Why did you bother having children?

[knowitallstrikesagain]

(The other thread title was waaaay too long!)

At one end of the spectrum: Parents who work away from home full time from an early age.

At the other end: Parents who home educate because they do not want to be away from their children.

I cannot count how many times I have heard people say, 'I don't know why she (and it is normally she) bothered having a child if she is going to leave it.

However, what is the definition of leaving it?
If you work away from home but see child at weekends?
If you send child to nursery at 4mo so you can return to work?
If you work part time?
If you work full time?
If you are a single parent who goes out once a week?
If you let your child sleep on their own?
If you send your child to boarding school?
If you send your child to any school?
If you and your partner go away for a week to Bali every year without DCs?
If you and your partner go away to Skegness one weekend a decade without DCs?
Does it matter whether they are left with nursery, childminder, family or friends?
When are they being 'abandoned'?

Since having DC I have been a WOHM, been a SAHM, been away with DP for weekends, sent DC to nursery/school, gone out in the evenings.

AIBU to think that if this is the view, nobody should ever have chilren unless they intend to be with them every second of every day until they are an adult?

The cool toys and lots of cuddles were deciding factors for us! Seriously, we just wanted a family and we were lucky to have three children. They frustrate and amuse me in pretty equal amounts but I wouldn't change it.

I'm a SAHM and have been since our first was born nearly six years ago. My husband is in the army and we came out of quarters and into our own home when we had children. For the first year, he was home most nights as he was doing a staff job. For the two years he came home three nights a week and spent a significant smount of time on the road or on exercise plus he did a six month op tour in Afghanistan. Then he spent two years in London, coming home every second or third weekend and since Dec of last year he's been overseas.

I wouldn't say he's abandoned our children and I'd take umbrage at anyone who did say it. Boarding school is a distinct possibility for us, due to the peripatetic nature of Forces life.

I try not to judge others. People make decisions (the vast majority of people, anyway) based on what they think is right for their individual family circumstances. Parenting is not a "one size fits all" thing.

captainkirk why is relocation not an option? DH commutes a long way and is putting his career first while I put the kids first as a sahm for a few years, as there's no way my career could provide much. He tried a few different things and in the end the best thing for our family was for him to push his career and get him on the right path to continue progressing up the ladder.

Why did I bother...

Lego, train sets, watching cartoons in the cinema.

Oh and
seeing the world through new eyes, giggles, unconditional love and friendship (caveat - my children are not yet teenagers)

Can't remember if it was the Queen of the Queen mother but one of them went on a tour of OZ and left their babies for a couple of months when they were small.

Well I drank too much limoncello and had some great sex one night on holiday. Dd is now 8. BUT can we get everyone to ask the MEN this question too?

I was sick of never getting a seat on the tube

Snake - both the Queen AND the Queen Mother did that. For posh people, way back when - nanny was in charge. Prior to that whet nurses were common - for 100s of years.

In fact the idea that you would sit and entertain toddlers on a full time basis - well that is very new in historical terms....

Wasn't any bother to have children.

Vaguely remember it involved a bit of chafing.

It's the looking after the buggers that gets me. Which is why I went back to work when my first was 5 weeks old!

snakeonaplane - And the queen and queen mother are known to be great mothers . Princve Charles in particular has talked about a lack of physical love in childhood. I rememmber when he was 5 being filmed meeting his mum on a train platform. He had to walk the length of the platform and was greeted with a handshake by the Queen.

Josie - I think its fine for parents to go on holiday without kids. But 1 month for a 10 month old does seem excessive imo.

LesAnimaux I see him for about 2 1/2 hours on a night, about an hour more than my wife does since I pick him up from nursery. She works later than me at the moment.

naturalbaby Relocation isn't an option for several reasons. One, my wife has a good job up here. All our friends are here. Her rapidly ageing parents are here. Our little boy is adopted and I wouldn't want to put him through the upheaval so soon, maybe in a year or two. Finally, I like it up here!

I had DD because DH decided to drink spirits for the first (and only) time in his life on Honeymoon.

I asked DH and he said "fucking Mojitos"

OriginalJamie 'because I wanted someone to make me cups of tea'. How's that working out for you? My eldest is 14 and on the rare occasion she stops tweeting/growling/preening/obsessing about 1D long enough, I recieve a mug of milky pish and that's only if she wants money

receive dammit

If I remember correctly DD1 is a few long island ice teas and DD2 a bottle of rose! I am not sure I "bothered" they were just there.
I kept them because they are loving, cute and funny. I like going down the slides and on the swings. I love playmobiles...

I am 24/7 with DD2 (2) at the moment. It is too much and I can see it is not great for her but again I don't have a choice right now. DD1 is at school so is fine.

I had a baby because I really wanted to know what it's like to get up and go to work after lying awake in bed all night with my boob in a baby's mouth. Oh and for the cuddles.

Hehe Duelling. I was a half shut knife during my DD2's first year and a half. No point in looking for sympathy from my colleagues either, miserable feckers. Why I was promoted during this time, I will never know. Maybe being sleep deprived is good for productivity

Lots of people seem to think that being with a young baby as much as you can is the ideal, but it is also fine if you have to return to work. So working to pay the bills is fine, what about working to afford a nice family holiday each year? Or a bigger car? Or should you be staying at home with your children and do without luxuries?

Also, what of the parent who is with their baby 24/7 for the first 6 months, then takes a month's holiday? Is this acceptable/more understandable than a parent who works part time from when baby is 6wo and then takes a holiday?

How long is it acceptable to leave a baby with loving GP for? An afternoon? A night? A long weekend? A fortnight? We all have our own cut off as far as what is acceptable for us. But I am sure that under all the PC business we also have strong views about what is healthy/unhealthy for a child.

I would happily leave DC with GP for a month if something amazing came up and it was a once in a lifetime. I would not do any more than a month, however. Would I be able to justify this if I said I am a SAHP and therefore see my DC much more than WOHPs? Or if I said I am a WOHP because we can't afford it any other way and therefore why should someone who can afford to stay at home be judged more kindly than me for being away from their children for a long holiday?

DD1 starts reception in Sep and I am already feeling guilty that I will not see her very much in the weekdays.

I work pt 3-7pm. I can't change hours though as these fit around dh's hours meaning we don't need childcare, which we couldn't afford anyway.

I worry about her remembering me not being around much

Why did I have children? seemed like a good idea at the time.... and still is mostly!!

I'm aware that it's politically incorrect to say it, but I don't understand why parents have a baby then are both back at work full-time within months, unless they absolutely need 2 full-time incomes.
I can't understand it. I know a few people who've spent the first few years of their son/daughters life just waking them up and putting them to bed each day, and all the hours in between are spent with a minder.
I don't get this.
I won't pretend I do.
I've heard all the reasons, but then I think if you've decided to start a family, (because having kids isn't compulsory) and could afford to be at home more, why would you not do that?

I can't understand why you wouldn't go back to work after a few months (if you can afford childcare) - just goes to show we're all different, doesn't it!

I had children because it's a biological imperative, and it would be a shame to deprive the world of my rather fabulous genes.

Some people love their work. I think this is great, good luck to them.