Wednesday, April 20, 2005

this woman is taking some serious heat

but with good reason - her letter filled me with dismay. Mostly for myself, selfishly. I'd go NUTS if I coulnd't leave my kids even for an hour.

Here are the letters in response, and most of them are right on.

If your children freak out so much that you truly cannot even take a shower by yourself, you and the children have issues. Kids need to be loved and paid attention to, and they need to feel that they are the center of your universe, but at the same time (and here's where parenting gets tricky), they need to learn that there are other people who love and care for them other than Mom. Dad is a great guy to be with, and perfectly competent (and in our case, *much better* than Mom at handling some things). The babysitter coming over can be loads of fun. And Mom and Dad really love each other - which can also be tricky to work out if you can't even leave the kids to take a shower, let alone dinner out or a quiet cup of coffee.

I will be the first to admit that in the first three or so months so of each baby's life, I too carried the car seat into the bathroom with me while I showered. But truly, that was mostly because I didn't want to waste his nap time showering when I could be sleeping too. Well, and also because I was terrified the kid would stop breathing if he was out of my sight for more than a minute - but I have relaxed considerably. The third'll probably accompany me to the bathroom for the first few months - he'll have two older brothers who might not understand fully the concept of playing with the baby gently, etc. But all in good time (and well before the age of two) I can justify running into the shower for six minutes, with the bathroom door open, while the baby plays with Si and Jude, or hangs in his crib. And I can certainly justify a babysitter.

I am a person too, with needs of my own, and if there's one thing we have all learned all too well in the past four years, it's that if Mama is miserable, everyone is miserable, and that's no good. If Mama is somewhat happy, it's better for everyone and Mama then can be the best Mama she can be. Which, you know, is sort of the whole goal of the exercise.

2 comments:

Gina said...

I agree with you wholeheartedly that no one is happy if Mom isn't, and I'm sure BB from Salon would agree too. But I wonder if she really *is* miserable--she doesn't seem to mind not having any time to herself.

I don't know . . . I agree with the readers who assert that she's being irresponsible towards her husband, and that she's doing a disservice to the kids in not letting them latch on properly to their dad, but . . .

I don't know. Maybe she's just different. Maybe having her world revolve around her babies is the best thing for her, for now.

I guess I have my own issues with this, because I feel like it's a judgement I can't make.

BabelBabe said...

Even if she is happy - and I am not sure she entirely is, I really felt that the woman who stated that the letterwriter was ignoring her glamorous past in order to not realize what she'd given up hit the nail on the head. But even if she is happy, she's setting those kids up for some serious issues. I know you did the attachment parenting thing, and Teddy is a fine boy, but you can leave him to go shower. Heck you can even leave him for an afternoon or evening. He's independent (enough for a kid his age). Her kids will not be. I don't mean to sound judgmental, I'm sorry. I just feel pretty sorry for those kids and the poor woman's husband who has clearly been marginalized and ignored.