AIBU to think that WOHM's don't "do the same as SAHMs AND work too!"

[eppa]

Firstly this is not a WOHM bashing thread at all.

Its just that I'm a SAHM and have been offended and hurt by a couple of real life comments basically saying that I shouldn't complain as I'm only a SAHM and that WOHM have to do everything I do AND they manage to work as well.

I disagree with this because for me an average day includes: making and clearing up after three meals, going out to baby groups, park, docs appts, trying to think up and doing activities such as cooking and painting and reading AND trying to keep on top of the mess that having 2 children in the house all day entails.

However a WOHM would get DC up and dressed, drop them at nursery where they would get their 3 meals, do activities etc, pick them up and return to a house that was clean (or the same state as it was left in!).

Obviously both WOHMs and SAHMs work and they both work hard and WOHMs do parent when they are at home. Its just that I don't think its fair to claim that WOHMs somehow do more than SAHMS.

iggi I think you are misquoting me.
I was asked 2 questions by catgirl. One was would I be happy to have my DS as a stay at home dad and one was what I wanted my daughter to do or aspire to so I answerd each question regarding that child. I was asked if I would be happy for my daughter to be a SAHM so I answered that question.
I would be happy if they were both stay at home parents or if their partners were stay at home parents.

bugster I agree that in the UK many are forced back to work. I also think we are a materialistic society as a whole. The thing here is that whilst there are loads of incentives for women to go back to work after having children there is nothing to support women (or men) who would like to stay at home to look after their children, therefore giving me the view that SAHM is not particularly valued. In fact the recent cuts to child benefit for couples with one higher tax rate payer is an example of SAHM/P families being actively penalised.

Well done Orm

I agree with that too Wordfactory. Make the best choice available to you and your family and then try to be happy. One of the worst possible role models surely is a parent who resents the role that having a child has pushed them into.

Really?
You think there are incentives to get women out to work?

You mean the cheap good quality childcare?

oh, hang on, there is no such thing.

You mean that women can easily access flexible working, and have the right to leave work early to breastfeed?

Oh, hang on, this is not happening.

You mean all the employers who have a creche on their premises?

Oh, no. no no.

You mean the low cost childcare available during half term, which happens every term, so, three times per year, in addition to Easter break, Christmas holiday, and Summer?

Oh, wait, that is actually not available either.

I thought it was the other way around actually. The government WANT women at home for one very good reason:

It brings down unemployment statistics, in that you are home and choosing to be work free, rather than unemployed.

The way they are achieving this is to ensure that childcare fees are so high, that working does not actually have any particular financial benefit.

(Compared to Norway where the government is actively IS encouraging women to return to work by subsidizing childcare so that there is only a small fee of £250 per month for a full time place with food included)

DH and I both work and we will lose CB too, as I am a HRT payer. It isn't only families with a SAHP who will be hit.

But the thing is, the incentives for mothers to return to work are largely connected to tax. The WOHP will pay tax in, not only while the children are small but longer-term, as they remain more employable in the future and are likely to have higher earnings.

The benefits of the SAHP are primarily for the individual family, and not for the wider society. I know you don't agree with this, but I don't think there is actually any credible evidence to support the case that SAHMs produce more successful or morally upstanding members of society. For every study that suggests there might be a benefit, there are other studies that suggest children benefit more when parents go out to work.

One of the worst possible role models surely is a parent who resents the role that having a child has pushed them into.

Yes indeed, pag. I felt horribly guilty as a teenager for having wrecked my mother's career. :(

Bugster what is the wage parity between men and women like in Switzerland? Are wages for men and women equal? If not, then the tax breaks for having just one parent working are effectively keeping women out of the workplace, aren't they?

quintessentiallyhollow

I thought that people did have the right to ask for flexible working and I thought too that they did have the right to express at work and that the company had to provide suitable premesis for them to do so, I also thought that many companies provided childcare vouchers for working parents and that working parents got working tax credits. I also though there were a number of before and after school clubs provided at a relatively low cost.

I would have thought that the governement would rather people were working and therefore paying taxes.

Also whilst what you say might be a "stick" to keep people out of work it is not like having a "carrot" to encourage people to stay at home with their children.

I make every effort to ensure that my children know that I am at home with them because I chose to be and because it suits us. My MIL used to tell DH all the time that he ruined her career.

I don't begin to understand why people make children responsible for choices they have no control over.

quint they want the single parents back to work just not the married ones. I had to go back when the dc's were 3 & 1 (I split with their dad just after dd's birth). The government would rather pay a fortune for a nursery to look after my dc's than risk me doing it and screwing them up .

Does anyone know any stats of proportion of WOHMs and SAHMs ?

I guess it's different for those with under 5s and for those with school aged DCs ?

When DC2 started school I returned to P/T work, also worked as nanny with DC1 in tow ! Have worked P/T since both at school but with brief periods, as now, between jobs.

Would be interesting to know what others are doing ! Trends etc

Jinsei
I honestly do belive that SAHP benefit society as a whole.
There is also credible evidence that SAHPs do produce better outcomes for children i.e. books such as Sue Gerdhart - why love matters, Oliver James - how not to f**k them up and Steve Biddulph - raising babies.

I would genuinely be interested to read any books or studies that claim the opposite so please let me know if you have any details (thats not meant sarcastically btw I honestly would be interested to read them!)

One thing I have noticed on this thread is that eppa is very VERY selective with whose questions / comments she decides to respond to

Wordfactory - that was a great post.

The right to ask for flexible working is not the same as the right to have flexible working.

I've asked, but am still waiting to find out if I'm allowed to drop some hours. It won't be particularly flexible then - it has to fit with the timetable.

And Oliver James is a prick.

Haven't got time to do a proper post, but this article suggests that WOHPs cause no ill effects:

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/oct/18/working-mothers-child-development

YABU. I'm a working mum, and there is nothing I would love more, than to be a stay at home mum. I loved my years maternity leave, and was part-time for seven years, untill the youngest was in school.

Alas, we cannot afford to pay the mortgage, all the bills, put any savings by for our future, and children's university fees, with only one wage. We need us both to work full-time.

You can say that you work as hard as working mums, as much as you like, I just don't believe it's the same, as being forced to leave your child in someone else's care, because you know it will provide a better future for them. This is my lunch hour, and the only time I get for mumsnet.

For example: m.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/jul/22/working-mothers-no-harm-children?cat=lifeandstyle&type=article

There are more but going out now. I will look later.

AFAIR, the latter tow books were opinion. Neither James nor Biddulph undertook any research. I don't know the first book you mention OP.

But all the stats show that in terms of education the most influential factor appears to be the education of the Mother. Second is affluence.
There is no eveidence to show that the DC of SAHPs attain any better academically than the DC of WOHPs.

Eppa- you need to approach research in a more intelligent way. And understand the bias of any stakeholder in funding and carrying out research and publishing conclusions.

Any of us could cherry pick particular examples of 'evidence' - its a totally pointless exercise because there is nothing conclusive either way, that kids do worse OR better in childcare

You clearly don't want to work. Thats fine. Try to enjoy your decision rather than screw yourself in knots in a desperate attempt to prove that women who work are somehow not as good as you.

curryspice
Please tell me where I have been selective? If you have any unanswered questions please let me know as I am happy to answer anything. Its just there has been alot of posts and questions and I have tried to answer specific questions that are directly asked to me but have not replied to every single post.
But as I said please ask anything and I will happily answer.

Also all the research undertaken on social mobility all seems to point to very little taking place however a child was cared for (either by SAHP or childcare). The factor that most affects any child's life chances in terms of tertiary education and later earning power is money.

I've given up tbh.

Good luck with your life and I hope you have a nice day

wordfactory - "There is no evidence to show that the DC of SAHPs attain any better academically than the DC of WOHPs."

Actually, there is considerable evidence to show that in some countries the children of WOHMs have much lower academic achievement than the children of SAHMs. There has been much effort in Germany in recent years to address this discrepancy and I have also read that this is an issue in Switzerland; in France, the level of education of the mother and affluence are the main drivers of academic achievement but it is becoming clearer, as the result of more detailed analysis, that parental availability (ie a SAHP or PT working parent) and insider knowledge of the education system are the key drivers of access to the most prestigious forms of higher education.

Eppa- SAHP do benefit society as a whole, as does anyone who does masses of unpaid labour in a highly skilled way.

However, if you continue banging on about how- essentially - the children of SAHP are 'better' than the kids of of WOHP , things are just going to get UGLY. Using the word 'outcomes' does not stop it being just another form of dull, competitive parenting.

librarian of course there's not wage parity! Which countries have that? I don't think the difference between wages of men and women is a lot higher than in Britain though although that's just a hunch, haven't got any statistics. I'm not pretending there isn't a lot of sexism here, pragmatism is preferred over ideologies and political corectness. A lot of things shock me but I think in the end average stress levels are lower and society is more cohesive and less materialistic.

Of course normally women are the ones to stay at home, but it's quite common for fathers in well paid jobs to work a four day week and have one day being the main child carer for example.