I don't understand how people can give up their career and be a stay at home parent ?

[lolstevelol]

You risk losing career progression, especially as jobs change so rapidly due to technology. The role you were doing a few years ago might look completely different today. Securing a stable office job is much harder now than it used to be.

You also miss out on pension contributions, which is a significant factor. Losing 5–10 years of contributions and compounding can be the difference between retiring at 58 and having to work until or beyond the state pension age.

Generally speaking, supporting a family on a single income while working can be more stressful than being a stay-at-home parent. Even when the job itself is manageable, workplace environments can be toxic, which can create tension and resentment between the working parent and the stay-at-home parent.

Actually, you could argue that a small baby / child has immediate needs can be looked after by any consistent care giver, and that it’s more important for parents to spend time with their children when they are older and starting to test boundaries, develop their identity and explore morality/ethics/philosophy.

Very bluntly yes. I think the former would benefit them more. And there are benefits for me, too.

I honestly am not coming from a place of judgement or anything like that. I don’t like the way SAHMs are often treated with thinly veiled contempt on here. But I do also think as with most things, there is a balance to be had!

But I do also think as with most things, there is a balance to be had
Indeed. Our benefits system nudges parents in the direction of both working and takes away the choice to be a SAHP.
Scandinavian countries offer help to be a SAHP..

Scandinavian countries offer help to be a SAHP..

Scandi countries support parents to stay home with babies, but beyond that, parents are expected to work and governments support this by providing heavily subsidised child care. Most women return to work after parental leave, SAHMs beyond that, never mind of school aged children, are rare.

But economically, do you understand why the system is set up to encourage working?

Best of both worlds - which it would be good for UK to have.

The bias in favour of early return to work in UK limits choice.

The plethora of posts on mumsnet from parents desperate not to leave the baby but who have no choice; and from parents meeting themselves coming back by trying to work for little financial gain - these are testament to the fact that the system is not working. Stressed parents cannot be good parents however hard they might try.

If I was married to someone in a very strong financial position I would probably leave my job and pursue more passion projects and a portfolio career. I am staying in my stable employment for security now.

But economically, do you understand why the system is set up to encourage working? - I do, but the toll in the mental health of harassed parents and many babies struggling at nursery also comes at a cost for society - some of which is monetary, some not - but important.

My personal view is that nurseries are an over-stimulating environment for the very small and that we pay the price for doing this to them. I know others do not agree but higher cortisol levels are confirmed by research.

The early years are crucial though. The care you get as an infant and toddler has huge implications for the rest of your life. Many children are in nurseries 5 days a week from 8am til 6pm, apart from when they go on holiday, when they are often sent to more childcare.

My daughter works in a nursery. They get babies at 3 months old- yes, they have competent carers, but it's a bit sad.

Why Scandinavia is upheld to be some sort of utopia amongst some I don’t know. It’s different in its demographics, population (and how that population is distributed) and outlook.

I always feel like suggesting people go to live there but the answer if you can’t: they have very strict immigration policies. So really, what’s more important? Because you can’t have a diverse and welcoming country and encourage half of that population to be out of the workforce for years!

Your examples are both extremes though considering the majority of working mothers go back to work part time when they have a child under school age and the majority of babies don't start nursery at 3 months old.

I don’t understand why people watch Game of Thrones.
Oh wait, I do. They’re different to me is all.

My daughter works at an upmarket nursery where most of the parents work full time and want the full service - very few of the children are part time. So it is her normal - anyway, icwas really commenting on the previous poster who suggested thst competent care giving by anyone is ok in the early years, and I'm not sure it's that simple.

I looked up some UK-specific studies (Effective Pre-school, Primary and Secondary Education project, Millennium Cohort Study, Understanding Society) and they show that there is no clear developmental advantage to a child being cared for exclusively by a stay-at-home mother vs nursery.
High-quality nursery care is often beneficial, especially for cognitive development, and home environment and parenting quality matter more than care type. There is very slight increase in behavioural issues if childcare is used very early, but those disappear once family background is controlled. Otherwise childcare seems to have a positive effect.

Scandi countries don't encourage SAHPs beyond parental leave. Yes I have lived there so can speak both based on statistics and personal experience.

It isn't simple at all, including mum at home = always better.

There has to be a balance. A mum who is miserable as a SAHM isn't going to be beneficial for a baby either.

Why Scandinavia is upheld to be some sort of utopia amongst some I don’t know. - I don't know that it is. It is just an example of a different approach and worth looking at.

What I am questioning is our acceptance here in the UK that economic activity takes precedence over all other considerations of child welfare and parental peace and sanity. The sort of frenetic lives that many working parents lead take their toll and are no doubt a contributory factor to the poor mental health of many who then go on to use NHS services at a cost to the country.

I also believe parenting in Scandinavia is less stressful, but for the reason that governement actually supports working parents. Childcare is affordable - parents don't need to calculate if it even makes financial sense to work. Same for afterschool programs to allow parents to go to work. Everything is set up assuming parents are generally in full time employment, it is not assumed like in the UK that the mother is a SAHM or has a part time term time only job so it fits around her caregiving obligations.

This!

I know a family with 11 children. Where would they stand? Eldest 21, youngest 4 months old. All belong to the couple.

I believe that most of these comparative studies look at things like developmental stages, then exam results, job prospects etc because these can be accurately measured. They don't look at factors like happiness, warmth of relationships.

I suspect that being in full time nursery makes you very independent, focused, able etc, translating into great job prospects.

I'm not sure that's the be all though.

My thought is that every family gets a set amount of years that they use as they see fit between the children they have when they each arrive. 11 is of course unusual and policy cannot be made on that basis!

Measuring the success depends on priorities which determine the parameters used.
My priority is to have families given more choice, for economic activity not to always be the main goal but for the personal well-being of parents and children to feature, and for young families not to be so frantically busy that they find it hard to give their all to any of their roles.

I always get asked about “giving up my career” when people find out I’m a SAHM.

I never had one in the first place. I did crap little temping jobs until I got married and fell pregnant at 21. I’m 46 now, had 3 more children in that time, the youngest is 5.

I quite like my life, it’s always other people that are horrified and obsessed with thinking I should want to do some course or other to “get back” to work.

I’m with you. It is sad. I do feel for the children. When I was working I can remember a mum coming in visibly upset. Her child was ill over the weekend and kept asking for the childminder.