"Oh I'm lucky that I don't need to work, financially"

[TerraNovice]

I'm going back to work next month and while chatting with other mums about it I've come across the above phrase a few times. Perhaps IBU but it sounds insufferably smug to be - so they married guys with money, so what? There's nothing wrong with saying you're a SAHM so why add the caveat that you've got a rich husband?

Split parental leave is not great for breastfeeding though.

Yes it is better than in the past, but we are a long way from equality. And many,many employers perhaps especially in high paying fields and in the context of people fearing for their jobs incentivise people working long hours, doing a lot of business travel and so on.

This makes it difficult for both partners to work and it is women who go PT, don't apply or aren't selected for promotions or quit.

These choices after DC are influenced by the social pressure on girls and women.

It's not compulsory. It doesn't change anything for couples who want the woman to take the full year off, or even give up work totally.

It's about extending choice, not making couples do something they don't want to do.

And I speak as a someone who is very pro breast feeding, and indeed I fed all mine long term despite returning to work when dc1 was 12 weeks.

I think people do talk about money in the context of whether they work. I am a WOHM and when people ask me if I considered being a SAHM I generally say it wasn't an option as we couldn't afford for me not to work. I guess I am side stepping the question in a way. Technically we could survive without me working but it would be tight. I'm not sure I would want to do it either. Saying it's for financial reasons makes me feel less guilty.

I don't think I'm that unusual in saying this so a SAHM acknowledging she's lucky to be able to stay at home would make sense to me.

Jilly my grandmother was a woman as you describe. Very well to do background, very well (university) educated in a science, then taken on by a massive company which, in those days, recruited bright young female graduates so their male employees could marry someone who "understood the importance of their job".

After marriage she found herself immediately out of work and very soon the bored stiff mother of 3 under two.

My grandfather had any number of expectations about a great cook, brilliant housekeeper, corporate wife, dinner parties, schmoozing etc.

My grandmother raised him a solemn two-fingered salute and wrote (bestselling) novels. They remained married but not happily. She did, however, lead the life she wanted to, despite being more "trapped" by her sahm status than most of us modern women are.

I suppose that is one reason why I'm not too worried about the sacrifices to my career sahming might cost me. I genuinely feel I can be here and do this and when the early years are over be elsewhere and doing something else. I think my gm was an excellent feminist too, despite her once-a-sahm status.

Ooh kitchen, now I'm starting to wonder who your gran might be!

Yes, hats off to your gm and would love to know her identity!

Did we really have no female scientists who had children of the age of your grandmother kitchentable? My grandmother certainly returned to her profession (doctor) and I can't remember it being especially remarked upon. There were less women in the professions then, but not none at all!

Back to the OP, yes, its an unnecessary thing to say. Some people defo feel to the need to "slip" in comments to demonstrate (their belief of) being well off or comfortable financially.

Im a SAHm because my salary, despite being a regulated professional (you know the sort, job title where you think you'd be well paid), didn't give me a lot left over after fuel/childcare and would have left me out of pocket by hundreds each month with our two DCs.

Lucky old me eh, DH earns much more so I can stay at home! I must drop that in every time the conversation spins round to jobs/occupation.

LinesThatICouldntChange, exactly, that's what I mean - if you can split the mat/pat leave between you no-one's had a year out, both of you have experienced a bit of what being a SAHP is like, seems a much more equitable position to be deciding who then stays at home with the kids if you want/need one of you to.

bigbluestars, yes I wondered about mentioning the bf thing too. I don't think we would have split it for that reason. But then I thought what proportion of people I knew, SAHM or not, who still bf much past 6 or 9 months. Not many So there are lot of people who could benefit from the option.

Fluffy, you sound like you feel it's people showing off their financial status - I can assure you it's far from that. Why would you need to show it off? It's obvious if you're not working that you can afford not to work. It's showing you appreciate that good fortune and that not everyone has the option. Doesn't mean everyone has to want the option or use it if they have it.

We have friends who are far far richer than us, that doesn't negate the fact I feel lucky to have the choices I do. Wouldn't it be a kind of inferiority complex thing if I can't say I'm lucky because they're richer than me? Said very rich friends are also appreciative of the things they have.

I was back at work very quickly and breastfed all he children for a year to 18 months. I expressed the milk when at work. I have never fed a baby a bottle ever actually.

Yes, I don't think the breastfeeding issue is a major one re: split leave. I fed all mine long term, and tbh most babies are able to drink breast milk from a sippy cup at several months old even if they aren't big fans of a bottle. And of course you can continue actual breast feeds early morning before work, after work etc for however long suits your baby.
But like i said, the transferable leave isn't compulsory, so families who still want the mother to have the entire year off (or give up work) can still do so. It simply enables greater choice, and greater opportunity for couples to achieve a better balance of home and work if they so wish. Which has got to be a good thing.

Why should women have to express? Many can't.

Wow that's a jump.

The choice to share leave leaps to babies torn from the breast.
I don't think anyone's suggesting babies MUST take expressed milk and mums MUST stay away from their kids at least x hours a day or else.

TheChandler I understand it was the policy of the company she worked for, if the female member of staff married one of their male members of staff she was given a golden goodbye.

She was certainly cowed by the expectations on her sex initially. When I left my eldest's dad (and ended up on benefits) she sent me a cheque with a post-it stuck to it saying "good for you, I never had the guts". But then there wouldn't have been benefits available for her either.

I'm not going to name her as I don't want to out myself. She wasn't world famous but she was known and very popular in the 60's and 70's.

BigBlueStars - you seem determined to look for a problem where there isn't one!

The transferable parental leave is a widening of choice. It doesn't change things for couples who still want the woman to take a whole year off, or give up work. It is simply an option for couples who wish to balance their roles so that both can take some parental leave

The discussion about bf was more of an aside really... I think several of us who were back at work under the old system of 3 months maternity leave were just reminiscing about how we were still avid breastfeeders.

Catkind - What about all the mothers like me who are priced out of work by childcare costs? If I worked and extra cash come in, we could buy one of us a newer car instead of having two 14 year old bangers. Id be delighted with a 6 year old car!!! More money would make such a difference to our quality of life but as you say, the fact that Im not working means I can afford not to work. If someone says they can afford not to work financially, what other reason have they got for dropping it in to the sentence except for demonstrating they are comfortable income wise.

Fair point fluffygreentail, I missed that option. As I say, everyone's situation is different.

It's not about telling someone your income though, it's just discussing how you feel about going back to work/not going back to work. I feel lucky to have options, you don't have options and feel stuck; there, now we know each other a little better.

Jilly my earning potential is much higher than dh's. I work in a highly specialist/niche role in the field of behavioural medicine. Unfortunately I'm too specialist for the Irish market and there's a public sector recruitment embargo on my core profession, which has flooded the private market. I'm not a public sector worker. So no gilded cages here, thanks.

Thank, duplo. I am just always interested in the many cases on mumsnet where by some chance (or sexism) the men keep their work and the women even if they would prefer to work some how seem to have ended up in circumstances where it is uneconomic or not possible and it seems an unfair sex bias. May be there is something you can do remotely via the internet in analysing data from a UK big pharma company at home in Ireland. May be not as I don't know what you do. Perhaps when the relatives needing care no longer need it you can move back to England for work. Anyway best of luck whatever you do.

Yes Duplodon, lets hope your elderly relatives all die soon so that you can move back to the UK and prioritise your career for the greater good of the sisterhood eh?

That's a bit unfair, I'm sure that's not what Jilly meant.

lol treacle soda, beyond ludicrous isn't it?!

knowing Jillys track record I've no doubts about what she meant

I've finally clocked who Jilly is. Numerous kids, island owner, divorced, hates SAHMs etc etc ?