This is quite a thoughtful look at caring for children and the evolution of family. The author, Luma Simms, doesn’t get into the “mommy wars,” which is a relief. I’ve long been against national, state-funded daycare, not because I’m against daycare per se, but rather because I’m against this inequitable method of telling people how they ought to raise their kids (which is what happens in every jurisdiction where such programs are introduced, lest you want to tell me “but it’s just another choice!” We should be able to care for kids in communities and even when this is difficult, we should aspire to that, without government funding.
I also like how she touches on our prosperity as being part of the problem. Abundance is harder to manage than scarcity, as she puts it.
Finally, notions on family especially on the part of conservatives like myself, have been reduced to an individualistic model. This happens precisely because mom and dad and children as a model is under such profound attack, so it’s a natural reaction to defend the inherent good of just that: Mom and dad and children. That said, I agree with her when she talks about how this family ideal is itself a product of the sexual revolution, not the ideal we should aspire to. Parents need more help than that.
What many miss when talking about family and community is this: The two-parent, biologically intact natural family is itself a product of individualistic thinking. So we research and analyze but the whole time we’re missing something right under our nose, a variable we’ve assumed is immutable. Family breakdown didn’t happen exclusively as a direct result of radical feminism and the sexual revolution, although those accelerated it. The breakdown began when we reduced the idea of what a family is to the bare bones of two parents and their children—what came to be called the nuclear family. But from time immemorial family included many more people in its definition.
Anyway, an interesting read from a reasonable woman. I’m fond of posting the work of interesting women here. I’m willing to bet she’s pro-life too–as so many reasonable, smart women are!!