» » The War Against Parents: What We Can Do for America's Beleaguered Moms & Dads

Download The War Against Parents: What We Can Do for America's Beleaguered Moms & Dads fb2

by Cornel West,Marguerite Gavin,Lloyd James,Sylvia Ann Hewlett
Download The War Against Parents: What We Can Do for America's Beleaguered Moms & Dads fb2
Family Relationships
  • Author:
    Cornel West,Marguerite Gavin,Lloyd James,Sylvia Ann Hewlett
  • ISBN:
    0786117222
  • ISBN13:
    978-0786117222
  • Genre:
  • Publisher:
    Blackstone Pub; Unabridged edition (March 1, 2001)
  • Subcategory:
    Family Relationships
  • Language:
  • FB2 format
    1675 kb
  • ePUB format
    1962 kb
  • DJVU format
    1630 kb
  • Rating:
    4.6
  • Votes:
    805
  • Formats:
    mbr lit doc docx


Sylvia Ann Hewlett Cornel West1 January 2007 parents have been left twisting in the wind by . .

Sylvia Ann Hewlett Cornel West1 January 2007 parents have been left twisting in the wind by a society intent on other agendas. -from the book In The War against Parents, two different parents from diverse. backgrounds-a female economist from Wales and an African American religious studies professor from inner city America-come together to assay what they describe as the world's antagonism toward parenting.

Sylvia Ann Hewlett, a white feminist, and Cornel West, a black human rights activist, join in a rare partnership to address the burning social issue of our time: the abandonment of America's parents. A brave and personal book (New York Post).

Sylvia Ann Hewlett (Author), Cornel West (Author), Marguerite Gavin (Narrator). Get this audiobook plus a second, free. There are governmental reforms needed in the tax code and Social Security and Medicare tax and benefits code to get rid of funded and unfunded subsidies to sole breadwinners.

Sylvia Ann Hewlett and Cornel West call for a Parents' Bill of Rights that gives new value and dignity to the .

Sylvia Ann Hewlett and Cornel West call for a Parents' Bill of Rights that gives new value and dignity to the parental role and restores our nation's commitment to the well-being of children. Hewlett and West show how for thirty years big business, government, and the wider culture have waged a silent war against parents. We live in a nation where market work, centered on profits and greed, increasingly crowds out nonmarket work, centered on commitment and care.

Sylvia Ann Hewlett and Cornel West. In this book, subtitled What We Can Do for America's Beleaguered Moms and Dads, two different parents with different backgrounds of their own, one black, one female, come together to assay what they describe in the prologue as the world's antagonism toward parents and parenting.

We’re dedicated to reader privacy so we never track you. We never accept ads. But we still need to pay for servers and staff. I know we could charge money, but then we couldn’t achieve our mission: a free online library for everyone. This is our day. Today. To bring the best, most trustworthy information to every internet reader. I believe all of this.

West and Hewlett hope to spark a parents' movement that will lead to implementation of a ""Parents' Bill . A potent presentation that may energize legislators and policymakers to end the ""war"" and reassess the needs of families. Pub Date: April 20th, 1998.

West and Hewlett hope to spark a parents' movement that will lead to implementation of a ""Parents' Bill of Rights,"" including such items as paid parenting leave, a ""living wage,"" legal and moral support for fathers (for instance, in child custody disputes), and family health coverage. Publisher: Houghton Mifflin. Questions? Call us! 88. 85.

The War Against Parents book. Sylvia Ann Hewlett, a white feminist, and Cornel West, a black human rights activist, join in a rare partnership to address the burning social issue of our time: the abandonment of America's parents. A "brave and personal book" (New York Post), The War Against Parents calls for a Parents' bill of Rights that gives new dignity to the parental role and restores our nation's commitment to the well-being of children.

Sylvia Ann Hewlett, a white feminist, and Cornel West, a black human rights activist, join in a rare partnership to.

One of the best-kept secrets of the last thirty years is that big business, government, and the wider culture have waged a silent war against parents, undermining the work that they do.parents have been left twisting in the wind by a society intent on other agendas.from the bookIn The War against Parents, two different parents from diverse backgroundsa female economist from Wales and an African American religious studies professor from inner city Americacome together to assay what they describe as the world's antagonism toward parenting. Analyzing the trends that have led to this shift of balance, from changing political and economic forces to the rise of television and divorce, they call for a Parents' Bill of Rights to restore the dignity of the parental role and our nation's commitment to the well-being of children.

Nargas
This book is interesting. The victimization mentality may be a bit overstated, particularly given that some of the authors' solutions are backwards (i.e. reinforce problems rather than address them), but I think they make some good points that both government and the marketplace are not supporting healthy families and, in some cases, are actively interfering with them.

I gave the book only two stars because of at least three or four glaring errors in their advocacy that reinforce problems or even make them worse:

(1) They don't understand the tax code. They don't understand the harm of income-splitting (i.e. adding more of it to our tax code, which already does this to some extent). Income-splitting is a fiction where income of one spouse is allocated to the other for the purpose of assessing tax and reducing the tax burden. Income-splitting is really a way to subsidize sole breadwinners at the expense of dependent spouses, 2-earner/2-parent marrieds, and single people; it was instituted in 1948. It is a type of regressive taxation that hits the the lower earning partner in a marriage very hard. The authors are focused on the 1969 relief of the singles penalty and how it created a partial marriage penalty while they miss the elephant in the room, which is the 1948 fictional amalgamation of married couple's earnings in the first place. (Most OECD countries have moved on from this to removing the fiction by connecting tax directly with the person who earns it.) The US system is not child-centric, it is sole breadwinner-centric. And the burdens of this fall disproportionately on minorities.

(2) They don't understand the payroll tax code. The payroll tax code currently requires higher wage workers to subsidize lower wage workers but does not assess a capital/property-based earner tax. This model is the reason Wal-Mart is able to profit so much in poor areas; the owners shift the cost of their workers to Social Security and other tax base of higher wage workers (and Wal-Mart doesn't employ many of these workers). Second, payroll taxes "paid by the company" usually just mean the company reduces the worker's wages or salary accordingly. Without a capital/property-based earner tax the owners and passive financiers will readily shift the cost right back to the workers (and mostly to high wage workers).

(3) They don't understand how child development is distorted by female-centric responsibility for child care and unpaid work. Although they both seem to say that a 2-parent responsibility for the unpaid work of children is desirable, their focus on things like income-splitting seems to say they don't care about this. This makes the book seem to care much more about parents than about children. A number of psychologists (Dinnerstein, Pruett, Greenspan and many others) have illustrated both theoretically and empirically that early childhood care done only or primarily by women distorts children's development. Shared parenting models are healthier for children. Paternity has been provable since 1970; why is this not discussed among the solution.

(4) They are naive about how the WWII GI Bill privileged men and hurt women and created dysfunctional family structures that exploded in the late 1960s. It is insane to think the 1950s family structure was healthy; if it was there would not have been such a watershed rebellion in the 1970s.

Some good books on 2-earner/2-parent marriage include "The Four-Thirds Solution", (a book the authors mention) "Equally Shared Parenting" and "Taxing Women". There are governmental reforms needed in the tax code and Social Security and Medicare tax and benefits code to get rid of funded and unfunded subsidies to sole breadwinners. I personally don't think paid parental leave is necessary (and may actually be harmful from a child welfare standpoint by just adding another program where people get paid to have children). If you really need parental leave insurance, gender-neutral parental leave insurance policies could perhaps be enacted at the state level (as California and some other states have done) but ONLY WITH A CAPITAL/PROPERTY-EARNER TAX (the current state programs, in CA, NJ, elsewhere repeat the regressive tax problem of Social Security where higher-wage workers pay for everyone). It would best if these were a more conventional insurance program (i.e. one that does not subsidize low-wage workers). Also, please do not subsidize female-centric parenting; women may have use their half the leave during times when biological demands are greatest (pregnancy and early breastfeeding) rather than trying to work during this time.

Income-splitting in the tax code and female-centric responsibility for unpaid work of the family will reinforce problems for children rather than fix them.

Some ideas in the book do make good sense, though, such as year-round school, later-starting school hours, etc. Only a fraction of the population needs school to be built around the family farm.
Xinetan
For all those who would criticize mothers for working outside of the home, and for wanting schools and workplaces to be more family-friendly, try to remember that this is not the 1950's! Most mothers simply CANNOT afford to stay home with their children, and NO, it is not because us working mothers are materialistic, greedy, and value work over our children! I find it awfully convenient how the women who like to attack working mothers for not staying home with their children, and who like to say, "Well, I can afford to stay home, so they can too", are always the ones who have husbands with good jobs earning $40,000-$50,000+ a year.

My husband brings home about $1,500 a month from his job after taxes, medical insurance, etc. is taken out. Tell me how a family of four can live off $1,500 a month, with having to pay for rent, utilities, food, clothes, prescriptions (my husband has diabetes, and my daughter has asthma, eczema, and allergies), etc? If I quit working, we would starve. I work full-time so my family can eat, and have a roof over our heads, NOT so we can live in a huge house, drive two new cars, or go on expensive vacations. My family and I live in a rented, 1960's era condo in a working-class suburb. We shop at discount stores such as Marc's and Wal-Mart for our food. We buy all our clothes through end of the season clearance sales. We've been on one vacation in the past 10 years. We have one vehicle, and an older one at that. We are hardly living it up while our children languish in daycare.

And yes, besides just the outdated attitudes of some parents, our schools and workplaces are stuck in the 1950's as well! I can't tell you how many times I've been criticized and punished by bosses at different jobs for having to take time off from work when my children are sick, or have days off from school, etc. My daughter is in the second grade, and I calculated that between summer vacation, Easter/Christmas vacations, other holidays, teacher in service days, etc, that she only goes to school 8 months out of each year. I am constantly scrambling to find care for her during her time off, and I know that there are millions of other working parents in the same situation.

This book is right on target.
Inerrace
If you are one of the politically hard-over types --left or right-- don't bother buying this book. This book is really for the open minded reader who is looking for an analytical and cautious approach to what ails us as a nation.

Systematically Cornell and Hewlett do that. They look at what worked in the past (when families seemed to be working for adults and children), and how that has changed to get us where we are today (latch key kids, high child suicide rates, high pregnancy rates). They point fingers at the far left and at the far right. They look at myth and truth and how often it is hard to discern which is which.

Some reviewers say they are liberal. Perhaps. But not so it matters. They certainly don't find much good to say about the programs of LBJ's Great Society, nor liberal divorce policies. Plus they argue for the importance of religion and parent-in-charge strategies in regards to child rearing, voting, and generally participating in society.

Four stars. If you are hard-over one way or another politically, ignore their arguments and just look at the data that Cornell and Hewlett have collected, then make up your own mind.

For the rest of you, this is a conscientious book that attempts to take a broad look at the problems that ail the American family today.