Heidi Hartmann.

• Author: Conniff, Ruth
• Position: The Progressive Interview

Heidi Hartmann is a pioneering feminist economist. Founder of the Institute for Women's Policy Research (IWPR) in Washington, D.C., she writes, lectures, and testifies before Congress on issues ranging from Social Security to family. She received a MacArthur "genius" award in 1994 for her groundbreaking work applying economic analysis to women's concerns.

I visited her recently at IWPR's offices in downtown Washington, where we talked about feminism, welfare reform, and the changing role of women--especially the problems of balancing work and family. We continued our conversation later by phone.

Controversy over the book Creating a Life by Hartmann's fellow economist Sylvia Ann Hewlett has rekindled debate about whether feminist emphasis on women's equality in the workplace--Hartmann's life's work--has led a generation of women to lose out when it comes to raising children. I asked her about this, and about her own experience bringing up three daughters (she had just returned from her middle daughter's Harvard graduation), while building her own career and fighting for social change.

"Unfortunately, that book is contributing to a kind of pro-family, anti-woman view," Hartmann said of Creating a Life. "I was at one conference where I heard a woman executive say that she thought it was part of the rightwing conspiracy to get women to go back home. But I'm sure that's not how Sylvia Hewlett intended it. I'm sure she intended to say we need more family-friendly policies."

A gleefully pugnacious and energetic talker, Hartmann started out by challenging my premise--that mothers desperately need more time to stay home from work so they can be with their children. "Eight weeks was about all I could stand!" she said. She's not about to give up that fight for workplace equality. But neither does she blame people who complain about the time bind.

Q: I interviewed Edward Zigler, the father of Head Start, recently [see June issue] and he told me he was bitterly disappointed the women's movement never became a lobby for children. He suggested that if feminists had fought for quality day care and better family policies, mothers and babies might be a lot better off.

Heidi Hartmann: Well, for one thing we have other issues to lobby for, like equal pay; is the children's lobby working for that? But I am not aware that the women's movement ever made a decision not to go after either child care or paid family leave. I am really not aware of that. What I am aware of is that there was a difference of opinion among those who felt that maternity leave per se was a good idea, and those who felt it was a bad idea, and we shouldn't go after paid maternity leave unless we could get paid parental leave for fathers and mothers.

Q: So, like Social Security, it applies to everyone?

Hartmann: Right. And that did multiply the allies. You had male steelworkers bringing Congress to tears because they would say, "My baby had cancer, and I couldn't stay home and be with her." It was a good strategy. But the price of it was that we don't have a paid maternity leave. It's possible that we could have gotten that. What we got was the unpaid but universal family leave act.

Q: What about the fact that women continue to do most of the housework and child care? And they're in the workforce, too. People are just terribly stressed. How do you alleviate this problem while still carrying the banner for equal treatment?

Hartmann: What's the alternative to carrying the banner for equal treatment? What banner do you want to carry? "I'd like my husband to make enough money so I can stay home?" You're just complaining--rightly so--that the rest of the world hasn't adjusted enough. You're not against equal treatment.

Q: But we simply haven't done anything about this massive demographic change. We've got all these women in the workforce, and how are they supposed to deal with their families?

Hartmann...