About a decade ago, one fine morning I visited a family. Most of its members were in the living room, spending time in a relaxed mood. One toddler was at the centre of attention.
Her mother and aunts were revelling in her liveliness and playfulness. The toddler's grandmother was sitting close by and relishing every bit of the fun and excitement. Sara, the domestic help, was on a top floor, making beds and sweeping floors that were left messy and untidy by the grandmother's adult children.
Moments of love and laughter came to an end when the toddler started crying and demanded attention. To my utter shock and dismay, the grandmother yelled for Sara to leave the household chores that she was doing and come downstairs to handle the crying baby.
I was a guest and was not supposed to poke my nose into the domestic affairs of my host. I could not help asking myself this question: When a child cries, does the primary responsibility of pacifying them rest with the domestic help, or with their parents and other family members?
Later I realised that, in that family, the responsibility of childrearing and housekeeping fell squarely on domestic helps. The family members worked outside, and at home they often fidget with smartphones or watch television but do no household work.
Sara worked day in and day out to keep the house in a decent condition. She remained busy cooking, cleaning, sweeping, mopping, washing, ironing, gardening and what not. My sympathy was with her for the amount of work she had to do. Her resentment at the lazy and carefree lifestyle of the employing family members was palpable.
But, her mouth was shut. Poverty and economic inequality took her voice away. Many mouths were dependent for survival on the meagre salary that she received from her employer so she could not say anything that might jeopardise her job security.
The other voiceless human being in the family was the toddler who could not say that she needed to be cared for primarily by her parents and family members, not by an outsider. I felt pity for her, thinking that her family members and relatives, including her parents, did not consider it worth their while to look after her even when they had nothing important to do.
That gave me an inkling of how the grandmother had brought up her children during their early years. And the cycle continued to the detriment of present and future children in that family.
I have heard about a young family with two children, a little boy of 4 and a girl of 2. Both Dian (husband) and Daisy (wife) are well-educated and found highly paid jobs upon graduation. The salary of one of them is enough to run the family.
But, in order to make good use of their potential and to boost their skill sets, both have decided to pursue full time (outside) employment. Considering their abilities to contribute to society and the need to prevent their skills from rusting, this decision makes complete sense.
For household work and childrearing, Dian and Daisy have employed Reshma. On weekday mornings, all in the house spend frantic minutes, getting ready to go to work, or bathing and feeding the two children. Either Dian or Daisy drops the 4-year-old at childcare, while the 2-year-old is looked after by Reshma at home.
On weekday (afterwork) evenings, Dian often needs to go out for groceries or other necessities. Daisy wants to be a loving wife and follows him, leaving their two children with Reshma.
On some other evenings, Daisy has outside engagements. Dian reciprocates Daisy's loving behaviour and accompanies his wife, again putting their two children in charge of the domestic help. Thus, during weekdays, the two children rarely receive care from their parents or other family members. It is Reshma-of-all-work who takes care of them.
At weekends, Dian and Daisy need to go out for various lengths of time for different purposes. Again, as a loving couple, one follows the other, leaving their children with Reshma. As their superior economic strength makes it possible, there are special days when Dian and Daisy have the luxury to spend exclusive leisure time together (dates) at expensive destinations. On all such occasions, the children remain at home with Reshma.
Dian and Daisy sometimes take their children out for dinner and buy things for them. They limit their parental responsibilities to their children mainly to economic issues. It does not occur to them that Reshma can be overwhelmed by looking after their children for long hours. Or worse, at times, she may lose her cool and abuse the two innocent souls under her care.
Taken by the lure of the outside world, such fears do not seem to affect Dian' and Daisy's lifestyle. Liable to be accused of breaching their duty of care to their daughter and son, they evidently compete with each other in lavishing their children with expensive extras instead of spending time with them at home. This may result in the two children getting spoiled at a young age and profligate later in life.
One married man once proudly told me that he had never entered the kitchen. Another man runs away when his children cry, pee or poop. I have also seen married women who never enter the kitchen and are reluctant to bathe their children or change their diapers.
Such stories are not rare anymore in the society we are living in. Parental negligence and indulgence are becoming common. Affluent parents are ready to spend money on their children but reluctant to give them the parental care they need.
Children brought up in such families know this as the only kind of parenting and will likely emulate it when they themselves become parents. In this sense, arguably, children born into financially struggling families are relatively more fortunate, as their parents do not relegate the roles of parenting to domestic helps or other support systems.
In the past, fathers were negligent of domestic duties and spent time outside, burdening mothers with housework and raising children. Fathers have largely remained what they were. Now (well-off) mothers have started competing with fathers and spending time outside the house, disregarding the interest of their children.
There seems to be a race between certain fathers and mothers in spending time outside the house and leaving their children with domestic helps. They appear to treat their children as objects to be kept somewhere with someone and to be collected at their convenience.
Is it the new world we have entered or is it a consequence of feminist interventions in domestic life? What about parental love and care for children?
In an interview with the Guardian book club in the UK during the 2000s, among many questions the late Doris Lessing (1919-2013) discussed with her readers was: "What about the effects on children of the changing relationships between the sexes?"
This question is still pertinent and deserves careful consideration. The problem of children being abused is ubiquitous. Worse, when parents are the perpetrators or complicit in the abuse.
Becoming a parent is a choice but looking after one's children is an obligation.
The writer teaches English and postcolonial literature at International Islamic University Malaysia. He can be reached at mmhasan@iium.edu.my.
** Please note that all names in the anecdotes are fictitious