To think that many sahms don't consider the long-term implications when deciding to give up work? ***this is not a sahm vs wohm debate***

[wannaBe]

This is not a thread criticizing anyone or their decisions...

When I decided to give up work to bring up DS, I did so in the knowledge that for me, staying at home with my dc was the best thing. We were fortunate as well in that financially we could afford for me to stay at home.

Back then, I had in mind that we would have two children, so realistically would have at least eight years at home until the youngest started school, and even then, going back to work wouldn't necessarily be something I would consider as would want to be there for after school/holidays etc, and finding a job that fits in with the above is almost impossible.

So, fast forward nine years and the two children we'd planned to have turned out to only be one, and I've been a sahm for that long, although I have done volunteering in that time (reading/helping in school/chair of governors/PTA etc...) so haven't been sat on my arse as such (although the amount of time I've spent on mn does contradict that statement somewhat, )

Now I'm in a position where I want to go back to work. Actually, I've been in that position for about the past 1.5/2 years but due to circumstances such as moving areas etc have only just been able to start exploring the possibility seriously.

And I've come to a realization which, although I guess I knew deep down, I never contemplated until now. Even if you take the fact that there are very few jobs for far too many applicants in the current climate, the one thing that employers seem to want above anything else is experience, and current experience at that.

And if you haven't worked for a number of years then the reality is that they will take the person who has worked more recently, every time. And as employers currently have the pick of applicants (regardless of who you are) the chances of getting a job in the current climate if you've been bringing up your children for the past however many years is minimal.

So what I've basically realized is that being a sahm has made me unemployable.

I don't regret my decision for a second. You can't ever get that time with your children again and I'm glad that I had that opportunity and took it.

But in retrospect I do wonder whether I should have sought even a part time work opportunity sooner - even if it was something minimal.

And equally I realize that you can't tell someone who is just choosing to give up work to be with their children that they may find that they're unemployable ten years down the line when the kids are at school and they want to go back to work again without seeming like you're criticizing their decision/lifestyle.

When we make decisions we often do so in the here and now, not necessarily with the future in mind - not for ourselves anyway.

I think employmentwise anyone who is currently out of work for any reason has it extremely hard anyway.

The thought of never working again for the next 30 years is frankly rather depressing...

maypole1 Tue 13-Dec-11 23:25:05
Worst mistake I made being a sham how very sad

There are lots of jobs you can do working form home you could have worked doing a night shift but hay blame your laziness on being a sham if you want

Yes - I can see why being a sham would make you sad.

Very very true himalaya- there are SO many myths surrounding motherhood- not parenting, just motherhood, and they can sometimes be very harmful, as women can feel guilt tripped into making certain decisions. I think indirectly men can be victims as well himalaya. I feel very sorry for children (and their dads) where the dad is working insanely long hours or in an insanely pressurised job simply to enable the other parent to not work. Children need both parents. I wonder whether in future years your last point will become the norm and parents would find the idea of these very polarised 'male female' roles bizarre

I wish I'd thought more about jobs I could train I and then do freelance/easily from home. I have (as you know wannabe) ended up setting up my own business (or two) and they keep the wolves from the door- but they're not really my first choice. Ideally I'd like to run something a bit more exciting. We need to put our heads together wannabe.

DS1 makes me utterly unemployable anyway (or DH - one of us needs to be completely flexible for ever- but DH is one brining in a lot more money and tbh I'm better at the ds1 stuff than DH). I think that would have been a helpful thing to have understood at the beginning - how some unpredictable events can make you pretty much unemployable and how useful entrepreneurial skills can be.

Ooh I've just had a business idea for you/us - will email you later!

Thing is though, had I gone back to work post ds1 (and I sort of did - half a day a week) I'd still (12 years later) be unemployable in a traditional career because of ds1.

I'm trying to teach ds2 and ds3 to think o easy they can make their own money when older without having to rely on an employer. (although that's good too - but always nice to have a fall back)

YABU. I had 8 years as a SAHM. Returned to work in 2003. Got a part time admin job at a local uni which was term time only. Worked my socks off and after two years went full/time and they have funded professional qualifications and a masters for me. I have a second career and a decent career pathway and salary again.

But, I used to work in the City and earned a six figure sum before dc and I was prepared to go backto the very bottom and bite my tongue whilst smiling sweetly at the demands of twenty something whippersnappers, admittedly with a plan, and took home about £140pw for the first couple of years. An awful lot of people in the playground turned their noses up at that at the time. Now, that the same people are turning 50 they really are unemployable and many of them are complaining that they would only be able to get a job in a school or a shop now and it's all so unfair.

I've done a bit of both, but there has been some flexibility on DH's part too. When we had DC1 he had recently set up his own business, which was going along fairly slowly, so I went back to my relatively secure well paid job full time and DH worked 4 days a week in his business. I didn't want to work f/t, but it made sense as we wanted another DC fairly quickly and that way I would get full benefits of mat leave etc. DH did most of the nursery runs etc as he worked more locally than me. After DC2 was born I was desperate to go part time and DH's business was doing much better, so I went down to 3 days a week, DH still did most of the nursery runs on my work days.

Once DS started school it got much harder for him to manage school pickups and his business, plus my job became more and more stressful, so when I was offered voluntary redundancy a year before DD was due to start school I took it (turns out it would have been compulsory within the year anyway). I got a decent redundancy package and stayed at home for a year till DD started school. I was EXTREMELY fortunate to find a job 15 months later through a business contact of DH, it is local, in my old profession, well paid and only 10 hours a week which can be worked to suit me. This was down to sheer good luck (plus a bit of networking, which I had asked DH to do on my behalf).

But none of it would have been possible without DH being willing and able to do a lot of the childcare dropoffs etc over the years. Also, we have stayed in a small house with a small mortgage, although we would love to have moved to something bigger by now. I don't know if I would have been ready to take the VR package if we had had a massive mortgage. I also don't know what my job prospects would have been like if I had been a SAHM for more than 15 months. I HATED going back to work f/t after DS was born, but I don't think it did any harm in the long run and I'm now glad I did it.

Childcare is harder when they are at school - and I'm a teacher, god knows how hard I'd find it if I had to find and pay for holiday care as well.

The number if times I've heard people say 'when they start school, that'll be my childcare sorted...' School is NOT childcare, and doesn't even fit around working hours.

adverse - quite agree. As some who has worked since dd was since 6 months old (she is now in Y1), it is definitely harder work organising childcare now she is at school. And the demands are more (in terms of parental organisation/input - homework/costumes/out of uniform day/bake cakes/raffle prizes.......) I often reflect on how wrong people are to wait until their children go to school to return to the workplace because they think that that it makes childcare easier. It really doesn't - it may make it marginally cheaper, but not by that much, as holiday clubs are so expensive. I can understand those who want to stay at home with very young children because they want to be with them - but factoring a return to work around the school thing is deluded IMHO. When they start nursery would be better I think - just pay the extra for the 'wrap around care' aspect on top of the 12/15 hours you receive free.

I will throw another piece of information into the equation. We have a lot of friends whose children are at the end of their school career and moving on to higher education, and it is anxiety-making (at the very least) to observe how closely, in our own social circles, having two working parents who themselves both attended the very best universities/higher education and have had time-consuming careers is an almost consistent predictor of their own children not achieving as well as their parents at school.

When there is one non-working parent in a family of two highly educated parents, children's school achievement is a lot higher and typically similar to, or better than, that of their parents

Our anecdotal observations are entirely supported by the statistics (in France, however, not in the UK). The evidence is that parental support is the greatest predictor of academic achievement.

The trouble is that with a drop in confidence it is difficult to be an entrepreneur. So many of us wind up with unexpected PTSD, PND, or ongoing physical problems post-pregnancy. We don't usually expect that we will find ourselves caring for a parent or child with disabilities, and it is genuinely difficult to combine those obligations with a business start up (all admiration to those who have managed it like jimjams!). If you find yourself out of work, with health problems or caring responsibilities, it is doubly difficult to get back in.

I have no doubt that I would make a strong contribution to any workplace willing to take a chance on hiring me. However I don't have the courage to start up my own business and I long to return to the structure of a workplace.

In the UK I believe (no doubt someone will have the study) that the best predictor of academic achievement is the mother's own. This whether they work or not.

TBF though, even if it were true that having one parent at home for the entire school career would have an advantage, would that be enough to encourage one to remain away from the work place for all those years?

That's a huge sacrifce no?

"I long to return to the structure of a workplace."

I fully understand why many people feel this way but, personally, always found the structure of a workplace five days a week stifling beyond belief!

What about internships? If you don't have to return to paid work straight away, you're in a much better position than some single 21 year old to take unpaid work experience.

You're more mature, responsible and have more work experience than the recent graduates/school leavers. Plus, it could be an opportunity to rethink your career and decide what you really want to do.

In hat case Bonsoir, I shall have totally failed my children. I worked on the Jesuit premise "give me a child until he is 7 and I will show you the man".

wordfactory - why is it a huge sacrifice? By the time you have met the costs of a second earner returning to work (housekeeping, childcare, holiday occupations, transport, clothing) within punitive tax régimes (such as France) there is little or no profit to be made in working. A second earner can estimate how much value he/she is adding to the family in a stay at home or working scenario and quickly conclude that he/she will destroy value to the family in the second scenario. So there isn't much of a sacrifice going on.

Bonsoir
That might be the case in France (and I am somewhat doubtful of that) but I doubt its the case in the UK or rest of Europe. Some women do feel the need to hothouse their children and live vicariously through them - maybe in certain circles in France that is the case.

Incidentally academic achievement does not always mean successful adulthood.

True Holly and ds1's disability certainly limits what I can do in terms of businesses as well.

Why would you doubt it? It is well documented. Governments, for very obvious reasons (money in coffers), are in the business of encouraging as many adults as possible to work outside the home for governments' own short-term gain. But when you look at long-term impact on families and children, two working adults is not better for children/families as a whole in many scenarii. It is important to look at families holistically and to realise that families on the breadline and families who are comfortably off have different issues and priorities.

Regarding sacrifice, I think it depends on your outlook. Bonsoir I get the impression that you approach your family like a career - you run the home and focus a lot on your child(ren)s schooling.
I imagine that domesticity is fulfulling for you and you dont want or need anything else, however not everyone is like that and by taking another path they are not damaging their children, just approaching things differently to you.

By returning to work when our youngest was 5 and our eldest 8 part time and full time when they were 7 and 10 I don't understand how value was destroyed for the family. The children saw me fulfilled rather than bored, I engaged with professional qualifications and a masters so studied with the children and as a result was far more supportive of ds's gcse experience than I might otherwise have been. I am far more tuned in to young people as a result of working, into different cultures and into the social mix of London which can only be a benefit for my children compared to the micro middle class environments of their peers. I am aware of many things and many dangers which are around in London than I would otherwise have been.

Further, even after paying for the au-pair in the early days I still netted £200 a week - far, far more now and in addition I have built up pensions rights which by the time I am 65 will not be inconsiderable and I have a career ahead of me once the children fly the nest in the next few years. That puts us an entire family in a much better place than many of our friends/neighbours and acquaintances. Two focused parents, operating as individuals and supporting their families who are also in tune with the world around them.

I have several out-of-home roles, so no, I certainly don't spend my life in some sort of domestic cloud .

The issue of fulfillment is another issue to be considered, beyond that of earning money for the family and rearing children.

But we are not talking about families on the breadline. You are talking about 2 parents working.

In the families I know its the better off families (as in male salary) where the wives work. The ones with less academic achievement or drive tend to stay home, maybe thats not the best for the children.

I agree that 2 parents working 12 hour days is far from ideal. But a mother working less than a 5 day week and a father working 8-10 hour days is damaging children. I very much doubt that.

Bonsoir I don't doubt that you have analysed your own family set up at micro level but that doesn't mean you can extrapolate to others.

Some women earn more than enough money to make it worth their time working. Ohters have very few outgoings vis a vis childcare so again financially it is well worth it.

Then there are circumstances where even though it probably doesn't make much sense it is worht it for the sheer fun of it. I was recently involved in some radio braodcasts of some of my work and frankly the financial reward was potty. By the time I'd paid travel and bought in yet more help I was probably in the red. But it was a hoot...and ultimately good for me to meet everyone involved for future reference .

So for me not to do that would have been a huge sacrifice.

Bonsoir, I am an expat wife/mother who has moved postings regularly, and has friends and (husband's) colleagues who have achieved at the highest levels internationally and others who have stayed at home. Anecdotally, I would agree generally with your observation about children's achievements.

I find myself, at 50, having not worked full time for 20 years, fairly unemployable (though I have done some part-time work over the years). I am not dismayed by this, as I had a decent career until my early thirties, so feel I had had a shot at achieving something ouside the home.

There seems to me to be no real answer to the conflicting demands of professional fulfillment and family needs. I have successful acquaintances trying to address female participation post-parenthood in various organisations, but they don't seem to me to have workable answers.