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

[Picoo]

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?

[OrangeMochaFrappucino]

Keep getting sucked back into those thread! I'd love to stay at home with ds and can absolutely see how this would benefit him. However, this is not an option due to finances. What neither Amazinggg nor Stepaway have addressed is this - if you couldn't be the SAHP would you still be so insistent that a toddler needs a f/t parent at home? Because I would not be prepared to work long hours and be the sole breadwinner for ds to have a SAHP. Would you? And if one parent staying at home means the other is stressed, unhappy and sees little of their own child, can you really say that is best for the family?

I'd never criticise the choice to SAH and wish I could afford to make that choice myself. I can see how it benefits the child. But there are many varied and flexible childcare arrangements made by working families all the time that benefit everyone, including the children.