To hate how mums always have to sacrifice their career...

You might work for a current loss for future prospects - so keeping a current reference, pension contributions. experience you can build on that pays off.

You might send your children to childcare even at a loss because you believe they are getting good quality care that is better than you can offer day to day. Its not about hating being with them, but possibly the nursery is nicer than your house, and they do stuff you arent good at like messy play.

I personally wouldnt be a doctors receptionist at a loss because I think its a stressful job but i can imagine scenarios where i would.

Ok, so it's ok to use childcare for money reasons - while for essential money or extra money. But NOT for the happiness or wellbeing of the mum. She should of course be, always, self-sacrificing.

I know very few people (despite most women I know working) - in fact none now I think about it - who use "daycentres" 5 days a week for very long days.

Well fine of course. But if it means children are in daycentres for long days - not so fine. What do you prioritise, your needs or your kids?
Mine, because you put your own oxygen mask on first. If parents’ needs aren’t met, how can they parent their children? My kids wouldn’t benefit from me being trapped at home, depressed, bored, refusing to do all the messy play they get to do at nursery. Other people might make a different choice, and that’s fine too. my kids are actually in daycare four short days, in any case, but in your example I’d still choose my needs. No one benefits from having an unhappy parent.

I wouldn't want to spend all day, every day with my baby. I'd be incredibly unhappy to be a SAHM and I don't believe it would be the best decision for my baby.

It's also about looking at the long term too, it won't always be less money because childcare isn't forever.

Like pp said, wanting to work is also absolutely fine but I don't see nurseries as a negative thing, even 5 days a week.

'Work isn't just about money though for many people. There's several benefits that have nothing to do with money such as socialising, mental stimulation, mental health etc.'

Well fine of course. But if it means children are in daycentres for long days - not so fine. What do you prioritise, your needs or your kids?

Again. I'm not talking about women who need to work. That's a different decision. Nor am I talking about women who work because the money benefits the family and the cost / benefit analysis is that it's worth the kids being in childcare. Nor am I talking about people who use childcare more occasionally. But to put your kids in full time childcare to do a job that would mean marginally less money for the family... why? You'd either have to really really love answering phones (or really hate being with your kids all day) to work for a loss.

I’m aware, and the conversation has evolved from that into childcare, work, career, SAHMing, etc. The post of mine you quoted was clearly part of the wider conversation, not OP’s situation in particular.

In her case, There’s no immediate extra money, but there is the gain of a weekend as a family, which they don’t currently get. Potential job satisfaction, life satisfaction, pension, balance. Plus the childcare bill goes down at age 2, then again at 3. There’s nothing wrong with 5x days childcare if OP wants to seek fulfilment at work. Mothers don’t have to sacrifice themselves at the altar of childhood, nor does working have to create a net gain. Breaking even is fine if the parent is happier working than staying at home.

Take the receptionist job or go back to dental nursing

yes you will not have any money for a few years but in the long term it’s worth it

I’ve always earned more than DH so no, my career hasn’t been impacted. I have gone slightly part time and still earn double.

If I were you @ZZTopGuitarSolo I’d stay as you are until you can get 30hrs funded childcare and then look for something full time or close to. It’s not that far off.

Work isn't just about money though for many people. There's several benefits that have nothing to do with money such as socialising, mental stimulation, mental health etc.

How exactly am I shaming women who want to stay at home by saying that mums don't have to sacrifice their careers, and explaining that being a working parent doesn't involve never seeing your child?

Exactly this!

why don’t fathers wages pay for childcare if there jobs are so important?!

bussteward - the OP is talking about having her kids in childcare 5 days per week gif kong days (except possibly one day when the DH has them)? For no extra money for the family overall.

I would not take the job in your situation. If it were a career type job, yes you should. But a NMW job as a receptionist you’d be able to walk right back into one once your youngest is school age or even 12yrs old when the NI credits towards state pension stop (I hope you are claiming child benefit to get these).

Id stay a SAHM and perhaps get a degree or other qualification that would be fairly recent when you wanted to go back to work so you can build a new career. A friend of mine did all the TA stuff while her youngest was doing the 30hrs in nursery, then took an TA job when he was in reception and primary and now is going for full teacher. She is 52yrs old and has 5 children ranging from 10 to 28yrs old.

Luckily I didn’t say that. Try reading the link I shared!

Another perspective, I started a new job just after maternity, starting salary 20k, earning £50 a month more than my childcare bill. 18 months later I'm on £25k + about 8k commission so closer to £32k and I'm went through with it. Plus I've paid into pension again.

But I agree in total, I've not been able to find time to complete training course due to lack of time and energy.

"childcare gives us breaks to recharge"

You don't need your kids in childcare 5 days a week to 'recharge.'

Here’s a few ideas, none of them help now I’m afraid:

Fewer women give up work/became pt because of the old adage ‘my wages aren’t much more than childcare’. Childcare comes out of the family pot FFS and the extortionate years aren’t forever.

Normalise larger age gaps between children (parenting age/health taken into account). Just because it’s seen as desirable to have a 2-3 year age gap that doesn’t mean it has to be that way. 4-5-6 years actually makes a lot more sense long term, financially.

Let/force the men to be equals in parenting/housework/life admin 🤮, even if they don’t do it to their exacting standards. They’ll have to learn if they apparently can’t cook/clean/organise after school activities. They need to be given opportunity to do it, even if they fuck up. So many of my friends micromanage their husbands. It enables them to be incompetent and reinforces the cycle.

More men (& women) demand flexible working, and it becomes common place in our society. Less childcare is needed then anyway.

It is perfectly possible to have a good career and be a wonderful parent.

Er, YES. Quite frankly my dream is to win the lottery, keep the kids in childcare (albeit not like 7-6 daily) and quit my job. I’d swim, read, write, paint, garden, gad about and do all manner of fulfilling things that I can’t do with a baby on one hip and a four year old hanging off the other leg going “I’m booored I want a snack why aren’t there any animals in space can I watch Cocomelon yuck I hate spaghetti”.

The latest In Pursuit of Clean Countertops newsletter shared something that is really good on this, from Is My Kid the Asshole?: that childcare gives us breaks to recharge, which makes us better and less snappy, more present parents when we are with our kids. It’s a good read:

https://melindawmoyer.substack.com/p/the-motherhood-fallacy-of-self-sacrifice?utm_source=substack&publication_id=236307&post_id=132769668&utm_medium=email&utm_content=share&triggerShare=true&isFreemail=true

I'd be miserable as a SAHM. How would that be beneficial to the child? I also don't know of any child that is ''packed off'' every day in the summer holidays.

I don't have kids so I'm not "supporting anything from my providing husband"?

Personally I don't like the people either who come on these threads and say bullshit like babies don't belong in nurseries they belong at home, and I'm someone who has worked in nurseries for years. If having your children in nursery is what works for your family then thats your personal choice.

but some people want to stay at home and be there for the first few years. They shouldn't be shamed for that either, and some people on minimum wage can't afford nurseries so if they have to be supported by their partner for a few years then so be it. As long as their names on the mortgage, it's all good.

I'm sure some people do enjoy their jobs. I'm also sure (most) children enjoy not being packed off every day in the summer holidays and years on end. What matters more?

Of course some women need to work and I am not criticising them one bit. For others, the money makes a difference ti the fdmily si irs a cost/ benefit analysis. But to choose to have your kids in childcare all day, for no extra financial gain (in family terms), just because you 'enjoy' your job - er, no.

Do men work to avoid being home with their children or does it only apply to women?

OP might enjoy working too. There's also the fact that childcare doesn't need paying for forever so financial profit would happen eventually. Not everyone works only due to financial reasons.

I don't need to work, I want to work.

@norestguests why is it OPs responsibility to drop off both kids and pick both kids up? Do they not have a second parent in the form of a father or something??

Nordicrain
Amen

My kids get at least 50% of each working parents time. How is that worse than 100% of a sahm's time combined with 0% of their busy DH and his big job?

Norestguests
You know some people enjoy working right? Like they enjoy their job