My husband sometimes accuses me of being a bit too laid back with our kids. While I'll admit that on occasion I perhaps should have been paying a bit more attention to what Gavin was doing, for the most part I don't believe that children - even young ones - need to be constantly monitored. And to be clear, by "monitored" I mean that they don't need a parent watching their every move, all the time. As long as I know where he is and what he's doing, I don't see a problem in looking away for a few minutes, or running upstairs to get the laundry, or letting him play in the backyard while I get supper ready.
I guess another way of putting this is that I am raising my children to be Free Range Kids. I love this concept. What's a Free Range Kid? As Lenore Skenazy, the author/creator of the Free Range Kids blog, defines it, "A Free-Range Kid is a kid who gets treated as a smart, young, capable individual, not an invalid who needs constant attention and help."
This isn't as easy as it looks. I know that I constantly feel like I'm being judged for my parenting decisions. Like today at the park, Gavin was running around the playground and I'd set Mia down on a blanket on the grass in a spot where I had a good view and could stay with her while I watched him. But then Gavin started throwing rocks, so I left Mia on the blanket and walked about 15 feet away to let Gavin know that wasn't acceptable behavior. I kept looking back to make sure she was still there playing nicely, but my biggest concern was making sure people wouldn't think that I was the kind of mother who would leave a baby alone at the park unsupervised. And while I know that there are people who will say that I could have picked her up and carried her with me, or that I should always bring my baby carrier, my point is that I don't believe that it was unsafe to leave her on a blanket, away from the action (i.e. where no kids would be playing and fall on her), in a park that requires a security card for you to enter in the first place.
A recent article in The Globe and Mail focused on the fact that this new era of "helicopter parenting" is likely a result of increased societal expectations of what constitutes a good parent, and not some radical desire on the part of today's parents to be involved in their children's lives. I can totally agree with that and we could go on for days about all the reasons why this is so. But there has to be balance. Maybe we could start by rejecting the proposition that the world is a scary place from which our children need to be saved and protected.
Fear is a powerful motivator, but it can also stop you from doing a lot of things that would add richness to your life. I think it's a sad irony that while TV is full of shows demonstrating everything that could possibly go wrong if you let your child out of your sight for a second, the movies are filled with stories of kids exploring and going on adventures with their friends with no adults around to interfere.
I don't want to be holding my child's hand forever. At some point, they are going to have to learn how to do things for themselves. They need to know that they are capable of making decisions, and that if they make the wrong decision they will be able to manage the consequences. I will always be here for them if they need me, but it is their life to live, not mine. I don't want the responsibility of knowing that I prevented them from living it as fully as they could have.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Having it All...Whatever that Means
When I was working, I tried to read Above the Law on a regular basis. Since I've been home and the time I'm able to spend on the computer has become more sporadic I haven't been able to read it as much, but the other day I found myself with a few minutes to spare and decided to take a look. And there, right at the top of the page was an article seemed to be calling me, "Female Lawyers, Can You Have it All?"
Seeing as I've been trying to find the answer to this question for oh, seven years or so now, I immediately clicked on the link to see if I'd finally found what I was looking for. Alas, according to the article's authors the answer was a resounding, "NO!" As one of the authors, Above the Law editor Elie Mistal put it:
"Unless you were born into comfortable wealth, or born too stupid to ever really make something of yourself, you’re going to be dealing with a series of painful trade-offs until the merciful end."
I figured as much - knew it in my heart of hearts - but that never makes it easier to hear. They asked readers to share their opinions. I couldn't read them all, but they did provide some perspective.
First, the conversation assumes that in order to have it "all" you need to have children, because it's all about balancing the needs of your family vs. the needs of your boss/client. I suppose then that the more accurate question would be whether it's possible to have a successful career in law while giving birth to and raising reasonably well-adjusted children. And that's where I think the answer gets a bit more complicated.
It will always be difficult (the article's authors say impossible) to have a successful Biglaw career and raise a family, based simply on the amount of billable hours that are required in order to advance at those firms. It's an argument based on simple math that's hard to find fault with. I'm sure you can find anecdotal evidence of the Biglaw lawyer who birthed more than one child and still made partner in record time but I would bet you most of what I have that she had a nanny. Or a stay-at-home husband. Or both.
What's interesting is that lately more and more female lawyers are moving away from the traditional law firm setting in order to create a working environment that's more conducive to meeting their family's needs. I'm thinking of Carolyn Elefant over at My Shingle , who not only launched a successful solo practice but who also spends a significant amount of time educating other lawyers on how to set their own pace outside of the traditional law firm. Or Stephanie Kimbro at Kimbro Law Office, who used her husband's knowledge of computer engineering to create her virtual law office and the software that will allow thousands of other lawyers to do the same.
Hanna Rosin recently wrote in The Atlantic that for the first time ever, women in the workforce outnumber men. In her article, The End of Men, she writes how the companies who have been most successful at innovation and creativity - in other words, those companies who are thriving in this current marketplace - are those who have promoted women. We've known for the past several years that law schools are graduating more and more women. It stands to reason that those law firms that will be most successful at adapting to the changing marketplace will be those who recognize that they are going to have to adapt to the needs of the talent, not vice versa. The risk of being left behind, of being made irrelevant, is just too great.
Still, I think the answer is that it's not so much about having it "all", but about creating the life you want. Some women are so passionate about what they do that they make their life choices (i.e. spouse, children, where to live, etc.) to fit their job. There's nothing wrong with that. What we're finally starting to see though is a workforce that's more inclined to make its own rules to try to create a life that's meaningful for them, a life that includes a fulfilling career AND a spouse AND children. So maybe those authors were only half-right. Yes, certain careers demand that you sometimes have to choose between your family and your job, but that doesn't mean you can't have the type of life you want. Does it?
Seeing as I've been trying to find the answer to this question for oh, seven years or so now, I immediately clicked on the link to see if I'd finally found what I was looking for. Alas, according to the article's authors the answer was a resounding, "NO!" As one of the authors, Above the Law editor Elie Mistal put it:
"Unless you were born into comfortable wealth, or born too stupid to ever really make something of yourself, you’re going to be dealing with a series of painful trade-offs until the merciful end."
I figured as much - knew it in my heart of hearts - but that never makes it easier to hear. They asked readers to share their opinions. I couldn't read them all, but they did provide some perspective.
First, the conversation assumes that in order to have it "all" you need to have children, because it's all about balancing the needs of your family vs. the needs of your boss/client. I suppose then that the more accurate question would be whether it's possible to have a successful career in law while giving birth to and raising reasonably well-adjusted children. And that's where I think the answer gets a bit more complicated.
It will always be difficult (the article's authors say impossible) to have a successful Biglaw career and raise a family, based simply on the amount of billable hours that are required in order to advance at those firms. It's an argument based on simple math that's hard to find fault with. I'm sure you can find anecdotal evidence of the Biglaw lawyer who birthed more than one child and still made partner in record time but I would bet you most of what I have that she had a nanny. Or a stay-at-home husband. Or both.
What's interesting is that lately more and more female lawyers are moving away from the traditional law firm setting in order to create a working environment that's more conducive to meeting their family's needs. I'm thinking of Carolyn Elefant over at My Shingle , who not only launched a successful solo practice but who also spends a significant amount of time educating other lawyers on how to set their own pace outside of the traditional law firm. Or Stephanie Kimbro at Kimbro Law Office, who used her husband's knowledge of computer engineering to create her virtual law office and the software that will allow thousands of other lawyers to do the same.
Hanna Rosin recently wrote in The Atlantic that for the first time ever, women in the workforce outnumber men. In her article, The End of Men, she writes how the companies who have been most successful at innovation and creativity - in other words, those companies who are thriving in this current marketplace - are those who have promoted women. We've known for the past several years that law schools are graduating more and more women. It stands to reason that those law firms that will be most successful at adapting to the changing marketplace will be those who recognize that they are going to have to adapt to the needs of the talent, not vice versa. The risk of being left behind, of being made irrelevant, is just too great.
Still, I think the answer is that it's not so much about having it "all", but about creating the life you want. Some women are so passionate about what they do that they make their life choices (i.e. spouse, children, where to live, etc.) to fit their job. There's nothing wrong with that. What we're finally starting to see though is a workforce that's more inclined to make its own rules to try to create a life that's meaningful for them, a life that includes a fulfilling career AND a spouse AND children. So maybe those authors were only half-right. Yes, certain careers demand that you sometimes have to choose between your family and your job, but that doesn't mean you can't have the type of life you want. Does it?
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Maternity Rolls
That's why it's been so long since I've written. I know I've mentioned before on this blog that I find it difficult to write my day-to-day life because I'm not sure that anyone would find it very interesting. And I've been too busy to peruse the headlines to try to find someone else's story to blog about. The next thing you know nearly a month has gone by and I haven't had anything to say.
That's not to say that life has been boring. Far from it. The weather's been pretty terrible, but it seems like every day my bits of sunshine find a way to bring the light in. Whether it's Mia's giggles or Gavin trying to do something, succeeding and saying so proudly, "I did it myself Mom!", they really are amazing little people. Lately I've been thinking a lot about how blessed I am to be at this point in my life, uncertainty and all.
I've also been thinking a lot about other mothers' experiences. Heather Kuttai and I met about ten years ago when I worked for Student Affairs and Services at the University of Saskatchewan as a summer student. Heather was the Director of Student Disability Services; she actually created the department. I remember being surprised when Heather told me that she had a son. I hope I didn't say anything stupid or naive, but I was twenty-one and it's entirely possible that I said something unintentionally offensive. See, Heather has a spinal cord injury and has used a wheelchair since she was six years old. I had never met a mother who was using a wheelchair when she was pregnant.
Heather had a daughter in 2005 and recently wrote a book about her experiences as a pregnant woman with a disability, Maternity Rolls. It's a very enlightening and inspiring read. My experience with pregnancy is nothing like Heather's, other than I understand what it's like to put your body through all kinds of indignities in order to be called Mom by your own flesh and blood. But while Heather started out from a place where no one really expected her to have children and she showed them wrong, my issue was the opposite - everyone expected that we would have kids and then we couldn't. It's worth celebrating that we both ended up at the same place: with a boy and a girl and more love than we could ever imagine.
That's not to say that life has been boring. Far from it. The weather's been pretty terrible, but it seems like every day my bits of sunshine find a way to bring the light in. Whether it's Mia's giggles or Gavin trying to do something, succeeding and saying so proudly, "I did it myself Mom!", they really are amazing little people. Lately I've been thinking a lot about how blessed I am to be at this point in my life, uncertainty and all.
I've also been thinking a lot about other mothers' experiences. Heather Kuttai and I met about ten years ago when I worked for Student Affairs and Services at the University of Saskatchewan as a summer student. Heather was the Director of Student Disability Services; she actually created the department. I remember being surprised when Heather told me that she had a son. I hope I didn't say anything stupid or naive, but I was twenty-one and it's entirely possible that I said something unintentionally offensive. See, Heather has a spinal cord injury and has used a wheelchair since she was six years old. I had never met a mother who was using a wheelchair when she was pregnant.
Heather had a daughter in 2005 and recently wrote a book about her experiences as a pregnant woman with a disability, Maternity Rolls. It's a very enlightening and inspiring read. My experience with pregnancy is nothing like Heather's, other than I understand what it's like to put your body through all kinds of indignities in order to be called Mom by your own flesh and blood. But while Heather started out from a place where no one really expected her to have children and she showed them wrong, my issue was the opposite - everyone expected that we would have kids and then we couldn't. It's worth celebrating that we both ended up at the same place: with a boy and a girl and more love than we could ever imagine.
Monday, May 10, 2010
A Perfect Day
Murray and I have often talked about what our ideal day would be. It doesn't have to be anything fancy, like lying on a tropical beach, or exploring a faraway city. Basically what we're really asking each other is this: If you had a day wide open, with nothing on your "to-do" list, how would you spend your time?
This past Saturday came pretty close. We got up, ate breakfast together and then got ready and headed out to Banff to go hiking. I strapped Mia on in one baby carrier and Murray wore Gavin in a hiking backpack. We chose a trail that was a 10k roundtrip, but not too difficult. There were some tough grades but it was fairly tame. Both kids were so good. Mia didn't really fuss at all. On the way back we let Gavin walk some of the way and he had a blast. He is such a curious kid; he wanted to check everything out. Before we left town we stopped at our standby restaurant, Magpie & Stump, for nachos. The kids fell asleep on the way home. It was all good.
But see, I don't think that the reason it was such a good day was because of where we were (although I love living so close to the mountains), or what we did (even if hiking is a great family activity). It was because we were doing it together. I can't wait until the kids are old enough to go on bike rides and take part in other adventures. It sounds horribly cliched, and by no means is it always roses, but I really believe that it's days like these that make a meaningful life. There was no grocery shopping, no errands to take care of. Just us. Just perfect.
Monday, April 26, 2010
Put a Mom on the Court
This morning, Peter Bienart at The Daily Beast urges President Obama to name a Mom to the United States Supreme Court, if for no other reason that working mothers need assurance that they can in fact "have it all." Prior to reading this, I was unaware that neither Sandra Day O'Connor nor Ruth Bader Ginsburg has any children. Sonia Sotomayor's personal history was well-documented during her recent confirmation hearings.
Luckily, Canadian mothers-who-happen-to-be-lawyers have had several role models in this regard. While Bertha Wilson, the first woman appointed to the Supreme Court of Canada, didn't have any children, it's hardly surprising. Our current Chief Justice, on the other hand, has a son. The two other women who sit with her on the court, Justice Rosalie Abella and Justice Louise Charron, also have children.
Now if they would only tell us how they managed to become such accomplished jurists while raising their children...
Luckily, Canadian mothers-who-happen-to-be-lawyers have had several role models in this regard. While Bertha Wilson, the first woman appointed to the Supreme Court of Canada, didn't have any children, it's hardly surprising. Our current Chief Justice, on the other hand, has a son. The two other women who sit with her on the court, Justice Rosalie Abella and Justice Louise Charron, also have children.
Now if they would only tell us how they managed to become such accomplished jurists while raising their children...
Put a Mom on the Court
A surprising percentage of women nominated to top government jobs have no children. Peter Beinart on why Obama should change that by tapping Diane Wood for the Supremes.
Posted using ShareThis
Posted using ShareThis
Friday, April 16, 2010
Random
It's been a couple of weeks since I blogged, but I don't have any big topic to discuss. Just a few random thoughts.
This picture really makes me laugh. I noticed it when we were out for a walk a couple of weeks ago. Does Kym know she's "loe'd"? I mean, if you're going through all the trouble to graffiti a bridge, at least spell it right.
Life with the kids has been pretty good. I know it sounds trite, but I really have a lot to be thankful for. Mia has started to sleep in her crib regularly and she'll sleep sometimes for 6 hours in a row, so no complaints in that department. The weather has been pretty iffy here for the past week or so, which has meant that we haven't been getting out too much.
Once a week we go to the library where Gavin sits at the one of the computer stations and pretends he knows what to do with the mouse. One day I was using the self-checkout to check out our books and one of my books wouldn't register with the system. A lady tried to help me and when she took the book Gavin gave her this glare and said, "Hey, that's my mommy's book!". She gave him a look like he was the rudest little boy she'd met and I was torn between telling her to relax and chastising him. I told him that the lady was helping Mommy and that he should apologize, but she didn't appear mollified. Whatever. If you're personally offended by what a two-year-old says, then you have bigger problems than what I have time to deal with.
Anyway, baby is crying. Gotta go.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)