Tuesday, November 20, 2012

Co-Parenting Irks My Sensibilities


And this is the why...

I'm going to be an obnoxious twenty one year old and cry out from my petite pedestal that I dislike a term/lifestyle: co-parenting.

I'd never heard of this term before I discovered this blog, which is a blog by a lady by the name of J., who--along with her husband--runs an organization/ministry.

I've read quite a few of J's posts, and I agree that she has some good ideas, and many interesting points. She’s an intelligent writer. However, this particular post irked me. J and her husband "co-parent", a term which confused me, at first—but supposedly-- is the idea that both parents equally parent the child.

So, the kiddos get equal mommy and daddy time. Time to be nurtured and loved from  Mommy and nurtured (in the masculine sense) and loved from Daddy?   Yay! Right?

What co-parenting does is insist that both parents have equal diaper, feeding, reading, teaching, disciplining time with the child and equal working out, working, recreation, and hobby time for themselves. 

Like any kid who's tried to split a Snickers bar perfectly in half knows, 50/50 rarely works out, even if both sides sincerely try. 

Last week was metaphor and simile week in poetry class. ;)

J and her husband both have their careers, and they both want to devote ample and equal time to their respective careers. It seems reasonable enough. 

But, it was when J penned [fine, typed] these words that my I cannot stand this idea and this woman makes me want to slap her radar began blaring. "I notice the pattern, that I write when [child] sleeps, and that[ husband]  writes while I watch [child]."

Watch.

Take.

Care for.

These words, when written in the tone she writes them in, do not denote a mother, comforting, loving, and adoring the moments spend with her child, but an underpaid babysitter grumbling about overtime she's required to put in watching a child, albeit a beloved child. 

If you doubt me, or think I'm being histrionic, I heartily encourage you to read the blog post (linked above). 

J seems to think that parenting is a shift, clocking in an out, passing notes off to the relief. Co-parenting is great, she thinks, until your shift goes into overtime, or when your co-worker gets sick, or when you don't get to [whatever].

The theme of J's post is Mercy. And one of the things she needs to be merciful in, is her husband just spending too much time on his work, his hobbies, errands, and not spending his share of time with their son so she can attend to her other very  important duties

After all, hubby not taking his due time with the child is definitely reason to be bitter and resentful. Having to write when the child is asleep, instead of husband doing his time watching him is really, really incorrigible. 

Susie, you don't have kids..sooo...

No, not yet. I've only been married for 3 months, so if I had a baby right now, that'd be awkward to explain to the family. However, I do have two awesome real-life anecdotes of
parents who parent, tag teaming through the joys, vomit, tears, and giggles of raising children. 

And one from…well, you’ll see…

The first is the beautiful, delightful couple whose darling, adorable, twin two year old munchkins I babysit once a week. Both of them have their careers, and they both are striving to be the best parents they can be to their [seriously I adore them] precious children. Daddy is in the military and Mommy is in the reserve and is getting her master's, along with working. The cuties spend some time in day care (no comment about that) but lots and lots of time with mommy or daddy, and of course, mommy AND daddy. They also spend one afternoon a week (sometimes more) with their loud, vivacious, and exciting babysitter, Miss Susie ;).  They love, adore, admire BOTH their parents, although Daddy is sometimes the "cooler parent" because he gives them candy. Their favorite time of day is when they get both parents.

And their parents love them, spending time with them, reading to them and encouraging those fresh little minds, and raising them up to be beautiful girls. They love their careers too, but their children, rather, their family, is at the forefront of their lives. 

Their spirits, demeanor, and the very way they fall to their knees and open up their arms to embrace their squealing children show that they joyfully parent their babies. It's not "I spent more time with them this week, so next week you better up the ante" but "I work so I can provide for my beautiful children and rush home to spend time with them and you, my love". They are truly the most beautiful family. J's "I watch [my child]" bitterness looks vapid, absurd, and selfish next to this shining example of marriage and parenting.

The second...

She's going to write about her parents again..

Yes, yes, I am. 

Daddy was a hard-working, dreamin' entrepreneur, who started a few businesses, and loved his savior, his family, and the party of Reagan. Mama was (and still is) an educated women, who LOVED and rejoiced in being a stay at home mom,who homeschooled her eight kids, worked alongside her husband in his various businesses, and kept the home front sane and running. 

Ask any of us older kids about our childhood memories when Daddy was alive and you'll hear...

Daddy took us here...

Mama taught us this...

We burned down this played this game...

Both my parents were actively involved in my religious, mental, physical, and education upbringing and development, and ergo, both were thoroughly involved in my life. 

And the surprise…

In the hit t.v. series, That Seventies Show, the bumbling idiot of the show, Kelso, has a baby with a girl named Brook. Brook is an intelligent, beautiful, loving woman, brimming with maternal instinct and baby book knowledge. However, she can't seem to figure out the art of cloth diaper pinning. Brook, in one episode, bursts into tears, convinced there's no way her child will survive because its mother can't figure out how to diaper it. 

Kelso, however, is a master at diaper-pinning. 

Brook and Kelso realize they both have strengths and abilities to bring into their child's life, and if they BOTH are involved, the wee one might have a chance. 

But it doesn't have to be 50/50. Split down the middle. 12 hours on, 12 off. 

From what I've observed and learned, good parenting is a natural patch-work of the parents tag-teaming, and using their own gifts to help grow the child. 


Co-parenting? Co-parenting sounds like regimented babysitting shifts. 


And for Stephen and I and our children?

Well, having changed hundreds of diapers (big and small), compared to Stephen's, ahem, zero, I win the diaper wars. ;)  Being the bubbly, energetic, people-lover--with a well-developed nurturing muscle--that I am, I'll probably do most the child "watching" (to quote J). However, I am so excited that my brilliant, analytic, godly, and geeky husband is going to contribute to our children's daily routines, experiences, and probably, tastes. So much Star Wars...

So I guess we'll be co-parenting, just dropping the "co" and keeping the "parenting" and the many trials, joys, and crazy moments that word means. No time clocks needed!

I want to mother like H. from Carrots for Michelmas, who uses her brilliance to write, relies on God to be a grace-filled mother, and positively adores her husband. 

Note: this blog post is about how I don't agree with the idea or practice of co-parenting. However, I think that J., even with her differing mindset, is trying to have a healthful attitude about the issue (see end of her blog). It's just that co-parenting, in and of itself, seems to be founded off of selfishness.  Each conscience is different, and for mine, the practice of co-parenting would be a selfish one, and consequently, a wrong one. 

Motherhood is a great honor and privilege, yet it is also synonymous with servanthood. Every day woman are called upon to selflessly meet the needs of their families. Whether they are awake at night nursing a baby, spending their time and money on less-than-grateful-teenagers, or preparing meals, mothers constantly put others before themselves. --Charles Stanley


No comments:

Post a Comment