My mother is guilting me about being a working parent.

My Mum is the same. It all just seems to contradictory, they moved to a nice area with a good school, wanted me to get good exam results, do well at uni, start a good career and then what.....give it all up to be a stay at home Mum?!

I can see why that generation feel like we all expect too much and I definitely think there is an element of truth to that. But I also agree when what you are saying about needing 2 salaries to get a house. I think you are both right in some aspects but just coming from different directions.

Of course it too to work because you want to not because you absolutely have to to avoid destitution. I am sick of the idea that women should want to be at home and if they can’t don’t want to then “that’s a shame”. Probably a subject best avoided with your mum.

So your mum stayed at home with you - presumably because she thought it was the best thing to do or because that's what society allowed / encouraged at the time - and now you are sneering at her because those choices haven't worked out? Nice. Perhaps her crystal ball was broken when she made the choices she did, good job yours is fully functioning.

She could definitely be less judgemental but it seems that apple hasn't fallen far from the tree

People are by and large a product of their generation, we cannot entirely escape the thoughts and customs we grow up with - or that the majority of people hold.

Time has moved on. Just ignore her and don’t engage with that conservation.

We no longer live in the 1950s when ‘the little woman at home was the norm’. Society has changed or hasn’t she noticed? Costs have changed, inflation has eroded the value of money, house prices have soared since the 1950s.

I went to work and my kids have turned out ok, both probably earning more than me now. My mum used to piss me off about staying at home etc, always questioned why I need my degree blah blah blah. Now it’s unfair as she is struggling in retirement and she can already see that I will not be in the same position. If I had a pound for each time she said it’s not fair or ‘in my day’ or ‘my generation’ it would fund a fun weekend in Europe every year 😂

“except people didn't 'expect to go on holiday every year or go out for fancy dinners, and were happy with their little house that wasn't that great.”

How awful, people wanting to enjoy their lives!

I would threaten her with going NC.

My mother told me that the main reason most households are dual income now is because they 'expect so much out of life, whereas in the 50s people were happy with what they had

When was your mum born, @Sevendayhigher ?!

I very much doubt the OPs mum bought in the 50s. My daughter is 28, so prime age to perhaps have a 14 month old (a bit younger than average) and I wasn’t born until the 60s. My career started in the 80s and I got on the housing ladder in the 90s. I doubt the OP’s mum is any different so I’m not sure where the 50s come in. All seems a very odd thing for her to have said.

God forbid anyone expects anything out of life.

I think it would help the discussion if people stopped promoting the view that being an SAHM involves sacrifice in a way that being a WOHM does not (this also feeds into a narrative of sacrifice being what good mothers do, which is in itself an unhealthy trope). Both SAHMs and WOHMs bring different but equally valuable things to the table and both sacrifice some things and gain others. The key point is that no-one should feel guilty for choices carefully made in their family’s best interest.

Your first paragraph is valid - but quite doom-laden. What if that happens? Sure, it's a possibility but if the reason I'm working when I want to be at home is because I'm afraid and trying to cover my arse in case something does happen then it's not much of a life.

The second point is just pure opinion. They MIGHT benefit more from those things, but they might not. That is surely down to the individual child and family. Some kids might yearn for more opportunities, some might be surrounded by activities and sports and holidays and money but feel disconnected. Not one thing applies to everyone.

You're doing great!

I'm a stay at home mum but we go out and about and do things because we have the resources to do so. My husband I share the boring housework.

I wouldn't have moved away from my friends and family and to be honest, I more so wouldn't move away from my home city to do it!

Children need happy and well rested parents. Isolating yourself to tick a box to say you're with your children is pretty meaningless in my opinion. I would do the same in your position and you should be proud of what you do for your kids! Like all of us. Parenting is hard, especially when you care about doing a good job!

This is ultimately why I'd never be a SAHM. I don't see working as optional just because I'm a woman, as far as I'm aware, I need to work as long as the alternative is relying on someone else financially.

I think we should avoid to generalise. I believe few SAHM believe that WOHM are working for pin money.

i gave up a brilliant career (and a lot of money) to be a SAHM for my children when they were small (up to end primary school). I believe having me at home was hugely beneficial for them in supporting them emotionally and practically. This is why SAHM are home - at least the ones I know.

i have now restarted my career and am probably a decade behind where I would have been. But I am doing well, making good money and my children are really supportive of me.

sometimes you make different choices during different times. And different choices are right for different parents.

“SerenityNowSerenityNow · Today 13:09

Childhood is short and the benefits associated with giving your child / children time will far outweigh the kudos of a nice house car or holiday or career you can always revive after the hard slog of mothering.
Nobody ever tells men they are working for luxuries do they? Why are working dad's providing for their families but working mums doing it for holidays and nice cars??
Also, not all careers can be 'revived' after a significant break.”

Totally this. I think SAHMs and WOHMs bring different but equally valuable things to the table but it’s really interesting how some some (not all!) SAHMs seem to regard WOHMs as somehow playing at work, as doing it for pin money and treats, as if they cannot truly comprehend a world where women act as fully-functioning and responsible adults in the workplace, earning a living to support themselves and their families. It’s such a sexist viewpoint. And actually most working parents spend a great deal of time with their DCs, just not during the working day.

I think SAHMs who hold such views of WOHMs probably don’t take themselves as seriously as they should.

What about long-term effects of making this sacrifice? You give up work as you think you don't need to work. Then you are 5 years down the line having minimised your pension pot and stalled your career prospects. Then your spouse falls ill or dies or leaves you. Just one of many things that can happen in life.
Or you float through life working part time and end up in poverty as a pensioner.
Not to mention that kids might actually benefit more from having access to activities and travel which extra income brings rather than "time at home with mum". Nice though as it may be.

But your argument relies on the fact that families can't make ends meet - and that's not the point of this discussion. OP asked whether working even when you don't 'have' to was reasonable or not. If you must work to put food on the table then obviously it's not a question. The question is whether making some uncomfortable but possible sacrifices to be able to not work are reasonable.

It's somewhat off the thread, but poor little lad - no wonder he's feeling poorly and miserable. My wisdom teeth came through between 17-20 (it's teething as well, even if we don't think of it in the same way) and I still had to get to get on with things. I just swallowed my painkillers, saw the dentist and cracked on. So I get what you mean.

My mother told me that the main reason most households are dual income now is because they 'expect so much out of life, whereas in the 50s people were happy with what they had'

Oh this did make me laugh. How funny (and out of touch).

But what do the 50s have to do with anything. I assume your mum was born in the 50s/60s, so that's the very beginnings of her childhood. I presume you were born 80s/90s. People did have 'luxuries' then. We went on a long-haul holiday once a year and skiing and had a game console and SKY TV. My mum was a SAHM. There's no way that life could exist on a single income now – my parents bought their house for £34k in 1983 (a town 40min commute to central London) and my dad earned £50k a year.

Regardless – you don't stop mattering just because you have a child. Your child matters more, but your happiness and wellbeing don't matter less. My DH is a high earner and could easily keep us all, but I absolutely love working and love my job. I still work 5 days a week and am very happy doing so. I also like holidays and buying things! Anyone else's input is not relevant.

The only correct response is 'okay boomer.'

Why is your mother talking about the 1950s?

I haven't read the full thread yet, but I think there can be some misconceptions between the generations. I don't have a car or phone on finance (both are second hand), I buy clothes from charity shops. My parents and their friends are much more unwilling to buy second hand for some reason, especially when it comes to clothes. They also go on more expensive holidays than I do. I'm sure there are lots of young people who do have cars, phones etc on finance, but I'm not convinced that the younger generations are any more extravagant than the older generation. I think there are just more options available to all generations than there used to be, more things to spend money on - but that doesn't mean the younger generations are any less able to manage their money responsibly.

Do you mean your Mum was born in the 1950s rather than was a parent then?