Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

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?

431 replies

bronya · 05/12/2013 17:22

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?

OP posts:
handcream · 07/12/2013 16:50

You know what keeps coming up in these threads - the fact that childcare is SO expensive. I am in the £50k salary banding. I have always worked full time and so has my DH. I was talking to a colleague who has just had a baby. She currently lives in the North and is looking to come down to the Redhill area. She has been quoted £80 per DAY for her child (she only has one).

That is £1840 per month!! Times by two if you have two children!

No wonder it isnt worth it. My children are older and ironically we decided that if we could afford childcare we could afford private schooling which is the route we have gone down.

What is wrong IMHO is the state paying you more the more children you have hence these large families which the state is effectively supporting.

Lets deal with child care costs first and stop throwing money at the feckless families who see that the more children you have the more you can get out of the state.

ItsIgginningToLookALotLikeXmas · 07/12/2013 18:31

Heartbrokenmum I hope you find something to suit you soon Smile
Being at home isn't really (these days) a lifelong choice for many women, I think it is important to remember that even if you stay at home with dcs for 20 years, you're likely to have 25 years of working life available (20-65 - or more!) and how you spend this may be restricted if you have been out of the job market for a long time.

Heartbrokenmum73 · 07/12/2013 18:54

Sorry Pagwatch - I wasn't talking about you.

It's all the 'oh, other people are raising your kids for you' sanctimonious crap that I can't stand, and it always comes up.

And this:

Lets deal with child care costs first and stop throwing money at the feckless families who see that the more children you have the more you can get out of the state.

is downright fucking offensive! There are a handful of families who operate like this. And haven't they just capped benefits? Stop reading the Daily Mail ffs.

MoreThanChristmasCrackers · 07/12/2013 19:02

I think "having it all" is however you want to see it.
I think if you are happy with your life then you have it all whatever you decide to do.
To me it is about being satisfied with your lot, not needing or wanting more.

Minnieisthedevilmouse · 07/12/2013 19:04

Completely lost. Think I agree. I have kids therefore I am a mother. I will work when we need it for what we need. Today I'm at home but tomorrow? Well tomorrow I'll worry about tomorrow.

Our house our life our choices our feminism. Hth

Us parents, we are kind of amaze balls dontcha think?

Xxx

Retropear · 07/12/2013 19:21

Sorry Handcream I don't think the state should pay for childcare for unlimited children.

Plan,save,wait,have the family you can afford,use the new parental leave,look into flexi hours,be creative.......It is temporary and parents are now getting more than enough help with it.This wah,wah,wah childcare is expensive is quite frankly going me the pip.

Decent childcare will cost,it's the most important you'll pay for.The state shouldn't be responsible for your kids anymore than the few families of 10 kids on benefits you mention.

MoreThanChristmasCrackers · 07/12/2013 19:24

I agree with Retropear, it isn't for the state to pay for childcare, especially as tax credits are being phased out.
It should be the same for both sahm/wohm, we are all the same and neither deserve more than the other.

Retropear · 07/12/2013 19:33

Exactly kids cost,we all know that before we have them.Most sahp I know have saved,planned,waited or are creative with hours.None of us have millionaire husbands and all will be wp eventually.

The sense of entitlement from some wp on MN(not in RL I hasten to add) is laughable especially when you consider many wp pay little tax,have their salaries topped up and expect unlimited childcare for unlimited kids on top.

Entitled much.Hmm

Chunderella · 07/12/2013 20:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

handcream · 07/12/2013 20:23

Can I clarify. I don't believe the state should pay for childcare or bigger houses, or more benefits the more children you have.

MoreThanChristmasCrackers · 07/12/2013 20:26

Either all parents should be paid to raise their dc or none should.
Then if both parents want to work and pay for childcare they can. If others want to have a sahp they can.

thenamestheyareachanging · 07/12/2013 21:12

heartbrokenmum, I'm sorry you're in that situation, I hope you find work soon. But I can't agree with the impression that all SAHP's have rich husbands who can afford to keep them - we struggle, and the whole family have made real sacrifices to have a full-time parent at home. That's our choice (childcare for 3 would probably cost more than I'd earn, but that's not the point).

Home Educating here, so school not an issue. But if I was working, I wouldn't be less of a mum - but I wouldn't be doing the work of a parent full-time, so I wouldn't call myself a full-time mum. No judgement there, because I have worked in the past. And then, I wasn't parenting all day.

ItsIgginningToLookALotLikeXmas · 07/12/2013 21:44

Re parenting. Am I parenting right now while they are asleep? Am I parenting while I stick cbeebies on so I can change the beds, or have I switched from parent to housekeeper at that point?
Parenting surely refers to the work of being a parent, as opposed to childcare, babysitting etc.

Philoslothy · 07/12/2013 22:29

Mine are either in bed or out, to be fair I am not parenting , I am getting squiffy on cava.

HappyMummyOfOne · 07/12/2013 23:17

"I agree with Retropear, it isn't for the state to pay for childcare"

Ahhh but you'll happily take tax credits for doing nothing but begrudge tax payers help with childcare Hmm

All child related benefits should be scrapped then everybody is on an equal footing and responsible fully for any choices they make.

Lifeisforlivingkatie · 07/12/2013 23:39

Is this to say dads who work are not fathers?

JohnnyBarthes · 08/12/2013 00:11

thename if your husband is earning enough money for five people to live reasonably, he's on a bloody good salary. That or you have no housing costs. Either way, you're wealthy.

If you're really struggling financially then I suggest you stop indulging yourself and get a bloody job if at all possible.

Retropear · 08/12/2013 07:37

Thename hasn't mentioned struggling and if she has so what.Hmm

Many families with a sahp are not on a huge income or getting tax credits(no tax credits here thanks)utterly sick of this assumption.If it was so great financially more would be doing it.Many will be on low and middle incomes.Having a sahp is a financial outlay.

Tax credits,help with housing,financial help,zero housing bills or very low mortgages are financial benefits that many families(both those with a sahp or 2x wp) can and do enjoy whilst keeping quiet about it on here.One size doesn't fit all.

The fact is many on one income find it hard.Having kids costs and you choose your financial outlay- a sahp or childcare.No choice is more worthy or deserving of help,sorry.

superstarheartbreaker · 08/12/2013 07:49

It takes a village to raise a child. I'd go nuts if I didnt work but each to their own.

JohnnyBarthes · 08/12/2013 11:13

Retro, I get pissed off with the claim that by making a few sacrifices, we could all afford to have a SAHP. The same argument gets trotted out on private school threads - the insinuation being that if we were less materialistic and shopped at Lidl, we too could choose to put our children first.

It simply isn't true. You need a substantial salary to provide a reasonable standard of living for several people. All the frugality and and romantic earth mummy skills in the world can't make up for the fact that housing, energy and food costs money. This is quite apart from the fact that, for most women, long term SAHMing is bad news. I don't think it does children much good either, but that can be mitigated more easily.

Chunderella · 08/12/2013 12:13

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Heartbrokenmum73 · 08/12/2013 14:19

Why are my words getting twisted?

I'm a SAHM myself (as I've said). I'm not having a go at SAHP's, or picking up on people who earn plenty.

My beef is with the (small minority) of posters on threads like these who get sanctimonious about 'who is raising your child while you go to work'. They are the ones I have issue with. Just because they have chosen/can afford that lifestyle, that doesn't mean they get to have a go at people who choose otherwise, or don't have the choice.

I wasn't, at any point, having a go at SAHP's in general who choose/can afford to stay at home - just the ones who lay on the guilt about other people not raising their own kids.

scottishmummy · 08/12/2013 14:30

I bring up my own children Also work ft.there's no conflict.
It's a false dichotomy to suggest only housewives bring up their children
Housewives dont have exclusivity on bringing up kids.

jellybeans · 08/12/2013 15:01

'I don't think it does children much good either' (SAH)

Why would lots of/more time with a parent be a bad thing? It's judginess like that that causes the SAHP/WOHP debate. That would be like me saying I don't think WOHM do their kids any good..(I would never say that just using it as an example).

JohnnyBarthes · 08/12/2013 17:04

Fair enough, jelly. I do have a tendency to get a bit arsey on these threads, which is neither big nor clever, and I sometimes make unfair assumptions about SAHMs (and I mean Ms here, not Ps).

Essentially, I don't think it does children much good to have a parent overly focussed on them and on the home at the expense of other things. It doesn't do children much good to have parents who are overly focussed on work, either.

The money thing is also a biggie. Yes, childcare is expensive but by the time children are at school costs plummet. The children themselves however cost more and more. It isn't just about Xboxes or iPads, or holidays, it's about having spare cash to allow them to try riding or motorsports or to be able to afford a car so you can ferry them to swimming competitions, or to have a bit of expert tuition if they're stumbling a bit with maths.

You know that thing people say about being on one's death bed and never wishing you'd spent more time in the office? There's probably truth in that. But equally there are adults who look back on their childhoods and wish that perhaps they'd had a few more opportunities, a few less hand me downs. Might have forgiven their mum being away a bit here and there in exchange for getting to go away on holiday.