WOW... now add that to the never ending discussion

[Deleted]

of stay at home moms vs working moms!

So here : www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/02/04/children.bmi.moms/index.html?hpt=Sbin

The length of a mother's employment is associated with an increase in her child's body mass index, according to a study in the journal Child Development.

It's not the first study to suggest that moms' working hours and kids' weight might be related, but it's likely to peeve some mothers.

"It's not causal, it's an association," said lead author Taryn Morrissey about the trends.

"Nobody found a single smoking gun as a cause of childhood obesity. We found quite a small, but (statistically) significant increase in the body mass index of children. This increase is associated with maternal employment."

Morrissey and her co-authors observed the increase in children's BMI -- which, at third grade, was approximately a 1-pound gain for every six months the child's mother worked. The weight gain was cumulative and the link became stronger as the children matured into fifth- and sixth-grade in the analysis of 900 children.

The reasons are unclear.

"The implication is not that moms leave the workforce," said Morrissey, who is an assistant professor in public administration and policy at American University. "If that were to happen, childhood obesity would not go away at all."

In the United States, 71% of mothers work, according to the 2008 data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The father's employment was not measured in the study, because there were not enough stay-at-home dads in the study to make comparisons.

There could be several factors why moms' employment and children's BMI were linked.

Working mothers could be pressed for time, which could cause them to turn to fast food and restaurants.

Carol M. Devine, professor of nutritional sciences at Cornell University, who was not involved in the study, has examined food choices of working, lower-income families.

"Some parents weren't able to eat with their families more than a couple times a week," Devine said. "The job structure had a lot to do with it."

When people don't eat together as a family, the diets are worse and people are heavier, she said.

Morrissey said other factors could be related to kids' sleep patterns and the kind of food and activity they're getting at after-school care. But none of these variables were in the study.

Wen-Jui Han, an associate professor at Columbia University School of Social Work, who read the study, said the results do not imply that a working mom's children are doomed to obesity,

"If I'm working, I'm not doing anything differently -- how much my kids are watching TV, how much meals we're eating together," she said.

Children with nonemployed moms watched about 14.6 hours of TV per week compared with 15.3 for employed moms. Researchers also compared children's physical activity and their time spent unsupervised between nonworking and working moms. None of these factors explained the link between maternal job status and children's weight.

Han said the study shows family and work issues need to be addressed.

"We don't have a choice. We have to go to work," Han said. "How does society as a whole support working families so I still am able to provide healthy food for children, so their weight will not be compromised?"

A 2003 paper found that for every 10 hours a mother worked every week, the child's chances of obesity increased by 1 to 1.5 percentage points. A 2007 study of Japanese schoolchildren found that kids of full-time working moms had higher BMIs and were more likely to be overweight compared with other children.

These types of studies upset Susan Wenner Jackson, who blogs on Working moms against guilt.

"I get sick of all these studies coming out that seem to say being a working mom equals harming your children," she said. "I've seen a bunch of them -- the kids don't get as much attention, they aren't good readers."

"I don't know how valuable these results are. They're not giving me anything."

But Wenner Jackson said it would be ideal if more family friendly policies such as child care, healthier foods in schools and more flexible work schedules for parents could be implemented.

Morrissey said that is the intent.

"The bottom line is that families face many, many constraints and that policies and additional research are needed to help balance health and family life."

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

Correlation does not equal causation.

[❤ mollymouser ❤]

I wonder if working moms are making EVERYONE fat?
And maybe THEY are behind GLOBAL WARMING!?!?!
And unrest in the Middle East!?!?

::: rolls eyes / insert sarcasm tag here :::

[Deleted]

Feb 4, 2011 17:53:53 GMT -5 ❤ mollymouser ❤ said:

I wonder if working moms are making EVERYONE fat?
And maybe THEY are behind GLOBAL WARMING!?!?!
And unrest in the Middle East!?!?

::: rolls eyes / insert sarcasm tag here :::

This is the same way I felt. Are working moms behind all those grown man and woman that are over 300-400 lbs or so.

Maybe the mothers of all the past participants of the biggest loser show should have stayed home with their child..

[debtheaven]

What a bunch of CARP!!! The only one in our family of six who is somewhat overweight is me (size 12). All our four kids are stick insects.

It may have something to do with our living in Europe where eating habits are much healthier, despite all the delicious pastry and cheese. But I'm sure as heck that it has ZERO to do with my working!!!

Caveat: I'm working several evenings / nights now. So I do use more "ready meals" than I did before, when I wasn't working evenings or getting home so late. Yet six months later, my kids are STILL stick insects.

Carl, you're Haitian, you speak French. "C'est chercher midi à 14 heures." (Not sure you have that expression in Haiti, but it means looking for something where you are sure not to find it.)

This is utter and total CARP as far as I am concerned.

I am SICK TO DEATH of working moms getting such a bad rap.

[kristi28]

I'm sure that i will get flamed for this, but I really liked this article. The author of the study did a great job explaining what they did and did not learn from their results. She says "It's not causal, its an association". The article goes on to explain some possible explanations for the association and describe the challenges for working families.

Maybe they will end up deciding that after-school programs which are utilized primarily by working mothers are feeding the children too much junk food and not letting them run around. This study is not a condemnation of working, and I don't know why people want to see it that way.

[jk70]

What a bunch of CARP!!! The only one in our family of six who is somewhat overweight is me (size 12). All our four kids are stick insects.

Not that I agree with any of the article but you can't take your situation and say, "aha, that didn't happen to us, therefore it's not true"

[april47]

OK how does it explain the obesity of people of "a certain age"?
My mom stayed home and cooked from scratch. There wasn't fast food at every corner. We didn't have money for junk food. I have faught obesity since forever! Stupid article.

[busymom]

I've done both the stay-at-home Mom gig, and the working Mom gig. Have you noticed how EVERYTHING is always the Mom's fault (how about looking at the Dad's involvement?!)

[Deleted]

Feb 4, 2011 18:54:47 GMT -5 busymom said:

Have you noticed how EVERYTHING is always the Mom's fault (how about looking at the Dad's involvement?!)

LOL, so true!
I guess fathers can never mess up their kids

[Deleted]

Feb 4, 2011 18:05:25 GMT -5 @debtheaven said:

Carl, you're Haitian, you speak French. "C'est chercher midi à 14 heures." (Not sure you have that expression in Haiti, but it means looking for something where you are sure not to find it.)

Bien sur

[debtheaven]

Not that I agree with any of the article but you can't take your situation and say, "aha, that didn't happen to us, therefore it's not true"

Fair enough! You are right.

Have you noticed how EVERYTHING is always the Mom's fault (how about looking at the Dad's involvement?!)

Yes I have indeed, and personally I am sick to death of it!

Carl I wasn't sure LOL. Wink back! (I'm on a Mac and the smilies I post don't show up for me.)

[debtheaven]

Kristi
I reread the article (it's really late here) and I can see your POV. There is certainly no one cause for this, and there is certainly no one solution either.

But, working moms generally do get a very bad rap!

[kristi28]

Debt: Having been a working mom, a SAHM, and now working part time, I have come to the conclusion that no matter what I choose, someone will think that I am an awful parent. I have to be satisfied that I am doing what is best for me and mine, and not worry too much about it.

That being said, I am also a statistician. I just love it when you actually read a study where the author realizes that the statistics can only tell you about correlation, not causation. This author did that and some people (especially the one cited in the article) are trying to turn her work into an indictment of working parents. I guess you get more attention if you try to make it controversial.

[Deleted]

Feb 4, 2011 21:22:03 GMT -5 @kristi28 said:

I guess you get more attention if you try to make it controversial.

No one would read it if it wasn't controversial.

[DVM gone riding]

This is called "soft" science for a reason. They can't PROVE that it causes it, but they have statistically shown that they are linked-which depending on their statistical analysis is actually a big deal AND it makes a lot of sense, in that working mom's have less time and might cook/get less healthy meals together. They did also point out that eating together was a big part of it, so those working moms that take the time to make their families eat together don't need to feel guilty! But the working mom's that get dinner 3/5 times a week from McD's probably SHOULD feel guilty!

[kindthatjingles]

First post ever.. Long time Lurker

I am a working Divorced Mom, and we have one drive thru night a week. Other than that, I cook and pack lunches. But one night a week the Mama needs a break!

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

The author of the study did a great job explaining what they did and did not learn from their results. She says "It's not causal, its an association".

The problem with this is that even though the author made this distinction, people are not reading it this way. All that you have to do is look at the comments on this thread.

Correlation does not equal causation and the popular press interpretation of the article interprets the research exactly this way. Not only that, sheeple are just as willing to believe someone else's (incorrect) interpretation of the data.

[cronewitch]

Feb 5, 2011 19:12:30 GMT -5 kindthatjingles said:

First post ever.. Long time Lurker

I am a working Divorced Mom, and we have one drive thru night a week. Other than that, I cook and pack lunches. But one night a week the Mama needs a break!

Welcome, you help make the point. When mother's don't work they don't eat out every week because they aren't needing a break. When I was a child eating out was a very rare treat maybe once a year.

It is more common in most families because people are richer now and fast food is more available but I have known working moms that let the latchkey kids order pizza just because they were stuck home all summer alone and she didn't take the time to force them to eat healthy. Her kids were old enough legally to be alone like 13-14 and if she had to go home and make dinner they wouldn't eat until after 7. Kids like that might also make mac and cheese or something for lunch that could pack on pounds over the childhood. They didn't say the kids gained fast just a couple of pounds a year that only takes about 7,000 calories extra. If those same kids aren't allowed to run and play but made to stay home while she was working they might not burn so many calories.

[telephus44]

I'm glad to see that in addition to all of the other horrible things I've bestowed upon my son, I am now also going to make him fat.

Woo-hoo!

Actually, this makes me want to check out that blog (Working Moms Against Guilt).

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

Aww crap, I saw on GMA last week that according to a pediatrician my kid is going to be fat because I feed her rice cereal. I've also read taht what I ate while she was in utero will make her fat.

I also work so that is going to make her fat!

Ah well, at least at this rate she will get her own TLC speacil

[thyme4change]

I'm glad this article is posted. I'm sick of everyone thinking I'm so perfect.

[dividend]

So one of my friends is the primary breadwinner in her marriage, with a 7 year old son. She posted on Facebook today that she felt attacked by all the recent press about working mothers, and a bunch of her other friends joined in, calling it, "oppression", "a consipiracy," and "an attempt to keep working mothers down," and citing the women's rights movement. I tried to point out that it's a good thing to examine both sides of an issue, and that that kind of thinking stifles intelligent discourse about both sides of an issue, but I got jumped all over. I guess as the only non-mother in the discussion, my opinions have no value. Am I wrong though? Are there issues which shouldn't be critically examined? Are the choices of mothers some kind of sacred cow? Do I just not get it because I don't have children?

[thyme4change]

One thing that we don't want to get near is creating an atmosphere where you have to choose between the academically studied and scientifically approved best way to raise children and the way women want to live. So many women have already chosen to be child-free because they don't want to deal with it. We are already at a zero-population growth, with our next generation being populated by immigrants. If you look at countries before us that have reduced their birth rates over time, there are economic consequences.

If half of the 71% of those mothers chose not to have kids, our country would be really boned in 20 years. So, we can examine anything you want - but we need to tread carefully because we could have some really unintended consequences. The best thing to do is examine the actual problems and try to fix those, rather than just say "Working moms statistically don't provide healthy living conditions." Why don't we really focus on what is wrong with health of all the children - something any mom could benefit from.

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

There is examining and then there is what the media does. Like Mich1 said correlation does not equal causation and the author is very careful to point that out when talking to the press.

HOWEVER, that is not going to sell news or boost ratings like "Working mothers make their children fat!". That's going to get a lot more people to tune in and listen to you than discussing the actual study and actual paper.

I am all for discussion, but it should be on the evidence that actually exists, not the hyped up media version of the information.

But most people will not do a literature dig to find the actual paper and make a decision based on that. They are going to listen to CNN and jump on the bandwagon because that makes them feel better about the choices they made.

Like GMA with the pediatrician that says rice cereal makes kids fat.

Not really what he was talking about, he was discussing more feeding children heavily processed foods and getting back to whole foods.

But that is boring and GMA doesn't want you to turn the channel to the Today Show so before going to commerical saying "Up next, Rice Cereal makes your child fat!" is going to keep you tuned in to see what they are talking about.

[kristi28]

Studies like this are exactly how researchers go about finding the real underlying causes, though. Now that they have learned that there is a difference between the averages for working and nonworking mothers, they can go and look for other things that differ between the two groups.

Suppose that the working mothers buy an average of three fast food meals per week for their families and the nonworking mothers buy only one. Then, fast food is causing weight gain, which makes it appear that working mothers have higher BMI children. However, both types of mothers who don't buy too much fast food are better off than either kind of mother who does.

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

Studies like this are exactly how researchers go about finding the real underlying causes

In general lay people do not know this. They do not know nor care how scientific studies work. They rely on the media to give them this information.

It's not the study that is the problem, it is how the media presents the story.

Most people will change the channel if you start to go into what an actual scientific study is and how correlation does not equal causation blah blah.

Most people are going to stop here:

The length of a mother's employment is associated with an increase in her child's body mass index, according to a study in the journal Child Development

They are not going to go here:

Wen-Jui Han, an associate professor at Columbia University School of Social Work, who read the study, said the results do not imply that a working mom's children are doomed to obesity
or here:

It's not causal, it's an association," said lead author Taryn Morrissey about the trends.
"Nobody found a single smoking gun as a cause of childhood obesity. We found quite a small, but (statistically) significant increase in the body mass index of children. This increase is associated with maternal employment."

The problem isn't studies it is the media sensationalizing to get ratings rather than being responsible and reporting studies as they are written.

[thyme4change]

Don't we already know what makes kids fat?

[Clifford]

I love how researchers choose to examine one variable - in this case mothers' working hours - when the topic clearly calls for a multi-variate analysis to see which of many factors is significant. I could come up with over 100 potential reasons for kids' obesity. Who's to say that some or all don't contribute as much or more than whether or not the mom is at work? They just picked this one so they could get published, because no one is interested in reading that if the two parents were kind of heavy, and the grandparents were kind of heavy, then the kids might just turn out kind of heavy.

Having said all that, since my wife stays at home, I will support their conclusions.

[justwhoever]

I heard on the radio just the other day that a new study(didn't say where or who) found that babies who are given solids before 1 yr are going to be overweight by 3 yrs old. And also if the parents didn't go to college then they will also be overweight.

I laughed. I did not go to college and none of my kids are overweight. And all of them had solids before a yr old.