The New York Times Ignites The Debate Yet Again

A front page story in The New York Times this week has moms taking sides again in the on-going, emotionally charged "Have it All" debate. The story described a so-called new trend among many female co-eds who have apparently concluded that they'll forfeit their careers once they become mothers. To be fair, not everyone planned to quit work entirely. Some said they plan to work part-time and others said they would take a temporary sabbatical and return once their children were in school.

What most people found shocking about the Times' article, however, was that the women surveyed are attending some of the most elite colleges in our country. These are the women who we can assume were (at least until they entered college) some of our nation's most ambitious and driven. They are the ones who had obviously achieved academic excellence and had been hyper-involved in extra-curricular activities to land them in their Ivy League towers today.

So the irony, of course, is if these young women have already surrendered themselves to the idea that you can't simultaneously have a career and be a mother, then what message does that send to all of the other women of their generation? And what does it tell future employers? Are we turning back the clock re-enforcing retro stereotypes that women are bad investments since they'll quit work as soon as they get married and have babies?

Over the past few days many of the moms I know -- both Stay-at-Work moms and Stay-at-Home moms have been passionately discussing this article. Most feel depressed that the next generation of young women seem to have relinquished their own dreams for an idealized version of motherhood before they've even graduated from college.

Others are concerned at the naivete and unrealistic expectations these young women have for themselves. They're believing in Prince Charming at a time when still about half of all marriages end in divorce. And what will these women do if their husbands lose their jobs? An Ivy League education alone is not a safety net.

A couple of years ago Lisa Belkin wrote an article in The New York Times Magazine that also created plenty of controversy and conversation. The article described women who graduated from some of the best universities in the country who were "opting out" of the workforce after they had children. Unlike this week's article, the women Belkin interviewed were in their 30s, 40s and 50s. All had delayed motherhood to have careers first -- many for ten to twenty years before they ever had children. A lot of the women Belkin described quit their big careers because they found that they just weren't compatible with children.

We all know that many careers simply don't mesh with motherhood. But that doesn't mean young women shouldn't plan to work or even to fight for better ways to integrate career and family. If the best and the brightest are exiting the workforce or mentally preparing to leave before they've even begun, then that means that the workforce is in desperate need of an extreme makeover. And we need the next generation of women and men not to withdraw and accept the status quo but to stand with us and help make the change we all desire.

Dads are from Mars, Moms are From Venus

Last night feeling pre-menstrual, cranky and bloated, I suddenly found myself bickering with my husband, Michael, defending the importance of the first day of school and defining yet again the fundamental differences between moms and dads.

I know it's silly, but even as a grown up, I get excited about the start of the school year. I want to buy new shoes, get my hair cut, and I still feel oddly compelled to buy new paper products at the drugstore. Perhaps the inevitable consequence of attending school for sixteen years is that the start of the academic year just seems like the natural time for fresh beginnings.

So last night, the eve of my son Jonah's first day of Pre-K, as I lay in bed next to Michael reading the Sunday New York Times, I asked him if he was disappointed that he wouldn't be taking Jonah to school, picking him up or even seeing Jonah at the end of the day because he would be out of town on a business trip. "Why would I be sad?" Michael asked me matter-of-factly. "It's not such a big deal."

"Of course it's a big deal," I said feeling even more irritable than ever. "Our baby is growing up. It's Pre-K! Next year he'll be in kindergarten. Jonah has a new teacher and it's a whole new crop of kids. How bigger does it get than that?" I asked incredulously, though not quite believing my own dramatic words.

I, of course, am the one who would be dropping off and picking up Jonah from school. And for the past two weeks I have already begun fretting about missing my 2-year-old daughter's second day of school because I will be en route to Milwaukee on a business trip. Coincidentally, I am traveling to speak to a working mothers group who most probably are also not available to pick up their children from school.

Time and again I realize that moms experience these types of life events more intensely than dads. My husband simply doesn't feel the guilt that I do -- and he's not alone. Yes, most dads say they want to be present, but if they are not available they usually don't beat themselves up over it. I think moms want more and expect more than dads do. Is it society that conditions us to feel guilty if we miss certain events, or is it biology that makes our stomachs churn when we're away from our kids for too long? It's probably both. I know my daughter will be happy to see our babysitter on Thursday after school, but I will make sure I'm carrying my tissues on the plane. Logically, I know it's not such a big deal, but then why do I feel so sad?

Today Show Appearance

Click Title To See Author On Today Show and Read Book Excerpt