to ask why having kids is expensive?

[HodgePodge23]

What do you need to buy them apart from toys, food, clothes and a few other bits and bobs here and there? I have an 8 month old so maybe things will get more expensive with time, but I really don't understand why people say having children is expensive. What are people spending their money on?

I wasn't taking a pop at working mothers. I don't care if it's the mother or father who is at home. I just wonder why those who could afford to live on one income don't choose to.

I'm also aware that doesn't apply to many, I'm trying to get some insight into "the few."

Ah I see. You started a disingenuous OP to have a thinly veiled pop at couples who both work. Nice. Hopefully if you decide to go ahead and Home educate your 'something to do' (I prefer to see mine as people but hey ho..) you'll develop a slightly broader mindset. Some of choose to work not because we're materialistic, but because we have skills which are valuable to society, and because we see life as a range of varied experiences, not about picking a partner who will work all hours to facilitate you packing in your job to sit at home judging other people.

Well said 32percent.

HodgePodge.

There are some people who share your values but there aren't many of us left now.
I too have never considered loss of earnings as I don't see it like that and to me there was no question of me working once we had dc.
As long as we had the essentials and could afford things for the dc there wasn't anything else we needed and I too didn't want to work for wants.
Everybody is different though and some people want a career and childcare to look after their dc, we are all different.
I agree though that it needn't cost a lot to have a sahp, we have managed on one min wage and still afforded the odd luxury and wants.

I just wonder why those who could afford to live on one income don't choose to.

Really? You can't possibly wonder that, unless you have zero imagination.

I choose to work, I don't have to, but I'm a better mother to my children because I have an outlet away from them. I studied for many years for my qualifications (a lot of tax payers money went into my education) so why would I waste that? Also, its nice to be able to provide my children with the things they want - not necessarily need but want - dancing classes, ski lessons, school trips, days out and so on. I also think that I am setting my daughters a good example - I'm teaching them to stand on their own feet, value themselves and be financially independent. Things I think are important.

Hodge

Perhaps since you don't have an expensive lifestyle you could afford to buy yourself a new pair of judgey pants your current ones are a bit worn out

Perhaps I should have phrased that better, of course my baby is not a pet project. I bloody love him to bits and he's his own person.

And no I didn't comment initially with ulterior motives, other comments led me to ask my last question. Bring your kids up however you like, parent however you like. It's your life. I just would like to understand further.

And to those who work as it betters society, that's great. But it's absolutely not the reason why everyone works.

Lol, you may not be 'materialistic' OP but that doesn't mean your DCs won't be!!

You are in for a hell of a shock when your DCs get old enough to say 'if you loved me you'd buy me an iPad/Xbox/£100 trainers/theme park trip/holiday abroad'.

Also I hope you have a rock solid marriage and excellent life insurance!

Because it's not materialistic to want to contribute to your families income? Or you may enjoy a couple of days of using your skills, interacting with other adults, having something that makes you a person in your own right as well as a mum? And also childcare isn't child abuse and many children are bloody happy there? But yes now you have a baby for 'something to do' you may well be overwhelmed with the feeling that you couldn't ever leave them and that no one else could ever look after them. That's quite natural. But don't get so judgy until you've been at home with them a year and quite fancy wearing something smart and eating lunch in peace and having some money in your account that your partner hasn't given you.

I can't see hire you don't see you are being judgmental.I also work doing something I love. My children are well looked after and have a range of people who live and care for them. I could show fake concern that is really thinly veiled criticism of your life choices, in that you intend HE your children when you have a complete lack of understanding about basic economics or empathy for othe people. What will you teach them? It's not the 1950s now so it's not going to be when you children have to make their way in the world.

I also think that I am setting my daughters a good example - I'm teaching them to stand on their own feet, value themselves

And SAHMs don't set that example?

Raising children and caring generally is very undervalued in our society, nurturing a child is one of the most important things we can do surely?
A contribution to society cannot always be measured by financial means.

OP- I feel sorry for you that you have such a limited life experience and imagination that you really can't get your head around why some people choose to work.

I have always worked (albeit part time when my children were tiny) However I have no problem getting my head round why some people become a SAHP. There are myriad reasons:

• prefer not working
• can't afford childcare
• child has specific needs which can't be met in childcare
• cannot get work in the career they are qualified in
• family cannot cope well with the demands of both parents working
• change of location due to partners career

See? It isn't hard if you talk to people, engage with the media and have a teensy bit of creative imagination to get your head around why other people's lives aren't a carbon copy of yours

Honestly, if all this is genuine, I seriously suggest you start thinking and reading a bit more before you start to Home school your child, otherwise they're at risk of having a sparse experience.

I suspect though that a lot of this is made up because you're bored, frustrated or whatever

I have a nearly 14 year old ds, expenditure goes on food (he can eat a lot), clothes (he never stops growing) and uniform especially sports kit is v expensive, school trips, rugby (subs, kit, fuel to matches etc, trip), bus pass, phone bill, his allowance and am sure there are loads more examples. When he was a baby I had very little money and we managed fairly well but now he costs so much more!

But if you've given up work voluntarily for two years before having children I'm guessing the enjoying work concept isn't one you will understand so much. because I assume something made you not want to anymore? Also really, children can still be your world and your reason for living and your joy etc whilst you go to work. It's not so cut and dry as 'you want to spend some time out of the home so you must not love your children like I do'. Which is always the implication with posters like you and the 'I'm just trying to understand... why you are so coldhearted'

You don't have to be a SAHM to nurture a child! There are 168 hours in the week and most people don't work more than 40ish of those hours. That leaves quite a lot of time for interacting with children, especially when they are poor sleepers!

It's also very easy not being materialistic when someone else is paying for the roof over your head and the food on your table.

Living off one income when it only covers basics puts a staggering strain on the person who has to do all the donkey work of earning that income.
You may also find that when your child is older all the things that you are snippy about now won't seem quite so vulgar. It's easy to fantasise that your child won't be interested in non worthy things in the future, and will spend their days reading the children's books from the library that are free to put on order, or drawing quietly at the table, but it's much harder when you have an actual teenager standing in front of you, who who love every bit as much as the baby he currently is and say 'No, you can't have new football boots/ballet shoes/an overlocker/oil paints/racing bike/fastskin/cinema tickets'
You may find that you want them to have 'stuff' that allows them to develop their talents, and you might even find that you want them to have that Jack Wills hoodie and money for pizza that allows them to enjoy a basic social life.

Besides, I like my job and I'm good at it. I love my relationships with my colleagues, and I love the sense of self it gives me. I work in cancer diagnosis. Tell me I'm selfish, I dare you.

What is your level of education, OP, and in what capacity were you most recently employed?

I hadn't seen you'd posted your hours fourtothedozen so apologies for that. If you only work 10 hours a week, unless you're sure you'd only be working 10 hours a week if you didn't have kids then yes, it's costing you income. Not necessarily the figure you give, as it's possible you wouldn't be able to and/or want to get full time in your field, of course. But even if we assume you'd have stayed in the less lucrative job, 18k is less than 24k.

And to answer OP's question:

Hypothetically speaking, if you or your partner earned enough to keep you going (e.i. enough to live but you wouldn't have all the luxuries), would the other stay at home?

No, I wouldn't and neither would DH. We could both cover enough to live and some luxuries on a full time wage, his being more than mine because I've spent the past couple of years having children, working part time and being on (not especially long) MLs. For a lot of reasons:

• We know our small children will get more expensive as they get older and want to be financially prepared for that. For us, staying in work is the best way.

• Insurance. I have experience of being brought up in a 1 WP, 1 SAHP household in the sort of situation you describe, and things then going tits up. I don't want to repeat that. It made me perhaps more risk averse than many, and so DH and I have prioritised tailoring our lifestyle to be affordable on one income if necessary. Of course we're lucky to have this option.

• Pensions. I don't expect the state one to be worth very much or available until I'm 193. And ability to save. Only one of us being in work in the situation you describe would mean no financial cushion if the shit hit the fan. I didn't much enjoy living on benefits even as a child, I doubt it'd be more fun now. Both staying in work reduces the risk of this possibility.

• Both of us are in lines of work where you need to keep your hand in. A couple of years out would screw both of us, for different reasons.

However, I freely admit part of the reason this is such a no brainer is because we're in a fortunate position wrt part time work, flexible work, free preschool place kicking in soon and extended family members who work in childcare.

nameless- of course working parents nurture their kids too= but they have a lot less time to do it.
If a child sleeps 12 hours a night then they are awake for 84 hours a week.
If you work full time you are away from your child for 40 hours, plus another 10 or so for commuting.

So that leaves 34 hours time with your child a week compared to 84 for a SAHM. THat's a whopping 60% less "nurturing" time.

I have 2 under 3. Full time childcare costs me £18,000 per year, and that's the cheapest option!

Bloody Nora Wuthering that is a fortune!

Are you married OP?

Interestingly, one of the reasons why I stayed in work was to reduce the burden on my husband.

The only way we could have afforded me not to work, was if he continued to work in London. However, that meant he was out of the house 7-7 during the week, so only got to see our daughter at weekends when he was tired and grumpy.

So we made the decision for DH to leave London, and I applied for and got another job closer to home. Initially, I only worked 10 hours, but increased this to mostly fit round nursery and school hours as my child got older and more expensive. More importantly though, DD got a dad who could take her to school in the mornings, was home in time for tea and could come and see her school assemblies etc...

It's not always about materialism.