The Real Responsibilities of Parents

My sister sent out an email a few days ago about a lesson she's going to have to teach in church in a few weeks.  Her calling is in the primary, so she's supposed to follow a manual containing lessons that are geared toward children.  She appealed for our assistance:

The theme is, Parents have important responsibilities in families.  So part of it says I'm supposed to invite 2 girls and 2 boys to come to the front to represent father mother son and daughter.  I'm supposed to give each a "prop" representing each one.  (The picture has the "father" holding a Book of Mormon, the "mother" holding a mixing bowl, the "son" holding a ball and the "daughter" holding a doll.  I'm offended already.)  Then I explain the roles of father (presides, provides, protects) and mother (care for and nurture)  Then the children are supposed to pantomime different things fathers and mothers do to fulfill these roles.  And mention that both parents are supposed to be good examples and teach the gospel.   

So I already have an issue with teaching that mothers cook and clean and change diapers and fathers go to work and teach the gospel and fight off bad guys.  Also there are many things that both parents do (like cook and clean and change diapers and work and teach the gospel).  And then there are plenty of children in our primary who do not have the "ideal" family for whatever reason, so I find the whole thing really awkward.  Does anyone have any good ideas on what to do?

Upon reading this, half of me cheered for her and half of me was ashamed for her.  She was so close!  She discussed all the problems that present itself with her assignment but when she was finished she came to the conclusion that she simply needs to frame the lesson better instead of the conclusion that the lesson is full of crap.

My sister is an intelligent, capable woman.  She graduated from BYU and became a math teacher before she met her husband.  Since then, she's dutifully embraced her responsibilities as a wife and a mother, but I'm glad that she had the chance to prove that she was perfectly able to support herself on her own before she met the priesthood holder on whose coattails she can ride to the Celestial Kingdom.

My mother, however, offered some useful advice for her:

I agree that your lesson model is rather stereotyped.  Maybe you could have the kids make a list (with help) of things their mother and father do.  (For example:  Who cooks dinner?  Mom.  Does your father ever cook on the BBQ?  So he cooks sometimes too.)  You might find that lots of mothers and fathers do the same sorts of things.  Then maybe you could read that part out of the family proclamation that tells what fathers and mothers are primarily responsible for.  Doesn't it use that word, primarily?  Just because it is someone's responsibility doesn't mean they only do it or all by themselves.

That's an excellent point, mother.  The Family Proclamation does state that "Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children."  But let's take your point and tweak it just a little bit so that it's not so backward and sexist.

Instead of interpreting that line as "mothers have more responsibility to nurture than fathers," let's interpret it as "mothers are more likely to be the nurturers than fathers."  If you look at a large population, you could say that more mothers are the caregivers than fathers but that it's not an exclusive responsibility.  If my sister's profession had been more advantageous to her family (which it wasn't) she should have felt permitted to pursue her career while her husband dealt more with the children, even though this is uncommon.

I wish the church could have said something along the lines of "Though God designed the family with the roles of the mother as caregiver and the father as the providers in mind, He recognizes that every family is different and there are many ways to achieve His honorable goals in the home.  What He desires most for our families is that there are two dedicated parents who work together to provide for and raise their children with love.  This may mean that in some cases, traditional roles of the father and mother may interlock or even reverse.  There should be no shame in or criticism of those choices so long as the first priority of the marriage partnership remains the loving nurture, teaching and protection of the children."

Instead, the church said:  "Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation."  Individual adaptation shouldn't be "necessitated."  It should be welcomed as a legitimate alternative.

In a society that has had so many families shattered by underage pregnancies, drug abuse, abandonment, selfishness, parental disinterest and so many other problems, the church should be championing loving partnerships, not gender roles.  What we need for the next generation is parents who are devoted to their children and to each other.  Which one cooks the food, cleans the house, brings home the paycheck or "presides" (which is a stupid, empty responsibility that simply elevates the father over the mother) should be irrelevant.  What's missing in too many children's lives is love and stability.

It's too bad my sister hasn't quite gotten to the point where she realizes that a church that teaches her to cook, clean, nurture the children, and support her husband as he presides over the family is not respecting her value, her potential, or her individuality.