Sioux Falls May Represent the Future of Motherhood

Marjorie Beeck, 31, grew up in small-town South Dakota, and she is not abashed about calling herself traditional. There is no trace of irony in her voice when she volunteers that she has family values; she likes to think most folks in Sioux Falls do.

So when daughter Jessica was born four years ago, Beeck made a decision that she says reflects her deep conviction that family comes first: Seven weeks after giving birth, she enrolled Jessica in day care and returned to her job as a securities broker at Citibank’s South Dakota branch.

For Beeck, whose pay nudges her family’s annual income just above the nation’s median of $33,000, working outside the home could easily be characterized as a choice in name only. Her family needs her income if it is to afford the trappings, and opportunities, of middle-class life.

Yet there’s more involved here than economic necessity. The fact is, Beeck likes her job. She likes day care too. She says it has given her children, Jessica and 7-year-old Ryan, “things I couldn’t give them at home,” including field trips, a structured learning environment and other kids to play with--lots and lots of other kids.

Beeck could easily parlay her skills into a high-intensity, and probably higher-paying, job elsewhere. But she has chosen to stay at Citibank and in Sioux Falls in part because her employer and her community have taken pains to ease the burden on mothers who work outside the home.

“Staying here,” she said, “is a measure of my commitment to family values.”

Sioux Falls, in fact, might just represent the future of American motherhood.

A surprising 84% of mothers who live here are employed outside the home, according to the 1990 census. Among women with children younger than 6, a whopping four out of five are in the paid work force. In a recent national ranking of the best places for mothers to work, Sioux Falls with its population of approximately 100,000 placed first.

The reason: Local employers such as Citibank are scrambling to adapt to the needs of working mothers instead of expecting mothers to adapt to theirs. Civic leaders are mobilizing private charities and public schools to pitch in. Elected officials are doing their part, providing a model for other cities, and perhaps Washington, to emulate.

As a result, family values and working mothers are coexisting peacefully here in America’s heartland.

“I don’t think women have to be home to teach their children family values,” said Liz Bute, a 37-year-old manager at Citibank whose five children have all spent their preschool years in day care. “I think we’re past that.”

While it is no simple matter for women to simultaneously keep their careers on track and give their kids the moral foundation they need, she said, it’s up to “society as a whole” to share the burden.

That, said Bute, is part of what values are all about. And it is a responsibility that Sioux Falls is taking seriously.

Special Place

At a time when many Americans say they are reexamining some of the fundamental choices made by themselves as individuals--and by society as a whole--the issue of working moms occupies a special place in the national “values” debate.

In the mid-’80s, conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly suggested that mothers who remained employed for their own self-fulfillment had contributed to adolescent suicides. As recently as 1991, then-Rep. William Dannemeyer (R-Fullerton) took to the floor of the House of Representatives to denounce the “devastation” that results when “working mothers . . . put careers ahead of children and rationalize material benefits in the name of children.”

But a substantial number of working mothers, including many who characterize themselves as political and social conservatives, has rejected that argument. They work not just because they need to, but because they want to. They believe they can continue to work without jeopardizing the physical and psychological well-being of their children, particularly if they get a little help from their employers, their communities and their elected representatives.

Clearly, for women whose families can afford it, curtailing outside work can increase the quantity, as well as the quality, of their involvement in their children’s lives. Evidence indicates some women are managing to do so, although their numbers so far don’t add up to a significant demographic trend.

But for a majority of American women, the values debate no longer turns on the question of whether they will or won’t work outside the home. They simply will, at a rate of almost seven out of 10 nationally.

In places like Sioux Falls, the values debate now turns on the question of how husbands, employers, communities and government will adapt to the reality of a society in which both mothers and fathers draw a paycheck.

“We have an economy that requires women to work and, of course, by choice, women work,” said Fran Sussner Rogers, chief executive officer of Work/Family Directions, a Boston consulting firm. “But we’ve kept our institutions and the places we work running on rules that were made for men with wives at home. And then we’ve had such ambivalence about whether women should work that we haven’t adapted our communities to a new situation.”

The solution, Rogers said, is obvious: “Social institutions, not individuals, need to deal with this as a values issue. Working is a necessity, and it’s good for us.”

Does this mean the end of maternal guilt, and of politicians and activists who prey upon it? Certainly not. But the working mothers of Sioux Falls have a message for public figures who suggest that employed mothers are hurting their kids and eroding the nation’s values: Don’t try it here.

“To tell you the truth, it kind of makes my blood boil” to hear politicians who equate stay-at-home moms with family values, said Karla Quarve, a 31-year-old mother of a son in day care and a daughter in first grade.

An auditor at Sioux Falls’ Home Federal Savings Bank, Quarve works because she likes her job. And she offers no apologies. Because she has a boss who values her and respects her family responsibilities, she regularly helps out during school and day-care field trips, and always makes it to her daughter’s school ceremonies.

Although it could probably afford to do without her income, Quarve said, “I think our family would suffer” if she stayed home. She would be less happy, and the kids would be denied the fun of their day-care center.

“You can still instill values in your children and work,” she said.

Dramatic Rise

Today, more than two out of three children have mothers who work outside the home, up from just under half in 1972. More dramatic, however, is the rise in women with very young children at home returning to work. In 1980, 38% of mothers with infants younger than 1 worked outside the home. By 1990, that percentage had climbed to 53%. Among women with preschool children, the figure has risen to 67%, from 44% in 1970.

According to a 1995 Harris Poll cited by the Families and Work Institute, 48% of married women in 1995 were bringing in half or more of their family’s income, making women a significant financial, as well as emotional, pillar of their families.

The rapid rise in maternal employment has coincided with extraordinary social ferment on a number of fronts: a surging divorce rate, more children born to single moms, a drastic rise in crime, a decline in academic standards and a general sense that the nation’s ethical climate has eroded. It was only a matter of time, say some, before mothers who work outside the home got blamed.

“Women have always been seen as the people who are the custodians of morals and values,” said Caryl Rivers, co-author of the book, “She Works, He Works: How the Two-Income Family Is Happier, Healthier and Better Off.” “They are seen as the people who are supposed to keep the culture tidy. So when it becomes untidy, there is a rush to say to women, ‘It’s your fault.’ ”

As a result, Rivers said, “we’re loading all the issues of modern society--drugs, crime, violence, rap music--onto the question of whether Mom is home or not.”

But it remains a subject of intense debate within academic circles whether children--and with them, society--suffer from that decision.

The early results of the most comprehensive study on the subject, released in April, appear to offer heartening news to women who work outside the home. In the first phase of a study overseen by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, psychologists tracked 1,300 families from a child’s birth to 15 months. They found that the security of the bond infants form with their mothers is largely unaffected by their having been left in the care of others.

Behavioral scientists have long surmised, though not yet established, that a weak trust relationship between a mother and her infant often marks a child for future trouble. But the study found that only in cases where the mother is judged to be insensitive to a baby’s needs does day care--especially extensive day care or poor-quality day care or a succession of day-care providers--adversely affect an infant’s attachment to its mother.

A 1993 survey by the Education Department also reflects favorably on working mothers. The study gauged parental involvement in their children’s school life--a strong predictor of student behavior and in turn, student achievement. It found that mothers in the workplace are, overall, more likely to be involved in their children’s school life--going to plays, volunteering in classes, organizing fund-raising or school functions--than mothers who are not employed.

Government Help

When it comes to working moms, many Americans appear willing to abandon their customary caution about the wisdom of outside intervention.

In a poll conducted in January 1996 as part of a National Issues Convention sponsored by the University of Texas at Austin, 80% said they believe that government should help with child care and preschool would be a “useful step in strengthening the family.”

The Clinton administration and its Democratic allies on Capitol Hill have tried to seize upon such views in their efforts to shore up the party’s values credentials. Arguing, for instance, that half of all low-wage workers in America have children, Clinton officials have pressed for a boost in the minimum wage, sought to stave off Republican efforts to restrict the earned-income tax credit for low-income families, and endorsed legislation to make women’s pensions more comparable to men’s.

“We as a society cannot and should not separate family values from economic values,” said Labor Secretary Robert B. Reich. “And what is the most important family value? The ability to keep your family in shelter, food and clothing.” On Capitol Hill, Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-Ga.) is pressing legislation to create a more generous tax credit than currently exists for day-care costs incurred by families with annual incomes ranging from $20,000 to $80,000.

Many in the GOP have sought to improve access to day care as well, especially as a corollary to welfare reform, which would allow states to require recipients to go to work.

Republicans have added $4 billion to bolster welfare recipients’ access to day care, and legislation by Rep. Constance A. Morella (R-Md.) would expand poor women’s access to day care by providing additional tax credits.

For middle-class parents, Republicans have argued that the broad design of their policy priorities is family-friendly: By balancing the budget, cutting taxes and reducing the deficit, they argue, Republicans would return more money to families, which they could use as they see fit.

Workplace Changes

While politicians look for legislative remedies, women increasingly are voting with their pumps and work boots and rubber-soled uniform shoes.

In places like Sioux Falls--a tight labor market in which working mothers enjoy considerable clout--mothers are doing more than merely hoping their kids will not be adversely affected. They are commanding changes in the ways that employers and the community operate, making the care of children easier and higher in quality, and making vital family time better, both qualitatively and quantitatively.

Sioux Falls’ largest employer, Citibank, subsidizes a day-care center for its employees just across a grassy field from its sprawling campus. The firm’s corporate culture is consciously pro-family. Supervisors try to accommodate the needs of their largely female work force, offering flexible working hours, insurance for part-timers, and a hotline offering employees advice on everything from breast feeding to balancing career and family.

Easing the burden on employed mothers is a challenge the Sioux Falls community is working to shoulder as well. The Sioux Empire United Way spends 20% of its funds to help provide day care, compared with a national average of about 9%. The Sioux Falls public schools have switched many of their parent-teacher conference times to evening hours, and family physicians like Dr. Jerry Walton have altered their hours so they can see many of their youngest patients, with parents in tow, after the standard workday.

Privately funded before- and after-school programs serve 600 children throughout the Sioux Falls school district, with sliding-scale fees for children from lower-income families. The school district has launched a summer-care program that combines learning and fun, and fills the vital child-care gap that working parents of school-age kids find during the summer months.

“We don’t take the place of parents; no one could do that,” said Dennis Barnett, president of Sioux Falls’ Volunteers of America, an organization that runs three day-care centers in the city. “But we are partners with parents in teaching some of these values we would all expect in our children. In many cases, parents choose to have that kind of partner in raising their children.”

Some in Sioux Falls would take the concept of partnering with working parents even further.

Mark Britzman, a psychologist and 35-year-old father of two, is laboring to create the Circle of Hope Family Enrichment Center, which he calls a “one-stop shopping center for families.”

Britzman’s center would provide day care with a holistic twist: When a child is enrolled, his or her family would undergo a family assessment, designed to identify areas of strength and weakness, and would agree to volunteer a certain amount of time to the program.

For families, and especially for stressed-out working mothers, he says, the family enrichment center would be a place to “relax and connect” with an extended network of neighbors and other helpers.

Top Environment

Sioux Falls recently topped a list of cities with the friendliest environment for working mothers, compiled and published by the women’s magazine Redbook. Some observers caution that the city is still far from nirvana for employed moms and their families. Wages for both men and women remain quite low--part of the region’s draw to big corporations like Citibank.

For all of their growing economic clout in their families and the community, professional women here still react coolly to feminist rhetoric.

Yet it may be that Sioux Falls and other communities like it represent the best available synthesis of our culture’s traditional commitment to family and mothers’ increasing commitment to work.

“There’s a quiet revolution going on in this city,” said Susan Randall, development director of Turning Point, a social service agency that works with troubled children.

“There are still the trappings of traditionalism, but the reality is very different.”