Are SAHMS discriminated against. Red magazine are doing an article about it.

(1000 Posts)
Darkesteyes Mon 25-Mar-13 16:58:46

Just seen this on twitter.

Are stay at home mums discriminated against? Are you one and unhappy with benefits, or feel judged? Tell us.
Marisa.bate@redmagazine.co.uk

iclaudius Wed 27-Mar-13 10:54:26

Sorry not had time to read thread
Yes I have felt discriminated against for a long time. Choosing to raise my kids has put me on the lowest rung of the socioeconomic ladder. Invisible to those in politics ....
Status wise - I have none
Tax brakes - none
Support - none
Respect - none
Acknowledgment - none
I don't regret it but have been BITTER and chucking things at the tv on budget day for many a long year

slug Wed 27-Mar-13 10:54:28

Women are discriminated against. Working women, SAHM, women who are SAHM then go back to work.

rainrainandmorerain Wed 27-Mar-13 10:55:48

janey68, nothing you have said really explains why MUMS attack each other. And why you just don't hear or see dads doing the same (or commenting much at all on parenting, in fact. It really would be worth you having a quick glance at Rebecca Asher's book - you don't have to read the whole thing, it is quite 'dip in and out-able' for specific areas.)

while I think an assumption that other parents are probably not idiots and probably do think about decisions affecting their children is v sensible, as is recognising that is is very rare to be completely in the picture about anyone's individual circumstances...

Your argument seems to be that parents shouldn't be making decisions based on what they think is best for their child. Or that they have some odd ideas about predicting outcomes that they shouldn't have.

That doesn't make sense. I do take into account, where I can, mainstream evidnce based info about what is best for my child. I chose to breastfeed - I know full well that it REDUCED the risk of some illnesses for my baby. I knew that did not mean it would GUARANTEE he would be illness free.

If there was a lot of decent evidence saying that babies were better off being looked after in fulltime childcare than by a parent, I'd be taking that into account. As it happens, there isn't - it tends to go the other way - so I am taking that into account. As damn inconvenient for my working life as it is! I know that encouraging my toddler to eat a healthy diet now won't GUARANTEE he is a healthy non obese adult. But it will give him a better chance than feeding him junk food. As a feminist and a mother, I want to be making responsible informed decisions wherever possible.

The argument that we can't possibly know how our children will ultimately turn out or be affected by our decisions doesn't mean that 'anything goes and therefore ALL choices are equally valid.' (it reminds me of my MIL's argument for not stopping smoking, which was that non smokers could get lung cancer too. Yeah - but they are a lot LESS likely to get it).

I do honestly think most parents understand they are dealing with possibilities and probabilities than guarantees.

Khaleese Wed 27-Mar-13 11:00:25

It appaling to remove CB when it was a universal credit. It was never intended as a benefit and should not have been cut.

I will be voting with my feet at the next election.

Divide and divide the coalition have done a good job, over the next few years CB will reduce and reduce until no one gets it.

janey68 Wed 27-Mar-13 11:03:09

I think if you read my post you'll see I certainly say nothing of the sort! Of Course parents should equip themselves with reliable knowledge, and do their best- but there are so many variable that deciding on a specific course of action does not come with guarantees of payback.
If you don't want to work, or do want to work, then fine either way. Just don't assume (as someone ludicrously did a few pages back) that your way is RIGHT and your children will be BETTER than everyone else's because you stand to be disappointed !!

rainrainandmorerain Wed 27-Mar-13 11:07:11

Oh - a basic point I keep meaning to make, and forgetting! is that I don't think looking after small children, and raising children in general, is regarded as a valued activity - by some women, plenty of men, and by society in general.

I don't know if this is because it has been traditionally a women's role, like most 'caring', and is therefore undervalued - or because it has been associated with 'home' rather than 'work.' (same point, really).

I have heard mums complaining about how much they pay for childcare when it is basically 'wiping noses and arses'. So god knows what they think of sahms.... I often see how much respect I get for the professional, paid work I do (nothing to do with kids) - but time spent with my dc is regarded as either a holiday, or by some as a tedious chore (obvs it can be both!). It is very rarely regarded as a skilled or valuable activity.

As a highly educated working mum, I find it utterly baffling that people can be si shortsighted about the raising and care of children, and devalue it so much. A scant hour reading anything on child psychology/language development would put paid to the idea it is just 'wiping noses and arses'.

tempnameswap Wed 27-Mar-13 11:09:22

Well said Juggling! Yes, the point is it isn't a CV gap. Why can't this society view SAHPing as valuable in itself? It has been said before but there is a complete lack of logic in the way we value childminding and yet not the same job done by a parent. Just because childminding is paid? Madness....

slatorre712 Wed 27-Mar-13 11:10:18

I think it is important for one parent to stay at home. One of the parents should be home with the kids in the early years before they start school. It is crucial to building the child parent bond and can have life long effects on all areas of the child's life if it is not developed properly.

But for that parent to be discriminated against when they are looking to join the workforce again is insane. Yes they missed a few years, however they do have the education and experience just the same. If anything they have more experience after being a SAHM in regards to market research and development.

BlackMaryJanes Wed 27-Mar-13 11:10:27

I feel discriminated against. Here's a convo I've had with an aquaintence:

Her: What do you do?
Me: I'm a SAHM.
Her: You're a kept woman then? [smurk on her face]

iclaudius Wed 27-Mar-13 11:13:18

Temp and juggling EXACTLY !!!!

FasterStronger Wed 27-Mar-13 11:21:34

Could posters pls link to research when they say SAH is important for child development.

scottishmummy Wed 27-Mar-13 11:26:58

If you don't work youre financially dependent upon waged partner you are kept woman.fact
Housewife is an arrangement were one waged person is solely responsible for earning
The economically inactive partner is financially dependent.

KarlosKKrinkelbeim Wed 27-Mar-13 11:33:30

I think there is discrimination in the way in which employers automatically regard experience gained as part of one's parenting role (whether you work outside that or no) as largely worthless. I work full time and in that capacity manage one person and mentor about half a dozen others. In my home life I manage a full-time employee as well as the people who work for me on my DS's programme of support (he has ASD). I actually get just as much people management experience in that capacity if not more than I do at work. but if I mentioned it in any kind of interview or promotion attempt I think I'd probably be laughed out of the room. Why?

fedupofnamechanging Wed 27-Mar-13 11:36:47

I'll bite, SM (not literally). Kept woman implies she sits on her arse all day and does nothing beside await the return of her lord and master. A sahp is working. They are looking after dc etc, so within their family unit have agreed a system to divide the labour - one person does out of house work, the other does in house work.

BlackMaryJanes Wed 27-Mar-13 11:37:04

FasterStronger read this. You will probably find it surprising.

IceBergJam Wed 27-Mar-13 11:38:53

I wonder if parenting is given less credit because the vast majority of the population do it ?

FasterStronger Wed 27-Mar-13 11:39:01

BlackM - that is a book by someone trying to sell their book. I doubt there is much money in - you know what, they will probably be fine, most people are.

maisiejoe123 Wed 27-Mar-13 11:39:46

Juggling made an interesting point regarding what companies need to consider. The problem is that they dont and why should they tbh. I have a close relative who is a SAHM. Her DH is a high earner. She has help around the house. Please dont flame me - but I do wonder what she does all day although she says she is very busy....

anotheryearolder Wed 27-Mar-13 11:44:20

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

scottishmummy Wed 27-Mar-13 11:45:07

So if housewife works with family,what work is being undertaken when kids at school?
Bottom line govt will reward working families as both wage earners contribute tax,ni
A housewife doesn't economically contribute.it may individually benefit family but is economic inactivity

anotheryearolder Wed 27-Mar-13 11:46:06

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

iclaudius Wed 27-Mar-13 11:46:23

'Housewife' lovely

FlowersBlown Wed 27-Mar-13 11:47:29

Caring for children is low status work, whoever does it. Jobs in childcare often pay minimum wage and are considered suitable for teenagers. That probably is connected to the fact that it has traditionally been women's work.

Why do women turn against each other? There is a way of creating staus in motherhood, by treating childcare as a competitive field. This type of mother always looks amazing, cooks fabulous healthy meals, and does loads of educational activities etc. But she is only able to gain status at the expense of other mothers.

iclaudius Wed 27-Mar-13 11:48:41

The SAHM is dependant on her partner financially just as the earning partner relies on the SAHM to raise and nurture the offspring Scottishmummy

impty Wed 27-Mar-13 11:49:51

I have been a sahm for 13 years.
The child care payments for working parents seems reasonable to me. We no longer receive child benefit, but why would we receive money for child care when one of us is at home to do that? I do however, feel shocked that this is not available for those earning under £10000.
When dd1 was born there was no help from the state with child care and so I feel any help with this is beneficial.
However, sahm are undervalued in our society. Unfortunately if you don't pay taxes in our society you are perceived as a 'burden'. Hand on heart I'm not and not likely to be. UK plc will only ever profit from our family, yet my role is dismissed.
I feel I am the glue. I invest time and energy in my children, and their schools. I look after my husband and he is able to earn, he creates business for the economy and pays a great deal, by any bodies standards, to the tax man. Looking at our peers we as a family earn more by taking this route than by balancing 2 careers. But, I concede this may not be the same for everyone.
I silently help out where needed at home and within the community, but as I don't earn a wage/ pay taxes my efforts are brushed aside.
I have no desire to tell those who choose to work that this is wrong, I believe women should be able to chose the best course of action for them and receive support whether they choose to stay at home or go to work. Neither makes you better or worse.
So, no I'm not discriminated against in real life. Although I seem to be a figure of hate for some, on these boards occasionally. My role within society is definintly undervalued.

This thread is not accepting new messages.