WHY DID RUTH HAVE TO CHOOSE BETWEEN FAMILY AND HER CAREER?
In a plea that will resonate with every exhausted mum, KIRSTIE ALLSOPP insists society must find better ways to allow women to raise children AND go to work
IFELT an unexpected surge of emotion reading Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson’s moving letter of resignation last week because it is one I have written many times in my head – and even sometimes in draft on my iPad – but have never sent. The detail that so chimed with me and, I believe, will do so with millions of working mothers, was her description of how the prospect of spending hundreds of hours away from home on the campaign trail would have once fired her up, but since the birth last October of her son now filled her with dread.
It’s clear Ruth had a demanding job that involved being on call from early morning to late at night, always available for interviews, always well briefed, always looking polished. But her moments of reflection on the time and care she could expend on her infant son, Finn, also made her worry that the pressure of politics had made her a ‘poor daughter, sister, partner and friend’.
I feel as if my busy career has made me poorer at these things, too. I don’t want to stretch the analogy; I’m only too aware I’m making TV shows rather than running a political party. But I also spend hours travelling and filming while juggling the needs of a family. And sometimes – hence the unsent letters – it can all feel too much. I suspect many working mums with far less support than I get would wholeheartedly agree.
It’s a pet peeve of mine that many successful women never share the obvious secret of how it’s done. How many times have we read interviews with, say, an actress or businesswoman in which they casually throw in the fact their son arrives home from cricket or their daughter from ballet? Well, who took them there? Who brought them home? Who washed the kit and made sure they had everything they needed? I’ll tell you who – the hired help.
I’m not ashamed to say I have had a nanny for the past 13 years to help me look after my four children. I also have a housekeeper and a PA. It’s expensive but luckily television presenting is well paid. Even a politician as prominent and successful as Ruth Davidson couldn’t afford that level of support on her salary. In a sense, the very fact she is so capable and successful, and still feels the need to resign, shows how tough it is for women from all walks of life to juggle homes and careers.
There are couples who manage to share the childcaring duties, and there are many brilliant stayat-home dads. But the responsibility for holding everything together and remembering all the little things that keep families working smoothly – the birthday presents and cards, the packed lunches, the clean, ironed clothes – usually falls to the mums. Of course, most can’t afford to hire staff.
And because house prices mean two incomes are needed to pay the mortgage, most can’t give up work. They just have to struggle through, feeling guilty they can’t give everything as much attention as they’d like.
PERHAPS it’s because caring and nurturing are seen as women’s roles that they are not really valued by many people. Indeed, at most workplaces, seeking time off to care for a child or an aged relative, for a school sports day or a nativity play, are seen at best as an unproductive inconvenience. At worst, it could risk getting you the sack.
But these gentle things of the heart are important. They are part of what makes us human. They are to be treasured and encouraged.
That’s why I congratulate Ruth Davidson for her courage in giving up a high-profile, high-status job to spend more time being a mother, daughter, sister, lover and friend.
Women are too often stigmatised for caring. And they are too often forced to choose between pursuing
a fulfilling career and looking after children or elderly parents.
My fellow presenter and good friend Phil Spencer and I have tried to make a difference. We’re part of a TV production company, Raise The Roof Productions, in which staff are encouraged to take time off for school plays or parents’ days. It doesn’t make any of us less productive. But as much as I love Phil and as much as we share values, there’s a crucial difference. He’s a father, I’m a mother. I have three staff to help make my life liveable, he has a wife.
We were filming last winter and both of us were due to go on family holidays immediately afterwards. My head was swimming with endless lists and schedules. When I asked if he had packed, he gave an apologetic grin. He didn’t know what flight he was on, or which airport he was leaving from.
There, in a nutshell, is the difference between many fathers and mothers. And it’s high time the world changed to accommodate it.
When I’ve said this sort of thing before, I’ve been accused of being some kind of 1950s throwback.
But nobody can accuse Ruth Davidson of being anything other than thoroughly modern, capable, hard-headed and logical. And she felt the heavy demands of her career detracted from the caring, human part of her life.
Not that men are entirely to blame for the problems facing women (even if most of the men I know seem to think it’s Father Christmas who fills the children’s stockings). The fact Ruth Davidson struggled despite having a female partner is evidence of that.
WE are often our own worst enemies – less inclined to make demands in the workplace and more inclined to do more for less. Our sex are also more prone to worry more about the opinions of our family and friends, or perhaps that’s just me. Maybe it will change one day, but I won’t hold my breath.
That’s why we need to look to countries where allowing time off work is commonplace – without losing any productivity. People
should be able to step away from their desks for all sorts of reasons, not just to care for their families.
And it may create a precedent where women taking time off work to care for their children is seen as a positive contribution to society, rather than stigmatised. Perhaps fewer women would feel they have to give up their careers for the sake of their children. And maybe those who choose family over career would be congratulated, rather than belittled or criticised.
After all, when a woman as capable and dedicated as Ruth decides it’s impossible to combine motherhood with a high-profile job, it’s a sure sign something needs to change. For all our families’ sakes.
Kirstie and Phil’s Location, Location, Location returns on Wednesday at 8pm on Channel 4.