R4 Womens Hour, young women preferring to stay at home?

Re extra v real salary, I just don't see it like that. Are we real still seeing women as earning pin money? I think it's more "extra household income" and "existing household income".

One thing that would be a great benefit is more part time jobs that aren't low wages. Part time graduate schemes? No chance. I think businesses are missing a trick in some respects. There must be loads of women who would be happy to work part time in job that pays well and challenges the mind...

"Would I rather have a house and miss most of my children's early years or would I rather be there for those years and try and buy a house further down the line if we can... It wasn't that hard a choice really."

But do men ask themselves questions like this? And why not?

Genuine question, like, not dissing your choices.

"Are there many women feel they have been denied the choice of having a partner who was a SAHD? "

I wouldn't express it in terms of individual women being denied the choice to have a SAHD (do you order them online?), it's more that families as a whole
don't tend to even consider that choice (INTERNALIZED IDEOLOGY INNIT) because "men don't do that" and "women stay at home with children, don't they?". Much like men don't have these agonized discussions about How Could They Possibly Go Out To Work When They Have Children.

Despite that, yes, I'm sure there are some hetero families where the female partner would prefer to be at work and/or the male partner would prefer to be at home but finances and work/social expectations don't permit it.

merrygoround perhaps, but I made the decision not to work with my eyes wide open. I knew what the consequences were likely to be (positive and negative). Would I rather have a house and miss most of my children's early years or would I rather be there for those years and try and buy a house further down the line if we can... It wasn't that hard a choice really.

Are there many women feel they have been denied the choice of having a partner who was a SAHD?

I have heard many women saying they want better formal childcare, but not heard them say they want the dad at home full time.

"Because you would have more choice rather than being forced into something, and that by being able to exercise that choice your life would be better - liberty leading to greater utility as Mill would have it."

'Zactly. And there'd be further minimization of the assumption that children are "women's work", and that childcare comes out of women's "extra" salary that's on top of the man's "real" salary, and, oh, there's no point in hiring a woman of childbearing age, she's only going to go off and have babies and not come back, and even if we do hire her we don't need to pay her as much, it's not like she'll need to support a family like a man, and....

Childcare costs are a serious issue but I think young couples have to accept that 'this too shall pass'. Its a long life and giving up working outside the home completely for 5+ years severely dents your ability to develop a career. I have so many friends who went back to jobsearch/education when their children were at school and are gobsmacked by the fact that they are not getting offered decent positions.

For all the women who say 'I would go back but how would i sort childcare', there is another woman who has sorted childcare. Its not easy, nor is it cheap but it is almost always possible.

Of course the desire to look after your own children is very strong, I took on a part time role thus passing up promotion but keeping my foot on the ladder. There are days when I think I am shortchanging my family, myself or my employer but most days we manage well enough.

Fourormore- something you said really resonated with me. My only regret is that it has impacted our ability to buy a house. That for me is huge, if one salary didn't allow us to buy a house I would have to go to work regardless of how I felt about it.

I am off with youngest at moment and I prefer working. My lot are all playing together in bedroom and I am on my phone. It is much more fun working as the kids don't need you 24/7 imo

but see no actual advantage in more SAHDs.

Why not?

How does that make people's lives better?

Because you would have more choice rather than being forced into something, and that by being able to exercise that choice your life would be better - liberty leading to greater utility as Mill would have it.

How does that make people's lives better? I understand the value of shared care, but see no actual advantage in more SAHDs.

who could work = who could perform paid work before I get snarked at. Yes, we all make mistakes.

Why is it better for women if more men are SAHPs?

Because it is better for both men and women if more (in this instance I am assuming hetero-) couples are having conversations which lead to balanced views on who could stay at home and who could work, taking other factors into account other than outdated societal expectations? This would be indicated by a change in the ratios of fathers to mothers staying at home?

Why is it better for women if more men are SAHPs?

"I don't think my DH "has it all" either. He misses out on so much with our children and he knows it. This is his sacrifice for our family. My sacrifice is not having an established career already."

That's fair enough - it's just that in so many families, like yours it's the male partner who (automatically/"because that's how it is"/"because he earns more") makes the "misses out on family time" sacrifice and the female partner who (automatically/"because that's how it is"/"because she earns less") makes the career sacrifice, and so the traditional pattern of man as provider and woman as carer continues. I don't accept that it's because women are somehow naturally drawn to lower paying jobs, or are more naturally suited to childcare (except in the very early exclusive breastfeeding months), or naturally just care more about staying home with their children (personally I would have gone stark staring batshit as a SAHP).

I'd be much more interested in a programme about a growing trend of young men deciding that they want to choose to be stay at home dads, or a growing trend of couples sharing childcare responsibilities and career hit. That would mean something was changing.

I'm 21 and have a 21-month-old DD and can't imagine anything worse personally than being a SAHP. I love my daughter to bits and love the time we spend together but I never had any desire to be a stay at home parent. DP enjoys it, however, and if either of us ever has to be a SAHP it will be him because he adjusts to it better. I go stir crazy.

I wasn't sneering.
I don't think my DH "has it all" either. He misses out on so much with our children and he knows it. This is his sacrifice for our family. My sacrifice is not having an established career already.

I also don't generalise out. If others feel that both parents can work full time and don't miss out on family time, that's great, it just isn't the route for me.

I personally hate the idea that a woman who wants to have a full time job and children at any life stage is (in what I can only describe as "sneer quotes") "having it all", and that this is clearly an entirely crazy/unrealistic thing to want or present as an aspiration because only the most ludicrously privileged women (or terrible uncaring mothers who don't want to spend time enjoying their children) could do it.

I totally agree that childcare costs are outrageous and there are numerous financial pressures that prevent many people who want to work from working. I also agree that the work that carers in the home do should be valued, and that many women work in jobs that are underpaid. However I will continue to be irked about it until men regularly have conversations like this and talk about how they "knew they couldn't have a job and have children and do both properly - something had to give!". My children aren't just my responsibility, they're my (male) partner's as well.

My mum had kids later in life (late 30s) after having a career and travelling. She ended up a single mum on benefits with nothing, and the advent of the computer meant her skills were way out of date by the time she tried to get back into work. She died in her 50s and it really brought home how little time we have. She always wished she had had kids earlier.

I had my children relatively young compared to my mum, I had my first when I was 21. I worked full time until I had my second at 25. I'm quite aware I can't have it all without having to let either my job or my children slide for a while (and neither could dh) so I'm a sahm until it becomes more viable for me to go out to work. I want to concentrate on my children and I'd like to hope that I have learned from my mum's mistakes.

The cost of childcare meant working was a bad choice vs benefits not totally uneconomic possibly bad wording on my part.

Poorer people work too, or are you not aware that most people claiming benefits are now in work? It's top up benefits like tax credits.

Well no, if childcare is more than you are earning, then you need a cushion to make up the shortfall, which I presume was Womble's point.

All I meant by cushion is that you must have had sufficient savings to cover negative income for a few years. Either that or you'd be in debt.

I have never had any sort of cushion everything I have I have worked for Womble! sometimes choosing to be worse off than benefit claiming friends in order to be better off in the long term is not a cushion it's a decision.

Oh good . I had to double check it was relevant, I have a few sore points at the moment