The working mums on school night out

[TimothyTaylor]

I went to our school festive drinks thing last night. A large portion of the evening was spent with a group of mums (who all work outside of the home) trying to "boost my confidence" and "help with my cv" and "help me to explore my power" (wtf). They seemed on a mission to get me back into work. I am a sahm through choice. I sometimes joke about getting a job for a break etc (just a joke) but am very happy in my role at home for now. They made me feel a bit sad and pathetic, as if I was only at home because I had no self-belief or confidence to go back to work. I said firmly but nicely on a couple of occasions that I wasn't working through choice and was happy to do that - but even that elicited "of course but in a couple of years when you're ready you must blah blah blah". Then I got the old "I admire you for sacrificing so much for your kids - being at home all day would do me in". Somehow that always feels like a jibe.

Anyway, it just left me feeling a bit irritated that there's a sense of sahms all being mad jealous of working mums and that we're only at home because we can't get a job!

Maybe they were just pissed. I know no harm was meant...

[LipstickHandbagCoffee]

Zadig,uk women not working is a relatively new phenomenon.post war in fact.
You asked is it norm to have two working parents, applying uk govt social data - yes it’s the norm to have working parents
We used nursery 8-6 mon to Friday, because that’s our work and travel commitment
My kids are happy,have secure attachment and doing well socially and academically.
Nursery inspection rating excellent Contrary to how some folk on mn describe nursery they have flourished

I don’t feel bad that women have employment or disposable incomes - that’s a good thing in my opinion. I hope it continues

[Zadig]

I think it depends on the definition of "full time" maybe - do people mean 35 hours a week or more like at least 60 which is more the norm where I live. There's a difference between having one parent who can be home by 4/5pm, or situations where both are coming in by 8pm earliest - that's if they're not travelling. I know DC who would be considered "privileged," but only really see their parents at weekends.

[Babbitywabbit]

Ps zadig- you mention coming from another country and culture where the ‘role of the mother’ is valued. Therefore I guess it’s natural that your view is going to be influenced by that.

Dh and I have always considered ourselves equally capable of childcare and working; therefore it’s been natural to us to split things more equally and neither of us have been sole earner or sole carer

It doesn’t mean one way is better than the other. There are multiple ways to be a good (or bad!) parent

[Babbitywabbit]

I don’t see any problem with it being the norm to have 2 working parents.... this is how it’s been for most of history! Also paid maternity leave is longer than any time previously, and shared parental leave is now an option, so I honestly think in terms of provision we are better now than in the past.

Having said that, there will Always be some people who want to stay at home, and even if they were offered the best quality childcare for free, would prefer to not use it. Which is fine- that’s a personal choice

[Zadig]

I have never claimed that as a SAHM, I am of special value to society .

I became disillusioned with social work and I feel that, these days, I have more to give to my own children than I can to other people's.

My family have never claimed benefits. We do not take up state school places, burden the NHS or social services and we pay huge amounts in tax. I grew up in the kind of poverty that is not seen in this country and DH is the son of refugees. We live within our own value system and in the countries we come from the role if the mother is valued. There is no such thing as 8am-6pm nurseries and this kind of thing. People may use relatives help if they can, but that's it.

If we are moving towards a society where it is increasingly common or even the norm for both parents to work crazy hours with babies in day care centres, or where 1 in 3 families are single mum's working every hour to make ends meet, is this progress? As life gets more stressful, this will impact children and society on a wider scale.

[Babbitywabbit]

I don’t agree with some of lipstickhandbagcoffees views. But I assumed what she meant here was the simple fact that paid childcare is different to looking after your own children simply from the perspective that as a paid carer, you are part of the workforce and having to change comply with certain regulations. That’s all, it’s simply a fact, not a value judgement.

Of course there is huge value in raising children to be responsible members of society who make a positive contribution. Children who grow up dysfunctional are a tremendous cost on society, financially as well as in all the other ways. As we all know, good parenting is not a simple case of whether a parent works or not. Therefore there is no intrinsic value beyond the immediate family, in having a SAHP

It’s not disrespectful to SAHP to say that. For families who choose to have a SAHP there is obviously enormous value. I chose to work part time when my children were tiny because I valued being at home with my children. But I wouldn’t claim that it had any value beyond my immediate family

[cantkeepawayforever]

If you must paraphrase me zadig,try get it right.as opposed to a summation that favours you

Then could you clarify your point, Listick? You have said that paid care is not the same as unpaid care, and have furthermore said that, as you do 'exactly as a SAHP does' as a WOHP, that you see the childcare and parenting that a SAHP does within your working hours as 'nothing'?

[Zadig]

And I spent nine years in direct work with children in crises - including in residential settings with children who are sexually abused, self-harming, suicidal or mentally ill. I have also worked with young offenders in secure units and refugees. Despite the stress and often very long shifts, it's a different level of engagement when it's a job. You maintain a professional distance - you have to. I can give more to my own DC than I can give to anyone else and that's why I stayed at home with them. It's got nothing to do with tasks or money.

[Zadig]

Well that is what you have said - that my being with the DC during say, the hours of 9-5, is of less "value" because I am not being paid to do it.
But the point is that I really value it in a way that has nothing to do with money or what anyone else thinks.

[LipstickHandbagCoffee]

If you must paraphrase me zadig,try get it right.as opposed to a summation that favours you

[Zadig]

I definitely agree that parenting is different to childcare. Parenting is about love, instinct, imparting values, attachment, adapting, finding coping strategies, personal development, anxiety - and so much more. It's the strongest instinct on earth. "Childcare" is a defined job. This is exactly why I find Lipstick's argument that only paid childcare should be recognised as "valued" so baffling.

[Babbitywabbit]

Zadig- you seem to be missing the point that you don’t pay other people to do parenting - as a working parent you outsource some aspects of daily care to someone else. Parenting goes far beyond that; it’s life long for a start and is about imparting values as much as changing nappies

Also, we’re all making our decisions within different contexts. Thank god I could afford quality childcare rather than relying on a worn out grandparent who’d spoil my children on sweets, or relying on a young second language speaker who’d just want to meet her friends and speak in her native tongue. If that had been the only childcare available, I’d have had to sacrifice my career, or dh his, and either one of us be home full time or take a less interesting evening / weekend ‘job’ rather than career to fit round each other. If needs must, of course that’s what we’d have done, but thankfully we were both able to stay on the career ladder in the knowledge our children’s well being wasn’t being compromised at all

[Zadig]

Lipstick seems to think that "parenting" only has value if someone is being paid to do it. Unless you are being paid, you are meaningless in his / her universe.

I would flip it around - from a baby's point of view is it preferable to (for instance) -

a) spend 50 hours a week with someone who loves you (and doesn't see you as a "task"/ means of renumeration)?

b) spend that same 50 hours in the care of someone who sees you as their job - no more?

I am not for one minute arguing that babies and children are damaged by spending time with non-parents on a regular basis. I'm responding to Lipstick's logic by applying a baby's perspective because there is clearly more to life than job specs and salaries.

[cantkeepawayforever]

The argument I am making to Lipstick is that he / she does not recognise childcare exists as a task at all, separate from housekeeping, except if done by someone who is paid to do it.

That indicates to me someone who cannot possibly be prioritising the emotional and physical needs of their children, because you cannot prioritise what you do not believe exists.

[Zadig]

Babbitty, but there you are comparing two totally different socioeconomic groups.
I can't comment on anyone else's parenting. All I can say is, that I believe my time is more beneficial to my kids than leaving them with some 22 year-old for whom English is a second language and is more concerned with texting / meeting up with all the other similar nannies in the area and talking in their own language in Starbucks about their boyfriends or whatever. Say I'm stereotyping if you like, but when I used to take mine to playgroups I saw this every day and that is the truth. Around here, people tend to have full time nannies from East European countries or the Phillipines, rather than put them in nursery all day. I know some fantastic nannies by the way, but there are many that are just "good enough".

[cantkeepawayforever]

Babbity, you have misunderstood my point.

The point was making is that it is NOT about hours spent with the child. iI is about the priority given to the child within the family's thinking, and within the family's life. I know familes with no working parent where the child has no priority in the parents' thoughts, and they continue exactly as they did when childless. Equally I know families with two very busy working parents who absolutely prioritise the emotional and physical needs of their children, both when buying childcare for them and when at home with their children.

As you quoted before "It's an attitude of mind, not a matter of hours spent at home or money spent."

[Babbitywabbit]

Cantkeepawayforever- I agree with you insofar as on the days I worked, someone else was doing some of the nappy changes, preparing meals, playing games, reading to my children etc.
I don’t think anyone is saying that they are splitting themselves in two and being half in the office and half at work!!

The point is that parenting is about so much more than just the quantity of hours physically being in the room with your child. If it were all about quantity, you would expect the children of two unemployed parents to have the best deal, because once the basic needs are taken care of and they have a roof over their heads and food in their bellies, they’ve got both parents able to interact with them all day. Conversely you’d expect the children of two parents with full time careers to have the worst deal, and all be dysfunctional low achievers!

Of course, in the real world it’s not like that.

[TimothyTaylor]

Just as I may joke to my husband that I'd like to get a job for a break he might joke about becoming a sahd so he could go to the park and eat cake all day. Neither of us believes this about the others role. We each respect he ofher's contribution to our family. We are comfortable to have a little joke - not passive aggressive at all - just a sense of humour.

[TimothyTaylor]

Do fuck off Bluntness I have clarified several times now that I did not make that comment to those women that night. I may have said it on occasion in the privacy of my own home! Try reading the OP updates at the very least.

[Zadig]

Bluntness - if you read the thread, she did not say this to the women. She says she may have possibly joked something like that to her husband in the past.
Don't we all say thinks like that from time to time - why do people take themselves so seriously?

[Bluntness100]

Not read the full thread, but after you said you’d want a job to get a break, I think I’d also have joined in with them. What a passive aggressive smug comment. Your life is so much harder and they only work to get a break from their kids. So you should do like they do to make your life easier.

Yup, I’d probably have stuck it to you too. Can’t blame them in the slightest. Just as I’d have expected a group of stay at homes mums to have a go if a working mum said “god it’s so hard juggling work and kids, think I’ll be a stay at home mum so I can have a break”.

I suspect you’re one of these women who makes this comment often but this time said it to the wrong people

[cantkeepawayforever]

Lipstick, actually, as a teacher, my 'out of the house' job doesn't fit your definition particularly well (nor would it fit e.g. a vicar, an artist) , let alone my 'in home' work when I was a stay at home parent!

I find your statements contradictory. You state that paid for caring / early education is very different to parenting - even if that paid for caring / early education is nannying or childminding of exactly the same children as could be cared for by one or both parents? You state that someone working outside the home does exactly the same as a stay at home parent, even though the latter provides 8-10 hours of caring / early education per day that the WOHP does does not?

How is the job of caring for small children as a childminder or nanny different from the job of parenting those same small children by a SAHP? What is it that the nanny / childminder does that is wholly different from what the parent does?

[DontMakeMeShushYou]

"I sometimes joke about getting a job for a break" is about as funny as "I'd love to be a SAHM so I can sit around all day watching TV"

It's a silly thing to say, although most of us probably do say it from time to time "as a joke". Which is fine as long as you're prepared to take the opposite viewpoint in the same spirit.

[Zadig]

Where have I ever claimed to have "the hardest job in the world?" What kind of nonsense is that anyway?
If you must know, my life is fairly easy and well I know it!
I have no idea what the hardest job in the world is. Coal miner? Prime Minister?

[Zadig]

"Attempting to digress from the ardest job in works rhetoric"

What does that mean?