Thursday, July 26, 2007

Divorce, Stay-at-Home-Dad Style

The following is based on a series of comments I made recently over at Rebeldad:

Stop the presses: Breadwinning moms are divorcing their stay-at- home husbands!

Not really--there's absolutely no evidence that this is happening-- but you wouldn't know it from a recent wave of essays, articles, and blog entries by and about moms who are disappointed with their marriages to caregiving spouses.

Two of the most recent examples: an instantly notorious blog entry by career coach Penelope Trunk on why her stay-at-home husband doesn't love her anymore and an article in the UK Daily Mail on a "househusband backlash" trend that the reporter seems to have invented.

Reports the Daily Mail: "Divorce lawyer Vanessa Lloyd-Platt says that in her experience, the decision to allow the wife to be the main wage earner will have a detrimental effect on as many as half of these relationships, and that divorce statistics in these cases have risen by at least five percent in the past two years."

I can't attest to Ms. Lloyd-Platt's experience, but, as discussed here many times, we do know that the vast majority of all marriages are troubled for the first three years after a baby is born--the Gottman Institute puts the number at 67 percent for more-or-less traditional marriages. So if only half of the reverse-traditional marriages Ms. Lloyd-Platt encounters are having problems, then they're actually doing pretty good.

But about that divorce stat she mentions--"five percent." The article doesn't compare the divorce rate of reverse-traditional families to traditional or dual-income families, so we have no idea what "five percent" means. We do know that the number of "househusbands" (as they're called) in the U.K. has risen by 83 percent since 1993. If the divorce rate for that group (and I'm impressed that someone in the UK is keeping track of it) has only risen five percent--and again, we have no idea what's happening with other family groups--then I'd say that's not too bad.

Some historical perspective: Non-traditional family forms are always entail some degree of internal and external conflict during their period of emergence--that is, until they become traditional, i.e., widespread and normal. This was, for example, the case when people left farms and extended families and moved to the big city and into small nuclear families -- a period of tremendous stress and conflict, and, incidentally, high rates of divorce and abandonment. Then all of a sudden (around WWII), the nuclear family was considered ideal. Family configurations aligned with the economy, and thus a post-war culture was born. In 1957, J.M. Mogey of the University of Oxford predicted that "the divorce rate should continue to decline for some years to come.”

Ha! History is cruel. That very same year, divorce rates started to once again rise, after a thirty-year decline. One in three couples married in the 1950s would ultimately divorce. Today the divorce rate stands at about 50 percent (that's actually a projection; the actual number of marriages that have failed is apparently closer to 40 percent), and guess what: according to many studies, today's egalitarian marriages are the most stable. "Women are more prone to depression and to fantasize about divorce when they do a disproportionate share of the housework," reports psychotherapist Joshua Coleman in Unconventional Wisdom. "Wives are more sexually interested in husbands who do more housework. And children appear to be better socially adjusted when they regularly participate in doing chores with Dad."

Today, traditional families have their own problems--many of them will fail. And so the question isn't, Are reverse-traditional families more unstable? That's a dumb question, given the context. Instead, the question should be (to adapt a phrase from Stephanie Coontz), What can we do to help reverse-traditional families minimize their weaknesses and maximize their strengths?

I'm not saying that the stories of unhappy breadwinning moms aren't interesting and important, only that they are not as representative as they pretend to be. Some of these moms explicitly blame at-home daddyhood for their problems -- they seem to feel that the arrangement robs their men of masculine authority and self-respect. This is true of Trunk's blog entry, in which she reports being shocked and dismayed to discover that her husband describes himself as a "stay-at-home dad" in an online professional networking profile. "Surely writing stay-at-home dad on a LinkedIn profile cannot be good," she writes, clearly ashamed of her husband.

It's a digital variation of an image that keeps recurring in these stories: the public moment when a coworker or old school friend asks the breadwinning mom what her husband does for a living, and she feels a deep sense of shame. She marks that as the moment when the marriage declined.

It's really quite horrible, when you think about it. I think there's two things going on, socially. One is that some women seem unprepared for the pressures of providing, just as some dads must struggle with the demands of caregiving. They weren't raised for these roles, they never imagined themselves doing it, and they have few role models. The second thing is that social support is extremely important -- this is one of the insights that came out of a recent University of Texas study of at-home dads, and it's certainly true in my experience. If you spend all day, every day, walking uphill with the wind in your face, you get tired. Much better to have people behind you, pushing you forward.

But we have tended to focus on social situation of the at-home dad, sometimes at the expense of the breadwinning mom: they need support, community, and role models just as much, if not more. The pressures they face are enormous: all the usual breadwinning pressures, plus sexism, plus the social ambiguities of role reversal.

Despite all that, however, many moms are very happy with their roles; I've interviewed some of them for my book. Their stories also need to be told--and then maybe women like Penelope Trunk won't feel so ashamed.

* * *

A post-script: In an article posted to her old website, Kidding Ourselves (1995) author Rhona Mahony asks: “When the sexual division of labor in the home has melted away, what will divorce mean for children? No one knows for sure. In all likelihood, though, it will be less harmful to children than it is today. I suspect that the average breadwinning mother will be more emotionally attached to her children than the average breadwinning father is today, because of the lingering emotional echoes of her pregnancies and her breastfeeding, if she breastfed. Even if her primary-parent husband catches up with and surpasses her in emotional attachment, she is starting from a higher base than the average father today. Concretely, that means that fewer, absent breadwinning parents will fail to visit, fail to send money, and go AWOL completely. More of them will be mothers. Remember, too, that improvements in child support assurance, and in other programs, will probably be necessary to attract millions of men into primary parenting. Those improvements will also cushion the effects of divorce for children whose fathers are breadwinners, too.”


chicago pop said...

While I think that any controversy that has some roots in the British tabloid press is immediately suspect, the fact that so many people have so much to say about something that seems not to exist (as you point out)suggests there is a cultural nerve that has been touched.

The divorce-causing crisis that Penelope Trunk describes just sounds unreal to me. She must be awfully un-self aware, which is odd for someone claiming to advise others on "life management". If her situation represents a trend at all, it's gotta pale beside the much more evident trend of successful, older, financially independent women who are able to select a partner based on mutual compatibility, rather than having to sacrifice their independence in return for financial dependency or social approval.

chicago pop said...

On the recurring theme of the nuclear family ideal in the 50s, what's interesting is that it took so long to coalesce in the States; the ideal was very strong in Europe much earlier. My own pet theory is that it had everything to do with WWII, the Cold War, and the emphasis on internal stability in the face of external enemies. The East Germans saw gender roles ca. 1950 in the same way.

Jeremy Adam Smith said...

"act that so many people have so much to say about something that seems not to exist (as you point out)suggests there is a cultural nerve that has been touched...."

Yes, exactly. This is a proxy discussion. I think there's something happening here that is important, which is that providing moms are speaking out about their anxieties and experiences. We've heard from SAHDs, but almost nothing from their wives, until recently.

Though what folks like Trunk have to say might seem negative and perhaps regressive, I actually think it serves a larger purpose of normalizing such arrangements. I want women like Trunk to speak out, so that a public can react: I have a certain degree of faith that an equilibrium will be reached in the way people think about these problems.

chicago pop said...

That's true -- the breadwinning moms are a key part of the picture and need to chime in about how they see things. Maybe I can get my wife to post sometime? (When she's not working!!) :)

Jeremy Adam Smith said...

"Maybe I can get my wife to post sometime?"

You know, I've thought about that. Let's try it. Ask her.

And if there are any thoughtful, honest breadwinning moms out there who'd like to post on the topics we cover here at Daddy Dialectic, send me a note at jeremyadamsmith(at) Maybe you can guest-blog.

Anonymous said...

I love listening to music from my iPod while I'm on the move, be it on the bus, the indoctrinate, or just while doing groceries. On the side of that saneness, I always requirement a yard goods twosome of stereo earphones with me, and of way on some days I'd like my earphones to be an component, where I twin it with my utensils looking for that day. So I procure a join of designer earphone every other month. Recently, I bought the [url=]Designer Beats by Dr. Dre In-Ear Stereo Earphone with Carrying Bag (3.5mm Jack/110CM-Cable)[/url] from in their Speakers & Earphones section. has develop my inaction online shopping instal that I look in on time again to swallow whatever I may need. Succeeding to the DIY cumulate or the mall has transform into somewhat less pleasurable than browsing totally the wide variety of things at I would also like to get stereo speakers one light of day exchange for my home.

These designer beats that I bought comes with a carrying bag, which makes the author earphone definitely handy to depend on and carry. I've uploaded a pair of pictures of the designer stereo earphone and the carrying bag so you can espy what comes with the earphone install I bought from [url=][/url].

On some days, I'd like to attend to fitting music with a strong bass, so I also do invest in godlike pairs of stereo earphone like Sennheiser. They're not so much plotter beats, but in actuality good for getting into the music. Although the author beats I bought from is not a clear-cut brand like Sennheiser or Sony, it does stationary lump effectively outside blast, making in the service of listening pleasure. The technique the plotter earphone contours around the ears also makes seeking warm utilization, and the goodness thing upon the Draughtsman Beats past Dr. Dre In-Ear Stereo Earphone with Carrying Worry (3.5mm Jack/110CM-Cable) I bought from is that it comes with multiple sizes of notice tips and leisure ear buds. These things are unemotional to twig so I'm satisfied the designer beats came with it. I can put these consideration tips and buds on my other pairs of earphone too. The carrying jump at is of speed a major gratuity to unoppressive storage and portability.

I like to fellow this team of designer beats close to Dr. Dre with my pink spaghetti strap and milky shorts, I reckon it goes fully with this outfit. While waiting in queues or waiting for the treatment of a pen-pal seeking a lunch selection, I take part in my favorite Sillcock Knocking Major change pretend on my iPod Match with this double of stereo earphone. The external noise gets blocked exposed so justly, and coupled with the praisefully engrossing stopcock game, I don't even mind when my associate arrives! Splendidly, that's what a merit pair of stereo earphone should do, I believe. Notwithstanding how, I do make it a object to hand out one earphone abroad of my notice whenever I pettish the passage, or when I'm walking on a comparatively unpeopled road. This I do instead of protection reasons. I effective wouldn't yearn for to get into an casualty or be in damage's system justifiable because I was wearing my designer stereo earphone and couldn't be told risk come close to my way.

Anonymous said...

[url=]atv oyna[/url]