to think working parents don't 'do all the things SAHPs do plus work'?

[Sampanther]

I've heard this response an awful lot, particularly to that awful 'being a SAHM is the hardest job in the world' advert. I have worked outside the home and been a SAHM and I do not feel that working meant I did all the parenting plus work on top. For example, as a SAHM parent I'd deal with squabbling, tantrums, discipline, naps, take them to parks/soft play etc and help them to play nicely with other children, cook with them, do painting and play doh and so on.

As a working parent I had an hour of getting them ready in the morning, dropped them off at childcare, then an hour of winding them down and putting them to bed at night. I could eat and go to the toilet in peace during the day, the house was tidy and needed little cleaning as we were rarely in it and I had very little to do with discipline etc.

I'm not trying to say working parents don't parent, because obviously they do but AIBU to think parents who work fulltime don't 'work and do all the parenting as well'? I don't get why working mums respond that way and think they're right but if a working husband came home and said to his stay at home wife that he does just as much parenting as her then I'm sure mumsnet would not agree.

We met at uni and were earning around the same but in different fields.

I have a very reasonable dp who was willing to give up work.We both wanted a sahp.I however wanted to be the sahp more,much more.Dp just didn't want it badly enough,I'd have shared.

I know loads of mothers like me.I also know several successful mothers in their field who would give it up in a heartbeat in order to have had/have more time with their dc.

I think at an individual level that's fine, if the father is happy for the mother to have the 'lions share' of time and hands on care. But many fathers do want to spend time with their children just as much as the mother does... There isn't necessarily any fundamental difference in that regard just because the woman has given birth, so that view needs to be listened to as well.

At a societal level, maternity rights have never been better: a mother can have a whole year at home with each birth. Even the new transferable leave is stacked in the mum's favour, in that she has to take a certain amount of leave first and then agree to 'hand over' some to the child's father.

I see more couples around me now who prefer more balanced earning/ caring roles and society should work towards facilitating this. Couples who prefer more polarised roles aren't being denied that choice: if they want the traditional provider/ carer roles then that option is already there

No,its not a given that women want to remain. At home with dc.its a social construct

I had no desire to remain at home,as I've said I booked nursery 12wk pg
I knew I was going back

Who said it was a given?Just chances are given the biology involved many will want to.

I'm not sure I agree with the biological argument... Many fathers, and many parents of adopted children or parents who've used a surrogate for medical reasons may feel just as strong an attachment to their children...

Anyway, the point is really (and seems to be agreed upon by most) that on an individual level it's up to families to decide what works best for them.

At a societal level, we have certainly made massive strides forward from the days when women had virtually no choice, and would be sidelined from certain careers and certainly expected to give up work on marriage and children, while society's expectation on men was that they were sole provider and that it was a bit 'soft ' to change a nappy or push a pram. Ever increasing maternity rights, paternity leave, regulated childcare, and indeed the fundamental expectation that girls are just as capable as boys at academic and career success, have enabled far greater equality than in yesteryear.

However, as indicated upthread, there is still some way to go before we see a greater balance overall in society, both in terms of women reaching the higher echelons career wise, and men feeling equally empowered in the home and with childcare

I too booked nursery place for youngest at 12 weeks pg - always wanted to go back to work etc & no regrets re going back.

I do agree with retro though, that if there was going to be sahp in our family I would want it to be me - and I'm pretty sure my husband would want it not as strongly as me (iyswim). (And he's a very hands on father and does the lions share of the housework too if I'm being honest ).

My husband and I wanted one of us to be at home with the children

If I wanted to work, childcare would have come out of our joint wages

I wanted to stay at home with my children for the first few years (it's been 15 so my definition of a few is obviously a bit flexible)

It's not just that dh can earn more than I. He does earn more.
But tbh. I don't know whether I'd choose for things to be different. I think, if I'm honest, I like it this way round.
I'm not neccessarily the best feminist example. But neither are my preferences neccessarily anti feminist. I can't accept that biology doesn't or shouldn't have it's place n determining some of our choices. I know I don't speak for everyone though.

And I never thought about having children much when I was younger. I had my DC1 when I was 39. I didnt see that to have children was a specific female goal.
But yes, I have always been more attracted to men slightly older (not scary age gaps ) who earn more than I do. I like the idea that a man is able to take care of me in a way.
But, as I am poorly skilled in some areas he also needs to be able to cook and to iron his own shirts.
Oh god, I know you all hate me.

I don't see it as a feminist agenda at all - though I suppose it is, if one wants to see it in a political context. I really just see it as women and men not being fundamentally different, certainly not in terms of their feelings about their children, and in terms of their abilities and aspirations career wise. I agree that there are biological differences (well- it would be daft to try to deny that!) but these are already taken into account when you look at rights and legislation... Mothers are Entitled to sufficient time at home pre and post birth to recover physically and ebf for example. Everything else can be done equally well, IMO by the father (if they want to)

DH is very capable of looking after our DCs. I don't think I am any better at caring for them.
But, I am still bf the youngest. And he can't do that. So there is still some "sense" to our current arrangement of me having more DC time than he has. Its not all folly, meeting my personal wishes IYSWIM.

Feminists have argued both cases, though, first wave feminists very prominently for equal access to education, the professions (because working class women long worked in many cases), and the vote. At the same time, less prominently, women also fought for and provided infant and maternal welfare, access to family planning services, financial provision for women as mothers (family allowances). A good hundred years ago, women were making these arguments and changing women's lives.

I should be clear that I don't think feminism or equality is about having to work; I do think it is about ensuring that women, as mothers, are valued and provided for as well, in and beyond the workplace.

That means recognising there are differences between men and women, that pregnancy and childbirth are physically demanding, as is bf during the night etc., and both working and SAHmums need support not to get dragged under by this. That means support in the workplace, as well as support for SAHMs so they are neither financially or socially vulnerable. Men can't be pregnant, have children or bf, but they can be supportive at an individual level and societal level, and take on full roles in other ways. Different does not mean unequal, it means thinking about ways of doing things which accomodate everyone.

Good post bluebell

I think that sentiment wanting greater recognition or remuneration for housewives actually is self defeating.
it buys into the ardest job in world sterotype. A role oerfectly suited to the wee womenfolk.so the men get in with working,and keep women in their place

Being a parent isnt a job.it's a set of tasks,an emotional engagement and commitment to nurture,feed,clothe.

I am not sure that is what I meant at all. Quite simply, if you have a woman, who is making a contribution to her organisation, whatever that may be, who has a baby and returns to work, is it fair or right to give her a full workload right away, or judge her appraisal as if she had not had that physical and emotional change in her life? Or is it better to discuss a managed return to work? If a woman has given up her job, it is not about paying for her services but ensuring that the still working partner pays into her pension, that they have equal access to money and equal opportunity to save; that separation does not mean poverty; etc.

It is about protecting women through a vulnerable period, not classing motherhood as a job. It HAS to be done, if we are going to have a future society, women NEED to have children. It is physically demanding, can have emotional and mental health effects and has financial consequences. 100 years ago having a baby was more dangerous than going down the mines. Protecting mothers is not about paying them and calling it a job, it is about a whole raft of measures which both ensure that opportunities remain and vulnerabilities are not exploited. I don't see how that is a wee woman at home narrative, my needs and adjustments as a new mother in the workplace are as important as the needs of a new mother at home.

Oh. And another good post bluebell
Too tired to be articulate. I'm off to bed.

'Couples who prefer more polarised roles aren't being denied that choice:'

it's not always a choice purely to be traditional to have a SAHP, sometimes it works better, for example, if a parent works away or shifts, to have a parent at home.

Also being a SAHM doesn't mean you sideline your partner!

it's not always a choice purely to be traditional to have a SAHP

Yes - this!

redsky's example (SIL had PhD may well have earned more than her other half but as other half was 4 year ahead with working and earned more chose the mommy track) was different in our case. I did earn less at the point we married. We agreed if one of us had to give up work as childcare did not work out then he would stop work as he knew I would earn more as I am in a better paid profession. So even though at that point he was earning more (for a year) and the year we had the first child we earned the same and even though the full time daily nanny cost 100% of one of our wages there was no question but that if one of us had to stay home it would be him, his choice as much as mine presumably on the grounds of simple economics.

The different with the SIL example though might be that I was sure I would earn a lot, wanted to and am ambitious and love my career (as well as gorgeous babies - I adore those too) and always knew I would work for the rest of my life and wanted to and I did not want the kind of life with lower income we would have had had I lived on his earnings. Had I married someone who was going to earn a lot more than I did may be it would have been different although I very much doubt it given my teens spent steeped in feminist literature and the feminism at home and that family history of my mother keeping my father for 10 years in the 1950s. We were never going to a family where women don't work. Even in the 1920s and earlier the women on both sides of the family worked.

Why do you assume that the almost inevitable consequence of "my teens spent steeped in feminist literature and the feminism at home and that family history of my mother keeping my father for 10 years in the 1950s" would be the decision not to take a SAHM break Maria?

It is quite possible to be 'steeped' in feminism and still decide to spend some (or lots of) years as a SAHP.

Surely measuring your worth by how much you earn or the status of your employees, is no more appropriate than measuring it by your status as a mother/ parent.

All this 'work ing mum vs stay at home mum' endless debate. All its going to result in is individual stories of 'I do this, I do that' whats the point? There are too many women wasting time looking for ways to compete with other women in an 'who is the best' way. You dont have to be 'the best' just do what suits you, life, your DCs best according to how you feel. Some mothers prefer to go out to work some do not, they prefer to stay at home. Its about time people got over that. It is what it is and in the scheme of life how much does it matter anyway?

Mistress

All the time wasted sniping at each other stops the real issue being addressed. The real issue is the massive sexism and inequality that still happens in most of our lives.

Yes Amanda It is the idea that paid work as the marker of status and thus feminist credentials that sounds so odd. And ongoing work at that.

If I had triplets tomorrow and gave up work for ever, my past work acheivements and projects wouldn't be erased. I'd still have my qualifications (and title in my case). So is it actually earnings that are considered the mark of a feminist?

But what if my whole-career earnings (inc SAHM years) are higher than those of my NDN who has never even taken her full maternity leave entitlement? What if i have ample savings from my own earnings to cover me for five years at home? Is SAHMing then more compatiable with feminism according to MariaJennys rules?

Or is contributing to family finances by monthly pay-cheque the only truly feminist way to contribute to the family (savings, capital, hands-on care just don't count)?

I do find this baffling.

I'm a SAHM and have been for a year since losing my job.

Today will go like this

Up at six with both chikdren
Do breakfast
Get washing on
Tidy house from the trashing having two young children (repeat x 4)
Soft play/group
Prepare lunch and dinner for later
Break up their squabbles
Change endless nappies
Walk dogs
Entertain children
Read with eldest
Baking with children
Ironing and putting away washing
Going to toilet with two children and two dogs in the bathroom with me
Put both to bed
Come Down and tidy again
More ironing
Lunch boxes for tomorrow
College course work

When I worked it was stressful but I could have a wee in peace, I didn't forget to have a drink or eat and if lucky I got a lunch break and some adult company. Both children were in childcare socialising and doing stimulating activities. House would be how I left in the morning. Dogs were walked by a dog worker and kids were shattered from nursery

Two very different things and cannot be compared. Both roles have been hard work but to me being a SAHM knackers me out way more than work ever did.