to think that this article is just another way to sneer at sahms? Motherism?

[usuallyright]

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/18/sorry-but-being-a-mother-is-not-the-most-important-job-in-the-world

Whilst I agree with some of it, I don't like the sneery tone. There are many similar articles around at the moment about Mothers who choose to stay at home.
Imagine if someone wrote a similar article about working Mothers.
It's just another excuse to pour scorn on Mothers and their choices, which are often complex decisions, not a knee jerk decision to be a martyr..

Chunderella- yes, it's a tough landscape out there. I reduced to 3 days a week for the pre school years, so basically out of my career of 25 years years so far I've done 20 years full time and just 5 have been three fifths of a normal week. Yet I'm still surprised at the impact that has on my pension projection- and I know that I'm in a relatively strong position; many women work part time or give up completely for a lot longer.
Pensions are the next big thing to hit many people, and it really pays- literally- to think ahead and try to imagine what you'll do when you're 60 plus and maybe you outlive your husband. a lot of people are woefully unprepared for it

Wp would rather be penalised in hours spent with their dc.

Sahp would rather be penalised in cash.

We're all different and unless we clone ourselves choices have to be made.

In RL parents make those choices and get on with it,not so much on MN.

There are lots of jobs you can combine the 2 retropear. I have had 4 different jobs and have always taken my children with me. I like it better than staying at home as there are challenges of the workplace etc but all your time with your children.

Oh and having worked out what we'll get in retirement(df is a financial adviser)we'll be better off just the 2 of us on our various pensions with zero mortgage than supporting the 5 of us on one very squeezed middle income.

Yup Chund but far better than being penalised in hours I'll never get back with my dc.

Lol my pension will be fooked anyway

That's a massive generalisation retro. Who says WOHP feel penalised through spending fewer hours at home? What matters to me is my children being happy , healthy, secure human beings.

The downside of working for me was what I stated above: it was pretty tough doing a full on professional job and for several years having no financial gain. Also, I continued bf for a long time after returning to work, which was physically tough. The amount of hours physically spent under the same roof as my children has not been an issue for me or DH

Clearly for you retro, being at home is the right decision because you would feel penalised if you worked. It really isn't like that for everyone else though. We're all different.

Think I said that Janey.

Some need to except that.

But you are penalised,you lose hours you'll never get back with your dc.You may not care but I don't care re extra cash.We're both penalised but happy with what we're missing out on.

I agree with some points in the article. Motherhood is usually separated from parenthood and fatherhood, and mothers can often feel judged for their choices, especially spending time away from their children.

I didn't find it sneering towards SAHMs, but maybe as a working mum I wouldn't be so aware of it.

But who isn't accepting it? I get that many, many people want to stay at home with their children. Do I wish society rewarded that a bit more? Yes. Do I wish it wasn't so disproportionately weighted towards women staying home rather than men? Yes. Does my heart break a little every time I hear of a sahm who's husband has now fucked off and left her with the kids, the house and no pension? Yes.

I can hold all these things to be true at one time.

And my pp wasn't that children hobble you. It was that being a sahp financially hobbles you. Childcare only bites for a certain amount of time, it is painful but ultimately you are still staying on the ladder and still increasing your earning power.

More women need to get that your earning power increases simply by showing up every day. Not enough of them do, imo.

I actually think phrases like 'precious times you'll never get back with your children' is a bit irritating, as if parents (mothers?) should feel bad for not wanting to spend every minute with DC. I know plenty of SAHP who may be technically with their DC an awful lot of hours but ignore them when at playground/soft play etc and get on with housework etc while DC do their own thing. It doesn't all look like 'precious time' to me.

Retro- you are projecting. You would feel its a penalty to not be with your children full time. Therefore you are a SAHM. Not everyone feels that way. I don't. I know that my children are just as secure, happy etc with me being a WOHM as they would be if I were a SAHM. Just as you know best what is right for your children.

Something is only a penalty if it is negative, or some sort of hardship. Can you not understand that for many people, they may spend different amounts of time physically with their children ( that's clearly a fact) but it isn't a penalty ?

And I hasten to add, I adore my children and they are delightful company- I just know that their life experience has been absolutely fine with parents who work. And I like my career so I choose to do it. Just like you choose to be a SAHM

I know SAHMs where the financial impact is non existent. Their presence at home has enabled DH's to gain senior roles. They are managing investment portfolios in SAHP capacity or projects with property that has not left them financially hobbled at all! If they were to divorce financial security is assured. I'm not suggesting that 'enabling' your husband's career is the 'right' thing a woman to do but it is not entirely accurate to suggest every woman loses out financially.

You are projecting,you( and posters)feel it is a penalty not to be earning a second income.I know I am happy on what we live on now and in the future,that no amount of money would make leaving my kids worth it.

You're also projecting and ignoring the fact that many parents want to be with their kids and can't.

Xmasbaby, there are plenty of parents that go to work and ignore their children on their return to, missing out on those 'precious moments'.

Not at all retro. I work because I really really enjoy it, not because I feel we 'ought' to have a second income.

Great I am a sahp parent because I enjoy it soooooo........

I am a SAHM and have a Masters degree but I don't feel like I've wasted my education as I value education for its own sake not just to allow me to have a 'career'. Equally, I just see my role now as a specific time in my life that is completely unrelated to what I was doing and for now that is that.

Yeap, that's what I said retro. I'm not telling you that losing an income is a penalty to you, because it clearly isn't. A penalty would be a negative thing, and you have made a decision you're happy with.

Likewise, us WOHP don't necessarily feel that not being with our children 24/7 is a penalty. It isn't negative, because our children are happy, secure and we are doing what we are happy with.

That was what I objected to: telling me I am 'penalised' for something which simply isn't true

Now , if we're talking about people who don't want to work but have to, and people who do want to work but can't afford to, then that's a totally different issue, and I have great sympathy with them

But please don't feel you have to imagine penalties which u
Just ain't there for lots of us.

And if being a mother is that important, why aren’t all the highly paid men with stellar careers not devoting their lives to raising children?

This makes my blood boil - so if men looked after the children it would validate it as an important job! FFS.

She totally misses the point and I suspect it is an entirely defensive article trying to justify her decision to work in paid employment. There are a million different reasons and choices involved here - entirely personal to each family set up.

However, looking after children all day is a job - even if they are your own children! Does a nursery nurse do a job? Does a childminder do a job? Does a nanny do a job? Yes - looking after children is a job.

Let's just take the judgy pants off and respect each others choices and not question them. Everyone has a different financial/social/career situation - it is none of anyone else's business.

I think so many of these comments and articles are born out of insecurities in the writers own position - guilt because they go to work/don't go to work etc.

And I object to being told I'm being penalised for something which simply isn't true soooooo........

However, looking after children all day is a job - even if they are your own children! Does a nursery nurse do a job? Does a childminder do a job? Does a nanny do a job? Yes - looking after children is a job

It's a job for them because the children they are looking after aren't theirs. I don't think raising your own children is a job, it's parenting.