Thanks so much to my friend Katherine Lewis, the About.com Guide to Working Moms, who named Charm City Moms as her site of the week this week. We appreciate the love!
And you should give her some back. Katherine's got valuable information on flexible work options; juggling a sick child and work (timely these days); and easing separation anxiety.
This week has been one of the most challenging in the eight years that my husband and I have been working parents. One or both of our children has been sick -- as in, sick enough to stay home and need a parent to care for them -- for the last six days. That means my husband and I have each worked from home several days this week.
We're lucky enough to work for pretty understanding employers that also have the technology to allow us to work pretty seamlessly at home. Still, this situation is scary for a number of reasons. First, we're worried about the kids, who apparently have coxsackie virus, a pretty common summer virus that seems to be making its way around the community. Because it's a virus, there's not much we can do but keep them comfortable and ride it out.
But frankly, in this recession, it's also scary to tell an employer you won't be in because your child is sick -- again. You wonder if your boss questions your work ethic or discovers he can get along without you. You try to make sure you're in touch and letting him know specifically what you've accomplished while working at home, but still.
And while you'd really rather take the day off and focus solely on the kids, you worry about that, too. If your work falls to others while you deal with the family emergency, you feel for your coworkers.
In our case, at the same time, I worry that the kids are watching too much TV and not getting enough attention as I try to work. Ideally we'd call in a family member, but the closest one is more than 1,000 miles away. And I don't feel right about asking a sitter to risk getting sick herself.
I'm curious about what others do about work during a child's prolonged illness. What are your strategies, at work and at home?
CBS News, which has started a project called "Children and the Recession" to examine the effects of the economic meltdown on our children, has some interesting data. They report:
--In the last six months, 60 percent of about 1,000 parents polled by the network said they've had to tell their children they may not have the money to do at least some of the things the family used to do.
--About 1 in 10 of the parents said they had delayed taking their children for some type of medical treatment within the past six months because of the recession. Here's more:
Meanwhile, I'm looking at the flip side of this story. I'm looking for kids and families who have shown incredible resilience during these hard times. When told that a parent lost a job, has a child you know responded in a very positive way -- offering to get a summer job, coming up with ideas for trimming the family budget, helping the job-seeking parent get computer savvy? If so, and if that family is in Central Maryland, I'd like to interview them. Please e-mail or call me (410-332-6753) to get in touch.
Yesterday Michelle Obama delivered a speech on work-life balance, a topic she has said would be an important priority for her as First Lady. The Moms To Work blog has a transcript.
Obama acknowledged that one income often can't support a family any more; that even if one parent wants to stay home, both often must work. She talked about the need, even in these times when all of us fear for our jobs, for companies to create greater flexibility to hold on to talented employees. Even if it's something as simple as helping them get out to pick up their children at school.
And she pointed out that many companies are a long way from that -- that many don't even provide their workers with paid sick days, leaving working parents with terrible choices when their children are ill.
What do you think about what she said? Are we likely to see these hopes realized any time soon?
AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite
I caught up yesterday with David Honick, the attorney in Salisbury whose firm is the only one in Maryland listed on the Babies in the Workplace web site as allowing employees to bring their offspring. (You'll remember this came up when we were talking about Sarah Palin bringing her infant to the governor's office.)
Honick, who specializes in civil litigation on land-use matters, said his office has formally hosted one baby so far -- but the child, now a toddler, has been around for a while. He's the son of Honick's paralegal, who works part-time. Honick started the policy to keep her happy, but he says he's been very happy with the arrangement, too.
"It's gone very well," he said. "I've actually enjoyed having her son around."
Honick said he was receptive to the idea because he has three children -- now 3, 6, and 10 -- and has struggled as well with getting the right child care. "It never crossed my mind to say no," he said. "Now if I hire new employees, and I'm looking for a secretary, if she wanted to bring her baby, I'd say that's fine."
Of course, it helps that right now he and the mom in question are the only employees in the office, so there's no one else to consult. But clients do visit. If they minded having a young one toddle around, they haven't said it, Honick said.
One of the many issues raised by the candidacy of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for vice president is the idea of caring for an infant while you're working in any kind of office. Palin's solution, as reported by several newspapers, has been to keep her baby, Trig, with her as much as possible, whether that's in the governor's office or while traveling to appearances, as in the picture on the left.
So I thought it might be interesting to talk about our own experiences bringing (or not) babies to work and to find out how many workplaces are truly baby-friendly.
A reader pointed me to the site Babies In the Workplace, which lists 104 companies around the country classified as "baby-friendly" and the number of "babies hosted" at each office to date.
I could find only one workplace listed there from Maryland -- the Law Offices of David Honick, P.A. (The Web site says that firm has hosted one baby so far.) I left a phone message there this morning to see if I could talk with the employees about babies at work. I'll report back if I hear from them.
Have you brought your babies to work, or worked alongside the babes of others? How did it go?
(Associated Press photo/Eric Risberg)
Spirited discussions continue all over the country about Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's work-family balancing act as she runs for vice-president with five children and a grandchild on the way. Here are some related links I thought might interest you:
--This ABC News piece has interesting stats on what working mothers themselves think about whether it's ideal for high-powered moms to be gone from home as much as they are.
--The Los Angeles Times' health blog examines the issue of genetic testing, highlighted by the fact that Palin's infant son, Trig, has Down Syndrome.
--Here at The Baltimore Sun, we're looking at the state of teen pregnancy.
--For lots of different views from female bloggers, here's the Palin link at BlogHer.
No matter where you stand, John McCain's choice of a running mate has definitely renewed discussion of what many of us see as a hidden, daily struggle -- how women can live up to their own expectations (let alone society's) as both mothers and individuals.
Among the many conversations about Republican presidential nominee John McCain's vice-presidential pick, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, is the one summed up in this New York Times piece today. Moms and dads are debating how a woman who gave birth just five months ago to a child with Down Syndrome can subject herself to the punishing rigors of this campaign.
This Washington Post story offers a clue: The baby's with her in the office, even being discreetly nursed during a meeting.
On one hand, it's a bit of a sexist argument: Would anyone ask these questions if the candidate were the father of a new baby? Palin's husband is reportedly on leave from his job and prepared, at least for the moment, to be a full-time dad.
On the other, at least one woman in the Times story says Palin's willingness to spend long hours on the trail doesn't jibe with her notion of putting a new baby first.
What do you think?
(Photo by Robyn Beck/AFP/Getty Images)
My week home with the kids (perhaps I should stop calling it 'vacation') is drawing to a close. It gave me the healthy reminder I get every so often of the organizational skills, strategic thinking and just plain tiring physical labor it takes to care full-time for two young kids.
Of course, I made it more difficult for myself (as I always do) by having too many 'goals' (work, home, and personal -- ha!) for my 'time off.' And this part of August is a weird twilight time that carries some conflicting emotions for both parents and kids -- you want to take advantage of the last free week before school, yet you want to get ready for school. Kind of a buzz kill if you're not careful.
Amid all that, I did hit on one winning strategy I'd love to share. It's called the "cooperation flower."
It's a variation on the oft-heard idea of giving points or stickers for good behavior. I've tried those before, but this seemed to work better. Each child started with a blank piece of paper. Every time I noticed a child exhibiting especially grown-up or cooperative behavior -- cleaning up a spill without being asked, giving up a chair for an older relative, not getting upset over a change in plans -- I would draw a flower on the paper. Something about having the flower drawn sparked their imaginations (and, perhaps, competitive spirits). They got to choose what color it would be, and each flower was a little different from the last.
Soon they started helping each other and drawing flowers on each others' charts. By the end of the week, they each had a whole garden.
If you missed it yesterday, you must catch up with Jill Rosen's story on stay-at-home moms who are trying to head back into the work force because the economy has made it very difficult to live on one income.
There's an interesting discussion below the story. These moms aren't getting much sympathy. Some of you might have a different take, and I'd love it if you'd share that here.
(Photo by Sun photographer Doug Kapustin of Jennifer Hart-Walters, mother of two, (Elizabeth Walters (5) and Zachary Walters (3) ) who has gone back to work part-time.)
My colleague Jill Rosen is investigating the notion that the rising cost of food, gas, and utilities are prompting stay-at-home parents to at least consider going back to work, part-time or full-time. Of course there aren't a lot of jobs out there, and some parents might end up doing the opposite -- staying home after cutbacks at their companies.
If the economy is changing the work-parenting balance at your house, and you'd be willing to talk about it for the story, please e-mail Jill. And please feel free to talk about it here, too.
How equally are the parenting duties really divided in your household? A fascinating story coming in Sunday's New York Times magazine, previewed on the web site, looks into that question. In light of our ongoing polls on fathers' jobs, I thought it was particularly timely.
I'd love to know your thoughts on the article, which really explores some unspoken assumptions about parenting roles.
This ABC news piece brings some discouraging news for expecting parents: Just 16 percent of employers offer fully paid, six-week maternity leaves, according to a study by the Families and Work Institute -- compared to 27 percent a decade ago.
The study also found that despite technological advances that might make more working from home and job-sharing possible, employers aren't offering more of those options. One upside: employers are becoming more accommodating to mothers who need private spaces to breastfeed (or pump, I gather).
As our economic picture gets bleaker, I imagine it will be harder for some employees to feel they can leave their jobs for long to have a baby or care for a family member. In retrospect, I feel supremely lucky to have been able to take 6 months or so with each child. Yet I would love to have been able to take more time.
How much time did you take for your maternity leaves?
