, to stay  married…


Roiphe: ‘Shaming the single mom’

10.07.2011 6:14 PM

A commenter on my last post drew my attention to Katie Roiphe’s new piece at Slate, about being a professor mom raising a six year old and a toddler with different fathers, neither of whom she’s currently with.

It’s an aggravating but interesting piece. For one thing, Roiphe is a distinctively gifted writer, steeped in the English literature she teaches and adept at the elegant turn of phrase.

Leaving aside my personal thoughts for now (as someone who, myself, grew up with a divorced mom and a half sibling) of how her children might feel now or later about all this, I will say that Roiphe makes a good point about how the educated class talks wild but acts sedate, and the subtle moralism (or, when you’re on the receiving end of it, apparently the not so subtle moralism) they/we use to police behavior. Her essay is in part a catalog of the ways the literati make clear to one of their own that it’s not cool to have a baby out of wedlock.

At the same time, I’d like to correct a couple misleading omissions. Roiphe writes:

It’s worth noting, though, that nearly four in 10 babies in this country are currently born to single mothers, and a rapidly growing percentage of those mothers are adults.

Actually overall it’s now more than four in ten, but it’s probably more relevant to Roiphe’s world to note how many college educated women have children outside of marriage: about six percent. Having a child without a husband is just not something that college professors like her do, much.

Roiphe also writes:

Here someone is bound to say, “Studies have shown …” But as far as I am concerned the studies can continue to show whatever they feel like showing. There are things that can’t be measured and quantified in studies, and I imagine the multitudinous varieties of family peace are among them. Not to mention what these stern studies fail to measure: which is what happens when there is anger or conflict in the home, or unhappy or airless marriages, relationships wilting or faltering, subterranean tensions, what happens when everyone is bored.

In fact there is much work on the impact of divorce and high conflict marriages and other such matters on children. The short version is that high conflict marriages are bad for kids, but only a minority of marriages that end in divorce are high conflict. Most end for other reasons, like the boredom Roiphe refers to (“it seemed to some as if I were getting away with something, as if I were not paying the usual price… [of] take-out Thai food and a video with your husband on a Saturday night”). In a national study I co-investigated some years ago, my colleague and I found that while high-conflict marriages are indeed bad for children, so-called “good” divorces are harder for children than low-conflict but unhappy marriages.

Roiphe’s made her choices; her kids have a hard-working, educated mom and with luck and grace they’ll be fine. But to other Slate readers who haven’t yet had their babies I guess my advice, as a mom married this week for 15 years, about the same age as Roiphe, well-steeped in the boredom and comfort and challenge and spark that comes with sticking with somebody for life, I’ll just say about her vision, don’t try this at home.


Worse Things Have Happened

10.06.2011 11:41 PM

I suppose now is the time to announce to the world…

I’m expecting. A child that is- and best news is, I know who the father is!

The second best news is I didn’t even have to pay him.

We’re very proud of our child’s conception story, though I won’t go into detail about it here. We brought forth new life naturally, with a lot of love and respect. I am already jealous of our child’s life. Even if the kid grows up to hate me and thinks of me as a horrible mother, I know I did one thing right.

But I see why many women delay pregnancy until it’s too late or very difficult. The career crowd isn’t much impressed by your happy news all the time.

We told my family. We told his family. We told my friends. Now we’re starting to tell his friends. We’re entering the second trimester and it’s just now starting to get more real. But there was one person I just couldn’t bring myself to tell until yesterday- my music manager.

When my fiancé and I first became engaged, I was so happy. Everything about the way he did it was special and beautiful and really confirmed what a great guy he is. When I told my manager, the first thing she said to me was, “we can’t tell anyone about this.” Not only people in the music industry, but also my fans.

The second thing she said was, “Don’t get pregnant.”

Whoops… When I told her about the pregnancy, she approached it gently and as politely as she could, but her true feelings showed through when she said, “We’ll deal with it… Worse things have happened.”

Worse things?!

Worse things?!!!

I get pregnant on the first try, without spending thousands of dollars on dangerous fertility drugs- with my enthusiastic, capable, and loving fiancé, as a healthy young woman with a stable middle-class financial situation and I’m told: worse things have happened?!

Society is crazy I’ve decided. She told me that music industry people will be nervous as to your decision to start a family and may think that you aren’t taking your career seriously.

I went into music because I thought it would be a great avenue for being a great mom. You get to pick your hours, make royalties, and can spend a lot of time at home (especially if you have a home recording studio). This choice of mine was affirmed this summer when I met Swedish music royalty Jenny Wilson. She told me, “Being a mother and musician is ideal! You can pick your hours! My only advice is make sure you pick out a great Dad.”

Thanks Jenny! Done. Snagged him.

Is it true that big career success is probably easier for the childless? Sure. I can’t imagine Lady Gaga getting away with what she does if she had little kids. Then again Madonna has a few.

The truth is, I’ve  been hearing stories of how painful childlessness is since I was 5 years old. It started with my mom and her battle to conceive, then when I sold my eggs I got a fresh earful of stories of woe- women who used birth control for years and waited for just the right moment and just the right man and just after they got the promotion they wanted… And now as I operate The Anonymous Us Project, the words are always different but the point is always the same:

Having a child is one of the most important things I will ever do with my life.

Unfortunately for most people, it took them up until too long to figure that out. I have the benefit of many people’s stories and wisdom. And now that a new soul has chosen me as its mother, I’m not going to abort that opportunity just because it makes a few people in the music industry nervous.


Babies, Habits, and Aristotle

09.19.2011 11:13 AM

With a baby on the way (six weeks away, if he comes close to his due date!), I’ve been thinking some about how I want to live. I have a tendency to set goals and cast grand visions, but to put off the daily practice that will get me to those goals. One example: I’ve been wanting to get into the habit of exercising my whole pregnancy. And now that it’s almost over, I’m finally buying a yoga mat.

When I’m a parent, though, how will I be able to teach my son to save his money, for example, if I myself don’t have a budget? It seems that we learn the most from our parents by what they do, not by what they say. I don’t ever remember my mom lecturing me about spending money wisely, but I did watch her cut coupons out of the papers and compare prices in the sales ad while making her grocery list. And she passed her habit down to me. I don’t remember her telling me to be generous, but I do remember her taking meals to neighbors after they’d had babies or been sick. I don’t remember her lecturing me about living a life of faith, but I do remember seeing her take a moment in the afternoons while us kids were playing to sit in her pink lazy boy to read, pray, and journal.

This also struck me when I was reading through some of the posts in “The Virtual Thrift Club” at The Dollar Stretcher.com, In one thread called “Childhood Memories of Money” people recall how their parents dealt with tough financial times (like the Great Depression), and note how this has affected their own thrift habits. I know that’s why my mom is thrifty—because her Iowa farmer parents had to be.

Of course, I hear parents all the time talking about how they’re not perfect and that they make mistakes—and I know that there’s no sense in having a guilt complex over every missed opportunity or fault. But I do feel like becoming a parent is going to act as a kind of check on my behavior. It’ll make me do a double take before I reach for that package of Oreos at the grocery store. It’ll make me pray more. It’ll make me manage my time better. Perhaps I’m being naïve, though. Maybe some of you more experienced parents can fill me in if that’s the case? :)

The point, though, is that parents model a life for us, and we often learn our habits from them. And this matters, because as Aristotle noted, “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act, but a habit.”


Into the Woods…

09.09.2011 1:09 PM

In the past week, I’ve been reading Judith Wallerstein’s insightful and breathtaking work, The Unexpected Legacy of Divorce: The 25 Year Landmark Study as well as Kevin Wilson’s fascinating new novel The Family Fang.  As I look back on the real and fictional terrain they cover, tracing the perspectives of children attempting to survive their families and live to adulthood, I see their point crystal-clear:

If you are a parent to a child, be an adult.

Wallerstein points out that the odds of your being and acting like an adult in service to the healthy development and maturation of your child are higher if you are married, but the true enemy of childhood is chaos.  Although intact families can be chaotic, divorce always brings structural and emotional chaos to a family system.

“Their lives begin with an intact family that one day vanishes…For children, divorce is a watershed that permanently alters their lives.  The world is newly perceived as far less reliable, more dangerous place because the closest relationships in their lives can no longer be expected to hold firm.  More than anything else, this new anxiety represents the end of childhood.” (31 and 60)

However, chaos can reign in intact families, in single family homes, in co-habiting homes…and chaos is always bad for kids.  Children need adults to be in charge and who put their development first.  I like her description of what being an adult on behalf of your child looks like:

“In a well-functioning family, mothers and fathers are in the background as children grow up.  Their role is to create a safe and supportive place for the children, whose job during elementary and junior high is to go to school, play, make friends, and simply grow up…Their parents should encourage, applaud, feed and clothe the players…the things that can make a difference in the child’s life always involve sacrifice and change on the part of one or both parents.” (57 and 257)

In other words, children should not necessarily see their parents, but they should not disappear.

In the Kevin Wilson’s Fang family, chaos reigns supreme. Camille and Caleb Fang, the parents, are explicit that their lives are devoted to creating chaos as art.  Carefully orchestrated and recorded moments of societal dissonance enmesh them to each other and to the world of artistic expression.  And then children come along.  Although Annie and Buster see themselves as children and individuals, their parents refer to them as Child A and Child B, or simply A and B, who are then dragged along and incorporated into the family act.  The parents see the children as equal players in their life work, but children see the world and their family much differently than adults do.  As Buster muses:

“How often had their parents sent them into the wilderness of a mall or public park or private party and asked them only to be prepared, to open themselves up to the infinite possibilities that their parents, god-like, would create?” (167)

Children are at the mercy of their parents, and chaos makes pretty unmerciful parents. Everyone in the family cannot be center stage in order for the children to mature into a healthy adulthood that is defined by meaningful relationships and meaningful work. Neither Fang child can figure out what to do nor who to be with, and when they do step out in faith they are terrified.  Buster speaks of his choice to try to be in a relationship:

“Actually, it seemed like a good idea, but I was terrified of it.  I feel like I’ve always done things that were profoundly bad ideas, and it’s always ended exactly as you’d expect.  That comes from Mom and Dad.” (233)

And then their parents disappear for real.  I won’t spoil the book for you, since you really must read it, but they spend the remainder of the book sorting through this dilemma:

“They (the siblings) would forever come to this impasse.  Buster wanted to believe that his parents still loved them, that they planned all of this as a way to save their children from falling apart and to make them strong. Annie, however, was certain that their parents had created something just for themselves, and that they did not care what pain they caused in service to this idea.” (169)

In childhood and young adulthood, they have no adults to help them negotiate this mine-field of relative meaning.

I first fell in love with Kevin Wilson’s writing with his collection of short stories, Tunneling to the Center of the Earth. I have been fascinated by how in both his stories and this novel, parents suddenly disappear, often exploding in fiery flames.  At first glance, one would think that incorporating the idea of spontaneous combustion would be a narrative stretch, but I wonder if Wilson is not a child of divorce.  In one short story, a young man’s parents spontaneously combust on a train and he is left to raise his younger brother.  He supports them financially by working in a Scrabble tile sorting factory, where each day he stands knee deep in lettered tiles searching to create words from the sea of letters around him.  His family has disappeared, he is deeply lonely, and he lives in a world full of meaning that is opaque and confusing to him.  And the tiles just keep falling.

As Wallerstein writes of chaotic family systems:

“there is far less opportunity to escape from the madness that surrounds them because there are no true adults to give them a helping hand.” (150)

Both Wallerstein and Wilson follow young people traversing the wilderness of growing up.  I think of Little Red Riding Hood who is sent into the wilderness to tend to the needs of the previous generation, her grandmother, and along the way is led astray.  Her mother, no father is mentioned, tries to provide a roadmap, but in a time of distress she is not backstage ready to help and encourage and support.  Little Red is swallowed up by the wilderness and with the countless different endings to the story you can choose, she is left to create meaning for herself.

As Little Red sings in Sondheim’s Into the Woods at the close of her journey into and out of the woods:

“And I know things now, many valuable things,

That I hadn’t thought to explore,

Do not put your faith in a cape and hood,

They will not protect you the way that they should,

And take extra care with strangers,

Even flowers have their dangers,

And though scary is exciting,

Nice is different than good.”

The world is wild, so if you are raising a child, be an adult.


Philadelphia Inquirer: ‘Brushing Up on Your LGBT Etiquette’

08.24.2011 11:17 AM

An article on a new advice book by Steve Petrow, Complete Gay and Lesbian Manners, in which the reporter poses the hypothetical questions:

How to refer to your child’s surrogate or sperm donor? And, if my son agrees to be a sperm donor for a friend, aren’t I a grandmother?

My reaction: If etiquette means being mannerly, civil, and kind to all people, I am for it. If etiquette means silencing children’s perspectives in order to appease adult sensibilities, I am not for it.

(And for the record, my responses to the questions above are: your child’s birth mother or simply “mother,” your child’s biological father or simply “father,” and yes, you are a grandmother.)


Rape Victims Ordered To Pay Child Support

08.16.2011 10:19 PM

So a man gets raped by a woman; the woman gets pregnant and raises the child. Should the father be forced to pay child support? Danny says no; Clarissa says yes. (The question was brought up by this article about a child support case.)

Clarissa argues:

Child support, however, is not about either parent or the process of how they ended up being parents. It’s about ensuring that a child – a separate human being who never asked to be brought into this world and who in no way influenced the circumstances of his or her conception – has adequate means of support. It is the role of the justice system to defend the person who is the weakest and who cannot even speak for him or herself, namely, the child. A justice system that prefers to deprive a child from adequate means of existence in order to avoid being unfair towards an adult is no justice system at all.

The fact that a person was created during the commission of a crime in no way reduces that person’s need for food, clothing, medical care, and education. Imagine baby Anna and baby Jessica. Anna is a product of a passionate loving consensual sex act. Jessica is the product of rape (whether by a man or by a woman). Is Jessica going to eat less? Will she be less deserving of visiting a dentist? Should she have fewer toys than Anna? Can anybody reasonably argue that one of these kids should be punished because she has a criminal for a parent?

As a general principal, I agree with Clarissa. Child support is for the benefit of the child. Certainly, I find men who argue that men should have the “choice” of a “paper abortion” ludicrous; a man’s need to not have to spend money supporting his children doesn’t outweigh a child’s need for support.

But it’s also true that child support is not an absolute.

For instance, if Charlie and Lucy adopt a child together, but are then too poor to support the child, we don’t expect the child’s biological parents to pay child support. In this case, the need for a clear adoption system — in which legal parenthood is definitively passed on to the adoptive parents — outweighs the need for the child to be supported by its biological parents. A similar logic explains why egg donors and sperm donors are not typically held responsible for child support.

Similarly, the need to avoid unjustly punishing rape victims for being raped, should outweigh the need to have two parents financially supporting every child.

But what about baby Jessica’s “need for food, clothing, medical care, and education”? I think the solution is to lobby for the state to step in and provide these things at a generous level — not to make things worse for rape victims.

A few more thoughts:
Read More


The Daughters of the Second Wave

07.25.2011 12:26 PM

Erica Jong’s daughter, Molly, below.

Alice Walker’s daughter, Rebecca:

…Ironically, my mother regards herself as a hugely maternal woman. Believing
that women are suppressed, she has campaigned for their rights around the world and set up organisations to aid women abandoned in Africa  -  offering herself up as a mother figure.

But, while she has taken care of daughters all over the world and is hugely revered for her public work and service, my childhood tells a very different  story. I came very low down in her priorities  -  after work, political integrity, self-fulfilment, friendships, spiritual life, fame and travel