Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to be a sham even though I can't afford it?

501 replies

Picoo · 21/06/2013 20:11

I would really like to stay at home with my DS I don't really enjoy my job and I would like to be a full time mummy. The thing is we could only just about afford it. We would have to pay interest only on our mortgage, give up insurance such as health and maybe house insuranc my husband would have to work longer hours, etc. We would be pretty poor, and we have zero savings, but at least I would be with DS.

Is it crazy to live a poor existence but be there for DS, or should I go back to work and be more financially secure?

OP posts:
AnnieLobeseder · 23/06/2013 20:04

The childminder who had DD1 from 4 months to 1yo is still in touch, asks for pics of DD and misses having her around. DD1 turns 8yo next month. The CM definitely loved her and still thinks of her 7 years later. All the nursery workers at both DD1 and DD2's nursery cared very deeply for them. Perhaps it wasn't love, but certainly a great deal of affection and kindness, which really is good enough for those few hours a day. Then they get the full-on parental love for the rest of the day.

I'm baffled by people who think that childcare is done by heartless strangers.

SizzleSazz · 23/06/2013 20:05

I am definitely not Mary poppins but I love my children and do the best for them I can.

I am not Peter Andre either

janey68 · 23/06/2013 20:05

Stepaway- your point is perfectly clear. You choose to leave your child with a cm believing that it isn't as good for her as being with you would be.
That's fine. Your choice and none of us are trying to dictate that you do otherwise.
Just stop assuming that all of us who use childcare feel the same as you do.

wordfactory · 23/06/2013 20:07

stepaway it might indeed be that having a SAHM is better for a baby/toddler but in the long run will it matter?

I don't think so.

I didn't use much in the way of childcare, due to an unusual set of circumstances in the early years and then settling on a career that means I can work flexibly from home.

Are my DC any more wonderful than their mates? I don't think so. They're all lovely teens. Smelly and loud and food dustbins. With great plans and ambitions and a huge love of their phones Grin.

I have no idea which ones had a SAHM, or a nanny or a child minder.

AnnieLobeseder · 23/06/2013 20:09

Perhaps you do have a superiority complex, stepaway.

Personally, I'm well aware that most people do a better job of looking after my DDs than me. Poor little tykes, they're stuck with me! Smile. But I do my best anyway, and they seem happy, clever, well-adjusted and healthy enough, and we certainly all adore each other. Not sure anyone could ask for or expect more, really.

agendabender · 23/06/2013 20:17

I am currently a SAHM following a nervous breakdown. We can barely afford it, and live in rented accommodation. However, our quality of life has massively gone up and I am able to do things that save us money, so our outgoings are lower than before. However...I am making an effort to create some self-employed income, with a little success; we have very supportive family who appreciate our reasons for making this choice; and DH has fantastic job security and prospects, even if his salary isn't huge. We don't have foreign holidays other than staying with family, but we have weekends away at friends', premier inn stays for weddings etc.

You need your insurance. Have a look at your budget, and see what you don't actually need, only want.

Jinsei · 23/06/2013 20:18

I'm baffled by people who think that childcare is done by heartless strangers.

Me too. Our nanny ceased to look after dd over four years ago, but still regularly makes a journey of over 300 miles to see her, at her own expense. Why she would bother doing this if she had no bond with my dd escapes me.

Obviously, she doesn't love my dd in the same way as I do, but that's beside the point. My dd's teacher doesn't love her either, but I happen to think she is better placed to educate dd than I am.

We don't have to be with our kids 24/7 for them to be secure in the knowledge that they are loved.

And whatever is wrong with your eldest dc, stepaway, may be purely a matter of coincidence. You certainly can't extrapolate from your own narrow experience to make sweeping judgements about everyone else.

MummytoKatie · 23/06/2013 20:24

Out of interest how many people on here who are arguing the WOHM viewpoint are not proper committed FT WOTM?

raises hand

I'm currently on ML and will be for over a year (as I did with dd), only work 3 days a week when I do, don't work long hours when I do deign to turn up and have more than once found myself arguing the PT/SAH viewpoint to Xenia and co.

I don't think there is a huge split between WOHM and SAHM. I think there is a huge split between those who judge others choices on this topic and those who accept that different things work for different families but the vast majority of us our doing what we think is best for our dc.

BlackholesAndRevelations · 23/06/2013 20:28

I'd also comment that my wonderful cm definitely does love my children. Yes not like their parents do, but still... They see her home as their own, and do genuinely love going there (I know my children and I know this to be true!)

The nursery otoh.... Starting to have my doubts about that one... Was never a huge fan of nurseries but chose one for a variety of reasons. Now, however, it looks like my suspicions might have been confirmed.

angeltulips · 23/06/2013 20:30

It also baffles me that the hardcore sahms make the logical leap from

"It is always better for children to be raised only by their parents"

To

"I must completely stop working for years at a time to ensure my dc are cared for"

My DH and I share both care of our children and our finances. Feels much more rewarding - not to mention less risky - for both of us that way. Yet somehow I'm guessing that a lot of these judgey sahms wouldn't be happy if they were the ones out at work all hours to enable their DH to care for their children. (Yes yes I know, it just made "more sense" for it to be done that way - amazing that.)

OP - really ehat the others said. If you can't afford insurance, you can't afford to stop work.

Jinsei · 23/06/2013 20:32

I'm a FT WOHM Mummy, and always have been (apart from mat leave). However, I've always worked very flexibly so have enjoyed most of the benefits of working PT.

DH was a SAH for around a year, and now works PT. We haven't used any paid childcare since dd was 3 and she is now 8.

flowery · 23/06/2013 20:34

"I don't think there is a huge split between WOHM and SAHM. I think there is a huge split between those who judge others choices on this topic and those who accept that different things work for different families but the vast majority of us our doing what we think is best for our dc."

Completely agree MummytoKatie

peteypiranha · 23/06/2013 20:34

I have had 3 different jobs, and 2 different children and have always worked but in roles where my children are with me. I have done part time, full time the lot but still think people who say children who are without their parents in childcare settings are all damaged in some way.

peteypiranha · 23/06/2013 20:38

Are ridiculous. My last two words should say!

janey68 · 23/06/2013 20:38

Angel tulips- completely agree.
DH and I made a positive decision that we would always try to achieve a good balance between us both working and having child/ home responsibilities, rather than one of us having to work stupid hours to facilitate the other not working! It actually seems a very logical way to live doesn't it, given that men and women are equally capable of having careers (and equally capable of looking after the home and children )

Wishihadabs · 23/06/2013 20:41

Us too Janey

daftdame · 23/06/2013 20:47

It is just that some career paths demand working stupid hours at some point...something's got to give......

peteypiranha · 23/06/2013 20:49

Most dual income couples I know only do at the most 40 hours each. Whereas one with just the dh working the dh often does more. It depends what both want.

Jinsei · 23/06/2013 20:50

It is just that some career paths demand working stupid hours at some point...something's got to give......

Yes, that's true. Personally, I have chosen to work in a sector where I earn a bit less but have absolute flexibility. It's worth the difference in salary as I value my work-life balance.

Shitsinger · 23/06/2013 20:52

Me too !
Love the fact we have both had a lovely time with our children and enjoyed our careers.

janey68 · 23/06/2013 20:56

It is just that some career paths demand working stupid hours at some point...something's got to give......
Yes, true, and that's why thinking these things through and discussion with one's partner are supremely important.
In some careers, putting in heavy hours early on the career ladder can lead to greater autonomy and flexibility later on...hence some women choose to wait until a little later to start their family so that they have an established and flexible career.
Other careers demand heavy hours, travel etc right through - so it's important to factor this sort of thing in when making a career choice. Careers don't just happen out of nowhere! I made a conscious choice to opt for a career which is interesting and worthwhile, pretty well paid but but not ridiculously high money and ridiculous hours to match. I didn't want to have a career where I'd never get much time at home. Neither did my DH. That's not what we want for our family life.

MummytoKatie · 23/06/2013 21:04

janey Are you actually me? That is pretty much exactly the choices we made.

AnnieLobeseder · 23/06/2013 21:13

daftdame Sun 23-Jun-13 20:47:24
It is just that some career paths demand working stupid hours at some point...something's got to give......

At the moment, that's me. But DH is taking up the slack where he can, and luckily I live 10 mins from work so can easily pop home to pick up the DC, then back to work once DH gets home. Plus I get some extra hours in at the weekend.

One person in a partnership having to put in long hours doesn't mean that the other one needs to give up work, though. It just takes some give and take, learning to say "no" to your employer sometimes and being creative in your work patterns.

At the moment I am ruthless, both with my job and with myself, about what I am capable of fitting in and what I'm not. It's not going to help anyone if I burn out completely. Only another 15 months until normality resumes!

daftdame · 23/06/2013 21:20

annie I get your point but it depends on the career, how much support you have near etc.

DH worked away at times, we lived away from parents, the work I had done previously wasn't enough to compensate for the child care. I wouldn't want it. There are a lot of different situations out there...

We are well matched because I am totally happy not working.

Jinsei · 23/06/2013 21:22

It's certainly true that putting in the time and climbing the career ladder pre-children can give you a lot more flexibility later on. As "the boss", I can pretty much decide my hours and work at home when I want to. I try as hard as I can to extend that flexibility to others in my team, but it isn't always possible for those in more operational roles to work as flexibly as I can.