Is the new parenting book by Oliver James an attack on working mothers or an attempt to meet the real needs of children under three?
THE COLLEAGUE did not mean it as an insult but the remark hit home all the same. “We decided it was best for the children if my wife stayed at home,” he said during a casual conversation in the office, soon after my second maternity leave.
“Unlike you,” he didn’t add – nor even think, I’m sure. But I wondered where such a remark left my standing as a mother in his eyes.
Working women with young children can be rather thin-skinned if they have any self-doubt or guilt. Equally, stay-at-home mothers often feel obliged to defend their decision – especially if there is any talk of “opting out”.
Such emotions are at the root of the so-called “mummy wars” – as women wrestle with reconciling their “mother” and “worker” identities. It is the unfinished business of feminism.
Although gender equality is well established in education and job opportunities, problems emerge when babies start to arrive.
With the “having it all” model exposed as a fallacy, women struggle to deal with the sometimes conflicting emotional and financial needs of themselves and their families.
Not just women – men, employers and society too. But mothers seem to feel it most keenly, wanting to justify their decisions not only to themselves, but also to family, friends and even the stranger at the bus stop.
'The real challenge of parenthood is you, not your child," says the British psychologist Oliver James in his latest book,
How Not to F*** Them Up. Babies' needs are simple and their reasons for crying can be summed up in the acronym WHEPT: wind, hunger, emotional distress, physical discomfort and tiredness
“Once a baby’s WHEPT need is met, it disappears,” he comments.
If only adults were so easily sorted.
James says the aim of the book is to help parents work out how best to care for children aged under three, taking into account their own personality and needs, not to mention the baggage from their childhood.
Nobody goes into parenting with a blank slate – as famously acknowledged by the Philip Larkin poem from which James drew the title of both this book and its predecessor, They F*** You Up. Roughly half of us try to replicate the parenting we experienced, the other half resolve to take the opposite of their parents' approach.
James, a father of two young children who lives in Oxfordshire, makes no apologies for aiming his message at middle-class mothers – for a start they are most likely to be reading parenting books; secondly, they are the ones who probably have choices; and finally, although there is a trend towards more fathers staying at home to mind children under three, they are still in a small minority.
Some critics have interpreted the book as an attack on working mothers, but James makes it clear that he sees the necessity of tuned-in, responsive care for babies and toddlers as the core issue, not who provides it.
“Babies and toddlers need to be in the presence of a responsive, loving adult at all times in order to thrive,” he writes. He believes his own mother’s unresponsiveness and irritability when he was a toddler made him emotionally insecure.
“In trying to care full-time for four children aged under five, she messed up,” he says baldly. “It was too much for a person like her. Arranging matters in such a way that she was irritable and depressed created a lose-lose situation for her and for us.”
He urges parents to try to work out what will be a win-win approach – whether this involves the mother staying at home, or going out to work and finding a substitute carer who can meet the child’s needs – be it the father, a grandparent, a childminder.
Controversially, James believes that most day care centres do not provide sufficiently responsive care to children under three.
He dismisses as “myths” the notion that one and two year olds need other children to play with, or that the sooner they learn to look after themselves the better.
He acknowledges that high-quality day care can increase the cognitive skills and academic performance of children of low-income parents.
However, there is no evidence that it is advantageous for children from middle-class families, and James dwells on the considerable evidence that day care increases the risk of aggression, disobedience and emotional insecurity – particularly if the care is low quality, which, he maintains, is the norm in the UK and the US.
He attaches much importance to studies that show raised levels of the stress hormone cortisol – which triggers our “fight or flight” response – among under-threes in day care and the negative impact that can have. The continuing effect of this has been measured long after early childhood.
The use of “naughty step” methods, as advocated by some parenting experts, is also rejected. “When used on such young children it actually often results in repetition of the undesired behaviour, rather than successful management.”
Even if you are not convinced by all his arguments and the scientific evidence he uses to back them up, James’s book makes fascinating reading for anybody interested in the debate about the work-life balance of motherhood.
The portraits of the three basic types of mums (see panel on left), and the outlining of the benefits and pitfalls of each approach are, at least, entertaining and, at most, enlightening.
Of course it has to be acknowledged that for many parents the recession has removed the luxury of lifestyle choice. Even where a dual-income couple could survive on one – who dares walk away from a job when your partner’s could be gone next week? Or a breadwinner and stay-at-home parent may long to swap roles but find it is out of the question at the moment.
However, frankness about our circumstances, as well as an understanding of our own needs and beliefs, is key to feeling confident that as mothers we are doing the best we can for our children. And, if James is right, we won’t be agonising about it on our own for too much longer.
He predicts a future – whether that be in 20 or 100 years’ time – when men will be wrestling with the same issues.
“Men will feel as torn as women between the desire to work and their responsibility to ensure the needs of their under-threes get met.”
How Not to F*** Them Upby Oliver James is published by Vermilion; £17.99 in the UK
CARING FOR BABY: WHAT IRISH EXPERTS SAY
We asked some Irish child experts to respond to Oliver James’s contention, based on scientific evidence, that group day care should be avoided if possible for children aged under three:
Rita Melia, national childcare policy adviser with the National Children’s Nurseries Association
“Where centre-based full-day care has a negative effect, it is down to poor quality. Oliver James is writing in a UK and US context, which has very little bearing on the Irish situation. Here, the Government has been committed to not only providing places, but also ensuring high quality through regulation of the sector.
“There is a commitment to quality and we are seeing it on the ground among childcare providers engaging with Síolta, the national quality framework, and Aistear, the new curriculum framework for all children from birth to six years.
"What I say to parents is they need to make informed decisions in relation to childcare. The NCNA's booklet, 9 Steps to Choosing a Nursery,gives the questions they should be asking."
See ncna.ie for further information.
Irene Gunning, chief executive of the Irish Preschool Play Association
“We all know that quality in day care is paramount. In practice, it means that babies and toddlers need warm, sensitive, responsive and reciprocal care interactions, and these relationships must be consistent.
“James states that there is no truth whatsoever in the idea that babies and toddlers need other children to play with.
“He completely ignores what most of us working with children know – that babies and toddlers love being around other children whatever age. Development, learning and enculturation require involvement through observation and participation.
“Although James says that trying to ‘educate’ them too early in life is not good, he doesn’t mention the importance of play once in his whole book.
“Babies, toddlers and children need to play – it is how they learn and develop.”
For further information see ippa.ie
Bernie Griffith, manger of Childminding Ireland, the national childminding association
“Family day care is what we’re all about and we believe it is the best option for children. Childminding is unique, with an age spread of children. It creates empathy rather than competition, as small children are not vying for limited resources as can happen in larger groups.
“Parents know the value as it is the preferred option for up to 80 per cent of full-day care for pre-school children. It is the original form of childcare, with the extended family doing it. As that changed over time it became neighbours. Childminding has become extremely professionalised over the years and is no longer the soft option.”
For more information, see childminding.ie
Clinical psychologist Marie Murray
“The debate about individual care and group care always generates pros and cons for both positions, with emphasis on the advantages for the baby of individual care and for the older child of the socialisation of group care.
“Children do need responsive loving care; responsiveness is the crucial ingredient. Because care is provided in a group setting does not mean that children are neglected.
“The most important thing is that children’s signals are understood and their individual needs are understood and met by responsible and responsive adults who genuinely care about them – regardless of the context in which this care occurs.”
HUGGER OR FELXIMUM: WHAT KIND OF MOTHER ARE YOU?
Scientific research, much of it based on the work of British psychoanalyst and psychologist Joan Raphael-Leff, shows that mothers of small children tend to fall into three groups in terms of their feelings and approach to motherhood.
In How Not to F*** Them Up, psychologist Oliver James deals with the three broad categories separately, attributing typical characteristics to each, including the following:
THE ORGANISER
During pregnancy, she wants to keep the interference with normal life to a minimum. As soon as she brings the baby home, establishing a routine is her main goal.
Breastfeeding is not her idea of heaven and she will be conscious of the need to move on to a bottle, so other people can feed the baby.
She does not believe in co-sleeping and will probably have the child’s cot in a separate bedroom.
She is happy for others to care for the baby and sees a routine as very helpful for this.
She is keen to get back to her “normal” life as quickly as possible, and aims to return to full-time work after her maternity leave.
Far better, concludes James, that she returns to the workforce and entrusts the baby during the early years to the care of someone who enjoys that stage, otherwise she runs a significant risk of depression.
He estimates a quarter of British mothers fit into this category.
THE HUGGER
During pregnancy she is looking forward to the birth, usually hoping for a natural one.
She places the need of the baby ahead of everything else – which can elicit criticism from her partner, family and friends.
Co-sleeping and feeding on demand make total sense to her.
She luxuriates in motherhood and is happy to put her life on hold.
She is much more likely to breastfeed until the baby is at least two years old, as is recommended, and beyond. She is the least likely of the three types of mother to have a paid job.
One price Huggers pay for their approach, says James, is that their children tend to wake more and demand attention during the night. Another quarter of British mothers belong in this category.
THE FLEXIMUM
She comes to motherhood with an open mind, realising during pregnancy that her life is going to be radically changed, but is unsure how she is going to react.
After birth she is led by her baby’s needs, but does not lose sight of her own.
She combines the “hugging” and “organising” patterns of care, depending on what seems to be required at the time.
She is keen to create a “win-win” situation for herself and the child.
Generally, she prefers to be at home full-time or to work from home.
However, she is least likely of the three kinds to be irrationally anxious about being separated from her under-threes.
Fleximums can trick themselves, James warns, into believing they have created “win-win” arrangements, in which the needs of themselves and their babies are being met, when in reality one is losing out.
About half of British mothers can be classed as fleximums.
