© 2006 Alyssa Parks
An article about the child care program
at Commerce High.
American culture shifted dramatically during the Second World War. The war
created dramatic rise in production to arm the American millitary. With the men
at the frontlines it became necessary for women to work in the factories in their
place. Everyone was expected to assist the war effort. Many women already worked
in the factories but most women up until this point remained at home with their
children. This situation presented many problems for mothers who were now compelled
to work in American factories. With many women working outside the home, childcare
became a significant issue. As a result, day care centers emerged to care for
working mothers’ children. Day care enabled American mothers to work in
factories during the War.
The American government played a role in creating propaganda that proclaimed
the need for women to work as a patriotic duty. Rosie the Riveter became a national
heroine. “A new caricature made the woman worker an angel, loyally
staffing the home front arsenals of democracy. Magazines, movie newsreels, popular
songs, and public leaders all praised her. Rosie the Riveter was a national heroine.” 1Rosie
the Riveter is one example of how the U.S. government stressed the importance
of women at work.
While some employers may have discriminated against immigrants, “…the
President, on July 12, 1942 issued a statement that 'persons should not hereafter
be refused employment, or persons, at present employed, discharged, solely on
the basis of the fact that they are aliens or that they were formerly nationals
of any particular foreign country.'” 2This statement
from Franklin D. Roosevelt helped many immigrants, especially women gain jobs
in the workplace.
A description of the program
at the Commerce Child Care
Center
Day care became a site of patriotism for many Americans. Such centers provided
working mothers with the security that their children would be safe while they
worked in factories across the country. Voluntary child welfare agencies “…have
been particularly concerned with the children of parents in minority groups,
migrant families, and men in the armed forces, many of whom are handicapped because
of environmental circumstances.” 3 Immigrants had
more of a disadvantage in American society with language barriers, discrimination,
and lower incomes. Immigrant women needed day care centers and nurseries because
most of these women had to work for a living and places that cared for their
children became vital to their situation.
While many people and organizations supported working women who used day centers
or nurseries, many found fault with this solution. Social workers and child care
advocates had the conviction that encouraging mothers to be workers would
harm family life [which] led them to resist expanding day care in the early years
of war, and then to insist on limiting and controlling it.” 4 Social
workers believed that mothers should be at home tending to their children and
that it would be a double burden to have the mother both work and then tend to
her family. In addition, they believed that by being a mother and raising children
could be looked at, in itself, as a patriotic duty to America. They believed
that child care would negatively affect the children because “…most
day nurseries offered substandard care and were organized with mothers’ convenience
rather than children’s welfare in mind.” 5 They
thought that a child without their mother’s full attention would be deprived
in day cares.
Children of women working in factories learn and plany while
their mothers work hard to support their families and country
Many mothers continued to do it all. Mrs. Mary Kolb, “…was a sheet
metal worker at the Navy Yard who had gone to work to help make ends meet after
her husband had enlisted. She worked on the night shift so she could care for
her three children, but was worn out and ill from the strain and lack of sleep. ‘My,
it will be a relief,’ she said, ‘if I can get my kids in the nursery!’” 6 During
the war, the number of day care centers increased but not fast enough to accommodate
all those who needed it.
The Springfield Armory in Massachusetts depended on women workers during
World War II. The day care center which was located across the street from the
Armory, indeed proved to be a huge benefit for both the women workers and the
factory owners. The Springfield factory owners gained more workers due to the
day care center provided for mothers who worked there. Also the mothers working
at the Armory could now provide for their family with the wages earned while
their children received an education.
After the war, women no longer worked as a patriotic duty, but they did find
other work for their own reasons. Most women, after World War II, realized that
they had other options than just being a stay at home mother. They could work
for a living while day nurseries provided for their children.
The need for female workers during World War II created a chance for women to
change their status in America while before the war women mostly stayed at home.
Although many people felt that after the war women should return to their homes,
many refused to do so. Women relied on day care centers during the war and continued
to after the war was over. This contributed to women’s independence and
entry into the working world. With the use of day care for their children, women,
whom before World War II did not play a large role in the work force, now saw
that they too could be self-sufficient and continue to look for ways to improve
their conditions.
1 Sealander, Judith. As Minority Becomes Majority. (Greenwood Press. Westport,
Connecticut. 1983) 95
2Schuyler, Williams. The American Yearbook: Records of the Year 1942. (Thomas Nelson
and Sons. 1943) 552
3Schuyler, Williams. The American Yearbook: Records of the Year 1942. (Thomas Nelson
and Sons. 1943) 572
4 Rose, Elizabeth. A Mother’s Job. (Oxford University Press. New York.) 154
1999
5 Rose, Elizabeth. A Mother’s Job. (Oxford University Press. New York.) 154
1999
6 Rose, Elizabeth. A Mother’s Job. (Oxford University Press. New York.) 167
1999
|