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.

I would eat my own foot rather than take seriously anything Oliver James had to say about child-rearing.

Anyone can find research to justify anything they want. The need to find research to justify being either a SAHP or a WOHP says a lot

Oh lord, I missed the OP mentioning Oliver James. He makes me v.cross regarding all sorts of matters, not just child rearing. He is an arse.

I do rather like Steven Biddulph though. I don't know why he gets such short shrift on MN. There might be one or two things he's said that I'm a bit about but there isn't a person alive I agree with on everything.

Well not here in the UK Bonsoir.
All the research is very clear. The driving factor is the education of the Mother. After that is poverty and affluence.

The research undertaken (although there has not been that much tbf) shows that where the Mother is highly educated and the family have a high level of affluence, the home set up has ever decreasing impact. As you have pointed out this may be because a certain level of affluence allows parents in the UK to buy an advantageous education. So advantageous that it appears to eclipse other factors.

In France this would less of a factor because the independent schools are of such lower quality.

Eppa, why are you turning this into a dig at WOHMs? And why does it matter who does the most with their children?

I'm much more exhausted on my days with DD because there is no break and she doesn't nap. I do lots of stuff with her - playgroup, rhymetime, park, fams, zoos, painting etc, but I much prefer it to being at work. I don't have lots of coffee breaks either. I have an hour for lunch and I usually have to work through it.

I think this such a pointless discussion because it really DOES NOT MATTER. I don't even know why I'm bothering to comment.

wordfactory - indeed, in the UK affluence allows parents to outsource their role in a way that other countries' education systems do not permit.

But the end conclusion is the same: more, higher quality adult input (be it parental input, shadow education or UK-style private schooling) has a massive impact on children's achievement.

Just to come back to working vs. stay at home, my mum took five years off, and since then worked full-time. We had a wonderful childhood, and myself and my brothers are all reasonably successful.

Yes, I have to work, but we chose to buy a 400k cottage in the country. We don't pay for private education, or expensive holidays, but need savings by us. Our children have lots of hobbies, and we have always read to them.

I took the decision to work part-time for seven years. I do not think a working mum makes a poorer mother.

This is very controversial, and I wouldn't say it in rl but I've decided to look after my dc till they are 2 or 3 years old just in case it protects their emotional health.

However, I can't wait to go out to work again, as I've got an ace idea for a small business!

When I was growing up I went to a girls school and we were pushed so hard into high profile careers traditional men's careers because we could do them - we were part of the new generation of women who could compete equally (ish) with men in the work place - we were encouraged to eschew the old traditional role of having to stay at home with the Dc and to be out there and going for it just like the men - what they failed to tell us was what we were supposed to do when we wanted to have a family. In a way they were wanting us to be just as good as or the same as men - that didn't leave room for having a family- really the only option in that case was to be with a SAHD- because for all their cry of equality and you can have it all is that we actually have to do it all.
You can be a high flying lawyer or a SAHM but fundamentally in the majotiry of relationships still the SAHM/WOHM is expected to be in charge of the house as well as the DC aswell as everything else - DH/Ps on the whole get to go out to work come back and have it done for them. I know that in many cases this is shared but how equally - I believe it is still the woman who takes on the majority role of responsibility for the family and home.
So there is no right answer if you are a WOHM you are trying to follow a career but you can't do it just like a man because you are still expected to be responsible for the home and are made to feel bad for outsourcing you parenting - not fair - or you are a SAHM assuming a traditional role of womanhood which is despised by many as a retrograde step and a kick in the arse for all those out there who have worked so hard for us women to have equality - so that's the wrong choice too.
What's sad is that society has put all mums in this position that whichever choice we make we will beat ourselves up for it being the wrong one - and it isn't helped by SAHMs getting at WOHMs and vice versa - couldn't we all get togehter and agree that being a mum is tough whatever choice you've made - that we are all mums togehter and can support eachother in whatever choice instead of constantly trying to justify our choices by putting down others.

Eppa - "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"

Have you seen the country's debt, no way can the country afford to pay mother's a wage to stay at home. If you really want to be SAHM, and do not have a well paid husband, then there is the option of, SAVE SAVE SAVE before children, do not have children young, live in a small house, and have very little material goods.

If we lived in a terraced house in a not so great area, I wouldn't have to work, we chose a nice house.

Right, lunchtime over for me.

"what they failed to tell us was what we were supposed to do when we wanted to have a family. In a way they were wanting us to be just as good as or the same as men - that didn't leave room for having a family- really the only option in that case was to be with a SAHD- because for all their cry of equality and you can have it all is that we actually have to do it all."

Agree very strongly with this, avoidinglibelaction.

Havent read the whole thread but surely wohms (unless they have a cleaner/housekeeper) do similar to sahms but at different times????

When I worked f/t (prior to dc) I did housework in the evenings and at weekends and dh did more.

Since being a sahm I try and do it during the day so my evenings and weekends are free

I know I am looked down on in the playground for being a sahm (until they want volunteers to help at book sales/gardening/school fairs etc) but couldnt give less of a fuck, frankly.

HTH

Not that a terraced house, isn't nice. Our first property, was a Victorian two bed terrace, but we wanted somewhere bigger for raising our family.

...and of course according to IDS sahp's "contribute nothing to society"

Sigh.

anewmotivatedme

Yes - of course there is the option to save/downsize if you want to be a SAHP but to me that makes being a SAHP seem like a luxury whereas I would like to see the governement showing that SAHPs are a valuble part of society.
I'm aware of the countries debt but somehow the government are still able to pay out billions for a number of other things I don't agree with (but that would be another thread).

Eppa - I think until mortgages can be paid with one income, SAHM will be a luxury. It's the difference between house prices and pay, that is the issue.

Did anyone watch Panorama about childcare in Norway and Denmwrk? The vast majority of women go back to work. Men are allowed three months leave while the mother is at work, to be a SAHD! The childcare look amazing and every month they have the children overnight and finish work at 4.30pm to allow family time!!

You have to be super qualified to work in a nursery and it is a well paid, professional career.

Imagine!

If we had this in the UK, this debate would not be happening.

(and I think Biddulph and James have mommy issues)

Good points avoidinglibelaction I went to a girls school in the seventies and got the same messages - that we could do anything now - encouraged to study sciences and not consider any careers to be exclusively for men.

Thing is later discovered more flexible working only available in the more traditional roles such as teaching.

So, yes, all very well, and commendable message to give young women - but what about when it came to combining all that with being a mother hey ?!
Someone tell me how to do that !

Ooh, I wish, as both a mother and an early years professional - that I lived in Norway - or it could be like that here !

It's interesting that in one of those surveys of happiness of children the scandi countries came out very high. Yet, they're almost all placed in childcare at an early age.

Similarly, the country wiht the highest mental health among women, is I belive Holland where the vast majority of mothers work full time.

There seems to be an emphasis on it being the responsibility of a community to raise a child and to look after families.

One thing I have noticed is that as I approach 40, my peers who continued working are now real experts in their chosen profession and that is incredibly important to society.

Mmm, it seems such hard work trying to stay in the work force as a mother in the UK - competing with others for scarce child minders etc.

If there was a breakfast club and an after school club at my DCs primary that would have helped me so much I feel. Would have been much more acceptable to DH too for some reason. Indeed when DS was at Nursery he did stay to the after school club they ran there, giving me a bit of time with DD - collecting her from school etc.

Norway and Denmark are streets ahead of us.

Epps on a previous thread I posted links to several papers produced and peer reviewed by high ranking universities showing WOHM produced socially and academically more adept children, I'll try and dig them out. Please note you are quoting populist self help books. There is a difference.

Sorrynive been unclear, what I had was actually research into the effects of Childcare on children's development, and for the umpteenth time not all WOHM will use Childcare.

Just feel I have to point out that just because there was any sort of correlation between WOHMs or SAHMs and outcomes for their DCs wouldn't mean it was a causal relationship.

There would be many other factors such as affluence of the family, education levels of the mother etc. - all of which research has already shown will have a big effect on children's well-being and development.