To think that it's ok to want to bring up your children and to be a mother, just as it's ok to go out to work instead?

[bronya]

I was brought up to 'have a career' and to think about work not babies. I admit I'd be bored doing nothing, and love the tutoring that I do - but I have no wish at ALL to be the main wage earner and leave the childcare to someone else. When my DS was born, it felt like I was complete. I'm happier, have more self esteem and confidence than I've ever had. I've met many other mums who feel similarly. Surely, our choice is just as valid as those who are WOHM? The point of feminism was that we should have that choice - whichever one we choose is our decision, surely?

Um so wp constantly asking for a pat on the back and childcare help is ok but not the alternative.

Quite frankly I couldn't give a stuff re pat on the backs or a boot up the backside so long as both are treated the same.

I feel this age need a parent at home very often even more That was (almost) exactly my point, jelly. If you have been out of the workplace for a long time when your children are younger, it can be much more difficult to find good employment that allows you to work flexibly.

By keeping my hand in (well, FT which was a bit more than I'd have liked but needs must) when my child was at primary, either dp or I are able to be at home by 4.30 pretty much every day. I'm sure we're not the only family in that position. It's not a scenario that would have panned out the same for everyone, but I do think it's worth thinking longer term rather than assuming that primary age children need you at home all day everyday, then trying to get back into the workplace just as the affordable after school and holiday options disappear, your children become dearer and dearer, and actually it is you and nobody else that they need (not that you actually see much of them necessarily - it's the being available if needed that matters).

Who is whining for help with childcare? Never had any myself, we paid it all out of our own income, even when 2 x nursery fees = the equivalent of my income. Many people aren't prepared to do that - you often see it said on MN that 'there's no point in me working because all my earnings would go on childcare'. Well, that's fine, it's a choice, but don't complain and feel resentful when those who've stayed in the workplace have improved long term career prospects and higher pensions.

I do think there's a case for making childcare tax deductible on the grounds that its a cost directly related to earning, and it did seem mad that we paid for nursery out of taxed income and then the nursery was taxed again on it! But hey ho, that's how it was and I'm certainly not complaining. Returning to work after children was one of the best decisions I ever made. Presumably if you decide not to, you equally feel its a good decision so why complain?

Wp have got what they want,sahp who ask for the same are invariably put down.

I do think there's a case for making childcare tax deductible on the grounds that its a cost directly related to earning

No, it's a cost directly related to choosing to have children.

Who is complaining?

I have said what many sahp want.

I and nobody else on this thread have voiced resentment thanks for high flying careers or pensions Dp and I have fab pensions thanks and if I wanted a high flying career I 'd have it.I would however rather eat my own hair.

Soup dragon - yes I am aware of that. It's not tax deductible because you don't need to have children to do a job. I said I think there is a good case for making it tax deductible on the grounds that the majority of adult women and men have children and it would be a tax break (not a benefit) and is a cost as closely related to earning without being necessary to earn IYSWIM. I'm not expecting everyone to agree; just saying that I think it is something the govt could quite reasonably implement. However- they haven't, and as you rightly say, it was my choice to have children; we limited our family to one we can afford t

Oops!
Afford to raise without relying on any govt help. And I'm not complaining!

Every week when I take my DD to her swimming lesson 2 other mothers always come and sit near me.

Every week they have the same bloody conversation. Both used to be high fliers in the city. One has recently gone back to work part time, doing something completely different to what she did pre-DC. The other is a SAHM. Every week the mother who has recently started working again, asks the other mother if she is going to go back to her old job in the city. Every week the mother gives polite explanations about why she hasn't gone back to work - she would be out of the house for all her childrens waking hours how finding someone to drop her DC at two or three differenet schools would be difficult, etc, etc.

Neither woman can just openly accept that being a SAHM (or F) is a valid option!

I bet I have to listen to the same conversation next weekend.

I don't think WOHPs have it that easy, do they?

They're hardly drowning in good, affordable childcare (other than school hours I guess), are they? We were lucky in that ds's school had an after school club that cost us something like £16 a week (that plus flexible working) - but we were very fortunate in that in comparison to a lot of others.

I suspect people hugely over estimate how much money working parents bring home in tax credits, too.

It's only temp Johny though and lets not forget long term wp are far better off than us sahp left on the scrap heap.

Lynette I've heard that convo a few times too.

niteresting post mamadoc

.. interesting, even!

All the way through I've referred to SAHPing long term and being detrimental, Retro.

And I'm not saying you're on the scrapheap - I am saying that, realistically, it is far more difficult to get back into the workplace doing something that pays OK and has good T&Cs if you stay out of work for a long period of time. It pays to have a strategy.

Maybe we have strategies.

So what's stopping you OP? There's obviously no law against it. Like anything, there are pros and cons. I do think the cons are fairly substantial though. As for the social approbation, a very curious thing I've noticed is that is the very same friends or acquaintances who are the snootiest about someone's decision to stay home who are the first to ask you to help them out when their child care doesn't work out for whatever reason. Eg child is sick, can't possibly take a day off, it's only a head cold (hmmmm).

And given that most wp x 2 I know have 1 part timer on quite a low wage(which I could certainly match if needed) what exactly are the strategies such wp have that many a sahp couldn't match if needs be in a crisis.

I'm talking RL not MN or Condemville where all 2x wp go off to the city suited and booted,raking in silly money whilst working a 10 hour day in amazing jobs they love every minute of whilst the Norland nanny teaches Mandarin to the dc.

Janey

"Who is whining for help with childcare? Never had any myself, we paid it all out of our own income, even when 2 x nursery fees = the equivalent of my income. Many people aren't prepared to do that - you often see it said on MN that 'there's no point in me working because all my earnings would go on childcare'."

^^ This, exactly.

When I had my children, myself and my husband were just above the limit for tax credits (I'm not sure they were even there when I had my eldest). To stay in my job I had to work full time (no part time or flexi option) and mat leave was only 4 months the first time, 6 months the second, there was no such thing as childcare vouchers then, either.

Almost all of my wage went on childcare, I carried on working regardless because I was looking ahead to the long term bigger picture - I basically worked for free until my youngest was 3.

Because of this decision, myself and my husband carried on up the career ladder and are now in the position of not only "seeing our wages", but we are in a senior enough position that we can be quite flexible with work (ie I say I'm going to the sports day/school play etc, rather than asking if I could possibly).

So many people say they "there's no point in working because I wouldn't make any money", the point is that the money comes along later when the childcare days are gone.

I also just cannot comprehend why people believe SAHPs should be recompensed to stay at home? Why? Why should the country pay you to look after your own children? (That is a genuine question, not sarcastic - I really have never understood that argument).

Long term SAHP could be seen as a risk, same as working p/t or many other situations in life. Many weigh up the risks and decide it is worth taking to spend that time with DC.

For me I went through hell to have my kids (stillbirths, miscarriages, massive complications while pregnant and birth etc etc) I don't think I physically could have left them (the ones after my losses especially) even if I really wanted to (not saying this applies to all as everyone is different even in the same situation). Yes I take on a risk that it will be hard to find a job should I want or need one but to me it is worth that risk. I have minimized the risk by furthering my education through the OU and other financial insurances.

It would be great if everyone could do what they wanted and be happy and not judged for their choice.

Monica why should the country pay for others to look after your children?

Oh and re sports day my dp in his senior position just says he's taking the morning off,as does my sister,her part time husband and the other 100s of wp at sports day who may or may not have had a break.Even I managed it on my non taxable wage.

It's not hard.You read the school newsletter and then book the time off.

As have I.