 |
|
This discussion is closed. This is a transcript.
Oh, babies!Author: Colloquy ModeratorDate: 02-20-03 17:29 An article in the new issue of The Chronicle examines how an academic department at Ithaca College is responding to a situation in which three of eight tenure-track faculty members were due to have babies within a short time frame. The article explores the responsibilities of colleges and people taking family leaves for handling the responsibilities of those on leave. Many colleges have few formal policies for handling such situations, resulting in those taking leaves having to plan for their absences, and their colleagues having to assume extra work. But some academics believe that the lack of formal policies results in unfair pressure on those having children, many of whom are also working to win tenure. Do colleges do enough to help departments with professors on family leaves? Whose responsibility is it to plan for such leaves? Read more ... Re: Oh, babies! Author: molly mfume, prof. emeritus, Univ. of Portland Date: 02-21-03 15:39 Whose responsibility is it to plan for such leaves? Simple. The person having the baby. It is NOT the responsibility of a university to coddle faculty. The faculty member was hired to teach, and in at least the scientific, math, and engineering fields required to conduct research. Both tenure and promotion require this. If a faculty member is having a baby, I see no problem in stopping the tenure/promotion clock until they return. However, I believe the following two constraints have to be applied: 1. The university cannot reduce the standards for tenure and promotion during the pregnancy. For example, if the standards for tenure is 2 publications per year, then 2 publications per year is what is still required of the expectant mother. If 2 publications is not achieved, then a negative report should be put in the tenure file---just as it would for a man who did not get 2 publications in a year. 2. The university cannot make any accommodations during or after the pregnancy. For example, the expectant mother should not receive a reduced teaching load, reduced committee assignments, additional teaching assistants, etc. If the expectant mother cannot carry the same load as a man, then she should take medical leave. The tone of the article bothers me. It implies pregnant women are "entitled" to special dispensation. The decision to get pregnant was theirs, and the university should make no special accommodations with respect to workload or productivity expectations. If the faculty member cannot pull her weight, then she should take medical leave. That's what is was designed for. But under no circumstances should a university allow the faculty member to keep the tenure clock running with a reduced requirement. That would be unfair to the other faculty. Re: Oh, babies! Author: ed. prof Date: 02-21-03 18:19 I'm taking the hard line approach on this one. Having kids is a choice, not a "right." Yes I believe in the importance of family. But just because I do not have children doesn't make me or others like me (who are childless by choice) excluded from those with families. My husband and I are a family. We do not get special treatment or extensions on our work deadlines. We have got to get away from this idea of having kids=special treatment. Re: Oh, babies! Author: anon Date: 02-22-03 08:32 I agree that a family is not necessarily adult(s)+ kids. I also agree that people in tenure track positions should not be coddled (weren't we just discussing coddeling our students?). But...I do think that there are times for special treatment. I am sure that if your husband needed extra attention due to a serious illness you would be there to help him. If it is possible, the compassionate human beings with whom you work would probably help, knowing that you are a productive person, and you will be again. One of the questions in science, engineering, and mathmatics is "How do we get more women in the profession?" I think that the answer is to stop the tenure clock for a short period of time. That does not mean that the woman in question has to give up teaching (at least if she is getting paid). It does mean that if the department says you must average two papers a year to get tenure and the woman has been at the university for seven years with one year off the tenure clock, she should have 12 papers (not 14). Maybe women are asking to have their cake and eat it too by wanting tenure track jobs and children. Maybe universities are asking too much if they want people to give up their personal lives for 50-60k/year. This is a complex issue and I am not sure that there is a "right" answer. use birth control Author: Lisa Jenkins, Any University Date: 02-22-03 19:23 If I wished to take a few years off to sail around the world, I would not expect my university to make special plans to let me do so. Having babies is a choice -- already, people who have babies are getting tax breaks, getting hugely discounted insurance (forcing those more reproductively responsible to subsidise them), and often getting to slack off work for some 15 years using children as an excuse to reschedule meetings and avoid heavy committee work. This is NOT a women's issue -- it is a matter concerning a specific group of people taking advantage of the rest of their department. It also causes problems for more responsible women -- it is simply assumed that *all* women will behave badly over this issue because of a small irresponsible minority. While there are some women who combine child rearing and teaching in a responsible fashion, many don't. Re: Oh, babies! Author: Not yet a Ph.D. Date: 02-22-03 21:28 I'm not sure that the comparison to caring for a seriously ill family member in "Anon's"post is fair. The big difference here is that pregnancies can be planned (to a certain degree) and family members' serious illnesses aren't. It's the same criterion for planned/unplanned circumstances that many of us apply towards student excuses. If Jill Student's grandmother dies (and she brings in an obituary), then we bend over backwards to help. If Jill Student is planning to enter the Miss College Coed pageant on a certain date, then she doesn't get an excused absence from class. I'd have no problem covering for a colleague dealing with horrendous unplanned problems. But judging from what I've seen as a graduate student, sometimes the assumption from the pregnant professor is that her colleagues will only be all too happy to do this when sometimes they aren't. The article on the Ithaca department referred to the "plan" that one of the pregnant professors devised - in part, "Her colleagues and outside guest speakers could cover her courses." (for a time) It is unclear from the article whether she actually [i] asked [/i] her colleagues for this gigantic favor or whether she only assumed. Re: Oh, babies! Author: Sandra L. Herndon, Professor, Ithaca College Date: 02-23-03 11:44 The main point of the prompting article seems to be overlooked. That is, what support should an academic *department* get when one or more of its members goes on maternity leave (or other medical leave, for that matter)? As a member of the department featured in the article, I can attest that the issue for us was not about "special treatment" for our pregnant colleagues. It was about finding a way to address the implicit expectation of the academy that *we* would perform unpaid labor during their legitimate absence. In this instance, our dramatic problem was ultimately resolved by benevolent administators, but this is not a policy nor a plan for the future. Even if a department had only one colleague on medical leave, the principle is the same--who picks up the classes? Some institutions have a policy of granting a semester paid maternity leave--not out of altruism but rather to provide the department the ability to plan and maintain continuity for classes. It's probably no accident that such institutions are typically unionized. On a more general note, I am a parent (single parent for many years), a past department chair, and a faculty member for 25+ years. As chair, I juggled faculty meetings for single (male) parents and counseled faculty members regarding alcohol problems, medical concerns, and career plans. The point is--the academy is filled with real people with real lives. We should take the long view and work for equitable, workable, flexible solutions for all our colleagues. Re: Oh, babies! Author: Staff Person Date: 02-24-03 15:51 It seems to me that if employees want special "perks" for having a baby, then they should be responsible enough to schedule their baby having time, with their department. With Ithaca, had the three faculty agreed to the dates when each want to be with child, and scheduled these dates with the department, the department wouldn't be so shorthanded. I assume that these pregnancies were intentional, after all, one couldn't expect the department to cover mistakes made by faculty during their own time. planning babies? Author: Paula Martin, Assoc Prof,, Juniata College Date: 02-25-03 07:56 Tenure-track faculty are real people with real lives. Pregnancy and child-rearing are just a selection of the challenges faced by human beings. Any institution that hires people ultimately must deal with these human challenges, as Ithaca and UCDavis are doing. It would be wonderful to 'schedule' the illness of a parent or 'schedule' the rupture of an appendix for convienent times. It is of course not possible. Pregnancies cannot always be scheduled, especially for those in an age bracket of declining fertility (e.g., >30). Let's not discriminate against females who want to work and have children. Should tenure-track positions be limited to those females who are willing to risk never conceiving? I should hope not. FYI: I am a female who chose years ago NOT to have children (for reasons completely unrelated to my position on the tenure track). "We are Family" Author: Michael McKenzie, Keuka College Date: 02-25-03 09:07 With apologies to the Pittsburgh Pirates, I suggest to those departments affected by unplanned leaves of absences (whether from pregnant females or laid-up males), that this issue be looked at from more of a familial perspective. As the Catholic principle of subsidiarity suggests, this issue is best treated at the lowest and most communal level possible. To come at the issue from a "labor vs. management" perspective is to neglect an opportunity to explore just what collegial might mean in this circumstance. To bring up questions of "Whose responsibility is this?" in the context of worrying about colleagues "unpaid labor" is to bring a college down to the level of a West Virginia coal mine. All of us do all sorts of "unpaid labor" and now and then we need to be reminded that being a college professor ranks as a fairly easy job when compared to 90% of the workforce. Those of us who can remember another kind of life, the rule of the timeclock, etc., probably realize this more easily than others. I would think that at all but the most dysfunctional institutions, there would be "benevolent administrators" that would step in if possible; but I would hope that collegiality would trump an adversarial stance, and that the immediate colleagues would be the first line of help. I have taught at institutions in which it was fairly common for colleagues to take LOAs--for all sorts of various legitimate reasons. Pregnancy is one of many legit reasons, and if this means that colleagues take overloads during this time, so be it. Surely, we can see the Golden Rule here. Ok, so Arnold is the only male to be "with child," but we males are likely to break down any minute. Ouch...was that my back? From two lakes over. Re: Oh, babies! Author: Steve Phillips Date: 02-25-03 10:02 The bitterness expressed in this forum against women who choose to have children is a little sad, and unrealistic. Every faculty member wants one special benefit or another--the perfect teaching schedule, avoiding committee assignments, a salary higher than anyone else at their rank, etc. There is nothing wrong with that. Help for mothers is a relatively new benefit, but let's not act as though we don't all seek to get whatever we can out of our departments and universities. Providing some assistance to expectant or new mothers is simply a smart way to keep good people on the faculty. Hiring someone who is the right "fit" for a department is not easy, and when we find an intelligent scholar/teacher who might be a co-worker for most of our careers we should do whatever it takes to keep them. As long as these faculty members are sympathetic to the concerns of those who do not have children, there should not be a great problem. Re: Oh, babies! Author: Karen Archambault-Crim, Grad Student/Trinity Coll, DC Date: 02-25-03 10:53 Certainly, colleagues of any person taking any leave are burdened by the increased responsibilities they face. Certainly as well, it is easier to shoulder those responsibilities when one feels that the person taking leave is facing their own burdens -- the death or illness of a family member, personal injury. Despite these difficulties, however, pregnancy and child birth are natural parts of life for both women and their families. Certainly, many women choose not to become parents. Saying that pregnancy is a choice should not suggest that those who become pregnant should not have the same leave capabilities (Family and Medical Leave Act for example) as those outside of the academy. To do otherwise is to perpetuate a standard that suggests that women are not truly and fully welcome into the University. Re: Oh, babies! Author: a faculty member Date: 02-25-03 11:04 I'm a little offended by the remarks made in one of the e-mails. A woman's decision to become pregnant is by choice but "planning" the "perfect time" to become pregnant (ie., so that one is due over the summer months and thus does not pose a problem to her department and university) is next to impossible for many women (especially those that are over 30 as one person stated in her post). I am a faculty member who put off having a family because of the Ph.D., etc. and then when I finally had the "time" to become pregnant, it almost didn't happen. As a healthy 32 year old I didn't think it would be a problem (especially since I have a very healthy husband) and I "planned" to become pregnant over the summer months so I wouldn't cause problems at my own institution. As it turns out, the "planning" took care of itself over a long, protracted ordeal when at some point we were about to give up the notion of having a child entirely because I could not become pregnant. I am happy to say that I am pregnant and due at the end of this semester so that I don't have to "inconvenience" my department or my institution. The fact that some people perceive pregnancy as an inconvenience in the first place is perhaps what bothers me the most. Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not advocating "special treatment" just because I'm pregnant (I'm teaching a full load, which at my institution is 4 courses per semester) and doing everything else that is expected of a faculty member at my institution, but I do believe that sometimes, circumstances arise (complications with pregnancy, etc.) when not everything can be "planned" perfectly so that no one is inconvenienced. After all, whether pregnant or not we are human beings and we lead lives outside of the ivory tower. Re: use birth control Author: Instructor, SUNY Date: 02-25-03 12:51 Frankly, I'm quite shocked at the general reaction here. Did women "choose" to be the sex that gestates? Is not academics having/adopting children a good thing? Any potential "special treatment" pales in comparison to the "chosen" responsibility of giving birth. The notion that a combination of child birth/care and an academic life is at best undesirable and at worst irresponsible smacks of a parochialism I thought to be long dead in academia. Pregnancy is not an abnormal medical condition; it's the base of our existence. And as such it should be woven into all levels of our social systems. This is, apparently, another case of the fictional "equal" playing field. We all know it doesn't exist, but some have a vested interest in retaining its integrity. Re: Oh, babies! Author: Shanon Date: 02-25-03 14:47 We do not get special treatment or extensions on our work deadlines. We have got to get away from this idea of having kids=special treatment. I don't expect special treatment for having children (I have a 5 yr old and a 3 yr old and I am in my first year as a full-time professor). I wouldn't have had children if I couldn't handle it. As a matter of fact, when I had my son, I was a grad assistant, and was back to coding video responses within six weeks, with my son next to me and the remote in my hand. I finished my doctoral course work while working a full-time job and raising toddlers, without any special treatment (and while my committee chair went through two pregnancies herself). I think we need to get away from the idea that academia=no personal life. I do much of my writing in the late evening, after my children are asleep. I have never missed a class or a faculty meeting due to my children. Yet, I feel guilty knowing some of my collegues are at the office all afternoon on Sunday while I am at home. Shouldn't there be *some* sort of balance between a personal and professional life? Re: use birth control Author: Patrick Jung Date: 02-25-03 14:51 Like the SUNY Instructor, I am also shocked at the reaction on this board. Just about every other profession makes allowances for pregnant women. Why should academe be any different. I read an article by a female professor a few years ago who noted that several other older women in her department, who were not married and did not have children, described their younger female colleagues in less than generous terms. According to this female professor, the older women in her department said that their pregnant colleagues chose the "mommy track" and thus "did not take their careers very seriously." Why would they describe their pregnant colleagues in such terms? Well, I have my opinions, but it illustrates that the prejudice against pregnant academics is not confined to men. Re: Oh, babies! Author: anonymous Date: 02-25-03 15:11 What a fertile field for discussion!! Re: Oh, babies! Author: ed. prof Date: 02-25-03 15:48 Okay, I sounded pretty harsh. I am in full support of well-defined leave policies and making things easier on workers in general. Life happens. Illness happens. However, since, as other posters have pointed out, this IS the twenty-first century, we have got to get away from the "parochial" idea that kids just "happen." These are human lives, not "accidents." In our era of birth control and rational family planning, can we not at least entertain the idea that we need to be putting some thought into planning families? I just don't see the logic in celebrating something that just about anyone with basic "equipment" can do, while ignoring the significance of raising the child one he/she is no longer in the "cute" stage (moms of teens get no special consideration, but watch the adoration flow for the mom of a newborn!) Being female is no longer an automatic equation for potential motherhood. Women have got to let go of this one-size-fits-all idea that motherhood is the #1 option for females and if you don't choose it, you still have to support it (as if you were somehow deviant or against the norm). Not all women want to have kids. Look at the popularity of birth control and declining family size. Things are changing. Having children is not the only social marker of having a personal life outside of academia. My husband and I are childless by choice, but we have an extremely leisurely and enjoyable life, albiet a busy one. Like the other posters, we have never understood folks who worked on Sundays when they didn't have to, or brownnosers of any kind. We don't have kids but, unbelieveable as it may seem, we are still involved in the world outside of work. So I say create a generic leave policy for EVERYONE, not just pregnant women. Re: Oh, babies! Author: Anonymous Grad Student Date: 02-25-03 16:01 There's one group that I think is being ignored here - the students. They are paying for an education, and when a professor has to leave in the middle of the semester to have a baby, the students are often left in the lurch. When a department is short-handed and unable to offer classes because faculty members are pregnant, students suffer. I'm a full time graduate student. I pay roughly $2500 for one three hour course. I had the misfortune to have a pregnant professor one semester. She cancelled class twice early in the semester because she had doctor's appointments. She was always late returning our homework, and every time she cited "baby issues". Her lectures were disjointed and she like to start the class by telling us inappropriate stories about her pregnancy experience. I would point out that this was a math-related course, and the subject matter was completely unrelated to babies. She went into premature labor and was unable to teach shortly after midterms. The class was given to a graduate student who was woefully unprepared. The entire course was a waste of money and time. Even worse, it left me and my fellow students unprepared for later classes since this class was a prerequisite for others. The professor never returned from maternity leave, and if she had I would have advised anyone who asked to avoid her like the plague. Unfortunately, she also taught a class that was required for graduation. The department didn't have anyone to cover for her the following semester and teach that course, so it wasn't offered. People had to postpone graduation because of the situation. Being a college professor is a job that has certain responsibilities, including teaching a course for an entire semester. Handing a course off to another teacher just isn't easy, and it provides a disservice to the students. My classmates and I spoke with the department head several times about this professor, but they were unable to do anything because she was pregnant, so we all had to suffer. Re: use birth control Author: M. Paulsen, University of Missouri-Rolla Date: 02-25-03 16:07 I find the majority of these responses downright embarrassing to academia, a place I have always (romantically, I'll admit) viewed as an island populated by educated, enlightened people in an otherwise deteriorating country. I recently had a child. I am a Lecturer, 50-75% time. I have been at the same institution for five and a half years. When I became pregnant, I went to one of the elder female members of our Department for advice. She was very gracious - offering to 'cover' my classes after the delivery (which luckily was anticipated to occur during Christmas break). I am (still) very grateful to her for those three weeks in January I spent at home with my newborn (I was home for exactly four weeks before returning to my normal schedule). When I described this to a close Canadian friend, she was horrified. She couldn't believe I went back to work so soon - and was amazed that I felt this offer both saved my position and allowed to me have a reasonable healing/bonding time. Childbirth is a natural thing...it is the most natural of things, as human beings. It is not a 'choice' in the sense of choosing a new car, as the tone of some of the other responses implies. Are we willing to alienate ourselves from this? It's almost as if we are willing to alienate ourselves from ourselves... to ed prof Author: anonymous Date: 02-25-03 16:13 Thank you for being clear on the issues YOU are dealing with that are really not other people's issues. We MUST put ourselves in the shoes of the "other," and understand the various perspectives that exist within organizations. THAT is how organizations change. Re: Past Posts Author: ed. prof Date: 02-25-03 17:12 I'll back off somewhat. I only used my own experiences to illustrate one set of viewpoints within academia. Since I am not a mind reader and since I cannot and will not speak for others, I only used my opinions for the purpose of adding to the discussion, much like the other posters did. I am still in favor of a general leave policy for the entire faculty. If this includes pregnancy, fine. I just don't see any reason to put a spotlight on it any more than any other reason for taking a leave. This discussion does bring up various intriguing questions: Is pregnancy really a "natural" state for women? How do organizations adapt to the inclusion of family leaves? Is tenure a family-friendly process to begin with? All interesting issues that we cannot avoid... Re: Oh, babies! Author: anonymous Date: 02-25-03 17:45 I would like to point out that much of the anger generated by this topic has nothing whatsoever to do with pregnant colleagues: it has to do with *irresponsible* colleagues and/or abusive administrations. There is no reason why someone should not be able to combine a successful academic life with a family life -- indeed many of us have chosen academe as a profession because it affords a certain flexibility (you may put in an 80 hour week, but to a large extent you choose the 80 hours). Stopping the tenure clock because of childbirth IS NOT "coddling". Let's be honest: there are lots of perks that come with tenure -- not the least of which is tenure! -- so the benefit conferred on the junior faculty member by stopping the tenure clock comes at a price. The problem of faculty -- both men and women -- using their responsibilities to their kids/parents/second job/commuting schedule as pretext for not fulfilling their contractual obligations *on a regular basis* is a real one, and one that needs to be dealt with. I think that we can all distinguish between the colleague who, for ten years, uses his school-aged kids as an excuse never to serve on a committee that meets after 2:30pm and the colleague who begs off committee work for a single semester because she's caring for a sick parent. But it's a mistake to conflate this with the "pregnant colleague" issue. And it's wrong for university administrations to expect departments to treat the staffing gap created by a pregnant colleague who has taken leave the way they would a contingency that could not have been planned for. The nice thing about newborn babies is that we know they're coming for about 9 months ahead of time. They can be planned for. And universities should plan for them. Re: Past Posts Author: Scandinavian Date: 02-25-03 18:29 As a Scandinavian woman, I find your reasoning unbelievable! I guess I will never understand Americans with viewpoints such as you -all this possibility for enlightenment and greatness in your country, yet you choose to cling to values from the dark ages. Re: Past Posts Author: old-fashioned feminist Date: 02-25-03 18:33 "Is tenure a family-friendly process to begin with?" Perhaps "family-friendly" should be redefined. In fact, define "family." My husband is tenure-track, and while I support him fully, he still works round the clock, and it still puts stress on our home life. It also means that our opportunities to have a family life with *our* parents, siblings, and other important relatives are extremely limited. We don't have and don't want children. Are we still as much a "family" as the proverbial Joneses next door with two kids and a dog? But my husband wants to do what he does, and I rarely complain, because he loves it and lives it. It's not just a job to him, it's his life's work. That's what scholarship, and in his case, science, is. You build your life around it. It's not something that you go in and do at eight am and then leave in your office at five to go home to your family. You dedicate yourself to the life of the mind, and your students are your posterity. What you can give them in terms of guidance and knowledge is a great deal more valuable than giving the world another copy of your DNA, cute and googly as it may be. I, on the other hand, had other interests I wanted to pursue (not including parenthood), and decided that an academic career was not for me. I made a reasoned choice. Parenting is an incredibly difficult job, and so is being a scholar and a teacher and a good colleague, and you just can't do both with any degree of true excellence, unless your spouse is willing to be a primary caregiver (and that's often a very good solution). Something has to give. You have to make choices. It's in the best interest of your students, your department, your university, your field, and your children. One possible solution to the quandary of women who want both children and a career in academia might be for institutions to help bring older adult women who are done with childrearing back into the field...we tend to assume that once someone leaves, he/she is "done" with academia and can never go back. I suspect that one reason that so many hackles have been raised, and this discussion has gone so quickly off-topic, is that many of the respondents here who work very hard at what they do have experienced inequitable treatment, or serious lack of consideration, because they don't have families to support or tend to, or because they have encountered women whose divided commitments have compromised their professionalism. It's refreshing to hear their remarks in a time when academic feminism has lost its edge and its original vision, which was to make it possible for women to do what *they* wanted, rather than be forced to follow the script of wife and mother that biology and cultural expectation forced on them. Re: Oh, babies! Author: Liz Date: 02-25-03 21:28 re: your experience with a professor who had the bad form to go into premature labor. I think that this speaks to the issue of having a plan, if there had been one the hand-off to the other instructor would have been smooth, and like other kinds of emergency situation, premature labor is nothing that can be controlled. While the content of her lectures and planning appointments during class was certainly inappropriate that doesn't seem to be as related to the pregnancy, but a total lack of consideration for students. One would never shedule a dentist appointment during class time. I had my baby one fall semester when I was still an assistant professor and we DID have a plan. My department hired someone to co-teach my class. We planned everything together and scheduled her lectures during the time I was expected to deliver, I ended up having an emergency c-section and spent more time recovering than I'd first intended, but I was back teaching within 4 weeks-- and no, I never scheduled my OB appointments on class days. The key here was to have a plan and to think about the teaching aspect of the job. Pretending someone isn't pregnant and about to deliver in the middle of the semester is just plain stupid. past posts Author: an associate professor Date: 02-25-03 21:39 I do have to add that I am somewhat disheartened by the tone of some of these posts, but also hopeful at the tone of others (in comparison to a similar discussion a couple of years ago). It is not as easy to plan a pregnancy as one would like, I know, my husband & I tried for 3 years before throwing caution to the wind. One of the things that I've talked with my doc students about is finding an institution that is a good fit for them and part of that is attitude toward babies & pregnancy. I was very fortunate, my faculty is very supportive, every one of us has children and men and women are equally likely to leave home early because of kid issues. I also am in a research I university where we must publish and write grants. I have been able to do this and so have my colleagues, & I think it's in part because of the support we provide for each other as a community of scholars. Part of that work and support does include covering classes for each other under all sorts of circumstances, and yes, planning ahead if someone is pregnant. "almost every other profession Author: Argrath, Lunar Date: 02-26-03 06:54 Hate to say it, but getting pregnant as an associate in a law firm means not making partner -- off the law firm version of the tenure track. Now it is true that med school is a bundle of coddling joy for the pregnant, but other than law, medicine and the clergy, there aren't any professions. When is the last time you saw a pregnant Catholic prelate or one who had been? No, every other profession and every other quasi-profession does not make room for pregnancy. Should they? I think so. I think the entire state of things is badly distorted. Rather than making proper adjustments, most schools now require things of their professors that no one required twenty years ago. Most better programs are taught by professors, more than half of which (the older half) could not have gotten admitted to them, none-the-less get a job there now. There is a real mess, but don't make the mistake of thinking it is better elsewheres. Re: Past Posts Author: professor and parent Date: 02-26-03 11:31 I am truly amazed and offended by the so-called "old fashioned feminist" who claims that it is not possible to be both a professor and a parent with any degree of excellence unless one has a stay-at-home spouse. This hardly sounds like any version of feminism I've ever encountered! It sounds more like the old-fashioned misogyny long used to exclude women from professions. Just for the record, I am both an assistant professor and a parent, with a spouse who works full time. Since our son arrived 20 months ago, I have published two articles, presented 6 conference papers, edited a volume, won a university research award, and neared the end of my second book manuscript. I've also taught a full load (no classes foisted off on colleagues) and received excellent teaching evaluations while administering an interdisciplinary program and serving on three committees (two departmental and one college level). On the home front, my son speaks two languages, loves to play outside with his toddler buddies, and spend most of his time with one parent or the other (only 6 hours of child care per week due to creative schedule juggling). I'm not sure if this meets the definition of "excellence" held by the old fashioned feminist, but both my institution and my family seem pleased--as am I. My main motivations in posting this message are 1) to counteract the veiw that seems to pervade several messages that parents (fathers as well as mothers, but evidently mostly mothers) are irresponsible, ineffective whiny colleagues always begging for special treatment and 2) to offer encouragement to those just entering the profession. Had I read many of the postings as a grad student, I would have despaired of ever being able to combine the career I wanted with the personal life I wanted. It can be done, and done well! Re: use birth control Author: Rod Carveth, Texas Tech Date: 02-26-03 12:00 "Lisa," I am just amazed at your position on this issue. Beyond all the other arguments that have been advanced on this board about the issue of pregnancy in academe, you assume that birth control is a sufficient answer. No form of birth control, other than abstinence, is 100% effective (the birth of my daughter attests to that). Are you suggesting that academics (both male and female), once they take a job, refrain from all sexual relations until they retire? I love teaching, but not enough to give up sex. And I certainly don't know any other occupation (other than the priesthood, and that's a whole other topic for discussion) that would expect abstinence from their employees. Re: Oh, babies! Author: Crusiana Date: 02-26-03 12:49 First, I really must echo those who have said that having a child cannot be "planned" for many of us. This has really touched a nerve for me. If a person happens to have no fertility problems, and really can decide when to get pregnant, my best wishes to her. However, the reality is that some of us just aren't that fortunate, and when medical treatment must be pursued--often after a long spell of trying to do it the "old-fashioned" way--there is no way that delaying said treatment for several months to make sure a child arrives over the summer break is going to be an option. That being said, once a person becomes pregnant, there is indeed a responsible way to handle it. There are usually nine months between conception and birth, allowing plenty of time to get all your ducks in a row. Those few irresponsible people out there--including the professor that Anonymous Grad Student experienced as well Ms. Hart featured in the article--make it a hell of a lot harder for those of us who are responsible parents and do our damnedest to make sure that our work obligations are not ignored. If Ms. Hart was going to resign following the birth of her child, that should have been made clear long before her department went throught he trouble of covering her classes for her. Also, I whole-heartedly agree with ed. prof that a family is not just adults + kids. The personal leave policy should be expanded or generalized to be just that: personal leave. If I choose to utilize it for time off after a baby is born, good for me. However, if a colleague without children wants to use it to spend time with her siblings or parents or even sailing aroudn the world, that should be equally allowed. Re: use birth control Author: DeVry University Date: 02-26-03 14:13 In our case I have known of professors who were given time off to have their babies, some returned to the job and some did not because they feel they need more than three months to bond with their babies. I feel that the US should take a leaf out of several European countries book about how they deal with women in this very sensitive area. France, for example, gives up to six months of leave. We can afford it. Re: Oh, babies! Author: Staff Person Date: 02-26-03 14:53 Crusiana, would you be willing to contribute, say 10% of your earnings to the institution to help fund stand-by faculty, so that there can be coverage of classes when you and your peers decide to do your "personal leave" thing....travel..or whatever suits your intermost needs.... Better yet, why not just pass the costs on to the students in the form of yet another tuition increase. This is typical of the entilement mentality that is rapidly replacing the work ethic in this country. You betcha' Author: Crusiana Date: 02-26-03 15:43 Staff Person, as it stand, people *do* get vacation time, am I right? Rather than calling it vacation time or sick leave or whatever, let people do what they will with that time. I don't think I said that this had to be any more time than people currenlty receive as part of thier benefits package. My thoughts are in response to those people who don't have children who feel like they don't get the leave time/understanding/sympathy/support that people with children do. It's probably true--I can imagine someone being more sympathetic to covering classes for someone because their child is sick than because there was this once-in-a-lifetime chance to meet an expert in the field of your favorite hobby, or to volunteer at the soup kitchen on short notice because no one else is available. And to answer your first question, yes indeed, I would be willing to take less pay if it meant that more leave time would be available. I think my work ethic is plenty healthy, thank you very much-but at some point, there is more to my life than just what I do to bring home the paycheck. For Crusiana Author: Rama Kaye Hart Date: 02-26-03 15:58 Perhaps you misunderstood the article. None of us EXPECTED to have our classes "covered for us." All three of us developed written plans outlining our strategy based on concerted efforts to enroll outside guest speakers (often not our colleagues, but outside professionals with whom we made special requests and negotiated content on our own), alternative ways of conducting classes (online discussions, project work, or individual student coaching) and in some cases coming back to campus early while in others receiving papers at home (on leave) to grade and provide feedback. The hiring of temporary faculty was a great surprise and an extremely positive action on the part of our department and administration. Nevertheless, we are all working with these faculty ongoing (during leave time for my colleagues who are already on leave), and it is hard work, as well. Furthermore, my decision to resign is for next Fall. I have a full load (4 courses), two committees, faculty meetings, a conference paper, etc. until the baby comes (End of March), and grading, feedback, collaboration (with co-teachers) to accomplish during the leave, as well as returning in May to see completed final projects, more grading, advising and ensuring that the department has feedback and knowledge for the transition next year. Like I said, perhaps you misunderstood the statement in the article. Irresponsible is a strong word to use with such limited information. Rama Kaye Hart Re: Oh, babies! Author: Canadian Date: 02-26-03 18:17 I'm a tenure track assistant professor at a major Canadian research university. I haven't yet had children, but hope to within a few years. The national government here mandates that everyone is entitled to up to one year of maternity leave (or eight months' maternity, four months' paternity). In practice, most academic new mothers round off leave to an appropriate term start. It seems that longer maternity leaves are much better for academic institutions and families alike. Slotting a four-week leave into the middle of a term is tricky. Figuring out how to cover a much more substantial leave is actually much easier, as courses can be not offered in one year or term (after all, when tenured professors sit out from teaching for a year on sabbatical, institutions manage), or adjuncts can be hired to take on full courses. babies and our profession Author: Jr Fac, Might have a child Date: 02-26-03 19:23 I'm an assistant professor in my early 30s, and my spouse and I have been talking about having a child -- and, of course, how it will affect both of us professionally. As we discuss the possibilities, one big difference we realized between being higher ed faculty and most other professions is that our lives are so calendar/semester-driven. There is such a delicate balance of frantic activity during the school year as we cycle through course preparation, introduction, teaching, assessing, and evaluation. There is no room for any activity outside the regular semester's regimen, and our students and colleagues are counting on us to pull through. They are engaged in their own delicate balance, driven by the same calendar. Even a conference -- which is expected and planned for -- can be very disruptive. A new child's arrival, so much more so. In that respect, are we like other professions? I say no. Lawyers and doctors schedule their work very differently from us. They can make adjustments and arrange coverage while they're taking a brief leave for childbirth. And making partner is not quite the same thing as earning tenure. If it were, we'd see far fewer tenured folks out there. The way I see it, if I am doing my job -- teaching well, regularly publishing, and meeting my community/service commitments -- it is no one's business how I spend my off hours. The only profession I can think of that is similarly scheduled is K-12 teaching. When those teachers become pregnant, they are able to freely take their leave. Coverage for their classes is arranged. The preparations are built into the system, and it doesn't matter what time during the school year the birth occurs. I do worry about things like having a child mid-semester (not my intent, but as one gets older you somewhat have to take it when it comes) and what that would do to a class. However, I also view it as one semester out of who knows how many I will teach. When the time comes, I can make plans for course coverage. Should I ask a colleague to help out for a week or two, I would hope they would be willing. Happily willing. Just as I have been happily willing to cover their classes while they've been out of town. Just as I would cover for them should a loved one become gravely ill. I have had colleagues who have been out mid-semester for surgeries, and no one begrudges them that. Are we not at least theoretically supposed to be a community of people who work together? I also acknowledge that there are those who abuse the system, but anticipating that anyone in academe who decides to have a child will do take advantage of the system simply is not fair. Some of the attitudes I've seen expressed here frighten me. When/if I become pregnant I would hate to get such a negative reception from my colleagues. Re: Oh, babies! Author: Jennifer @ SUNY Date: 02-26-03 20:24 As a relatively young woman who works for SUNY, and will eventually be looking for a tenure-track position (once that PhD is finished). Increased parental leave is a big issue and it worries me. SUNY is in such a financial mess right now. If the union negotiates mandatory paid parental leave, will that affect hiring decisions? Of course it's not legal, but if you're a department chair on a very limited budget, will the possible increased costs of a prenant professor affect your hiring decision? I hope not, but maybe. Re: Oh, babies! Author: Anon 2 Date: 02-27-03 10:05 I have no problem with parental leave providing arrangements are made to get the faculty members responsiblities covered. I find that most faculty go above and beyond the call of duty where this is concerned, and when they don't usually they weren't that great a faculty member in the first place (regardless of the child). However, I disagree that faculty who take parental leave for extended periods of time (3-6 months) should have not have the tenure track process delayed. In the non-academic world, if you take off for an extended time then generally it takes a bit longer to get promoted (it's not a case of never being promoted, but a case of putting the necessary time). I think the bigger issues surfaces after the leave is over. I have discovered that there are two types of parents. One type of parent occassionally takes time off because of an occasion child emergency, but in general based on their job performance you wouldn't know they had children. The second type of parent seems to endlessly be absent because one of their children is sick, has a doctors appointment, has a school activity. When a person's family duties routinuely conflicts with their work duties, and an added burden is placed on their co-workers. Just like any employee who is absent frequently and over an extended period of time, a person who is absent due to their family should be asked to shape up or take a LOA. You're right, Author: Crusiana Date: 02-27-03 10:30 and for that I apologize. I lost track of the names, and didn't realize you hadn't had your baby yet--and thought that you had annouced your resignation while you were out with your child. I simply jumped the gun because I see read when I hear about women who go through all the motions of making plans, having thing covered, taking leave, etc., and then telling their employers during their leave that they quit. While there may be complicated personal situations that make someone do this, in general these stereotypes end up making it harder for those of us who really do plan on coming back--even do work during--our leaves. Again, my apologies to you, and best of luck with your new family, Re: Past Posts Author: Patti Fredericksen, Associate Professor/ Boise State Un Date: 02-27-03 15:03 I have to agree with those on this posting who indicate it is possible to do well in academia and as a parent. The level of hostility directed at women and men in the academy who have "the audacity to procreate" is very sad. My husband and I are both busy with research and teaching. We both do well in the classroom and offer professional service in the community. We have three active children (including an infant) and find that our ability to "enrich minds in the classroom" is quite useful as we enrich the minds of our own children and their friends. I just do not understand the disdain that many hold for children and their academic parents. Re: Oh, babies! Author: pregnant, again Date: 02-27-03 15:08 I am alternately astonished and reassured by the comments I have read here. I am pregnant with my second child in three years, and am up for tenure this year. Were I consistently imposed on by child-bearing colleagues as some on this list appear to have been, I would perhaps be as hostile to pregnant faculty as they appear to be. While I can only offer anecdotal information, in my experience there is at least as much resentment on the other side of the question -- namely, those who feel a need for some institutional compromises when biology conflicts with the academic calendar. I feel compelled to add that I find the hostility to childbearing particularly bizarre among those who are themselves educators. I say this not with the view that the academy should be more "enlightened" than other professions -- personal experience has shown me that this isn't necessarily so. Rather, this hostility seems to completely ignore a source of our own livelihood -- teaching other people's children. If we don't, as a profession and a culture, give some nominal accommodation to those among us who choose to add to the ranks of future students, are we not undermining the very basis of our work? For an educator to ignore the connection between those who have children and those who teach them seems to me to be either willful blindness or malignant hypocrisy. If I and my generation don't have any children, whom exactly will you or your proteges teach in 18 years? As an aside, I have long regarded this as a lousy profession for any two-career couple, with or without children; I think the models for career excellence we have inherited are much indebted to the days when men took their Ph.D's and married their graduate students, who then raised families at home while their husbands became professional successes. The bitterness apparent,particularly among women, in these responses is in keeping with a general tone I have heard from older women faculty who came of age under this system. Because they had to struggle under extremely difficult conditions, whether they had children or not, some seem to feel that the current generation should share in the various forms of academic hazing. As one respondent commented in a different context, this is certainly like no feminism I know of. --Pregnant, again Re: Past Posts Author: Old feminist Date: 02-27-03 15:30 Thirty years after Title IX appeared, academics are still arguing about children. In 1972, having children pretty well disqualified you from the "bigtime" circuit. The mysogeny and prejudice, then, just told a woman with a Ph.D. to go home where "you have a husband to support you" or offered little jobs for little ladies.(It was ok to use their dissertations, though...) It is evident that unionization brought public school teachers all they needed to maintain their jobs and their families. And what could be more disruptive than having to find a substitute for someone responsible for a classroom of children for an 8-hour day? Or are academics driven by the myth of American science that holds scientists must spend 24/7 in their labs? And, so, require wives to look after them? Beyond that, should our society want to return to a professoriate limited to single men (as it was in England up to about 1900)? Isn't there something about the experience of parenting that broadens one's human experience? If so, graduate schools should begin requiring a "no marriage, no children" pledge. And wouldn't that start a lovely roar! Really, women have children; many (most?) men like being fathers: deal with it, academe. Re: Oh, babies! Author: Mike Shapiro/Cornell Date: 02-27-03 15:46 I'm a male faculty member with tenure. Perhaps we need to examine some of our assumptions about the tenure system and of the "fairness" of other fringe benefits we receive. The tenure system evolved to allow then largely male faculty to work very hard for a few years to ultimately insure his academic freedom and the security of his family. The time period of 5 to 6 years was considered enough time to establish expertise and a reputation if you did little else. In many if not most cases a wife who did little work outside the home enabled the faculty member to work endless hours and still have a family. The relatively short time period kept the period of uncertainty relatively short and prevented abuse by administrators. Even under those circumstances getting tenure is often psychologically brutal and damaging to family life. Today I hope that most of us want to see universities lead in creating a diverse family-friendly work environment. Many faculty members do not want to be the kind of person who disappears into office or lab for weeks at a time, barely interacting with family. What we need to do is figure out fair and reasonable ways to make tenure more flexible without compromising fairness, academic freedom, academic quality or security. The rewards should be a more diverse and fulfilled faculty. Second, I suspect that some writers who see women getting maternity leave etc. as unfair miss the similar "unfairness" in many of our fringe benefits. For example, I suspect that I cost our health insurance system significantly more than the average faculty member. At some point somebody has to pay for it. Indirectly my colleagues pay for it. Yet I've never heard anybody say that it is unfair that I use this benefit more than others. The fact that health is less controllable than childbirth is irrelevant. The university does not provide health insurance because they are being fair or altruistic. They provide it because we have decided it is a priority. To be competitive universities must provide those benefits that faculty want. Do we want to be competitive in attracting all women or just those women who choose (as it their right) to be childless and those few super-moms who can sustain a family and a career on the same schedule as men who have family support systems? Re: use birth control Author: A prof of the year Date: 02-27-03 16:10 ..and you wonder why legislatures want to cut our budgets! Reading the self-righteous anger in here (almost all from the holy careerists) is simply stunning. It would be nice to see some of your vitaes and compare those with the folks who have kids, do a lot of community work and service, etc. etc. Lighten up and be kind. Re: Oh, babies! Author: Not yet a Ph.D. Date: 02-27-03 18:58 Contrary to some of the sentiments in the posts above, it is not necessarily the province of jealous and wistful women scholars who came of age during the 1950s and 1960s to feel that carte blanche for faculty maternity leaves is a bit over the top. Nor is it particularly true that the childfree by choice feel "bitter" about women who choose to have children. What I feel uncomfortable about is the assumption that every female hiring prospect is a potentially pregnant hire. On the one hand, I am sure that there are still hiring committees out there who wonder if their top female candidates might not opt to quit in a few years like Professor Hart in the event that they procreate and discriminate against women accordingly. On the other hand, we have institutions where having children as a faculty member is something akin to what playing golf used to be for doctors. At my graduate institution, it has sometimes seemed like the most direct entree to social acceptance for new faculty members (both men and women) is to have children. At departmental social events, one either talked about one's children or shop matters. Social acceptance doesn't necessarily lead to tenure, of course, but it does help. And I fear that institutions which seek to be "family-friendly" sometimes swing a bit far in the other direction and isolate the people whose families don't include children. If there truly is a broad consensus out there for more flexible leave policies for all faculty and not just the ones having children, then why aren't we having Chronicle colloquies that are framed more broadly? Why is pregnancy necessarily the wedge issue here, as it was with the recent discussion on when exactly universities should be prepared to stop the tenure clock? Re: Not yet a Ph.D. Author: ed. prof Date: 02-28-03 12:29 To Not yet: I really like what you have to say. Well put! Re: Oh, babies! Author: Shanon Date: 02-28-03 13:12 >>>I had the misfortune to have a pregnant professor one semester. She cancelled class twice early in the semester because she had doctor's appointments. She was always late returning our homework, and every time she cited "baby issues". Her lectures were disjointed and she like to start the class by telling us inappropriate stories about her pregnancy experience. >>> I have to say, in my experience, a professor that acts in this manner isn't simply reacting to a pregnancy. If she hadn't been pregnant, it would have been something else. I have a math professor that stands out in my memory because he would simply walk out in the middle of class for a cigarette break. He didn't keep office hours, and when he did, he told more than one student who showed up for help that he wasn't going to spend his time with the student because the student "would never get it anyway." Some people just shouldn't be in academia, male or female, pregnant or not. Re: Past Posts Author: Shanon Date: 02-28-03 13:17 >>>It's refreshing to hear their remarks in a time when academic feminism has lost its edge and its original vision, which was to make it possible for women to do what *they* wanted, rather than be forced to follow the script of wife and mother that biology and cultural expectation forced on them.>>> I've never understood why feminism requires that one give up motherhood. I *am* doing what I've always wanted to do - have a professional career I love and also be a mother. Re: Oh, babies! Author: Steve, a tired adjunct Date: 02-28-03 17:01 The responsibility is ours that is unless the stork dies. Mothers to be have little choice in regulating both the timing and the organization surrounding a leave of absence and the birth of a child, but this biz as is offers little to anyone but the mom. Last year as an adjunct I agreed to fill in this spring for a colleague who was due in Dec. Little did I know that there was no support system or reciprocation for heros. For a part time salary I took on three separate preps and found that no one had an extra text or seemed willing to order one. Teaching manuals were not considered but worse more recently my college has advertised a full time position in my area without querying my interests. Moral: Don't believe that it takes a college faculty to rear a child. Obviously a primitive village can do much better. Academic Racism and Misanthropism equals Pedothropism Author: Devi Date: 02-28-03 18:27 Academic racism, and misanthropism/misogyny combine in a toxic way to give birth to the monster of pedothropism--hatred for children. The venomous and noxious quality of the communication of pseudo-professors who violate the sanctity and beauty of childbirth,children, and parenting is horrifying. Let me guess--all or majority of those who voice hatred toward expectant mothers, parents, and children here are white people! Their discourse resonates with the reactionary right's vile opposition to African-American women being "on welfare." This is white racism pure and simple because it is white privilege and a white-dominated university culture alone that endorses such audacious and violent communication as enlightenment. Should these white Americans go to another culture or work in a truly multicultural university where they are not the majority and mouth these atrocities, they will be taken to task and rightly so since non-white cultures view children as sacred and if they don't, you can count on them not to mouth such ignorance in such an arrogant manner! So once again white Americans have to mete out ideological violence, this time against mothers-to-be, family, and children, since slavery, genocide of Native Americans, raping Vietnamese women, wiping out Iraqi children ad infinitum is clearly not enough! How pathetic. All this using the pretext that what these "academics" do is so important and special! They act like they work so hard when the world is slaving away so that they can live off the fat of the land. If you all are so conscious of oppressive workloads because of your pregnant colleagues, why don't any of you join the anti-globalization protests that raged through the streets of the world! Why don't you go picket American sweatshops the world over! This time this racism has plummeted the university into Dante's ninth circle of hell as it is combined with rank misanthropism. These racist white impostors-masquerading-as-academics who denaturalize parenthood and family, treating it as if it is some kind of travesty and freak of nature, also exhibit hatred for humanity and nature at large which must stem from deep self-loathing. These pseudo-academics act like they did not pass through a birth canal! I pity their parents and these people are a good reason to use birth control! No student should be exposed to these individuals. Parents who are paying these freeloading, callous, cold-blooded, zombies need to rise up against them, boycott their institutions, and bankrupt them. Then let's see who will go running after entitlements. And just so you know--the 2 articles per year means nothing to anybody. It is a meaningless piece of drivel that academics get paid to write because they have pulled wool over the public--hardworking parents of students and students who trust and pay them. So it is indeed karmic and poetic justice that universities are facing massive budget cuts. You can only fool so many good people for so long. Then bad karma catches up and does the trick. In the future, it behooves university administrators to assess white Americans they hire as professors for their feelings towards children. Universities should only hire faculty who accept the concept of birth, family, and children and refer the child-hating ones to psychiatrists. How can universities hire ignorant people who think that the most natural process in the world--birth and children--is unnatural and abominable? This explains why higher education is in such an utter state of crisis. Cruelty toward children is a sure-fire indication of cruelty toward students. And cruelty is a function of excessive stupidity. Pray, how did these stupid people get Ph.Ds and tenure? And how is that they are entrusted with higher education? That is the pardaox of our times! Stupidity that gets rewarded with the highest academic honor! These are the ugly "Americans" that give good, compassionate, family-loving. community-embracing Americans a bad name. In other words, these are the people with their racist misanthropism who are responsible for much of the global anti-American sentiments that are making life so difficult for so many innocent Americans. So this is all I want to say to all you mother-and-child-hating, racist impostors, posing as educated folk, in the sacred space of the university--shut up, pack up, and get out! Re: Oh, babies! Author: Academic Scientist Date: 02-28-03 22:49 I have often thought that despite the reputation for liberality, academics are the most conservative reactionaries possible. THe problem (as Dr Shapiro points out) is that the structure of academe is designed for a different era, when the largely male professoriate would work under the tenure gun for 5 or 6 years, while their wives at home took care of the kids and made them dinner every night. The benefit of this can be seen in the positive correlation between a man's scholarly productivity if he is a parent; no such boost for women. Now, of course, few have a spouse at home, the tenure clock at the most elite institutions runs for 10 or 12 years. This profession is not easy without a spouse at home--and hats off to those who manage to do it with kids to boot! My professional life is so demanding that I have almost no free time. Weekends? That would be nice. Kids? Impossible--no time for a relationship. I feel guilty taking one week of my ostensible 6 weeks of vacation at a time while I scramble for grants and publications and that ever lengthening trip to tenure. The backlash comes from the expectation that the childless will OF COURSE step in, cover for the parent, and be inconvenienced. Even my childless life runs on the schoolday schedules because of this. Yes, it does happen--but I happen to believe a humane profession should ALLOW people to be people, to have lives and families. Fortunately, most of my colleagues with families (men and women) are considerate as much as they can be, so it works out. Then there's the more than occassional experience that "she doesn't have a family" means female prof gets paid less. There is also a tendency by administrators to think that women's issues are coincident with children, which they are not. Just because you get a daycare center doesn't mean all the women will get enfranchised. WE have to change the structure of the profession. The macho work ethic, the unvoiced expectation for "lab first, family second", doesn't benefit us in any tangible way. Do you really think anyone in 30 years is going to remember your publications? But they WILL remember your children, and your students. Re: Academic Racism and Misanthropism equals Pedothropism Author: old fashioned feminist Date: 03-01-03 23:46 Typical. What a crackpot. Nobody's being cruel in asking parents to be responsible for the choices they make. People like you are the reason the academic left is no longer taken seriously. Try to snow us under with the chicanery of abused postmodern jargon and accuse us of racism while you're at it--I'm not having any of it. (And yes, I consider myself to be on the academic left.) Re: use birth control Author: old-fashioned feminist Date: 03-02-03 00:00 And where have *you* been getting your information about birth control and abstinence, "Rod" -- the Bush Office of Disinformation? Why should your colleagues shoulder the burden for your failure to follow directions? --old-fashioned feminist, sexually active and quite happily childfree Re: Oh, babies! Author: Just a naysayer Date: 03-02-03 01:23 Fine. In the interests of conserving monies, universities should seek out those who are dedicated foremost to their areas of research, lest we follow the the lead of many IT firms who farm out their work to childfree professionals from other countries, who do not demand such parks as "paid leave" and special "lactation rooms". Precious grant money should not wasted on those whose interest is primarily in that which is grunted forth from their own loins, and secondarily, producing work in their specialty. Too many child-free graduate students are in supply, who would rather dedicate their time and energy in cultivating the pool of knowledge in their area of research, rather than first letting brats suckle from their breasts, and then doing the work they were trained to do--the work in which hundreds of thousands of dollars wree invested in them, to produce. A professor wants to drop out of the rat race and become a breeder instead? Fine. Drop the no-longer-dedicated, entitlement-minded lump of uselessness. Grow some balls, and realize what a drain these entitlement moo-cows are on acedemia. As a doctoral candidate, I do not wish to be taught by them, I do not wish to be cajoled by stories of the "cute things" their brats did the previous day. These breeders have little to offer. Their dedication is not to work, but rather to which that was grunted forth from their crotch. I'd rather have professors brought in from a country that wasn't so pro-natal, so child-obsessed. Please rescue me from the Dr. Kathie Ritchies, of Indiana University-South Bend, and the Dr. Kevin Ladds, of the same school, who are so obssessed with bearing forth children in this already-overpopulated world that they seem to be more intent upon breeding and belching forth more young than in actually teaching their graduate classes. (Please, can we go one half-hour without hearing an anecdote about your most unexceptional offspring?) Re: Oh, babies! Author: Just a naysayer (From IUSB--Dr. Ritchie, please read) Date: 03-02-03 01:24 Fine. In the interests of conserving monies, universities should seek out those who are dedicated foremost to their areas of research, lest we follow the the lead of many IT firms who farm out their work to childfree professionals from other countries, who do not demand such parks as "paid leave" and special "lactation rooms". Precious grant money should not wasted on those whose interest is primarily in that which is grunted forth from their own loins, and secondarily, producing work in their specialty. Too many child-free graduate students are in supply, who would rather dedicate their time and energy in cultivating the pool of knowledge in their area of research, rather than first letting brats suckle from their breasts, and then doing the work they were trained to do--the work in which hundreds of thousands of dollars wree invested in them, to produce. A professor wants to drop out of the rat race and become a breeder instead? Fine. Drop the no-longer-dedicated, entitlement-minded lump of uselessness. Grow some balls, and realize what a drain these entitlement moo-cows are on acedemia. As a doctoral candidate, I do not wish to be taught by them, I do not wish to be cajoled by stories of the "cute things" their brats did the previous day. These breeders have little to offer. Their dedication is not to work, but rather to which that was grunted forth from their crotch. I'd rather have professors brought in from a country that wasn't so pro-natal, so child-obsessed. Please rescue me from the Dr. Kathie Ritchies, of Indiana University-South Bend, and the Dr. Kevin Ladds, of the same school, who are so obssessed with bearing forth children in this already-overpopulated world that they seem to be more intent upon breeding and belching forth more young than in actually teaching their graduate classes. (Please, can we go one half-hour without hearing an anecdote about your most unexceptional offspring?) Re: Academic Racism and Misanthropism equals Pedothropism Author: canadian feminist academic Date: 03-02-03 11:45 1) The idea that universities should hire only those who conform to a single opinion (loving children, and "supporting" those who bear them in the way those parents deem appropriate) is more than noxious. 2) Why does the thought that people should be responsible for their own actions make one a child-hater, let alone a racist childhater? People choose to have children, and are responsible for the consequences of their choices. 3) "pedothropism"? What is "thropism"? Please learn the meanings of the terms you want to mutilate: misos=hatred. anthropos=human being. Such ignorance taints your entire argument. To naysayer - re: professionalism Author: jones Date: 03-02-03 18:47 Naysayer, Clearly you have strong feelings about this topic, and you are welcome to your opinions. As I see it, your argument at least in part, is concerned with whether or not faculty are behaving in a professional matter. Certainly I do not think it professional for one to discuss one's children -- OR one's spouse, friends, hobbies, etc. -- with students in a classroom setting unless the anecdote is clearly related to the subject matter and used in an illustrative manner. I find it equally unprofessional, however, to enter a very public discussion board and call out one's own colleague or professor by name and accuse them on less than professional behavior. And to do so anonymously is even worse. If you have a gripe with Dr. Ritchie, you should address it to her directly and privately rather than disparaging her in such a public place. If you cannot figure out how to deal with the problem in a professional manner, you really should not be in this profession either. And if you cannot make such a harmful accusation without your identity attached as well, you really should reserve your comments. Incidentally, I don't know Dr. Ritchie personally, nor did I know of her before reading your message. I do not myself have children, and I do not discuss my private life with my students. I am not posting this message in her defense (and will choose to reserve judgment, myself, as I do not know her), but rather to address what I consider inappropriate use of this discussion board. Re: Academic Racism and Misanthropism equals Pedothropism Author: Another Anon Date: 03-02-03 21:56 Hitler also thought that women's major role should be having children. The way out of oppression is not to make a fetish of childbirth as the sole aim or duty of women. It is one of many choices we now have -- and due to the struggles of many feminists, it finally is a *choice* -- not a right, an obligation, or a necessity. get real Author: associate professor with a child Date: 03-03-03 12:54 I agree that we cannot abuse our adjuncts by asking them to fill in uncompensated. There is an assumption that if full-time faculty fills in for someone, the favor will be returned. However, I do disagree with the assertion that having a child somehow costs the department money. Well, it can if someone must be paid for filling in for someone else, but that?s a relatively small cost over the course of one?s career. Let me give you an example, in my department when I had a baby during the semester, we planned (yes, we did have several months to anticipate) for an adjunct to fill in when I would be away. Because we planned, we did so AHEAD of time, and we both laid out what would be taught during the course. My son is now 5 years old, I declined travel for up till he was 2 unless my husband & child could accompany me, because travel means that I?d have less time for class prep., writing, and dept. tasks. So, doing a great job for the dept. became my focus, rather than going to conferences. When my son was little, I did limit my time on campus, but that didn?t mean that students couldn?t meet me/call me at home during times outside my designated office hours. At this point, I?ve brought in about 3 million dollars of grant money to my department. The adjunct that filled in for me (who was paid with dept. money) now teaches half time (3 courses/year) in the department (she could work full time, but she doesn?t want to). Whose course release money goes to support that teaching? Mine! Also, my dollars from my course release funds go to enhance the department in other ways, for example money goes into the TA pool. So, for relatively little investment (about 6K), my department has in the long term, benefited from having accommodated my pregnancy?if they hadn?t I would have left (& taken grant money with me). But, I?m very loyal to my department. Equally, my university has benefited from my research grant productivity (remember those 50% overhead charges). I?ve been asked to apply for other jobs in other universities, when I am, I first tell them I?m happy where I am. Then, I look at whether people have children?not that they must, but a department where no one has children, or NONE of the women have children?sends up all sorts of red flags for me. Re: Academic Racism and Misanthropism equals Pedothropism Author: Niel Date: 03-03-03 13:57 The hostility against children in some of these posts is truly astounding. Most of the posts from "child-free" individuals here betray a profound ignorance of what it means on a personal level to have a child. From the lunatic rantings about "breeders" to the slightly more educated-sounding scoffers who see in a child little more than an obstacle to self-advancement, there is a thread of aggressive egotism running through all of these. If you choose not to have children, that's fine, but don't underestimate the extraordinary emotional impact that having a child can have on those who choose to do so. Perhaps the defensiveness that drives academic parents to request protections of various sorts is a reaction to this kind of nastiness and antipathy. My wife, fortunately, is not in academia, so it's a minimal issue for us. But I feel for those women who try to have a child and an academic career. Re: Oh, babies! Author: T Dalton, UNC-Wilmington Date: 03-03-03 17:22 "Knocked up, again" said: If I and my generation don't have any children, whom exactly will you or your proteges teach in 18 years? Oh, that's rich! Please explain how "Perhaps people shouldn't expect their colleagues in academia to take up slack for them when they're out having babies" equates to "never have children, ever again!" Please tell me this person isn't in academia herself! Once you resort to sensationalizing and jumping to outlandish conclusions, you can be sure that you've lost the argument. The issue is pregnancy in academia, and specifically the entitlement mindset that believes one should expect preferential treatment just for being pregnant/giving birth. The issue is NOT the birthrate at large in society (US population grew 13% from 1990-2000, by the way. Does this sound like a dwindling human race, even American race, to you?) Re: Academic Racism and Misanthropism equals Pedothropism Author: la estudiante Date: 03-03-03 19:18 Some non-white cultures make childbearing sacred with support of women in academia ("stay home with your baby, don't come to class this year!") and some non-white cultures make childbearing sacred with hostility against women in academia ("stay home with your baby, don't you dare come to class ever!" - the Taliban never asked new mothers to teach in universities, after all). Which is less similar to white privilege and a white-dominated university culture? Meanwhile, some non-white cultures view not just having children but early marriage and teenage pregnancy as sacred too! Is paying a professor the same salary for four years of maternity leave as for four years of teaching enough? Or does her school still violate the sanctity and beauty of childbirth, children, and parenting unless it also awards a student the same grades for four years of maternity leave as for four years of coursework? vitae Author: an associate prof Date: 03-03-03 21:48 good idea, here's mine: after 7 years on the job... I have 35 publications, most in level 1 peer reviewed research journals; 5 manuscripts currently in review 4 grants (3 currently active, and I have 1 in review and am writing another) I've chaired 2 searches; and have been on the graduate admissions committee 4 times; I'm on 1 university-wide committe; and 1 college-wide currently I have 1 doc student, 2-3 will be starting in my lab next year, 1 post doc, and another starting next year; I'm supervising 6 master's theses & yes, I have a young child, I leave work by 4:30 and arrive at work at 9:30 each day. (yes a 35 hour work week working straight through lunch, and at home in the am-- little at night except class prep or grading so that I can YES, SPEND TIME WITH MY CHILD-- my most important committment) Niel Author: Jim Ryan, philosophy prof. Date: 03-03-03 22:36 But, Niel, why should academic mothers get a break, whereas someone who decides to sail around the world, or take up acting - also projects of "extraordinary emotional impact" - does not get a break? Say why without any ad hominem. Re: Niel Author: An Invisible Adjunct Date: 03-04-03 09:12 So bringing a child into the world, and caring for that child, is no longer to be viewed as an important part of the task of caring for the world, but is rather to be likened to a voyage of self-discovery (taking up a hobby, going on a journey)? Forget past, present and future: the past is over, the future is history, and it is all me all the time, and all in an eternal present. This must be, if not the final, then the penultimate phase in the progress of nihilism. Re: Academic Racism and Misanthropism equals Pedothropism Author: Psychologist Date: 03-04-03 16:21 O.K., I finally get it. You'd think I would have figured it out from some of the other discussions, but sometimes I am just too literal. Many of these messages have to be parodies! I mean, all these close-minded, mean-spirited, and profoundly ignorant people can't be working in higher education. Can they? Re: Niel Author: Jim Date: 03-04-03 17:44 Raising a child and taking up a hobby are alike in the relevant respect: emotionally demanding. You haven't stated the relevant difference between the two. Can you do so? But it won't do simply to argue ad hominem (nihilist, selfish, etc.). How about this: Society values the raising of children with care. On this ground, you might argue that society should pay mothers (give academic mothers a break) to raise their kids, whereas society shouldn't pay for people's hobbies, since society doesn't value people's having hobbies. Or you could argue that raising a child is altruistic, whereas hobbies are not, and thus the former deserves a reward, whereas the latter do not. In the first case, there's a false premise. Society does value people's having hobbies. Shall a university give the message that it doesn't care whether the professors have fulfilling hobbies? Or whether the community has a thriving amateur acting scene? That would be a callous thing to do. In the second case, there is a counterexample. Suppose a professor decides to work for charity - an altruistic endeavor - and as a result can't publish. Clearly the university shouldn't give the professor a break. By the same token, nor should it give the mother a break. Maybe there is a good argument for giving mothers a special break, but I don't know of one. But you should have one before you move on to the ad hominem. Otherwise, you might prompt a psychologist to make rather disturbing pronouncements. Re: Niel Author: An Invisible Adjunct Date: 03-04-03 19:23 Ad hominem? I don't know where in my post you could find grounds for such an accusation. At no point did I attack you or anyone else personally. I did not call you a nihilist, I rather characterized your position as nihilistic. There _is_ a difference. Your insinuation that I might "prompt a psychologist to make rather disturbing pronouncements," on the other hand, is quite clearly an ad hominem attack and a very cheap and nasty shot. As for raising a child versus taking up a hobby: The one is a leisure or recreational activity designed for relaxation; the other is a very serious responsibility involving the care (physical, emotional, moral and intellectual) of another human being. The one is trivial in its significance; the other is quite important. The one is basically an ephemeral pursuit; the other is a very long-term commitment that links past, present and future generations. You have introduced an analogy that would strike many people (myself included) as shallow and facile. The burden of argument lies with you to demonstrate that it is not a shallow and facile analogy and to make a convincing case for the similarity between these two very different pursuits. This you have not done. Re: Niel Author: just a thought Date: 03-04-03 23:21 Suppose a professor decides to work for charity - an altruistic endeavor - and as a result can't publish. Clearly the university shouldn't give the professor a break. By the same token, nor should it give the mother a break. well, what is unique about childbearing is that without people having children, the species would die out. without professors doing altruistic projects, the species could still live on. thus the two "activites" can't really be equated in my mind. not that doing altruistic things isn't worthwhile, but it isn't as necessary to preserving the species. this assumes one thinks preserving the human species is important. on a more personal level, i am a new mother of a 4-mo old, back to work after taking an unpaid leave the semester i gave birth. it is a tough road and i am not asking for any big favors. i would say it is very hard to produce (research-wise) at the same level once you become a parent, however, if you are really committed to becoming a parent. i find it hard to imagine how academics manage to have more than one child and stay productive. i guess it must get easier as your children grow out of infancy. i hope so. Re: Academic Racism and Misanthropism equals Pedothropism Author: Confused, evil Westerner Date: 03-05-03 04:39 And I thought that parody was dead. Surely, this jargon-laden screed that even manages to touch on the Vietnam war and the genocide against native americans (but not the Iran-Iraq war, the Pakistan-India wars, the genocide in Rawanda, the inter-tribal violence in Somalia...) was written by someone nailing closed the coffin of Foucaultian post-modernist psycho-babble. I suppose I must be one of those delusional, child-hating zombies who draw the proper castigation of the world upon America, but I always thought that having more children than local agriculture can support, children born to a world where high infant mortality is the norm, is a pernicious cruelty in its own right. And let us not stop with the child; the sanctity and beauty of childbirth has, until recently, been routinely accompanied by the death of the (often pre-teen-aged) mother in childbirth. If we celebrate childbirth for its ancient roots, roots long predating the West's unwholesome and undeserved ascendance, then perhaps we should also celebrate the consumption of scavenged, uncooked carrion, and the practice of coerced sex. Certainly both of these latter practices have roots equally deep in time, and have been equally fundamental to the development of humankind. Gee, let's see, in which societies are women least likely to be treated as chattel and to have the greatest recourse to the law when seeking redress for rape? Oh, silly me, it's in the reviled West. Oops, I must be confused because the West is he cradle of all that is wrong in Devi's world. Help! Re: Niel Author: Jim Date: 03-05-03 08:58 "Your insinuation that I might 'prompt a psychologist to make rather disturbing pronouncements,' on the other hand, is quite clearly an ad hominem attack and a very cheap and nasty shot." Take it easy. I was merely pointing out that a psychologist had just made such pronouncements. See the post by Psychologist. Without argument, you called my position nihilistic and selfish. That's an ad hominem. There is no difference of the kind you cite. Anyway, you've given a good argument now. By the way, the analogy I gave simply flowed from Niel's thesis that something "emotionally demanding" deserves a break from the university. But you've moved the argument to a new level by pointing out that the raising of children is of _more value_ to society than amateur acting or similar hobbies. Now the question is whether the university should give a break to every such endeavor. Suppose a professor becomes highly active in charity work, visiting the homes of people who are badly off and taking care of them. Suppose a professor runs for city council in order to address grave problems plaguing the city. Suppose a professor of physics begins to write great poetry. Suppose a professor's spouse is injured and needs to be cared for for several years. Should the university fund all of these activities, too? If not, then what makes parenting relevantly different? functional periodicity extended Author: Tired Adam Date: 03-05-03 09:35 From the mid- to late- nineteenth century until about the mid-twentieth century there flourished in academe as well as in business and industry a notion called functional periodicity. It was fervently believed that women suffered substantial diminishment in performance, including both mental and physical impairment, during menstruation. Implications for training, hiring, promotion, etc., abound. Why, for instance, hire a woman to do a job when she would unavoidably be less than par for approximately one-quarter of each month? Thanks to the wonderful work of Leta Stetter Hollingworth, this myth was debunked for once and for all. It's specter, however, seems to be rising again in the form of pregnancy. Perhaps here there is more to the myth than we'd care to admit. While I am loathe to confess it, the reason I am "Tired" is because I work with young female colleagues. Up front, I must commend them to you as highly talented, bright, and "tired" themselves. But as one of two men in a department of seven, very simply, we two are required to carry far more of the departmental/institutional governance load because four of the women in our department are mothers, three of young children, one of older. They all certainly responded to the directive to "go forth and multiply," I simply wish they hadn't done so exponentially! The cumbersome and thankless chairship of our department bounces biennially between me and the other man, despite the fact that there are three women with more rank and experience. But, working as a unified body, they've made it clear that they haven't time for such things. Cissie is in the school play, Buffy needs to get to ice dancing, Jody's baseball team is perennially in the playoffs. Everybody's kids play soccer. I am constantly covering classes for these mothers as they tend their sick children. Their teaching schedules begin and end based on the premise that they can't teach our early morning classes because they need to get their kids off to school. They can't teach afternoon or evening courses because of their familiy commitments, leaving I and my male colleague to cover all of the nontraditional, late night, off-campus teaching load, with 8:00 morning classes the next day. They can't attend meetings at the state capital because of their family commitments. Three of them can never attend our graduation ceremonies as required of them in their contracts because their children have elementary school commencement ceremonies on the same day every year! Committee schedules remain in shambles to accommodate parent/teacher conferences. As department chair, I am in the highly unenviable position of performing annual evaluations of these women who have made it clear that the most mundane of "motherly" commitments trumps even the most important career commitment. To avoid the slightest perception of sexism, I've been directed by the Dean to "focus on strengths," not their weaknesses. I've had several very uncomfortable discussions with them about asking their husbands to step in and cover some of these family responsibilities, but, in fairness, a department chair has (and SHOULD have) little input into the family dynamics of his fellow department members. I've asked them to reassess their priorities, but you know how that sounds: "Ladies, can you please place your careers before your families more frequently?". And now I find out that not only is one of these ladies pregnant again with her fourth child, but another is "planning" her third. I've got to tell you, I'm less than overjoyed. My male colleague is considering a richly deserved sabbatical that he won't likely receive. Great! I am quick to confess that both I and the administration are "enabling" this behavior. Given the tenor of a majority of the comments in this forum, however, to do less would brand us as inconsiderate, short-sighted sexists who oppose the propogation of our own species! By the way, I'm the married father of three boys who wonder why dad is gone three nights a week and virtually catatonic on weekends. Chivalry may not be dead, but it is damned exhausted! Re: Niel Author: Anonymous Grad Student Date: 03-05-03 10:43 An Invisible Adjunct wrote: As for raising a child versus taking up a hobby: The one is a leisure or recreational activity designed for relaxation; the other is a very serious responsibility involving the care (physical, emotional, moral and intellectual) of another human being. The one is trivial in its significance; the other is quite important. The one is basically an ephemeral pursuit; the other is a very long-term commitment that links past, present and future generations. I would argue that this argument is flawed. Right now the planet is overpopulated. At the beginning of the 20th century there were roughly 2 billion humans on the planet. At the beginning of the 21st century we had topped 6 billion. Experts predict that that number will double by circa 2050. We don't have enough food or water to last much longer, and our increasing population is destroying our ecosystem at a ferocious rate. We are consuming the water, destroying the land and wiping out other life forms without a second thought. Also, people in first world countries consume as much as 10 or more times the resources as those in less-developed countries. In times past, raising a child might have been rightly viewed as a selfless endeavor. I don't believe that's true in the current age. At this point, having and raising a child is the epitome of selfishness. Adding more humans to a world that cannot support them cannot be justified. Additionally, parenting suffers when compared to teaching or altruistic pursuits. A teacher helps to educate thousands of people, who then have the ability to improve the word in some way. A parent raises one or more people who are related to them by biology. There really is no comparison. A person who delivers meals to seniors or helps others who are not related to them is doing more good than a parent, yet our society chooses to reward parents and ignore the others. Re: Niel Author: Eater of breakfasts and lunches and dinners Date: 03-05-03 10:46 well, what is unique about childbearing is that without people having children, the species would die out. Childbirth is not unique in this regard and is one of several vital activities for the future of humanity. For example: With people having children but without people hunting, gathering, farming, and/or ranching food, the species would *still* die out. No matter how much you or your partner labored in childbirth, your baby still cannot pass on your genes if s/he starves to death once weaned. So...should professors who farm/hunt/etc. get more paid time off from teaching and research than professors who don't? Re: that disfunctionaly dept of seven Author: Anonymous Asst Prof Date: 03-05-03 11:07 In your department of seven you have four mothers who apparently can't do their jobs competently at all. You two men are perpetually tired and so that equals six...what's with the seventh (presumably) female non-maternally challenged member of the department? Is she tired too? Or, is this just the terrible burden on men that women produce? I don't doubt that this could well be the situation---as a woman with no young children I am considered to have, as I was told, "no responsibilities." And, being low ranked I have been treated in two jobs to "helping" those who have become parents---both male and female I might add. What irritates me is that their tenure clocks have stopped or slowed, I get their service duties and schedules that often make researching difficult and yet my "clock" ticks right along at not only the regular pace but I'm noticing a creep of that "you are lucky without responsibilities!" notion into evaluations of what I should be "producing" in my apparently care-free life. Right now I'm ahead of that production curve but, why should I have to be? Re: A Question for Devi Author: ed. prof Date: 03-05-03 11:52 While I will admit that racism has been a catalyst for the distribution of contraception and sterilization efforts in SOME instances, I do not buy the wholesale arguement that somehow sexism exists only as part of racism. Many cultures were profoundly sexist before contact with the western world. But I digress to the real issue. My question for Devi is, suppose the sort of leave programs the article suggests were put in place. The work of the absent professors would have to be done somehow. Most departments do not have the budget to hire substitute help. Who would you suggest to "fill in" for the absent parent(s) to be? I have a feeling that you and others with similar views would say that single people or families without children would be the logical choice. After all, as the logic goes, we don't really have a life or we aren't doing anything as morally significant as parenting. That's the attitude that many single folks and folks without children have to contend with daily. It's not just a matter of written policy, it's a matter of the silent majority putting social pressures on the rest of society that if you don't have kids, you aren't fully human. It's the same attitude that my grandma encounters when younger people assume that those in her age group automatically want to babysit. "Hey, they're old people! They don't have a life like we do...all old people are lonely and want to be around kids! They have time to spare now that they are retired!" Now most folks don't deliberately espouse this viewpoint. It's a silent social pressure. (As far as I'm concerned, if a retired person or even a child-free person on their free time wants to do nothing but lounge around in a hammock, more power to 'em! It's none of our business!!!) I think that's what some of us child-free people are trying to say. It's even worse for my single friend. She has to contend with being thought of as lower on the "obligation totem pole" for not having a spouse. Single people and people without kids do exist and we are just as moral, kind, and compassionate as those who choose to parent. Re: Niel Author: Niel Date: 03-05-03 12:57 Actually, I'm not sure that was my "thesis" exactly. I wasn't necessarily advocating for special treatment for those having children (though I think the family leave policy that most large institutions have is a good thing - I made use of it myself when my daughter was born) so much as I was pointing out how having a child can be an experience of profound personal import. Many parents come to feel that this is truly the most significant and vital thing they have ever done with their lives. To read some of the posts here, you'd think having a kid was like buying a dog at the pet store. Incidentally, I'm not sure one can argue that having a child is doing "society" as a larger unit any favors. None of us are invaluable - the earth would go on rotating just fine if you or I or my daughter never existed. No, the dedication of a parent serves one interest - that of the child his/herself. But when the child is yours, its wellbeing is one of the very few things that really, really matter in life. >By the way, the analogy I gave simply flowed from Niel's thesis that something "emotionally demanding" deserves a break from the university. But you've moved the argument to a new level by pointing out that the raising of children is of _more value_ to society than amateur acting or similar hobbies. Re: functional periodicity extended, et al Author: cesek Date: 03-05-03 14:20 Tired Adam, Are you saying that men have always put their career before their family and now that women are in position, that men's chivalry prompts them to accommodate the ladies? Equality, in my view, means that. Shouldn't men put their families before their career also? Or should we expect women to put their career first? Maybe we can strive to find some balance, which I believe, is what we as a society are actually trying to accomplish on this bumpy road. Perhaps then you could spend time with your three boys without being so tired, because, really when it comes down to it, your boys are very very important as much as you are very important to their growth and well-being. That is not intended to regard you as a lone crusader. Your department should also address the role and responsibilities of the women faculty. Picking up their slack because they are mothers appears to negate your role as a father. It does strike me as unfair. Again, the question posed simple enough invariably leads the posters to answer in ways that digress to exposing attitudes that transcend time and culture. I too am appalled at the mean-spiritedness of some of the posts, yet it does serve to underscore some basic human traits. 'How dare another's actions affect my schedule, my choices, my life?' That goes for every professor and every student whose expectations are not met and affected by someone else's actions. For the anonymous grad student who claims that having a child is selfish and raising it is equally selfish, it would be important to note that the actual raising of a child has to be one of the more selfless acts that one can participate in. Wanting a child and proceeding to the process may actually be selfish in intent, but it changes once the baby is born. Each of us may have been born out our parents' selfish reasons, but they were not capable or irresponsible enough to continue on with their 'selfish' behavior. Do colleges do enough to help departments with professors on family leaves? It depends on the college and the faculty. Some departments can cope better than others. A formal policy on family leave cannot adequately address every situation that one may find themselves in. The case at Ithaca seems to be outside the norm, and probably not ever to be repeated in the same way there. A formal policy tackling the issue of multiple faculty with due dates around the same time frame is not within the scope of a viable policy unless of course they are able to initiate a policy that can address the loss of multiple faculty in the same time frame due to death, disappearance, illness, etc. Sometimes, a unique situation must be dealt with on an ad hoc basis. Whose responsibility is it to plan for such leaves? Again, it depends on the college and the faculty. If one is going to stay at home and care for the child for the first 5 years, then it appears that it becomes a situation of resigning from the postion. An instructor is responsible to her students and to the college that employs her. Also true for men, but I address the issue of pregnancy alone in this case. One should make plans for the students with a competent replacement. The department should also be an approving body for the replacement. I see from some of the posts that there are those instructors out there who haven't risen adequately to the challenge of meeting their obligation. Does a formal policy force all humans to be more responsible, more knowledgeable, use more common sense? Those who don't care, won't. There are no laws, no policies, no programs that can make people who are prone to selfish and irresponsible behavior change their habits. Only personal experience can do that and even then, the myopia of certain individuals is inhibiting. We will never be rid of the human propensity to making things easier, taking advantage of well intentioned but lenient policies, or manipulating for personal gain. To end, men and women are still raised differently, despite our efforts to reduce inequities. Men are still valued for their earning power and raised with this as the first goal. Women are raised with a similar agenda, but it is presented as a choice. In so doing, when pregnancy does occur and the word choice is bantered about here as simple as if it were a decision to buy this or that, it makes it look as if we are all playing by the same rules but suddenly, the rules are changed in the middle of the game. That doesn't feel fair to anyone. Perhaps it is off the mark then. Putting pregnancy and raising a family outside the radar of career development does more harm than good and calls up a force of educators who are single and childless. This applies to both men and women. It's a dilemma for sure. There are no solutions-only alternatives. Re: Niel Author: Productive Scholar, Depart Chair, Partner and Parent Date: 03-05-03 14:40 I find myself compelled to keep reading this colloquy (rather like the bizarre fascination humans have with accidents). It is clear that many people on this site believe themselves to be unfairly burdened by department colleagues who claim "children" as the reason. In addition, some students have experienced very unprofessional behavior from faculty with the excuse of "children." Unprofessional behavior such as this is inexcusable and uncollegial. I wouldn't tolerate it (as a student or from a colleague). However, these experiences aside - there is a deep bitterness expressed by many of those commenting that is very very frightening. Being a parent requires an enormous amount of emotional and physical energy. I find it exhausting, rewarding and very worthwhile and feel some sadness for people who have not been so fortunate. I am also feeling quite lucky for landing in the three wonderful and progressive departments/universities in which I've worked. I have never seen this level of hostility from any colleagues and had forgotten that adults could behave so hatefully to one and other. Re: Niel Author: anon2 Date: 03-05-03 16:29 I was recently told of this discussion by a colleague, who warned me that I probably would not want to read many of the comments posted. You see, I'm currently expecting my second child ( I was audacious enough to have my first child during my current tenure). Sadly, I'm not surprised by the hostility, having experienced some of it first-hand. Why not focus on the work these individuals accomplish, as opposed to their reproductive status at any point in time? I'm not asking for preferential treatment when the tenure decision comes(next year), but I am requesting some flexibility in the path that I choose. I suppose I should be grateful that my department has been so supportive of me, and even more grateful that I don't work with some of the individuals who have posted here. Re: Academic Racism and Misanthropism equals Pedothropism Author: curious student Date: 03-05-03 22:19 Confused, evil Westerner wrote: its own right. And let us not stop with the child; the sanctity and beauty of childbirth has, until recently, been routinely accompanied by the death of the (often pre-teen-aged) mother in childbirth. If we celebrate Speaking of customarily young mothers, what about university admissions? Think of two girls who were classmates from the first day of kindergarten at age 5 to the last day of 8th grade at age 13. Then one of the girls studies in 9th to 12th grades (at public, private, or home school). She earns As and Bs and decent SAT II and IB scores. At the same time, the other girl does no more academics. Instead she raises four daughters (one born each year) as her father-in-law asks her to keep trying for a son. What if both these girls, when they turn 17, apply to B.A. or B.S. programs in your university? Re: Niel Author: Married w/o Children Date: 03-06-03 09:55 "Why not focus on the work these individuals accomplish, as opposed to their reproductive status at any point in time? I'm not asking for preferential treatment when the tenure decision comes(next year), but I am requesting some flexibility in the path that I choose." So what sort of "flexibility" would you like to be given? The problem is that too often in discussion of academic standards "flexibility" is read as "lowered standards." I assume that what you want from your school is understanding of your workload at home, and that it kept you from writing as many papers and serving on as many commitees as you otherwise would have. What do you plan to bring to the table to offer the school, in exchange? Re: Niel Author: academic scientist Date: 03-06-03 13:15 Standards for tenure and promotion continue to go up. Most senior faculty couldn't pass the bar they now set. So the profession has changed -- to demand more time, greater commitment, and greater sacrifice of everything to the almighty career. Why is this sort of change acceptable, yet an attempt to bring academe back into a humane range, isn't? And I don't even HAVE children. I just find most of my colleagues who have commitments to their families, ahead of their careers, are far more pleasant than the back-stabbing, anything-to-get-ahead careerists. if I wanted to work with that attitude I'd have gone on Wall Street. While there are people who abuse their situation and expect the rest of us to enable them, there are far more who are accomplished and highly organized contributors. One of the most accomplished women scientists at my institution, a Nat'l Academy member, has a committed family life withyoung children. She gets more done than those childless assistants who sit around yakking with each other about how smart they are. I used to be proud of being an academic but the vitriol on this thread is making me wonder about a lot of you. |