2020年10月14日 星期三

Mothers are the ‘Shock Absorbers’ of Our Society

The pandemic is forcing moms out of work at great financial, societal and marital costs.

Mothers are the ‘Shock Absorbers’ of Our Society

Olivia Waller

Dharushana Muthulingam was on maternity leave with her second child when the pandemic began. In April, she returned to her full-time job as an infectious disease physician and public health researcher at Washington University in St. Louis, Mo. Muthulingam, 38, was working remotely with a team reviewing Covid results, figuring out if people needed retests, and guiding the hospital about how to take virus precautions.

She was working six to seven days a week, she said, including night-time calls, sometimes with her kids awake beside her. Muthulingam and her husband, a research scientist, had moved far from family in California and Idaho to work in St. Louis, and her father had a heart attack this year. Her husband’s job is less flexible than hers is for the first time in their relationship, and after he had taken on the extra domestic load for many years when her job was more intense, something had to give.

So Muthulingam made the difficult and painful decision to step back from her research position and go part-time as a physician — despite the fact that doing so may set back her academic career. And because she’s a public health researcher, that’s not just a personal loss, it’s an obvious loss to society.

“My decision keeps me up at night,” she said. She knows that she can come back to this important work later, but right now her well-being and humanity are stretched too thin. “I have a lot of optimal circumstances,” she said, “A successful career trajectory, an A-plus feminist husband who tries to step up and do 50-percent plus, and I have a workplace that’s supportive. But at the end of the day that’s not enough.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Many married mothers are finding themselves in the same untenable position Muthulingam did: making decisions that are sensible for their families in the near-term, but are also emotionally devastating and have long-lasting consequences. Women already accounted for the majority of jobs lost during the early days of pandemic. And every month since June, “there’s been a pronounced slowing of job growth and labor participation for married women,” according to Michael Madowitz, an economist at the Center for American Progress.

Overall, four times more women than men dropped out of the labor force in September, so the situation for single women isn’t looking so hot, either. “Three women dropped out for every woman who got a job,” Madowitz said.

Though we can’t be sure that what’s going on is entirely because of parental status, both economists I spoke to thought the dire situation for women was related to remote learning and the lack of child care availability.

“The drop in female labor-force participation was quite dismal and not surprising with the return back to school not happening,” said Betsey Stevenson, a professor of economics and public policy at the University of Michigan, as most of the biggest school districts are fully remote, and even many hybrid models provide a paucity of in-person learning. There is past evidence that during times of employment uncertainty, heterosexual couples fall back into traditional gender roles, according to Jessica Calarco, an associate professor of sociology at Indiana University.

ADVERTISEMENT

Because of the outrageous expense of child care in the United States, even before the pandemic, “women with young kids in many cases pay to work,” said Stevenson, which is to say, they’re paying more for care and other work-related expenses than they’re making in salary. But this is usually a decision that makes sense for the long haul, because there is ample evidence that mothers are financially penalized for taking time out of the work force, and child care costs go down when children enter school.

Without school, the calculation implodes. If you can even get child care, the high expenses continue, and during this pandemic, there is more housework to be done and more child-related tasks to complete. (For example, I spent at least 15 minutes last week trying to log into Seesaw — a string of words that would not have even made sense to me before March 2020.) Because men tend to outearn women, it is economically the more rational decision for some proportion of mothers to leave their jobs.

But that does not mean they’re happy about it, or that it’s good for marriages or long-term financial security. “Sacrificing market skills to help your family comes at a really big cost,” said Stevenson. “And potentially causes tensions in marriages, and when you put those two together, a generation of women may be pretty badly scarred by Covid.”

Calarco has been conducting a survey of over 100 Indiana mothers as part of the Pandemic Parenting Study since April, and she found that almost 40 percent of her respondents are reporting increases in pandemic-related frustrations with their partners, and child care is a major source of strife. Rather than ask their spouses to step up their domestic contributions, “mothers blame themselves for these conflicts and feel responsible for reducing them, including by leaving the work force, beginning use of antidepressants, or ignoring their own concerns about Covid-19,” Calarco and her co-authors noted in a pre-print of a new paper using data from their study.

ADVERTISEMENT

As Muthulingam put it, women are the “shock absorbers of our system, and the poorer and more precarious you are, the more shock you’re expected to absorb.” She recognizes how lucky she is to even be able to cut down on work — something single mothers, like Jamie Brody, 38, of Boynton Beach, Fla., cannot do.

Brody has a 3-year-old daughter, and she lost her job as an account executive for an insurance company in May, which she described as “quite traumatic.” When she was unemployed and without consistent child care, she would spend all day teaching and playing with her kid. Then after she put her daughter to bed, Brody estimated that she spent three to five hours each night scouring job sites looking for work.

She finally found a job selling data visualization software, which she started two weeks ago, and Brody’s daughter is back in preschool, which makes her feel anxious. “I feel like I’m choosing between health and financial security,” she said. That’s a choice that no parent should have to make.

P.S. Follow us on Instagram @NYTParenting. If this was forwarded to you, sign up for the NYT Parenting newsletter here.

Want More on Working Parents?

  • I really don’t want to depress you any further, but this study about women in the workplace from McKinsey and LeanIn.Org is extremely bleak and includes statistics such as: “One in three mothers may be forced to scale back or opt out" of their jobs because of fallout from Covid-19.
  • This study from Catalyst is similarly upsetting and bad! The most striking statistic from this research is that 42 percent of parents are afraid to take advantage of benefits that their employers are offering during the pandemic, because they fear it will be a risk to their job security.
  • I want to leave you on something hopeful, though, so please enjoy this quote from Louise Glück, an American poet who just won the Nobel Prize in Literature, via a 2014 interview she did with Poets & Writers magazine. It was brought to my attention by NY Writers Coalition on Instagram.

“I used to be approached in classes by women who felt they shouldn’t have children because children were too distracting, or would eat up the vital energies from which art comes. But you have to live your life if you’re going to do original work. Your work will come out of an authentic life, and if you suppress all of your most passionate impulses in the service of an art that has not yet declared itself, you’re making a terrible mistake.” — Louise Glück

Tiny Victories

Parenting can be a grind. Let’s celebrate the tiny victories.

I bought my 2-year-old twins $1 dog and cat masks. They spent the whole of the following hour wearing them and yelling “Woof!” and “Meow!” at each other. Money well spent. Alice Henchley, London

If you want a chance to get your Tiny Victory published, find us on Instagram @NYTparenting and use the hashtag #tinyvictories; email us; or enter your Tiny Victory at the bottom of this page. Include your full name and location. Tiny Victories may be edited for clarity and style. Your name, location and comments may be published, but your contact information will not. By submitting to us, you agree that you have read, understand and accept the Reader Submission Terms in relation to all of the content and other information you send to us.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for NYT Parenting from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

2020年10月13日 星期二

On Tech: When to buy a new phone. Or not.

If you're wondering if you should buy a new smartphone, ask yourself these questions. first.

When to buy a new phone. Or not.

Amrita Marino

Apple will talk on Tuesday about its new iPhones and other doodads. Brian X. Chen, a technology columnist for The New York Times, has a three-question quiz to help you decide whether it’s worth considering a new smartphone or sticking with what you have. (You can watch Apple’s iPhone unveiling here. Or don’t. The Times will have the useful bits here.)

It’s that time of year again when companies scratch and claw and advertise like heck to get us to buy the latest versions of their phones. The difference this year is that it’s 2020, and the world feels upside down. Many of us are facing unemployment or dealing with stresses that can’t be solved with slabs of computer circuits — and have no desire or ability to buy a new smartphone.

The good news is that modern smartphones are so robust and reliable that most of us probably won’t need to ditch our old ones. Here are a few questions to ask yourself to determine whether it’s time to consider a new phone.

Can I still get software updates?

If your smartphone is so old that the manufacturer is no longer issuing the latest operating system for your phone, you may need to consider buying a new one. Without the latest operating system, you may be missing out on important bug fixes and security enhancements. Some of your favorite apps may have also stopped working properly.

Here’s how to find out:

  • Apple’s website shows that its most recent operating software, iOS 14, works for phones going back to the iPhone 6S from 2015. If you own a model that’s older than that, you should probably consider a new device.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Androids tend to have a shorter shelf life. On average, manufacturers support Android devices for two to three years before they stop providing updates to the operating system and security software. Do a web search for your phone model to find out whether it can download the latest version of Android, currently Android 11. For example, owners of the original Google Pixel smartphone are no longer guaranteed to receive software or security updates, according to a chart posted by Google. If you own the Pixel from 2016, it's a good time to replace it with a newer phone. Here’s some information on Samsung smartphones that work with Android 11.

Is my device beyond repair?

If your device can still get the freshest software but it has other problems, like a short-lived battery or a broken screen, I recommend researching whether it’s worth repairing the device. Replacing a battery costs about $50 to $70, and a new screen from an independent fix-it shop usually costs around $100. That’s far cheaper (and less wasteful) than buying a new smartphone.

But at some point the cost of repairs isn’t worth it. The good news is that you don’t have to pay $1,000. Excellent smartphones, like the Google Pixel 4A and iPhone SE, cost $350 and $400.

Am I unhappy with my phone?

This is a tough one because satisfaction is subjective. If you feel that your phone isn’t keeping up with your needs in terms of speed, features or photo image quality, then it’s perfectly reasonable to upgrade, assuming you can afford to. But try to make the decision based on your needs and wants, rather than caving to pressure from peers or corporate advertising.

If you don’t already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

ADVERTISEMENT

Being wrong on Facebook is often dangerous

It’s Shira Ovide, taking over the rest of the newsletter.

Mark Zuckerberg says he wants Facebook to give people a voice, and that has included allowing denial of the Holocaust on its websites and apps. The company on Monday changed its mind.

Facebook’s switcheroo is important for two reasons. First, it showed yet again that — despite the company’s claims — it is in fact an arbiter of speech. And second, it pointed to a conundrum in Zuckerberg’s argument that all views should be permitted online because the internet should be a place for people to be wrong.

On Facebook’s stance that it doesn’t want to be an “arbiter of truth” online, well, as I’ve written about before in this newsletter, it is.

ADVERTISEMENT

Facebook has thousands of pages of rules of what people are allowed to say and do on its websites and apps. Most of us would agree that it’s good that Facebook takes a hard line against terrorists who openly plot violence online or people posting images of child sexual abuse. The debate is where Facebook should draw the lines in other areas and the trade offs of the company’s decisions.

Second, the policy change exposes holes in Facebook’s principles. When Zuckerberg two years ago defended the ability of Holocaust deniers to post their views, he said that people should have room to say factually wrong, even abhorrent, things on the internet — unless the bad information resulted in real-world harm.

That sounds reasonable. But in reality, wrong information on the internet often has devastating consequences. Unfounded information about wireless technology causing the coronavirus, about a school shooting being a hoax or about criminal activity in a Washington pizza parlor all caused real harm. Zuckerberg said that his views on Holocaust denial and distortions changed after he saw information about increases in anti-Semitic violence.

That reality most likely requires Facebook to devote more people and money to effectively spot when the lines have been crossed between online expression and real-world danger. And it requires a commitment from Facebook to be smarter about understanding humans and not merely regurgitating free speech principles that don’t stand up to logic.

Before we go …

  • Divided recommendations on an Uber ballot measure: I wrote Monday about Uber and other app companies backing a ballot measure in California that would overturn a state law requiring app contract workers to be reclassified as employees. The New York Times editorial board recommended that California voters vote no, because doing so would “ensure gig workers the protections all workers deserve,” the editorial said. The editorial boards of two large California news organizations, The San Francisco Chronicle and The Mercury News & East Bay Times, recommended Californians vote yes on the measure, known as Proposition 22.
  • When apps become politics: Pakistan banned the TikTok app, citing what the government said was immoral and indecent content. Government critics said the ban was intended to stop criticism of the country’s leadership over how it has handled the coronavirus and economic challenges, my colleague Salman Masood reported.
  • Is everyone OK? Our social media habits suggest NO, WE ARE NOT: Researchers created the “Hedonometer” to track our collective happiness based on the words we write on Twitter. The data are far from perfect, but readings show — perhaps unsurprisingly — sustained sadness this year, Casey Schwartz wrote for The Times. The saddest day recorded by the Hedonometer in the last 13 years was Sunday, May 31, 2020.

Hugs to this

Birding enthusiasts in New York are obsessed with a barred owl that has popped up in Central Park. And I gotta say, the owl is beautiful, especially when yawning or looking sad.

We want to hear from you. Tell us what you think of this newsletter and what else you’d like us to explore. You can reach us at ontech@nytimes.com.

If you don’t already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for On Tech with Shira Ovide from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018