AIBU to think SAHMs are lazy?

I think it’s a personal choice and whats right for one family isn’t right for everyone’s. It is for me an odd choice if your kids are in secondary school and are more independent. I also think SAHP can put themselves at financial vulnerability - I couldn’t do that, I could not be reliant on anyone else. I also would get
grumpy with solely carrying the financial load if the SAHP was still at home when the kids were older or at uni etc…

You don’t know this person’s financial situation - she may be a millionaire from her own earnings or inheritance for all you know. Being a SAHM doesn’t automatically make someone financially dependent in EVERY case.

A lot of women I know had judgement in the playground when I lived in one area, where in a more wealthy area there wasn't the same taboo around it. On the whole I think most mums don't want to be a slave to the wage over the holidays, for example and many would rather be with their kids than pay huge amounts for them to be carted off to various clubs when they might want to sleep for eg.

If you are going to be a SAHM you need to be aware of the financial issues if the partner leaves and you had a career break - super hard for mums to get back into work these days. If you have passive income and are fine with that then you have to grow a tough skin and realise a lot of people would love to be able to work when they want and do things at home or with the kids regularly. It is hard work at times but a better balance than trying to do a 9-5 for many, particularly as so many women have chronic health conditions that the NHS is not treating.

Not at all.
SAHP do what works for them and their family.

Ive had a few people say how nice it must be at home to relax....
When I have 3 autistic kids. My life was much easier working a very well paid job, but its not possible to do my old job and be able to be the parent who gets called when the kids are not able to stay in nursery / school.

Im a sahm and I have never had this said to me. I did have a huge corporate career behind me so maybe people respected that?
In my circle there are quite a few sahm and all have had hugely successful professional careers as well. We don’t judge each other.
Also, people should mind their own business!!

I’m a SAHM. Nobody has called me lazy to my face, but people have implied that I don’t deserve a break from my children or any help with them because I don’t work. I don’t see anything wrong with working and using childcare if that works for your family, but I agree with you that sometimes staying home is in the family’s best interests. I have a 3 year old son with additional needs. Last year I tried to put him in nursery for just 2 1/2 hours 5 days a week because it’s free in my area through flying start. They couldn’t cope with him and his needs for all that time so reduced him to just 3 days and he needed a one to one even then. I have no family willing to look after him at all. So I don’t know what I’m supposed to do with him while I work a full time job, it just would never work. And anyone who thinks I’m lazy should try spending one day looking after my son then tell me if they still think that. Having a job would be easier.

You’re not doing everything that a SAHP does though - if you are working full-time then you are outsourcing 40+ hours of childcare per week that a SAHP is doing. I don’t think you can do an easy comparison here as jobs & children & home situations vary considerably.

”Mum guilt” may well be balanced by the SAHP having lost their career due to having children & needing to plan how to return to work. Or by having to care for a child with additional needs or one who simply didn’t thrive in childcare. The SAHP down the road may think that you have a charmed life for having a job that can be balanced with having children. Both of you may be wrong.

It’s also not in WOHM’s interests to downplay what is involved in caring for a child - if being an SAHM is such an idle life, then that’s a strong argument for reducing nursery ratios.

I think the OP is BVU in perpetuating these tropes as there are some very real issues that affect parents that this type of debate glosses over. These include:

-that having a child can result in a woman being managed out of the workplace
-that some jobs just aren’t tenable with having a child (unless you can afford some really deluxe childcare)
-whether support for SEN is adequate
-whether early years & before/after school childcare is adequate & affordable especially for those without family who can step in
-the impact of cutting Sure Start & other support that helped children reach their early milestones
-the variation between jobs and public & private sector on women being able to continue working with a child & whether this is being adequately flagged in careers advice
-if there is adequate support for SAHM to return to the workplace (especially as they might not have chosen to leave it)

💐to @Freddiefisherwhose situation really is an example of what the usual tropes overlook.

If someone thinks a SAHM is lazy they are then calling all nursery workers lazy and they are not.

Who says that the only thing we should do with our lives is work?

As long as a person can afford the lifestyle they choose then it's up to them what they do. That applies to all people regardless of sex or whether they have children.

I've known lazy SAHM's (although more lazy SAHD's - they seemed to think it was SAHG - stay at home gaming!). I've also known SAHP's who worked their socks off - with younger children, high needs children, foster children as well as their own, carers for other family members, doing unpaid volunteer work that kept the community and society ticking over. I've been a SAHM, and I was always hyper aware of the privilege of my position, and felt a need to provide 'output' as justification for my existence. I also had my lazy days, and periods where I found it bloody hard to function.

To put it in perspective, I've also been a full time working Mum, and a part time working Mum. I've never been a Mum parenting alone.

When I came over here, I was surprised at how defensive a fellow SAHM was when she said she was a SAHM. Not for long though. And definitely not after finding Mumsnet!

Like everything, a mother and a woman's place is in the wrong. I've been admonished for staying at home, and I've been castigated for working, when I didn't 'need' to, and was 'taking a job that could have been done by a man that needed to feed his family'. I kid you not. . .

I wouldn't describe them as 'lazy' but I do think being a SAHP to school age children (totally different to before that) is a luxury, and a very easy life. But why shouldn't people choose an easy life if they can and are ok with the financial trade-offs? I work nearly full-time, but I could definitely earn more in a more intense job with a big commute, and I don't want to. I don't know if that is 'lazy' as such, it's just choosing trade-offs between time and money. SAHPs just do that and have chosen a different point on the scale to me.

Im a sahm I wouldnt say im lazy, ive 5 children they are all home educated,i keep on top of our home im with my children 24.7,nor would I say ive got it easy either!
My partner works long hours by the time hes up washed and out the house the children are just getting up when he gets in there already in bed! So unless hes off work I solo parent and educate my children as well as providing 3 healthy nutritional meals & snacks a day!
I also wouldnt judge somebody else's life if they choose to work there children go to school or maybe even have a cleaner thats up to them.
But as a sahm im definitely not lazy.

Lazy, stupid and dull.
It’s not said, but it’s between the lines.

I could never stay at home, I’d go mad if I can’t keep busy.
what do you do all day?
I was so bored on maternity leave, I need to keep my mind stimulated.

Some people just lack empathy and imagination. They also dump childcare on their elderly female relatives and think they’re doing granny a favour letting her spend time with the little darlings, and never get stressed about Christmas because they just rock up to their mum’s.

You can instantly tell in the playground, playgroups and school yard who is a relative and who is a paid childminder by the amount and quality of interaction with the dc. Even just by looking at the expression on the faces coming out of the classroom - the ones who look out and see mum, dad or granny light up.

It wasn’t the norm. It was only the norm for those that could afford it. Plenty of working class women always had to work out of the home.

I agree. For most working parents it’s not a case of buying in help to do the domestic chores. You do those in addition to working.

I don’t think SAHP are lazy. For me personally, being a SAHP was way easier than being a working parent on me and the kids. Just the logistics of working around illness, school holidays etc alongside the stress of working a job that never truly allows me to switch off. But that’s just me; for others it may well be the other way around.

I did get some comments. Fine when they young you are kept busy. I do find it weird being home when they 19 though! But my friend wont work now she too long out of work. So each to their own.

It also depends on the level of involment of the other parent. Bouncing through the door at 5pm daily, doing a fair share of child care and house duties, including overnight issues?

Or away for weeks at a time, often at short notice.

I suppose once the kids start school there's no reason not to get a job, unless you are wealthy enough not to need to. Up until then you basically either work to pay someone else to look after your child or do it yourself. For some it's financially worth staying in employment and others cut their cloth accordingly and live off one wage until their child starts school.
Parenting is hard work and exhausting. T he cooking, cleaning, baby and toddler groups etc I guess none of that is compulsory though and you could sit your child in front of cbeebies all day and put your feet up - now THAT would be classed as lazy!

I also find working full time is a lot less effort than looking after young children 24/7.

It's widely known that nursery is not the best place for under 3s. Perhaps you'd like to show me where I've made myself out to be superior?

I was SAHM for about 3 years to 2under2 - went back to work when my youngest was 18m it was WAY easier than working and still doing all the mum stuff that needs doing anyway. They are 4 and 5 now and that time at home with them was the best time of my life.

But I imagine a SAHP to 3 or 4 with complex needs and a school run to juggle is harder than me floating around the garden centre café with a sleepy new-born and a cheerful toddler.

Everyone's situation is different.

I'm not policing anyone's thoughts.

I'm just observing that the pp is as negative and judgemental about WOHPs as some people are about SAHPs.

I don't personally think that kind of attitude is helpful, whether people express it or not.

What do you do in the 8 hours of daily routine childcare, just concentrate on the children 100% or do you manage to walk to shops/park, cook lunch, include them in household chores. I understand children need attention but when I was at home I managed to include the children in alot of life stuff that I now have to do outside work hours.