Are SAHMS discriminated against. Red magazine are doing an article about it.

[Darkesteyes]

Just seen this on twitter.

Are stay at home mums discriminated against? Are you one and unhappy with benefits, or feel judged? Tell us.
[email protected]

Scottishmummy what about those DH who don't have jobs which readily lend themselves to flexible working?!

I was the higher earner before we had DD. I am now back at work part time. DP has to work full time as there are no part-time opportunities in his career.

Now now I don't iron but all the other domestic drudge is done for him, inc ordering from just eat.

ihate - i am too pissed to calculate the numbers now, but tomorrow i will run the figures. what is his current salary pre sacrifices?

i am can show you ours if this helps (so to speak !!!)

morethan - I am not talking about people who home educate their children or who are studying themselves. You are in the minority.

Oh I study

dont readily lend themselves to part time working

Jobshare has. 2set paperwork,p60,2 leave to be arranged,2set training.all costs incurred

No Janey it wasn't a choice.

Like most people my dp signed up to do a job he physically can't do 3 days a week,he can barely do it in 5.Quite reasonably his company would get somebody able to do 5.

My sister and her husband had to battle to drop 1 day each(which very early cost dsis her career).She wants to drop another but as very senior she can't.

Do let us know all these sectors and companies you can pick and choose hours because in my experience they don't exist.

Yes, so your dh signed up to it kazoo. Between you, you decided that he would enter a field where part time working isn't an option, but clearly is well paid enough for you to not work, and puts him over the CB threshold. Other families make different choices, which often come with their own downsides such as childcare costs

those of that do it do it to for the most important reason of all-the good of our children which is thus the biggest contribution we can make to society.

It's not going to stop the country going bust is it. What then because its the DC that will suffer most. Because its them that will have high unemployment and massive debts to pay. Maybe we should all consider paying taxes so we can protect them from that!

"Err Happy sahp contribute plenty to the pot.Many have paid shed lads in tax for years and support a partner also paying tax,often a lot.Finally the biggest contribution they make is to their children. Those of that do it do it to for the most important reason of all-the good of our children which is thus the biggest contribution we can make to society."

A working person doesnt need another adult to support them to pay taxes, they do that themselves via working. Unless the SAHP had a high flying career for many years and came to parenting late, then i doubt many have paid that much into the pot. Thousands dont even pay back their student loans!

As for biggest contribution to society is children, i disagree entirely. Nobody has children for the good of society, its a selfish choice aduts make as they want a child. Based on your theory, working parents really deserve recognition as not only are they contributing to the pot but making that huge contribution of having a child

I'm always fascinated by what motivates others, what makes them tick.
And what fascinates me the most about this thread is why posters like Janey are so utterly committed (to the point of having dedicated hours of their time to the cause) to prove that sahm's are not discriminated against.
Why are you so determined to prove that sahm's are not discriminated against?
I really don't get it.
Many posters have told you, in lots of detail, exactly why and exactly how they were discriminated against.
It's a fact that childcare and the raising of the next generation is deemed a low value occupation of drudgery. On another sahm bashing thread a poster refers to the work of sahm's as 'all that dross' and wohm's regularly make comments on MN about the 'tedious, mind numbing depression of looking after the kids'.
To say that sahm's are not discriminated against is a bit like saying that there is no snow in Alaska because you can't see it.

Kazoo your dp choses to remain in job he can only do pt
You chose not to work.he chose to support as dole earner
You have choices.if it doesn't suit you could both work pt, he could go pt

No he did his degree before we met.What is he supposed to not do the job he trained for?

It's the same in most sectors.You do the hours required or you walk.Being able to pick your own hours is unusual so hardly a choice,it's just real life not cloud cuckoo land.

Mirry2

I know we are a minority, but seriously look how many people are doing H.ed just temporary. It blew my mind when we first looked into it. There really are thousands and its growing due to parents being disillusioned with the system or more recently not gaining a place at any school, let alone one of their choices. But a different thread.

I do think that the typical family no longer exists though and that a sahp can fit into as many scenarios as the wohp. I know we are a long way from total equality but the change in the last 20 years has been drastic in terms of flexible childcare and employment for parents. Women are gaining even more of a voice and sahm's are not the same feeble dh serving, chained to the kitchen sink as they used to be. it is also no longer acceptable to slap the little wife around like it used to be. Thank God we moved on.

Flexible working would allow more skilled individuals to work if the economy needed more workers. I suspect as the government are extending school leaving age, and are not encouraging pensioners to work, lack of workers isn't the solution to our economic crisis...

Well it's a public forum for debate yknow, step away? Not sure why it fascinates you, it's a pretty obvious answer. And if you are still too busy to cut and paste the examples where I've apparently shown discrimination against SAHM then I can't really see why youve bothered to come back to fling a few accusations around

Its a fact that childcare and the raising of the next generation is deemed a low value occupation

It's not an occupation and that's fact not discrimination. It's a parental responsibility!

Scottish their are no jobs in his sector advertised part time.He is always looking.

Faster, he is high fifties, not sure of exact figure. He pays in to a pension so that reduces taxable pay a fair bit I think.

happymummy, I worked every day from leaving university, right up until I had second dc. I did pay back my student loans.

Step I know re Janey et al when do they actually work?

Going by this thread I work more hours than they do.

This is a futile thread. The sahm are determined to believe that they are suffering discrimination because they aren't getting financial recognition for doing something they have hosen to do. Unbelieveable. No doubt you are doing a good job but there's no way you will be paid for it. If it ever happens i'll be putting a bill in for the time i was a sahm as well.

Well said little chick.

Given some of the statements on here you would think SAHPs are akin to godliness. Always thought it was down to the parents to provide emotionally, pratically and financially for a child but some seem to expect medals or opt out of the finance part as its their entitlement to claim from the state as they wish not to work.

Good post stepaway. For what it's worth, my dh couldn't do his post part time either. He would never get promoted again and that wouldn't be good for the economy either. We discussed him going part time when this whole CB fiasco kicked off and I would work part time. We would pay less tax, keep child benefit and now get tax free status for child care. How would we be paying more in to the pot in this instance?

To say that sahm's are not discriminated against is a bit like saying that there is no snow in Alaska because you can't see it

Perhaps because, beyond the privileged confines of those who have limitless time to post on mumsnet, people in paid employment are battling the real issues of actual discrimination every day, rather than bleating about how special and hard done by they are.

So far all I've taken from this thread is how SAHMS should have their unique abilities recognised by employers, despite not being relevant to the job and encompassing tasks most people have to carry out as a matter of course. Of how they shouldn't be required to even have experience from interests or experience outwith the home, because that experience (in raising children) is so unique and special, every employer is a fool because they do not prioritise them over other employees with more recent relevant work experience.