Joel Anderson, “Is Equality Tearing Families Apart?” in May, Applied Ethics, pp. 362-372.

Anderson holds that equality is not tearing families apart. Workplace equality, he contends, need not destroy a family. Complications in schedules brought about by both parents working require negotiation. The benefit to women of greater equality outweighs the inconvenience to men of shared responsibility in the home.

Anderson holds that neotraditionalists are presenting the alternatives as pro-family or pro-equality. The choice is not that sharp, according to Anderson. 

Anderson describes Blankenhorn’s position as neotraditionalist. He responds to Blankenhorn’s view that equality is destroying the family. Anderson’s response is that promoting equality between males and females does not necessarily require eliminating the distinctive roles of mothers and fathers. The main issue, Anderson asserts, is that males and females should not be trapped into one role or the other. The roles could be maintained, but the question of who should fill those roles can be kept open. The view that women are best suited to fill the mothering roles may be more a matter of socialization than of nature (“chromosomes”). Anderson asserts that “...much of what gives humans their dignity is the ability to refrain from doing ‘what comes naturally.’”

Anderson quotes the view of the German sociologist Ulrich Beck that work-place forces are incompatible with the raising of children. Anderson’s response is that negotiation on an equal footing between males and females is required and that families can be preserved along with equality for women in the workplace.