To only want to look after my own children on strike day?

[emkana]

I'm a sahm. I know one of my wohm friends was hoping I would offer to have her two on strike day - they are already coming round for"after school" that day but I just can't face having them for the whole day. I know with just my three it will be a fun relaxing day but with five, four of them girls who don't want to include ds who is the youngest it would be no fun at all. Is that horrible of me?

Oh, and I forgot to mention, in the OP's case, she is expected to look after children who don't get along with her DS, to the point that they exclude him. Why on God's green earth would she put her son in that situation?

I absolutely agree with you Greythorne. To me this issue supersedes any notions of sisterhood.

"Erm, how many times have I seen it claimed on here that you cannot be a SAHM and a feminist? I cannot count the number of derogatory terms I have seen bandied about on here...and yet when wohms have it tough it is down to SAHMs to rescue them in the name of feminism?"

Don't understand this, sorry. Could you rephrase?

"Add message | Report | Message poster Xenia Sun 27-Nov-11 11:24:00
The main feminist issue is why are women talking about this and not men. Just say - you sort it out. Let it be a men's issue."

Absolutely. But that's not going to happen by Wednesday, isnit?

Which bit is complicated? It has been said many times on here that SAHMs cannot be feminists because they give up careers/rely on men for money. Yet when a wohm needs help, they are suddenly supposed to spring into action in the name of feminism?

"Which bit is complicated? It has been said many times on here that SAHMs cannot be feminists because they give up careers/rely on men for money"

Ah. Not by me it hasn't.

:)

Look I ain't getting embroiled in the feminist argument here. For me, it's not political.

But I would help this friend out for just one day.

For me it wouldn't be a feminist issue just more that 2 extra children all day on top of my own 3 would be too much really.

Its nice to help out if you can and if pushed - well I probably would do it but I'd know it would be a stressful day if the children weren't ones who were going to play together well.

Depends on many factors - Does she have alternatives, why can't she take annual leave, can she afford childcare. My DS's school is open, his 'friend's who I find a handful isn't. It was inferred hopefully as I was planning to strike I could just have her son. She is a well paid director and has an after school childminder who can do the day (and well afford it). I've not had any time to myself for over 2 months. Easy decision - no chance. Now if it had been my single mother friend down the road who is paid by the hour and I know what a difference a days pay would make then yes I would.

I would do this, and have done in the past, two or three extra children on top of my own three. I would do it for the sake of friendship and because it's good to be nice to people.

It's only one day. Of course not all children get along all of the time, and often one is excluded, that is perfectly normal with children; I see it as an opportunity to explain to all the children how it's not nice to exclude someone.

It may be a bit stressful for that one day, but as a SAHM myself much of the time, I just look forward to the next day when the children will be back in school.

If I'm just with my own children, we can do stuff together - craft, cooking, walks, whatever - and I love doing it. If there are other children I will only be required all day to firefight, which I hate. Enjoying my children's company when I can is the one perk of being a sahm, and one I gave up a lot for.

It is only one day emkana.

Yes exactly only one day where we can do this together - no extracurricular stuff, no homework, no dh even cos while it's lovely to be together as a family it changes the dynamics - we get very few days like this and soon dd1 will be old to see them as a treat, so I want to enjoy them now. And before you say school holidays - never have time then as always of to my home country to see relatives and friends. I think there is something particularly delicious about unexpected days off like strike or snow days.

(I say all this now and will probably have a nightmare day on Wednesday )

The OP obviously from he responses isn't a horrible person at all and has thought about how it would help her friend, how it wouldn't help her son to have all the children, she has looked at it from many angles. OP if you say yes, I would explain to your friend it is hard for your son but, you may not always be able to say yes, you cannot always put other people's needs in front of your sons. If you say no I would equally explain it's not because you don't want to but because of the dynamics would make it difficult.

I personally would do it, but that's because that's me and I just don't say no, I like to be part of a community that helps - today for example, 2 different mums are taking parental responsibility for 2 of our children, as I had already promised my time to help a children's fun activity afternoon and then the children got invited to parties and a swimming competition, I am incredibly grateful to those parents who are taking my children with theirs whilst I look after other children, it's all about having that network of helping and caring for others, very few people I know have the benefit of an extended family network and rely on friends where we live.

Whatever the OP chooses, she is thinking of everyone's feelings, that's something very admirable.

Having read this thread Greythorne speaks total and utter sense (and I say that as a WOHM).

I work in the NHS and we have been told that they will not accept anymore requests for annual leave that were not already agreed before the strike was announced. And that sick leave must be accompanied with a sick note.

Thankfully my dh was organised and booked the day off weeks ago so we are fine. I'd certainly not expect friends to cover if that wasn't the case although there are people I would have asked if we were stuck.

If they were not able to help I'd be telling my employers that I have no choice but to take a days leave unless they are happy for me to bring my son along to the breast clinic with me!

So to the OP - YANBU. Neither is your friend though as long as she isn't getting stroppy because you haven't offered.

I have done it before if it is some kid that gets on well with my own DC. Some kids though no way. YANBU. I agree that as a SAHM we lose out on a salary, pension, respect of some people and career prospects. But we do get the benefits of no childcare worries and relaxed time with kids. WOHM get salary and other benefits and have the stresses of childcare etc. No one has everything. Why should SAHM be expected to have the worst of everything? Unless it's a good friend, I wouldn't do it.

I agree with those that say SAHMs can help those who work. I say it myself. I think the thing is, though, everyone is looking at this as a one-time thing, which it is. However, (not knowing OP situation) how many SAHMs only have one friend? I'm the emergency contact for 8 children at the DC's school and 3 from different schools, so if any of them have emergency issues, I'm the one they call if the parents are at work. (And I actually had several more ask, but they were people who either think I have nothing else better to do because I'm at home, or will ask and ask favors from me and never offer anything in return. There's a difference between helping and being a doormat, IMHO.)

In the past 4 weeks, I've watched kids 5 different times due to emergency child care issues from different friends. I don't mind it at all, but if I were in the OP's situation right now, I really wouldn't want to be doing it right now, because I feel like I've more than done my part right now, and know that in a few weeks the kids will have 3 weeks off from school, (I'm in the US) and history's shown, I'll have at least one time where I'll be watching other people's children.

Lots of people don't think that being a sahm is a valid life choice - until they need help, that is.

Hear hear

OP your wish not to do this is completely valid, as I've said before.

Greythorne I totally agree with your post earlier and again I say that as a WOHM.

Why do SAHMs owe WOHMs anything? As a feminist myself, it sounds like total rubbish to me to pick on this axis as being where a debt is owed. This again makes it sound as if men have no responsibility for any of this - the point raised originally and very pertinently by Xenia (who I wouldn't usually agree with) earlier. Why aren't the WOHM's husbands being called upon to save the day?

Also, if we're going to make this a 'sisterhood' issue, how about WOHMs banding together and arranging to take turns at using a day's leave to look after all of their kids? Now that would be a fairer and more sisterly approach. Plus it could well be something worth considering arranging, given that more strike days are expected.

*Parents who work need to realise that there are costs to each choice; as a SAHM my costs are to my career, long term prospects, salary etc. As a WOHM, their costs are the very occasional day of lost salary due to strike.

As a SAHM, there are very few benefits we are actually alowed to articulate. God forbid the naive SAHM who dares to mention on MN the benefit of seeing their children grow up, or the resulting closeness they feel to their children having spent every day with them. Just watch the bunfight and the mocking accusations of being "precious moments mamas". The one thing SAHMs can legitimately lay claim to is having holiday, strikes, Inset days, illness covered. But not anymore. According to this thread, they should also, in the name of community and feminism, offer to look after WOHMs children too.*

Amen Greythorne

Why didn't my bold work??

"Also, if we're going to make this a 'sisterhood' issue, how about WOHMs banding together and arranging to take turns at using a day's leave to look after all of their kids? Now that would be a fairer and more sisterly approach"

Why on earth? Why should anyone lose a day's holiday or pay if it isn't necessary?

People who find looking after an extra child mind bogglingly stressful don't have to,obviously. But those of us who don't can take up some of the slack.
I feel a bit the same as I do about my car. I have a 7 seater- and I feel better about my carbon footprint if I give as many people as many lifts as possible. No problem for me,makes other people's lives easier and is a bit less damaging to the planet. What's not to like?

seeker
i am baffled by your response:
WOHMs: "why should they lose a day's salary?"

The point is, salary is a perk of being a WOHM.

Time, to be with your own children or to be at home alone when they are at school, is a perk of being a SAHM.

Why should a SAHM give up her perk to look after someone else's children who exlude her own son and make er life for that day much more stressful?

Are you willfully missing the point here?

I did say (are you wilfully misreading?) that anyone who finds it mind bogglingly stressful to have a few more children for the day of course shouldn't.......!