Is a rational mother a good mother?

Md Jamal Hossain In economics, the usual perception about the term 'rational' is not so comfortable at all. People usually think that the term means a self-centred or selfish behaviour of economic agents. This is in fact true, and it is what we learn in our classrooms. In this sense, a rational agent can't be a good one since the self-centred agent rarely qualifies 'himself/herself' as a good one. But the lesson can be quite different in case of a mother. A rational mother perfectly qualifies as a good mother and vice versa. On the other hand, an irrational mother can be a good mother but not vice versa. A rational mother is a good mother because she doesn't behave in a selfish manner. Her altruistic behaviour distinguishes herself from other normal economic agents, which often act on self-interest. By the same token, a selfish mother can't be a rational mother, since in order to become rational she must not act on self-interest motive. The force of this argument is reinforced by the fact that a rational agent strives for utility maximisation, and a good mother is not exception to that. But her way of maximising utility sharply differs from that of normal rational agents. In this write-up, we will discuss the pure economic behaviour of a rational mother. TIME ALLOCATION-DECISION OF A MOTHER: The usual work-leisure choice tells us that an economic agent allocates his/her time between market consumption and leisure. That means he/she will allocate his/her time choosing an optimum combination of leisure and work. Similarly, a mother also faces this kind of choice. But her time allocation decision differs somewhat from that of normal economic agents. A normal economic agent can move from higher leisure and less work to less leisure and higher work. That means he can easily substitute leisure for labour and vice versa. For a mother, decision is somewhat complicated since she can't set her time allocation decision between leisure and work only. A mother has to decide what part of her time is substitutable for market consumption or work; that means can she substitute motherly care for private child care for her children to maximise her utility? Or can she substitute other household works such as cooking for private maid service? Yes, she can easily substitute some household work for private maid service so that she can work outside, and this doesn't contradict her utility maximising behaviour. However, she can't easily substitute motherly care for private child care, and this often contradicts her utility maximisation behaviour. But why? The reason is that a mother can't anyway apply her utility maximising, a utility function in which only personal consumption and leisure enter. Her utility maximisation is directly dependent on the amount of care she gives to her children. That is why at first we said that a mother can't behave like a normal selfish economic agent if she wants to qualify herself as a rational mother, who strives to maximise utility. We see motherly nature in birds and animals, but motherly nature of a human being is utterly different from that of a bird or an animal. The reason is that a mother-bird's utility function is not dependent on how much care she gives to her offspring, but a human mother's utility function is directly dependent on the amount of care and sacrifice she ensures for her children. Thus, a rational mother is a good mother, and this rational mother is also a utility maximising mother. This conclusion is contradictory to the usual point of view, in which selfish behaviours lead to utility maximisation. HOW DOES A RATIONAL MOTHER BEHAVE? A mother can allocate a day's time or 24 hours in the following activities: a) leisure (sleeping included) b) motherly care to children, c) household works (such as cooking), and d) working outside (market consumption). Every mother confronts this time allocation constraint in her daily life. In her time-allocation decision, a rational mother must decide between work and leisure since working outside means finding substitutes for motherly care and other household works. The first question that comes to her mind is that can she substitute other household works and motherly care for children in the symmetric way for working outside or market consumption? She can easily substitute other household works such as cleaning, cooking etc for private maid service, but she can't easily substitute motherly care for private child care, if she cares for her utility maximisation. Why is motherly care not substitutable for private child care for a rational mother? The reason is that motherly care instills some values and norms into a child that enter directly into the utility function of a mother. For example, a child raised under intensive motherly care will at least learn some discipline and values such as obedience, patience, tolerance, and controlling bad temptations, etc. Think about the situation of those parents whose children are like errant boys and girls who don't listen to parents' words and are always chaotic in houses. This kind of behaviour of children generates the negative utility (disutility) for parents. But the negative utility doesn't come instantly and it takes time. Therefore, a mother has two choices: First, she can substitute motherly child care for private child care. Second, she doesn't do any substitution between motherly care and private child care. Since a rational mother wants to maximise her utility from raising a child, she will definitely take the negative utility effect into account in substituting motherly care for private child care. Even if a mother substitutes motherly care for private child care, the negative utility in the future causes her to 'impute' a higher price on private child care. That means she will value motherly care as relatively less costly and private child care more costly after taking negative utility into her account. The negative utility effect implies that she will not make any substitution between motherly care and private child care as she wants to maximise her utility. In other words, for a rational mother motherly care is not substitutable for private child care. This argument is more clearly presented in the following graphical illustration. In the figure one, private child care-time is measured on the horizontal axis and motherly child care-time on the vertical axis. The budget curve AB indicates that a mother can find optimal combination of motherly care and private child care on this curve. For example, she can move to the point E substituting AE amount of motherly care for OD amount of private child care. OA is the total amount of motherly care-time a mother can devote to a child if she doesn't spend any time on private child care. Now, if a mother chooses the point E, she will spend DE amount on motherly care and OD on the private child care. But by the above analysis, we learn that a rational mother will not substitute motherly care for private child care since such substitution produces negative utility. Therefore, moving to the point E indicates that the price of motherly care will decrease relative to the price of private child care, and this is shown by the AM budget curve. This implies that demand for motherly care will rise. Anyway, the solution would be OA amount of motherly care and zero amount of private child care, where OA is shown by the heavy black line. The figure two depicts the child care demand curve of a mother. It shows two demand curves: One with the zero-slope and the other with the negative slope. The negatively inclined demand curve says that as the price increases, demand for motherly child care decreases, and the zero-slope-inclined or horizontally flat curve says whatever the price is, the amount of motherly child care is constant and fixed at C0. Since a rational mother would not substitute motherly care for other purposes, such as work or private child care, the horizontally flat demand curve is a rational mother's demand curve for motherly child care. The negatively inclined demand curve is an irrational mother's demand curve for motherly child care. So, a rational mother will not respond to the increase in the price of child care, and this is contradictory to the view of normal rational agents that increase and decrease quantity demanded, reacting to price decrease and increase. Yes this is contradictory yet natural since a mother is not like a normal rational agent; she is different and special. That's why her behaviour should be different as well. SUMMARY VIEW: The main theme of the above analysis is that motherly care for children is not substitutable for private child care or other purposes. A rational mother who strives to maximise utility from raising a child would not anyway substitute motherly care for work or private consumption or private child care. That means a rational mother's demand curve for motherly child care would be zero-slope-inclined and she will not respond to market price of child care to determine how much of the total time available for child care should be allocated between motherly care and work. Moreover, the economic behaviour of a rational mother is not like the behaviour of an ordinary rational agent, because her behaviour is not actuated by self-interest. Nevertheless, she is perfectly a rational and utility maximising agent. The writer is with the University of Denver, the USA. [email protected]