is staying at home a real luxury??

[btfly2]

and why many women feel the obligation to justify that they are stay at home mums. Im sorry, just feel very curious about your opinions and if aibu? Thank you!

rufus - that's interesting what you say about having a limit on your DH's wage in relation to you bring a SAHP.

Mine and DH's monthly take home pay is £3'300 and our childcare is £300 a month maximum which leaves us with £3'000. I know that we don't need that much money to maintain the house but it's important to us that every month we put decent amounts of money in our saving account, some in DS's bank account, some in our Holiday Fund account and also have money left over so we can treat ourselves and our DS to things.

Realistically I probably could work far less than 32.5 hours a week but it would mean we wouldn't have any money left over to do the things I listed above.

As has been said, having a SAHP is about sacrifices and I imagine in some cases the decision to have a SAHP must be made in relation to whether a family is prepared to sacrifice the lifestyle they want.

It is a luxury to have the choice of whether to stay at home.

Staying at home can be very boring if you dont like housework, going to work can also be boring and stressful. On the other hand if you have delightful, easy to manage choldren at home, or love housework, or an interesting stimulating job you may be happy at home or at work.

So no not a luxury in itself. Depends entirely on circumstances. Best to make sure your daughters get well qualified as possible to maximise their options.

I don’t think it’s a luxury. If you can afford to do it and want to then I suppose having that choice is a luxury. But the SAHMs I know (not many as in London where it’s so expensive) do find it a struggle with money and can’t afford to do everything they want. That isn’t a luxury to me, but it might be a choice that is worth it for them. But a lot of people just don’t have that choice.

Of course life is all about choices. Me and DH could probably just about afford for me to stop working. But it would mean no holidays, worrying about spending money all the time – and I don’t want that life. I also like my work so, for me, working is absolutely the best option.

But of course we could move to a smaller house, a less nice area etc and save loads of money on our expensive mortgage, but again we don’t want that life.

It’s a little luxury for me to be able to leave DS at his lovely nursery, read my book on the train with a coffee, go to work and have a lunch break!

"Staying at home can be very boring if you dont like housework, going to work can also be boring and stressful. On the other hand if you have delightful, easy to manage children at home, or love housework, or an interesting stimulating job you may be happy at home or at work."

so many things taken for granted with this post.

life is never this black and white...if only it was.

I can imagine it certainly feels like a luxury for the parent who is at work, never having to worry about rushing home for pick up, if the kids are sick etc.

But then that is tempered by them being the only earner which of course is a massive pressure/stress!

I would love a job. Can't afford childcare on what I would earn, so I'm at home. Is it a luxury if you've not got much choice?

jackiebrambles - you aren't wrong there. I've only been back at work for two weeks and my DH is realising how much things have to change in his life now seeing as there is no longer a default parent at home.

Yeah its definitely an adjustment.

We had to have a couple of conversations about that when I went back to work.

And every time when DS is sick there is a stressful conversation and diary comparison of 'what do we do about tomorrow' 'who has got the most important meeting' etc. It's hard.

And Dh earns double what I do but he still pulls his weight and does his equal share of leaving the office early to pick up a sick baby, working in the evening to make up lost time etc. It would be awful if it was all on me just because I earn less.

What do you mean by 'luxury?' .

I suppose for my DH and I it was a 'luxury' - we had our DS very late in life (40s), we had a low mortgage, DH was reasonably well paid and we lived in a fairly cheap part of the country. For completely different reasons I had left my job a couple of years before we actually had our DC (we had both had a break and done some travelling) so I didn't have a job 'to return to'.

We lived very comfortably on one salary - I didn't have to scrimp and save but you read on Mumsnet about couples who both work who have to budget very carefully etc etc so it depends totally on your personal circumstances.

Personally I loved being a SAHM at the time - I had time, money and energy to follow my own interests whilst DS was at playschool etc. We made a choice to just have one child.

However when circumstances changed and I needed to return to work in my 50s it was very, very difficult to re-enter the workforce and although I do now work part time it is nowhere near the 'level' (or salary ) of my previous job.

I absolutely hate it when people trot out the stupid phrase "being at home is a luxury".

For example, a £75,000 salary is about only about £44,000 take home after a pension contribution and tax etc. Not really a lot depending on how many cars you want to run and size of mortgage.

My salary before giving up work was £24K and that no where near covered x2 FT child care bills. Could have continued to work but would have been out of pocket £600- 700 every month.

Im at home out of necessity, Id rather be at work as i find it more stimulating.

Its lovely to have more time with the DCs and not have a rush to get to work/drop off/ potter around but there's loads of extra work created by being at home: cooking, feeding, sterilising and making up milk, cleaning up after the DCs, taking them everywhere etc, etc.

It can be as lovely as it can be dull!

I never, ever, considered it a luxury. There were advantages and disadvantages.

As parents we all weigh them up and make our choices to best suit our own families. Who'd have thought it, eh?

and why many women feel the obligation to justify that they are stay at home mums

I feel less under pressure now to qualify myself..but with my first under labour gov, it was work work work, mums get children into nursery and get back...lots of pressure.

or seemed to be in the media....

i dont care now, and would care what campaign any gov had going.

wldnt care

I'd love to be able to get a job but it's not viable for us even with tax credits. My dh works long hours which vary, sometimes he's out the door at 5am and not home till 7pm, other days he's out 7am till 6pm. He also frequently works away with very little notice. We have no one who could regularly help our with childcare so I could only work 9am till 5pm on weekdays and there aren't many jobs here that would fit with those hours and pays enough to cover the childcare above what tax credits would cover. During term time I'd be lucky to be left with any wage and school holidays would put us into massive debt.

We get some tax credits now which I hate relying on but I'm studying so that hopefully when ds2 is in full time school in can get a job with a decent wage which will cover childcare in the holidays and give us some money left over.

It's not all lazy sahm who can't be bothered to work like the benefits programmes would have everyone believe. It's a lack of affordable childcare and enough jobs with the flexibility to work from home on days when children are ill so that there isn't a shortfall in wages on payday that would mean bills go unpaid or not enough food or heating.

Not a luxury when your DD is disabled and needs 24 hour care and is hospitalised every 6-12 days and no employer will hire u.

But then I still have to justify to family members 5 years later and they still don't get it!

I imagine the cost of childcare over the school holidays is phenomenal in some families. Without any relatives on hand to do free childcare I imagine the costs soon add up.

My sister is a working single parent and the childcare for her two children over the summer holidays is about £2'000. It's insane.

My friend is a teacher and pays £58 a day for childcare, so almost £1'200 a month. She and her DH would love a second child but the choice is either they don't have one or they do but my friend then has to give up her career to be a SAHM. It seems so unfair. My guess is that when push comes to shove she would give up her career for the sake of being able to have a 2nd child but she'd be so, so upset about it.

It's seems so wrong that a woman has to make a choice between having a career or having a family.

""I think staying at home with children is a luxury now for many people - it didn't used to be in the 70s & 80s when the cost of living was cheaper""

I hady first in 1985. There wasn't Min wage, wages could be as little as £1.30 (there were no discount shops) and realistically, there wasn't the career progression for women with children that there is now, as well as no Parental leave. I know many women who worked as Care Assistants, Cleaners etc, who had to leave work in late pregnancy. Maternity rights didn't exist.

There was only Child Benefit and Child Care was unregulated.

Staying at home, for me wasn't a choice, I couldn't afford to work, as it wasn't for the women that I knew, even those with "Careers".

I know a few women who are in "Jobs" that they don't have a secure contract for, are only earning a fraction above Min wage and unless they are working over 35 hours, it isn't worth them working, when weighing everything up.

Thank ladies for all your replies!
First of all apologies for any mistakes as English is not my native language and I felt a bit shy about posting something at mumsnet but when I saw all the comments and answers to my questions...how can I say?? a big thank you :)

Second, if you see me posting similar or different topics at random, is because in my mind I imagine with many of you gathering around coffee and treats and chatting about things that normally I'd like to know but dont dare or feel shy to ask in person.
Im a loner type in general but its good to know that sometimes you can rely on a few girls for sharing thoughts, tips, opinions...

Finally I think mumsnet has been a revelation and Im so pleased :)

Depends in your situation. For us it would be a luxury. Dh currently earns £50k but rising to £80k from October time. If I was to stay home we could afford it but could we justify it. I would be unfulfilled not realising my potential.

Thinking further, right now, my working would be a luxury rather than not! If I price in childcare over the school holidays now DC1 is at school, I would make a loss or just break even on childcare and commuting costs vs my wage, so I'd be adding nothing to the pooled 'money pot' of our family. However, to do that, DH would have to do one side of pick up or drop off, limiting the hours he could work, limiting what roles he could go for (once you've got flexible arrangement, it's very hard to move to a new employer, and couldnt take promotion without longer hours than he does now), causing problems when one of the DCs is sick (either DH or I having to cover it, or call in grandparents who'll do odd days here and there but not regular care). And meaning all the little bits of family admin I fit in during the day would have to be squeezed into evenings and weekends - further reducing 'family time'.

All that for no more money - just some sort of personal fulfillment seems very luxurious and selfish - but it's something I'm struggling with at the moment, I've had enough of being a SAHM (I worked between DCs 1 & 2), but I've not seen any jobs in my old field that would bring a profit until DC2 gets the 15 hours free. While DH earns a high amount, we live just outside London and life costs means there isn't all that much left over after bills are paid, I can't justify working for a loss

(Although it would be lovely to be able to have that 25 minutes on the train twice a day reading in peace - I used to hate bumping into someone I knew and had to waste that lovely time making polite conversation !)

oh and the childcare costs was something we factored in when we decided to have DC2 and we accepted I'd probably not work afterwards - we arranged the rest of our life to mean we could afford to live off just DH's wage, because either way (me working or not) that's what we would have been doing.

Personally, I don't think it's a luxury, although it does depend on the individual's situation. Staying at home might be classed as a luxury if one parent is a very high earner and the other parent loves staying at home and they still have money for luxuries. However, if one parent is not so keen on being at home but has to because of personal circumstances, money, etc, then it's not a luxury. Similarly, if both parents work and earn lots of money and are happy with their situation, then I'd say that's also a luxury. However, if both parents work and one really wants to be a SAHP, then it's not really a luxury. I've been a SAHM for nearly 10 years now and I am getting a bit fed up of it now TBH. However, it does make our life easier in so many ways and it has enabled dh to earn a decent salary. I don't see it as a luxury for us though, as my career is over, I don't really have a particularly exciting life any more and there is not much money left after all the bills are paid. I am certainly not a lady who lunches and I have started to feel quite down about not having a 'life'. I find myself constantly reminiscing about my 'old life'.

Sleepy how is raising children unfulfilling?

I don't see it as a luxury.... It's just a choice like anything else. If people can't afford to stay at home when they want to, then don't have kids, or just get on with it...don't be a martyr about it (not generalising to everybody, just responding to the idea that people are so hard done by because they have to/feel they have to go back to work.)

in the majority of cases most people know what they are getting themselves into when they plan to have a family...I don't feel sorry for them. (If it's being implied that staying at home is a luxury then surely that means other people are worse off? ?)

I stay at home because I can, and because I don't want to put my baby in nursery, it's not something I would be comfortable with. However my career prospects suffer, we have less income, I get bored with the mundane house related chores and being a full time mum does drive me up the wall at times. But overall I am happy with the choice.

My personal experience (limited, granted) is that some people don't want to give up their lifestyle when they have kids, so don't want to cut back and therefore protest that they cannot afford to stay at home. Each to their own. But me making choices and sacrifices is not a luxury. Rant over.:)