To be shm after children are at school

[Notthinkingclearly]

I have 2 dc who are 6 and 9. Since my first child was born i have been a stay at home mum. My DH works away alot abroad so I am often on my own. My Dc's have not been the most robust and have both had quite a few weeks off school with legitimate reasons over the last few years with hospital appointments. I have felt that if I had been at work I would have been a rubbish employee. I seem to be really busy all the time but feel I am constantly justifying to everyone why I don't have a job. I look after a relations 2 year old one day a week, help in school one day a week and I am a member of the schools PTA. I don't go out apart from supermarket or a walk during the week and only ever sit down to eat my lunch during the day. Am I as spoilt and lazy as I am made to feel?

I was a shame for 7 years until my youngest started nursery and then I started part time/term time work which I still do 10 years on. It works for us as I also do majority of housework and child ferrying. Personally I would be bored not working at all and it would feel a bit unfair to be having leisure time all day while DH works, I like making a financial contribution and I enjoy the stimulation of working outside the home.

ha ha sahm not shame!

The way some people go on giddy we should probably rename is shame.

I was shamed for 5 years whilst I raised the triplets whilst DH flew fighter planes for the air force, just sitting on my lazy ass squandering his money, calculating how much I'd get if we divorced before the kids were 3

I don't think they need to be taught any more relationship topics than they already do at school. There will be no time for academic subjects soon, most education is dumbed down as it is.
It's up to parents to socialise their children, to teach them about social norms, values, relationships, money and protecting themselves.
I see the problem as parents expecting somebody else to educate their children in everything.
Parents should teach their children the none academic stuff.

Reading through this thread has made for some interesting reading. When this thread first started my initial thought was 'Why do you care what others think? Do what is best for you and your family.'

I am extremely fortunate to have the choice of working or not. I tried PT hours and I never worked 20% less hours although my pay was certainly that much lower. I have a career with long hours. Average hours are 8-7pm during the year and during crunch times its 8-11/12. It is a very long day and DH has to step it up a lot during crunch times.

I have done those hours for a reason and I am now looking to leave into a senior position elsewhere with shorter hours and a pay increase. I have paid my dues and I have Partners at work looking to put me in with clients where I can leave at 5pm, meaning I get home around 6pm.

Very very few parents are fortunate to have the financial backing I have to enable me to do this. We live in a home right outside NYC with fantastic transportation links that is $$$, we have money for good childcare, buying in outside help including someone to cook (when dH is away as its his hobby), clean, do our laundry and I someone to collect Amazon parcels when I cant send them to DH's office.

DH travels a lot but its day trips. Again we are fortunate to be in the US, living very close to two major hubs for domestic flights and international hubs for when he has to fly to Europe. Trips to Europe are tough as he must leave on a Saturday for a Monday morning meeting and returns the following Saturday late afternoon when meetings run through Friday. I can fully understand why the parent left at home to manage family life doesn't work. I do it and it's tough being a single parent working long hours, 3000 miles from family, even if you have the resources to do it.

Oh and its in the UK that people talk to me about having a nanny as being fancy. Its a bloody necessity to have good quality childcare if both parents are working FT. If I were to go back 5 years and do this all over again the only thing I would change is hiring a norland nanny from the start and telling DH to suck up the cost. I live in a country where anyone can and does call themselves a nanny. Drives me nuts!

I forgot to say I am fortunate that DS who has ASD has lots of appointments but that everyone has worked with me. So many therapists have weekend hours and I use them. The school have also worked with me too, enabling private sessions to go on during school hours on school premises. In the UK no one would turn a blind eye to that. When pregnant all of my appointments were at 7am and if I was late for work it was no more than 15mins. The NHS has a long way to go WRT appointment availability and turnaround times once you get to a clinic for working parents.

babybarrister - even when people fully understand how the state is trying to coerce them into making certain decisions by making others much riskier, they do not always agree with the state's risk-return analysis!

MommaGee - Regardless of your lack of options, you are doing an invaluable job with your DS. None of us know what the future holds, SAHM or not and many working mums would not be able to make ends meet either in the event of a separation.

I had 4 DC with 2 year gaps. As soon as I'd finished breastfeeding one, I was basically pregnant again! It was 9 years before they were all in school and my professional confidence became very eroded in that time.
My family are in Spain and my DH has always been a workaholic to all intents and purposes, though I can't complain as he's done extremely well for us. I admit it would be a real wrench for me to not be there for the DC after school. At present though, our girls are still primary aged so I have to be mobilised by 3pm to collect them. By secondary school they're getting in at more like 4.30-5pm and no school runs probably, so its a significantly longer day and I think I'll need to be doing something part-time then.
In our case, DH has an obsession about his children needing their mother around because he was put in boarding school at 7 and once told me he used to vomit every time he and his brother were the only ones whose mother never came to events or even to pick them up at half-term ( because she followed his father round in the Far East).
I totally agree that people have all kinds of reasons for living the way they do which are not always obvious to an outsider. Nothing is perfect!

Babybarrister. sahps maybe aware of the risks but as you'll see from this thread, not everyone has the choice to go to work for a variety of reasons. My childcare club closed down last year and there were no other options as everywhere had year long waiting lists
One granny in my daughter's class has stood in and bern an unofficial childminder. I take the risk of paying for unregistered childcare but the only other option is to give up my job.
Having kids is risky full stop x

Thanks Alaia, I k ow I'm where meant to be

Your poor DH :( xx

for me its about my financial independence,my career,and solely being mum simply isn't enough. I'm not defined by motherhood. And the stultifying women I have met on mat leave and school who all talk in past tense of what they used to do,and fret about minutiae because they have the time to. Meanwhile their partner carries on unencumbered by any familial responsiblities cause family has been defined as women's work

In devaluing "women's work" with statements like that you're colluding with misogyny.

Is anyone really financiallynne independent even if they both work? You buy a property taking into account 2 mortgages. If one of you left, you'd have to downsize anyway. Property is prohibitive in this area so there's no way anyone can.live on 1 salary unless they get a fortune in maintenance or bought their.house in 1997!

gandalf I earn enough to support myself and my DC once they have all reached school. They would have a huge drop in living standards but I do earn enough to put a roof over their heads and food in their bellies.

Is anyone really financiallynne independent even if they both work? You buy a property taking into account 2 mortgages.

Our mortgage is based on my salary alone as dh didn't work for a while after we relocated. Property prices aren't bad in this area in any case, so we have been able to massively overpay the mortgage and there is very little left to clear.

I am financially independent and wouldn't have to make significant changes to our lifestyle if dh and I were to split. Most of his income goes into savings at the moment anyway, but he earns a lot less than I do so it wouldn't make a huge difference either way.

My DC and I could live comfortably on my earnings.
Not how we live now, but very pleasantly none the less.

No.chosing to prioritise a male career,female giving up work,being reliant on a man that's collusion with patriarchy
Setting the example to children that men work,women don't have to is collusion with patriarchy
Woman being maneouvered into domestic domain cause men won't is collusion with patriarchy
These threads are predominately men who won't change for family commitments and women who do

Gimmee - yes but in full knowledge of all that, if women still decide to prioritise their family over other forms of work, why should they be diminished for their choice?
Being a SAHM is not necessarily a financial gamble if you and your husband have a certain level of wealth and you are certain of your status in the event of a separation. You may actually be far better off financially than if you'd been working all those years.
There is no fixed rule. SAHMs are not necessarily victims if the patriarchy who have given it all up. Most I know are far from it and consider themselves very fortunate.

My DH is fully British but part Argentinan and part Iranian. Obviously Iran is not exactly known for its women's rights, but at least there is no shame attached to being "just" a mother.

Do as you please, it's your life. Personally I ran out and got a job as soon as my youngest started school but we're all different. An empty house feels like a prison to me and living rurally, once the DCs are in school, there's naff all to sahm life outside the WI and the PTA. I would be driven to insanity in days.

Is it truly free choice,or actually societal overt and covert pressure exerted on women
Why don't men chose to be at home with children if it's free choice?

Setting the example to children that men work, women don't have to is collusion with patriarchy
Me being a SAHM doesn't mean my son learning that he has to work but a future, unplanned) sister should just get pregnant and cling to the tailcoat of the first eligible man.
My sister has been a SAHM / carer for .most of my nieces life. Niece wants tp join the army. She knows you work for a living because as a family we model that. She also understands that her mom was a career for her disabled partner and that was hard and necessary and valuable work. She understands I have given up work because of DS's issues.

She knows I've travelled, gone to Uni, worked up until nearly 2 years ago. Her other aunt has recently returned to work after a baby. Similarly my nephew understands the same. That if he gets married a woman isn't going to sit at home darning his socks

Why don't men chose to be at home with children if it's free choice?
Because he put my needs and my need to be with my son first

momma perhaps your DH was desperate to be a SAHD but put you first, but let's not pretend that's happening on a a macro level.

Tbf he would have if I'd been desperate tp go back to work it happily concedes he couldn't do what I do five days a week
He's got the easy job gets vomittes on less

There are lots of reasons famies .make the choices they make. its only an issue if someone is unhappy and can't change it