(http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/archive/00080/irisevans_new_80223gm-a.jpg)
lol she looks like she still uses branches from outside to 'put the kids in line'
--------
[span class="first-letter"]C[/span]ontroversial comments on parenting made by Alberta Finance Minister Iris Evans in Toronto have triggered a spirited and emotional debate in her home province. [/p] Ms. Evans, a divorced mother of three grown children, told a business audience yesterday that, to raise children "properly", one parent should stay at home while the other earns a living.
[/p] In a Wednesday speech on Alberta's economy to the Economic Club of Canada in Toronto, Ms. Evans said good parenting means sacrificing some income to stay at home while kids are young, as her children have done. [/p] "They've understood perfectly well that when you're raising children you don't both go off to work and leave them for somebody else to raise," Ms. Evans said. "This is not a statement against daycare. It's a statement about their belief in the importance of raising children properly."
[/p]In a tangent at the end of a speech on Alberta's economy to the Economic Club of Canada in Toronto, Iris Evans also went on to suggest a lack of education is linked to mental illness and crime.[/p]
[/p][a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/raising-kids-properly-means-one-parent-at-home-alberta-minister-says/article1186366/"]http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/raising-kids-properly-means-one-parent-at-home-alberta-minister-says/article1186366/[/a]
[/p]--------------------------[/p]heeeee haaaaaa[/p]So presumably mothers should stay home? Well then why the heck is she working? Oh and she's divorced, I bet that went well with the kiddos.
[/p]
Where economically possible, I'm all in favour of this i.e. at least until the children are of a reasonably advanced age/competance.
But its not possible, and not everyone wants to stay at home.
Presumably this is geared toward mothers. (Yet she's working...)
What helps the kids more?
Staying at home and providing?
or
Working and providing so your kids can have a better life?
give you an example of a) and b)
Its the 21st century, university is no longer cheap. Parents still think its possible to work and go to school because "that's what we did" (dynamics between the 60s and 70s are way different now)
Someone my parents knew in university decided to be a stay at home mother. She had a good job, but didn't have the motivation.
Her son (my age) got into a nationally high profile university in Washington D.C. He wants to go into politics, this is a politically connected school.
He couldn't go, family is only on one income, if the mother had worked, he'd be going. Now he goes to Indiana University
b) University comes around, you get in, you're parents are able to afford it as they've got two incomes. You end up going further than person A just due to economic life choices of the parents.
option A only works if you come from money.
Post-Modern family life is run like a team now especially when you get older. You can't live in the world of A where there's a breadwinner and that's it. Life doesn't work that way anymore even in rural areas. Nobody stays at home anymore in the rural life, both parents work.
I was speaking idealistically.
Ah, well there's ways to do it. You can always work from home.
Just today when I hear 'stay at home' its a code word for me that says "I don't trust public schools.." and then religion, multiculturalism, science, gay agenda, sex ed, whatever the loons think of.
just like 'states rights'
All good points......something all parents should have thought about before producing a kid that they cannot adequately provide for
I'm with you Gophie and 49er. Of course it's not always possible...but ideally....I agree.
Totally.
49er wrote:
All good points......something all parents should have thought about before producing a kid that they cannot adequately provide for
Absolutely!!! That would happen in an ideal society. It's just too bad some folks can't think beyond tomorrow.