The Time Bind

Chapter 14
The Time Bind: Third Shift

This article attempts to show readers the impact that work has had on the everyday family life. Throughout this article Hochschild describes through the use of her one example, Amerco, how the value of private life and the family have decreased do to an increase in the value of work. Her reasoning for a greater emphasis on the work is because people generally feel more appreciated and valued at work than at the home, feeling that even at times work felt more like home and the home felt more like work due not only the fact that work was more interesting to them, but also to the emotional support they received there from their closest friends and the greater recognition that they received at work. Family and work instead of working together, has actually become competition, as Hochschild describes the shift amongst the four different types of families. Hochschild notes that the four different families include the “haven model”, the “traditional model”, the “no-job weak family” and the “work-family balance model,” and the “reversal model” that has recently become popular in working parents. Learning to manage the home and the workplace has through history and changing economic times become something that working parents have had to deal with. However in modern times, work has become a substitute for family time and time spent during the third shift- dealing with the emotions and problems at home. I thought that one of the most important points that Hochschild made throughout her article was that families have become dependent on other forms of entertainment to help them “get through” the emotional part of family life. Entertainment and watching television as a family has been used as a substitute for actually communicating and actually getting to try and emotionally connect with family members. Instead of having their own conversations and making their own jokes as a family, they are laughing and commenting on other’s conversations and jokes of tv families. In response to the “burdens” of the third shift, parents are also completing tasks and activities with their children more rapidly than actually spending time. Working parents depend more on scheduled time to spend time with their children and their spouse due to their busy work schedules and outside commitments that they have to their jobs. And instead of working on contributing to their best ability to their family, they are doing the least so as to save time for work. Another important fact that Hochschild brought up was that those who have the most authority and power in companies, who are mostly men are the only people who can actually launch a family- friendly environment in which the compromises and sacrifices that children have to make due to the amount of time dedicated to their parents’ work could be more balanced, however very few have interest in advocating this work environment, making it harder to bridge the gap between family and work.

Chapter 15
Many working families due to long working hours and heavy job commitments struggle to find the balance between having a gratifying work experience and having a gratifying family life. Hochschild calls this the time bind, in which parents find themselves compromising certain family values and family time for work. One way parents respond to their overwhelming demands of time as Hochschild describes is by leaving their children alone as their primary type of childcare. Many modern day families have decided that leaving their children alone trains them to become self- sufficient and independent, which although it does Hochschild also notes can be dangerous. Leaving one’s child at home can not only encourage more tv time for one’s children, but also exposes children to dangers such as alcohol, tobacco or marijuana, and may cause other problems later down the road such as fear of reoccurring nightmares, fear of noises, of the dark and personal safety. Another solution that Hochschild says that parents make is resorting to time-saving goods and services that speedup regular household tasks and allows parents, especially mothers to buy time. Substitutes for family time include summer camp, pre-ordered meals, and learning centers that allow for children to stay after hours. The concept of buying time so as to avoid actually spending time with your family or with your child to me just sounds irresponsible and selfish. I think that as a parent your primary priority should be taking care of your children, and although I think that outside childcare is acceptable amongst working parents, using childcare and time-saving services that allow parents to avoid spending time preparing dinner for their families is taking away from many of the things that allow families to develop their own values, traditions and quality time essential for building relationships. Hochschild also refers to the potential self and the actual self. Parents decide to separate the potential self from the actual self, so as to acknowledge all of the things they wish they could do if they had the time. It shows their families and especially their children that they have the desire to do and be a more pro- active parent and if they weren’t so consumed with their work, they would do these things and be that person. I think that although the potential self may be in a way making false promises to your family and children, it also shows your family that although you may not have the time right now, you have the desire to spend more time with them and you are constantly thinking about them and the type of person that you want to be for them. This time bind that Hochschild describes throughout her article is something very prevalent in modern times and although there may not be any one direct solution to solving the problem, parents are trying to figure out ways to readjust their time so as to better provide for their family in terms of quality time.

Maternal Employment and Time with Children: Dramatic Change or Surprising Continuity?
Suzanne M. Bianchi

The article Maternal Employment and Time with Children: Dramatic Change or Surprising Continuity by Suzanne Bianchi attempts to understand if the recent increase in the labor force participation of women has resulted in declining time investments in children. I think the most interesting comparison that Bianchi makes is the time spent of employed mothers and non employed mothers. The investigation done by Nock and Kingston reveals that although employed mothers on their longest working day spent less time with children than did non employed mothers and spent less direct “ quality” time with children, the time non employed mothers spent with their children was not devoted to childcare or direct play, but rather time cooking and doing household chores. “Non employed mothers spent more than twice as much time per day with their preschoolers, but the difference in time for direct childcare and play/ education was less than one hour.” Another important point that Bianchi makes is the actual amount of time that children spend at home and not in another form of childcare such as school. Children spend most of their time in an educational setting in which during that time parents are at work. So for long periods of time, and for several years, it would be hard for parents to actually spend time with their children, and then accounting the time that children actually desire to spend with their friends rather than with their family. As a child, I remember being taken care of by family members and especially by neighbors after school before I was at the age to get involved in extra curricular activities. However, during high school, I would stay after school and not get home until six in the evening. As I adjusted my time spent at home and at school, both of my parents also had to do that. They would postpone dinner until my sister and I got home so that we could still have dinner and spend time together. This is an important point that Bianchi makes in her account and in considering good mothering. Another thing that I found interesting was that while mothers on average have not reduced their time with children, married fathers have significantly increased the time they spend with their children.

The Career Mystique

“The Career Mystique is the expectation that employees will invest all their time, energy and commitment throughout their “prime” adult years in their jobs, with the promise of moving up in seniority or ascending job ladders” Based off of the feminine mystique that captures the life of the middle class woman, who lived off of the family wage, the career mystique mirrors this life because it shows the perspective of the man’ life according to the American Dream. Men have become centered around their work because they have had women to take care of the details of the family and the home. The article begins by talking about the lives of Lisa and David, who as an effect of the career mystique have suffered in their personal lives. I think that one interesting point made in the article “ The Career Mystique” is one of the five societal trends that us as the United States face in the ways in which we think about, organize and regulate careers and the life course. In the article, the recent shifts in marital and educational paths that challenge ideas about adulthood is noted. Many students are delaying going to work, and are actually continuing on their educational path, going to graduate school or professional school until they are thirty, remaining economically dependent upon their parents. In modern day America, all genders want to do it all, have a career, be caring parents and happy spouses, and this is all instilled in American institutions. However, the main focus of young people today, is to become successful and skillful in their careers and jobs; allowing institutions to encourage students to center their lives around their career. Success however is harder to come by for minority individuals, and especially with the feminine mystique still ingrained in our society’s heads, it is hard for the career mystique to encompass everyone, and allow for equal opportunity for all.

Overworked Individuals or Overworked Families
Jerry Jacobs, Kathleen Gerson

The article Overworked Individuals or Overworked Families begins with explaining to readers that the demands that an individual faces at work creates limits on the time that individuals can spend with their families. The difficulties in setting the boundary between time and work resides in the fact that “too much time at work can undermine personal and family welfare, whereas too little time can endanger a family’s economic security and lower its standard of living.” I think this is a great point that Jacobs and Gerson make, because I think that as children of working parents we also have to recognize the sacrifices that our parents make in order for us to have a good life. Many times my parents wish that they could stay at home and just relax with my sister and I, but they are not able to always make such sacrifices financially. As our primary providers, they are there to make sure that first and foremost our basic needs that require money are met.
The article begins by stating two theses, one stating that American families are spending too much time at work and another stating that there is an increase in leisure time amongst working parents. The overworked- American thesis however concludes that the increase in annual income is due to the number of weeks worked per year and the increased leisure thesis is due to younger people retiring and people staying in school longer. Jacobs and Gerson also focus working time of the individual versus the dual earner family. Though there is a small increase in the average working time of dual- earner couples as group there is also a number of couples whose joint hours are high. Those couples that have the most education, most prestigious jobs and occupations experience a growth in working time. Another important concern that Jacob and Gerson also brought to this article is the consequences that working time has on children, especially those belonging to single mothers whose sole income is the most depended source of money for the whole family.

Children’s Perspectives of Employed Mothers and Fathers: Closing the Gap Between Public Debates and Research Findings
Ellen Galinsky

Galinsky’s article, is a study that focuses on how employed parents affect a child’s development. Throughout her study, Galinsky tries to answer several debate questions concerning parents’ employment and child’s development such as, 1. Is having an employed mother good or bad for children? 2. Is it mothering or fathering? 3. Is child care good or bad for children? And 4. Is it Quality time or quantity time. By surveying a diverse sample of children, Galinsky draws many conclusions.
“A mother who works outside the home can have just as good a relationship with her children as a mother who does not work.” Upon asking this question, Galinsky received a range of answers, finally concluding that mothers and fathers both have a different view on the subject. The most profound difference that Galinsky received was that although there was no difference in dual- earner couples, there were large differences among fathers with employed spouses and those with a spouse at home. Because economics plays a major role and is a priority amongst most parents, a majority of parents, most of those who were both employed, felt that mothers should only work if they needed to help support their families financially. Among fathers, many believed that mothers should stay home regardless of their financial situation. What I found most interesting about this debate was Galinsky’s question of what other employed parents thought about moms who worked but could afford to stay home. I feel that work should be something enjoyable, and though one may live a comfortable life and be supported financially by their husbands, people should take part in something that they like. I think that it is important for all members of a family to contribute in some way or another and if a mother enjoys working and enjoys making money, then she should be allowed and supported in her choice to work. Galinsky also draws the relationship among parents who work and child behavior, such as their healthy development and success in school. He concludes that there is no difference between children with employed mothers and those with mothers at home. As I agree, what really matters is how children are mothered and whether mothers are warm and responsive and priorities in their lives. Another interesting point that Galinsky brought up was how studies and society fail to see the potential harm of a father’s employment to children. A father’s primary role is seen as being the economic provider, and the mother as the primary caretaker. However through her study, we come to recognize that the father actually plays a very important role in the child’s mental and motor development, such as receiving better scores on school tests or managing everyday social problems.
Galinsky finally debates that the only way for us to see changes in the way in which society views parenting is by changing the way we thing about things. We must be open to the fact that as society is changing, our style of parenting has to adopt in order for parents to have a good relationship with their children. What is most important is keeping a good family environment in which it doesn’t matter if both parents are working or not, the children can feel comfortable in confronting them about any issues that they may face. Another suggestion that Galinsky makes is including children’s perspectives in work- family literature. I think that in order for us to gain a true understanding of the way that work and the way that stress from work impacts parent-child relationship, is by actually surveying and asking the children who are most affected by these changes.

How to Succeed in Childhood
Judith Harris

Harris’s article How to Succeed in Childhood attempts to show how society has the largest impact on a child’s life. Throughout her article, Harris explains the differences between the parent- child relationship and the child- peer relationship to emphasize her thought on how children are more apt to relate and learn from other children rather than their own parents. Harris refers to Freud’s study on how children tend to mirror their parents of the same sex in order to prove how unhealthy and untrue it actually is in society. Harris believes that when a child imitates their parents in order to learn how to be grownups, they actually get themselves into more trouble because there are certain limitations on what children can do in comparison to what parents can do. She concludes with this thought with “a child’s goal is not to become an adult; a child’s goal is to be a successful child.” I tend to disagree with Harris on this point. I think that parents serve as an essential role model for children. Because children are so easily influenced, and they are so willing to learn, they do in fact imitate their parents at a young age because that is who they mostly are around. Yes, there are certain things that children cannot do because they are not adults, but their parents should be there to guide them into making responsible decisions as children that they will carry with them through adulthood. I do agree with her that children should strive to be successful as children, but I do think that their values and the lessons that they learn in the home from their parents are most important in making them successful as children. Harris also makes the point that the relationships that children make at home with their parents and siblings do not affect the relationships that they make outside the home with their peers. She makes the example of immigrant parents, where their children are born into a bicultural world, and live two separate worlds. Harris concludes that although their two worlds are separate, the outside world, which does not encompass their family’s culture, takes precedence, and the children are left compromising not blending their two worlds. Once again, I find myself disagreeing with Harris. Coming from a family in which both of my parents are immigrants, I feel that their culture is what stands out most in the way in which I choose my friendships, and also stands out in the different values that I have about most things. Because my family’s culture is so strong and the values of that culture have been embedded in me since I was a baby, I find it hard to leave them behind, and completely assimilate myself into a culture that I do not entirely identify with. Instead I have learned to blend my family’s beliefs and those of the outside world, taking what I learn at home and applying them to my everyday life, mostly relying on my values and beliefs that originated from my family’s culture. Harris’ main point was to show how society’s affect on children takes precedence over parental influences. Harris goes into describing how children learn to categorize and separate people into separate social groups in which they are most influenced by. Harris believes that socialization occurs mainly within a child’s play group, or a group of their peers, rather than their familial group. I do agree with her that children are influenced by their environment, the friends in which they socialize with and do gain a sense of community with their child groups but I also think that their primary social group will always be their family. A child can choose their friends according to what is socially acceptable according to their parents and the values of their families, and although they children do learn to identify with a certain peer group, their home training should guide them in the type of peer group in which they decide to socialize. Society and media do play a large role in the way in which children enter into the real world, but as children, parents play an important role in being good role models, that their children should emulate.

Children’s Share in Household Tasks
Frances K. Goldscheider and Linda Waite

Children’s Share in Household Tasks attempts to inform readers of the gender defined roles that exist in children’s household tasks. Children learn gender roles in the home at an early age by not only watching the differences in the type of housework that their mother and father do, but also in the type of housework that they are assigned. Goldscheider and Waite make an interesting point however in their survey that shows that many American families today have shied away from having their children complete housework because they would rather them be more successful in the workforce. Children are actually not getting much or any experience in working at home, as their mothers are completing most of it, and men have taken on more industrial jobs. However, Goldscheider and Waite also point that some parents do feel that their children should share some responsibility in the housework because it builds character, and helps them develop a sense of responsibility. Chores are used to prepare the child for household tasks that they will use later on in their adult lives, though they are mostly focused on the chores expected to be completed by daughters such as cooking, laundry and cleaning. Another interesting study that Goldsheider and Waite also show is the amount of sharing of housework completed by the children. In two parent households, it is dependent on the age of the children, and also specific tasks are directed toward certain genders. However in single parent, single mother households, sons are more likely to complete more housework than daughters because they are expected to take care of the work that would be completed by their absent father, and mothers are working longer hours for less money than what would be obtained from a combined income. I found this article very interesting, because as a child I was never expected to complete any other work except cleaning my own room and making my own bed. I actually wish that my parents would have given me chores and allowance so that I could learn how to complete these household tasks that are essential for adult living, and also so that I could learn better time management. I feel that learning how to cook, do laundry and even cut the grass are skills that because they are not taught at school, should be taught at home, so as to be able to better prepare for adult life.

Pricing the Priceless Child; From Useful to Useless and back to Useful
Vivian Zelizer

Vivian Zelizer’s Pricing the Priceless Child makes some interesting points regarding the changing roles of children in the household. She notes the change from the worker to the sacred and innocent child to the child that had to work. What she struggles with however is the loss of the sentimental aspect to the child if they are paid for their work. What is a child’s work worth; how much do we value our children and their work? She explains the complex interaction between the child and the market in describing the switch from the exploitation of the child for their work to the sentimental, sacred child. Another important fact that Zelizer makes is the difference of the private and public love for children. In today’s American society we tend to practice private love for our own individual child, rather than reaching out and extending our love publicly to other people’s children. Parents reach out to their own children in fear that they will leave the home, thus through buying them incredible material items and denying the responsibility factor, programs are not supported to help other children. One other point that Zelizer makes is the change from the “Age of Protection” to the “Age of Preparation”. Parents are beginning to rush children into adult behavior after their innocence has disappeared. Thus she questions the meaning of a real childhood, and is nostalgic toward returning to a childlike childhood so as to preserve the innocence of children while still giving them a sense of responsibility by encouraging them to work. I agree with this statement and do think that children should be taught to work, and taught to learn skills that require them to be responsible. This work ethic should be carried with them throughout adulthood, and if managed correctly should also allow them to still be children and participate in regular childlike activities.

Fathering

The Absent Black Father

Dorothy Roberts

Dorothy Roberts writes The Absent Black Father to inform readers of the fatherlessness that exists within black America. Fatherlessness is defined as single motherhood. It is a father who is not married to the mother of his child either by choice, by separation, or divorce. Fatherlessness is not having direct contact with the child. Roberts begins her article stating that the fundamental reason for society’s problems are caused by the lack of involvement of black fathers within their children’s lives. Fatherlessness as Roberts observes is considered to be normal and accepted among the black community. A female-headed household in which the mother or othermothers provide the primary care for children is considered common, and is the most dominant structure for black families. This structure however is abnormal compared to the majority of society, in which the ideal father is the breadwinner and the family is centered around the role of the male. Society defines a good father as someone who is able to completely support his family financially. The breadwinning husband, who sustains the family in their finances and exposes them to a well off social network, is a good father in which his family can depend on. However, because a black man is not exposed to the goods of society as readily as a white man, he struggles with being able to live up to society’s expectations of a good father. Instead black families follow the pattern of the black matriarch in which the woman becomes independent of her husband, in order to sustain her children. The discovery as Roberts makes is that black men lack the opportunity to attain well paying jobs that can support their families due to societal injustices that promote white privilege and motivate racial inequality. What I found most interesting about this article was the “bridefare” programs that give mothers monetary rewards for marrying. I find it so discouraging to women that the only way that society thinks they can survive and make a good life for themselves and their children is by being dependent upon their husbands. Within the article it states that the bridefare program denies any income support to an unmarried woman who lives with the working father of her child, to a working mother who does not have a husband, and to two mothers who pool their money together to support their children in a single household. The only way for women to receive support from this program is if they are married and are receiving financial support from their husbands. I however encourage the independent woman, who is not reliant on her husband’s money and wants to make a living to support herself and her child. I think that society should support the many different ways of parenting and should not normalize a certain lifestyle but be accepting and tolerant of all lifestyles and family structures.

No Man’s Land Introduction

Kathleen Gerson

The Introduction to No Man’s Land by Kathleen Gerson is an article that emphasizes the change that has occurred and is occurring among men. Gerson begins by briefly with the image of the breadwinner. She notes that although men were typically considered to be breadwinners in the past, there were also families, never accounted for, who had employed wives. These families were seen as dysfunctional as they defied social norms, and deemed husbands as failures to be good providers for their families. Women now- a-days as Gerson examines have undergone a revolution that allows for women coming from very diverse backgrounds to be employed. Women who are married, unmarried, or mothers have entered into the workplace, rearranging social rules and norms. The change in men, however is the main focus of Gerson’s article. Gerson notes the decline of the primary breadwinner as the man’s role as well as their cultural support. Redefining manhood and what it actually means in society is a task that men have had to take due to their ever-changing roles in a household. One important and rather interesting thing that Gerson also noticed in the changing man, is the slow change toward men’s participation in domestication. Men, although women are participating in the paid workforce, still have yet to participate as actively in domestic chores such as housework and child care. Equality between a man and a woman’s role has yet to occur because women are now seen as double participants, inside and outside of the home. Gerson also goes into to explaining men’s increasing desire for freedom, and lack of commitment and responsibility which has influenced an increase in the divorce rate, in the postponing of marriage, and in becoming fathers. This I see as something very typical of young men, yet hope that the majority of men do want to settle down and want to share their lives and their fortunes with another person. Explaining men’s lives and their behavior toward family and work is hard to make generalizations about. As Gerson explains, we as women tend to put men in one category and women in another. We focus on differences between men and women, and fail to recognize that there are variations amongst men. Gerson hopes that by examining the variations amongst men, she can learn to understand how men construct their choices dependent upon the diverse ways in which men experience relationships and the world. The individual experiences of men contribute greatly to how they experience their privileges within their world.

The Myth of Masculinity

Kathleen Gerson

No Man’s Land as defined by Gerson is the state in which most men are as of now after experiencing the many changes that have rearranged social rules and norms that have left them uncertain about male privilege and power. The changes that Gerson examines in The Myth of Masculinity emphasize changes in workplace opportunities, relationships and experiences with children. Balancing family and work in a revolution that encourages societal change as men face the conflict of redefining masculinity and what it means to be a man is what Gerson hopes to examine. Gerson first defines masculine personality. Men’s childhood experiences shape the way in which men make choices as adults and respond to conflicts that they encounter in life. However because individual experiences are different for each person, choices cannot be explained by a generalized complex of personality qualities that are commonly used to label males. Gerson attempts to explain to readers that neither masculine personality, masculine culture, nor male dominance are ways to explain how men rationalize and make conscious decisions and responses. Rather, men’s values, qualities and characteristics should not be categorized, but rather individual experiences should be valued and should precedent experiences that happen later on in their lives. As masculinity and manhood are being redefined in society, men should learn to base their understandings of the world, and of relationships of family and work off their knowledge that they have gained throughout their personal experiences.

Having It all: The Mother and Mr. Mom

Francine Deutsch

Having it All: The Mother and Mr. Mom by Francine Deutsch examines how working class couples balance family and work. Deutsch begins by explaining how parents who both work take alternate shifts in order to provide efficient child care and take care of basic housework. The most simple explanation as to why couples have alternate shifts is because of money, and the expenses that childcare endure. Having alternate shifts also make living at home more comfortable. It is believed that children should be taken care of by family. The bond that is created between the parent and the child during childcare is essential in the emotional and psychological development of the child. Deutsch also makes an interesting point in saying that although in alternating- shift families, the father is more present than the image of the breadwinner family, the mothers still remain the mothers. Mothers always seem to make their children’s lives their priority, and shift their schedules so that they can always have more time allotted to spending with their children. Women want to be home as a parent because they think they should be home, this is what defines a mother for most women. Men also still cling to the idea as the mother as the primary and nurturing parent. As a child all throughout high school, I lived in an alternate-shift family. My father would make breakfast for my sister and I and take us to school , and my mother would pick us up after school and take us to our other extra curricular activities. I think that it was a good balance because there was never a day where I never saw both of my parents. They always found a way to be involved in my everyday activities whether it was making me breakfast or dinner or coming to one of my afterschool events.