Fox News Fact Check: Is it bad for lower-income kids if Mom has a job outside the home?
Short answer provided by science: no. If anything, it's better for lower-income kids in the US if Mom gets paid.
Unsurprisingly, Fox News claims that the answer is "yes".
Fox News Fact Check: Is it bad for lower-income kids if Mom has a job outside the home? | PsySociety, Scientific American Blog Network. By Melanie Tannenbaum.
Excerpt from intro:
Last week, the anchors at Fox News made headlines when they covered the recent Pew Research Center finding that 40% of all households in America have a female primary breadwinner. About 1/3 of these households consist of two-parent households where the mothers make more money than their husbands, and the remaining 2/3 consist of single mothers. Left completely in a tizzy after learning of this statistic, Fox assembled an entirely-male panel to mourn, in no uncertain terms, the downfall of society as we know it. This was quickly followed by another segment in which lead mouthpiece Erickson doubled down on his statements, and a third in which female anchor Megyn Kelly criticized the men for their backwards, offensive views. Many of the things said on these segments were hurtful to thousands of men, women, and children who were essentially being told that they are responsible for society crumbling into ruins. However, in addition to being offensive, many of the “facts” and much of the “science” on these videos were not quite correct.
Erickson claimed that in poor- and middle-class households, children were hurt by mothers working outside the home.
The study is a meta-analysis that doesn't show that result at all. It is also a study that came out in 2010, so I'm not sure why Fox decided it was news, but that's is less egregious than their trumpeting some of the results of the study while actively contradicting the rest. I'm offended by both the attack on working women and the abuse of science.
Excerpt from text:
According to the data (which... covers over 100,000 children across almost 70 different studies conducted over 50 years), having a mother who works outside of the home, if anything, might actually be MORE BENEFICIAL for children from lower-income families or single-mother households than having their mothers stay at home. For children from wealthier families, there is either no difference between the children of working and stay-at-home Moms, or the children of stay-at-home mothers fare a bit better.
...
As the authors note, the “added financial security and health benefits that accompany [maternal] employment [in lower-income households]…improved food, clothing, and shelter because of increased income…[and] the psychological importance of having a role model for achievement and responsible behavior” are all really important things for vulnerable, lower-income children to have in their lives.
That link again:
Fox News Fact Check: Is it bad for lower-income kids if Mom has a job outside the home? | PsySociety, Scientific American Blog Network. By Melanie Tannenbaum.
Crossposted here (
comments).
Unsurprisingly, Fox News claims that the answer is "yes".
Fox News Fact Check: Is it bad for lower-income kids if Mom has a job outside the home? | PsySociety, Scientific American Blog Network. By Melanie Tannenbaum.
Excerpt from intro:
Last week, the anchors at Fox News made headlines when they covered the recent Pew Research Center finding that 40% of all households in America have a female primary breadwinner. About 1/3 of these households consist of two-parent households where the mothers make more money than their husbands, and the remaining 2/3 consist of single mothers. Left completely in a tizzy after learning of this statistic, Fox assembled an entirely-male panel to mourn, in no uncertain terms, the downfall of society as we know it. This was quickly followed by another segment in which lead mouthpiece Erickson doubled down on his statements, and a third in which female anchor Megyn Kelly criticized the men for their backwards, offensive views. Many of the things said on these segments were hurtful to thousands of men, women, and children who were essentially being told that they are responsible for society crumbling into ruins. However, in addition to being offensive, many of the “facts” and much of the “science” on these videos were not quite correct.
Erickson claimed that in poor- and middle-class households, children were hurt by mothers working outside the home.
The study is a meta-analysis that doesn't show that result at all. It is also a study that came out in 2010, so I'm not sure why Fox decided it was news, but that's is less egregious than their trumpeting some of the results of the study while actively contradicting the rest. I'm offended by both the attack on working women and the abuse of science.
Excerpt from text:
According to the data (which... covers over 100,000 children across almost 70 different studies conducted over 50 years), having a mother who works outside of the home, if anything, might actually be MORE BENEFICIAL for children from lower-income families or single-mother households than having their mothers stay at home. For children from wealthier families, there is either no difference between the children of working and stay-at-home Moms, or the children of stay-at-home mothers fare a bit better.
...
As the authors note, the “added financial security and health benefits that accompany [maternal] employment [in lower-income households]…improved food, clothing, and shelter because of increased income…[and] the psychological importance of having a role model for achievement and responsible behavior” are all really important things for vulnerable, lower-income children to have in their lives.
That link again:
Fox News Fact Check: Is it bad for lower-income kids if Mom has a job outside the home? | PsySociety, Scientific American Blog Network. By Melanie Tannenbaum.
Crossposted here (
comments).