Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To wonder why anyone with school-aged children would want to be a SAHM?

1006 replies

Badtasteflump · 22/09/2011 13:43

And what they do all day?

I have my flame-proof hard-hat ready Grin

In the spirit of the general shit-stirring on here today I though I would ask this - as I do really wonder. Fair enough when you have pre-school aged children, I can understand wanting to be a SAHM. But once your children are at school full-time, what is there to do all day?

I work PT (school hours, basically). I manage (jointly with DH) to get all the housework, cooking, diy, etc) done in the evenings & weekends, no problem. If I were at home all day I really think I would go a bit mad - either that or I fear I would gradually become relegated to the role of house-slave, doing all the housework and childcare myself because I wouldn't have the excuse of a 'proper' job. . .

OP posts:
motherinferior · 22/09/2011 22:40

So quite a number of you are SAHMs in order to facilitate your husbands' careers? And/or to relieve your husbands of household responsibilities?

Kladdkaka · 22/09/2011 22:42

guess most posters on here who don't work have seriously high earning partners

I don't, just seriously low mortgage. When we lived in the UK I worked full time and we still couldn't afford to buy.

Cocoflower · 22/09/2011 22:45

Two of my older female relatives became SAHMS to aid their DH career (involved lots of moving overseas etc)

If they hadn't, and both kept working, between them they would probably earn 50k

Instead the two womens families are now worth millions

SanctiMoanyArse · 22/09/2011 22:47

'So quite a number of you are SAHMs in order to facilitate your husbands' careers?'

Yes but it's a privelddge he has already extended to me and will be shared soon.

Marriages aren't snapshots: theya re w ahole lifetime, sometimes they swing this way and sometimes that works. It's the whole balance that matters. Even when ic an;t work I get to study which matters a lot to me.

lovingthecoast · 22/09/2011 22:50

MI, it's not so much to facilitate his career as to boost our household income. I'm not his personal assistant, I'm an equal partner in our relationship. Quite simply, the way we work things brings in the most money whilst having the added benefit of me being there for the kids when they're ill etc.

southeastastra · 22/09/2011 22:51

i find it quite sad that people's lives are so driven by income

i guess i'm simple and just want to do a good job and help the community

rather than feather my own nest.

horses for courses

irregularegular · 22/09/2011 22:53

I can't believe how many of you use the possibility of child illness as a major reason for not working. How often are your children ill?? I think my daughter has had 3 days off in her entire school career (just started yr 5). I know there are special circumstances, but jeez...

Cocoflower · 22/09/2011 22:53

Its quite possible to help the community without expecting payment

lovingthecoast · 22/09/2011 22:56

Well, income is important to pay the mortgage. It's not everything in life and it doesn't make you happy but it does make life easier.

Also, I served my community whilst working as a teacher. Always worked inner city schools. I have excellent Alevels, a very good degree from a top university and a masters. If I was only driven by income I would have become a lawyer like DH. I certainly would not have become a teacher!

I loved my job and my life back then. But I also love it now, having 4 children and being a SAHM.

southeastastra · 22/09/2011 22:56

of course, but you have to be able to afford to do it voluntary in the first place

it's all very 1950s/women's institute to me. i wonder if the rest of europe is similar, doubt it

lovingthecoast · 22/09/2011 23:00

Re illness; when you have 4 children who seem to get chickenpox not nice and conveniently at the same time but running concurrently then that adds up to about 6wks. DS1 is in Y3 and has rarely been off. The others more so. But when your DH is out of the country and you literally have no living family then it falls to you. And as a teacher, it simply wasn't workable.

Cocoflower · 22/09/2011 23:00

Nothing wrong with 1950s/women's institute to me.

cat64 · 22/09/2011 23:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

lovingthecoast · 22/09/2011 23:02

Obviously I mean consecutively rather than concurrently! Grin

scottishmummy · 22/09/2011 23:07

if your kids all at school,not a sahm.
at home,unwaged not working.so dont pretend its mothering role of kids absent 9-3

NormanTheForeman · 22/09/2011 23:11

Not read all of thread, but for me, when ds was born, I had to give up my job. I could have worked part time, but would still have had to do very varying shift patterns. There was no way I could have done this without family help (no childminder, nursery etc could have covered the varied hours I would have had to work). My parents were 80 + when ds was born, and lived 100 miles + away. My Dad had Alzheimers. So they couldn't help. ILs were much younger (60s) but lived 400 miles away, so no good.

Now ds is at school, it would still be difficult to do the job I used to do, as we would still require a lot of childcare at odd hours/days of the week (it would be different every week). I am looking for a part time job, but trying to find something that would fit in with ds's holidays/ school hours is almost impossible.

I haven't exactly chosen to be a SAHM while ds is at school, but there isn't a great choice..........

Northernlurker · 22/09/2011 23:14

Thanks OP - have never been able to work this out either!

School holidays/ llness is no reason not to work. Especally if you are in a two parent family. When dd3 had C pox I had a day off then dh worked two days at home. You manage.

begonyabampot · 22/09/2011 23:14

My husband earns about 20 times what I would probably earn (hard to believe but most SAHM did work once upon a time), probably more. It makes financial sense for me to take up all the slack of children, school, illnesses, school hols - especially as he works away alot, sometimes for weeks on end. We also have been moving countries quite often which raises other issues.

It also means when he is home he can chill and relax more rather than spend his off work time doing chores etc which would happen if we were both busy at work.

It works for us at the moment and I enjoy my free time and the fact that we argue less about housework and kid stuff. Sometimes I do think I should be doing more and I might at some time and financially it might be nice to earn and be more financially independent but it would be a drop in the ocean compared to his earnings and would work against out tax/ business set up. There are pros and cons to both SAH and WOH situations, neither is perfect. Plus, i'm not taking up a job I don't really need for some 'pin' money which might be really needed by someone else. Future, we'll see.

lovingthecoast · 22/09/2011 23:15

Well it is a mothering role to the mother who places huge importance on being the one dropping off and picking up. On being the one who can come running when they break their wrist (DS1) or split open their head (DD1). Just being there even if just on retainer, is important to some women. It doesn't make their choice any less valid that those who choose to work.

The contributing to the economy argument doesn't wash (IMO) otherwise it would be less valid to choose a career that paid less than another you could reasonable do with your intellect and/or qualifications.

begonyabampot · 22/09/2011 23:16

Illness does matter, when my kids have illnesses, my husband is often thousands of miles away for weeks at a time.

Northernlurker · 22/09/2011 23:17

begony - the longer you stay out of the work market the more the disparity will grow between your earning power and his. Unless you want to sahm basically forever, you have to set a point where you change things.

Northernlurker · 22/09/2011 23:18

Loving - when and if my children break bones I will be there. Why would working stop me? Hmm

lovingthecoast · 22/09/2011 23:19

Northernlurker, you did very well if your child only needed 3days off! My lot added up to nearly 6wks as they barely overlapped. Also, as I said, DH is very often away from home sometimes out of the country.

On top of everything else, me being at home offers a little stability when their Daddy is away so much and they have no grandparents, aunts, uncles or cousins like so many of their friends.

scottishmummy · 22/09/2011 23:20

we respond if nursery or school calls if required
dont need to be sat at home to do that
if your kid/s all at school you're not doing mothering or any such thing.you have a period 9-3 with no childcare commitments. and no amount of phraseology like home maker glosses over fact you're not undertaking any childcare in absence of kids,to be sahm you need a dependent child

NormanTheForeman · 22/09/2011 23:22

Yes, but you also have to say what's the most important thing for your child. For example, it wouldn't be too bad during term times if I found a part time job, but in school holidays, after I had taken off the amount of holiday I could, my ds would have to spend quite a bit of time in childcare/holiday club etc. He would hate that. I would hate it too, I really want to see him when he's not at school.

I don't see the point of having dcs, and then the minute they are at school pcaking them off to holiday clubs, if you don't need to.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In
This thread is not accepting new messages.