All and sundry have had their say on Mark Latham’s AFR column on parenthood and feminism. The bitter, stupid and one-dimensional rant suggests Latham is utterly out of juice. Maybe he should take a step back for a few years and reload. He’s got the money for it, after all — lifelong parliamentary super that gives him the luxury to parent without working.
As Latham writes, “Other than for money, why would anyone want to commute and toil long hours for businesspeople?” Why, indeed.
But there is one important matter in what is otherwise another performance of Latham’s bitterness towards the inner-urban woman: as regards mothering, depression, anti-depressants and class, he’s dead wrong.
Anti-depressant use among women isn’t greater in higher socio-economic status areas, it’s the reverse. Maternal depression isn’t more common among urban lefties than among working-class mothers, it’s the reverse. The upshot? There are a lot of mothers in western Sydney doing it very tough indeed, and if Latham is genuine in his concern for the people of that area, he’ll take that on board.
Tut tut, Crikey. The person who penned this editorial is clearly too wet behind the ears to recall it was Latham (as Opposition Leader) who forced PM Howard’s hand in 2004 to cut the taxpayer contribution to MPs’ super from 69% to the standard 9%.
This was not to apply to sitting members but to parliamentarians elected after the passing of the Bill. To his credit Latham volunteered to cut his taxpayer contribution – however, J W Howard did not.
So your crack about Latham’s parliamentary super affording him ‘luxury’ is offensive & way off target. He remains one of the few politicians not to have had his snout in the taxpayer trough.
Whoever wrote this response is a bit over sensitive. I just read the article in question and it’s having a bit of fun whilst extolling the joy he gets from raising his kids.
As they say in the New Yorker – get your hands off it!
Poor Mark – all the appeal of an ADHD ferret – hardly leadership material but that didn’t stop them putting him in the cock-pit – Pro Patria.
The data you present re anti-depressant drug use, and incidence of pre and post-natal depression, both studies done overseas, does NOT accord with my own observations (anecdotal, admittedly) over 45 years of midwifery practice in this country and in Canada.
The women I cared for during that time were largely from the middle and upper classes, despite my practice involving both public and private institutions. I therefore suggest that replication of these studies would need to be undertaken in Australia, if your assertion is to have any validity.
Should read: The women I cared for, with pre and post-natal depression, during…….