Thank you enaj for clarifying your true position with us. We appreciate it. Too bad for your general readership not privy to supplementary notes we at OLO are privileged with. All those choice induced stress infested middle-class families torn apart by decisions such as sending Hunter and Pearl to piano lessons, or splurging out on a new Lexus.

It somewhat explains you generic references to obsessive parenting without once mentioning gender. We can only presume this was in the interest of neutrality. Commendable.

But there is one choice you totally omitted. This is available to every modern feminist parent, considered by at least half and probably exercised by a third; the choice of one resident parent over two.

My goodness, it was obvious to me that Jane was being ironic, even before I read any clarifying comments. If you're oblivious to irony, that doesn't actually mean the author is communicating badly.

Back on topic, I'd say this touches on the nature vs nurture debate. Obviously Jane thinks that nature is more responsible than nurture for the resulting personalities of the kids. But I think it's also an interesting point about Western parenting as opposed to the sort of parenting that goes on in other parts of the world. In traditional cultures, where people don't do things like read books that tell them how to bring up their kids and (irony alert for those who don't understand it) that it's very important that they listen to Mozart or their brains won't develop properly, and they must teach them to read from flashcards before the age of two or they're neglectful parents, there is consensus as to how children are treated, and so much less choice about how to raise them.

I actually think this is an important factor in the children not turning into brats. Their parents are certain of both their roles/actions and the children's roles. There is no parental uncertainty for the children to exploit. The child won't sense indecision and have a tanty, because there's no indecision - the parents simply act the way their parents and their grandparents acted, and all the other parents around them act.

The point is that all the choice we have doesn't improve anything. (Although also, for the record, I'd suggest that anyone "chosing" to give birth with their feet in stirrups is not actually being empowered to make an informed choice!)

I found this article to be amusing in parts but I could not relate to it. I agree with Maximus that this article can be construed as offensive when viewed in the wider context of world inequality. I am glad that Jane has made clear how lucky I am that I do not have all the angst associated with middle-class parenting choices.

Public or Private? Private is out of our reach financially - glad I don't have to agonise over that.

Piano lessons that my children will hate? Can't afford a piano or the lessons. My children will get only one extra-curricular activity because we can't afford more for each of our three children. They will learn to choose carefully.

Indeed Maslow's heirachy of needs dictates what it is a parent will 'angst' about. For our family, it is getting the bills paid and what budget we have for food this week. I have little angst about my childrens future success in life because I operate on the assumption that modelling of healthy relationships, self-respect and respect for others and a strong work ethic will be enough to send them out to make their own choices.

Jane is right that all that angst has probably come to nought. But perhaps she would like to consider how desirable that angst might be to those of us who don't even have those options.

Can anybody please explain?

Why is it that women complain (at length) about how hard it is to be a mother, how dreadfully boring it is, how many dilemmas and difficulties they have to contend with. How men are pathetic for doing the bulk of the paid work, paying for everything but not also looking after the kids as well?

Yet, when push-comes-to-shove, they hang onto this dreadful burden with all the legal and immoral tricks their lawyers can think of... In the place where push-comes-to-shove, in the Family Cout?

Yep, why don't women embrace shared parenting after divorce?
Especially the feminists who should want equality?

Answer: the Feminasties (nasty feminists) have taken over from true pro-equality feminists. Feminasties don't want equality, they are just nasty!