To be a traditional sahm ??

[ProudMum4Eva]

I personal have never been flamed for my choice in life, however I see many people who continuously get some sort of insult for their life choices. So here I thought I would share all for the first time.
I am 34 years old I got married at 18 straight from college. I am happily married with five wonderful children who I adore and do everything for. I have NEVER worked (outside the family home) my DH has always worked. He works traditional hours leaves about 8:10 mon-fri and is home for around 5:30. I do everything in the home cleaning, cooking, bathing the younger children, ironing and so on. I dote on my children and my husband. I love it they do not need to help me in the house I look after them and that is what I am good at.

Not to be the twat on this thread but what exactly are you teaching your children? Are you dd's never going to work or aspire to anything other than washing up? Are your ds's going to solely financially support their families and take that burden on their own?

I have no issue with sahm I'm one at the moment as on may leave however I will be returning to work so my partner is under less pressure, to stimulate my mind and so my dc know and understand the importance of a good education and contributing to society etc.

However secure you think you are I suspect if something did happen to your partner you would struggle immensely to fill that gap. Who the hell would employ you having never worked before? Professional pot washer??? Benefits would be your only option or do you rely on them already?

Bonsoir- I think the point that AL is making is that you can take proper care of and responsibility for your family and contribute in other ways, whether as a volunteer for an organisation of helping within a preschool/ school setting, etc. I wholeheartedly agree with her about the positive contribution to society and how insular we have become.

I haven't noticed any correlation between whether someone is a SAHM/WOHM and how well their family is taken care of. Once the DC are in school, SAHM is hardly a full time occupation.

I agree with aanieL's point.

It's not about making a song and dance about volunteering or helping people out. She's making the point that bringing children up in a healthy balanced way is about embracing the fact that they are part of a wider society rather than focusing 100% of your energy onto your own biological offspring. Obviously when a child has particular needs or disability there may be less time and energy to spend looking outwards but I think what annieL is referring to is more an attitude of mind. I have to say that the most Unattractive and self serving mums I've encountered are a local clique who spend their time obsessing over whether their child is in the top set, where they 'rank' in relation to other children and whether they'll get into a top university. Really, life is bigger than that.

Bonsoir - Of course I don't know who is doing what in their private time. That's why I don't form judgments about people I don't know.

Matisout - I think you're deliberately missing my point, or we're looking at this from two very different angles. This discussion has not at any stage been about dysfunctional families. The point I was trying to make is that some people are so far up their own arses that they think their little ray of sunshine children are so amazing and wonderful that just having squeezed then out of their fanjos was all the positive contribution they ever need to make to the world.

I fully understand the point AL is making and I am saying that it is not necessarily those who make a song-and-dance about volunteering that are actually contributing the most to others.

Is it a greater contribution to society to dress up as a witch with the other members of your PTA, hand out sweets for Halloween at the school gate and seek the applause of other school parents (visible) or to quietly support your friend who has cancer and is desperately worried about ensuring her children's future?

Hi MsVestibule, you are right - I would have had the conversation about the school, our children, the PTA rep - as I often do with these Mums. I am not against trivia - just against narrow lives, when in this day and age it is not necessary. I know you resent the implication that SAHM's are less interesting - as would I. I also resent, on behalf of these women when at dinner parties their DH's who are often a big factor in the fact they are now at home, try not to sit next to SAHM's. I have on numerous occasions had the 'oh thank God I got next to you, we can talk about something other than children'. I know this will anger SAHM - it should!!!

I'm pleased to see some people understanding what I'm trying to say, and even agreeing with me!

Someone has to be there for children in the day or to do school runs. I don't think it matters that much who it is, children like having their parents around but also benefit from having hard working parents making the most of their abilities and educations.

I think what's hacked off some is the sense in which your OP contains an implicit boast... 'You don't think SAHM can work, but see, look at me!'

Yes, SAHM is all fine if you like it - and not everyone does.... All fine, until it isn't. What if your breadwinner leaves? You will be unemployable. What if he gets sick or dies? Do you have lots of insurance? What happens when your children grow up - as in what happens to you? These are the fears we all harbour, and they restrain us - rightly, I think, but your life belongs to you, and what is any life without some risk?

Chandellina - well, yes, there does need to be someone there for the children once they start school, but it doesn't need to be a parent. There are such things as childminders and before/after school clubs. Also, there are 6 hours between 9 and 3 that need filling up....

"I have to say that the most Unattractive and self serving mums I've encountered are a local clique who spend their time obsessing over whether their child is in the top set, where they 'rank' in relation to other children and whether they'll get into a top university. Really, life is bigger than that."

I think those mothers are taking their children's future seriously and that if you haven't the time or inclination to do so yourself, their attitude makes you anxious.

I do see your point but I still think you are wrong.
I am approaching retirement age and DH is past retirement age so what we will do after retirement has been discussed and it was a bit of an eyeopener to realise that people like me, still fit enough to work (part time if not full time) are sitting at home. (though many, in fact, i would guess at, most, are doing some voluntary work). But finding something you are good at, or is available in your area, or you have time for, or that you have the confidence to put yourself forward for is not that easy.

And in the end it is everyone's own choice. We live in a free country and I would wonder what your issues are that make you so anti SAHP, why shouldn't we do what we want - perhaps its v sensible to do what you want that makes you happy rather than martyr yourself because someone else says you should.

I think that celebrity culture now unfortunately informs much of people's perception of the worth of others. If people haven't got a publicly validated label attached to their identity, they are "worthless".

"I think those mothers are taking their children's future seriously and that if you haven't the time or inclination to do so yourself, their attitude makes you anxious."

Disagree!!! I think this has become their one and only role - to ensure their children succeed and they support their husband's careers. As women we should have moved on from that role of just being about the future success of our children. It is important of course - but should it be our raison d'être?

Do you think so bonsoir?
I take parenting very seriously and so does my dh. We don't believe good parenting equates with frantic obsessing over whether our dd or ds are 'outperforming' little johnny in end of term test. Neither do we spend hours in a state of high anxiety about what career our children might end up in. Perhaps the fact that we both have interesting careers ourselves helps us to not transfer any unfulfilled ambitions onto them!!

I'm sure you are right that volunteering/ contribution can take many forms and perhaps some people have mixed motives.

It is perfectly possible to take your children's future seriously and put time and effort into raising them as well as working outside the home.
Chatting about a PE teacher's moustache in a coffee shop after doing the school run is not 'taking your children's future seriously'. It is enjoying some leisure time.

There are both SAHM and WOHM who do and don't raise their children in a responsible and caring way. I can't see any correlation between the two things.

You still misunderstand me, Mayisout. I'm not anti-SAHP, though it's not a choice I'd make. I'm anti people who think that society owes them rather than that they owe society. If you have free time, there is always some way you could be using it to contribute positively, from spending time with the elderly, to joining a conservation group looking after local woodland, to picking up litter, to volunteering at your library. To say people don't have the confidence or don't think they're good enough or that nothing might be available locally are all just excuses, IMO.

Of course we live in a free society and people have choices. But I really genuinely wonder why some people choose to do nothing but indulge themselves. Human nature? I hope not, and that most of us are made of more than that.

Personally I see about me two sorts of parents in our economically and socially advantaged environment: complacent ones where both parents work, did fine and think that if they provide their children with similar opportunities they had themselves, they will be fine. And realistic ones, who know the world has moved on, that the competition is really frightening and that their children will need 3x or 4x the skills they had at the same age to go to the same universities and have a similar lifestyle.

OP, if you are still around, I think it's great that you're happy with your choice to stay at home and look after your children. It wouldn't be my choice but if it works for you and your family, that's fantastic.

The only thing I would advise is that you plan ahead very carefully to ensure that you have a full and fulfilling life of your own when your children eventually leave home. My own mother suffered with serious depression when I moved out of the family home - a classic case of "empty nest" syndrome. She genuinely didn't see this coming, and the sudden feeling that she no longer had a purpose in life came as a real shock to her. I don't think this is inevitable for mums who stay at home by any means, but it is a significant risk and you need to plan ahead to minimise that risk.

'it is perfectly possible to take your children's future seriously and put time and effort into raising them as well as working outside the home'

• hear hear sugarandspiced. That encapsulates it all really.

bonsoir, I don't think the working status of a child's parents has any impact on how involved and "ambitious" those parents are on behalf of their kids. Pushy parents can be found equally among SAHMs and WOHMs in my experience!

6 hours go in a flash mumsnetting and you are tied to the school day.

Bonsoir, genuine question

If, when they grow up, your DCs decide the most valuable thing they can do with their future is to stay at home working to equip their own children with the skills required to maximise their futures, will you feel that you staying at home trying to maximise thier futures will have been a worthwhile sucess?

Of course, catgirl.

Don't know if you are still around op but i had a mum like you.

She loved feeling useful as she had a condition which meant she couldn't work out of the home. So she would do everything for everyone. My dad and brothers never had to do a thing although my dad could iron occasionally. My three brothers and dad were never allowed to help in the kitchen (i was taught very few basic things like how to peel a potato). Even if the door bell went everyone would look at my mum!

I told her i didn't think it was in their best interests to do everything for them but she didn't listen.

Then she died. My dad can still only do the ironing and literally doesn't know how to clean the house or cook a simple meal. As a result of that he has become ill through a terrible diet. My three brothers are lazy and entitled and think they shouldn't have to do anything for themselves. They don't clean at all, cook or anything. They even smell as their home smells and they don't seem to realise that their clothes get musty. As a result of all this they can't get girlfriends. Who wants a smelly man who can't even heat pasta and lives in a dirty home.

Generally all four of us children were left unequiped to deal with life.

Im not saying this to get at you op. Im a sahm too. The difference is that i see my job as to teach my children how to function as adults, whereas you seem to see it as to make your kids lives as easy as possible. That's lovely in the short term but damaging in the long term.

I would imagine it is as you say a nice feeling to look after everyone, but actually when you are doing any job you need to look at the long term goals not just the short term feelings it gives you. I don't know of any job where you could just go in and choose what to do based on how that thing makes you feel rather than what is best for the company or whatever. You'd probably get sacked!

So this isn't about sahms at all for me. Just about how misguided i think your intentions are.