Evans
Here is what some visitors to edmontonjournal.com had to say about comments by Iris Evans about parenting: - is she planning to compensate parents for that lost paycheque? is she going to instate a parental benefit that is 100 per cent of a parent's normal income until the child is five and starts going to kindergarten? is she offering financial support for single mothers who have to work? no, i didn't think so. Oh, but her kids made the right decision because she raised them to have good family values. with the way day cares are these days with their lack of space and subsidies, i would agree that stay-at-home parents are best, but the answer isn't to lambaste working parents; it's to improve the day-care system and/or support parents who would like to make the decision to stay home.
--B. J. - in a perfect world, a stay-at-home parent is ideal. when is the last time any politician, including iris evans, created a perfect world? however, a stay-at-home parent is a family decision, not iris evans's. if she is going to make these comments, then it has to be followed up by tax concessions. a mother, or stay-at-home father, is a full-time job. a loving, caring and nurturing job, but still a full-time job that requires tax concessions under her narrow definition of parenting. iris evans' concept of parenting neglects the fact that some families only have one parent.
--Tony - good job, iris! i agree with her. Canadians are too materialistic and need five big-screen tvs and three new cars --no sense of sacrifice for their kids. ask your kids what they'd prefer--a big tv and a nintendo wii, or time with mom and dad. i know what most of their answers would be.
--Joe - no doubt that it is better to have a parent at home, and i'm sure most parents would opt for that if they could. But in the past 40 years, our governments, through taxation, have rendered the single-income middle class family extinct.
--Bob P. - Unbelievable. as a professional and a mother, i choose to work. i choose to be a positive role model for my two girls so that they, too, will choose to learn how to be financially independent, socially and intellectually fulfilled and challenged. i tried the stay-at-home route and became thoroughly dismayed by the self-righteousness and downright nasty attitude some of the zealot moms demonstrated towards working. it actually seemed spurned by jealousy! why is it considered a sin if a family wants to maintain a certain standard of living? i believe the whining about "sacrifice" creates a very unhealthy attitude.
--Lynn - i truly believe that the PCs have been watching too many Leave it to Beaver and Ozzie and Harriet episodes. with Ms. evans's comments and with the passing of Bill 44, the alberta government is not progressing forward but rather jumping back 40 years. i would love to stay home with my kids, but like others have said, the cost of living nowadays does not allow everyone to have that privilege.
--I can't believe she said that - good for you, iris. i assume your husband must be a "stay at home." Of course, with your salary and benefits, you don't need a second income. reminds me of this famous comment, "why don't they eat cake?"
--PT - Canada is so expensive for families, both parents have to work to pay all the taxes and bills.
--Taxpayer - iris: thank you for helping all of us better understand our roles as parents. now, could we offer you some advice on how to be a better politician?
--Erik - i find it amusing that every time the issue of a stay-at-home parent is brought up, people automatically consider it a slap in the face of equality and women's rights. everyone can make their own choice on this issue depending on their own circumstance, but i believe that having kids implies you are willing to make sacrifices to raise them, and too many people have kids and pawn off raising them to someone else (nanny, day care, etc.). everyone finds their own balance, but sending your kids to day care from 7:30 a. m. to 5 p. m. every day just so you can have better stuff, or a bigger house, or because you don't like being at home with your kids, raises questions about priorities, not equality. iris's point shouldn't be taken out of context. equality is a cop-out response to justify greedy decisions that sacrifice time with your kids you'll never get back.
