May 27

Mothering at Mid-Career: Academe and Parenthood -- Commenting on the Comments

By Libby Gruner

I’ve probably spent more time than I should over this Memorial Day weekend at the IHE site, reading and re-reading Scott Jaschik’s piece, “Does Academe Hinder Parenthood?” and, especially, the comments on the piece. (Almost 30 of them, at last count.) Jaschik’s piece confirmed my sense, derived purely from “anecdata,” that academics—and academic women, especially—tend to have smaller families than other professionals. I came by my sense from watching the stroller brigades at the afternoon pickup at my children’s elementary school, and from talking to other parents about their families. Jaschik’s piece has harder data, derived from two recent studies, but it boils down to the same thing: as one commenter put it, “the academic environment [can be] cold to mothers.”

Of course, as several commenters noted, there may be data that the studies aren’t getting at. For example, are people who don’t want children, or don’t want many children, disproportionately drawn to academe? Perhaps. But what struck me most about the comments was a set of assumptions about parenthood and family life, unveiled in several different comments, that seem to run like this:
1. children are the sole responsibility of the women who bear them;
2. “having children” is a responsibility that ends when said children enter school;
3. academic work should be so all-consuming that academics not only shouldn’t have children, but probably shouldn’t miss them.
I hasten to add that there were many comments counter to these, heart-breaking comments about the difficulties of managing career and family, upbeat comments about managing career and family, smart questions and thoughtful replies. I focus on the three assumptions above, however, because when they are distilled as they were in the comments they seem to me to represent widespread assumptions that underpin many of our policies; unless we change the assumptions, the policies are unlikely to change, either.

So to the commenter who wrote: “When a woman has a child it is her problem, and no one else’s,” I want to ask: first, who said the child is a problem? Thinking of children as problems to be solved may be a useful academic exercise, but it’s wrong. And to the commenter’s other point about the woman’s responsibility: as a feminist, I agree that the decision to carry a child to term — or not — is largely if not exclusively the mother’s; once the child’s in the world, though, s/he becomes the responsibility of many more than just that one woman, whether you like it or not. What about that child’s other parent (if present)? What about the rest of the family? What about the school system that will educate that child, who might eventually end up as your student? The fact that Hillary Clinton appropriated the phrase “it takes a village to raise a child” may have tainted it for some, but I still think it’s relevant today. I would also, as at least one other commenter suggested, extend the notion of caregiving to elderly parents or other relatives as well: it is in all our interests that families be supported in their caregiving efforts. Exhausted caregivers do not make for good teachers, scholars, or workers; well-supported caregivers, however, certainly do.

And to the commenters arguing about whether having children might make one more sympathetic to college students — and especially the one who questioned how that might be, given that college students aren’t children — I ask: what am I supposed to call my 18-year-old daughter, herself about to enter college, if not my “child"? She’s no longer a spitting-up baby, of course, but the experience of raising her to this point has indeed given me some new insight into some of the experiences of my entering students. That is not to say, of course, that only parents can be sympathetic to college students, or even that parenthood necessarily engenders sympathy: but to conflate “child-rearing” with “child-bearing” is a terrible mistake, one that allows us somehow to stop thinking about supporting families once we’ve put a maternity leave policy in place. Last I checked, I was still responsible for my school-age children.

And, finally, to “Viper” and “Science Prof,” who—in “Viper"’s words — seem to believe that “it would be far better if the C19th ideal of the academic as a non-married person or one who enters into a union with a partner with both deciding not to have children would be followed,” I can only say: I don’t agree. One of the great joys of academic life for me has been the portability of my work: I may work an occasional 80-100 hour week, but much of that work can be done at home, or in a coffee shop, or even (gasp!) on the playground. Yes, I’ve graded papers in all those places, or made notes for articles, or prepped my classes, or even written. This means that my children have seen my work, seen it as an integral part of my life rather than (or perhaps, to be truthful, in addition to) something that takes me away from them. Not only that, they’ve improved my work, giving me insights into my research (currently on children’s fantasy literature) that I could not have reached without them. Parenthood has made me a better (if, occasionally, slower) academic; I can’t, alas, claim that being an academic has made me a better parent, but it has made me the parent that I am. The academy may not be friendly to parents, but we — academics and parents alike — are a stubborn and an inventive bunch. Surely we can figure out ways to improve our lot rather than simply turning back the clock.

Comments

parenting and academe

Libby, you make great points about the silly comments on the academe and parenthood article. Children are not just the responsibility (or the “problem") of their mothers. However, why is this group blog called “Mama Ph.D."? Why are there only women academics here (at least so far as I’ve seen) who write about their children and parenting, many of whom are not regular tenured or tenure-track faculty? I applaud your efforts to get us talking and thinking about these issues, but it seems like you and your fellow contributors are perpetuating the stereotypes that you (righteously) call out in this post.

On the one hand, it’s a reality that women cluster in the ranks of “special” and “temporary” faculty, while men still dominate the tenure lines. On the other, calling a blog “Mama Ph.D.” seems to feed the stereotypes that are in part responsible for this hierarchy among women and men faculty. Why is this blog a pink hood and mortarboard ghetto? Dean Dad and some of the other male bloggers occasionally write about their families, but their blogs are nominally about their professional concerns. Why is the only blog here written by women called “Mama” before “Ph.D.?”

Ann M. Little, Associate Professor, History at Colorado State University, at 10:50 am EDT on May 27, 2008

Great question, Ann. The title comes from the book of the same name, which does focus on the experiences of women academics. However, my piece in it and several others do take up the necessity of fathers also being involved in the conversation.

Libby, at 2:05 pm EDT on May 27, 2008

“many of whom are not regular tenured or tenure-track faculty?”

Many of them are not faculty AT ALL. (Libby Gruner is.)

Ann is absolutely right. It would be different, perhaps, if women wrote a reasonable proportion of blogs, news stories and opinions at IHE, but look at the bylines — they are overwhelmingly male.

jcl, researcher, at 2:35 pm EDT on May 27, 2008

Thank You

Libby, this post was an excellent read, and brought my blood pressure back down after reading through the comments on Scott’s piece.

Thank you.

Elrena, Coeditor at Mama, PhD, at 4:05 pm EDT on May 27, 2008

children are not a problem

I do think it’s interesting when childless people see having children as someone else’s problem. I wonder who they think will be taking care of them in their old age? It will be someone else’s children and the childless should think about what they want that experience to be like!

Physiology Mama PhD, at 8:35 am EDT on May 28, 2008

Self-indulgence

Another related feeling about children among academics I know is that having them is sort of self-indulgent. “If the life of the mind is not enough for you,” they seem to say.

Jeanne, at 9:30 am EDT on May 28, 2008

Wonderful, on-target post—my blood pressure is back down as well. My career teaching college has allowed me the opportunity to be both the parent I want to be, and the professional as well. It’s not easy, but it’s worth it. And, I might add, parenting HAS helped me become a better teacher—I know this for certain,

Alissa, at 10:15 pm EDT on May 28, 2008

Well, some of the points in this blog entry seem spot on to me, and a few seem to miss the target widely.

For instance:

“So to the commenter who wrote: “When a woman has a child it is her problem, and no one else’s,” I want to ask: first, who said the child is a problem? Thinking of children as problems to be solved may be a useful academic exercise, but it’s wrong.”

Do you really think that’s what the commenter meant? You don’t think it was just a way of saying that the problems that inevitably arise when one has children tend to land on the mother? Why not answer the spirit of the comment instead of lecturing the commenter on the letter of the comment?

You make some good points, but interlacing them with pedantry makes me wonder if you respond to your students the same way.

J. Robinson, at 7:15 am EDT on May 29, 2008

Mid-Career Parenting

Perhaps because I made the transition from administrator to faculty after having had our son at age 30, I gave little thought about how being a mother would be a “problem.” Sure, there are the obvious biological differences to consider, but shouldn’t we all be role models for our students who may chose having demanding careers and personal lives that may or may not include having children?

Couples should not have to chose careers over families or having families to the detriment of their careers. I do not believe it to be a matter of balance but interactive symmetry which changes over time in response to situational changes in our lives and influenced by our own values and priorities. In the past, that symmetry favored men’s careers and their significant others attended to home and family matters. In fact, I wonder how many men sat around worrying how fatherhood would have been problematic for their careers back in those days?

However, times have changed; today, both men and women seek greater work and family symmetry in their lives. Consequently, our institutions need to become responsive to its employees’ needs for this life symmetry, regardless of gender, in order to recruit and retain those whom they value and need.

Although I did not plan our second child while working on my dissertation, having her in our lives has been such a blessing. We have continued our careers in academe and, in my case, on the tenure-track. I have no regrets wanting and working to have our family and pursuing our individual careers. I believe doing both has made me more emphatic as I see my students striving to negotiate symmetry in their lives.

OSUPhd2004, Associate Professor, Education at Regional State University, at 4:45 pm EDT on May 29, 2008

I just came across Harvard’s Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Ed: A joint initiative to improve the quality of faculty work life.

If you’re interested in reading more research on the subject: http://gseacademic.harvard.edu/~coache/info/resources.html

knezmom, at 5:35 pm EDT on June 2, 2008

Thank you— 2 boys during full time tenure track?

It sounds like my experience of having two babies since my Ph.D. and working in a tenure track line full time is quite unique. I must say that I had 1 child in a comprehensive university in a department that had not had a child born in 18 years! The were unfriendly and yes I left to a research university that has until now welcome my second baby, now 2. I do worry about tenure and yes, I restarted my tenure clock, but family makes me a more complete person, and I agree a better professor and researcher. I do still feel they view children as a problem but they have been accepting. Of course, I was told about the story of another older full professor who had a baby and went back to work after 2 weeks? Crazy!!! Having a family and a tenure-track appointment is possible. It can be done but it is hard and stressful but REWARDING. We need more discussion about why this is the only field where having children is an issue! We need more discussion about slowing your clock and how you can guarantee it will not hurt you as you go up for tenure. We just need more support from those of you who have gone through it successfully and are now full professors, where are YOU?

Claudia, Ph.D., at 9:45 pm EDT on June 2, 2008

Knezmom, thanks for that link—it looks like an interesting project, and it’s great to see all the research gathered together in one place.

J. Robinson, I did actually read the comment that way; I see how your reading works, too, but in context that’s not how I took it. As an English prof. I’m of course prone to pedantry though I try to restrain it in the classroom!

Thanks all you parents who are sharing your stories!

Libby, at 3:00 pm EDT on June 3, 2008

I am a grad student and mother of a 10 month old, working on my dissertation and going on the job market this fall, and I just stumbled onto this blog today. I was thrilled to find it — but then dismayed to note that only three of the nine bloggers are actually working in academia. This certainly seems to corroborate Scott Jaschik’s piece. I appreciate Libber Grunner’s thoughtful response, but what about the message being sent by the imbalance on this blog? The predominance of writers who have chosen to leave academia is really disheartening to someone hoping to integrate an academic life with life as a mom — which is what this blog is ostensibly about, no?

kristen, at 4:25 pm EDT on June 4, 2008