There seems to be a theme in the anti- comments here that you’re either properly looking after your kids by staying at home or you’re in the workforce and anyone who wants more women in the workforce is therefore ignoring The Kids and saying parenting is not real work. The figures suggest, in fact, that most families manage both parenting and paid employment. Again, the issue here is whether we provide incentives for mothers to remain at home or encourage them to work - at whatever level is appropriate given the age of their children and their family circumstances.

But I suspect I can say that till I’m blue in the face and parenting fundamentalists will still complain I’m attacking at-home mothers. Stay at home mothers are great. I just don’t believe in giving them even more money than they get now.

Bernard, you ask why state-at-home mums should be rewarded with paid maternity leave equivalent to working mums. Are they being rewarded? Aren’t they just being treated equally?

A better question to ask is why should stay-at-home mums be punished with no paid maternity leave.

http://www.crikey.com.au/Budget-08/20080516-Labor-ignore-stay-at-home-mums.html

Whilst at home caring for my children I make muffins, but I also work as a volunteer in the community sector (ironically working to improve policy affecting women and children). I find my unpaid work very challenging (sometimes days I would gladly walk-out). I know however that on balance I am doing the best thing for everyone concerned (including me). Until there is a considerable culture shift (that acknowledges the pressure of the unpaid-paid work juggle and the value of working mothers) educated women will continue to work well below their capacity.
Muffins and nappy changing muddles along with writing the odd grant application or policy document. For me raising our future and helping improve our community (as a volunteer) beats the hell out of ‘settling’ for a dodgy but flexible job, putting up with substandard child care and living on junk food because I was too damn tired.
I would love to combine my unpaid/paid work, but entrenched misogyny prevents this.

I fail to see how you arrive at the idea of for ever importing skilled workers. as being a good idea. Why can’t we produce them ourselves? Some day, in the future, when you appreciate that Melbourne and Sydney have a population of 9 million people- making Victoria a coast to coast housing estate-I hope you will arrive at the conclusion that the term Populate and Perish had some merit.

Two things:

1. I don’t write the headlines, as I’ve explained previously, and I too complained about the superfluous apostrophe.

2. I don’t recall urging that all mothers work full-time. The definition of employment is 1 hour a week. Between that and full-time there’s a variety of possible balances between employment and childcare by both parents and external providers. All of them are better than a stay-at-home mothers whose skills atrophy while the economy cries out for workers.

And Jessica, you’re very welcome. Or were you being sarcastic when you thanked me? In which case, yes, put your child to work sweeping chimneys or selling matches. We need more productive workers and taxpayers, especially in low-skilled occupations. Failing that, I understand kids taste delicious baked with some paprika and a little chicken stock.

Sarcasm - it’s SOOO hilarious.

Either a couple budgets properly and to do it or they don’t. Why should taxpayers (the government isn’t some faceless patriarch with a bottomless wallet IT IS THE TAXPAYERS) pay for your decision to have children?

If we want to make women between the ages of 20 and 45 unemployable, then by all means - - let’s also dump the burden of other people’s choices on business owners. Sheesh!