What if women aren’t opting out, but burning out?

If we’re serious about the birth rate and the economy, we need to talk about the mental load.

A few weeks ago, everyone was talking about the $5,000 “baby bonus” and the proposal to award a Medal of Honor to women who have six children. And as a mom of four, I had a lot of feelings.

But this week, a headline from The New York Times hit differently:
Not Just More Babies: These Republicans Want More Parents at Home

Because they’re starting to say the quiet part out loud, that the goal isn’t just supporting families, it’s getting women out of the workforce and back into traditional gender roles.

The article cited a striking statistic: 60% of women with children under 18 say they’d rather stay home or work part-time.
And that number has people talking.

But instead of asking why women want to scale back, we keep jumping to the same tired conclusions: that it’s about family values, personal preference, or a rejection of feminism.

What if it’s none of that?
What if it’s burnout?

Because the truth is, women aren’t just making choices, they’re reacting to impossible conditions.

They’re working full-time jobs while managing the majority of childcare, domestic labor, and the invisible mental load that keeps everything running.

They’re not opting out because they don’t want to work.
They’re opting out because they physically, mentally, and emotionally can’t do it all.

Meanwhile, men, though more involved in parenting than past generations, still aren’t expected to manage the household in the same way.

They’re not the default.
They’re not the project manager.
And because of that, they’re not the ones burning out.

Men are still more likely to have time for hobbies, to network, to rest, and to advance in their careers, while women are spending their so-called "free time" folding laundry, prepping meals, and managing the family calendar.

We cannot talk about women wanting to leave the workforce or declining birth rates without talking about this imbalance.

We also can’t pretend this is just about working moms.

Many women do want to be stay-at-home moms.
But what holds them back isn’t always a lack of desire or even affordability, it’s fear.

Fear of what happens if the relationship ends.
Fear of having no retirement plan, no career to return to, and no financial safety net.
Fear of becoming invisible in a world that still undervalues caregiving.

Stay-at-home moms are doing critical, unpaid labor, but they’re often left without protections, compensation, or long-term security. They’re sacrificing their earning power to hold their families together, and we act like that’s a “choice” instead of a cost.

If we want real solutions, we need to build a system that supports all mothers.

• Working moms need paid leave, flexible jobs, affordable childcare, and career protections.

• Stay-at-home moms need retirement contributions, protections, and compensation for their labor—because financial security shouldn’t be the tradeoff for raising your own kids.

• We need affordable healthcare, improved maternal healthcare outcomes, and for men to start fully participating in the domestic labor and mental load.

We need policies that honor the value of caregiving, whether it’s paid or unpaid, not policies that push women back into outdated roles.

And we need to stop framing this as a “women’s issue,” when the reality is:
Men benefit from paid leave and affordable childcare too.
They just aren’t as harmed when it doesn’t exist.

This isn’t about one group winning over another. It’s about building a world where women aren’t left carrying the weight of two full-time jobs, without acknowledgment, compensation, or support. We need policies that support all paths, whether a woman chooses to stay home, work full-time, or something in between.

Let’s stop asking how to get women back in the home and start asking how to support them, wherever they are, with real choices, real care, and real equity.