not to understand people with very young children who say they have no choice but to work?

[nesomja]

Whenever there's anything that touches on being a SAHM / WOHM on here, several people pop up saying how lucky people are to have a choice, that they have no choice but to work and basically to stop whinging about it. I can't work it out because I am pretty sure that next year when I will have two under-3s, it will cost us money for every day I work as childcare is so expensive. So are all the people who say they have no choice those with older children or only one child? Or are they very high earners or do they have access to low cost childcare? For me it feels the other way round, that I will not be able to choose to work - but yet it often seems to be presented as if SAHM are living a luxury lifestyle, propped up by their wealthy husbands. Why is it okay not to be able to afford not to work, but not okay not to be able to afford to go to work?

The childcare element seems to work out that you are £50 per week better off per week working than not working.

However if you are very high earners you may have to work at a loss in order to keep your job/career as it would be so detrimental not to IYSWIM.

This is assuming you do not get housing benefit as I'm not sure how that would affect your earnings after childcare.

For some people that £50 per week isn't a choice, they need it to survive for other people they can afford to cope without that £50 per week (remember you have travel to work costs, office clothes etc to come out of that £50)

MaMoTTaT by splitting childcare, don't posters mean working at different times so that the parents don't need external childcare?

I have a friend who works saturdays so her DP looks after their DS, no need to pay.

I went back to work when DD was 6 mths old. I didnt want to but if I hadnt I would have lost my job. So I went back and when I had DS1 I my wages went pretty much on childcare until they were both in school.

Because if I had stopped working until they reached school age I would be a crap position to get an job. OH wasnt the most reliable of people at the time (he is much better now) and I didnt want to bring my children up on benefits.

They both did very well in childcare. They loved their CMs and thrived in nursery later.

I kept DS3 out of childcare for longer because of his complex needs. I was able not to work because of our unusual situation at the time.

I dont understand why people dont understand why some people dont have a choice but to work.

It surely doesnt take that much imagination to work it out does it?

I'm the breadwinner - my partner's wage wouldn't cover the rent.

I don't wish to go on benefits.

It's not rocket science.

YABVU.

mrsDeVeerie, noone is saying people shouldn't work, the OPs point was that for many people working and paying for childcare comes so expensive that they can't afford it

nothing to do with disliking childcare per se, a mere question of cash

for me, working at a loss was an investment; it means I can now work at a profit

well without my boss offering me a free childcare place (i work in a nursery part time and a place for baby due in may would be £95 per week even with staff discount) i wouldnt be able to afford to go back to work once baby is due. The free childcare place is on the understanding that i go back to work after 6 months (am having 2 months off before and 4 months off after)! Im actually VERY happy with this and it will mean i can still work 9:30-2:30 and do school runs and baby will be at work with me for free!

oh right - I thought they meant splitting the childcare costs

FWIW - I wouldn't recommend working 3 or 4 (or even sometimes 5) night shifts a week while your OH is working 5 or 6 day shift - you'll nearly kill yourself

to be vhonest i have wondered this myself sometimes, £56 a day for nursery? how much must they earn to make it worthwhile going back to work?

however i do understand if there is a difference between a job and career. i had a job which i didn't view as a career, but if you do take a long break from most careers, it is very difficult to get back on track

Errr, I will have to go back to work (have my own small one-person business and setting up another one) when my baby is few months old because if I don't then there will be no work for me to come back to in lets say 3 years (when the baby qualifies for a state nursery). If I stayed at home, I would solely have to rely on the maintenance from the baby's father (and benefits) and the baby is a joint responsibility - he pays for half of her upkeep and I should too as well as sharing the childcare.

Also even if in the first few months/ a year my earnings will equal childcare fees, after some time that ratio will change. It's about long-term vision and what you want to achieve. If I stop earning now so I don't have to pay for the childcare, then I will be in shit financial position for much longer because 3 year break will devalue my position in the market/ experience and decrease my client database more than a 3 month break.

What I guess I am trying to say is that not working to save on childcare now is in a long run more costly to the household income (for some people of course!).

I work from home and people keep saying "Put her in nursery!" and I have to repeat "I cannot afford it!" I wish people would not say that to me.

My dh is chronically ill. I work because he is not capable of working.

What is my choice?

WHHHHHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAA.

OP is asking a genuine question not saying sweet anything about people's choices!!

Let's not get into I work so I can have pension choices/don't because I love my children too much baloney.

If I didn't go back to work it would destroy my mental health.

I love the buzz of being back at work and I know my children are well cared for.

I worked because we could afford it

Y'know there is a thing called a mortgage around these days, oh and bills.

In most families I know it takes two people to pay these things. Usually from what they have left after childcare.

It doesn't take a genius to work that one out surely.

YABVU because you are assuming that women are the lower wage-earners in all cases. Also you are being quite judgemental. To me it would be a luxury not to have to work

PMSLL Cory

Pat - that's not what the OP is asking though - she's asking why it's ok for someone to "have" to work, but not ok for someone not to be able to afford to work.

The long term gain thing is great if you can afford to absorb the loss in the here and now, sadly not all can.

I don't see how OP is being unreasonable for not understanding something .. I think what it boils down to is individual situations, people earn different wages, use different means of childcare, have a different number of children to look after & different financial commitments... it's not really a comparable thing. OP may well be better off financially not working whereas others will likely be better off, pretty simple really

Oh here we go with the judgmental card! Was wondering how long it would take for that to come up

I got pregnant with DS back in the late 80s when a woman had to have worked for the same employer for 2 years to get paid maternity leave.

I'd worked for them for 18 months and got my redundancy notice the same week I found out I was expecting along with several hundred other people. DP and I had only just bought our house, our mortgage was half based on my wage.

I was lucky and got another job straight away but wasn't entitled to any paid maternity leave. I got SMP of £31 for 11 weeks.

I gave birth to DS at the end of August and went back to work in mid November as we couldn't afford for me to take any more unpaid leave and it broke my heart. If my DM hadn't provided free childcare we'd have been utterly fucked.

My choice was work or have the house re-possessed. Work and keeping our house won. My DS is 23 now and I still feel cheated out of spending those first few months with him out of financial necessity.

If I didn't work who would pay my bills???

If that is what the OP is getting at then it is very badly worded. Unsurprisingly most people will misunderstand.

People who are saying everybody's circumstances, wages, costs, savings etc are different and unique are right, so you are really never going to find an answer

@childcare of £95 per week!

she says it very clearly in her last line

"Why is it okay not to be able to afford not to work, but not okay not to be able to afford to go to work?"

Cory that is what I said in my post.

I worked to pay for childcare for about 5 years. Because I needed to keep the job I had.

It wasnt much of a job TBH, certainly not a career but I need to stay in it.

I dont tend to get involved in the SAHM V WOHM because it all seems a bit .. oh bugger cant think of the word.... you know when it doesnt really have any relevance in your own little world?

By that I mean I really didnt feel there was any choice so whats the point debating it?

But I will admit to finding this thread a little bit confusing so I may have gone totally down the wrong end of the stick and got hold of the wrong path