Recent studies on academia and parenthood

Two recent studies on parenthood and academia have turned up some interesting findings (h/t Feministe).

The first study is entitled “Alone in the Ivory Tower: How Birth Events Vary Among Fast-Track Professionals” and is by Nicholas Wolfinger (University of Utah), Mary Ann Mason (UC Berkeley), and Marc Coulden (UC Berkeley).  It compares academics to professionals in other fields, tracking households with children aged one or younger, and found that academics were much less likely than other professionals to have had a child recently, and that women were less likely than men to have had a child recently:

The study, based on 2000 Census data, finds that academics are the least likely to have experienced recent birth events, and that the gap is greatest for women. (Physicians are most likely to have had children recently, and lawyers are in the middle.)

[...]

One factor that makes it easier for the male doctors to have recent offspring is that, in addition to earning more than professors, the M.D.’s are less likely to have child-care needs. That’s because male doctors are almost twice as likely to have spouses out of the labor force as are male academics (40 percent vs. 22 percent). In another sign of the impact of academic careers on parenthood, male professionals whose wives are physicians or lawyers are disproportionately likely to have had recent birth events, while male professionals whose wives are academics do not have any greater than average chance of new parenthood.

The second study is the COSWA Academic Climate Report 2008, which can be read here.  It finds

Key differences were found with regard to work/home balance: men in the field are more likely to be parents, but women are more likely to be more responsible for child care or other family obligations. For instance, of men who experienced a career interruption, 7.4 percent cited child care as the reason and 3.7 percent cited the experience of being a “trailing spouse,” one who moves when a partner is hired elsewhere. Of women who experienced career interruptions, 22.9 percent cited child care and 9.1 percent cited being a trailing spouse. And women were much more likely (52.9 percent to 5.6 percent) to anticipate a future career interruption due to child care responsibilities.

Check out the article.  Note also the interesting comparisons of percentages of white and non-white academics with children from the COSWA report in the table at the bottom of the article.

–IP

Cameron calls for abortions to be made less accessible

The UK’s Conservative Party leader David Cameron called for the time limit on abortions to be cut from 24 weeks to 20:

Cameron told the Daily Mail: “I would like to see a reduction in the current limit, as it is clear that, due to medical advancement, many babies are surviving at 24 weeks.

“If there is an opportunity in the human fertilisation and embryology bill, I will be voting to bring this limit down from 24 weeks.

So David Cameron thinks abortions should be made less accessible, despite medical opinion to the contrary.

“For example, both the British Medical Association and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists have said they do not believe there is a case for changing the time limits for abortion.”

Interestingly,

In 2006, 1,262 abortions were carried out at 22 weeks or later. Around 194,000 abortions were carried out altogether.

That’s 0.7% of abortions carried out at 22 weeks or later — a tiny tiny fraction of all abortions. The anti-abortion lobby likes to imply that late-term abortions are common, when in fact they are extremely rare, and frequently performed in cases of medical emergency. Late term abortions are medically necessary procedures.

You can write to David Cameron here and point out to him that cutting the time limit on abortions will endanger women’s lives, and is contrary to medical opinion. For more information about the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, please go here. Please consider writing to your MP and asking them to protect access to abortion if/when ammendments are offered to the the bill.

–IP

Because kids are important

See what I did there? I gave you an answer before the question.

The other day I saw someone with a sticker that had a picture of a baby on it and “I’m not a choice, I’m a child” printed over it. And I thought about how simple that made having a kid sound. As if it’s easy, as if everyone has the practical, financial, or psychoemotional means to raise a kid. As if raising a kid is something everyone does effortlessly.

Well there’s a lie and a half. And while I wouldn’t want to pre-empt my parents or put words in their mouths, I’m reasonably certain that if I phoned my parents and said “Mami, Papi, wasn’t bringing me up effortlesly easy and cheap and utterly risk-free?” their response might be more along the lines of “Have you totally and irrevocably lost your marbles?” than “Of course it was, sweetheart.”

At some point I will probably want to have kids of my own. And if/when I do, I want to be in a position such that I can provide for them properly, and be as good a parent as possible. I take kids seriously, and in my experience, so do the vast majority of women. Seriously enough to say “I want the best for my kids, and that means a good mother capable of looking after kids.” And because I take kids that seriously, there are probably going to be times in my life when I’m not going to be in a position that I consider to be an acceptable one for raising a child. In those situations, having a child would be irresponsible both for the child and for me, if I didn’t have the resources to look after me or the kid. So it’s really no surprise that this study found that concern for future and existing children is a key reason given by women as a reason for having an abortion (hat tip: Feministe).

And hey, I’m also concerned about my own wellbeing, and I don’t think that’s selfish. Because if my health and wellbeing go to pot I’m going to have a seriously hard time taking good care of my kids, which ain’t fair on me or on the kids.

I’ve said it before and I’ve said it again: no one is better able than I am to judge whether I’d make a good parent. And no one cares whether I’d make a good parent more than I do. Because if I have kids, I have to actually be a good parent, which isn’t easy. So-called “pro-life” policies deny medically-necessary options to women, endanger their health and wellbeing, endanger the health and wellbeing of potential or existing children, and override the opinion of the people who are best placed to assess the effects of parenthood on their own or their other kids’ health and wellbeing: women. It’s that simple.

The question was: why do you vote pro-choice? Tomorrow is Blog for Choice Day, the 35th anniversary of Roe.

Image description: An image of someone typing in the background and the words ‘Blog for Choice Day January 22, 2008′”

–IP

Maternity leave for high school students

Students are requesting maternity leave from a Denver high school:

Pregnant students in a Denver high school are asking for at least four weeks of maternity leave so they can heal, bond with their newborns and not be penalized with unexcused absences.

The request is unusual in Colorado’s public schools, where districts tend to deal with pregnant students or new moms with specialized programs or individualized education plans.

Denver Public Schools has no districtwide policy, leaving it up to schools to work out plans for students to continue their education.

Two counselors from East High School approached the school board last month, saying the policy at their school is unfair and inconsiderate because it forces new moms to return to school the day after being discharged from the hospital or face being charged with unexcused absences.

In a lot of US high school districts, a certain number of unexcused absences leads to automatic disciplinary action, including detention, suspension, and failure.  So in practice, the accumulation of unexcused absences often forces many high school mothers to drop out of school — a state of affairs that is utterly inexcusable, in my humble opinion.

 Teen mothers face a challenging future, with many dropping out. A third of teen moms receive their high-school diplomas and 1.5 percent get college degrees before they turn 30, according to the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy.

Well those numbers are pretty telling.

(Hat tip to Bitch PhD, who got it from Lawyers, Guns, and Money.)

–IP

Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill does not itself deal with abortion, but is presenting an opportunity for amendments concerning abortion rights to be tabled.

From Abortion Rights UK:

the government’s Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill is speeding through the Lords. Although the Bill itself does not address abortion, it is expected that anti-abortion Peers and/or MPs will table a number of damaging amendments to restrict women’s rights to abortion. In addition pro-choice MPs are expected to table amendments to improve the law for women.

The Bill has already had its First and Second Readings in the House of Lords on 7th and 19th November respectively.

A stream of anti-abortion Peers took part in the debate and attacked current rights with pro-choice Peers speaking in defence of the 1967 Abortion Act. Pro-choice MPs are planning to table amendments to improve the law during the course of the Bill in the Commons.

Follow the link for more info. Amendments concerning abortion that are expected to be tabled include reducing the time limit on abortions, imposing a “cooling off” period and mandatory counselling for women seeking abortions, the removal of the need for two doctors’ signatures, permitting access to abortion in Northern Ireland, and removing the need for certifications to be sent to the Department of Health for all abortions.

If you are a UK citizen, please consider writing to your MP and urging them to protect women’s health by supporting those amendments that would improve access to abortions on demand (eg, by removing the need for two doctors’ signatures), and urging them to oppose the amendments that would restrict access to abortion (eg, the “cooling off” period and mandatory counselling).  Abortion rights has a model letter and advice on writing to your MP, here.

Hat tip:  Winter at Mind the Gap.

–IP

Why contraception ain’t just my headache

Fun stuff comes with responsibilities. That means that if a lad doesn’t want to be paying child support or actively participating regularly in the upbringing of their kid, then that lad better be part of the responsibility as far as contraception is concerned.

Out of biological necessity and the limitations of medicine, most contraception more sophisticated than condoms usually involves the woman doing something, eg, the woman remembering to take a pill, or the woman having a hormone injection, or whatever. These treatments are not risk-free, and may have unwanted side effects. In a lot of cases, doctors don’t know what the risks and side effects will be, especially when it comes to long-term use.

And when contraception fails, the bloke involved better be prepared to contribute to the cost or logistics of emergency contraception or abortion. Why? Because he’ll have to deal with the consequences too if the contraception-failure results in a baby.

This should be obvious, but the number of times I’ve heard men and women comment that they expect women to take the responsibility for protecting herself from pregnancy if she doesn’t want kids, and that if her efforts fail, the man is not in any way responsible. Even worse is the often-heard expectation that men will flat-out refuse to use condoms so it’s pointless to even suggest it, and women should instead take responsibility for finding contraceptive methods such as the pill that men don’t have to participate in.

Quite frankly, my attitude to that is that any bloke who wants to fuck without any having to take any responsibility for the potential consequences of fucking, is too selfish and irresponsible to be worth fucking. Men with this attitude of are putting their partner’s health at risk without any consideration for the fact that they are doing so.

That said, the choice of contraceptive method that a couple will use may boil down to what the woman wants if the contraceptives she’s picking from are ones that affect her body. Why? Because most contraceptives are not carry health-related side effects and risks that the woman has to deal with, so the decision as to whether she will use that method is her decision (and equally, the decision of whether or not a man is going to have a vasectomy is the man’s decision because it’s his body).

That’s why, when the Existentialist and I decided that the mini-pill wasn’t the best contraceptive method for me, because it limits the preventative medicines I can take for migraines, may in fact be contributing to my migraines, and potentially carries unknown health risks if used long-term. I decided that I didn’t want to take hormonal contraception, and he supported my decsion. And after I had the coil put in yesterday and was feeling all achey and horrible, the Existentialist looked after me, and made me a hot water bottle, and a yummy supper of comfort food, aka roast duck. As it happens, when I got to his place, he had a headache, so while he was making me a cup of tea, I made him a cup of chicken stock. How’s that for egalitarian?

–IP

Links for your reading pleasure

1. Acceptance of transgenderedness depends on being seen as ill:
   

   “It’s a Catch-22,” O’Donnabhain said. “I have to accept the stigma of being labeled as having a disorder [or] a mental condition … in order to get benefits. I haven’t liked this diagnosis from the very beginning. But I’ve got to play the game.”

2. “Experts” tell women when to have babies:
   

   Egg freezing should not be offered to women who want to put off having a family purely for lifestyle reasons, say experts.

   …An increasing number of women are choosing to freeze their eggs for social reasons in the hope they will be able to have a child when they are older.

   Critics argue they are delaying motherhood for the wrong motives, such as climbing the career ladder or until they have more money.

   Dr Marc Fritz, of the ASRM, said it would be wrong for women who have frozen their eggs to think they had ensured their future fertility.

   So, the idea is that freezing eggs is not a guarantee that women will be able to have kids. That’s fine. But instead of doctors warning women that freezing their eggs is not a guarantee of being able to have kids, and letting women make up their own minds as to whether that’s a risk that they want to take, “experts” are saying that women shouldn’t have the option because women make “bad” choices, like having jobs. (And to hear these experts talk about how wanting earning money is a “bad” lifestyle choice, you’d think raising kids was free.)

3. An earth-like planet may have water
4. A radio play of Douglas Adams’s “Dirk Gently’s Holistic Detective Agency” is on Radio 4. Listen Again is a wonderful thing.

–IP