In an interesting article written in May, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary president Paige Patterson expressed alarm over the high percentage of women over men enrolled in institutions of higher education. Read the article and answer the following questions:
Do you think that the family is under attack because many women have forsaken their roles as mothers in order to pursue their careers? At what point has a woman chosen career over family, instead of choosing career and family? Is there a difference? Do you believe that men are shirking their responsibilties as men because of intellectually strong women? And, more personally, if you as a woman have chosen to continue in your career, how, if at all, has your family suffered from such a choice? How have you benefited?
July 20, 2007 at 9:26 pm
This is a bit of a bunny trail, but I find it a ironic that Patterson wrote an article like this one. Judging by his real life actions, he thinks it’s preferable for a family to struggle with great financial hardship instead of permitting a woman to earn a good salary.
He did a tremendous injustice and injury to a female professor at Southwestern Baptist Theological seminary a couple of years ago. Dr. Sheri Klouda was the main financial supporter of her family because her husband is disabled, and Patterson pulled the rug out from under her and her family when he dismissed her from her job because she is a woman.
Dr. Sheri Klouda joined the faculty of SBTS in 2002 to teach Old Testament Hebrew, with stellar credentials. She had the highest respect from peers and students alike. Then Paige Patterson came aboard as the President of the seminary a year later. Patterson is reported to have given all faculty members his personal assurance that their jobs were safe. One year later, she was informed that the Paige Patterson insisted she be refused tenure because she was a woman. Patterson does not believe it is proper for a woman to teach “biblical studies” (i.e., Hebrew) in the school of theology. The seminary gave her three years to find another position; then they would replace her.
Today, Klouda is teaching elsewhere at a significantly reduced salary. One Baptist pastor was so outraged that he orchestrated a collection to help her, and thousands of dollars of support poured in. Meanwhile, Patterson sees absolutely nothing wrong with what he did.
Dr. Klouda’s dismissal by SBTS has caused her family major financial hardship. Medical bills for her disabled husband, a house that wouldn’t sell, and mortgage payments on a new home hundreds of miles away near her new, lower-paying job.
And Paige Patterson has difficulty understanding why women need training for a remunerative occupation?
July 20, 2007 at 10:09 pm
Light,
I thought about Dr. Klouda, too.
“Do you believe that men are shirking their responsibilties as men because of intellectually strong women? ”
This is just the silliest thing and it gets repeated over and over again. Sometimes in different forms.
Men don’t shirk their responsibilities because of intellectually strong women. Men shirk their responsibilities because of their own personal sin and then turn around blame it on intellectually strong women.
It is popular to blame a lack of spiritual interest on women. Men don’t want to go to church because it is “feminized”? And what does that mean? Too many women. Pastel colors.
Just like when we are told not to “run ahead of our husbands” as far as bible reading and learning bible doctrine. We are told it will cause our husbands to not want to read the bible and learn doctrine.
July 20, 2007 at 10:13 pm
From the article: “Patterson laments that most of the women ascending to these new roles will maintain a major focus on a career, not on the family and on children.”
Based on what evidence? And, I wonder, does he think the same thing of men who work outside the home?
“Patterson warned … that the traditional family unit is now under attack worldwide.”
Hmmm, I wonder what he means by the “traditional family”. He surely can’t be referring to the nuclear family, because that’s a development of the past hundred years or so.
“A biblical model of the family is key to restoring social order in the world, stated the Southern Baptist leader.”
Hmm, wonder what model that would be. Patriarch, two wives, plus begetting children by the servants? Hundreds of wives and concubines, dozens or more children? Or maybe husband-wife teams of tentmaking? How about two adult sisters and a brother?
Funny, nowhere in the Bible do I see fathers leaving the home daily for a 9 to 5 job while mothers stay at home and raise the children. Family life in NT times integrated work and home – most families were either agrarian, or if doing a trade, the shop shared the same quarters as the family living area.
Patterson suffers under the same illusions as many of the hyperpatriarchs – that the 1950’s middle class nuclear family model is “THE biblical model.”
July 20, 2007 at 10:28 pm
“It is popular to blame a lack of spiritual interest on women. Men don’t want to go to church because it is “feminized”? And what does that mean? Too many women. Pastel colors.”
Oh, Corrie, if only this weren’t so depressingly true. People have all sorts of excuses as to why they don’t like/go to church, and this is the one men like to use (plus so many others I’ve been given).
July 20, 2007 at 10:30 pm
I’m on a roll here … finally, to address Mollie’s questions:
Do you think that the family is under attack because many women have forsaken their roles as mothers in order to pursue their careers?
We treat men as multi-faceted human beings, with the capacity to love a family AND pursue a profession or a job. Why do we then treat women as one dimensional, with their only proper role as a F/T SAHM? We acknowledge that men can be a good marriage partner, a good parent, and pursue their interests and use their gifts to bring in income for the household. Yet some people refuse to acknowledge the same about women. They seem to think ALL women are called to the exact same thing – wife and mother only.
At what point has a woman chosen career over family, instead of choosing career and family? I dunno, but I guess it’s at about the same point as a man – when relationships suffer and needs go unmet. That will look different for every family.
I started my own business when my youngest started preschool, and there were certainly adjustments. But here is what I think is the greatest benefit to my kids. My children learned that everyone’s dreams and gifts need to be encouraged and supported … even Mom’s. They learned that while a mother sacrificing her dreams to serve her children all day may be one noble choice, it is not a compulsory choice, nor is it necessarily the best choice for families. And it is certainly not a biblical mandate. As long as parents love their children, bring them up in the Lord, keep them safe, meet their needs, and nourish their gifts and dreams … it doesn’t matter who brings home the bacon.
July 20, 2007 at 10:44 pm
“Patterson suffers under the same illusions as many of the hyperpatriarchs – that the 1950’s middle class nuclear family model is “THE biblical model.””
Light,
Very well said. You truly nailed it when you described the biblical model of a family from the Bible times.
What I found disturbing is the how he vilifies women and blames them for all of our social ills. He mentions abortion and how women are still executing their unborn children. Does he not know that behind many abortions there is a man who is doing the pushing to get rid of that child? I am not saying that a woman should shirk responsibility for her part in it at all. I am just saying that there are many men, married men, who coerce their wives and girlfriends into getting an abortion under the threat that they will leave them. He seems to think this is such a cut and dried and one-sided problem.
Also, I think it is good news that there are so many women attending college. But, what does that have to do with men not attending college? Nothing. Maybe he should look at the men who aren’t going to college. Why aren’t they going? It surely isn’t because there are too many women at school! LOL Ask a college-aged man if there could be such a thing as too many women!
Maybe he needs to address the man problem instead of concentrating on blaming all societal ills on women? There are many men who will not stand to have their wife stay home and care for the children. They are the ones who want the material things and they insist that their wives go out to work. I know many women who are working who would rather be at home with their children but their husbands berate them and call them “lazy” and “leeches” and tell them how being a mother at home is so easy and how they are not contributing to the home or society by sitting at home instead of working. My husband tells me all the time about how women are envious of me because I stay home and that is what they would LOVE to do but their husbands will not let them.
So much for feminists, huh? It still seems women are bearing up under the curse of desiring their husband and wanting to please them, even when it means giving up what is most important to them.
And, Light makes a good point. Should a man maintain a major focus on career and not on the family and children?
Alisa,
I think it would be a good article to look at the “church for men” movement. I think I may just have to come up with something on that. It is amazing what they come up with. The latest thing is concerning why men prefer Islam to Christianity. Very scary stuff! The focus is definitely NOT on God but on the created in this movement.
The major reason these men give for not going to church is because they feel that the focus is not on them.
July 21, 2007 at 1:00 am
This quote from the article: “Mom and hot apple pie have been replaced by institutional daycare centers and cold apple turnovers at McDonald’s” sounds a lot like Kevin Swanson’s “stay at home with your father and then you’ll have a beautiful family life or go to college, and become a slut who has three abortions and ends up lonely at 50.” These false dichotomies between two extremes are insulting to the reader. One would have to be extremely sheltered (or willfully ignorant) to not know actual human beings that give the lie to these ridiculous stereotypes.
I chose to continue in my career as a lawyer. I was fortunate to have a position that allowed me the flexibility to work part-time when my first child was born- and I’ve been working part-time for the past 20 years. My oldest daughter is (horrors!) about to begin her sophomore year in college and my youngest is entering her freshman year in high school. (We’ve never homeschooled- my children have attended parochial school since kindergarten.) I’ve never thought that I chose career over family- the two have worked together. My job has stimulated me intellectually and also allowed us “extras” such as travel that we have all benefited from. My children are all old enough now that I can say with some certainty that they have not suffered from my continuing to work– my oldest considered the question to be ridiculous when I posed it to her a few minutes ago. Anyway, at this point in my life, being a lawyer AND a mother AND a wife are ingrained parts of my being– my husband and children couldn’t (and wouldn’t want to) imagine me any other way.
July 21, 2007 at 2:27 am
As I was driving 6 teenagers home from a party this evening and listening to some of the girls chatter about what they want to be when they grow up (a teacher, an engineer, something with music, and a few I-don’t-knows) something else occured to me. Every time I hear a talented, gifted woman who works for pay say half apologetically, “Well, I have to work” I get so sad. It is as if they feel that financial need is the only legitimate reason for working outside the home. But y’know what? God created us for work! He set us in the garden and gave us work to do!
Working to contribute to society, working for the joy of exercising one’s gifts and skills, is nothing to apologize for! Think of it this way: when you’re in the hospital, who would you rather have attend you – a nurse who’s in it primarily because her family needs the income, or a nurse who’s doing it primarily because she loves taking care of people and helping them get well?
As long as we are putting God first and being faithful to the family responsibilities we have, there is not a thing wrong with desiring a career.
July 21, 2007 at 2:33 am
I actually heard a state home schooler leader tell a lovely man and his wife – who was recently recovered from a severe illness – that it was immoral for this woman to work even though they had huge medical bills (partially because of the influence of misguided theology that discourages insurance). The family was going to have to send their children to public school for a time because mom needed to work to make ends meet. It was so sad – this leader rebuked the father in front of his kids and said it would be a sin for the wife to work and send the kids to school. I am not kidding. I was horrified. Obviously, it would be best for the mom to be with her kids, but if circumstances require otherwise for a time it’s not a sin.
July 21, 2007 at 2:51 am
sarah said “Obviously, it would be best for the mom to be with her kids, but if circumstances require otherwise for a time it’s not a sin.”
the saddest part of all is that it’s the church’s responsibility to step up and help families in situations like this so that the best possible outcome can be had, regardless of the circumstances. i do believe that too many church leaders and church members have the attitude that when the family struggles financially, the wife must go to work, or she is not being responsible. rather than placing value on mothers raising children, they worry about their own wallets. if this leader were so concerned about this mother going to work, then why didn’t he help them financially himself? or work with the family’s church?
it’s easier to talk than it is to act.
July 21, 2007 at 2:54 am
Mollie, do not get me started. I took the dad aside later and told him my parents sent us to public school for a year when my mom was sick, and none of us ended up worse for the wear.
July 21, 2007 at 12:12 pm
My background is in developmental psychology, and what I learned in graduate school and the importance of the mother-child relationship in the early years of development very influential in my desire to walk away from a PhD and a graduate career. Too often I saw my female “mentors” at work on Saturdays, their kids running around in the hall. Granted, they did have a degree of flexibility to leave for appointments, etc., but it was not a 40 hour a week job, and I realized that it would not be compatable with *my* personal hope for my family.
That being said, do I think it’s wrong for a woman with children (even young children) to work? Absolutely not!!! I do feel though, that if you have young children, they must be your focus, and for a season of your life they must be considered first and foremost in decisions you make about your career or lack of thereof. I think that there are some women who are fortunate to be well-supported by family or the institution they work for, and can continue in their work (though I personally think it would be hard to work more than 30-40 hours a week logistically with young children.) I am happy for the woman I hear is fortunate to find themselves in this situation, and I rejoice when my friends find jobs that are flexible and allow them to still focus first on their children, and their kids are well-cared for while moms are working and helping their family by bringing in income.
I basically don’t think that it is appropriate to make hard and fast rules about whether a woman should or shouldn’t work outside the home. We are individuals, and God has a specific plan for each of our families. We also have different God-given talents and abilities. I personally do not have the ability to go to work right now and be the mother that I feel I’m called to be- I have realized after prayer and consideration and talking with wise women in my life that at home is the best place for me in this season of life with real little ones.
Does that mean I am not praying about my future work? Of course not! Even now through volunteer positions I’m hoping to prepare myself for a future where I would be able to pursue work or job or career. I feel very busy and “utilized” by God right now in my current position as a SAHM and I have no doubt that he will continue to open doors for me to do good and serve him in other capacities… I honestly don’t know what it will look like, and at this point in time I am choosing not to worry about it, just keep my eyes, mind and heart open to the possibilities ahead of me.
To address Paige Patterson’s concerns, I don’t think that women can be held responsible for the lack of male presence in higher education. The answer is for men to encourage and mentor other men (as Paige Patterson did with my own brother, btw, encouraging him to apply to Southeastern Seminary and assuring him he would be able to get funding to attend), not to attack other women. And both men and women alike need to be open and respectful and supportive of women who balance families and careers, and actually stop and listen to what *that* particular women is feeling led to do, and support her on an individual basis as a sister in Christ without reverting to this “the sky is falling” mentality and placing the burden of the downfall of the “idealized family” on her.
August 4, 2007 at 3:08 am
I don’t think this can be answered with a hard and fast yes or no answer.
But, generally speaking I think the answer most of the time will lean to the yes category. I’m thinking in terms of a career position that is full time employment that may often involve extra time commitment in addition to as well.
Recently a female elementary school principal in my town died. She had been in the education field for nearly thirty years and had amassed many accomplishments to her credit. Her obituary was long and glorifying. As I read it I felt so sad that she had focused the best of her time and energy on her career, and her husband and two teenage children got what was left over…which couldn’t have been much.
A friend of mine teaches at the school where she was principal and said she was a driven lady, living on caffeine and nicotine for all those very early and very late hours that she regularly put in.
No one would question her professional accomplishments. But I have to wonder…how much time did she give to her family?
I also base my answer partly on my own experience growing up. My mom did not work until I started fifth grade, then she went to work at a full time, second shift job, which she stayed at for five years. I saw her in the mornings before school (which often turned into somewhat of a battle time over this or that) and weekends. That meant that she was not there when I walked home from school (if it rained I got wet) and wasn’t there to have supper with us. I often went to a friends house that I wasn’t suppose to go to, but she never knew that. This girl was bad news. Praise God I didn’t follow along with all the things she wanted me to do with her.
Did our family need the money? I suppose any extra income would’ve helped a working class family like ours, but I would’ve preferred to have my mom at home after school and evenings.
I’ve also had friends whose mothers worked and they said things like, “you don’t know what it is like to be sick at school and not be able to have your mom come and get you.”
All that said, yes, I know there are situations where mothers HAVE to work full time, and also situations where mothers maintain some type of part time employment, perhaps as a much needed income supplement, or perhaps as a way of staying current in their career field.
But, generally speaking, I think if a mom has a full time career outside of the home, the family will fall into some cracks at some point.
What is the quote that was made by Barbara Bush she gave in a graduation address at a prestigious women’s college some years back?…something to the effect that when you come to the end of your life, you won’t think about how much more time you wish you would’ve spent at the office. You’ll think about how much more time you should’ve spent with your family. Good words to think about, I’d say.
Susie
August 4, 2007 at 6:13 am
My mom started working part-time (as a school nurse at my school) when I was in 4th grade. I think because her job was right where I was, I never felt bothered by it at all. If anything, we were around her *more* because of her work than before.
I think that sort of thing is a great solution for a parent who really struggles with full-time caregiving of their children (which is valid—caregiving solo is intensely exhausting!) or who needs to help with a little extra income, yet doesn’t want to sacrifice the children’s well-being in the process.
I personally feel that children, especially the young ones, need their parents. It can be mom or dad—either one is great, but when their primary caregiver is someone else during the main hours of the day, I think ample studies show that children *do* suffer, particularly the very young.
So it’s my personal belief that when one has children, one of the parents needs to choose to be with them instead of out in the workforce. It is usually easiest to have it be mom in the early years, due to breastfeeding, but there’s nowhere in the Bible that says it has to STAY mom.
It’s a product of the Industrial Revolution, this idea that Dad goes away all day long and Mom stays home by herself and does all the childrearing.
During Bible times, this was NOT the way things worked. Most families had a family business/trade or worked a farm, kids working WITH parents when they were old enough to help, etc.
Also, families generally lived in the same area, so kids had parents, aunts, uncles, grandmas, etc, in their neighborhood as the norm. Homes weren’t in the suburbs, either, the way we think of neighborhoods today—then, for those who lived in the safety of the city, you were generally surrounded with neighbors and everyone knew everyone.
So this supposedly “Biblical” concept that Mom is the one home with the kids as their constant caregiver while Dad is away from home 10 hours a day is NOT actually “Biblical” at all but something that has happened to families AFTER the Industrial Revolution introduced the concept of factory labor, and also after motorized vehicles provided humans with the ability to work far from home, as well as move far from home and relatives.
That said, I admit that it really bothers me when parents choose full-time daycare over one of them being home with their young child/ren.
I used to work in daycares in college, and also a year as a nanny. I did a great job. But I never *loved* the children like a mother or father does—and they would have much rather been with their parents, no matter how much fun I was to be wtih. I remember it profoundly impressing me—that by working in childcares (the top two best ones in my large city, no less!), I learned that I did NOT want to put my kids in childcare, EVER.
I think that parents need to remember that the children are the “weak” ones—easy to take advantage of, easy to forget the very real needs of (emotional, not just physical), easy to dominate and manipulate. It is easy to forget them—they do not have the voice that we have, they do not understand what is going on in them emotionally and can’t explain their feelings, can’t explain why they are hurting (they don’t even know themselves).
It is easy to think that our decisions don’t effect them because they seem to be doing okay, but it’s important for us to take the time to stop and really listen—and really care about what they say.
So, yeah, it’s easy to take advantage of children but Christians are different. We are called to take care of the weak, to put ourselves in the shoes of those around us and to love them with the love of God.
Since we know that children thrive best with loving parents, it makes sense to me to forgo all the various careers I could have (and would have) enjoyed for now, while I provide our children with a parent that can be there for them, “full-time.” I’m enjoying working on my degree online (and have plans for continued distance eduation after that)…who knows, maybe I’ll have my PhD by the time my kids are in their teens-lol!
But while I work on my degree, I know that I’m not going to be career-building any time soon. As much as I’d sometimes love a break from the overwhelmingness of caregiving for 5 stair-stepper children and would love being out in the community more than I am, I know that I could never do it with a clear consiounce. It would be fun for me, but the children would be the ones that would pay the price.
Long Winded, As Usual,
Molly
August 5, 2007 at 1:08 am
Well said, Molly.
August 5, 2007 at 5:01 pm
If the family doesn’t suffer, then the mother often ends up suffering.
When I worked out at what was supposed to be a part time job, I was so determined not to let things slack on the family end.
The mental gymnastics I did, the physical exhaustion I put my body into, the emotional wear and tear, the list can go on! I felt close to a break down when I quit.
Then I had to go through the anger my husband had toward me after I quit. For us there were financial concerns but I had no choice. No amount of money was worth what I was going through.
Now my husband is better about the financial side of things but he still thinks I should be able to perform at the same level of manic activity that I managed to maintain for 3 years.
What he doesn’t realize easily is that I’ve put out so much that even 1 year after quitting I just don’t have it in me!
So in my experience, the family may not show suffering. The family maybe able to juggle things just so that the kids are always with a parent, the food is always home cooked, the volunteering happens, the laundry is done, the house is spotless, appointments are kept and nothing seems amiss; but ultimately someone is likely falling through the cracks!
August 7, 2007 at 4:41 pm
Songbirdy, what you say is backed up 100% by recent research — women almost always spend the same amount of time with their children no matter how many hours they work. What gets lost is sleep, household management and relaxation time. So women literally shave years off their lives. When a family has children and both spouses work the same amount of hours, women always spend more time with the children and still do upwards of 70% of the household duties. Read the “Mommy Myth” or, even better, “The Cost of Motherhood.” Excellent read by a prize-winning economist. A huge part of the problem is that the American society and legal system doesn’t provide a way for women to have children without sacrificing career. We have the longest workweek of any industrial nation and the smallest amount of childleave and none that is paid. In my experience, I feel that our churches’ view of motherhood is all sentimentality — they put a Victorian, romanticized model of motherhood ona pedestal and then expect you to pull the mind-numbing, energy-sucking 10 hour shifts on your own and heaven forbid if you miss church!
Anyway, that was slightly a rant, sorry. (THis is experience still has me reeling somewhat; my son is only 6 months old!=)
One thing I feel is never discussed when this topic comes up is how our lives outside of the home enrich us as wives and mothers. That what we do as individuals gives us more to contribute to our community. There’s research showing that the more educated a woman is, the more intensive quality time she spends with her children. IOW, just because a woman is at home with her children doesn’t mean she’s actually doing worthwhile things with them. Oprah and screaming at the kids or leaving htem in the crib to cry does not count! Women who are educated understand better how to teach and how to model a thoughtful and productive life. I’m not working right now because we believe that me being home was the best for our situation and for our son, but I”m certainly not against it. If we had family nearby or someone to watch him that we really trusted and could afford, I would love to work some!
All that being said, I think an important thing for all of us, whether working and wishing we could be home or at home wishing to get out, to practict contentment. It’s been exciting to experience God’s creativity in ministering to me as my lifestyle changes.
P.S. Interesting that Dr. Patterson makes these comments as opposing research is coming out, at least concerning marriage! http://www.mcclatchydc.com/staff/frank_greve/story/16476.html
October 30, 2007 at 6:20 pm
I work part time. 7 days on and 7 days off. I work as a nurse caring for the elderly in long term and transitional care settings. I work evenings, and my husband works nights.
Together we cover everything. It’s not easy, and I would love to be home more. But my children are really spoiled. They have to have the American dream. You know, food, clothes, a roof over their head, and electricity. We don’t often go out, we forgo the extras we could afford if I worked full time. But I must work if we are to eat.
I think God has provided for us by allowing me a job that I only have to work part time at.
But I do believe that the work I do enriches me. My work is my ministry. I help those who can no longer help themselves, and in doing so am able to minister to Christ. My work is a gift to me, and a blessing. I have no doubt that my children see that.