"Its what I want to do", a phrase that I've been repeating to my father over and over again since I graduated college. And it turns out that what I want to do (become an author, specialize in pediatric psychosis) requires a Ph.D ...atleast for anyone to take me seriously. So thats the direction I've been headed towards. This morning I just got my first call to interview for a five year, Ph.D in Clinical Psychology with a specialization in a Child and Adolescents program. Joyous occasion? Not for pops, it wasn't.
There's alot of cons to obtaining a Ph.D; yet it seems like the biggest problem my father has about it is how it effects the probability of marriage. Five years, he says, is too long of a commitment. If my heads' in the books for the next five years, I'll be 26 when I finally get three letters after my name. And by then, I'll be considered an old maid. I'm in my prime NOW. Factor in fertility drops, career devotion, ect. ect, and a Ph.D suddenly has caused more harm than good. Now, don't get me wrong - my dad's in no rush to marry me off. And in his mental hierarchy of existentialism, I'm pretty sure education trumps marriage...but family trumps both. And in his eyes, a Ph.D is a threat to family.
A skeptic, I spent half my night researching and reading to find someone in this century that thought like he did - and was suprised to find many. All the articles supported his arguement...its hard for women Ph.D to find husbands. But why? Unlike what so many articles cited, I don't believe its the time commitment that decreases the chance of a woman getting married or causes divorce. I believe its the type of personality behind a woman that seeks her Ph.D that prevents her successfully finding a mate or keeping one (Monomaniacal. Type A. Overly Independent).
But if my theory is correct, then why don't female MDs and JDs have the same reputation as PH.Ds?
