
Margaret Thatcher’s legacy is often hotly debated. But in addition to concerns about how she handled national and international issues is another intriguing question: Was she a good mother?
The actions of a good mother?
It’s said Thatcher occasionally called her daughter Carol by her assistants’ names. Carol and her twin brother Mark slept in the nanny’s room and went to boarding school from very young ages. Their mother never attended a single sports day. Mark heated up his own frozen dinners from age 7. According to some sources, Thatcher even had a favourite child (Mark). For some people this alone could be considered a mark of bad parenting. I can’t think of a single parent who would even entertain the notion.
How good of a parent does a PM need to be?
Of course, a PM has a lot of things on their mind — you could say ensuring a future for the entire country’s children — so it’s understandable and even selfless for them to focus on their job.
Our attitudes about how good a parent that our Prime Minster needs to be is a function of the changing times. David Cameron was lauded for being an involved dad as was Nick Clegg, while some newspapers have joked that Boris Johnson doesn’t even know how many children he has.
We naturally tend to look back and judge the parents of the past with our current set of values (missing a child’s sporting event? How callous!). With important figures, we are often desperate to examine and unearth ‘the real person’ behind the public image.
Yet criticising Thatcher the Mother is, when you think about it, a strange way for critics to stick the knife in. Not only was she a divisive political figure, they seem to be saying, but she failed at home as well! Amid all the other issues that people have with her, it appears there’s something particularly reprehensible about a cold mother or one who plays favourites.
The modern version vs the Thatcher mother
How different Thatcher was from the highflying working women or female politicians of today (or at least our image of them). We’ve all read profiles of these high-powered women: They rise before dawn, exercise and email before breakfast, work like demons all day but always make it home for dinner or bedtime stories. They love their children equally. Then it’s back to the computer until bedtime. It’s agreed and accepted that children are a top priority, shoehorned in between work, work and more work.
When I read these stories I think, ‘I could keep that up for a week or two, but I couldn’t live that way permanently’. When is the time for thoughtful repose? Time to spend with husband or lover? Time to call your mother or watch Mad Men?
How to appreciate Thatcher the bad mother
In that way, I actually take comfort in the stories about Thatcher’s aloof parenting and shortcomings at home. It acknowledges a truth that we don’t like to admit to ourselves: There is only so much of us to go around. Of course women and mothers can get to the ‘top’, whether that’s in the political, corporate or creative world, all other things being equal. (All other things aren’t equal, but that’s a whole other story.) But something’s got to give. You can’t be everywhere at once. You can’t create more hours in the day.
Should we care if Margaret Thatcher was a ‘bad parent’?
A mother who sends her children away to school and has them get their own suppers while she runs the country: Are these the actions of a mother who doesn’t care or a mother who recognises her own boundaries?
Admitting that she has a favourite child — whether that occurred simply in the fictional world of The Crown or in real life — is highly controversial. But does simply feeling that way mark Thatcher out as a terrible mother?
If it were true, is it brutal honesty, simply articulating something that was evident to Thatcher…and to her children? Could we call it — even — bold?
Margaret Thatcher’s legacy
She was a remarkable prime minister who remade the UK at a pivotal time in its history. She caused deep divisions in the UK – many of which are still abundantly apparent almost a quarter of a century after her resignation – yet she was widely respected overseas.
Perhaps Thatcher was just pragmatic enough to recognize that if you’re busting the unions, engaging in a war in the Falklands, and dismantling the welfare state, it doesn’t leave much time for reading bedtime stories. Perhaps she was simply a product of her generation, when leaving all the childrearing to nannies and boarding schools was perfectly acceptable.
Women and men both make sacrifices for fulfilling high profile, responsibility-laden roles. We’re in the process of examining how our institutions should accommodate family life. But let’s stop pretending that being the perfect working parent is easy or even achievable. That all they need is a bit of grit and an alarm clock set to go off at 4am, right?
About Jennifer Howze
Jennifer Howze is the Creative Director and co-founder of BritMums. She blogs about family travel at Jenography.net, tweets at @JHowze and Instagrams at @JHowze. Previously, she wrote the Alpha Mummy blog at The Times and as a journalist has contributed to The Times, The Guardian, The Independent, The Wall Street Journal, Travel & Leisure, Budget Travel, CNN.com, Allure, SELF and Premiere, among others. She won The Maggie Award from the Planned Parenthood Federation of America for a health article in Seventeen magazine.


christine
Monday 30th of December 2013
I had a mother who preferred to be at work. I have 3 sisters and we loved our dad who found time for us. My mum was lonely and alone when my dad died. As we did not know our mum and she did not know us...I thought our housekeeper was my my mum...we felt no bond. You reap what you sew. I feel an affinity with Carol. This is sad but true.
Kate Thompson
Wednesday 17th of April 2013
And also - as a woman she had to be even MORE than a male equivalent, women are judged so much more harshly and across a broader spectrum. She was the longest serving PM of the 20th Century, and is up there with Gladstone and Disraeli, Palmerston and the political giants of the 19th Century in that respect. She was elected three times running despite electoral reform, AND was a wife and mother. Amazing IMO and I wish I could be there in London today.
Kate Thompson
Wednesday 17th of April 2013
No I don't mean basic trickle down economics... it's more fundamental than that. A bankrupt country cannot pay its workforce - look at Greece. The police, the NHS, teachers, all public sector workers who (and this is the huge irony!) were striking for better pay and conditions were striking themselves out of work, and pushing the economy to the brink. We had yet to recover from post WW2 bankruptcy and as I said, desperate times (and believe me, they were) require radical measures. Reform on that scale takes time, and teamwork. The former was in progress, I disagree that most happened in the 2nd and 3rd terms, and Major then Blair in many ways continued what she started. I don't disagree about the mining communities - the same has happened in the European countries requiring bailouts, it's unfortunately a natural progression, you cannot fix everything at once. On the latter, that was her downfall towards the end, her inability to play for the team.
But you cannot judge a legacy mid term, it's much much later, and despite the current recession we are still a strong international power, and a much wealthier country, and the past 30+ years have resulted in a socially richer country for everyone.
Christina E (@Beadzoid)
Wednesday 17th of April 2013
I had better qualify that "it never works".
Sure, she improved the lot of the economy when it was in a disastrous shape, and she was a good person to do that. Much of the extreme policies that will set her legacy occurred into her second and third terms.
There was no need for her to deliberately pursue a policiy of unemployment, simply to crack the unions. They did need reforming, and Scargill didn't help the miners case on occasion, but planning the stockpiling, changing the laws around strike and welfare claims, changing the laws around ballots, possibly even bringing in the use of military posing as the police if you believe some historical accounts. It wasn't necessary and it wasn't right. If you want to end whole industries then you must create employment where those industries have died. You cannot leave whole mining communities in Wales, the Midlands, the North on the scrapheap. That's what she did. She created mass unemployment and didn't replace it. If you want to see her legacy then have a look round some of those towns that have never recovered from it. It is also not good policy to sell off all the council houses if you are again not going to replace them. Great for those buying their homes, no one could argue with it, but not so great for those who need social housing after to find none available.
No one is arguing she didn't do some good, especially in regards to foreign policy (the rebate, for instance) and standing up to Ronald Regan when needed is something politicians today could learn from, but when you leave the country socially poorer than you found it through fostering greed, inequality and the individual over society, then I would argue that results in a highly negative legacy.
Christina E (@Beadzoid)
Wednesday 17th of April 2013
Basic trickle-down economics, you mean.
It never works.
And society becomes all the poorer and more unhappy for the increase in inequality. there are economic studies indexing that too.