In A Mother's Work: How Feminism, the Market, and Policy Shape Family Life, Neil Gilbert admits that so much talk about the glory of paid work and the burden of child-rearing for women has been purported by a group of occupational elite. The fact that academics, part of the occupational elite, study these issues and enjoy their work further complicates the practical implications when considering that the vast majority of male and female workers do not love their paid employment and simply dream of retirement. If paid employment is only liberating and enjoyable for the occupational elite, then why does our culture push mothers of all occupational persuasions into a male model of work? Gilbert examines ‘how capitalism, feminism, and the state contribute to cultural norms and values and how the social pressure they generate influences lifestyle choices and the changing role of motherhood (p. 47). He also suggests new possibilities for mothers (and fathers) with regard to childrearing and paid work.

Paid employment and childrearing historically have been an either/or choice full of loaded implications for women, so when Betty Friedan blamed the unhappiness of upper-middle-class housewives on childrearing and housework in The Feminine Mystique in 1963, many college-educated women decided they wanted it all. Gilbert posits that the women Friedan discusses were simply experiencing burnout, something that many paid workers also experience. Just because some women found the tasks of childrearing and housework uninspiring does not mean that all women feel that way. He also disagrees with Linda Hirschman's idea that all women should obtain paid employment because a separate checking account is the key to liberation. He argues that this brand of feminism is not universal. Challenging a feminism of the few is certainly not a new concept, but what he adds is the notion that occupational elites are some of the exceptional few benefiting from such an ideology. Gilbert is arguing that feminism has failed the vast majority of women when it comes to the work−family balance. Not all paid employment is more engaging, challenging and creative than childrearing.

Capitalism has also failed women in their pursuit of a work−family balance. He discusses two important influences capitalism has on motherhood. First, multiple children are no longer necessary for the functionality of a household, like they once were in an agrarian society in which a household needed many helpers to tend to fields, animals and other household duties. Children are expensive and time-consuming to rear in modern society. They are not a good financial investment. Having children, then, must be either an altruistic behavior or rewarding in non-financial ways (i.e. emotional and psychological benefits that cannot be calculated in a cost−benefit analysis). Capitalism also shapes motherhood by constantly turning luxury goods into necessities. The need for two incomes in order to simply ‘make it’ is greatly influenced by the fact that ‘making it’ now means being able to provide a certain level of leisure and luxury. Gilbert states, ‘the triumph of materialism in modern times feeds the market and leaves childrearing and family life undernourished’ (p. 35).

Policy has provided limited benefits to women trying to maintain a work−family balance. Because of feminism's focus on paid employment, ‘the triumph of feminism winds up advancing the culture of capitalism’ (p. 61), which in turn yields state policies that benefit ideologies of feminism and capitalism more than actual women and families. Gilbert analyzes the policies of several European countries touted as the most progressive and supportive work−family policies in the world. Though he sees success in some of them, he still notes that when the women return to work, they are often returning to uninspiring jobs, again supporting the notion that it is the occupational elite who benefit most.

An interesting contribution to this field of study is the typology Gilbert creates to analyze women according to their reproductive behavior. The categories are: traditional (three or more children), neo-traditional (two children), modern (one child) and post-modern (no children). Women often end up in a category not by direct choice, but indirect choices regarding goals and lifestyle (e.g., a forty-something corporate woman who wants children, but finds herself without a partner and/or the biological capability to have a child). Though it seems a bit biologically reductive to view a woman and her choices regarding the work−family balance by simply how many children she has, it nevertheless provides interesting commentary regarding the complex lifestyle choices modern women are forced to make.

Gilbert concludes the text with a challenge to the traditional male work model of paid work with no breaks until retirement. He highlights the success of ‘use it or lose it’ paternity leave in some European countries that not only have given men more parenting time, but also create a cultural acceptance of the notion of equal parenting. Gilbert takes it further by proposing a ‘sequential’ model in which policies would be in place that easily allow for mothers to move more freely in and out of paid work and temporary, full-time childrearing. He is clear that the sequential model should be available to both mothers and fathers, but notes it is likely that more mothers would take advantage of such a model than fathers would. It would be helpful to have suggestions regarding ways in which to get men to participate in the sequential model as well, Otherwise, we still have a traditional male work model and a separate, female work model in the sequential model.

A Mother's Work is an effort to take the conversation about women and the work−family balance out of ideological debates and into a pragmatic place. Gilbert, who studies social welfare and social services at University of California at Berkeley, suggests a sequential path for both men and women that serves to create a more equitable work and family balance. His policy suggestions seek to preserve a space in which both women and men spend their time as they choose, whether that is changing diapers, leading board meetings, but preferably a little bit of both along the way.