Iris Evans creates Controversy - One parent should stay home

I am sorry but I vote for her, she is right and I support her, this is not about individual rights, but about the well fair of children and if parents can not get it through their head that once you have children that is all that matters and all that counts then they should not ever have kids in the first place.

Children need a stable and well balanced family with both parents and one stay at home parent.

Money is not important to kids, as long as there is food on the table all is fine, no need for big screen TV nor for SUV or vacation to Bermuda.

Kids first.

Thank you for your comments.  She wasn.t telling anyone how to live their lives anyways.  She was stating her opinion on this subject, based on her lifetime experience of raising kids.  The media, of course, jumped on this statement.  Iris Evans was a nurse in her former life.

Thanks for this, albertacowpoke.

We all agree, with each other and with her. :) Interesting. It says something good about our feeling function.

I don't know that the parent has to stay home full-time.  A part-time job may be ok.

I'm not sure how I feel about this - I think in this day and age, it's really hard to support a family on one salary and while my mum stayed home I'm not sure that now it would be possible to do so. Some areas, especially within the city, are so expensive that both parents need to work, even if one is only part-time, to be able to afford their mortgage and bills.

I think Iris Evans acknowledges that it is not possible to have one parent home in all cases.  She claims her statement was taken out of context.

In Vancouver, in particular, it would be difficult to make it on one income, the price for living in paradise:).  There are also many single parents nowadays, the only way they could stay home is either by having a job to work from home or on welfare.  There are many consideration that go into this.

As an overpaid politician (a use of redundant English as all politicians are overpaid), Iris misses the main point here, MONEY.  I believe we all agree it's better to have one parent stay at home to raise their children properly, but our economic reality cancels out that possibility for a countless number of Canadians.  Lowering our tax burdens by decreasing the salary and retirement benefits of politicians, and doing away with their wasteful spending programs might make this utopian statement a possibilty.  I doubt though if that is the hidden message behind Iris Evan's comment.

Thank you for commenting.  Your points are valid.

The burning question remains: "Was either she or her husband a stay-at-home parent?"  Hypocrisy and politics are frequent bedfellows, after all.

To be honest, I think that one parent should be at home, and I think that person is more important than the one out working, because they are in control of raising a whole new generation, and if they don't do it right our world will be negatively affected.

children need to have an adult around them at all times, a responsible one who is committed long-term. Not a hired person who can be fired and replaced at any time, but a parental figure, be that a grandparent, aunt, mature sibling, mother, father, or owned slave!  It's not right to come home after school to an empty house, crying from whatever childish tragedy inflicted itself today, and you're alone with chores and a couple hours before someone gets there.  It's not right to be dropped off at an institution when you're still a baby to be cared for by people with no more than monetary interest, even if they're caring people who generally love children.  One needs to be valued more personally and directly.  One needs to have someone in one's childhood that values one as though precious, even if undeserved.

We shouldn't be defining a family as one male and one female and their offspring, nor stating which adult stays home, but yes, someone should put the children first or use birth control till you can.  Properly running a household is a full time job.

Totally aggee with anarkissed  - it's also downright abusive to subject kids to 16 years of  schooling (mostly mental distraction),  6 to 8 hours of meaningless school daily with just a few minutes of recess, plus tons of more mind numbing work for home (HW). Some kids do not get a rest and peace of mind from school doing home work until 11pm or later ....

I appreciate all the great comments and opinions from everyone on this issue.  There is a lot of food for thought.  Thanks to all that contributed to this story.

It is an interesting quesiton, but I think for one Iris Evans as a provincial minister should not have raised it.

Evans spoke to reporters Friday morning while attending an early literacy program, where she was honoured for her commitment to early childhood development.  Read more Here

The comments were made in that context.  I'm not trying to defend her,  but she did not make them in her capacity as Finance Minister.

I totally agree with Iris Evan, that one parent should stay at home with the children and preferably the Mother. I had seven beautiful children and stayed home when they were real young but went back to work part time as a nurse. If I could do it all over again, i would have stayed home 100% and Home schooled the children.

Thank you for your thoughtful comments,

I agree 100/%.  Children not things should be a priority... They have years that are

"formative"..........they need so much interaction.. listening, questioning, touching, loving.

I know Iris is correct ...