I reviewed a recent debate sparked by an op-ed written by Keli Goff saying that female Ivy League graduates have a duty to stay in the workforce.

Princeton alumni and stay-at-home mom Anne-Marie Maginnis couldn’t disagree more, offering her perpsective:

This type of thinking is regressive for women for many reasons. First, while I agree that “to whom much is given, much is expected in return,” to state that “advancing the lives of her own family at home . . . does not require an elite degree” completely overlooks the value of that degree to the woman herself.

If a woman at home doesn’t need an elite degree, as Goff argues, one wonders, does she need a college degree? A high-school degree? At what point is a woman not worth educating at all?

This perspective completely disregards the inherent worthiness of educating a human mind to know the world, to think independently, to judge accurately, and to live confidently. For these reasons alone, an elite education should be available to the best and brightest minds. To concede Goff’s point would be to reverse hundreds of years of progress in women’s rights.

Second, at the purely pragmatic level, insisting that elite degrees are pointless for women who want to stay home with their children overlooks the fact that many stay-at-home mothers resume their careers after their children are in school. In fact, this may be a more appealing solution than the insane juggling act of work and family that is normal life for many working mothers.