in thinking there's nearly always an element of choice in the decision to go back to work?

[benetint]

I would never judge anyone (mother or father) for going back to work after having children. I think its entirely individual choice, whatever works for each family.

However I'm getting a bit sick of people saying to me "oh its okay for you being a SAHM, I had no choice to go back to work" when they clearly have a nicer car/go on holidays/live in a bigger house/nicer area etc.

DH and I decided that one of us would stay home to look after DCs till they were in school. As he earned more we decided this would be me. Its not been easy financially by any stretch and we've had to stay in a not-so-nice area, not have holidays etc etc.

But what I don't understand is people who say they have no choice in this matter. Surely if there are people out there who can't afford to pay for childcare then the people who can afford it are choosing to do so? (I obviously make an exception for single parents here, who can't rely on someone else's salary).

I understand that people may have to go back to work to support the lifestyle they currently have...but if they really wanted to they could downsize/move to a worse area/not have a car etc etc.

Anyway I'm not looking for s SAHM/WOHM debate, I'm just a bit tired of biting my lip every time I hear the same comment.

poopooinmytoes - How do you know madame could of got credit? If she is poor then she would only have been able to get payday loans etc. Not everyone can get in to debt as no one would lend them enough, so I can see how shee didnt have a choice

Molly. That's still a choice Molly. You could have stayed at home. You could have claimed benefits. You children could have shared your bedroom. Those choices aren't acceptable to you and that's fine but it was still your choice.

I find it amusing when people assume that dual income couples work for luxuries like second cars and foreign holidays. We have one small car that is 13 years old and haven't been on a foreign holiday for the last three years. That isn't because we can't afford them, but because we have other priorities.

As I said, as the main earner for our family, I don't really have much choice but to work, but even if I did, I would choose to work for the following reasons:

• I think it's good for my mental health to have a role outside the home in which I can achieve & make my own contributions to society. My mother deeply regretted the loss of her own identity outside the home, and that made life very difficult at times for all of us.
• I don't want to be financially dependent on someone else, and I think it is less risky if earning money is a shared responsibility within the family
• I worked extremely hard to gain qualifications and pursue my career, and I don't want that investment to be wasted. Also, I think I make a positive contribution to the lives of others through my work, and that makes me feel good.
• I want my DH to be actively involved in parenting my dd and not just focused on earning a wage.
• I want to be able to afford a house in a nice area so that dd can play safely and attend the school of our choice
• I want to be able to afford the various activities that dd wants to do, and for her to be able to pursue a hobby in which she has talent but which is very expensive.
• I want to pay off our mortgage early, establish a decent pension pot and ensure our financial security in the future, so that we need not be a burden on dd in the future
• I want to be able to build up a pot of savings for dd's future so that she has the freedom to pursue her own dreams in a way that wasn't an option for me when I was younger
• I want to show dd that it's possible to have a career and be a good mum, whether or not that's the route she decides to follow in the future.

Yes of course there's an element of choice. We could perhaps manage on my DH's salary. To do so we'd probably have to move into a one bed flat and literally watch every penny. As it is, one salary will not cover mortgage and basic utilities.

Our house is by no means big or fancy. We can't move to a cheaper area- there's nowhere cheaper anywhere near here, and his job is quite specialised, very little opportunity to relocate. We can't spend less on travel- we don't have a car and only pay enough to get to work. We could indeed cut our spending on holidays- by never visiting family and not going anywhere at all.

Yes, you can argue that there's a choice, but it's never as simple as 'Cut out the foreign holidays and spend time with the kids'.

So we are advocating claiming benefits and getting into debt now?
Is that a realistic "choice"

My children do share a bedroom! I live in a flat in a postcode in one of the top most deprived areas of the country. I wouldnt claim benefits because I am not that type of person to take money from society to do nothing when I am cpable of working if that is a choice that is fair enough I see it as having morals. Fwiw I work with my children as they come to my job but I can see how offensive this is to people who are on low incomes like me who bother working

"Why assume its the woman who should stay at home?"

Well this is what you did. Yes, we do have a choice when deciding if DH should work or be a SAHD. I do not have the choice though if we want to keep the house and reasonable lifestyle and not live in a bedsit on pennies.

"Childcare is paid by tax credits so I do it for self respect I dont want anyone to give me benefits for sitting at home when I am capable of working."

mollie how is being a SAHM "sitting at home"? Being a SAHM is for many people very different to that, with various fun, interesting things going on, interspersed with the obvious chores like cooking, housework, etc. If bringing up children and finding stimulating activities for them is so easy, why do nurseries pay their staff at all?

My mother working was a MASSIVELY positive influence on my life and allowed me to go to Uni (as well as keeping a roof over our heads when we were younger). I want to be a positive influence on my children too - I worked extremely hard to gain a professional qualification and a good career.

Sadly i cannot actually get work at the moment, but my choice, yes choice would be to work.

Oh, and I like the view out of my window and would like to keep it. My children seem to like it too.

Also if we ALL try to move to less desirable areas, demand would outstrip supply, and prices would rise, so we would all have to go to work to afford it.

Circular. Non?

I didn't have a choice to work but not for financial reasons. DH currently has a life limiting and incurable illness which would make it very silly to rely only on his salary when there is no guarantee he will be able to work (or indeed, live) in 5 years time.

The decision for me to continue working part time is obviously right for our family and to that extent I don't care about the debate. There just might be non-financial factors involved as well though which you won't necessarily know about.

Madame could have sold her body or her organs Molly. She could have gone on benefits. She could have gone begging. Moved in put relatives. Not everyone's cup of tea of course! But you see what i mean?

I don't think you understand what the op is saying.

Everyone has a choice. One of the choices might be Shit as anything, like being made homeless. Completely unacceptable idea to most people but still a choice.

Sorry, I didn't word it correctly, when I said "no choice for me" I meant "there was only one option I was happy to do", not that I was devoid of options. As I said at the beginning of my post, I had two choices.

filter - yes well we would all love to be doing that at home but we cant can we as we have to work to support ourselves.

Ok, so the OP is saying there's always a choice, even if that choice is to go and live in a tent or homeless accommodation or something, without adequate food/heat/whatever. I suppose that's true. But unless the OP (and some of the other posters) are living that reality, they aren't in a situation to dish out condemnation to those of us who feel that choice would not be in our children's best interest.

Molly. You're very lucky to be able to take your children to work with you!

I actually don't know why everyone is having to justify making a 'choice'.

Actually, we should be saying 'yes, I made a choice and I am proud that I did because it is a good choice'.

Arguably it is more admirable to make an active choice to go out to work and not claim avoidable benefits than it is to be forced into it. Equally, is it not more admirable to make an active choice to make sacrifices to stay home with your children than do it grudgingly.

So yes, everyone has a choice and well done them for making those choices.

Its such a ridiculous thing to say that being homeless is a choice, there's a slight loosening of peoples grip on reality.

"yes well we would all love to be doing that at home but we cant can we as we have to work to support ourselves."

Molly, you haven't answered my point that being a SAHM is not "sitting at home" as you rather insultingly suggested. You have no idea about other people's circumstances and how low their income may be. They may have decided to be a SAHM on a lower income and standard of living than some of the people who say they "have to work". It is possible to do that, even if you personally choose not to.

Attheendoftheday. I am pretty sure no one is dishing out condemnation. That fact that you think so is perhaps a reflection of how you feel about working rather then anything the op has said.

Isn't the OP totally based on the assumption that most couples don't earn similar amounts? I find this very outdated.

In my circle of friend's the females almost all earn similar amounts to their partners. In those situations unless you're prepared to sacrifice HALF of your total income there is no choice about one parent returning to work.

I went back to work because I wanted to. All sorts of reasons, but all underpinned by the fact that regardless of our lifestyle we could not just give up half our income so I could stay at home. DP continued working for much the same reasons.

Madame could have sold her body or her organs Molly. She could have gone on benefits. She could have gone begging. Moved in put relatives. Not everyone's cup of tea of course! But you see what i mean?

Yes, I can see how this would be a better situation for my children to be raised in than me going back to work

I realise that poopoo but most of the people I work with havent got the choice and they are there first thing in the morning coming in exhausted when others get the same amount of money and just stay at home. I have the upmost respect or them having to do pretty shitty jobs to be fair for the minimum wage away from their kids but they do it to try and help themselves.

I am also on the minimum wage but am lucky in doing a job I do enjoy and have my kids with me, however I know how close I am to being like those others mums I know who could always take the eaier option and stay at home and claim benefits. I respect them all for it, and think ops like this stating that everyone is working for holidays and whatever else are offensive

This is getting absurd. Why do WOHMs have to justify going to work at all, whether for economic necessity or professional or intellectual stimulation? Is this 1953? OP, I think your question was loaded from the start. YABU.