to think children don't really care about 'work ethics' and would prefer to have a SAHP?

[Mingnion]

Well aware I'm probably going to get mightily flamed for this but here goes...

I have a 6.5 year old and an 18 month old. My husband that supported us sadly died last year and I plan to stay at home and on benefits until my youngest is at school. I have a degree from Cambridge and will put in what I take out a hundred times over in the future no doubt. We do not have a lavish lifestyle but my children are adequately fed, dressed and are very happy which is more important IMO. Six months ago I found a part-time job and the impact on my children was massive. They were miserable at having to go to nursery and after school clubs and I was miserable as I missed them. Now they are inexplicably happy. I know it is a common opinion that single parents must work so as to teach their children about work ethics but realistically, do you really think children will care? I'd say most children would much rather have a SAHP and in retrospect I'd have preferred my mum to have been home so her work ethics obviously didn't rub off on me. AIBU to think this way and plan to stay at home with my children until my youngest is school age?

If we are extending anecdote into data I can contribute a study here.

My 2DCs are grown up, I am in a traditional profession and have worked part time since they were small, initially 2 full days with childcare then, at senior school age I worked 3 short days in termtime and 1 day a week in holidays. They think it was just right, it suited them and it suited me.
Having said that DS's best friend had a SAHM, she gave up her career when she had children and never returned to it. Her sons think that was just right too.

DD's best friend's mum always worked full time, they are a close and happy family so she feels that was just right for them too.

The only young adults I know who do have some reservations are those who feel the decision was not made in their best interests but for other reasons e.g. the family where both parents had very challenging high powered careers, long hours and away on business a lot, etc. Although the children had everything financially and were always well looked after they missed their parents being around, at school events, etc.

Ultimately I think these things are very individual and, as long as the decision is made with the child or chidren's best interests at their heart, it is right whatever you decide but there is no "cast in stone" best way.

It's not really something that can be generalised. Some parents, single or otherwise, really have no choice whether they can work or not. For some parents, it might not be a purely financial issue, but might be the only way they can keep up their own sense of worth in order to be the happy parent their children need.

Very sane post.

And sadly, here we all are again, mothers kicking lumps out of each other about how we parent. OP couldn't have done better if she were a Daily Fail journo on the trawl for controversy...

Oh, hang on, you don't think...?

That's sobering, Ubik. What was your old industry? Although don't say if it would out you.

I see plenty of children who cry their eyes out at the end of school when they see they're walking to the after school club and not going home with their parent/to a friends for tea etc.

Mine don't use after school clubs ...but I have never seen children sobbing on the way, they seem to be having a fine old time with their pals when I walk past

OP- I believed you when you said that you are happy with your choice to not work, because you feel that for your children it's the right thing

However, as you now seem to only be content with your decision if you are convincing yourself that the children of WOHP are somehow damaged, or less happy, or will be less successful, I'd urge you to think carefully about your decision. You're obviously not as content as you seem.

"Your mother told you were infertile" (which you believed), you're shit at maths, science, logic, general knowledge - yet somehow despite all of these failings you allegedly attended Cambridge, were awarded a degree and will walk in to an amazing job. Good luck with that princess!

At my DD's school all the DC are thrilled when their parents (mother or father) pick them up at lunchtime or in the afternoon. The smiles are clearly visible.

Many DC go to the canteen and are picked up by nannies/childminders/au pairs and some go to the after school club. Their faces are not full of joy.

I stand by that. I do not know any children that would rather their parent worked and they went to childcare. I do not know any adults had a happy-to-be-there parent at home with them who wished their parent worked instead.

You are wrong.
I had a happy to be there parent. I wish she had worked.

I envied my friends their mums in suits, who took them to plays and dance class and holidays. I envied it from the age of 5 years old and as I grew into a teenager I became resentful of my mum who was there doing fun at home activities with my younger siblings. I was very academic from a young age, and top of my year of 500 in GCSEs. I was driven and ambitious and wanted nothing more than opportunities...to maybe have piano or a language lesson, the chance to go on the French exchange trip in Comp or the debating team residential...none of which I could, due to money restraints because my mum was at home.

It was my upbringing that made me determined I would work when I had my own children. I have taken a year of mat leave with each then they have gone to a childminder. Df and I are lucky - we both work full time but compressed shifts so they go to the cm for 3 hours 3 times a week.

My children don't even realise they are going to a childminder...I don't think they would recognise the word. The cm has children the same age, so as far as they are concerned they are going over a friends house for tea 3 times a week.

Should I chuck in my job and become a Sahm, my children would be devastated. No more going over their friends for dinner, no more swimming club or football lessons. No lovely holidays or class trips.

A few extra hours a week colouring in at home with mummy wouldn't make up to them what they'd lose out on.

I do think having a degree puts me in a better position to get a job than those on benefits who don't which was the original point.

Well, it may have been your original point, but what you said in a subsequent post was Yes, actually, I do believe that a Cambridge degree makes it more acceptable that I'm on benefits than someone with no qualifications, who is making no attempt to gain any or any experience or skills. You're all receiving more or less the same level of benefits. But some people currently on benefits worked for 20 or 30 years, paying taxes all the way, before their circumstances changed; they've put a lot more into the system already than you've had a chance to. And some are bettering themselves with study or voluntary work to make themselves more marketable - you don't know how many are doing this. They are individual people doing what people do: surviving. And they aren't costing a penny more than you are while they're doing it. So enough with the moral high ground over less "acceptable" non-earning. Your contributions will be taken into account as and when you make them. In the meanwhile, thank goodness, you are enabled to stay home to look after your children while they most need you. Good - but not better.

I worked in the media. It's very competitive but I had good experience, moved to another country and pulled casual shifts while the children were little. It wasn't enough. I'd say about 70 per cent of my former colleagues were made redundant. The positions are filled with students working for free and very experienced people doing 2 jobs at the same time.

Yes it is sobering.

I am due to finish my second degree this year and hope to do a PGDE. Working in a call centre has shaken me up though, it reminds me how easy it is to take a career for granted and how tough it is for people to find work. Lots of people with many skills, business/admin/languages who are working in shops, as carers and in call centres. It reminds you that the world does not owe you a living.

MummyPigsFatTummy, what I meant was that I think very few people earn enough top cover the cost of childcare, it's so prohibitively expensive. So I didn't see how anybody with more than one child is actually better off financially for working. Yes, if you're a high earner or have one child then you will be. Or if your children go to school, and you manage to find a job that fits in with school hours, or if you have family who provide cheaper / free childcare.

Most of my friends, in professional jobs, are not better off for working. That's all I meant.

Like most things it depends on the child and the parent. My older daughter just said to me this morning, actually, "it's much nicer now you have found this job, because you're less stressed." She's 11 and the younger one is less keen, but will enjoy all the plastic tat the job provides for her at Christmas, and actually loves nursery (I am very bad at imaginative play etc. so think she was bored at home, we would just spend all day doing jigsaws and gluing things which was frankly mind numbing). I have worked on and off with both of them and really I don't think working or not working was particularly 'better' for them (though once I became a single mum it was harder to cope with not working, because the level of income support is shockingly low and exes were faffy about maintenance). This is partly down to their personalities (older one was less happy in childcare because she is quite introverted, now she is older she goes to school and then comes to my work and waits for me in the reception doing homework- younger one loves childcare because she is a noisy wee menace), and partly down to the fact that I am not very domestic and hate cooking fancy meals, am bad at 'keeping house' and generally happier in a work environment for most of the day than being at home. If I was different or they were different, it would be different!

But I completely agree that preschool children especially don't need a 'working role model' or whatever tory shite they are spouting at the minute, because as far as they are concerned you are just going somewhere and unless you are a firefighter or similar how on earth can they relate to your work? (I do think that continuing with my job is good in terms of role modelling for older one to an extent though because I work in a technical/scientific role and tbh there are not enough women with kids in such jobs for it to be filtered down generations as a 'normal job' for women).

You have a social sciences degree, you have worked,how many years in total? Presumably not many as you're only 28 and your eldest is 6.

You seriously think after several years out of the emploment market, by which time there will be 1000s of other graduates competing, you will walk in to a highly paid job?

You have a Cambridge degree So it's more acceptable for you to choose to live on benefits?

And on top of all that you make a sweeping generalisation about working mothers. Have you the grace to admit your choice is being partly funded by them?

Thanks for answering my question,Ubik. A 70% redundancy rate is terrifying.

After being made redundant once, I've also had the experience that you have to take what you can get, and it can be a long and painful haul getting yourself back up the career ladder.

Cambridge doesn't do degrees in self awareness then...?

StealthPolarBear - it doesn't make me a martyr at all. I'm not sacrificing myself for the greater good - I'm making the choice to be WITH my daughter. It certainly isn't losing my career - it is gaining something far, FAR more precious IMO.

And what am I teaching my DD? That the whole point of feminism is choice. The ability to choose what is right for me. And how lucky I am to be able to be in a position to have a choice that is driven not by financial constraints but by what I wanted to do. And this is certainly my choice. Absolutely. My husband was 100% supportive of my decision - just as he would be 100% supportive if I wanted to work. We COULD do that. I CHOOSE not to.

The "work ethic" argument is dreadful because it confers moral superiority on something that doesn't necessarily have it at all. You can have an excellent work ethic without working at a paid job. You can have a dreadful work ethic (moral code) while raking it in.

I find myself agreeing with bonsoir there ^

Going out to work does not automatically mean you have a great work ethic, it usually means you have to work for financial reasons. You get some real lazy arses at work. I hate that moral high ground viewpoint.

What children probably benefit most from is happy parent(s), and if someone is in a job they hate, with no fulfilment, that's going to have much more of a negative impact than it would have a positive one simply because the parent is demonstrating a 'work ethic'.

OP I'm really sorry to hear about your husband - it must be so tough. I can totally see why you feel staying at home with your children is the right decision for your family.

I think probably most children given the choice would choose to have a parent at home, yes. But then again given the choice my children would probably choose to have sweets and chocolate for dinner every night because they can't see the full picture - similarly most if not all small children will not be able to appreciate the many factors their parent(s) has/have to take into account when deciding how much they will work.

With most parenting choices I find it best to decide what's right for my own family and leave other families to make their own decisions.

ThenSheSaid If she worked part time it is likely she would still receive benefits - most recipients of benefits are in work.

Leopoldina nice to meet a fellow history fucker

I am sorry to hear about the death of your husband.

However, YABU to assume one solution fits everyone. I would go out of my mind without my job. I like it! And as a child, my recollection is that life was much nicer when my mum was working - because she was happier and fulfilled, not climbing the walls with frustration (admittedly, it's hard to separate cause and effect in her case - she had mental health problems and was unable to work when they were bad, so it may have been the depression causing both the unemployment and frustration, rather than unemployment itself causing the frustration).

Ha ha ha- yes an Oxbridge education is most certainly due to an 'innate' intelligence, nothing at all to do with privilege, wealth and background? What a coincidence that all these exceptionally clever people decided to occupy the current coalition government??

Anyone else smelling a rat with this thread?

Or a fig roll?

Several, but it's a good debate so