To ask if you think SAHMs are lazy?

It all depends on how much effort a sahm puts into caring for her DC. Some put everything into it, some neglect their DC and prioritise their own enjoyment.

Oh sorry I thought you mean simultaneously.

To be fair to that poster, she didn’t say the only way she felt intellectually stimulated was in paid work. She just said she didn’t find childcare intellectually stimulating. I’m inclined to agree. I love being a mum and I love the days I’m with DS and I love finding activities for us to do. But I’m no childcare pro and I find my paid job a lot more intellectually stimulating.

Running your own business = working. So surely not a SAHM really

You can be a SAHM then run a business.

Like saying you were a SAHM then you went back to work.

You can do other things after being a SAHM.

I’ve just picked up a job after years of being a SAHM, running my own business
I get that by definition “SAHM” refers to those physically at home, but the essence of it is that you don’t work. Running your own business = working. So surely not a SAHM really?

I have stayed at home with 2 kids and it’s not intellectually stimulating enough for me

I’ve just picked up a job after years of being a SAHM, running my own business and caring for Dp during a long illness.

I was never so bored as when I was in paid work.

I ended up with depression

Oops apologies.

Northernsoulgirl45

I think you meant to tag the person who made that comment -AnoDeLosMuertos rather than the person who quoted it?

Alongcameacat

I have stayed at home with 2 kids and it’s not intellectually stimulating enough for me

Wow just wow. Being a SAHP or part time working parent can be an amazing opportunity to be intelluctually stimulated. There are volunteering opportunities and courses. I have done both. In fact my time at home is far more stimulating than my part time job is. Well apart from housework which is so dull.
Op has your (d)h said that you are lazy? He seems to want it all. The kudos of a wife and kids but is not prepared to fully support them financially or help with running the home and childcare if you work
I think LTB is probably the only way out.

Whatever you do, surely life is what you make it. Whether you’re working or SAH, so much will depend on the people around you; your team / support network; your work / home environment. I’m not sure, for instance, I could have managed as a SAHM in a very isolated or rural area, for instance. It really helped that at the school mine went to, I’d say maybe 75% were SAHMs, so it was easy to meet people and there was always something going on. It was never lonely or boring. I never used a nanny or au pair because I would have found that quite awkward and just another thing to manage, on top of the kids. Plus we’re in London with all sorts on the doorstep. Also, when I was working, it was in the field of child psychotherapy, so I genuinely find the significance of all the stages of emotional / cognitive development fascinating in my own children, just as I did with other people’s children (albeit differently). Although it was hard work, it felt like a total privilege ultimately and a relief to be able to properly “see things through” with my own DC, rather than being a part of a child protection system which often felt very unsatisfactory because there was only so much you were able to do and some of the circumstances were horrific, obviously. But if I was the corporate type who got a lot of fulfilment out of that kind of role, I can see how being “at home” might have been more of an adjustment. It totally depends on individual motivations and outlook really. There’s as many SAH scenarios as there are job descriptions and it’s impossible to generalise.

@pollypork I agree that just because you say I wouldn't like X lifestyle because of Y doesn't mean you're jealous. Lots of people (myself included) are just happy with their choice. I do think the people who passive aggressively deride other people's choices ('staying at home would be just so unstimulating and I'd hate not contributing to the family' or 'I could never work full time and leave someone else to bring up my child') do so out of a feeling of insecurity and jealousy.

There are fairly obvious advantages to both lifestyle choices and people who pretend they don't see it are usually unconvincing.

I have stayed at home with 2 kids and it’s not intellectually stimulating enough for me

I could reply in a similar fashion that you have to be able to find your own interests rather than being told what to do and what is expected of you all the time. It isn’t for everyone.

But.....that wouldn’t be nice would it

I’ve done both, I manage a team of 25 and a budget of £156million, I can tell you it’s a stroll on the fucking park after being a full time sahm. Of course I’m doing it all from home but dh and my teen kids share chores as I’m still working all day. When I was a full time mum it was DRAINING and exhausting, honestly massive respect to those that do it

I have stayed at home with 2 kids and it’s not intellectually stimulating enough for me. I find if I have too much time on my hands I start to worry about stupid things. I’m in a full time job now where I use my brain. There’s no point being at home because my kids are at school.

@Alongcameacat Because it's project based & he has lots of autonomy there's a fair bit of flexibility. Of course there are some 10pm finishes too but mainly wfh.

I gave up my previous career as no p/t, flexi option so I hear you on that one. Shit really as I loved it. I would have been easily on 70k plus now but the advantages were not worth it for us. I feel into another job through a contact which eventually lead to another career which Im super grateful for. 70k will very likely be the limit for this new career but Im happy with that & it's much more family friendly. DH is good with facilitating & even though he earns more my job is still important. Any dc illness/appointments are very much shared etc. Also companies are becoming more progressive, he had almost 3 months paid paternity leave.

Sure, but the OP is in an abusive relationship, whether she is working or not. She said herself, than when she returns to work, the H will stop giving her any “allowance” at all.

How is society breeding these men? The mentality is beyond belief.

I don’t think having a DH who earns 100, 200, 500k in itself is a secure enough reason to give up work long-term. His salary won’t protect you if you divorce. Assets will, however. So if, over time, this money is invested in properties in both your names, or other assets / investments that you know you could fall back on if the worst came to the worst, then you are making the decision to SAH in a different context. This is what I’m trying to say and why it’s not always the case that SAH makes you financially vulnerable. Anyone’s job can come or go tbh - it’s how you invest and accrue assets as a family that will secure long term financial security.

If a SAHM doesn’t back to work longer-term or at all, chances are there is substantial family wealth accrued to enable her to make this decision. Otherwise, she’d be heading back to work wouldn’t she!

It's not always as simple as that. Just check this current long thread from a SAHM with a high earning man - she gets no money for herself and is expected to pay for everything for DC from an absolute pittance. If she would go back to work, the DH would not cover child care and would stop giving her any money - but also would not take over any of the child care of housework. It's not that she is so comfortable that she does not need to work, she's trapped.
Of course it's just speculating what would have happened if she had taken different decisions, but maybe would have figured out sooner that the DH is a financially abusive bastard

DH (high ish earner) would not get or keep his role if he worked four days. He could however take a lower paid role (30-40K diff) and have a ‘job’ with less responsibility but more flexibility.

I feel I am in a good place to see both sides of the coin.

I didn’t enjoy my job and it was a job, never a career to me. When I had children I wanted to spend more time with them, not least because I didn’t enjoy my job and disliked not seeing my children in the morning and only for a couple of hours in the evening.

After continuously being refused all requests for part time and being in a fairly stressful environment where the job would never change and was one that was never going to tip over 40KI l left. Sometimes I regret it. Most of the time I am happy. I woukd make the same choice again in those circumstances. But if I gained personal satisfaction from something eg like teaching, it would be very different. I am more an advocate of flexible working than giving up work altogether. Sone people are amazing parents and their children benefit hugely from having them around. I’m not sure I place myself in that category tbh but we are pretty happy overall (most of the time anyway!).
We’d be financially better off if I had kept that job but a high price for getting to see the children for two hours every evening and a few weeks off every year.

Good for you & good luck @mbosnz

@HandfulofDust but some posters have said if you discuss a negative then you must be jealous hence my response. I also see negatives to working full time or having a spouse that works away.
I can certainly see advantages to lots of lifestyles but that doesn't mean Im jealous of them or they would suit me.

Im not one of those posters who believes SAH & you are doomed but like I said my eyes were opened when my friend divorced & I do look at things a bit differently now.

I never intended to be a permanent SAHP. It just kind of happened, due to incidents of geography.

A role came up in a company I know rather well, that I'd always thought I could do rather well - it's FTC, and entry level, but potentially a good entry into a growth area that uses the skills and education I have.

So I thought, buggrit, go for it. And got it. Despite all my years as a no account drudge at home. . .

@mbosnz How come you decided to go back & ft? Im not sure I could ever work Fridays again? I would like to be back in the office, was supposed to be but they are unsure now.

I definitely don't think every working parent is jealous of every sahm or vice versa. I think the people I both camps who claim to see no advantage of the alternative lifestyle are really betraying their own insecurities.

Likewise the people who think sahms in general need educating on the risks involved. I've also seen people claim that you can never have financial security as a sahm. This is clearly nonsense.

I actually work part time now but when I didn't I had a friend desperately trying to convince me to apply for a low paid admin role in her company. It was a ridiculous idea as it was full time but paid less than part time roles I'd be qualified for (and now do). The salary wouldn't make a significant contribution to savings or household income and it would look bad on my cv. I'd also be rubbish at it because I'm not good at admin stuff and would hate it. She was still insistent that I wasn't aware if my own financial situation or career possibilities. She wasn't even an especially close friend so was very odd that she was even so invested. I do think in her case there was definitely ibsecurity/jealousy involved.

I think most people occasionally wistfully look at other people's lives but for the most part get on with the choices they've made.

There are a lot if woman on here who are married but effectively are financially single. So they live off their own salary and the DH lives off his. They might share bills etc, but the outcome is that one has more disposable income than the other. Usually the man

There are loads of threads where married women are even on maternity leave and have saved up for this, in the full knowledge that the DH will not see any need to support them through this time. So he’s sailing out to work as if nothing in his life has changed, while she is trying to buy nappies out of her savings and child benefit.

So if this is the way society is headed (ie letting men have their cake and eat it under the guise of women having “independence”), then it’s hardly surprising that some people simply can’t grasp the fact that in some families, it doesn’t matter who earns the money because it’s all one and the same.

There is a function to a family - ie caring for your children and giving them the best opportunities you can - so parents will organise themselves accordingly, depending on their motivations, personalities and financial circumstances. That’s all there is to it. After a cost/ benefit analysis, it might be beneficial to have both parents working, particularly if the second income makes a huge difference to the quality of a family’s lifestyle; or both would go crazy at home, etc. But equally, two people working might make less sense if, for instance, one earns hundreds of thousands in bonuses and the other is in an average wage because, unless the lowers earner really loves thst job, what is the point if the money is negligible to your family. You might feel that your time is more productively spent with your kids in such circumstances.

If the aim is to financially provide for you family and one person is better placed to do that - then it makes sense for that person to get in with it. If the other aim is to provide a stimulating, loving daily experience for your child and one parent feels he / she is the best person to provide this - then it probably makes sense to get on with it.

Some women have careers that are easier to return to than others. Some women may welcome the “break” in life to reassess what they want to do next. Many SAHMs have no intention of returning to what they did before - they retrain or start their own businesses maybe.

If a SAHM doesn’t back to work longer-term or at all, chances are there is substantial family wealth accrued to enable her to make this decision. Otherwise, she’d be heading back to work wouldn’t she! So a lot if the “concern” on here is irrelevant. In other words, she knows she could walk away from a marriage in a better financial shape than if she had remained single all those years. It is a conscious choice to live the way she does.

It seems that a certain contingent on MN only wants to acknowledge the downtrodden SAHMs and point out, ad infinitum, the risks. It doesn’t matter how many SAHMs say, “yes thanks, but we’ve got that covered,” they just keep banging on and on God knows why. “Yes, but wait until he leaves you..,, “ “Yes, planned for that thanks....” Yawn.

We're going to find it a bit of a shock to the system in a couple of weeks time. I'm going back to work full-time, DH is going back to the office full time, and everyone is going to perhaps appreciate the good ol' days when they had a SAHP, as this little bunny ain't going to be doing it all no more!