Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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

204 replies

emkana · 26/11/2011 11:12

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?

OP posts:
TheFallenMadonna · 27/11/2011 23:31

Last time my school was shut because of snow I looked after several extra children. It was a pain because I did actually need to work, but it wouldn't have occurred to me not to offer to have them. And when I was a SAHM I did the odd bit of emergency childcare too.

Really, if this is a single parent in a bind, and your friend, then I would take the hit on the relaxing day and help her out.

lockets · 27/11/2011 23:36

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

fedupofnamechanging · 27/11/2011 23:51

I don't find it 'mind bogglingly stressful' to look after other people's kids. I just don't want to, and being a sahm doesn't mean I should feel obligated to. Not unless wohp feel obligated to share their wages with me.

The other thing here, is that at the moment, we are talking about one day of strike action. I think there will be more days coming up and I wouldn't want to do this and then have it assumed that I will always be willing to cover child care on strike days.

It does piss me off that because a sahp isn't in paid employment, their time is seen as less valuable than that of a person who is in paid employment and that it's somehow okay for other people to make plans that involve the sahp giving up their time and some people expect the sahp to just fall into line.

TheFallenMadonna · 27/11/2011 23:56

This is for a friend, yes?

I think people are focusing on the "I shouldn't have to" (well, of course not), rather than the "my friend could do with some help" angle.

belgo · 28/11/2011 06:53

I agree with that THeFallenMadonna.

I'm getting annoyed by all of the 'poor SAHMs, no-one appreciates us' posts.

emkana · 28/11/2011 06:55

The point is that she values her free time too much to take a days leave, she told me. So why should I give up the free time that I value so much with the children for her?

OP posts:
Greythorne · 28/11/2011 07:01

Thefallenmadonna
have you read the bit about the other kids not getting on with the OP's DC, anspd having form for excluding her DS?

seeker · 28/11/2011 07:01

I think women should help other women. And as a SAHM the commodity I have to offer is time. I don't think that my time is less valuable than a WOHM's- if I did I would be saying that time spent looking after children is less usefully deployed then time working in an office, for example. Which i don't believe. It's just that the way I spend my time is compatible with adding an extra couple of children. A train driver's time isn't.

belgo · 28/11/2011 07:02

I'm sure she does value her annual leave; they are probably vital to her when the school holidays come around.

All of the WOHMs I know spend months in advance organising the school holidays and there is barely any room for manoeuvre.

emkana · 28/11/2011 07:10

Sorry to bring this up so late in the thread, but these girls have retired grandparents who live closeby, a father who is separated from the mother but still around - it just grates that there are all these people and none of them can be bothered to do it

OP posts:
mumnotmachine · 28/11/2011 07:31

For all the people who have said "Its only one day" from what I have heard its the first in a long line of strikes, so having them one day may well be setting a precedence (says one who speaks at having two extra kids on Weds...so far)

natation · 28/11/2011 07:32

Well the children are 50% from their dad so should be 50% his responsibility.

seeker · 28/11/2011 07:37

Of course it should be 50% the father's responsibility- but unless the whole structure of our society could be rearranged before Wednesday.......

NinkyNonker · 28/11/2011 07:50

Belgo, did you see what the SAHM posts were in response to?

fedupofnamechanging · 28/11/2011 07:57

belgo, I don't care if no one (outside of my family) appreciates what I do. I do care about the expectation on this thread, that as a sahp, I ought to go out of my way to accommodate the child care needs of other people. It's not my responsibility and more than it's a wohp's responsibility to buy me the things I cannot afford because I gave up work.

There are people in this woman's life who have much more of an obligation to help her - the ex partner, the GPs, but there is an assumption that the sahp has nothing better to do, so it's okay to inconvenience her, rather than anyone else. That is saying that her time is less valuable.

belgo · 28/11/2011 08:04

Has emkana's friend actually asked her to babysit yet?

If not, who exactly is expecting her to babysit?

I think it is about what you believe in - I think it is important to help other people when you can, because the chances are, you will have the favour returned at some point even if it's not for a very long time. That has certainly been my experience.

It's not just me being used as a free babysitter. My WOHM friends have helped me when I have need their help, in other ways.

Greythorne · 28/11/2011 08:12

MN is a strange place. Just try posting something like:

"AIBU to expect my retired and healthy parents to take my DC for a couple of hours to give me and DH who work long hour a break? I feel it is their responsibility to do a bit to help us."

The responses will be mainly of the "your kids, your problem; the grandparents have no responsibility for your DC" variety.

And yet, SAHMs have a shared responsibility for any random children in the neighbourhood on strike days because.....it's the feminist thing to do and no woeking mums should have to lose a day's pay or day's holiday.

Very odd.

belgo · 28/11/2011 08:15

No actually I don't think the OP should offer to help her friend because she is a SAHM.

I think she should offer to help her friend because she has the opportunity to help; in the same way a friend of mine offers to give me lifts to places because she has a car and I don't drive.

I think she should offer because of the value of friendship and of doing good deeds.

fastweb · 28/11/2011 08:30

but unless the whole structure of our society could be rearranged before Wednesday.......

There is always going to be a time crunch on any single need for help. If the pressing need is always fulfilled by outside parties the motivation to do the difficult task of tackling a lack of help where it should be forthcoming will never be generated.

My NDN had her brother die of a nasty disease last NYD, four months ago her father was diagnosed with the same and is very ill.

I have cancelled lessons short notice and rearranged lessons where notice was possible to take care of her teeny tinies. All while her husband works at the end of our road. I know his employer socially, there is no lack of compassion, there is no question that time off when needed would be forthcoming for the odd half day here and there when needed. Other employees with a similar need for understsnding in crisis have been accomadated without issue. But he will not take time off work to watch their kids. Not even a couple of hours so I can teach my students first and then take their kids til she gets back.

It's not her fault that he thinks ....

SAHM = you sort out kids

WOHF = I don't take responsibility for kids

...even when she needs to dash to the hospital or do her part in taking her dad to appointments.

My students are very flexible becuase I offer the same by the bucketload, and I love having her kids. With the best will in the world I just couldn't say no, her pain is palpable and this, and an ear/shoulder is the only relief I can offer

But I do wonder if perhaps I am part of the problem rather than the solution if you look at the bigger picture rather than the instant when I am asked to take the kids.

Because until they have to thrash out his lack of stepping up to the plate in an indisputable crisis, the plethora of issues stemming from his fundamental attitude will never get resolved. And I think those issues will ultimatly either destroy their marriage, or all her self esteem.

So I don't think it as black and white as saying help out where time does not allow for change becuase I am not sure if I am doing more harm than good by never refusing to step into a breech her DH has never waded into.

I think it is probably a lot more complicated and shades of grey than a simple "help other women" would suppose.

Maybe if I helped less the pressure would bring things to head next door, and in the longer term that might be far better for her one way or the other.

But I am too much of a coward to take that risk and say no, cos this is medical crisis and I'd hate to be the reason why my friend didn't get to be with her father at the end or something similarly horrible.

But were it a case of a pre planned strike and a bloke getting away with murder becuase I am the path of least resistance......I'd be more inclined to take myself out of the equation and let the situation force the issue between the protagonists.

Society isn't going to change without the individual babysteps of women refusing to pass male responsibilities onto other women, on the basis that other women are more likely to say yes and it is less hard and scary to ask them cos no issues will be forced in the parental dynamic.

As my husband keep pointing out to me when I cancel income again, so a bloke doesn't have to take PAID time off work.

I think the whole SAH V WOH thing is a red herring in this. The real question is why is the onus STILL on our gender to resolve child care issues almost exclusively and to what extent do we collude with this by avoiding grasping the mettle on the basis that society can't change by next week so....same old same old for today, tommorow and ever more.

WoTmania · 28/11/2011 09:26

YANBU OP - it sounds like you help your friend out a lot usually so totally reasonable to say no for once.

seeker · 28/11/2011 09:29

It's still disproportionately tough for women to hold down outside jobs. They still get disproportionate amounts of flak and blame and still have to carry a disproportionate amount of the accompanying baggage. But it's important that they carry on doing it in the face of a society which still secretly thinks they should be at home in pinnys. If I can take up a bit of the slack for a woman who works outside the home, I will. But as I said down thread, I am a hangover from the 70s and can use the word sisterhood without q trace of irony or even the faintest of invisible quotation marks.

emkana · 28/11/2011 09:47

I really don't think it's the case anymore that society expects women to be at home. It's not the message that government policies send out, nor do I see it in the media.even the daily mail runs a column by Lorraine (?) Candy, talking about how she can't wait to get back to work after maternity leave.

OP posts:
seeker · 28/11/2011 09:52

I don't agree, I'm afraid. The second a scapegoat is needed the spotlight falls on WOHMs.

Well, it falls on people on benefits and immigrants first, obviously- but WOHMs are next.

fastweb · 28/11/2011 09:57

It's still disproportionately tough for women to hold down outside jobs

Not least becuase the whole childcare responsibility is still seen primarily as our job.

We are about the same age I think, cos I'm with you in terms of sisterhood as a principle, (even if that does make us dinosuars) , what I'm questioning is ...does the application of sisterhood, so help out in scenrios like this, necessarily help in terms of the bigger picture/longer term for both the individual asking for help and our gender as a whole ?

While admitting I am too big a coward to put my theory into practice and just take the kids cos

a) I like having them

b) of the two choices this is the one that protects me from external critism and "looks good"

c) it's easier

Greythorne · 28/11/2011 10:22

But seeker, rather than expecting the women who are at home in pinnies to pick up the slack, which reinforces the idea that they (the SAHMs have got nothing better to do because they are sitting in the sofa, eating bon bons and watching telly), the better way to fight for women's equality in the workplace is to shift the responsibility 50% on to the fathers.

Swipe left for the next trending thread