Home Subscribe Print Edition Advertise National Editions Other Languages
Features

Advertisement

Printer version | E-Mail article | Give feedback

Moms Staying at Home

Professional Careers—'It's just not worth it'

By Sharon Kilarski
Epoch Times Chicago Staff
Jul 02, 2008

KIM JANICKI: Kim Janicki stands between her daughters, Jillian (L) and Peyton (R). (Courtesy of Chris Janicki)
KIM JANICKI: Kim Janicki stands between her daughters, Jillian (L) and Peyton (R). (Courtesy of Chris Janicki)


CHICAGO—What makes a mother give up a professional career? Three moms from the Chicago area considered their options and realized that the pay-off that comes from their careers wasn't worth it.

These mothers are not unusual. Sue Shellenbarger's Work & Family column for the Wall Street Journal, "More New Mothers Are Staying Home Even When It Causes Financial Pain," looked at 2004 data from a cross-sectional historical study of mothers' work-force participation (cut by moms' education levels, ethnicity, and husbands' incomes).

Shellenbarger found that those with bachelor's degrees and above, and women with husbands in the top 20 percent of earners, have shown the biggest dip in employment. (Leslie Morgan Steiner, washingtonpost.com )

Like the mothers in the Shellenbarger study, the mothers interviewed all agreed that they desired to nurture children in their first years, and all were unwilling to accept the possibility of poor quality child care.

Interestingly, though, these mothers found deeper reasons for staying at home than those listed in the study. They looked at the bigger picture or at more profound issues.

'There are too many latchkey children.'

One felt that unwholesome characteristics in our society contributed to her decision to care for her own children, and that, in turn, rearing latchkey children doesn't contribute to society.

Kim Janicki, 45, from Sleepy Hollow, IL worked for 18 years in the pharmeceutical industry—first as an Analytical Chemist and then as a corporate Compliance Manager working on documentation. She was earning six figures and had considerable status, overseeing six projects at one time at the chemical plant.

Mrs. Janicki tried to keep working, even after her second daughter was born, but there was considerable stress in trying to balance a family life and a full workload. She worked from home some days, but was always on call, even, for example, taking calls at the supermarket. Or she worked at night so that she could spend time with her family. Others days, when she had to be at the office, her mother-in-law took the children.

If one of the kids was sick, she and her husband traded off staying home from work.

When her mother-in-law admitted that watching her granddaughters was getting to be too much, Mrs. Janicki was already "burned out," and family life was tense.

So four years or so ago, she gave it all up. She admits it was a sacrifice to stay home, but she has few regrets. "It was more important to stay home. This way you don't miss out on all that. It was the right decision."

But there were bigger issues involved, too. "It's better to have a parent with the children. There are too many latchkey children." Also, Mrs. Janicki wanted more control over what and who her kids came in contact with. There are "all these influence from society" that she doesn't feel are appropriate for children.

Krysty Mendiola (Courtesy of Krysty Mendiola)

'Embedded in motherhood'

Another mother felt that she needed to consider whether the impact of her work, the amount of good it would do in the world, would outweigh the negative impact of being away from home so much.

Krysty Mendiola practiced Family Law for three years before her children were born. When she and her husband moved to Connecticut, she got a new license to practice there but had no contacts.

She also had a newborn, so it was difficult to start the practice anew.

But even after returning to Illinois, she decided to stay at home with the children. Her husband began making more money and soon her return to work wasn't necessary. She never went back. What had been a decision based on finances became a priority for Ms. Mendiola who had become, as she puts it: "Embedded in motherhood."

It's not because she hasn't had offers. Her old colleagues have wanted her to come back, and she gets job offers all the time; "I got a call this morning asking me for help."

She explained that practicing law is an unconditional profession. "You take an oath when you take on a case to take it seriously. You don't go through the motions, but put in your heart and soul."

A case demands an enormous commitment of time, and that factor of time is unknown when you agree to take the case. "You think a case is going to be easy, but you could be in court longer than you expect to be." She would tell her clients, "Typically this case will take x amount of time, but depending on the system, depending on your availability and their availability, it can last any amount of time. A child support case could conceivably go on until a child is 18 years old."

So taking on a case which would require great devotion and time away from home would create too big an impact on her family.

"If, though," she continued, "there were a case that had a good cause, that she felt strongly about, she might, in the future when her children were older, consider taking the case. But it would have to be worth it."

Gina Scarnegie (Courtesy of Gina Scarnegie)

'… a mom at home'

Another mother wondered what impact her staying home might have on her daugher's decision some day. In other words, are we teaching our daughters a double standard?

Gina Scarnegie, 42, of West Dundee was trained to be a Graphic Designer and worked for a small company in San Jose before she quit when her daughter was nine months old.

Since she worked for a small company, she was able to get experience doing a little bit of everything: logo design, ads for public transportation and radio stations, and the more hum drum direct mailing ads.

When she lost childcare that she was comfortable with, she didn't want to count on strangers to take care of her daughter. Since she and her husband could survive on his income, and since they wanted "to see it all, the first this and that of her child's development," she decided to stay at home.

"We did it for the love of our daughter. Love and protection," Mrs. Scarnegie summed it up.

Mrs. Scarnegie has been wondering though, now that her daughter has started high school—"what do we recommend for our own daughters?"

Is it worth having them educated to become a doctor or lawyer and spending all that money if we sense that they will want to settle down with a family? "I wouldn't want to push her to pursue a big career if I sensed her calling wasn't in a job but in family and children."

"Wouldn't they want their children to grow up like they did, with a mom at home?"

A whole new generation of mothers will have to decide if tackling a career outside the home is worth it.

Share article:

Advertisement