Journal of Feminist Family Therapy

ISSN: 0895-2833 (Print) 1540-4099 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wfft20

Flexibility, Sacrifice and Insecurity: A Canadian

Study Assessing the Challenges of Balancing Work
and Family in Academia

Shauna Wilton & Lynda Ross

To cite this article: Shauna Wilton & Lynda Ross (2017) Flexibility, Sacrifice and Insecurity: A
Canadian Study Assessing the Challenges of Balancing Work and Family in Academia, Journal of
Feminist Family Therapy, 29:1-2, 66-87, DOI: 10.1080/08952833.2016.1272663

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/08952833.2016.1272663

Published online: 31 Jan 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 217

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 3 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wfft20
JOURNAL OF FEMINIST FAMILY THERAPY
2017, VOL. 29, NOS. 1–2, 66–87
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08952833.2016.1272663

Flexibility, Sacrifice and Insecurity: A Canadian Study

Assessing the Challenges of Balancing Work and Family in
Academia
Shauna Wiltona and Lynda Rossb
a
Department of Social Sciences, University of Alberta, Augustana Campus, Camrose, Alberta, Canada;
b
Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies, Athabasca University, Athabasca, Alberta, Canada

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
Semi-structured interviews (N=21) were conducted with faculty academic; gender equality;
working at a small liberal arts campus in Western Canada during work and family balance
the summer of 2015. The research explored faculty's perceptions
of balance between their roles as academics and as parents, as
well as similarities and differences between men's and women's
experiences. Three dominant themes emerged: flexibility, sacri-
fice, and insecurity. Ultimately, our research demonstrates that
although male and female faculty members experience similar
challenges in balancing family with an academic career, women
tended to sacrifice more and experienced more stress and pres-
sure stemming from both the academy and socially imposed
norms around motherhood.

“Justin Trudeau celebrated his 11th wedding anniversary three days early last week,
taking a day off in Japan [emphasis added] before his first G7 summit. He was
leading by example, he said: ‘This is the kind of work-life balance that I’ve often
talked about as being essential in order to be able to be in service of the country.’”
(Kingston, 2016)

Introduction
Although changes in the social, political, and cultural landscapes from the
19th century onwards have affected women’s many roles, including their
rights to, and their participation in, education and employment, we have not
yet seen a parallel shift in gender ideologies, particularly those informing
women’s and men’s caregiving roles. Ironically, contemporary mothers in
Western societies spend more time raising children today than was ever the
case in the past, regardless of whether they are single or partnered, stay-at-
home mothers or working full-time outside of the home. Mothers are giving
up work, sleep, and relaxation in order to engage in intensive mothering

CONTACT Shauna Wilton swilton@ualberta.ca Department of Social Sciences, University of Alberta,

Augustana Campus, 4901-46 Ave, Camrose, AB T4V 2R3, Canada.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/wfft.
© 2017 Taylor & Francis
 JOURNAL OF FEMINIST FAMILY THERAPY 67

practices (Wall, 2010). In addition to child care responsibilities are the hours
needed to maintain households. Although the amount of time spent in
household labor has declined over recent years, more of the housework is
still being done by women (Milan, Keown, & Urquijo, 2011).
The scholarly literature on balancing work and family suggests that a good
balance is difficult to find within academia, particularly for female faculty
members (Conley & Carey, 2013; Mason, Goulden, & Wolfinger, 2013; Wolf-
Wendel & Ward, 2012). The combination of a job that never really stops and
the increasing expectations for parents (particularly mothers) to be actively
involved in every aspect of their child’s life makes it difficult to negotiate
between the roles of professor and parent. Understanding how academics
balance their professional and personal lives can provide insights that will
benefit all individuals attempting to balance family and work responsibilities.
This research explored faculty’s perceptions of balance between their roles as
academics and as parents. Similarities and differences between men’s and
women’s experiences were explored to isolate strategies used by each group
to achieve a sense of balance.

The context of mothering in academia

Over the past 25 years, motherhood has re-emerged as a legitimate and
significant topic of scholarly inquiry engaged by different academic disci-
plines and explored through a diverse range of topics (O’Reilly, 2008, 2010).
While women’s reproductive capacity was seen by some feminist theorists as
a site of oppression (Badinter, 1981; Firestone, 1970; Rich, 1980), by the mid-
1970s there were a number of maternal scholars who, while continuing to
acknowledge the oppression women faced as a consequence of living in male-
dominated cultures, drew attention to the empowering aspects of mothering
(O’Reilly & Porter, 2005). Rich (1976a, 1976b) used the term “motherhood”
to refer to a patriarchal institution—male-defined, male controlled—that was
seen as necessarily oppressive to women; in contrast, “mothering” was
positively framed in terms of women’s agency, experiences, and interests.
Making this distinction created a theoretical space to envision mothering as a
state, in many ways, removed from its social structures. This distinction also
allowed for the re-imagining of mothering as a role with the potential to
positively impact all women’s lives. What this distinction does not do,
however, is acknowledge how mothering can only be empowering when it
is practiced from within social and political structures that are prepared to
recognize its importance and fully support women. It is from this perspective
that work-life and family-life balance is interrogated. Like other researchers
before us, we also acknowledge that dilemmas facing individuals surrounding
work-life and family-life balance are not personal, but systemic and reliant
upon neo-liberal discourses surrounding productivity (Bacigalupe, 2002).
68 S. WILTON AND L. ROSS

Gender and academic progression in Canada

Over the years, Canada has seen a steady increase in the number of women
attending and graduating from universities (Uppal & LaRochelle-Côté, 2014).
Women, aged 25–64 years, now represent the majority of university gradu-
ates in Canada (55% of bachelor’s degrees; 51% of master’s degrees); yet only
39% of earned doctorates are held by women (2011 National Household
Survey, cited in Ferguson, 2016). The decline in women’s progression from
undergraduate to graduate work can partly be accounted for by age. Younger
women, aged 25–34, now account for almost half of all doctoral degrees in
Canada; whereas older women, aged 55–64, account for just under one third
(CAUT, 2013; Ferguson, 2016; Turcotte, 2011). But “pipeline leaks” are
evidenced by the smaller proportion of women progressing from under-
graduate to graduate work. Leaks are also seen as women progress from
doctoral studies to academic careers and later as women work their way
through the academic ranks. Women comprise just under one third of
employed university faculty in Canada and are still predominately repre-
sented in disciplines that have historically been seen as more “natural” for
women, including the humanities, social sciences, and education (39.6%), as
well as in the life sciences (35%; The Expert Panel on Women in University
Research, 2012, p. xv). Not surprisingly, given the fact that science and
technology are still considered as masculine domains, women’s numbers
are lowest in the physical sciences, computer science, engineering, and
mathematics (14.8%).
In short, while more women in Canada are gaining degrees and doctoral
education and more women are now working in demanding academic posi-
tions than has ever been the case in the past, equity has not yet been
achieved. In tandem with professional gains made by women, not only has
there been little movement in the constructed gender roles assigned to men
and women, or the gendering of academic disciplines, but we are now seeing
significant shifts in mothering ideologies defined by “intensive mothering”
scripts affecting women’s caregiving labor (Hays, 1996).
As more women assume the responsibilities associated with demanding
academic careers, they are also being asked to spend unprecedented amounts
of time, money, and emotional energy in raising children (Quirke, 2006;
Warner, 2012). According to Statistics Canada (2012), the majority (67%) of
families in Canada are still headed by married couples and common-law
partnerships (17%). Within these relationships, and regardless of whether or
not women work outside of the home, women still tend to perform the bulk
of the work inside of the home while enjoying less and poorer quality “free
time” compared to their male counterparts (Bianchi, 2011; Erickson, 2005;
Guppy & Luongo, 2015; Lachance-Grzela & Bouchard, 2010; Lee & Waite,
2005; MacDonald & McIntroff, 2015; Mattingly & Sayer, 2006; Statistics
 JOURNAL OF FEMINIST FAMILY THERAPY 69

Canada, 2011). Even in the most egalitarian couples, attitudes about who is
best suited to be the primary caregiver tend to shift following the birth of a
child and men’s and women’s beliefs about gender roles become more
traditional when they enter into parenthood (Green & Groves, 2008; Liss &
Erchull, 2012; Liss, Shiffrin, Mackintosh, Miles-McLean, & Erchull, 2013).

Dual faculty couples

Even in a situation where both husband and wife are employed full-time as
university professors, domestic labor tends to be distributed along “tradi-
tional lines,” with the women in these partnerships “shoulder[ing] consider-
ably more household labor than do their male colleagues” (Suitor, Mecom, &
Feld, 2001, p. 50). For many women, “marriage and parenthood bring added
responsibility for maintaining a household and caring for other individuals”
(Mattingly & Sayer, 2006, p. 218). This “family penalty” can manifest itself in
reduced leisure time and feelings of constantly being rushed. It may also
adversely affect women’s psychological well-being, physical health, and inter-
personal relationships.
For women working in academia, this “penalty” can further contribute to
difficulties integrating work and family responsibilities, reduced productivity,
invisibility (both as mothers and professionals), discrimination in their places
of employment, delayed promotion, and less overall success and satisfaction
in their professional careers (Baker, 2010; Cummins, 2005; Gerten, 2011;
Hunter & Leahy, 2010; Parsons, Duke, Snow, & Edwards, 2009). Some
women are prepared to make these personal sacrifices; others have chosen
to handle the dilemma of balancing family life with work life by forgoing
family altogether, by having fewer children, or by delaying having children
(Milan et al., 2011). These choices may involve partnering at an older age in
order to establish a career before creating families (Milan et al., 2011). In
light of recent media coverage exploring the difficulties of “work-life balance”
for women, many assume that these multiple roles—productive faculty
member and “good” mother—will be incompatible. In light of the evidence,
such assumptions are not unreasonable.

The role of fathering

It is clear that women still perform the lion’s share of child care and household
labor (Milan et al., 2011). For many mothers who are in married or in common
law relationships, their lives and that of their children are often profoundly
affected by the quality and quantity of fathering. At a structural level—social,
political, economic—the ways in which fathering is being transformed in
contemporary society profoundly affects not only the practice of mothering
but men’s experiences in parenting. Historically, fathers were defined largely
70 S. WILTON AND L. ROSS

by their “breadwinning” and “moral leadership” roles within the family

(Marsiglio, Amato, Day, & Lamb, 2000). Today, we see a broadening of the
ways in which fathers and fatherhood are being defined. Not only are men’s
roles and responsibilities in relationship to the family slowly changing, but
there is now an “appreciation for the increasingly complex set of social,
cultural, and legal forces associated with the multiple pathways to paternity,
social fatherhood, and responsible fathering” (Marsiglio et al., 2000, p. 1175).
Unlike much of the research that occurred prior to the 1990s, research on
fatherhood now recognizes the need to move beyond simply looking at fathers’
presence or absence in households to the far reaching impact of their practice
on child, family, as well as men’s career outcomes.
In similar ways that tenets underlying notions of the “good mother” conflict
with the obligations of professional careers for women, ideologies surrounding
the “good father” are beginning to create similar conflicts for men attempting to
balance family involvement with productive careers. Further, while historic
understandings of femininity impose barriers to women’s being able to fully
achieve satisfaction in both work and family spheres, hegemonic masculinities
also create barriers; albeit in qualitatively different ways from women’s experi-
ences, that can interfere equally with men’s abilities to “have it all.” However, it
is still overwhelmingly the case that mothers “feel little ability to relinquish
parenting ideals and time when working in the paid labor force, fathers feel that
work necessarily reduces child care participation. In effect, their at-home to do
list is shortened whereas mothers’ list is lengthened by engagement in paid
labor” (Pederson, 2012, p. 241).

Methods
This qualitative research employs a feminist perspective in order to explore
and evaluate the similarities between men and women balancing work and
family in academia. We aim to connect the struggles they face with broader
forms of gender inequality in society and the restrictions that come with
gender roles and norms within both work and family.

Participants
This research was conducted at a small, undergraduate, liberal arts campus in
Western Canada. This campus has a strong emphasis on teaching, with
teaching responsibilities comprising a minimum of 60% of the workload.
There is also a strong emphasis on service and community engagement. Over
the past decade, research expectations have risen significantly, particularly for
tenure and promotion. Only members of the faculty with children (n = 39)
were sent an e-mail inviting participation in the study.
 JOURNAL OF FEMINIST FAMILY THERAPY 71

Although the sample size for the interviews is relatively small (n = 21),
they comprise 36% of the total faculty and over half (54%) of the faculty with
children employed at the campus. The gender division of respondents was
proportionate to the gender composition of faculty; 57% (12) of interviewees
were male, while 43% (9) were female. Of the 21 participants, 76% were
married with an average of two children each. Although we did not assess the
age of participants in our study, the children of our group of participants
ranged in age from 10 months to 18 years of age.

Self-of-the-researchers
The interviews were conducted by the first author, and by a research assistant.
The first author is an associate professor of political studies at the campus where
the study was conducted. The research assistant who helped with the interviews
is a third year undergraduate student. The second author is a professor of
women’s and gender studies at a different university in the province, thus, in
contributing to data anlysis, provided an “outsider” perspective. Both authors
are also mothers; SW is a single-mother of a pre-teen daughter and LR is
married and the mother of two adult children. We have both experienced at
various times and in varying degrees the competing demands of parenting and
academic work which often made difficult finding balance between the two.

Data collection
Six faculty were interviewed in person, while 15 responded to the questions
via e-mail. Each in-person interview took between 45 to 90 minutes.
Interviews were conducted in various locations, depending upon the prefer-
ence of the participant (e.g., participant’s home or university office; inter-
viewer’s university office; coffee shop).
Interviews began by stating the researchers’ openness to all ideas and experi-
ences and with assurances that we had no preconceived expectations about how
faculty members should answer the questions posed. The interview protocol
was divided into five sections. The first set of questions garnered background
information pertaining to the participant’s academic position (e.g., What is
your position? How long have you held it?) and family structure (e.g., How
would you describe your family?). The second set of questions focused on
decisions to become a parent in relation to employment status (e.g., Was this
something you discussed with your employer?). The third group of questions
concentrated on factors surrounding child care (e.g., How was the process of
finding/arranging child care?). The fourth and largest group of questions asked
participants about their experiences with balancing work and family (e.g., Do
you feel that you are able to balance the demands of family and your career?
Have you ever felt that one has interfered with or taken away from the other?
72 S. WILTON AND L. ROSS

Can you describe an average work week during the fall and winter terms?). The
concluding set of questions asked participants to discuss challenges, successes,
and failures in balancing family and career (e.g., What are the greatest chal-
lenges you face in balancing your career and your role as a parent?).

Data analysis
Data was analyzed using critical discourse analysis (Fairclough, Graham,
Lemke, & Wodak, 2004; Wodak & Meyer, 2015). In particular, the responses
were grouped in categories by topic, dominant discourses and themes were
identified and contradictions within the responses were explored. This resulted
in a rich body of data, from which we have begun to draw some conclusions.
The findings presented here focus on presenting an overall picture of work/
family balance on the campus and an exploration in depth of three recurring
themes that emerged in the interviews: flexibility, sacrifice, and insecurity.

Findings and discussion

We have organized the majority of our findings and discussion section around
the three main themes noted above. As a prelude to exploring flexibility,
sacrifice, and insecurity, we introduce findings from the literature, as well as
from our participants about what “balance” means. In order to further con-
textualize these three themes, we discuss findings from the literature combined
with insights from our participants that address some of the broad challenges
faced by working parents in attempting to find that balance. Many of the issues
raised in relation to describing balance and the challenges of balancing work
and family responsibilities discussed in these first two sections are not neces-
sarily unique to academic parents. For example, combined with work respon-
sibilities, the impact of gendered social norms that define a “good mother,” the
all-consuming nature of many professional positions, the gendered nature of
work, and the absence of physical and emotional support to care for children
each impose on a parent’s sense of balance. While flexibility, sacrifice, and
insecurity may also promote, or alternately hinder, a sense of balance for all
working parents, these factors are highlighted in our findings and discussion
section because the majority of the academic parents we interviewed suggest
them as critical issues imposing on balance. Equally important, flexibility,
sacrifice, and insecurity, intersect with the ways in which our participants
understand the nature of academic work.

Finding balance
The scholarly literature identifies two main ways in which to define the
achievement of a balance between work and family: “the ability of individuals
 JOURNAL OF FEMINIST FAMILY THERAPY 73

to pursue successfully their work and non-work lives without undue pressures
from one undermining the satisfactory experience of the other” (Noon &
Blyton, 2007; cited in Raiden, Räisänen, & Caven, 2012, p. 274), and, as
“achieving satisfying experiences in all life domains, [requiring] personal
resources such as energy, time, and commitment to be well distributed across
domains’’ (Kirchmeyer, 2000; cited in Greenhaus, Collins, & Shaw, 2003, p.
512; emphasis added). These definitions are interesting because the terms
“successfully” and “satisfying” are obviously quite subjective. When faculty
were asked whether they felt they had achieved a good balance between work
and family life, 52.4% of these faculty stated yes. Yet, the description of the
average work week may appear to contradict that. The majority admitted to
working more than 40 hours per week (and often significantly more during
stressful periods of the academic year); 76% stated that they regularly work in
the evenings, and 72% regularly work on weekends. Thus, while most of the
interviewees started off by saying they felt that had good balance between
their work and family life, their later responses indicated that they had
serious challenges in achieving or maintaining this balance.
A number of the interviewees described the problems they had achieving
balance. For example, one male professor’s comments reflected the difference
between having a balance and having a good balance when he said, “Yes, I
am able to balance them. But the important question is how well I feel I’m
doing it, and I do not think I am doing it well. I have a hard time weighing
the two, and making conscious, medium-term decisions that would allow me
to balance these demands better” (Interview 7). While a female faculty
member, in comparison, reflects on the struggle to achieve balance, stating
“you don’t find the balance because the factors keep changing . . . I think in
my head, I just keep doing the best within what I can do . . .” (Interview 9).
Finally, another male faculty member reflected more on the systemic issues
associated with achieving balance, rather that his individual choices. He
stated, “the system is designed for people to not have a balance, I mean we
are into a monastic structure where it wasn’t a job, it was a lifestyle. And then
to push back and say, ‘well, no I need to have this structure’ is not something
that the system would reward you for” (Interview 18). Thus, while the
definition of a “good” balance and the choices can differ between individuals,
we need to consider the systemic or common challenges that are likely to lead
to failure or success, both within the academy and within the home.

Challenges to work/family balance

The academic literature on balancing work and family identifies the follow-
ing key barriers: ideal worker norms, the lack of time, and the prevalence of
traditional roles around parenting and “home” work. The norm of the ideal
worker suggests the worker must prioritize their labor responsibilities over
74 S. WILTON AND L. ROSS

everything, even family. “[T]his model, which includes 60-hour work weeks,
required travel, and relocation, prohibits participation by women with family
responsibilities” (Fothergill & Feltey, 2007, p. 8). Competitiveness in the
workplace necessitates total commitment from the individual, reducing the
time available for other activities, such as family life, child care, and house
work. The ideal worker is generally seen as male, particularly in professional
careers, such as academia, where the job is built “around men’s normative
paths and assumes freedom from competing responsibilities, such as family,
that generally affect women more than men” (Ward & Wolf-Wendel, 2004, p.
238). These ideas are reflected in the comments from faculty. In particular, as
seen in Figure 1, they identify self-imposed pressure, work events outside
regular hours, the demands of work, feelings of not doing enough, and
unclear expectations as barriers to achieving a good work/family balance.
The ideal worker can also be understood in contrast with the “ideal”
mother. Current social norms around motherhood assert the importance of
a mother’s presence, especially during the early years, as a mother’s nurturing
love is seen as necessary for the proper emotional, physical, and intellectual
development of the child. This over-emphasis on the role of the mother
makes her a scapegoat for anything that goes wrong and puts tremendous
pressure on mothers to achieve unattainable levels of perfection (e.g.,
Douglas, 2005; Mintz, 2014; Thurer, 1994). As Walvarens (2011) notes:

Whether they work, stay at home, or do both, they are judged for not living up to
their potential; those who focus on career are criticized for not fulfilling the role of
a traditional mother; those who stay home to raise children are criticized for
‘opting out’ and not pursuing their professional goals; those who juggle part
time work and motherhood are seen as doing a mediocre job in both areas (p. 1).

Number of Responses

Feeling of 'not doing enough'

Gender role stereotypes
Household chores
Unclear expectations
Demands of work
Lack of sleep
Lack of time
Self-imposed pressure
Work events outside regular hours
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Figure 1. Challenges to finding balance.

 JOURNAL OF FEMINIST FAMILY THERAPY 75

Similarly, Ward and Wolf-Wendel (2012) argue that the general narrative
“suggests that both faculty life and parenthood are all consuming and
irreconcilable, and that only a fool would attempt to balance a tenure-track
academic career with the desire for children and a family” (p. 1). This point is
reiterated by one of the male interviewees, who reflects:

I’ve never received any comments from my colleagues about my family, but I do
think there is a divide between those academics who decide to have kids and those
who don’t. The modern academic seems to have realized that a university career
and kids do not mix. I have had several tell me that. You’re simply not ‘on’ all the
time as an academic when you have kids, and it becomes very easy to fall behind in
your field, or to get disconnected from your academic networks. (Interview 16)

Another man commented that “current working conditions make having

children feel like a risky proposition, in the sense that it would be hard to be
both a good parent and a successful academic” (Interview 14). And, another
male faculty member stated that “I don’t think that, in my particular field (with
higher-than-average class sizes, and the nature of my research discipline being
very resource and time-intensive), I could be performing substantially better
without sacrificing family. I can see colleagues who are getting more accom-
plished than I am in comparable fields (i.e., within Sciences), and these are
colleagues without children” (Interview 8). These quotes suggest that it is not
only women academics who are feeling the pressure of trying to balance work
and family. In fact, as gender roles have changed over the past few decades,
men increasingly want, and are expected, to play an active role in family life.
However, other studies document the heavier burden for women. For example,
one study of faculty members at the University of California revealed that
mothers, on average, worked 95 hours a week, with 43% of those hours devoted
to child care and housework, while fathers worked 80 hours a week, with only
31% devoted to their domestic duties (Mason, 2009).
This discrepancy in gender roles and responsibilities is identified by one
female faculty member in our study, who commented that, “My husband is a
willing enough helper for the most part, but I am the primary parent in all
things. If I don’t organize it, it likely won’t get done. The ‘it’ refers to
everything from dental appointments to vacations. This not only requires
my time to see to all the details of daily life, but takes over mental focus and
energy that I would rather use for work-related activities” (Interview 15).
This supports the idea of changing but still differentiated gender roles, where
women are often playing the role of “manager” for the family, even while
men are playing a larger role in child care (Asher, 2011).
Yet, in spite of the many challenges, the majority of faculty felt that they were,
overall, able to achieve some kind of balance. Part of this is due to the fact
that working as a professor has certain benefits less available in other professions
or workspaces, in particular flexible work schedules and autonomy.
76 S. WILTON AND L. ROSS

As Figure 2 shows, almost all of the faculty interviewed mentioned flex-

ibility as a key factor in achieving balance, however, what became very clear
was that successful balance was largely determined by factors external to the
university; in particular, the presence of extended family near by to help with
child care and a spouse who stays at home, works part-time, or also has a
flexible career. Those without these types of supports found it much more
difficult to give their career the attention it demanded and that they felt was
necessary. This was more challenging for female faculty, who, as mentioned,
still bear the bulk of the responsibility for managing their family lives and
doing the second shift.
Many of the men interviewed commented on the benefits of having their
partners stay at home or having extended family who help with child care.
For example, one professor stated that “My wife’s career has not progressed
in a traditional sense, but that was a collective choice about declining interest
in pursuing that career, interest in taking care of kids full time, and interest
in volunteering in the community” (Interview 2), while another said that “My
wife was (and continues to be) a stay-at-home parent. While this had always
been our plan, when my son began experiencing [health issues], this rein-
forced the importance of having a parent in charge of his care” (Interview 8).
Several others commented on the traditional structure of their family (work-
ing father, mother at home). One faculty member commented that it was
easier to manage his academic career before his wife went back to work
(Interview 12). And another recognized the benefits of the traditional model,
stating, “I owe a great deal of comfort and support, and privilege, as well as
avoiding the need to face problems with child care, because my wife stays at
home and takes care of our children. I am not sure I would have been able to
keep my position and be happy enough in it if she had been working full-
time . . . for men, this would be an important part of the work/life balance:

Number of Responses

Enjoying work
Extended family near by
Sabbaticals and summers
Children getting older
Stay at home partner
Supportive partner
Flexible schedule (partner)
Flexible schedule (self)
One Child
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Figure 2. Factors that improve balance.

 JOURNAL OF FEMINIST FAMILY THERAPY 77

the roles the partner plays” (Interview 7). These comments, however, should
not be read as an endorsement of the traditional family or the stay-at-home
mother, but rather as revealing of the conditions of work and the pressures
associated with performing well. In fact, they suggest that it is very difficult to
find a balance between an academic career and family. This difficulty
becomes more apparent when we focus on the responses from female faculty
where only one female faculty member had a partner who stayed at home to
care for the children. She stated that “The only reason I could perform the
way I did was because I could count on him at home. I had no feelings of
guilt since my children were with their father when I was not home”
(Interview 3).
Another factor that helped faculty members achieve balance, particularly if
their partner worked outside the home, was the presence of extended family
who provide a significant amount of child care. As one male faculty member
noted, “Since we knew that we wanted to have children, being close to our
own families . . . was highly desirable” (Interview 8). While others, wished
that they did have family close by. As one female faculty member expressed
it, “if my family was close by, they would likely babysit, it wouldn’t be an
issue. It would actually be a huge relief” (Interview 5).
Regardless of their family circumstances, virtually all of the people
interviewed recognized that having children did change the way they
viewed themselves and/or their careers. As one female professor stated,
“Now that I have children, what I do and who I am are still merged, but
my career can no longer dominate my life because the needs of my
children also play a dominant role in my life” (Interview 15). While a
male faculty member stated that “I have less time for my career. The
objectives of academia and its achievements now seem a bit empty, at
times, when I feel frustrated about the amount of time they demand”
(Interview 7). At the same time, this change often requires sacrifice. For
some, sacrifice appears to come willingly; for others with a struggle. As
one woman said, “I have had to give up all of my personal time that could
be spent on hobbies or fitness and I resent this” (Interview 15). As the
above discussions on finding balance suggests, flexibility, followed by
insecurity and sacrifice, play a major role in determining how male and
female faculty balance work and family and their feelings about the
balance they achieve.

Flexibility
As mentioned above, flexibility was the most often mentioned benefit of
working in academia when it came to balancing the needs of the family with
the demands of work. This was conveyed in three main ways: first, the ability
to shift working hours in order to spend important times with family (e.g.,
78 S. WILTON AND L. ROSS

school events); second, the flexible nature of the work itself; and, third, the
flexibility to have different kinds of career paths. These three points are
interconnected. Faculty need to be present and available during teaching
times, office hours, and for various meetings and service requirements, but
the majority of the week is theirs to schedule. This can be very beneficial in
allowing faculty to prioritize home and family at times, but it has also been
described elsewhere as the flexibility to never stop working (e.g., Mason et al.,
2013).
Similarly, faculty often decide what they will research, how much research
they do, and determine their own career goals, although these decisions are
made within the context of tenure and promotion, and regular performance
assessments. These decisions, in turn, can lead to different faculty taking
different career paths. Flexibility is a recurring theme within the scholarly
literature, however, it is not clear from the literature, or from these inter-
views, whether the academy rewards those who make less traditional career
choices. In fact, more of the literature points to a penalty for faculty who take
time off to have or raise children (Ward & Wolf-Wendel, 2012) and the trend
within universities is increasingly towards a higher emphasis on research
outputs, often at the expense of other aspects of the job, such as teaching and
service (never mind family; Mason et al., 2013; Wolf-Wendel & Ward, 2012).
Within our interviews, it is unclear at this point how the choices of the
people interviewed will play out over the course of their careers. However,
while all faculty interviewed commented positively on the flexibility of the
job, the ones who stuck most closely to set work hours (e.g., 9–5) had the best
self-declared balance and some of the most productive, “fast track” careers.
The benefits of flexibility are clearly articulated by one male faculty
member, who stated, “For me, given the demands of the job and that of
my partner, flexibility is better than a set end time. I appreciate the flexibility
because I can take care of tasks during working hours (meetings/appoint-
ments related to children’s needs) and still get my work done” (Interview 4).
Similarly, another male colleague summed up the sentiments of many of the
interviewees when he said:
This means that I can easily be at home for more hours when my children are
awake, and then do more of my work on my laptop after they have gone to bed or
before they get up in the morning. This time flexibility is one of the most valuable
aspects of my job. While it means I rarely have evenings or weekends when I am
not engaged in at least some work, it also means I get to spend much, much more
time with my family that those who have ‘9–5’ jobs.. . . On the flip side, I recognize
that my work is never ‘done’ and that I bring work home with me much more than
many of [my friends]. (Interview 8).

Others also recognized the challenges that come with flexibility. As one
female faculty member reflected, “I say I don’t work in the evenings but I’m
always doing my e-mail in the evenings and I wasn’t including things that
 JOURNAL OF FEMINIST FAMILY THERAPY 79

really should be part of our work, like reading” (Interview 20). The idea that
the work is never really done is a common theme that runs through the
interviews and ties in with the theme of insecurity.

Insecurity
With tenure, a job in academia is one of the most secure positions a person
can hold. The lifetime employment that comes with tenure is rare outside of
the university and can potentially provide faculty with a tremendous ability
to balance work and family. The challenge for many faculty, particularly
women, is that their biological clock and child bearing years tend to coincide
with graduate school and the early, pre-tenure years of their career (Ward &
Wolf-Wendel, 2004). Conley and Carey (2013) note that since the pre-tenure
years tend to correspond with the childbearing years for women, this leads to
high workload demands at home and at work, with women struggling to
juggle their responsibilities and goals in both spheres. This timeline has also
been linked to women’s increased likelihood of holding part-time, non-
tenure track positions compared with men (Trepal & Stinchfield, 2010).
Similarly, Wolfinger (2013) notes that women with small children or babies
are “35% less likely to get tenure-track jobs compared with married fathers of
young children” (p. 3).
The insecurity associated with the pre-tenure years or with contract
appointments leads to increased difficulty in balancing family with career
demands as these faculty are far more vulnerable and less able to say no.
This insecurity can be exacerbated by a lack of clarity around expectations
for tenure and promotion. The lack of institutional clarity around expecta-
tions regarding research, in particular, combines with self-imposed pres-
sure and the very high personal expectations that faculty tend to have in a
way that is not conducive to achieving a successful balance between family
and work.
Many faculty commented on the lack of clear expectations about their
work. For example, one female professor in our study reflected, “[The job
is] flexible. [But] because there is not a lot of structure or there’s not a lot
of questions about how much time am I supposed to dedicate to these
different areas . . . that could make it a little bit challenging. It would be
nice if there was a little bit of more clarity about expectations” (Interview
5). Another stated, “That’s the thing with academia, which is no one will
tell you when it’s enough . . . it’s a competitive system and it’s scary”
(Interview 17). One male interviewee pointed to the systemic nature of
the problem, stating “I think an academic must consciously push back at
‘the institution’ or it will eat you up. ‘The institution’ does none of this
destructive activity consciously. However, it is multifaceted, and all its
demands taken together can be soul-destroying. A sane faculty member
80 S. WILTON AND L. ROSS

needs to remember that he or she has to impose some kind of balance that
the institution will not offer” (Interview 14). But a significant number of
others recognized the role they play in the workload dilemma as well,
stating that the stress over expectations is self-imposed. In addition, many
pointed to the culture of the university and the pressure to publish in top-
notch journals at the expense of more community oriented research and
service. This is succinctly summarized by one male faculty member who
argued that:
The culture of academic life, I would venture, is ever more cutthroat and compe-
titive, and thus does not foster successful family life any better than in the past . . . I
don’t think that most academics would admit to such feelings for fear of being
categorized as weak or ‘not cut out for the job,’ or being labelled as ‘not a real
academic.’ Busy-ness has replaced righteousness as a virtue in academe. If you are
not always busy, creating a ‘product,’ there must be something wrong with you. If
you make time to reflect, explore, play, or contribute outside the university, you
are treated as a lesser being. (Interview 14)

Sacrifice
This leads to the question of what faculty are sacrificing in order to succeed
at work or to be there for their families. To be clear, sacrifice does not imply
that the faculty interviewed regret the choices they made. In most cases, the
participants were comfortable with the sacrifices they made especially in
regards to their careers. However, almost all faculty, male and female, felt
they had made sacrifices—particularly with regards to research and work
related travel for conferences and research.
The most obvious sacrifice related to work for women was taking the time
off to have children. Women’s career paths experience more interruptions
that men’s, which tends to result in long term consequences for salary and
status (Lovejoy & Stone, 2012). There is an ongoing need for more effective
policies aimed at enabling women to better balance work and family, includ-
ing better paid maternity leaves, affordable quality child care, and social
supports. Similarly, Madden (2004) argues that when milestones are rigid,
women are more likely to forgo families than men and women not in their
career position. When milestones are flexible, women are less likely to forgo
having a family but are still disadvantaged when compared to men. However,
“women, regardless of family status are disadvantaged relative to men in their
likelihood of success. And within these fast-track jobs, mothers feel greater
stress than fathers in balancing their careers with their families” (Madden,
2004, p. 12). Often this stress is associated with the increased role that
mothers play at home. As one female faculty member in our study commen-
ted that “My home life requires not only a double shift, but a triple shift. I
have adjusted my courses and my research to try to combine my needs, but
 JOURNAL OF FEMINIST FAMILY THERAPY 81

this is only minimally acceptable from a job perspective” (Interview 21).

Unlike the men interviewed, who largely focused on the work side of work/
family balance, women were more likely to discuss the pressures from home.
This was reinforced by other female faculty who stated, for example, that “I
can’t rely on my husband to do these things each day or even every other day
because he doesn’t rank them with the importance that I do. Rather than try
to win a battle of wills with my husband, I put the time in with my children
because then they win and that is ultimately what counts most to me”
(Interview 15) and “it’s not that he doesn’t think about these things . . . but
for the most part, I’m the one who organizes” (Interview 20). In these ways,
women generally continue to take on more of the responsibilities at home.
Other male faculty recognized the fact that they are able to prioritize their
careers because of the work their female partners do at home. As one male
faculty member commented, “I know that my wife does more parenting than
I do and I don’t know if that is culture or it’s just because my wife is always
thinking that way, she is always there” (Interview 17).
Yet, some male faculty also expressed a feeling that it was less acceptable
for them to limit their work in favor of family. As one male colleague noted,
“I think it’s more accepted that a woman kind of has to take leave (even
though there are always negative consequences regardless), while with a man
the leave is more of a luxury” (Interview 12). Another male faculty member
stated that he felt “pressure not to pursue parental leave that would disrupt
my teaching responsibilities, especially since at the time I was pre-tenure”
(Interview 8). In addition, a number of faculty said that they felt that having
a family made career progression more difficult, in particular, achieving full
professor standing. While it is reasonable to assume that academics have to
make sacrifices—either at work or at home—in order to balance career and
family, the nature of the sacrifices remain problematic. In particular, because
women are disproportionately making the sacrifices and because the increas-
ing emphasis on research within universities makes it difficult to impose
limits on workload or pursue the possibility of having that “different career
path” mentioned earlier.

Strengths and limitations of the study

This study is limited by the small sample size, which makes it difficult to
form generalizations about the experiences and needs of faculty with chil-
dren. The individual circumstances of the faculty interviewed arguably have a
significant impact on their experiences; for example, having a spouse at home
or family nearby. However, this study does reflect the general findings within
the existing literature on balancing work and family and reinforces the
conclusion that faculty, particularly female faculty, continue to pay a career
penalty for having families. The inclusion of both male and female faculty in
82 S. WILTON AND L. ROSS

this study provides a unique perspective on changing (or the lack of change
in some cases) gender norms in families and the academy, but more research
is needed to broaden the sample size and enable us to make concrete
recommendations.

Clinical implications
Like other researchers, we assumed the term “balance” in our study reflected
participants perception of and satisfaction with the ways in which they were
able to manage varied demands associated with their multiple roles as
parents, academics, and other important responsibilities in their lives
(Brown & Duan, 2007). We appreciate that balance is perhaps a value
laden term that may represent for some individuals “another measure of
success in professional work and motherhood [or fatherhood]” (Tajlili, 2014,
p. 255). Various researchers and clinicians have replaced “balance” with
terms such as “integration”; others with phrases specifying directionality,
such as “work-to-family conflict” and “family-to-work conflict”; still others
use directionality with words that insinuate a positive interaction between
work and family roles, such as “work-to-family facilitation” and “family-to-
work facilitation” (Whiston & Cinamon, 2015). Family or couples therapists
working with clients experiencing stress related to work-life balance should
be familiar with all of the different ways in which the literature describes and
theorizes the phenomenon. It may also be important from a therapist’s
perspective to understand the nuances of labeling and the role labels might
play in helping academic clients to reframe role conflict in an attempt to help
reduce the stresses and strains resulting from tensions. However, it was clear
from the findings in our study that participants fully understood the concept
of “balance” and were able to articulate some of the negative mental and
physical health outcomes resulting from their failed efforts to achieve
balance.
As for all workers, achieving a real sense of balance for the faculty in this
study, was complicated by the age and number of children in the family, by
relational status, by the availability of social support, and to a large extent, by
gender. The notion of balance for faculty was further complicated by the
specific teaching, research, and service demands of academic work, by
expectations regarding productivity that are both self and institutionally
imposed, and by a career progression that often intersects and competes
with stages of family development. Although women in our study appeared
to be struggling more with balance issues compared to their male colleagues,
our findings, particularly in relation to younger faculty, support the idea that
generally men and women are equally committed to their academic work and
to their family (Brown & Duan, 2007; Evans, Carney, & Wilkinson, 2013).
From these perspectives, family therapists who work with academic clients,
 JOURNAL OF FEMINIST FAMILY THERAPY 83

in addition to their familiarity with the “balance” literature, also require

awareness and understanding of the shifting nature of socially constructed
gender roles in the work-family context. It is also important that they be
wholly familiar with the academic culture.
In assessing a group of couples who had successfully balanced work and
family, Haddock, Zimmerman, Current, and Harvey (2003) noted that while
the couples in their study were “creative, proactive, and flexible in creating a
dual-earner lifestyle that works, often their successes appeared to be depen-
dent on contextual factors and responsive workplaces” (p. 51). Equality and
egalitarian relationships, as well as social support, may indeed go a long way
towards promoting work-life balance for academic men and women, but
ultimately only with systemic changes will work-life balance be an achievable
goal for both men and women. Therapy, and particularly feminist family
therapy, is committed to effecting personal, as well as social, change based on
the understanding that “much of the distress that brings people to therapy is
socio-culturally based” (Hill & Ballou, 1998, p. 2). At the personal level,
therapists can encourage individuals to realistically assess the work they are
doing in all spheres of their lives, to reflect on achievable goals in each of
these spheres, and to develop positive problem-solving and coping strategies
to deal with the stresses that will inevitably arise in attempting to juggle the
demands associated with academic work and family responsibilities. While
individuals have some control over the value they place on work and family
and consequently on how they might divide their time, energy, and emo-
tional resources to meet the demands associated with each, it would be
ludicrous to suggest that achieving a sense of balance rests solely or even
largely in the hands of individual academics. A focus on mentoring pro-
grams, support at work, normalizing academics as mothers and fathers,
encouraging the development and use of family-friendly policies (without
career penalty), and creating family-friendly spaces and facilities on campus
are all areas in which family therapists could engage with their academic
clients in order to foster systemic social and cultural change to academic
institutions (Holm, Prosek, & Weisberger, 2015; Whiston & Cinamon, 2015).
As such, family therapists can play a vital advocacy role in affecting cultural
change to academic institutions that no longer meets the needs of their
employees.

Conclusion
In conclusion, this research aimed to explore the challenges and under-
stand how male and female faculty at a small, undergraduate, teaching-
intensive campus balanced the demands of their careers with the needs of
their families. Some of the issues identified by faculty as problematic are
foundational to the academy: tenure and promotion, faculty evaluations,
84 S. WILTON AND L. ROSS

and the increasing focus on high profile research. Other issues point to the
continuing gender inequality within the home and the higher expectations
for women to take on more of the responsibilities for caring for the family.
Although women continue to sacrifice more and have less of a feeling of
achieving an acceptable balance, men are experiencing similar tensions
between having a family and a successful career. As gender roles continue
to change, this may become a more widespread problem. However, as
Mason (2013) notes, “family formation negatively affects women’s, but not
men’s, academic careers. For men, having children is a career advantage;
for women, it is a career killer” (para. 3). In addition, the research findings
presented here suggests that academic careers are particularly unfriendly
for families headed by single parents, those who are geographically
removed from their extended family, or where the partner does not have
job flexibility. This raises questions about how we as a society and as
workplaces can improve on this or help people in these situations.
Ultimately, we need to recognize that while faculty make choices about
how much to work and how to manage their work, the responsibility for
achieving reasonable workload that allows for a life beyond the academy
does not just lie with individual faculty members. The institution—if it
wants happy and healthy, well-balanced employees—also needs to take
responsibility for creating a work environment in which balance is not
just possible, but readily achievable.

References
Asher, R. (2011). Shattered: Modern motherhood and the illusion of equality. London,
England: Harvill Secker.
Bacigalupe, G. (2002). Is balancing family and work a sustainable metaphor? Journal of
Feminist Family Therapy, 13(2–3), 5–20. doi:10.1300/J086v13n02_02
Badinter, E. (1981). Mother love: Myth and reality. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Baker, M. (2010). Motherhood, employment and the “child penalty.” Women’s Studies
International Forum, 33, 215–224. doi:10.1016/j.wsif.2010.01.004
Bianchi, S. (2011). Family change and time allocation in American families. Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 638(1), 21–44. doi:10.1177/
0002716211413731
Brown, C., & Duan, C. (2007). Counselling psychologists in academia: Life satisfaction and
work and family role commitments. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 20(3), 267–285.
doi:10.1080/09515070701420996
Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) (2013). CAUT Almanac of post-sec-
ondary education 2013–2014. Retrieved from http://www.caut.ca/docs/default-source/alma
nac/almanac_2013-2014_print_finalE20A5E5CA0EA6529968D1CAF.pdf?sfvrsn=2
Conley, C., & Carey, D. (2013). Academic mothers on leave (but on the clock), on the line
(but off the record): Toward improving parental-leave policies and practices. In K. Isgro &
M. Castañeda (Eds.), Mothers in academia (pp. 200–212). New York, NY: Columbia
University Press.
 JOURNAL OF FEMINIST FAMILY THERAPY 85

Cummins, H. (2005). Mommy tracking single women in academia when they are not
mommies. Women’s Studies International Forum, 28, 222–231. doi:10.1016/j.
wsif.2005.04.009
Douglas, S. (2005). The mommy myth: The idealization of motherhood and how it has
undermined all women. New York, NY: Free Press.
Erickson, R. (2005). Why emotion work matters: Sex, gender and the division of household
labour. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 67(2), 337–351. doi:10.1111/j.0022-
2445.2005.00120.x
Evans, A., Carney, J., & Wilkinson, M. (2013). Work-life balance for men: Counseling
implications. Journal of Counseling & Development, 91, 436–441. doi:10.1002/j.1556-
6676.2013.00115.x
Fairclough, N., Graham, P., Lemko, J., & Wodak, R. (2004). Introduction. Critical Discourse
Studies, 1(1), 1–7. doi:10.1080/17405900410001674489
Ferguson, S. (2016). Women and education: Qualifications, skills and technology. Women in
Canada: A gender-based statistical report (Statistics Canada, Cat. No. 89-503-X). Retrieved
from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-503-x/2015001/article/14640-eng.pdf
Firestone, S. (1970). Dialectic of sex. New York, NY: William Morrow.
Fothergill, A., & Feltey, K. (2007). I’ve worked very hard and slept very little. Journal of the
Association for Research on Mothering, 5(2), 7–19.
Gerten, A. (2011). Moving beyond family-friendly policies for faculty mothers. Journal of
Women and Social Work, 26(1), 47–58. doi:10.1177/0886109910392532
Green, K., & Groves, M. (2008). Attachment parenting: An exploration of demographics and
practices. Early Child Development and Care, 178(5), 513–525. doi:10.1080/
03004430600851199
Greenhaus, J., Collins, K., & Shaw, J. (2003). The relation between work-family balance and
quality of life. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63(3), 510–531. doi:10.1016/S0001-8791(02)
00042-8
Guppy, N., & Luongo, N. (2015). The rise and fall of Canada’s gender-equity revolution.
Canadian Review of Sociology, 52(3), 241–265. doi:10.1111/cars.12076
Haddock, S., Zimmerman, T., Current, L., & Harvey, A. (2003). The parenting practices of
dual-earner couples who successfully balance family and work. Journal of Feminist Family
Therapy, 14(3–4), 37–55. doi:10.1300/J086v14n03_03
Hays, S. (1996). The cultural contradictions of motherhood. New Haven, CT: Yale University
Press.
Hill, M., & Ballou, M. (1998). Making therapy feminist: A practice survey. In M. Hill (Ed.),
Feminist therapy as a political act (pp. 1–16). Binghampton, NY: Haworth Press.
Holm, J., Prosek, E., & Weisberger, A. (2015). A phenomenological investigation of counsel-
ing doctoral students becoming mothers. Counselor Education & Supervision, 54, 2–16.
doi:10.1002/ceas.2015.54.issue-1
Hunter, L., & Leahey, E. (2010). Parenting and research productivity: New evidence and
methods. Social Studies of Science, 40(3), 433–451. doi:10.1177/0306312709358472
Kingston, A. (2016) What Sophie Grégoire Trudeau says about feminism and politics.
MacLeans. Retrieved from http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/what-sophie-gregoire-
trudeau-says-about-feminism-and-politics/
Lachance-Grzela, M., & Bouchard, G. (2010). Why do women do the lion’s share of house-
work? A decade of research. Sex Roles, 63, 767–780. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9797-z
Lee, Y.-S., & Waite, L. (2005). Husbands’ and wives’ time spent on housework: A comparison of
measures. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 328–336. doi:10.1111/j.0022-2445.2005.00119.x
Liss, M., & Erchull, M. (2012). Feminism and attachment parenting: Attitudes, stereotypes,
and misperceptions. Sex Roles, 67(3–4), 131–142. doi:10.1007/s11199-012-0173-z
86 S. WILTON AND L. ROSS

Liss, M., Schiffrin, H., Mackintosh, V., Miles-McLean, H., & Erchull, M. (2013). Development
and validation of a quantitative measure of intensive parenting attitudes. Journal of Child
and Family Studies, 22(5), 621–636. doi:10.1007/s10826-012-9616-y
Lovejoy, M., & Stone, P. (2012). Opting back in: The influence of time at home on profes-
sional women’s career redirection after opting out. Gender, Work & Organization, 19(6),
631–653. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0432.2010.00550.x
MacDonald, D., & McInturff, K. (2015). Family policies for the way we live now. Our
Schools/Our Selves, Summer, 39–51. Retrieved from https://www.policyalternatives.ca/
sites/default/files/uploads/publications/National%20Office/2015/09/OS120_Summer2015_
Family_policies.pdf
Madden, J. (2004). Preface. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social
Science, 596(1), 6–18. doi:10.1177/0002716204268886
Marsiglio, W., Amato, P., Day, R., & Lamb, M. (2000). Scholarship on fatherhood in the
1990s and beyond. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(4), 1173–1191. doi:10.1111/j.1741-
3737.2000.01173.x
Mason, M. (2009). Men and mothering. Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://
chronicle.com/article/MenMothering/44863/
Mason, M. (2013). In the Ivory Tower, men only. Slate. Retrieved from http://www.slate.com/
articles/double_x/doublex/2013/06/female_academics_pay_a_heavy_baby_penalty.html
Mason, M., Goulden, M., & Wolfinger, N. (2013). Do babies matter? Gender and family in the
Ivory Tower. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Mattingly, M., & Sayer, L. (2006). Under pressure: Gender differences in the relationship
between free time and feeling rushed. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 205–221.
doi:10.1111/jomf.2006.68.issue-1
Milan, A., Keown, L. A., & Urquijo, C. R. (2011). Families, living arrangements and unpaid
work. Women in Canada: A gender-based statistical report (Statistics Canada, Cat. No.
89-503-X). Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-503-x/2010001/article/11546-
eng.pdf
Mintz, S. (2014). Mothers and fathers in America. Digital History. Retrieved from http://www.
digitalhistory.uh.edu/topic_display.cfm?tcid=81
O’Reilly, A. (Ed). (2008). From motherhood to mothering or how feminism got its mother back.
Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
O’Reilly, A. (Ed). (2010). 21st century motherhood: Experience, identity, policy, agency. New
York, NY: Columbia University Press.
O’Reilly, A., Porter, M., & Short, P. (Eds.). (2005). Motherhood: Power & oppression. Toronto,
Canada: Women’s Press.
Parsons, W., Duke, P., Snow, P., & Edwards, A. (2009). Physicians as parents: Parenting
experiences of physicians in Newfoundland and Labrador. Canadian Family Physician, 55,
809.e1–809.e4.
Pedersen, D. (2012). The good mother, the good father, and the good parent: Gendered
definitions of parenting. Journal of Feminist Family Therapy, 24(3), 230–246. doi:10.1080/
08952833.2012.648141
Quirke, L. (2006). “Keeping young minds sharp”: Children’s cognitive stimulation and the
rise of parenting magazines, 1959–2003. Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue Canadienne
De Sociologie, 43(4), 387–406. doi:10.1111/j.1755-618X.2006.tb01140.x
Raidan, A., RäIsäNen, C., & Caven, V. (2012). Juggling work, family. . .and life in academia:
The case of the ‘new’ man. ARCOM 28th Annual Conference, Edinburgh. Retrieved from
http://publications.lib.chalmers.se/publication/162391
Rich, A. (1976a). Of woman born: Motherhood as experience and institution. New York, NY:
W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.
 JOURNAL OF FEMINIST FAMILY THERAPY 87

Rich, A. (1976b). Women’s studies—Renaissance or revolution? Women’s Studies, 3, 121–126.

doi:10.1080/00497878.1976.9978382
Rich, A. (1980). Compulsory hetersexuality and lesbian existence. Journal of Women in
Culture and Society, 5(4), 631–660. doi:10.1086/493756
Statistics Canada. (2011). General Social Survey—2010: Overview of the time use of Canadians
(Cat. No. 89-647-X). Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-647-x/89-647-
x2011001-eng.pdf
Statistics Canada. (2012). 2011 census of population: Families, households, marital status,
structural type of dwelling, collectives. The Daily. Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/
daily-quotidien/120919/dq120919a-eng.pdf
Stinchfield, T., & Trepal, H. (2010). Academic motherhood for counselor educators:
Navigating through the academic pipeline. International Journal for the Advancement of
Counselling, 32(2), 91–100. doi:10.1007/s10447-009-9086-0
Suitor, J., Mecum, D., & Feld, I. (2001). Gender, household labor, and scholarly productivity
among university professors. Gender Issues, 19(4), 50–67. doi:10.1007/s12147-001-1007-4
Tajlili, M. (2014). A framework for promoting women’s career intentionality and work-life
integration. The Career Development Quarterly, 62, 254–267. doi:10.1002/cdq.2014.62.
issue-3
The Expert Panel on Women in University Research. (2012). Strengthening Canada’s research
capacity: The gender dimension. Ottawa, Canada: Council of Canadian Academics.
Retrieved from http://www.scienceadvice.ca/uploads/eng/assessments%20and%20publica
tions%20and%20news%20releases/Women_University_Research/WUR_fullreportEN.pdf.
pdf
Thurer, S. (1994). The myths of motherhood: How culture reinvents the good mother. Toronto,
ON: Penguin.
Turcotte, M. (2011). Women in Canada: A gender-based statistical report: Women and
education Cat. No. 89-503-X. Ottawa, Canada: Statistics Canada Social and Aboriginal
Statistics Division. Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-503-x/2010001/article/
11542-eng.pdf
Uppal, S., & LaRochelle-Côté, S. (2014). Changes in the occupational profile of young men
and women in Canada. Insights on Canadian Society (Statistics Canada—Catalogue no.
75-006-X). Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-006-x/2014001/article/11915-
eng.pdf
Wall, G. (2010). Mother’s experiences with intensive parenting and brain development
discourse. Women’s Studies International Forum, 33(3), 253–263. doi:10.1016/j.
wsif.2010.02.019
Walvarens, S.P. (2011). Torn: True stories of kids, career & the conflict of modern mother-
hood. Seattle, WA: Coffeetown Press.
Ward, K. A., & Wolf-Wendel, L. (2004). Academic motherhood: Managing complex roles in
research universities. The Review of Higher Education, 27(2), 233–257.
Warner, J. (2012). Is too much mothering bad for you? A look at the new social science.
Virginia Quarterly Review, 88(4), 48–53.
Whiston, S., & Cinamon, R. (2015). The work-family interface: Integrating research and
career counseling practice. The Career Development Quarterly, 63, 44–56. doi:10.1002/
cdq.2015.63.issue-1
Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2015). Methods of critical discourse studies (3rd ed.). Los Angeles;
London: SAGE.
Wolf-Wendel, L., & Ward, K. (2012). Academic motherhood: How faculty manage work and
family. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.