What's wrong with being a SAHM?

Clarity, if you think womens jobs are insecure and at the mercy of exploitative bosses then presumably mens jobs are equally precarious. Why risk family ruin by having one earner in a unpredictable job.

Because one person being able to wholly concentrate on their career is often more financially lucrative. From there, investments become the safeguards.

53rd. Indeed not. But the nature of the question lent itself (on my interpretation, anyway) to a balanced discussion of the issues. Which involves putting both sides across.

Why yes, Natalia. And if the OP's post was "what's wrong with wanting to work full-time with children?", I would be pointing out those things too. But it wasn't, was it?

OP I am a SAHM and DH works full time. I have only became a mother 2 years ago and am enjoying it so far. Before that I was self employed in a creative industry so very flexible - should be easy enough to set up again, but my point is, I had very little job security/no guaranteed income before DC anyway. You are the breadwinner currently so just pointing out that our circumstances are different, it made a looooot of sense for me to give up work.

Our set up is:

• Joint mortgage
• All joint bank accounts except one savings account in my name (with 'his' money in!) and an ISA each
• Both have life insurance
• Both have wills
• DH who does his fair share of housework - your job is to look after DC, not do EVERYTHING. You are a stay at home MOTHER, none of those words suggest anything to do with cleaning :)
• DH who loves his job, enjoys working, appreciates that he would hate to be a SAHP
• Packing away a fair chunk of DH's salary each month in case shit hits the fan.

I plan to go back once all the kids are in school. Set up my own business or something. We are very fortunate though.

If DH dies, well, he has life insurance.
If we divorce, everything is joint, so while it will be shit, we should be OK. Maintenance would be a good amount. I don't see us divorcing! But most married couples wouldn't I guess.

There's a lot to consider but the set up definitely works for us currently. If it stops working, we'll mix things up.

Clarity, if you think womens jobs are insecure and at the mercy of exploitative bosses then presumably mens jobs are equally precarious. Why risk family ruin by having one earner in a unpredictable job.

53rd And equally, I know plenty of working mothers who are exhausted and resentful and doing jobs they don't enjoy, because they've slipped into a damaging pattern of living up to a certain lifestyle that can be bought by two incomes which they now regret as they feel that they don't get to spend the time with their children they'd have liked. Also not inevitable, but something to watch out for.

There isn't a perfect choice. You can't have everything (at the same time, at least!) because you can't be in two places at once. So you make the choice - yes, on the basis of thought and consideration - which works best for you and your family in your own particular circumstances.

Spaghetti, so how would you have managed my particular risks? Managed advocating effectively for a child through SEN process and flexible schooling? Managed to not get breast cancer? Managed having people care for you through the treatment? (It would have to be very expensive insurance indeed to cover all the help you need through treatment).

Why would I be bored? I think most people have jobs which are pretty boring - or at least routine - to some extent.

Lovely for you, Natalia. But I think you misread me.

I'll repeat - I don't think there's anything inherently wrong or bad or anti-feminist about being a SAHM. But the SAHMs I know who are exhausted and bored and resentful tend to be in a bad place because they've slipped into a damaging pattern of how the man lives vs how the woman lives based on cultural ingrained sexism, which neither party intended going in. It isn't inevitable - but it is something to watch out for.

We are all vulnerable. Maybe a different type of vulnerable but vulnerable all the same. For example, armour protects a person from impact but it also affords must less movement.

Ultimately, the 2 women I am concerned about and want to warn, are my 2 dd. It's not a judgement

Painful, it often feels like a judgement. I think it is often meant as one.

Whenever I've read it on here, it's definitely been a warning, because it's a huge risk that needs to be accounted for when making plans.

Marriage, shared accounts, good life insurance coverage, keeping up your career part time all mitigate this risk - they keep your options open. I know too many women who've found themselves trapped (my sister who can't afford a tank of petrol to visit my parents because her and her husband have separate finances, and she is SAHM so has virtually no money), a friend of a friend who's partner died, and she found herself kicked out of the house they'd shared for 10 years by his children because she had no stake in it, and he didn't have a will, to take that risk myself.

There is nothing 'wrong' with your family's choice, and I would never judge another woman for being a SAHP.

However, as others have said, it leaves you wholly financially dependent on a man. And if your plan works out - three children, not going back to work until they're all in school etc - you will have significantly dented your earning potential and pension, and may fns it hard to ic u your career where you left off.

I say this as someone who was a SAHP for a few years. I don't regret it (slightly complicated in my case by the fact that one of my children has SN and I felt I needed to dedicate some time to getting the right diagnosis and support in pace for him), but it has affected my career and I have had to work very hard and do significant re-training to claw it back.

I was quite defensive about my position as a SAHP at the time and remember feeing really out out when others (particularly my own Mum!) gave their opinions on the vulnerable position it leaves women in. In hindsight, they were right.

I gave up (another failure) and went back to work, luckily on the same level and similar position.

Not a failure, then, Time. You just recognised where your strengths lie. Nothing wrong with that.

Excellent post Clarity.

However, I think this is one of the ones where OP has thrown a word-bomb and left the building.

watch out for a time six years down the line when you're knackered and exhausted and bored and resentful.

But this applies to working parents just as much, in my experience. They're knackered and exhausted because both parents are out of the house full time and still have to deal with the day to day grind of food, laundry etc etc. Your child hasn't slept well? Your boss doesn't care. Is the school holidays and your kids are at home? Not your boss's problem.

As for bored, well - I, afraid I never found work was the thing that provided my interest and stimulation. Why does being with children equate to being bored? I've learned a huge amount through my children and their interests. I've met a huge range of people who are all quite different from the City types I used to mix with all the time, which has broadened my horizons considerably. I get time to read and deal with projects that interest me. Why would I be bored? I think most people have jobs which are pretty boring - or at least routine - to some extent. That's why you're paid to do them! I think my DH must have it about as good as it gets, but even he isn't exactly bubbling over with enthusiasm about all the thrilling, intellectually stimulating, mind expanding things he's done in the course of a day.

As in neither offer absolute security.

We cannot have absolute security in life. The best thing, IMO, is to be adaptable and tenacious, as a person. No matter what life throws at you.

If you can, leave your option to go back to work after your baby is born open for as long as possible. The day to day reality of being a SAHP is hard. It totally knocked my confidence and self esteem - i felt such a failure as 'other people' managed to do all I did and work/still look glamorous/have a lovely house/make uinteresting meals.

i imagined me and my child playing games (fucking hated a tea party) baking (fucking massive mess for something inedible) and arts and crafts, yes great idea in theory but just more mess to clean up. All maybe worse by the fact that I knew other (better) people did all these activities and enjoyed them (double failure for me).

I gave up (another failure) and went back to work, luckily on the same level and similar position.

Painful, marriage is a legal contract too. And you can divorce and remarry. Some employers are exploitative and unlawful, some husbands are.

If you think employment offers better security than marriage I think you are misguided.

Dependence on employers is based on a legal contract and monetary compensation for time/effort/responsibility/skill/knowledge, not faith and trust. And changing employers is an option

You may absolutely adore being home with 3 DC under your feet, cooking every day and keeping chickens, but equally you may hate it and be dying to go back to work after six months

Chickens? Where do chickens come into it, FFS? I'm "at home" with my two, although they are now at school, but even when they weren't, we weren't in with them "under my feet" very often. And I'm not sure I've seen a chicken in that time that wasn't in a plastic bag from Waitrose....

I had what would be termed a "serious job" on here; long hours, high status, high pay. And I completely agree with a pp - I felt far more exploited in that scenario than I ever have done bringing up my children. If you're financially secure (now and in the event of a death or break up), what's the problem? Yes, you contribute less to the system in terms of not paying tax yourself and not employing someone else to look after your children who will then pay tax.....but then, equally, arguably I've enabled my DH to pay a lot more tax.

Ultimately, you make your own choice. Yes, you can't go back into a career at the same level ten years later....but in today's fast moving world, who is to say you'd have had that job anyway? Technology is changing many traditional roles and is likely to continue to do so. Equally, you can't work full time for ten years and then decide to have that concentrated time with your children when they are small....because they won't be small any more and their needs will have changed. There is no perfect way of doing things; choose the way which works best for you and your family. Be mindful of the possible downsides, sure - but they are present (in different ways) on both sides of the coin.

Just wondering why you don't think women shd have an equal stab at life as men? (You say you aren't a feminist and this is what. Being a feminist means). Whether you choose to woth or not is not really related to this unless you think women shouldn't be able to work outside the home which I assume you don't believe? Purely a personal decision on what is best for your family is clearly completely up to you!

Painful, it often feels like a judgement. I think it is often meant as one. It is suggestive of me making an unwise choice. I think my choices to support my dc in the way I did were good. They have proved successful. My health issues involved no choices. I am still left dependent. The reality is that people are dependent on each other. Whether dependent on employers, husbands, family, benefits, the health service, people who work for us. We are all dependent.

Feminism to me is more about making sure relationships between the sexes are equal in the sense that they do not involve exploitation or oppression.

I don't think think there's anything wrong or anti-feminist about being a SAHM. I did it myself for a short time (and was very very happy to back to paid work again, but that's me rather than anything inherently bad about the arrangement).

But. I do think that in a sexist society it can be easy to fall into a damaging pattern in your own family about what men do and what women do. And I don't mean "men go out to work and women don't", I mean the childcare gruntwork and basic household maintenance and emotional labour.

You see this all the time on MN. "DH does his hobby four nights a weeks so I do all the bedtimes." "DH works hard all day so he doesn't want to do housework when he gets home, he wants to relax." "Oh I don't let DH do laundry, he can't understand the washing machine," while DH is holding down a six-figure job as a procurement specialist working on incredibly complex contracts. Because of course his time is more valuable than hers, his work is harder than hers, and childcare and housework are simultaneously so easy she doesn't need a break and so taxing he can't be expected to do them.

Some men are admittedly awful and plan this right from the start, but mostly it's not that, it's just men and women falling into this old pattern without realising because it's easier than swimming against the tide. If you're already going into this with expectations that you'll be the perfect mother and home maker with his tea on the table every night, watch out for a time six years down the line when you're knackered and exhausted and bored and resentful.

clarity the 'dependent rhetoric' is not a judgement...it's concern. And a warning.

You are fortunate that your marriage has survived and you can depend on your husband. Many women find themselves in your position and then their marriage fails. So they have no-one to depend on and no financial stability/means of their own

I'm a feminist, a SAHP and a PT student - those things aren't mutually exclusive. But yes, safeguard your own financial independence, if you can. For some this means working, even just one or two days a week to keep career skills ticking over, for others it's managing their savings/investments, and for others it's retraining/changing career direction through study. Always have a Plan B, it's not feminist, it's wise.

And then do whatever suits you and your DH. For my DH, having me at home managing the kids, the home and all the myriad bits that go with that has suited him. He's been free to work long hours, travel for business and go to work social things in the evenings. If I'd been working, even PT, he'd have had to pull his weight at home and that becomes more onerous once DC start school, as nurseries are open 7.30am-6pm 52 weeks a year, schools are not.

The other thing I would say is, have an open mind. We all have these grand ideas when we're pregnant with #1 that we're going to be this or that kind of parent, but reality is a lot different. You may absolutely adore being home with 3 DC under your feet, cooking every day and keeping chickens, but equally you may hate it and be dying to go back to work after six months. And if you fall into that latter camp, it's okay. Not many women these days choose to be 50s style housewives and there is a good reason for that. But if you DO find that sort of life extremely satisfying, that's okay too.