Father's Day

There was a lovely article in this morning's Age about modern fathers: a discussion about how it has become the norm for fathers to play an active role in their children's upbringing. Gone are the days when men were derided if they were seen to be pushing the pram. Now men are more likely to be derided if they are not seen to be doing their bit with the kids. Certainly, at my son's school there seem to be as many fathers as there are mothers doing the daily school run. And the swimming pool on a Saturday morning is mostly a "dads and kids" zone. Yesterday at the pool I was touched to see a young father playing in the water with his daughter. Of course, it's always touching to see the dads playing with their kids. But this dad looked as though he was only about 25 years old. I had become so accustomed to seeing parents in their thirties and forties (and often dads who look to be in their fifties) that I found it refreshing to see such a young parent out with his kid.

Today's article on fatherhood included a profile of a very young new father: just 16 years old. It brought tears to my eyes to read about how much he was enjoying fatherhood and the active role he was playing in his baby's new life. Why is it that I found this so touching? Well, I am a big softy so it doesn't take much to make me tear up. But I think it's got something to do with seeing someone who bucks a stereotype, especially seeing a teenage boy expressing love and tenderness and responsibility. See, they're not all that bad.

The article also mentioned Reservoir Dad, a Melbourne stay-at-home-dad who blogs about his experiences. He said he has been surprised to find many people question his motives and don't seem to understand why he has given up work to look after the kids. His wife enjoys her job and wanted to return to work. He was not happy at work and wanted to look after the kids so his wife could work. It seems like a no-brainer to me. Funny that there might still be some resistance to this reversing of stereotyped roles.

Personally I have found plenty of resistance to the role-reversal idea. Unfortunately the resistance has come from my own family. Now don't get me wrong, my husband is a great father. He spends lots of time with the kids. He works from home, so there is no long commute and he is usually there to eat an evening meal with us. Okay, we have to bang on his office door and tell him it's time to come out for dinner. But at least he is there. And working from home means he can drop the kids off at childcare/school on the two days a week that I'm at work. And on the weekends he takes the kids swimming, he takes them to the park, he does heaps with them. From an outsider's point of view it looks like I'm married to the perfect hands-on dad. But it's not all as it seems.

Last year, when my husband was made redundant, I was privately thankful. Finally, I thought, I'll be able to get a bit of time to finish some writing I'd been working on. I thought my husband would take a week off to spend with the kids before looking for more work. I thought he would want to do this. But when I suggested this to him he was not happy. "Looking for work is a full-time job," he said, and "you always take the piss with my time." Well, I don't and he knows this. I was not asking him to look after the kids so I could get my nails done, I just needed a few days to finish some work. I needed to spend a little bit of time nurturing my own career. Of course, this was an extremely stressful time and he was in a panic. And as it turned out he didn't need to be. Within a week he was offered a short-term contract with his old employer, which has since become a permanent contract.

But it doesn't end there. I had hoped that contracting would mean he could have some flexibility with his hours. When I was offered a .5 contract later that year, going from 2 days a week to 2.5, I suggested he might like to reduce his hours and look after the kids for one day a fortnight: he would work a 9-day fortnight while I worked a 5-day fortnight, and the kids would remain in childcare for two days, rather than three days, a week. This suggestion was met with extreme resistance. In fact, let's me honest, it was met with anger. Similarly the idea that perhaps it might be time for me to look for full-time work while he goes part-time (there were lots of opportunities out there for me at the time). Okay that was never going to happen: he earns far more than I do. But I am never going to be in a position to increase my earning potential if I can't get the experience necessary, and so long as I am confined to part-time work I am going to be confined to fairly junior roles. There's the rub.

But it's not really about my career. It's about both of us getting the balance right. My husband does not like to pick my son up from school on the days that I am at work. He is at home, only five minute's walk away from school. I understand that he needs to protect his work time. But it would do him good to have a walk and it would be a great opportunity to chat to his son about his day on the way home. This does not happen. Instead I arrange for another parent to pick him up and drop him off at home. It saddens me that my husband cannot see what he is missing.

Yesterday I heard of the best mum/dad childcare arrangement I've come across. Both partners work 7-day fortnights. The kids are in childcare two days a week. Mum is at home with them one day, Dad is at home with them another day, and Mum and Dad alternate on the remaining day. This seems ideal to me. I told my husband about it last night: "Doesn't it sound like the perfect arrangement?"

"No," he said, "it sounds awful."  Why did he think that? Does he just not like being at home with the kids? No. The problem is he thinks that if he spends any less than 50 hours a week working he will become unemployable. Clearly I am going to be fighting an uphill battle if I am hoping for a role-reversal.