Home-Alone America by Mary Eberstadt

I was prepared to like this book; why shouldn't I like something that justifies my lifestyle choices? But while I agree wholeheartedly with Eberstadt's thesis (specifically, that children who have absent fathers or mothers who work long hours are at a higher risk for all sorts of dangers), her book is terrible, terrible, terrible! I'm tempted to go line by line for the sheer joy of the smackdown; such horribly-argued rhetoric deserves to be dismantled. However, it would take a long time and this book just isn't worth it. I'll let one example speak for literally every single page of this book.

Eberstadt begins with a lengthy explanation of why children in day care have more illnesses than other children. (No one doubts this.) Then she mentions the argument that these early illnesses may be justifiable because they result in the child having fewer illnesses down the room. She dismisses this in one sentence as poor justification. No real reason given.

But this deserves more. What is the data? Do 60 childhood colds prevent one teenage cold? Does one childhood cold prevent 60 teenage ones? What about complications? In any case, is it justifiable to injure little children to prevent harm later on? What effect do the childhood illnesses have on working mothers? These are important questions that Eberstadt doesn't answer.

I only continued reading for the same reason that people gape at trainwrecks: I couldn't really believe how bad it was. I'm sad that such an important argument was mangled in Eberstadt's hands: her holely rhetoric has done the cause more harm than good.