Stay at Home mums

[marilynmonroe]

There is something that has been bothering me for a while about being a stay at home mum.

I decided to stay at home with my kids after my second was born. I enjoyed my job but wanted to be at home with my children. I have (and sometimes still) struggled with this. In the way that people who I meet will find me boring as all I do is look after the kids, clean, cook etc etc.I am an interesting person who reads, keeps up to date with what is going on in the world and I don't just talk about my kids!

Anyway, I'm getting to my point now, my eldest is about to start school in September and all I get asked at the moment is "have you thought what you are going to do next?" "Are you going to go back to work" now this may be due to small talk etc but...

It makes me feel that I should be thinking about doing something else.
But I feel that the kids need me now more than ever when they are at school and what about school holidays etc.

This isn't a thread about what's best, being a stay at home mum or a working mum.

I would like to hear from other mums that didn't go back to work when their kids started school and what they did with their time when they were at school?

I do worry about how i will fill my time when that happens and if I will get bored. Is there anything wrong with not wanting to go back to work and look after your family? Why do women feel that they have to go back to work when they don't need to? I'm in a very lucky situation where I don't need to work for financial reasons although this could change at anytime as my partner is self employed. I don't want to start a discussion about how some women have to work etc etc.

I'm not sure if I am being clear, I have been thinking a lot about this recently. Would like to hear other people's opinions just to make me feel better about my choice I guess. Maybe I'm trying to justify my choice.

Thanks for reading!

Hello.

I/we would like somebody to tell me how I/we have abused the system

I have lived frugally and saved, declared every penny and assisted my dh with first his S.E then small business for at least 20 years without gaining anything financially.
I didn't want to work for an employer, that is not abusing any system. Childcare was also not something i agree with for me and my family and was not easily available all those years ago.
I could have taken payment as his book keeper all this time and I have been told that as the family income would have remained the same been entitled to more tc as an employed person in my own right. Believe me this has been tempting at times listening to the evilness from some wohp who believe you don't have a right to be sahm.

I'm still waiting for the robust evidence which proves caregorically that attending nursery is harmful for children.... Though tbh even if someone provides a link, we could play tennis batting back and forth because other studies will 'prove' the opposite.

People need to be aware that all research is carried out through funding and it is often difficult to eliminate bias. And most importantly, any research will be carried out on a sample of families, who each have their own particular context and set of variables, and frankly as each family is unique they are far better making their OWN decisions

janey

I'm not sure if you are asking me or somebody who said this upthread or even a different thread? Wasn't me, don't like them for me, but know theres some good ones and bad ones. Certainly wouldn't say harmful to dc

Exactly

The fact remains childcare will be damaging/negative for some children,it's positive for those from disadvantaged families and I'm sure many others.

Children,families,parents differ and have different needs.Both should be supported,however at the moment both aren't and sahp are actually being prejudiced against by this gov as pointed out by Vincent Cable.

Vince Cable is just as complicit in this as the rest of the government. It's all well and good for him to try and garner voters from mumsnet, but he is equally to blame. I don't like either coalition party. They are all deceitful, lying spin doctors. Bunch of hypocrites too. The same goes for labour by the way.

I don't think there is any point in worrying about whether someone has abused a system or not as we all have different views. As long as people operate under the law that is all they can do.

We have different views. I think children do much better when both parents work full time and that housewives damage the prospects of other women as employers see that no point in hiring women as they leave and live off husbands who earn more than they do. It is politically damaging to women if other women give up work and harmful to our daughters. I am obviously very glad that Cameron the feminist is helping the anti housewife feminist cause with his changes and that is all to the good.

Cameron won't be glad in 2015 when he's booted into oblivion.

I think the main thing is the the child has a loving responsive carer most of the time. Preferably a small number of close carers that are consistent. So the quality of care is very important. DD1 was in a very good nursery but there were no tiny babies just older toddlers (16 months+). I did feel that 8-5 everyday was too long though and it was very 'regimented' even though was a fab nursery with mature staff. DS3s pre school is great but wouldn't want him there for long days every day. Each child is different though. Some kids love after school clubs while others hate it. However that is my personal view, others may feel daycare all day is a good thing for their child.

I still don't think anyone has answered why it is bad to SAH but not bad to work few hours/p/t. Isn't that sexists/bad role model also? Why should the man work longer to allow you to work less/have more 'leisure' time. Men/women will never be 'equal' in the workplace unless women also work full time after all..maybe they don't want to after all.

But xenia ... if either parent can have time off to provide child care then that arguement doesn't work. As employers will be hesitant to hire anyone, male or female, of child bearing age.

"and no one lies on deathbed regretting achievement and approbation"

Most older people gain perspective and come to realise that public achievement and external approbation are not very important.

Amen to that George.

It's the quality of the care, whether at home or in daycare, which is important. The number of hours in daycare also has an impact.

Scientists like to think that they can provide useful answers to society's pressing questions, but the truth is, some questions simply can't be answered definitively by science. The question about the effects of daycare may be one of those.

There are too many variables to find a definitive answer, as the article linked to above concludes.

It's another question where there are as many answers as there are parents and children.

Some children thrive with extended family, others suffer. Some thrive in nurseries, others with childminders. Most children thrive within their own families - but as we know only too well, some are miserable and neglected.

Xenia.

I understand your point and you are entitled to your opinion. From a feminist view I see that women fought long and hard to be able to have choices.
My daughter as you know from other threads about education has her life mapped out at 9 years old, it doesn't include sahm .
I think it important that all dc see us using our abilities to the best, whether that paid employment or not.
I do wish that people would open their eyes though and see that a sahp does not just sah.
Apparently it is acceptable to volunteer as a sahm but not volunteer to assist your dh with his work/business.

It is politically damaging to women if other women give up work and harmful to our daughters.

It is more damaging to be dictated to by others. Particularly when one woman does this to another. Familes make choices. I hope that those choices will become more equal as more women earn more and men have to decided whether they will work f/t, p/t or not at all.

If you feel that in your family both partners should work then that's right for you. It doesn't make it right for everyone, in every situation.

morethanpotatoprints - it is also acceptable to volunteer as a SAHM in an organised/institutional context but not to be, quietly, a good friend and neighbour.

On the "harmful to our daughters" claim - I sadly know rather too many daughters of WOHMs who have ended up in psychiatric units on prolonged stays due to pressurised family life. I know zero daughters of SAHMs to whom this has happened.

It all comes down to what YOU want, what others think is irrelevant and bears no meaning on your life.
You like, and can afford being a sahm, good keep up with it.
You are bored and YOU want more fulfilment, look for work.

Only listen to yourself and your life will be the way you want it.

Cameron the feminist now you're having a laugh, Xenia

[[http://www.fawcettsociety.org.uk/the-impact-of-austerity-on-women/ "... women are bearing the brunt of the cuts to public spending, with record numbers of women out of work, the majority of welfare cuts coming from women?s pockets and essential services under threat, with women expected to plug the gaps.

As a result, we face a future of fewer women working, more women living in poverty, the gap in women?s and men?s incomes and earnings widening, women?s financial autonomy weakened and women?s basic rights to safety and justice under threat. The final outcome is a UK where far from continuing to move forward on the path to equality, we are now going into reverse."]]

I think this may be of interest to many on this thread!

There are many ways to maintain a CV when a SAHM- my own SAHM status is not a choice (am a carer) but my CV has not remained blank: I have acquired training, qualifications (including a degree and postgrad), some voluntary hours and a saleable hobby.....

Families differ and decisions must be based on circumstances: the partner of a shift worker living many miles from family and whose own employment has been in a role requiring out of hours work will face different choices to someone working office hours whose parents live nearby and are willing to provide all childcare (as my parents did for me when I lived in my home town, they were younger, and I had the only Grandchildren). A family may have a partner who travels and a trailing spouse, which has all sorts of difficulties associated- there are two many variations for anyone to judge.

Personally I'd like the system (including the carers system) to recognise families where employment is shared- two part time jobs- as a viable and productive model that can give the best of both worlds, especially for shiftworkers and those with limited childcare options- but sadly that is not the case.

I don't believe either WOHM or SAHM to be directly harmful as long as a child is raised with love and quality care.

I don't know that it is always politically damaging, logic dictates that if a parent gives up work for whatever reason then it will be a woman in 50% of cases when all else is equal- but I'd like to see an end to the assumption it MUST be the mother who stays at home, and I am seeing a rise in stay at home fathers in my area, a fairly affluent village, although I do not know if that is by redundancy or choice.

I never expected to be a Carer / SAHM, but I am good at it and enjoy it and DH finds it very suffocating. He HAS held the role though, when I ahd a contract I adored and did not want to pass up, and I hope our boys have learned from his example that parenting is an equal responsibility.

Mind, it is probably easier for us too be equitable with roles as our earning power is roughly equal; it's also different in that my 'choice' ended up amounting to residential care for my disabled teen or becoming a SAHM.

I think if people really want to progress the cause of feminism, it is best done through fighting for better pay for women and equal chances of holding a decent job. That buys people choice, and choice is the key.

I certainly do not believe children of SAHM do less well; my eldest two are early teens but certainly academically they are thriving and happy, which is all I can base it on right now. My own mum was a SAHM and despite growing up on a rough council estate, my sisters and I are all well educated, and (in my case until I became a carer) have good jobs and steady relationships.

The question a feminist would ask is why is it the woman who might "help out with her husband's business". Why are women so useless they cannot found their own businesses in which their husbands might help? Why the constant sexism - man as provider, woman as domestic servant?

Feminism is mostly fought on the home front by forcing men to clean the loo whilst you attend the board meeting or requiring sunny Jim to get home on time 3 nights a week to collect children from nursery rather than requiring mummy's career to be put on some kind of silo side track.

On tax evaders - not avoiders - HMRC just published some names...

www.hmrc.gov.uk/defaulters/defaulters-list.pdf

Good posts, Peachy.

I'm a sahm with school aged children aged 5 and 7. I want to work as we desperately need the money we are constantly living off a permanent overdraft transferring money over from our savings which will soon be gone and it only gets marginally better when dh gets paid every Monday. Then the cycle starts again ! I need a job but haven't found one. I also know that if/when I get a job I will have to do the lions share of the housework and childcare as dh leaves the house between 6 and 630 am every morning and does at least 12 hour days