To feel sad some women are forced to go back to work

Again, if we’re just talking outside of the home productivity, two people working full time are likely to use more childcare than anyone with a part time job involved in their set up.

Which then puts more into someone else’s work, adds more into the economy, etc etc.

I love those olden days. My grandmother had 14 children, constantly pregnant, and worked to the bone - but at least she was at home I guess….

In an ideal world (workforce wise), both would work full time so you’d have 200% of the workload being completed and not 2 x 50%.

It is affordable to live off one wage still. I have four DC and DH earns 28k roughly. We manage fine. We chose a cheaper part of the UK to live which means I have been a SAHM for 17 years now. It can be done🤷‍♀️

I was brought up to always earn my own money and never rely on a man. I am passing that down to DD because it means you don't have to settle and you have freedom to leave.

Agree. I have passed this on to both my young adult son and daughter. Thankfully they agree completely.

And who is going to fill the gap in the workforce? Are child free people supposed to endlessly work with no breaks?

But what if you don’t want someone based solely on their capacity to support you to stay at home?

Some of us don’t want to stay at home
Some of us don’t want to select someone purely on the basis of their ability to “provide” and want a broader range of more interesting criteria in a partner
Some of us want more equitable relationships
Some of us are frightened of the prospect of being wholly dependent on one other person for all if our financial needs
Oh, and some of us are led to believe that we have met someone who will support us to remain at home only to find that they renege on that…

I breastfed my children past a year for each and for that I needed maternity leave. By the time I went back to work, they didn't need daytime feeds anymore. There isn't a biological imperative for women to stay at home forever.

I am all in support of more and better choices for everyone. But women's rights and the progress we've made are fragile and they're under attack right now. I want to live in a world where parents can make the choice to SAH or to work, but not one where women are made financially dependent and disenfranchised. I want my daughters to have the option to pursue careers they love as much as I love mine, and to always have their freedom.

My dad is 85 his mum always worked, he went to nursery, child minder, then boarding school. My mum’s mum met her husband at work and was devastated to have to leave when she married. She went back when he died prematurely in his ‘50’s.

I have always worked and I’m about to be made redundant. I don’t think I will be able to get another job that fits around my caring for disabled child and my chronic illness, so our family will be worse off.

I don’t have to work but I enjoy it and also like having my own pension in case of emergency. My DH earns a good 6 figure salary but I still enjoy having my own money. I will be a reluctant SAHM.

You can, but you risk making yourself and potentially your children completely financially dependent.

What if your husband runs off with another woman?
What if he loses his job?
What if he becomes ill and can no longer work?

None of these things are terribly unlikely. Giving up any semblance of financial independence is a serious risk.

If you marry someone who makes decent money then you can be a sahm

Women should be able to stay at home if they would like to without it harming their future pay prospects and careers.

How though?

Employers want people with up to date experience. If someone takes 5 or 7 years out of the workforce to raise a family then obviously they won't be as valuable to an employer as their peers who kept working during that time. So of course the choice to absent yourself from the workforce for a period is going to impact on your "future pay prospects and career". It's not up to an employer to subsidise someone's lifestyle choices.

The problem is fundamental - too many of us have no choice as to whether to go back to work or not, because delivering care is not sufficiently valued by society.

A more family centric society would include properly affordable childcare options and or tax breaks for child raising.

I feel the same way. I had a good education, went to a good uni and can fall back on that if I need to. But being at home with my children is so much better than any career.

I'm not sure if leaving a child with competent carers for the length of a working day is 'heartbreak' but obviously if someone feels this way they need to make plans before choosing to have children.

To be perfectly frank, it's not anyone else's problem.

I'm very suspicious of the phrase 'men are not wired that way'. Men and women are socialised differently, yes. But the conservative rhetoric about women being naturally suited to staying at home seeks to restrict, control and imprison woman claiming that it's innate and inherent and just as God intends.

We can challenge societal expectations of men and women. Certainly in my household, my husband does a lot more domestic chores than I do.

We're really being bombarded at the moment with regressive propaganda, and this post feels like part of it.

So what would happen if your husband was too heartbroken to leave the kids and go to work too?

I think it is messed up that these days a lot of women have to go back to work after maternity leave whether they like it or not.

Most people don't particularly 'like' going to work but have to in order to earn money. Being a mother does not make you different from anyone else in that respect.

First post nailed it