What do you think?
Rate this book
Motherguilt:: How Our Culture Blames Mothers for What's Wrong with Society
Mothers--working, welfare, single, teen, or any combination thereof--get most of the blame for imperfect children and unraveling families. This firebrand book dismantles the bias of social scientists, parenting experts, and the media who blame today's mothers for all of society's problems caused by our disintegrating families, naming instead the true culprit: America's abysmal child-care system.
317 pages, Hardcover
First published April 23, 1996
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
August 12, 2025
A PSYCHOLOGIST CRITIQUES MANY OF THE MODERN ACCUSATIONS AGAINST MOTHERS
Diane Eyer teaches psychology at Temple University. She explains in the Introduction to this 1996 book, “I had written my first book [‘Mother-Infant Bonding’] primarily for my undergraduate college students who … needed to know more about how science is influenced by the prejudices, ineptitudes, and professional agendas of scientists… I had expected my book might relieve parents of guilt and regret as so many of them were inevitably unable to have such a ‘bonding’ experience because of exhausting births, C-sections... and so forth. But I was completely unprepared for the deluge of publicity that ensued… This enthusiasm was… because I seemed to be touching on some deeply held beliefs regarding maternal instinct and the ideology of motherhood. Indeed, ‘bonding’ … was now identified with those myths… Mothers told me they were being advised to stay home from work for the entire first year of their child’s life in order for proper bonding to be attained. I was astounded. There was absolutely no research I knew of to prove the existence of a special ‘bonding’ period during this time or to show that women’s employment interfered with mother-child relationships. The new and improved claims for bonding were made possible by an old psychological [concept]… called ‘attachment.’” (Pg. ix-x)
She continues, “I am not a mother. Therefore, I had a great deal of trouble understanding why the working mothers I encountered were feeling so guilty. It seemed to me that they had done nothing wrong. Yet they were hearing not only from child-raising experts but… from other mothers … that they had gone back to work too soon… They were also hearing from their employers that they could not be taken seriously if they devoted time to their children…. I was frankly perplexed by it.” (Pg. xi)
She goes on, “Mothers, it seemed, were once again to be seen as the root of all evil… Psychological theories simply provided the underpinnings for a scapegoating game conducted by politicians and pundits: If mothers were working, they were damaging bonding/attachment… Mothers, I began to realize, are encumbered with the burdens of a society unwilling to carry its own weight.” (Pg. xii)
She explains, “This book demonstrates that the indictment of mothers in the kangaroo courts conducted by social scientists , child-care experts, and public officials is not sustained by the evidence. The crimes committed against our children are committed by our entire society, and these are devastating. The solution… requires the spending of collective money and the genuine involvement of men as equal partners with women and as co-stewards of American family life. Moreover, such a stewardship requires an acceptance of the fact that there are many legitimate family forms.” (Pg. xiii)
She asserts, “Two related and unhappy social changes contribute to all this scapegoating. The American family has changed dramatically in the last two decades, and men have increasingly been estranged from it… Men have lost contact with their children through divorce and women’s growing propensity to bear children without marrying or cohabiting… The other great change inspiring motherblaming is the tremendous economic losses experienced by the majority of Americans… In the 1980s much of the middle class fell into poverty… for the first time in a hundred years, the curve… tilted leaving fewer people in the middle and a lot more filling up the poor end. The growing loss of well-paying jobs and decrease in economic security has many looking for a visible culprit. In mothers, they believe they have found it.” (Pg. 32-33) She continues, “an ideology of motherhood has ‘framed’ mothers by creating rigid, unrealistic ideals and then faulting mothers for not adhering to them. It is this ideology that has led us down the dead-end road of motherblaming.” (Pg. 34)
She says of the 1940s, “In the flowering of this new era of motherguilt, women had become dependent on these expert authorities as never before because they were increasingly isolated… in the newly affordable private housing. Women were also isolated from the … wisdom of mothers and grandmothers… Pediatrician Benjamin Spock… sounded reassuring and old-fashioned, telling mothers to just use their ‘common sense’ at the same time, of course, [while] telling them what to do every single step of the way. Spock announced a shift from the tyranny of scheduled technicalities in child rearing to a theory of managing the unconscious.” (Pg. 58-59)
She suggests, “Divorce, per se, has little predictable effect on children. However, there is one important caveat. In my ideal world, work would be so well integrated with family that most mothers and fathers would have the opportunity to enjoy work and family equally. Mothers’ employment would be a command and desirable fact of life. In my ideal world, adult relationships would be so mature and informed that when partners decided to have children divorce would be very rare indeed. Divorced mothers would be a rare and undesirable fact of life.” (Pg. 120)
She notes, “What’s really extraordinary … is the accidental finding that again and again, mothers bear the lion’s share of responsibility for their children and shoulder it so very well---sacrificing their own needs in order to provide for their children. And it is extraordinary, too, that instead of focusing on the detrimental effects of poverty on mothers and children, researchers continue to search for damage inflicted by bad mothers. And while they earnestly engage in scrutinizing the bad mother, the bad father is nowhere to be found. Isn’t Dad, after all, an unmarried father, a single father, a divorced father, a teenage pregnant father, a lazy welfare father? … his help could be very valuable…” (Pg. 145)
She says, “Behind all the mother blaming, there is a rather nasty reality. No one wants to pay for the care of our young children. Rather than putting forth the effort and providing the funds for a first-rate day care system for these young children, for whom all blamers profess such concern, mother castigation provides the useful smokescreen.” (Pg. 175)
She points out, “We’re so used to our culture of motherguilt and motherblame that it’s hard to imagine any other paradigm. But in fact, most other modern countries have reformed the exclusive mothering ideal to fit the needs of the modern family. In other words, they VALUE women’s work outside the home. They pay to support it. They VALUE their children. They pay to support them. America apparently still just doesn’t get it.” (Pg. 203)
She argues, “American children are suffering from the stupidity of a nation of adults who fail to see themselves as responsible stewards of the new generation. It is a squabbling nation that lacks the unity of purpose to recognize that our children are ourselves…. They are the civilizing or uncivilizing force that will be guiding us in the very near future.” (Pg. 229)
She observes, “Reconciling the ideals of fatherhood with the realities of men’s employment and the needs of families is essential to providing children with a loving, stable environment. When men stop being penalized by the workplace for giving time to their families, they will be far more likely to seek responsibility for the day-to-day care of their children.” (Pg. 234)
She concludes, “Mothers who work, divorce, never marry, or parent their grandchildren, are doing a superb job and deserve to be congratulated for doing it with no little support. Blaming mothers for the ills of a changing society … is scapegoating of the most superstitious kind. If we, as a society, are to live well---as our tremendous wealth promises---we must all become like mothers. Only then can we truly understand motherguilt.” (Pg. 247)
This book will interest those concerned about the fate of mothers in the modern world.
Diane Eyer teaches psychology at Temple University. She explains in the Introduction to this 1996 book, “I had written my first book [‘Mother-Infant Bonding’] primarily for my undergraduate college students who … needed to know more about how science is influenced by the prejudices, ineptitudes, and professional agendas of scientists… I had expected my book might relieve parents of guilt and regret as so many of them were inevitably unable to have such a ‘bonding’ experience because of exhausting births, C-sections... and so forth. But I was completely unprepared for the deluge of publicity that ensued… This enthusiasm was… because I seemed to be touching on some deeply held beliefs regarding maternal instinct and the ideology of motherhood. Indeed, ‘bonding’ … was now identified with those myths… Mothers told me they were being advised to stay home from work for the entire first year of their child’s life in order for proper bonding to be attained. I was astounded. There was absolutely no research I knew of to prove the existence of a special ‘bonding’ period during this time or to show that women’s employment interfered with mother-child relationships. The new and improved claims for bonding were made possible by an old psychological [concept]… called ‘attachment.’” (Pg. ix-x)
She continues, “I am not a mother. Therefore, I had a great deal of trouble understanding why the working mothers I encountered were feeling so guilty. It seemed to me that they had done nothing wrong. Yet they were hearing not only from child-raising experts but… from other mothers … that they had gone back to work too soon… They were also hearing from their employers that they could not be taken seriously if they devoted time to their children…. I was frankly perplexed by it.” (Pg. xi)
She goes on, “Mothers, it seemed, were once again to be seen as the root of all evil… Psychological theories simply provided the underpinnings for a scapegoating game conducted by politicians and pundits: If mothers were working, they were damaging bonding/attachment… Mothers, I began to realize, are encumbered with the burdens of a society unwilling to carry its own weight.” (Pg. xii)
She explains, “This book demonstrates that the indictment of mothers in the kangaroo courts conducted by social scientists , child-care experts, and public officials is not sustained by the evidence. The crimes committed against our children are committed by our entire society, and these are devastating. The solution… requires the spending of collective money and the genuine involvement of men as equal partners with women and as co-stewards of American family life. Moreover, such a stewardship requires an acceptance of the fact that there are many legitimate family forms.” (Pg. xiii)
She asserts, “Two related and unhappy social changes contribute to all this scapegoating. The American family has changed dramatically in the last two decades, and men have increasingly been estranged from it… Men have lost contact with their children through divorce and women’s growing propensity to bear children without marrying or cohabiting… The other great change inspiring motherblaming is the tremendous economic losses experienced by the majority of Americans… In the 1980s much of the middle class fell into poverty… for the first time in a hundred years, the curve… tilted leaving fewer people in the middle and a lot more filling up the poor end. The growing loss of well-paying jobs and decrease in economic security has many looking for a visible culprit. In mothers, they believe they have found it.” (Pg. 32-33) She continues, “an ideology of motherhood has ‘framed’ mothers by creating rigid, unrealistic ideals and then faulting mothers for not adhering to them. It is this ideology that has led us down the dead-end road of motherblaming.” (Pg. 34)
She says of the 1940s, “In the flowering of this new era of motherguilt, women had become dependent on these expert authorities as never before because they were increasingly isolated… in the newly affordable private housing. Women were also isolated from the … wisdom of mothers and grandmothers… Pediatrician Benjamin Spock… sounded reassuring and old-fashioned, telling mothers to just use their ‘common sense’ at the same time, of course, [while] telling them what to do every single step of the way. Spock announced a shift from the tyranny of scheduled technicalities in child rearing to a theory of managing the unconscious.” (Pg. 58-59)
She suggests, “Divorce, per se, has little predictable effect on children. However, there is one important caveat. In my ideal world, work would be so well integrated with family that most mothers and fathers would have the opportunity to enjoy work and family equally. Mothers’ employment would be a command and desirable fact of life. In my ideal world, adult relationships would be so mature and informed that when partners decided to have children divorce would be very rare indeed. Divorced mothers would be a rare and undesirable fact of life.” (Pg. 120)
She notes, “What’s really extraordinary … is the accidental finding that again and again, mothers bear the lion’s share of responsibility for their children and shoulder it so very well---sacrificing their own needs in order to provide for their children. And it is extraordinary, too, that instead of focusing on the detrimental effects of poverty on mothers and children, researchers continue to search for damage inflicted by bad mothers. And while they earnestly engage in scrutinizing the bad mother, the bad father is nowhere to be found. Isn’t Dad, after all, an unmarried father, a single father, a divorced father, a teenage pregnant father, a lazy welfare father? … his help could be very valuable…” (Pg. 145)
She says, “Behind all the mother blaming, there is a rather nasty reality. No one wants to pay for the care of our young children. Rather than putting forth the effort and providing the funds for a first-rate day care system for these young children, for whom all blamers profess such concern, mother castigation provides the useful smokescreen.” (Pg. 175)
She points out, “We’re so used to our culture of motherguilt and motherblame that it’s hard to imagine any other paradigm. But in fact, most other modern countries have reformed the exclusive mothering ideal to fit the needs of the modern family. In other words, they VALUE women’s work outside the home. They pay to support it. They VALUE their children. They pay to support them. America apparently still just doesn’t get it.” (Pg. 203)
She argues, “American children are suffering from the stupidity of a nation of adults who fail to see themselves as responsible stewards of the new generation. It is a squabbling nation that lacks the unity of purpose to recognize that our children are ourselves…. They are the civilizing or uncivilizing force that will be guiding us in the very near future.” (Pg. 229)
She observes, “Reconciling the ideals of fatherhood with the realities of men’s employment and the needs of families is essential to providing children with a loving, stable environment. When men stop being penalized by the workplace for giving time to their families, they will be far more likely to seek responsibility for the day-to-day care of their children.” (Pg. 234)
She concludes, “Mothers who work, divorce, never marry, or parent their grandchildren, are doing a superb job and deserve to be congratulated for doing it with no little support. Blaming mothers for the ills of a changing society … is scapegoating of the most superstitious kind. If we, as a society, are to live well---as our tremendous wealth promises---we must all become like mothers. Only then can we truly understand motherguilt.” (Pg. 247)
This book will interest those concerned about the fate of mothers in the modern world.
Displaying 1 of 1 review