212.
CHAPTER VIII
HOME-MAKING AND CHILD-REARING
"The sober comfort, all the peace which springs,
From the large aggregate of little things;
On these small cares of daughter,Wlfe or friend,
The almost sacred joys of home depend".
Hannah More.
•
Though it cannot be denied that the hours a
married working ~man spends in home-making or
house-work are far less than those put in by the •
non-working 'housewife, this chapter digs deeper into
th'e homemaking practices of married working women ,
and non-working house\.zl ves, in order to find in
what respect, and to what extent they differ in their
basic roles of home-making and child C8X~.
~ Needle s's to say, the amount of time spent in
house-keeping activities, ~onstitutes the essential •
differentia~i?g factor between the 2 groups. Other
areas looked into were: the type of food the families •
• in.the 2 groups lived on; the volume of house-work the
women in the 2 groups were used to before marriage,and " the difference, if any, brought about by their marriage •
•
213.
This has relevance to Michael P. F9garty and Othersl •
who 'pointed out-that among ;ther reasons that motivate • •
married women to pur~ue careers is the fact'of early
economic deprivation, which drives them towards a
goal of economic security. Or again, perhaps, if
•
the father in earlier life was found wanting in his
capacity of a breadvl1nner, or unstable in anyway, then
a sort of defence is built up by not relying on any
man for source of ' livelihood and at times, this feeling
is generalized into their own mari tal situation, even
though the husband is able to provide a comfortable , '.
living. Finally, they point out that when women are
used to :a:partirular standard of living before marriage, •
they choose to work after marriage, and if possible,
after the first child also, in order to maintain • •
that standard.
Further, an attempt was made to find, who held
the purse-strings in the two groups, the husband or • . -the wife or they shared it; and whether earning an
extra income affected the spending habi ts of the
housewife •
• #
1. Michael P. Fogarty, Rhona Rapoport and Robert Rapoport, Sex. Career and Family, 1971, p.368.
214.
, Lastly, the 'leading part taken in the arrange-• • •
ment .of !urni ture and the general decor of the home . in the .. tw5> groups w~ looked into • . -
'Regarding the second basic role of married •
~en, viz., child-rearing, the practices in the 2
"groups were unfolded by inquiring into: the person/s
wI. th whom the child/children spent most of their time; "-
the amount of time spent exclusively with their
child/children by?l'the mothers in the 2 groups and the
way in which this time was utilized; the SUpervision •
of their studies; the difference, if any, between their ,} . .,
own childhood and that of their child/children, the
question of discipline: what constitutes it and
whether it is affected in any way in the case of working
mothers. Here too, it would not be out of place to .... refer to P. Keiran on this topic. l She quotes Viola
Klein, who studied working mothers for more than 10
years, and pointed out: "If the gist of some 25
separate studies may briefly· be summed up in a
sentence~ it is, that maternal employment as i
such •
appears to be of no importance in the lives of •
children • Personal characteristics of the. mother, the • , nature of sUbstitute c are, social. class, urban rural
. differences~and such factors as to whether or not a
•
1. p. Keiran, HO\t Working Mothers Manage, 1970, p.52. I .~
•
215 •
•
mother enjoys her work, are each statistically •
more sf'gnificant than the simple dichotomy,working
- not working". It· will be seen how our responses
compare \\!i th the above finding.
_ HOME MAKING
In order to determine the food habits of
the 2 groups, the respondents were asked: '''Your
f8Jllily lives on food that is : (a) home-cooked by
you? (b) tinned or "instant"? (c) Ordered from
outside? (d) prepared by servants? (e) other
alternative, if any. The responses of the 2 groups
are tabulated below.
TABLE VIII.1 : SHOWING THE FOOD HABITS OF FAMILIES OF \() RKING MOTHERS .AND NON-WORKING HOUSEWIVES
TYPE OF MARRIED NON-WORKING FOOD EXEUu~IVES HOUSE~VES
a 22(44%) 36 (72%)
.. b 0 0
c l( 2%) 0 FREQUENCY OF
d 14(28%) 6 (12%) MeH RE§PONS~ Resp- Married Non-'
ad 6(12%) 6 (12%) onse Execu- WOrking
4( 8%) 0 tives House,:"
e' wives • c e 1( 2%) 0 a 3J 44
a~;b 0 1 ( 2%) b 0 1
ad c 2( 4%) . 0 c 4 0
ad e 0 1 ( 2%) d • 22 13
Total 50 50 e 5 J.
•
216.
The above table shows that in both groups
the majority of families (44% among the working •
wives' and 72% of housewives) depend on the ,rlfe
herself' -- working or non-working -- :for their
meals. No doubt, the percentage of housebound wives
is much more than that of the working wives, yet
the majority in both groups fall in the same
categoi'Y~ Also, this category, I ai, ",as found to
be the most frequently used category (eitller singly
or with anot..'ler), in both th.e groups. The notable
difference in the 2 groups lies in the fact that .. ,</hereas only 6, (12%) of families of non-working
house.nves depend entirely on servants for their
meals, more than double --- 28% of the families of
"TOrking wi ves had meals prepared .by servants •. But
taken in terms of frequency of occurrence, this
category was second largest in both groups.
Category 'b ' , i.e., "tinned or instant",
by itself, .!as notable by its complete absence in "
both groups, though together wi til category r a' ,it
appeared only once in the case of a non-"TOrking
housewife.
217.
Category 'c', "ordered from outside ll , was
not used at all by the house,dves, but stated
singly by one working wife; by another, in .,. •
combination with category Ie' which specified
"mother and servant"; and by t1QO (4%) other working .\
• • rives, toget':1er with categories 'a' and 'd', i.e'.,
themselves and servant.
The unspecified category Ie' was made use
of mainly by working wives, who stated it ei ther •
singly or together with amrther, e.g., 4 (8%) of them
stated it singly; 2 (4%) of ,:mom explained that
their meals were cooked by mo~~er; in the third
case by the mother-in-law, and in the fourth, an
aunt cooked for the family. One working wife (2%)
used this category jointly with category 'c' by
saying her family lived on food that was either
ordered from outside or cooked by the mother or
serv8nt.
One (2%) non-vrorking housewife clarified her
use of category Ie' by eXplaining that either she
herself or the servant cooked the daily mea.ls ,or
else, the family ate out.
218.
The 2 groups appear to be similar to the
extent that in both groups, categories 'a' and
'd' . , taken singly or in 'combination, appear to
rank first and second respectively. • •
.The next aspect of homemaking activity ~!" .. ;;-t I
tapped, lWas the volume of work the women in the
2 groups were used to, before their marriage, and in
their present position, i.e., after marriage. It
was asked of them: uBefore marriage, in your father's
house, you lived: (a) very comfortably, for there
were servants to work? (b) quite comfortably, as
there were some labour saving gadgets? (c) by
working hard, for there were neither servants nor ...
equipments to do the work? \I This was follo\."ed by
the question~ uIn your husband's home, your
housework is: (a) reduced to nothing? (b) considerablY
lessened because of servants/labour saving gadgets/ .
husband helping out? (c) increaSed very much rOT you
have to do everything yourself?U •
Their answers to the 2 queries are shown in
Table VIII.2 on the next page.
~ ,
TABLE VIII.2:': SHOWING THE EXTENT OF COMFORT ENJOYED BY MARRIED EXECUTIVES AND NON-WORKING HOUSEWIVES BEFORE AND AFTER MARRIAGE
I
MARRIED EXECUTIVES
EXTENT BEFORE AFTER MARRIAGE OF MARRIAGE a b (c d COMFORT • (s aJ.llfU
a 34 8 17 9 0 (68%) (24%)(50%)(26%)
b 14 2 10 1 1 (28%) (14%)(71%)(7%)(7%)
c 2 0 1 1 0 ( 4%) (50%)(50%)
TOTAL 10 200 11 1
@ In 16 cases out of 28, the husband helped in the housework(i.e., about 57%)· .
NON-WORKING HOUSEVIIVES
EXTENT BEFORE AFTER MARRIAGE OF MARRIAGE a b c d COMFORt ( samel
a 3J 2 20.7 1 (60%) . (7%) (67%)(2~J.(3%)
b 14 0 11 3 0 (28%) (- ) (79%)(21$)
c 6 0 4 2 0 (12%) ( 66%)(Jl%) • ,
TOTAL 2 35@ 12 1
@ In 29 cases ou t of 35, the husband helped in the housework (i.e., about 83%)
220.
Viewing Table VIII.2 as it stands, the
2 groups appear to follow an identical pattern,
i.e., in both groups, the highest number before
marriage (68% and 60%) are found in category t at:
lived very comfortably as ~lere were servants·to ,. work and next highest 28% in both groups in
cate gory I b I: quite comfortably as there ,.,ere some
labour-saving gadgets. Similarly, in both groups,
the largest number after marriage (50% and 67%)
fall into category Ib l : considerably lessened because
of servants/labour- saving gadgets/husband helping ou~,
and the second largest (26% and 25%) into categorylc l :
increased very much for you have to do everything
yourself.
Now taking the married executives separately,
it was found ~lat out of 34 (68%) who belonged to
category 'al before marriage, i.e., lived very
comfortably, only 8(24%) of these were found after
marriage to remain in the same position; 17 others
(50%) placed themselves in category Ib~, i.e.,
cons~derably improved, and out of these 17 (50%), •
it must be noted that 7 (41%) stated that their "lork
",as lessened due to servants and labour saving •
221.
gadgets, but specifically pointed out. that there
was no help from the husband. The remaining 9( 26%)
classed themselves in category lei after marriage,
i.e. their position worsened considerably.
Again, among the employed mothers, 14(28%)
placed themselves in category 'b'· before marriage
i. e., they lived qui te comfortably. However, after
marriage, 2 of these (14%) elevated themselves to
category 'a', representing a more comfortable
position, while 10 others (71%) remained in
category 'b' which again represents some imprOVement.
Here too, only 6 out of thes; 10 (60%) indicated
help from their husbands, besides servants and
labour-saving gadgets; the husbands of the remaining
4 (40%) offered no help in the house.
One married executive who belonged to category
'b' before marriage i.e. lived quite comfortably as
there vlere some labour saving gadgets put herself
in category 'c' after marriage: increased very much for
you h~ve to do everything y~elf, While another one
considered her position before and after marriage to
be quite equal.
222.
Two married executives (4%) placed
,themselves in category IC I before marriage,i.e.,
their positlonwas not comfortable. ~ter marriage,
while one o~ them (2%) improved her position and
pu t herself in ce.tegory I b l (wi thout the husbend
helping out), the other remained in category 'c'
which me~s her position worsened.
Coming to non-working housewives, we find
that out o~ 30 (60%) who put themselves in
category 'a' before marriage: very comfortably,
for there were serv.ants to work, only 2 ~7.%) put '.
themselves in category 'a': reduced: to nothing , .
~ter marriage also, ~Thile out of the rest, 20(67%)
placed themselves in category Ib l (with the husbend
helping out in 16 (80%) cases) ; 7 (23%) in
category 'c': increased very much end one (3%)
maintained status quo.
As in the case of married. executives, in this
group too, 14 (28%) housewives put themselves into
category 'b l before marriage. Out of these, none
were found in category 'a' : i.e. reduced to nothing,
~ter marrie.ge, while 11 (79%) of them placed
themselves in category fbI, which indicates an
223.
improvement in their position. It must be noted
that. there also, out of these 11 (79%), only
2 (18%) reported that their husbands did not help
out with the household chores, while 9 (82?&>
asserted that their husbends helped. Further, 3(21%)
housewi ves' posi tion worsened after marriage, for
they classed themsel \as in category 'c': increased
very much.
Six hoUse",ives (12%) belonged to category' c'
before marriage: by working hard for there were
neitiler servants nor equipments, but after marriage,
4 of them (66%) reported category 'b' (all asserting
that their husbands also helped in the housework).,
while 2 (33%) remained in category 'c', indicating
no improvement in their Dosition.
~ overall pictur~ of the 2 groups from
Table VlII.2 reveals that categories 'a' and 'b'
"mich represent comfort end category 'c' which
represents discomfort after marriage, are more or ~
less the same in the 2 g~OUps i.e., 38 (76%) married
executives and 37 (74%) housewi ves came under
categories 'a' or 'b', tnusindicating comfortable
lives. Again, 11 (22%) ~rking wives and 12 (24%)
. t
224 •
. housewives were found to f 2~1 under c~tegory I c I
atter marriage, indicating the presence of dis
comfort in their lives. ~cordingly, the results
• indicate that none of the ree.sons of Michael
Fogarty and others, pointed out earlier, applY
to the working wives in our study •
• Ho,,,ever, a notable fact revealed through our
results is that more husbands of house,,,ives lend
a hand in the household chores (83%) than those
of working wives (57%). This will be discussed at
greater lengths in the next chapter.
Running a home, no doubt involves spending
money and therefore, in order to determine who
takes what financial decisions, our respondents were
asked: IbWlat financial decisions (any occasion
which calls for spending money) are taken by: (a) your
husband alone? (b) you alone? (c) both of you
together?
The following were the answel's .
as found ;in
Table VIII. 3.
225.
TABLE VIII.3 : SHO\>lING THE PATTERN OF FIN.ANCI.AL DECISION MAKING AHONG v/ORKING AND NON-WORKING WIVES.
• •
FINANCIAL DECISION lolARRIED NON-WORKING • TAKEN BY EXECUTIVES HOUSEWIVES
a 3 (6%) 3 ( 6%)
b 1 ( 2%) 2 ( 4%)
c 30 (60%) 41 (82%)
b c 0 1 ( e%)
abc 14 (28%) 3 ( 6%)
? 2 ( 4%) 0
TOTAL: 50 50
Th e re sul ts as per Table VI II. 3 sho\·, th at in
the majority of cases, working or non-working wives,
all financial decisions are taken by the husband
and wife jointly. This was more so in the case of
non-"lOr~ing \-li ves - 82% as against working wives
(60%). In both groups, in an equal number of cases
C3(6%) in eachJ, the financial decisions were
stated to be taken by the husband alone. This ap~s
to be a little surprising in the case of working wives,
who, earning an independent.income, may be expected
•
226.
to expend this with a certain amount of freedom.
On the other hand, in the case of one working wife
(2%) and two housewives (4%), the financial decisions
were taken exclusively by themselves: (one of ~hese
2 housev.d. ves had no choice,. as her husband, for
the most part,~,orked away from heime.) •
Although the number of men exclusively taking
financial decisions in the family is only slightly
greater than that compared to women who exclusively
take financip~ decisions, 6% as against 2% and 4%,
does this finding --~no matter how weak the evidence
~-'reaffirm the fact of male superiority?
A response which was typical in only one case
among housewives, was giVen in category fbI and tc',
i.e., financial decisions taken either by the wife
alone, or jointly.
Twenty-eight per cent of working wives and 6%
of housewives explained clearly that while some
financial decisions were taken by each spouse
independently, others needed their joint appro~
The majori ty of working Wi ve~ clarified further that
while the husband was free to use his earnings on •
227.
i terns of personal use, the wife looked after her
o~m personal needs and those of the household
or of the child/children. Major purchases or
investment of savings was decided by them
jointly.
,. The housewives who also reported categories
•
I a', 'b' and 'c', stated that while major purchases
and savings and planning for holidays was left
exclusi vely to the husbands, they alone were
responsible for the general household expenditure.
Decisions regarding·gifts and items relating to
the whole family, were taken jointly.
On the question of decorating the home ,the
respondents were asked J "Do you carry out your
own ideas on decorating your home? Or is it done. in
Joint consultation? Or is an expert called in every
time you wish to change the decor of your horne?tI ...
The answers of the 2 groups were similar in some • respects and different in others, as shown in
Table VlII.4.
228. •
TABLE VIII.4: SHOWING THE EXTENT OF INIDLVEMENT OF \o.ORKING AND NON-UORKING WIVES IN DECORATING THEIR HOMES
EXTENT OF INVOLVEMENT
Own ideas
Husband's ideas
Joint consultation
Friends' and Expert's opinion
Whole family's opinion
In-laws decide ,
No. time or money for it
Can't tell
TOTAL
MARRIED EXECUTIVES
12 (24%) ~
2 ( 4%)
29 (58%)
3 ( 6%)
3 ( 6%)
o
o
1 ( 2%)
50
NON-WORKING HOUSEWIVES
10 (00%)
o :J7 (74%)
o
1 ( 2%)
1 ( 2%)
1 ( 2%)
o
50
The largest number of wives in both groups
decorate their homes in joint consultation \nth
their husbands, and more so the housewives (74%)
than the working vii ves (58%). -Main, more working
executives (24%) than housewives (20%) \vere found
to carry out their own ideas on doing up their
homes and this perhaps disproves the general
opinion that working women neglect their homes. The
229.
resul ts further sholved that in the case of
2 (4%) married executives, the decor of the
house was totally left to the husbands and 3 (6%)
others, discussed with friends or even consulted
an expert if they wished to change the decor of
their home. In the case of wives living in joint
families, it is understandable, that 3 (6%)
working and one (2%) non-working wives explained
that the gener8~ consensus of the whole family was
desirable before the home decor could be changed.
The l83t 3 single responses are not
significont as one housel.zL fe pointed out tpat her
housewas done up according to her in-laws' decisions,
while another asserted that she had neither time
nor money to spend on elaborate decorations. One
lrorking .Tife was unable to give any definite
anS1"er.
Qill.LD REMING
In order to understand the child care habits
of working and non-working ,,,i ves, let us first
-determine the number of children in the 2 groups,
whether of school going age or under 6 years.
TlIBLE VIII.5 . SHOioiIN G THE NUMBER OF CHIL DREN IN THE TIIO GROUPS • OF MARRIED EXECUTIVES AND NON-WORKING HOUSEWIVES
--NUMBER OF CHILDREN
~ '-GROUP
Iii :S (!) fI) fI)
M ~ ~~ Q) (!) ~ til (]) (]) <D(!) ~ ~ <l> (!) (!)
s:: <l> 0 ~ ~~ +> (!) ~>- '2>-0 ~ ~ tl :S:S ~ ~ z 0 0\0 :::>\0
•
Married 64% 36% Executives 19 14 14 2 1 52 1.7
(38%) (28%) (28%) ( 4%) (2%)
Non-working 0 14 23 12 1 100 2 75% ·25% Housewives (28%) (45 %) (24%) (2%)
231.
Table VIII. 5 sho\·1S that although the married
executives i.e., working wives apparently have fewer
children than the house,,,ives, on an average, the 2
groups are not very different. Again, agewise also,
in both. groups, the number of school-going children
i.e., children over 6 years, are far more than the
younger ones, below 6 years, who need relatively •
more looking after and it must be noted that this
number (children under 6), is considerably greater
among the working wives than among the housew. ves.
Now, having this overall picture of the
housewives, tQe working wives, their school-going
children, and other younger children who need
comparatively more intensive and almost constant
supervision, let us see how the children in the two
groups are managed i. e., where these children are,
most of the time; how much time their mothers
devote exclusively to them and how this time is
utilized; who is resp'onsible for helping them in the1r
studies. The working and non-working wives in our
study also pointed out differences between their own ,
childhood days and ways, and the upbringing pattern
of their children - whether it was better or worse,and
232.
if so, in what respects. The question of
discipline, so vitally essential in childhood,
was also considered, and finally,the much-argued
topic about whether the personal growth and
discipline in children of working mothers is
adversely, or otherwise in any way affected, W8$
discussed.
The first question our respondents were
asked was : "Your child/children is/are, most of
the time with: (a) you? (b) your mother/mother-in
law? (c) an aunt or other relative? (d) servants?
(e) other children at a public creche? (f) any
other al ternati veil. The responses of the working
wives were many and varied as compared to the
housewives". This can be seen in Table VIII.6
belo"'l :
,
233.
TABLE VIII. 6: SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF WORKING AND NON-WORKING MOTHERS REGARDING WHERE THEIR CHILDREN ARE,}lOST OF THE TIME.
RESPONSE MARRIED NON-\'iORKING EXECUTIVES HOUSEWIVES
a 16% 88%
b 29% 0
c 0 0
d 19% 0
e 0 0
ad 7% 10% a b 3% 0
a c 0 2%
b c 3% 0
b d 7% 0
a b d 3% 0
b c d 3% 0
At Boarding school 3% 0
Grown; up, ther e- ~
fore independent 7% 0
Undoubtedly, "the children of non-working mothers
are more with their mothers (88%) than those of
working wives (16%), and this is as expected. But -'" "~
234.
here, it is important to see where the children
of the working mothers are, most of the time, if
not with themselves, and the answers show that
the majority of them, (29%) are with their
grandmothers, while another 19% are left with
servants. No working mother was found to leave
her Child/children with an annt or other re18.tive.
(Again, the fact that no working mother left
her child at a public creche implies one of two
things: perhaps the facility for such child care is
not available in our industries and if it does exist,
perhaps the efficiency or reliablli ty of such
agencies may not be popular or acceptable. Therefore, --
more study is needed regarding child-welfare ~
agencies for working mothers, before we can make any
definite conclusions as to why no working mother in
our study left her child at a public creche.
Further, the working mothers gave a variety
.of combination responses, the more common among them
beirig, "myself and a servant" and "grandmother and a . servant". Other infrequent responses given were: "myself
and grandmother", "grandmother and an aunt or other
relati ve", "myself, -graridmJOther and servant" and
"grandmother, a relative or serv:ant".
• .
•
235.
One working mother explained' that her
child was away at boarding school and therefore
the question of who she is with,' most of the time, • •
did not arise • •
It must be noted here, that the •
possible advantages of a boarding schoQl life on •
children of working mothers represent an avenue . . . .. well- .... ,orth exploring, for it could become the
. .' answer to many an employed mother's prayers
regarding the Upbringing of her children, provided •
the necessary adjustments are made on both sides •
• And finally, one working mother had no - , worries about her children, as they wer~ all grown
up and therefol~ did not need much supervision. , •
The importance of~ the physical presence of the
mother during childhood can n~ver be overemphasized,
and therefore our next query referred to the amount
of time our. respondents were eXclusively 1Ilith - &.. "'" >
their.children. The responses of the 2 groups were . -' . too' varied and are. therefore shown sep.arately in
Table VIII.7.
236.
TABLE VIII. 7 : SHOWING THE AMOUNT OF 'TUm SPENT BY WORKING lIND NON· WORKING ,lo10THERS ~CLUSI~Y WITH- THEIR CHILDREN -
EXEUUTlVES
" ... 1. All evening,after
work • . .
2. 1 to 2 hours a day - ~ • .
3. Morning and, evening
4. 3-4 hours a day
5. Very Ii tUe. • 6. Grown up, so on - their own
7. At boarding school
... . HOUSEWIVES . ,.
• ~ .
- ,1. All .01' most 'of 26 % .• 1?e time :t 32%
,... ...... -.~ . • 2. OVe!' 2 hours
26%··... a day 24% • ..
3. No fixed hours • 14%
4. Afternoon and' evening ... 10% - ....
3% -, '5. 1 .. 2 hours a day 10% -. ,
" ....
6. -Before and • after school
, ~
7. Depends on the - attention needed
.. 4%
',. , AS can be seen, a response like livery Ii tt1e ll
... . is typical only of. the working mothers, a1thoughit , . is a very low percent~e,while a response ·1 ike ,
.~ . ~
"all or most of the time" is 'not only restricted .to • ~ ,
" the group of !lou s ewi ves but is also the most frequently
given 'ref{) onse among' th~m.. Of course, this is ~ .
expe cted. £gain, it is evident .from the responses of' ,
. working wives, that they spend all the available ~ime
when they are not working, by being with their children,
'.
while the responses of the housewives appear more
casual - for being at home, they feel they are always
there to look after the needs of their children as
and when the occasion may arise.
'. Although the time spent by ",orking and
non-~/orking mothers exclusi velyfor their children, , . . ~
natural'ly varies among the~2 ,groups, the manner . in which this time is utilized ,~as' found to be
." much the same -- for.a mother is a mother still
even though she may be alvay from home much of
the time. In both groups, the responses weI'e IDOI'e
or less common viz., the time ",i th the children
was spent in : "playing with them", "helping them
with their studies", "taking them out for enjoyment
or relaxation", "looking after them, .generallY", •
and ,.men children were older, "discussing their
problems" or "discussing Iilchool events" •• From among
the working mothers, besides those stated,~BIDe
responses like, "just being with them ll , or "doing all
the things that the childl:"en particularly like
playing games they enjoy or cooking delicacies they
relish".
-.
238.
When it came to helping the children \ori th
their studies, the majo::ity of vlOrking mothers •
had private tutol'sto coach their children, and
the second largest nwnber studied on their own.
The-mother herself, or toge~~er with the fa~~er, ....
helping tile child/children in their homework, formed
the next category, while other single responses
showed the elder brother or the grandmother of
the child, helping out •
./Among the house.rives, more than 50% themselves
helped and personally supervised their children's
study, W:1ile in a few cases, the husbands also
helped. In only a negligible number was a tutor
appointed.
The point that was next touched upon was:
What difference, if any, was detected by our ,
respondents in the childhood ways and patterns of
their children today, as compared to their O\o/!l
) childhood, tilree or even four dac'ades ago? Is this • ..
change evidenced only among the children of working
mothers? Or is it generally pervaSive? .. An analysis of the responses of our working
• anf' non-working mothers reveals that many, if not all,
239.
of the differences indicated by the 2 groups, refer
to more or l~ss the same. changes, though of
course, not worded in identical terms, or stated
in the same order.. Rather than tabulate their
responses, in a set classification, let us discuss
each difference pointed out by the 2 groups,
individually, in their order of frequency of •
occurrence.
The Working wives noticed the following 6
differences.
(1) "Financially better; more comforts
and facili ties". This response is no doubt typic al
of this group only, and understandably so, ~Iith
the mother and father both e"arning, the child/
children naturally get a better deal, in the form
.'
of greater comforts. In earlier decades, ~he mother
contributing to the family income was a very
unusual fact.
(2) "More homevp rk from school, so that most
of the free time of the children is spent at it,
which in turn leads to a sort of alienation from
their friends". It must be l10ted that this point ,. was brought out by the housewives too, as shall be
. ,
seen;'1.ater.
240. - .
,. . (3) "More friendly relationship wi th
paz.ents". Main, this i'«ct was also pointed out by
the housewives. They al~ stated that "they found
their children more open and confiding wi th them
-- a si tuation, quite ral:'e, if not unhe ard of,
during their own childhood days.
(4) In this cate€ory were working wives, Who .....
found no difference at all bet"een their childhood
and that of their children. Also in this category,
were executives who stated the very obvious
difference .. viz~, that their children spent lesser
time .,ith their parents than they did with theirs.
This is typicaD¥ a change brought about by mothers
going out to work.
(5) "More lonely, since families today are
smaller"; "they have m.ore frJedom; Ibthey get more
attention from me, since I am more absent from them".
These comprised the fifth, difference given by the
working wives. The child being umore lonely" on . account of being the only child, was once again,
a response, common to both working and non-working
mothers. The third difference in this category is . evidently the outcome of the mother going out to
'-lork and therefore typioally belongs to this group
only.· ~
241.
(6) "Pampered by grandparentsII , IImore wi th.
servants ll , "better off generallyll, IIless healthy",
"more independent". This category, although the
last and least stated, points to differences
triggered off on account of the mother going out to
work, e.g., in order to make good the absence of
th~ mother, the grandparents tend to be extra-... generous with the children, and thus at times tend
to pamper and even spoil them. .!Again, the difference,
IImore with servants ll is self-evident, and needs no
fUrther explanation. "Better off generally", can
perhaps be explained by the fact of the working
mother providing those extra luxuries which children
of non-working mothers do not generally enjoy. These
children were found "less healthy", perhaps becaUSe
the working mother is not around to watch over them
as carefully as does, the full- time housewife • •
Finally, being on their own, much of the ..
time, the working mothers rightly indicated that their .
children ~Tere "more independent", than they were a:t
that age.
From all that is stated above, it can be Said
with reasonable freedom that quite a few of the
242.
differences which our working mothers quoted bet':reen
their own childhood and that of their children,
possibly spring from the tact of their going out to
work, e.g., differences Like "financially better
off", "more wi th servants" etc. Of coUrse, other
factors may also be responsible, for there ~ . , similar differences among children of nom-working
wives also.
Now let us examine the responses of housewives
regarding the difference :in their own and their
child's/children's childhood pattern :-
(1) "Greater parental attention, facili ties
and opportunities.
(2) "Better, though more difficult educational
methods", "More independent", "no difference".
(3) "Smaller families at present"; "children
enjoy greater freedom", "relationship bet"reen child
.and parents, more friendly". <'.
It can be seen that all the above-stated
differences were indicated by the working mothers also,
and therefore, to say that these differences arise from
the fact of mothers going out to work, can safely be
ruled out.
other differences pointed out by the
housewives were :
243.
(4) "Easier life ll ; "totally different life",
"they have learned the joys of sharing", "the
children lead a less outdoor life", and
(5)"They have fewer friends II , "they are
more self- confident", and "more mischievoLls lI •
The only notable point in the responses of
the 2 groups seemd to· be that the number of house
wives who found "no difference tl between their
child/children's and their own childhood was greater
than those among the working ,dves, for the former
appeared under category 2, while the latter were
found in the fourth.
After viewing the differences as perceived
by our respondents in the childhood patterns of today
and those of a fe~T decades ago, OLlr respondents were
asked to cornmen t on whether they considered their own
childhood better or worse, and if so, in what
respects.
244.
(12%) Six working mothersLand 12 house~aves(24%)
stated that, their childhood was neither 'better',
nor '''TOrse', but just the same. Here too, twice
the number of housewives found no change in the
childhood pattern of today and that of 3 or 4
decades earlier. It is this fact that leads to
the important question that since more .vTOrking
mothers have indicated the stated changes, could
this change be the effect of change in ti1eir
o~m life pattern? Any answer in definite terms
is not possible from the present study, though
a possible relationship does suggest the
need for more intensive research into the type
and extent of each perceived change and-all
possible causative facto~ before any solid
conclusion can be laid down.
The responses of the remaining moti1ers who
stated that their childhood was better/worse,are -..
gi ven below :
l1ARRIED EXECUTIVES
Better bec~
1. Could confide in others.
2. Not much competition.
3: More scope for more activi ty.
4. Life easier in general.
5. More free time.
6. Better in every way.
7. Constant presence of mother.
8. Life more easy-going, heal thy.
•
9. Barents had no interests outside the home & spent more time in the family.
Wor'se because
1. More inhibited.
2. Less social life.
3. Brought up by relatives.
4. Gret'l up in a boarding school, therefore not much affection.
245.
NON-WOFKING HOUSEWIVES
Better because
~
1. More easy-going.
2. More playmates.
3. Parents were rich';no~l we are, middle- cl ass •
4. In terms of discipline. ~
5. EdUcation had more value.
6. Less competition,so more relaxed.
7. Things were cheaper •
8. More security and companionship in joint femilies.
9. Less worries,more outdoor life.
Worse because
1. Absence from parents.
2. Greater fea~ of children picking up bad habits.
3. Le~ger families, less attention.
4. Less communication between child and parents.
'. It is difficult to separate discipline from
child-~earing, for reaxing children implies instilling
246,
and fostering discipline in them. ~ccordingly, our
executives end housewives were asked, what quaJ.ities,
according to them, constituted a disciplined child,
and their answers were more or less similex; the
.,@xecutives used terms like; "obedience", "well-.• mannered/~rell-behaved", "responsible", "considerate",
truthful", while the housewives gave "obedience", •
"good manners and behaviour", "respectful", "loving", • "friendly", "polite" and "of good habits" •
• It was determine(j from the mothers themselves
whether their child/children were disciplined or not.
Their answers are given in Table VIII.8.
TABLE VIII. 8& SHOWl]\; G WHETHER OR NOT THE WORKING JlN) 1'101'1- \40RKING MOTHERS CONSIDERED THEIR CHILD/CHILDREN TO BE DISCIPLINED
RESPONSE -_._-Yes
No
MARRIED EXECUTIVES
31%
10%
Partly 7%
Child/ children too young to decide either way 10%
Can't say 42%
'. •
•
1'101'1- WORKING HOUSIDIIVES
68%
16%
16%
247.
This table sho"lS that more housewives than
~rorking mothers consider their children to be
disciplined. However, one must remember that this
constitutes their personal opinion and hmv far it
.is a fact, needs to be investigated. Again, the
majori ty of working mothers (42%) were unable to
decide either way, so that one is merely left to
guess what their recticence could mean for
reticence could be the result of a genuine inability
to decide one way or another or it could possibly
be the outcome of an attempt to ~dthhold some
incriminating evidence.
The last question dealt with is a much
discussed topic: Whether disciplining a child,
is, in any way affected where a mother goes out
to work. Reactions of our working as well as
non-working mothers was soughtcadi their responses
are tabulated belo,,,. But these reactions must
be accepted with certain reservations,for no doubt,
the responses of each group will tend to be coloured and
by its Olm life-pattern,ian effort to defend it.
248.
TABLE VIII.9 : SHOWING THE REACTION OF WORKING AND NON-WORKING·MOTHERS TO WHETHER OUTSIDE WORK ADVERSELY AFFECTS CHILD DISCIPLINE
N.uiRRIED NON- WORKING REACTION EXECUTIVES HOUSEWIVES
Yes 31% 54%
No 29% 18%
Partly 8% 10%
Depends on the person looking atter the child
3% 4% in the mother l s absence
Depends on hours of work 2% and nature of job
No effect 2%
Undecided 29% 8%
Depends on individual cases, cannot generalize 2%
-0:
... .As the above table shows, the majodty of
worktng mothers (29$) indicate either that outside ...
wOrk has no adverse effect on the upbringing and
disciplining of children, or an equal number (29%) -If' .,. ...
were undecided about the issue. On the other hand,
•
the maj ority - 54% of housewives felt that outside •. ~.,)
work ~ have an adverse effect on child discipline.
249.
There were 2 types of responses on which the 2
groups were more or less in agreement: i.e., the
response "partly", which was given by 8% 'of
working and 10% of non-working mothers, and the
response that child discipHne being affected by
the mother going out to work depended lion the
mother-substitute". Other notable responses given· •
by the house",i ves were that: (1) this issue depends
also on the hours of work of the absent mother
as also the nature of her "lOrkj and (11) that
is the question is more personal and individual .;
so that generalisation cannot be adequate. This .. seems a very acceptable statement for irideed, 2
• mothers may agree verbally and in t..heory on what ~... .
:consti-tutes 'discipline', but in actu8~ practice,
their expectations may differ, 1tTith the result that .-
any "conclusion. based C.' ~ ;t
of much. value. ... -on such responses, would not be
Po