The Price of Motherhood: Why the Most Important Job in the World Is Still the Least Valued Book

It's kind of ironic. We're reading this for book club because I recommended it, but I don't even want to finish it. She is very right, though. Mothers are horribly disadvantaged, and it's not fair. Society really does need to stop devaluing mothers. I have to say, though, this is the most worldly book I've ever read. Maybe it is because my husband and I have a very good relationship, financially, that I feel they way I do. I know money is important, and without it, life can down-right suck. But she makes it all about money. She drags out all the horror stories and the worst case scenarios. I get a very strong vibe that she thinks that women should not be in the home, that to be "equal" they need to be working. It makes me think of the scripture of the natural man. The entire book is about the natural man; devoid of the qualities that make marraige and motherhood worth it.

Don't get me wrong, though. I definitely think that motherhood should not just be rewarded by warm fuzzies, like many people seem to think. She is right that things NEED to change. It's absurd the position that this devaluing motherhood puts caretakers. I haven't actually finished the book, so everything from here on out is interpolation, based on what I've read so far. We seem to think very different things need to change. I think that jobs need to be less demanding. It completely absurd for jobs to expect 90 hour work weeks from anyone, let alone a parent. This book has completely convinced me that if we follow the principles of the gospel, it will make things better in our families.

I just figured out what is rubbing me so wrong about this book. It's the fact that she is making all these arguments about motherhood being not valued, but the whole time I feel that she is saying that you only have value as a mother if you are working, too. Yep. Don't like the book.

Update: I skipped ahead and read her conclusions. This book was written in 2001, 15 years ago. I have to admit, I am not sure, but it seems like many of her conclusions and suggestions have been at least partially implemented. Obviously, to me at least, things have not changed as much as she would hope. I wonder how much they have changed. Since I was fairly young and clueless in 2001, I can't really compare then and now. I would be curious how she would write this book today. Would she feel that we've implemented her suggestions all wrong? Would she feel that we've made some progress, but we have more to go? I also am looking at what is going in the European countries she extolled in this book. I don't know if the countries like Greece, which are facing such huge financial chrises were on her list of forward-thinking countries or not, but I'm curious. I also know that France is considering ending their 35 hour work week, in favor of a 40 hour work-week. I'm not saying her ideal has failed. I wonder if it has failed, or if a culture of greed has overtaken it, and is trying to destroy something good. I really just don't know.

I still don't like that to her, to be successful, women should be working. She says that we need to stop the stigma of being a mother, but she seems to be adding to the stigma of being a stay-at-home-mother. So many of her suggestions seem to focus entirely on getting all moms working. I guess they seem best if that is your ideal, but I think it would be a beautiful thing if we didn't need so many preschools because mothers were staying home and being actively engaged in their children's early education. Maybe having free co-op style preschool materials, instead. I would enjoy seeing a book that had stay-at-home-mothering the end goal, instead of working-mothering the end goal.