This is a ludicrous article. Payment is done for work in exchange for something that benefits the payee. Is the implication that children should pay the mother? Or perhaps the mother should pay herself since she is also a beneficiary of her work. Or maybe taxpayers dollars shoud be spent to compensate nonworking mothers?
As a Dad who does appreciate what Mom does, I can't help but wonder the value of all the work that Dad puts in outside his job: all home maintenance, car upkeep, financial (paying bills, making investments), educating sons and daughters, etc. We (Mom and Dad) were both busy all the time--Dad's extra work is "worth" something too. It's a partnership.
It really is ludicrous and condescending. Don't they have this article every year?