Advertisement

Parenthood in Norway: Between Politics and Science

  • Ole Jacob MadsenEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Crossroads of Knowledge book series (CROKNOW, volume 1)

Abstract

Norwegian legislators have recently altered the legal regulations for the parental leave. Parents are now given the chance to split the existing one year of leave fifty-fifty. A newly proposed bill even seeks to make paternity leave mandatory. Several Norwegian medical and psychological experts have opposed this newly introduced legislation. Their argument is that ‘Research shows that…’ young children may show symptoms of stress reactions and in the worst case suffer from mental health disorders later in life when the primary caregiver changes during the child’s first year of life. Many of the experts implicitly seem to defend a normative idea of static ‘natural preferences’ between men and women, as a basis for a conservative political outlook, that neglects that deducing from scientific knowledge to political decision-making rarely is straightforward. The experts in question rarely seem to recognise that questions of maternity and paternity leave, also concerns opposing values and political priorities, for instance equal rights between the sexes.

Keywords

Gender Equality Parental Leave News Story Individual Freedom Conservative Party 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Ellingsæter, A. L., & Leira, A. (2006). Introduction: politicising parenthood in Scandinavia. In A. L. Ellingsæter & L. Arnlaug (Eds.), Politicising parenthood in Scandinavia. Gender relations in welfare states (pp. 1–24). Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Leira, A. (2006). Parenthood change and policy reform in Scandinavia, 1970s–2000s. In A. L. Ellingsæter & L. Arnlaug (Eds.), Politicising parenthood in Scandinavia. Gender relations in welfare states (pp. 27–51). Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Winnicott, D. W. (1960). The theory of the parent-infant relationship. The International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 41, 585–595.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chodorow, N. J. (1978). The reproduction of mothering: Psychoanalysis and the sociology of gender. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brandth, B., & Kvande, E. (2009). Norway: The making of the father’s quota. In S. B. Kamerman & P. Moss (Eds.), The politics of parental leave policies (pp. 191–206). Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Leira, A. (1998). Caring as social right: Cash for childcare and daddy leave. Social Politics, 5, 362–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Engh, C., & Ruud, S. (2008, March 4). Politikerne må forstå hvorfor kvinner stritter imot [Politicians must understand why women resist]. Aftenposten, 4–5.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kennair, L. E. O. (2008, March 4). Nettprat – Advarer mot å ta permisjon fra mor [Internet talk – Cautions against taking permission from the mother]. Aftenposten. Retrieved from http://tux1.aftenposten.no/nettprat/kennair2008/
  9. 9.
    Vikøyr, H. (2008, March 7). Omsorg på skift kan skade spedbarn [Changing care giver may harm infants]. Verdens Gang, 4–5.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Berg-Nielsen, T. S. (2010). Følsom, formbar og uferdig. Epigenetikk, utvikling av hjernen og stressbarhet. In: E. Befring, I. Frønes, & M.-A. Sørlie (Eds.), Sårbare unge. Nye perspektiver og tilnærminger [Vulnerable young ones. New perspectives and approaches] (pp. 75–85). Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gunnar, M. R., & Donzella, B. (2002). Social regulation of the cortisol levels in early human development. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 27, 199–220.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vikøyr, H. (2008, March 7). Høres rimelig ut [Sounds reasonable]. Verdens Gang, 4–5.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Markestad, T. (2010, May 12). Valgfrihet for barnas skyld [Parental choice for the children’s sake]. Dagbladet, 74.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kværness, R. (2010, May 20). For barnas skyld [For the sake of the children]. Dagbladet, 66.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Holter, Ø. G., & Lorentzen, J. (2010, November 3). God familiepolitikk [Better family politics]. Aftenposten. Retrieved from http://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/debatt/article3885971.ece
  16. 16.
    Holter, Ø. G., Egeland, C., & Svare, H. (2008). Likestilling og livskvalitet [Equality and quality of life]. Oslo: Work Research Institute.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Norwegian Directorate of Health. (2009). Spedkost 12 måneder. Landsomfattende kostholdsundersøkelse blant 12 måneder gamle barn [Diet for infants. National survey among infants aged 12 month]. Oslo: Norwegian Directorate of HealthGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    The Men’s Panel. (2008). Equality and social inclusion Ministry of Children 10. Oslo: Ministry of Children, Equality and Social Inclusion.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rose, S. (2001). Moving on from old dichotomies: Beyond nature-nurture towards a lifeline perspective. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 178, 3–7. doi: 10.1192/bjp.178.40.s3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fausto-Sterling, A., Gowaty, P. A., & Zuk, M. (1997). Evolutionary psychology and Darwinian feminism. Feminist Studies, 23, 402–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thornhill, R., & Palmer, C. (2000). A natural history of rape biological bases of sexual coercion. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ertzeid, H. (2008, March 4). Dette er så dumt at det bare kunne være sagt av en professor [This is so stupid it can only come from the mouth of a professor]. Aftenposten. Retrieved from http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/politikk/article2292562.ece
  23. 23.
    Vassnes, B. (2008, March 6). Det man ikke vet… [What we don’t know…]. Dagbladet, 48.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lawler, S. (2000). Mothering the self. Mothers, daughters, subjects. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tjernshaugen, K. (2010, October 17) To av tre spurte sier nei til pappakvote [Two out of three say no to father’s quota]. Aftenposten. Retrieved from http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/article3860173.ece

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for the Study of the Sciences and the HumanitiesUniversity of BergenBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations