We’ve written a lot about work-life balance, leaning in vs. leaning out, on PRose, but I’m just back to work after having my second son and I can’t resist returning to the topic, so bear with me.
The latest controversy-generating article on the subject is by Judith Warner, “The Opt-Out Generation Wants Back in”. The recent New York Times Magazine cover story revisits Lisa Belkin’s 2003 cover “The Opt-Out Revolution”, which profiled several accomplished female Princeton grads who walked away from high-powered careers to care for their kids full-time.
I’m fascinated by these tales. Apparently I’m not alone since the subject matter is still meriting cover stories, selling books, and sparking heated discussions. I think we’re drawn to them because they’re instructive and we’re interested in other people’s choices, but the stories also “serve as Rorschach tests,” as Belkin puts it in the Huffington Post. She says, “After my piece ran I heard from people who read it as an indictment of the decision to stay home and from others who read it as a declaration that every woman should do so. And now I hear the same about Warner’s.” For me, a couple things stand out:
It feels like it boils down to perceived value.
These women opted out of the workforce for a long time. Their kids were entering middle school before they returned to work. For some this was the plan. Others wanted to go back sooner, but couldn’t find the right job. The idea that they’ve become financially vulnerable after such a long break is not particularly surprising. (Meanwhile “vulnerable” is a relative term. One woman’s earning power went from $500,000 at her peak to $100,000. A significant drop in income, to be sure, but it’s still not relatable for the average American.)
Because these particular women were affluent and married to high-income earners (for the ones who didn’t divorce) it appears the thread is more about value broadly speaking – the value society places on a woman’s work when she returns after a long break (diminished is the implication), but also a woman’s perception of her own value. Warner talks about the erosion of confidence and a “gender-role traditionalism that crept into their marriages once they gave up work, transforming them from being their husbands’ intellectual equals into the one member of their partnership uniquely endowed with gifts for laundry or cooking and cleaning; a junior member of the household.” Obviously these women didn’t suddenly lose their capacity to think critically, but Warner suggests they lost a perceived edge in terms of skill set, contacts, self-confidence and, in some cases, footing in their marriages. As a PR person I well know perception is not always reality, but it certainly has an influence on reality. Women who could overcome the perception problem through strategic networking and stellar credentials fared better as they attempted to re-enter the workforce. In fact, one woman said, “I feel like I escaped a whole slog level of my career. I got to stay home with my kids and I got to come back to a leadership position.”
It’s a relevant article even for those who haven’t struggled with the decision to work or not to work
I’ve never grappled with whether to return to work or not. I always envisioned myself as a working mom and I’ve found that I love caring for my kids, but I also love work. The article caused me to reflect and recognize anew that this is largely because I’ve gotten lucky in many, many ways. Namely:
- My career suits me. PR has been great to me and I’ve cultivated a freelance writing career on the side.
- I have a supportive husband who works many weekends so we don’t have to put our boys in daycare full-time (which would probably amp up the guilt factor and would definitely lighten our wallets substantially).
- At RoseComm we work in an entrepreneurial environment, so I can manage the juggle without killing myself. Though client service is to some extent 24-7 I’m not in a profession like banking where 60-80 hour work weeks are the norm.
- I’m also not in a male dominated profession, so I can sit in my office with a glass wall pumping milk under my nursing cover without feeling too shy/embarrassed about it.
For all this I’m grateful. I’ve never had to make the hard decisions.
I read Warner’s article – and Belkin’s and many others on the subject – because I think the dialogue about families and work is so interesting and so important. I believe the takeaways Belkin articulated in her recent post are spot on:
“Keep your hand in.”
Belkin notes: “nearly every woman Warner interviewed said they would exit differently if they were to do it again. Rather than walking away completely, they would work part-time, or consult, or try harder to find a job with more flexibility.” This was backed up by data in, “What Mothers Really Want: To Opt in Between.”
“It’s no longer just about women.”
My husband can attest to that. When we had a childcare issue one of the options on the table was staying home, but he would’ve been the one staying. Men are more hands on than ever before. It’s a great thing.
“The workplace needs to continue to change.”
Amen. More and more people – men and women – are finding unconventional ways to work and they’re proving they can still be effective and valuable. I’m hopeful employers will take note and eventually the whole idea of opting-out or opting-in will become obsolete.