Crunchy Con

She had everything -- but a life

Saturday November 7, 2009

Categories: Culture, Family

Alex e-mailed to me the remarkable story of Gaby Hinsliff, the political editor of The Observer newspaper in England -- or rather, the former political editor, inasmuch as she resigned because she concluded she couldn't have both a high-powered career and a satisfying family life. Excerpt:

Tucked away down a winding track on a remote Welsh peninsula, the farmhouse we rented for a family holiday last June was a much-needed haven from real life. My two-year-old son and his cousins ran wild on the empty beaches all day, chasing crabs through rock pools. When they all finally fell asleep in a sandy tangle of sheets, the adults cracked open another bottle and watched the sun sink slowly into the water. Months of tension melted away... until the night someone flicked on the television for the weather forecast, just in time to see James Purnell resign from the cabinet.

"That's the end, then," I said.

Of Gordon Brown, someone wondered? But I meant, of the holiday. The point of journalism is being there when things happen: the blessing, and the curse, of political journalism is that things happen so often. I rang the office, and started packing.

All the way back down the motorway, the car seethed with resentment. "Freddie NOT go home," said my son mutinously, kicking the back of the seat. "Yes, well, Daddy doesn't want to either," my husband muttered. Even the dog glowered.

And was that the tipping point? The moment I realised I couldn't do this any more, couldn't do it to my family any more, and would therefore have to resign from the job I loved? It would make for a convenient story if it was. But in all honesty, it was a slower, subtler thing than that.

Surrender steals up on the working mother like hypothermia takes a stranded climber: the chill deepens day by day, disorientation sets in, and before you know it you are gone. In the sleepless blur of the last three years, I can barely even remember now how it started.

More:

Every day became a battle against the clock. I never listened properly to phone conversations with friends, because I was always simultaneously doing something else. I was so on edge I raged at the tiniest delay - tourists blocking tube escalators, a computer slow to spark up in the morning. Running for the train in high heels, I sprained my ankle: the doctor prescribed some exercises, but who had time for that? I wore flat shoes, took painkillers.

My reward was that for two crazed but fantastic years, I did - in that loaded cliche - have it all: terrific job, plus small child. Thanks largely to a brilliant nanny and a hands-on partner, I don't honestly believe either suffered from the other.

But what got lost in the rush was a life, if a life means having time for the people you love, engaging with the world around you, making a home rather than just running a household.

So when my long-suffering husband was offered a new job in Oxford, involving the move to the countryside he has always wanted, there was strangely little to discuss. For years he had organised his own career to let me do what I loved, and now it felt like his turn. I closed my eyes and jumped.

But I never expected the emotional outpouring that followed. "Wish I had the guts to do the same," texted a junior minister, when I announced my resignation.

A seemingly unflappable PR confessed secretly agonising over "not being the kind of mother my son deserves": a colleague whose slick work-life balance I had always envied admitted she was "at the end of my tether", dying to quit.

Confessions tumbled compulsively from people I barely knew: tales of stricken marriages, miscarriages, only children who were meant to have siblings but then a career got in the way. "Too many of us once had relationships that we haven't got now because of this job," said a veteran male reporter, now divorced.

"I can't afford regrets," mused a cabinet minister, "because I've had this fantastic career, but..." Politics had, he said, dominated his children's lives.

I hope you'll read Hinsliff's whole essay.

Hinsliff is now writing a blog about her life as she tries to downshift from high-powered career woman to stay-at-home mom. Here's an excerpt of a recent entry:

I come from a family where good food and the rituals associated with eating together -- talking, arguing, laughing, getting drunk -- mattered.

When I worked fulltime, cooking supper marked the transition from office to home: here is something terribly soothing about chopping, stirring, spooning. But it was also one more thing to fit in, and sometimes by the time it was finished I was too tired to eat it.
So Henry has reminded me that now I have more time I want to spend more of it on food: cooking for friends, cooking with my son, maybe growing a bit more of our own stuff, and working out how to use cheaper cuts and leftovers.

After all, without a fulltime salary, there can't be expensive takeaways and convenience foods and nice stuff from the deli. But there might actually be time to eat without getting indigestion.

I don't mean to give the impression that Hinsliff believes she's stepped out of a stressful life into a garden of domestic bliss. She's struggling with a lot of anxiety over whether or not she's done the right thing, and getting used to life at home all day instead of being at the office. What Gaby Hinsliff did takes courage, and I bet she'll embolden many more couples to try it. Her blog is one to watch.

Advertisement
Comments
R Hampton
November 9, 2009 1:41 PM

"It is so bogus that society is sending a message right now and has been for probably the last 40 years that a woman isn't strong enough or smart enough to be able to pursue an education, a career and her rights and still let her baby live."
Sarah Palin, Nov. 6 2006

Siarlys Jenkins
November 9, 2009 8:17 PM
http://siarlysjenkins.blogspot.com

If we look behind the "middle class family" model of the mid 20th century (a myth for millions of families), and behind the Industrial Revolution's twin bastards, child labor and protecting children from work, we might consider that for most of human history, "working for a living" was done in the vicinity of "the home," both parents had roles, women did plenty of hard physical labor, the children were always around somewhere within earshot, and the parents were always around somewhere, within earshot. Maybe we need to reintegrate our separate modes of life, in a modern, technologically current, humane, 21st century sort of way.

Quick note to Jon: I don't know how the actual Jewish name of the King David in the Bible was spelled or pronounced, but "David" is a modern Europeanized variation. A lot of Welsh people name their sons "David" or "Dafydd" (pronounced Dah-vith with the th as in there or this), because a much later St. Dafydd is the Welsh (or more properly, Cymraeg) patron saint -- even modern Welsh Protestants name their sons Dafydd. Real Biblical names would really be confusing, like Shlomo, Sh'aul, Yishayahu (you would expect it to read "Isaiah), or Chizqiyahu (Hezekiah). David, or Dafydd, is a good Welsh name. The Biblical kind we call King David actually had a good Hebrew name, and he was not Welsh.

Jon
November 10, 2009 6:55 AM

Re: I don't know how the actual Jewish name of the King David in the Bible was spelled or pronounced, but "David" is a modern Europeanized variation.

This is true: our English Biblical names come to us after first being filtered by Greek and Latin (and sometimes French). "James" for example started out as "Yacobimini". It's odd that the name "David" appears to be popular only in the British Isles (and their descendant nations), and probably derives mainly from the Welsh usage. Why was King David a popular source of naming there and no where else in Europe?

Karl G
November 10, 2009 10:58 AM

"It is so bogus that society is sending a message right now and has been for probably the last 40 years that a woman isn't strong enough or smart enough to be able to pursue an education, a career and her rights and still let her baby live."
Sarah Palin, Nov. 6 2006

Gotta love how that statement just drips with ignorance of poverty, and tries to spin the fact that the cost of pregnancy, never mind raising additional children represents an untenable burden on people who already can't make it above water into an attack on women. (And that's being generous and not reading in any implicit suggestion of just punishment for people who failed to adhere to her favored moral code.)

Mama C
November 17, 2009 10:41 PM

It's true that most women can't actually have much of a career-plus-baby without leaning pretty heavily on outside care. Question becomes, who is going to provide that extra care, and how are we going to pay them?

The spoiled yoga moms are a fair bit better than some of the part-time working young moms of my acquaintance, who don't quite make enough money to pay for reliable childcare, but whose husbands also don't have good enough prospects to make permanently forgoing their wives' small careers a reasonable option.

Those couples try to do opposite shifts to avoid burdensome childcare costs, but they also lean pretty heavily on friends and family to look after their kids during inevitable scheduling conflicts. It gets OLD after awhile.

All that "it takes a village" stuff leaves out the inevitable petty village drama.

I, for one, am feeling pretty tired of being the unpaid "emergency" back-up babysitter lately. grrr.

Read All Comments

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Please type the text you see in the box below to verify your post and help us prevent spam. You have a limited time to type - you may wish to compose your comment in a separate document and paste it here upon completion.

Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Advertisement

Search This Blog

About Crunchy Con

Rod Dreher is an editorial columnist for the Dallas Morning News, and author of "Crunchy Cons" (Crown Forum), a nonfiction book about conservatives, most of them religious, whose faith and political convictions sometimes put them at odds with mainstream conservatives. The views expressed in this blog are his own.

feed icon Subscribe

RSS Feed

Receive updates from Crunchy Con

Advertisement

Advertisement


About Beliefnet

Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness. More about Beliefnet.

Legal

Copyright © Beliefnet, Inc. and/or its licensors. All rights reserved. Use of this site is subject to Terms of Service and to our Privacy Policy. Constructed by Beliefnet.

Advertisement

Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.