Justifying long term SAHM to DDs?

"idle life" that's a laugh. Childcare is hard work.

DaVinci I am very thankful to the ones who SAH just because they can afford it...it means people are able to make less assumptions about my own, private reasons, for choosing to SAH.

Not because I am ashamed, but because assumptions about my child, and their potential future, whilst they are still a child and not grown to their full potential, are certainly not welcome.

But that's the thing. We should do the best to balance the needs of the family (eg a child with SN, a parent needing care), our personal need for growth and the financial needs of the family.

What I don't agree is when all the burden and so called meaningless and not valued jobs are left to women so they are the ones to automatically looking after the child with SN or the relative needing care.

And that's what I mean with having a strong argument. If you can explain why you are staying at home and not working then it won't have any ill effect on how our dcs will look at SAHM. If the only reason is 'that I can afford it as DH earns plenty and I like my idle life' then maybe not so much.

I think op can say what she likes

I've never seen any feminist protests or groups or anything - will have to look it up. It's all usually about sex and porn

Feminists have been campaigning around this for the last fifty years at least.

I'm pretty annoyed with the OP (whom I have never seen post on this board before), start up a really sexist thread bashing SAHMs on a feminist board, phrasing it in such a way that suggests she thinks feminists will agree with her issues with SAHMs.

In the end I hope I could say to my daughter - look at the subsidised childcare you have for your child and aren't you fortunate to have the opportunity for you and your partner to work flexibly/compressed hours/part time so that family life can be organised around a desire to work (or not)productively and have a reasonable income to keep you all financially secure.

I don't think I will be able to say that though because the debate always descends into rhetoric which is basically oneupmanship and is never about the practical realities of helping women achieve a happy family life.

Why aren't feminists campaigning about this?

I most certainly do understand and do my best to ease it thus "contributing".

The fact that there are still a few SAHPs around allowed me to feel relatively normal, especially when my DC was small.

Otherwise we would have 'stuck out', even more. It was bad enough being practically required to volunteer for everything going at the school, because it was OK as I didn't work, The same school who did not seem to unconcerned in acknowledging any progression at one point (retaining funds?), the progression that I felt was vital for my DC to achieve their full potential and contribute back to society.

As it was, I could be a SAHP and concentrate on supporting my DC through the SEN and there has been a huge marked positive progression.

We don't have any pressure but if there was I would totally understand, you don't have to have a job to be able to understand.
There are no power struggles here and haven't been in 22 years of being a sahm. It has never stopped me having a voice or feeling equal to dh in every sense.
He in turn has never felt like he's missed out on parenting and running the home as this is at least equal most of the time.
Sometimes he does more domestics than I do and more parenting, other times the roles are reversed.
It works for us, because we make sure we put ourselves in the position for it to work, its all part of being a team and whether you who or not has no relevance.

Handcream What would you do if you suddenly were faced with caring for a child / elderly parent with SNs? One for whom the required was at a high level and expensive?

I expect you would just do the best you could, like all of us. I don't expect you would welcome having to justify your self to a stranger with no involvement or reason to be involved in your life.

Your work would probably not give you a great deal of advantage, save allowing you to accumulate some money, since the process of finding and securing adequate care can be lengthy and time consuming.

Many SAHPs are so because of these sort of circumstances, don't add to their burdens by saying that they contribute to society less.

Handcream What would you do if you suddenly were faced with caring for a child / elderly parent with SNs? One for whom the required was at a high level and expensive?

I expect you would just do the best you could, like all of us. I don't expect you would welcome having to justify your self to a stranger with no involvement or reason to be involved in your life.

Your work would probably not give you a great deal of advantage, save allowing you to accumulate some money, since the process of finding and securing adequate care can be lengthy and time consuming.

Many SAHPs are so because of these sort of circumstances, don't add to their burdens by saying that they contribute to society less.

Davinci is right, you have more to contribute when you are both working as opposed to really not understanding what pressures your partner is under.

Really Handcream. In a thread of under 300 posts mostly given to sahm bashing and demanding a need for them to justify their existence that is the comment you choose to point out.

You've made some of the choice derogatory sweeping generalisation comments yourself- as you always sweep in to do on these threads.

yes capsium

I've a friend who pays £75/day for 1:1 care for her autistic child in the school holidays. This is just beyond so many parents.

Well first of all, there is never any guarantee that a current lifestyle is for ever. Nothing like being having no work skills when you husband dies or leaves you with small children, and I have seen too many people in that position.

Secondly, education has so many uses, not just for joining the workforce.

Thirdly, a mother has to make intelligent and informed decisions about their children's health and education, among other things.

Fourthly, I personally was not a SAHM, but I think that the care and education of children is the most important job in the world and just because a capital male-orientated society does not value this job, as a feminist I cannot fall into the same mind-set.

Was going to bring up the pseudo comment myself!

You used the term in loco parentis wrongly.

The thing is what you think is suitable to do depends a lot if your experience.
Someone mentioned up thread that their childhood experience will colour their views. I think that your experiences as adult also colour your views.
As an adult I have been in the situation if being a SAHM and thinking about getting divorced. The jack if work and not being sort if financially independent scared the hell out if me and I vowed not to be in that situation again.
I also realized that, once I went back into work, the sort if power struggle between me and DH diminished, ie as an earner in the family, I suddenly had as much to say as he had (just as it was before dcs).

So because if that I would been encouraging any girl to carry on working whilst adapting both hers and her DH work to family life.

Education I think is different. A good education IS important to raise dcs too not the least to be able to talk about all sort of subjects with them. An example that comes into my mind is the comment if a childminder who was talking about her Y4 dd saying that her dd knew more than her now. They were talking about whales being a mammifere....

herc

What was wrong with the term pseudo mothers?
It was referring to the role of a cc worker in the absence of the parent.
Surely if you use childcare you would be glad your child was being parented in your absence.
Nobody was saying you were a worse parent for doing this, but that it wasn't their choice as that's not what they want for their dc.
I used the term in loco parentis, in place of the parents because this is the term.

I haven't read the whole thread, but what if someone asked the opposite question? How would a mother working outside the home, justify to her children that her employment was more important than them when they were little?
See, it's silly. As long as a child is loved and cared for then there is really no need to justify anything.

Could you give directions as I'm not seeing posts saying kids with wm can't possibly be happy

Me neither.

Herc That poster (beep?) was essentially saying the care provided by nursery/nanny/childminder is substitute 'mothering' during work hours. Had a slightly anthropological ring maybe, but she wasn't calling WOHMs pseudo-mothers.

Yup,still a way to go until we get to 50/50 though and then there is the thread title of course.

Did you miss the 'pseudo mothers' comment?

Could you give directions as I'm not seeing posts saying kids with wm can't possibly be happy.Not one let alone several, it is a long thread though.

Would like to point out that an entire thread asking sahm to justify their existence kind of stinks to be frank.

hey lets not pick them to shreds I did select some pages of this thread at random and there's about 50/50:
-SAHM aren't contributing etc'
-WM are upset, sad, having to do it and BAD MOTHERS.

Maybe just the 3 pages I picked at random. The WM seem to be more 'direct' and the SAHM seem to have more little comments about how WO (or their kids) can't possibly be happy. Neither is excusable really.

But this idea that people are being 'mean' to one group and letting the other go is simply not true.