I enjoyed writer Brian Braiker’s first person account in Newsweek about his nine months as a stay-at-home dad to daughter Freya. His essay was laced with timeless anecdotes about sniffing for poopy diapers and the sheer fun and exhaustion of taking care of a child all day.

While I was on leave, I fell into a predictable, if occasionally dull, routine. We spent a lot of time at playgrounds or on playdates (stay-at-home-dad perk: a glass of wine at the end of the day with bored young moms). I did the shopping and the cooking, the diaper changing and bathing. I became fluent in sleep schedules and stubborn dietary whims (I'd die happily without enduring another all-macaroni Monday). It was the most rewarding time of my life—and a bonding experience I wouldn't trade for anything. But when Freya turned 1 it was time for me to get back to work, as much for my sanity as my bank balance. All this is not to tell you what an awesome dad I am (although, if pressed, I will admit to being a little awesome). But I like to think that I will get something out of parenting that, maybe, my dad didn't. Clearly I'm not alone: in 1965 men spent just 2.6 hours a week with their kids—today that number is up to 6.5 hours. An impressive leap, but still shockingly low—that's less than an hour a day. What did Average '60s Dad do with his free time if it wasn't hanging out with his spawn?

As Braiker pointed out, in the last decade the number of stay-at-home fathers has tripled. Fathers today are much more involved in the nurturing of their children than they were a generation ago.

The other day, a SAHF at Ari’s school told me he wanted his wife to have another baby so he could stay home longer. He did not say this out of laziness, but out of joy from being a stay-at-home dad to two boys. I thought this was sweet and symbolic that we are headed in the right direction.

But I got a chuckle when I read this letter to the editor in response to Braiker’s story:

I am disappointed with the way your article criticized the dads of my generation for not being “involved in their child’s care.” I am 63 with two sons, 33 and 31. I changed diapers, bathed them, read books, prepared meals, assisted with homework, took them to appointments, attended and coached various sports, played with them and was an officer in their school PTA, all while working a full-time job. So don’t go touting how wonderful these fathers -- who can take an extended time off work -- are as caregivers. I also had the opportunity this summer to take care of my then 8-month-old grandchild, who lives out of state, for several days. While I hadn’t changed a diaper, fed, or bathed a child in 30 years, it was not hard for this “old dad” to reacquire the skills. And, just for your information, my son -- while working a full-time job -- does all the things the dads in your article are doing.

David Martin
Prescott, Ariz.

Two minor corrections: The article was a first hand account by one dad. Also, Braiker did have an initial disclaimer that his essay was in no way critical of dads of his dad’s generation. He was simply recounting his experience.

Glad to see we women aren’t the only ones who are insecure and defensive. LOL!