English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I was watching an episode of the UK series Judge John Deed. As a side story to the main issue, the barrister - a female QC - was torn between staying in England which she loved and was familiar with, or leaving for South Africa for the sake of her foster son. She eventually decided to stay in the UK.

While watching it, I was fascinated by the emotion involved and as a lawyer myself, I could certainly understand why she was reluctant to leave a successful career.

However, as someone who was raised without a mother, I also believe that woman should put as first priority her children. Therefore, I also found myself disapproving of the fact that she eventually decided to stay behind.

Your opinions on this dilemma? Is a woman a mother first when she has young children, or is she still her own person?

2007-09-30 13:57:20 · 22 answers · asked by Lighthouse 5 in Social Science Gender Studies

Doc - because the story itself is fictional, I really can't give any more details. Her foster son was about 5.

2007-09-30 14:07:54 · update #1

To be fair to the mother, the foster son was going to South Africa with his biological father. Both the father and son desperately wished for her to live with them in South Africa.

2007-09-30 14:26:43 · update #2

22 answers

Can you give more details about the circumstances? How old was her foster son?

EDIT: Yep. At that age she sucks for abandoning him. He was still dependent.

Anyway, in most cases the child depends on her, so she has a responsibility to the child. You do realize that the whole point behind most men having a career is to provide for their family anyway so if the children would suffer if the career didn't it's pretty much a no brainer which choice would be made.

You don't just abandon a child because you want to pursue your career (or whatever).. I think it could even be considered murder or child abuse under a lot of circumstances.

2007-09-30 14:06:59 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4 8

Very good question! As a mother of five children, they have and always will be my number ONE priority above anything else.
I feel that if a woman feels that a career is more important than having children, then you should seriously consider not entering into motherhood. A lot of women successfully raise their children and re enter the work force once their kids start school, but they still manage to do both.
A woman can still be an individual and maintain her 'identity' as a person throughout motherhood as i feel it's important to keep an element of individuality for your own well being. We aren't just someone's wife, or someone's mother. We just need to set out priorities right in order to have that equilibrium

2007-09-30 21:28:04 · answer #2 · answered by leolady0765 4 · 2 0

After reading your information, it is easy to see that this particular episode touched a real personal note within you.
I am sure it was difficult without your mother being present.
When a woman gives birth she is a mother. But that does not denote that she is the best parent for the child. In our society women who make choices like you described are never looked at positively. We have a belief that as long as mom is present-it is alright. Dad can leave and while we may not like it-the implications of his actions-he is not held up under same scrutiny as mother's are.

As far as which role takes the spotlight. I don't see either one being the sole identity. Becoming a mother changes your identity. There's no doubt in my mind about that. Ask any mom and she will confirm that. We stop having single identities once we bear children. As far as being our own person-that sense of feeling doesn't stop when we make the transition to motherhood. How we respond to that dual role reveals which one is important.

2007-10-07 03:21:26 · answer #3 · answered by MISS PHILLY 2 · 0 0

Why didn't the father stay in the UK so that his son could remain with this woman?

Regardless, the term "foster mother" is throwing me off a bit.
Maybe it means something else in the UK?

Here in the USA, kids go into foster care when their biological parents are unable or unwilling to take care of them. It's a temporary situation. The kid will eventually either go back to the parents or be adopted by another family.

In this case, the biological father wanted his son back. So, he got his kid back. The foster mother is relieved of her duties as foster parent.

2007-09-30 22:12:31 · answer #4 · answered by bikerchickjill 5 · 5 1

I'd really have to know more about the situation before making a judgment. What exactly was at stake if she didn't go to South Africa? Who knows what was behind her decision. Sometimes what's good for the mother is, by extension, good for the child. And, obviously, sometimes taking your career and your ability to generate a decent income is very important for your child as well. It's a balance.

I'm confused why everyone is assuming that in this scenario the woman has "abandoned" her child. I didn't gather that that was necessarily what happened from the question.

2007-09-30 21:24:06 · answer #5 · answered by Priscilla B 5 · 3 1

I am not familiar with the show you are referring to, so I will refrain from commenting on it... Your questions are the most challenging to answer for all women who brave to balance motherhood and career. I had never been in a situation, where I had to make a choice like that. However, if one day I was put in this situation, there would be no contest. The well being of my child is my very first responsibility and care in the world.

2007-10-01 00:12:52 · answer #6 · answered by ms.sophisticate 7 · 0 1

you are both when you have kids. going with the story line she was only a foster mom which means that the biological father has more rights than her and she is only a temporary home for the kid. foster parnets is the hardest job there is . kids come and go in your life. some will love you back in return some won't . being a foster parnet is that a job. by staying she'll foster others kids,but remeber this is a t.v. show in real life she'ed have other kids to take care of.

2007-09-30 23:45:08 · answer #7 · answered by tazzielovestweety 2 · 0 1

This is something I've been grappling with for a long time. Its easy to lose your identity when you have kids. Especially when your kids friends (and sometimes their parents!) refer to you as "Hey, Jimmy's Mom"!

There has to be a happy medium. During the day and before bed I'm in Momma Mode. My kids are my priority, which is hard becuase I work from home. I have what I call 'Momma Time', nightly, after my kids are all tucked away for the night. During this time I partake of guilty pleasures, such as my Tivo'd programs, reading, Yahoo Answers, and emailing friends/family, absolutely nothing work or kid related, period. I also make sure my husband and I get quality time together whether its dinner and a movie, or cocktails and dancing, a couple of times a month.

Parents should always put their children first, but that does not mean that you have to ignore your own needs either. Who wants a Martyr Mom anyway? Inevitably, Martyr Moms end up resenting their kids and vice versa.

2007-09-30 21:43:07 · answer #8 · answered by bijou 4 · 3 2

Your own circumstance is interesting. "as someone who was raised without a mother, I also believe that woman should put as first priority her children."
__I'm a single father who raised my kids through their teenage years (and put my career in 11 years of limbo to do so). I've wondered what a woman raised by a single father, and who seems not to have nasty issues with him, feels she missed out on. Not to get personal, but in generic gender terms.
___I agree with your contention, and I think it applies to fathers as well. On the other hand, I can muster up at least a smidgen of sympathy for fathers who take off to Alaska after family-court horror-shows. It's tough to to deal with another parent who's difficult, yet manages to get the kids anyway. I was able to trade family heirlooms for lots of visitation when the kids were young, so my sticking around wasn't pointless.
___Law isn't as easy to transfer as some professions, but they do have lawyers in South Africa. The woman in the story might have put her career on hold, returning to England as needed to maintain her credentials, until the child was a few years older. And her relationship with the father has some relevance. If he was a control freak who kept her influence to a minimum, then her opportunity to be much good for the child wouldn't have amounted to much.
___The notion of "first priority" does have some limits, and the other parent's attributes matter. If the other parent is someone into whose clutches one doesn't want to abandon a child, that's different from the other parent being caring and competent.

2007-09-30 21:55:31 · answer #9 · answered by G-zilla 4 · 4 1

I'm gonna have to go with the belief that a woman is a mother above all else. When you become a parent you have to put your children first and foremost. Being true to your self and following your ambitions is important however children are dependent on their parents they didn't ask to be born and that's why you have to use the best of your ability's to make sure your doing whats best for them because they can't do it for themselves.( I think it's best to try and accomplish all of your goals before having children). Kids aren't kids forever their will be plenty of time to be a woman once they are grown and off to college.

Some may disagree with me but oh well :O

2007-10-01 00:42:45 · answer #10 · answered by nobody 5 · 1 1

your question caught my attention.. then i read it through...
for myself , i am a mother to 3 girls, and one dog,[ shes my girl too]... and i would give my life for them... and i would do anything for them..

in my life i had health problems, crohns disease, pancratits, depression because of physical problems... and it ended up that my first two stay with their grandparents, i am fully involved in their lives. but daily care is up to them... [ long story, ] then some time on my own, was really hard, i had forgotton what is was like to be my own woman...
now i married, and we have a 2 yr old and the dog. and we are all a family, even the first two are here every weekend and whenever they are not in school.. but now it because of the school district that they still stay with their granparents...

we have decided to move to a new city, and the older two are 13,[ twins], and friends and school are important to them... so we have decided that once we are moved, we will wait for the end of the semester to make any changes, and have also decided that only one will move with me, the other will stay with her grandparents, at least till the end of the year...

so i will not see her as much.... and it again will be painful, but i know that moving to this new city, we have gaurenteed jobs, healthcare, and better schools, and better bigger houseing... so as difficult as it is, our family will be better off in the long run, even if it means seperation for a while.

2007-10-01 02:04:50 · answer #11 · answered by smurfette 4 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers