While I was working on my Master’s degree at Queen’s, my husband and I decided to try for a family. I ended up miscarrying our first child, and found myself in a fog of grief. My feminist thesis supervisor, though, congratulated me. “Now you can really devote yourself to your Ph.D,” she told me. I walked out of her office and swiftly got pregnant again.
Her attitude is quite commonplace in higher education. Career is all that matters, especially for women. Concentrate on a family and you’re betraying the wider cause. There’s nothing wrong, of course, with pursuing a good career. Many parents whose twenty-something kids still live in the basement wish their children would show some initiative in this regard. But making a career the sole focus of your life really begs the question: for what purpose? Outside of purely practical considerations like how one is to afford the Kraft Dinner after we’ve launched out of the nest, what does a career offer?
Our society, I believe, thinks that careers offer identity, happiness and self-worth. You are what you do. But while the search for career may preoccupy young adults, once they’re married with kids, other things take priority. A Vanier Institute poll from 2004 found that 84% of men and 90% of women who worked full-time would prefer to work part-time if they could afford it in order to be home more with their kids. It seems that work just doesn’t give the kind of life satisfaction that one’s family does. And an Ipsos-Reid survey from 2003 found that people’s top indicator of career success is being able to achieve balance between work and family. Career just isn’t primary; family is, despite what our educators may wish.
Our tax system, though, currently penalizes those who choose family over career. A couple where each earns $25,000 pays thousands less in tax than a couple where one spouse earns $50,000 and one spouse stays at home, even though both families have exactly the same income. The Conservative government is considering allowing couples to income split, getting rid of the current stay at home penalty. Besides, wealthy couples can already find ways to split income, so it’s only the middle class that’s currently out in the cold. University of Victoria Professor of Economics Elisabeth Gugl, though, thinks this tax change will hurt women. She told CBC, “If there’s a divorce, then having spent a long time at home… [is] going to hurt them in terms of the earnings that they can have afterwards”.
Why is this a concern in the first place? Because Dr. Gugl knows that if families have more disposable income, some will choose to have one parent stay home more, and that parent is likely to be the mom. And if moms choose this, they render themselves less employable. Therefore, we shouldn’t give women the choice. If we do, they’re likely to choose badly.
I don’t know about you, but I find this rather insulting. I figure that most people can figure out what is best for their own family, and we don’t need the government—or out of touch professors—telling us what to do.
Will women lose out if they stay at home and then divorce? Of course they will. But everything in life is a trade-off. Most marriages today do not actually end in divorce, and many women may feel that the benefits to their children of being cared for by a loving parent outweigh the possible risks they face later if the marriage does end. Dr. Gugl may not think that’s wise, but don’t we have the right to decide that for ourselves?
Income splitting isn’t about giving breaks to certain types of families. It’s about evening the playing field so that all families get the same breaks. Academics may still be trying to push young people onto the career track and away from families, but what if that’s not what we want? It’s still not clear whether the Conservatives will pursue this change, or whether they’ll give in to those calling them sexist. Personally, I don’t think anyone, regardless of gender, should be pushed explicitly in any one direction. I think we all should get to choose for ourselves, without outside pressure, no matter what those choices may be. What’s wrong with that?
- FAMILY VALUES: Don’t Follow Your Heart - Friday June 25, 2010 at 9:39 am
- A Graduation Speech - Friday June 18, 2010 at 8:35 am
- FAMILY VALUES: Too Young to Be Hot - Friday June 4, 2010 at 9:50 am
