used to / simple past

[tedtmc]

For many families , childcare is a more complicated issue today than it was when many mothers stayed/used to stay home with their children.

I'd say 'used to' is redundant.

The author is making a comparison between mothers of today and mothers of yesteryears. There is a growing tendency for mothers of today to stay home with their children less and less, which makes childcare more complicated. The author is comparing this with mothers of the old days who stay home with their children more. Whether the mothers are used to doing that or not is not the issue, is immaterial and therefore redundant.

[bhaisahab]

I'd say 'used to' is redundant.

The author is making a comparison between mothers of today and mothers of yesteryears. There is a growing tendency for mothers of today to stay home with their children less and less, which makes childcare more complicated. The author is comparing this with mothers of the old days who stay home with their children more. Whether the mothers are used to doing that or not is not the issue, is immaterial and therefore redundant.

Hi ted, I think you are confusing your "used to's". "When I lived in England I used to drink tea at breakfast." "Since living in France I have become used to drinking coffee instead."

[Trex]

What makes it inappropriate is that we are talking about two different sets of mothers, the mother of yesterday versus the mother of today.

Hi, David.

About the different sets of mothers. This does not cause a problem with "stayed" but it does with "used to".

Why?

'of the mothers' refers back to 'families', 'the mothers specific to these families/the families referred to at the beginning of the sentence)' and comparing how things used to be for them (they used to stay at home and do the child-caring themselves), and how things are now (they have to find alternative child care).

Why do you think it has to refer back to the same families? Why does "many mothers" have to be the same mothers specific to the "many families" referred to at the beginning of the sentence?

Do you think "used to" should have a meaning relevant today. For example, I used to have a beard. (meaning I don't have a beard now). If all the "used to" sentences have this logic, then this should be wrong, right?

People used to lead more social lives in the past, but now their lives are more isolated.

Are we talking about the same people? Not necessesarily. Does this make "used to" wrong?

(I said "not necessarily" because when we say "People used to lead more social lives in the past" we might mean "those same people have changed over years and become more isolated let's say with the advent of technological facilities", but we might also mean that "those same people in the past led their entire lives in a social way". Even if there were novelties, advances, they were not affected, but it was the new generation, i.e. today's people who got affected by the trend and lead more isolated lives.)

Well, al in all I am not a native speaker, but I try to understand why you think "used to" would be wrong in this sentence.

For many families , childcare is a more complicated issue today than it was when many mothers ...........home with their children.

A) used to stay
B) stay
C) stayed
D) have stayed
E) are staying

[David L.]

For many families ((today/now))....childcare is a more complicated issue today than it was in the past when many mothers .(stayed)..........home.

Perhaps you are right. Perhaps I am being influenced by my past, and knowing that this social change took longer than the period of time of a 'childhood' = the period of time during which children need the constant supervision of an adult; and that therefore different families must be being referred to: by the time 'many mothers' were going out to work rather than staying at home, this was a new generation of young children to new younger mothers.
That's it.

[2006]

I couldn't get that. What's wrong with using three words instead of one? It may not be a stylistic choice, but does it make it wrong?

"used to stay" is not really wrong; that's why I put wrong in quotation marks. But using three words where one will suffice is a relative fault and is the reason I think the best answer is "stayed".

[tedtmc]

Hi ted, I think you are confusing your "used to's". "When I lived in England I used to drink tea at breakfast." "Since living in France I have become used to drinking coffee instead."

Why bhaisahab, I don't get you. Doesn't 'used to' mean 'accustomed' or 'habituated'?

[2006]

Why bhaisahab, I don't get you. Doesn't 'used to' mean 'accustomed' or 'habituated'?

"(am)(is)(are)(become) used to something or to doing something" means the person is 'accustomed to (doing) that'.
I am used to waking up at 6 o'clock every morning. (it seems like the normal thing to do and I don't hate it any more. I still do it)

"(I)(he)(you)(they) used to do something" means the person(s) did that before but don't do that any more.
I used to wake up at 6 o'clock every morning. (I did it in the past but I don't do it any more)

The two meanings are very different.

[tedtmc]

2006 - I got you now, thank you.

For many families , childcare is a more complicated issue today than it was when many mothers stayed/used to stay home with their children.

Well, when you say 'mothers stayed home' or 'mothers used to stay home' and they don't make any difference to the comparison, why bother to use more words to express the same thing? Shouldn't we be opting for 'economy of words'?

[2006]

2006 - I got you now, thank you.



Well, when you say 'mothers stayed home' or 'mothers used to stay home' and they don't make any difference to the comparison, why bother to use more words to express the same thing? Shouldn't we be opting for 'economy of words'?

Yes, I agree that's a good rule to follow on most occasons.