To feel like I have to justify being a SAHM

[Emlou07]

I fully expect this to go down like a lead balloon...

Do any other SAHM/House wives feel like they have to justify themselves when someone asks what you do?

I always feel like I need to say 'I'm a SAHM, but I'm not claiming any benefits. I also don't just sit around all day'

Not that there is anything wrong with being on benefits!

g1itterati sadly entirely dependent on your husband working to keep you in your life of leisure. So what happens when he decides he’s had enough of you sponging off him & sitting about at home & leaves you? Who will then fund your lunches, coffees, travel & leisure activities. Why would any one have so little self respect to ever want to be dependent as a SAHP at home looking after the kids. And once they’re in school you’re kidding yourself if you think you have a function as a SAHP. Why does anyone require an adult to be at home full time. What for exactly? What do SAHP’s do all day, everyday? Most stay at home because they have no up to date employable skills or because they can’t cope with work environments due to a lack of confidence. Some are just bone idle & like pissing away their days doing pilates, setting up crappy pininterest businesses & meeting similars for lunch etc. But essentially someone is paying for them to lead that lifestyle. How entitled. I’m not sure what there is to be so smug & self righteous about.

"Why does anyone require an adult to be at home full time"

Because it is very difficult to find a job that fits exactly into school hours and allows immediate leave as often as is needed, whenever it is needed plus frequent planned time off for appointments, courses, and meetings. For some children and teenagers there is no suitable childcare.

I think that it is a difficult and emotive subject because, ultimately, being a SAHP and, especially a SAHM relies on a model of marriage which frequently does not work out.

Clearly (and it should go without saying, but this is MN) what I post is my opinion and does not apply to everyone. There are brilliant relationships with a SAHP where it works well for everyone.

I think it is really good for a child for a parent to be around a good deal of the time in the pre nursery years (I.e up to about 3 years old). This is a career interruption and should not prevent a return to work.

With school age children, there start to be meaningful issues. Firstly, if you ‘stay at home’ you need to take on a housekeeper/organiser role for both your husband/wife and children. Many resent this and you see the term ‘wife work’ bandied around. However, if you are at home all day, what else are you (materially) contributing to the marriage?

Secondly, there is the thorny issue of divorce. What tends to end up happening is both parties are resentful as the WOHP parent feels that they have been working all hours for their children, whom they will now see part time, but will still have to pay for full time (fair, given the circumstances, but it is the circumstances that I am questioning). The SAHP, in the others hand, often feels forced back into a workplace where their skills and confidence have deteriorated, and where they command far less respect than had they carried on working.

So, the SAHP model works well for some but carries considerable risks.

I don't think that's why it's difficult and emotive, Larry. I think it's difficult because it's the biggest and often the first instance in a woman's life of realising that family and the working world often don't fit very well together, and that where there's a mismatch, women are the ones who're expected and encouraged to pick up the slack. It's emotive because people would like to believe that they are completely in control of their own destinies so they defend their positions. It would be better for all of us if we could acknowledge the extent to which our hands were forced when we make these decisions but it'll never happen on these threads because usually within 3 posts someone will have posted "don't you find your life's a bit empty? How do you explain your idleness to real people when you get to go out to a party?" or "no judgement but I personally wouldn't feel comfortable farming my child out to some random stranger" and that's it, back to defending positions.

My DH got made redundant and couldn't find a job in the UK in his specialism. I was really pissed off because I had a good, albeit less well paid, family friendly interesting job. Making the transition to SAH was hard for me. But I have more life ambitions than simply spending 40 years at the coal face so you learn to adjust. And the alternative for us was the kids being separated from one or other of us for most of the time, seeing the absent parent on weekends. And we know people who've done it. It can't have been an easy decision for them either.
Instead of arguing among ourselves we should all be angry at the insecure working conditions that put people in this sort of situation.

jube - the thing is, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
When I met DH I was working in the health service and he'd had a couple of years in banking after the marines. After the birth of our first DC, he went into business with a couple of friends. To cut a long story short, a while ago they sold that company for over 1bn, just to give you an idea of what they have created in this 15 years because this does not come from nothing. In this same time, we have also had 3 more DC. DH has never had "working hours." It has been a lifestyle for him and non-negotiable. He has worked every evening since the DC were little really and he still does. If he needs to go abroad at the drop of a hat, he goes. I don't claim to have been part of his business, but I have definitely gone on the ride with him, day in, day out, every step of the way. I've absorbed all his stress and tried to balance the family so that my kids aren't impacted by it all. Quite often, I have felt like a "dustbin" for everyone else's stress, quite frankly. 4 DC is a lot too, with all the friendship dramas etc. Two are now in very academic schools and it's a lot of pressure. If I can take some of that off, I will.
DH has another company too which is another story. He's probably involved in about 15 things off the top of my head. Amidst all this, would it if helped the family for me to go back to doing shifts in the health service? If I had, maybe the family would have fallen apart.

So yes, it has paid off, but like anything else, there has been a cost and I have negotiated this as best I can.

@zzzzz you've obviously not read the post properly because she was talking about SAHP whose kids are at school! You appear to be talking about when the kids are at home.

@g1itterati don't feel like you have to justify yourself to anyone as a result of a personal attack. You are clearly doing what you and your husband feel is right for your family, and given that you are not expecting the tax payer to pick up the tab, it's frankly nobody else's business!

@Spikeyball unless your kids have disabilities or MH/behavioural issues then working with school age children isn't restricted to school hours only....most schools these days have wrap around care for instance. None of the kids I know who go to wrap around care appear to have suffered for it emotionally!

I agree Jube, I couldn't do it and neither would I be prepared to fund a partner to do it either.

It's amazing there are any working mums given the amount of people who says they can't work once chidren come along or thinks term time school hours is the maximum they could do. I'm very glad lots don't think this way or we'd have less teachers, gps, health visitors etc.

My DM describes herself as a housewife and sees it that she hasn't really worked since DC arrived 30 years ago, however over the years she has been a carer for her MIL, managed a small independent shop, had 3 DC (so preschool years go on for longer), volunteered with Scouts, Homestart and several other charities, taken temp work when cash was needed, fostered over 15 kids, project managed major building works on their houses and now looks after my DD a few hours a week so I can work.

She has made a great contribution to society (and of course our family) but is viewed as a lady of leisure, especially now we've all left home. Just because very little of it was paid doesn't mean she didn't have an occupation, or a strig of occupations!

But essentially someone is paying for them to lead that lifestyle. How entitled.

Why? Two WOHP would pay for nurseries or nannies and often cleaners and gardeners. Why is it wrong for a wife (or husband) who does that to receive money from the person their work supports at home? Why do you view going out to work and being paid as acceptable, but helping your partner and being paid as a result as unacceptable?

Face it, for a lot of women going back to work would mean looking after someone else's kids or cleaning someone else's house or acting as someone else's secretary or admin for little extra money.

Voice neither my son's special school nor his former mainstream school had wrap around care and even if they did he wouldn't coped with it. Childcare even if it was available would cost £30 an hour minimum because he needs 2:1 specialist care from anyone but me or dh.

Fantastic post, toomuchtooold. I hardly bother posting in these discussions, since they usually get dominated by the loudest and nastiest voices, but somewhere beyond all the insults there's an important discussion to be had: about supporting and maintaining women's career trajectories, about valuing and recognising unpaid work (and it would be interesting to consider if childcare and domestic labour would be treated with such utter contempt if it wasn't a traditionally female field), and about giving each family the chance to function in the way which suits its adults' and kids' needs best.

And for those who insist on describing SAHMs with such disproportionate venom and disgust... please bear in mind it's not just this generation's women you're shitting on. My nan raised five children and fostered others. My MIL raised four great kids and is now a hospice volunteer. My aunt also raised four and knew every isolated older person on her street, visiting them every day and inviting them to Christmas dinner etc. You can say 'well, that's different: they had less choice' but you're still erasing their work and negating their impact. People have value beyond a paycheck.

@zzzzz thank you for your reply

I can’t find the name of the poster who said ”But essentially someone is paying for them to lead that lifestyle. How entitled.”, but how dare you patronise SAHPs like that? FWIW in our situation it me who has the assets, but even if it wasn’t, they are OUR children, we had them together, and we raise them together. Your comment implies that SAHPs are lazy, grabby and selfish. Which is unmitigated bullshit.

x-posted with zzzzz, who said it more succinctly!

I took a full year's maternity last year and am pregnant again so will be off next year too. Once the second baby's here I'll work part time until both are in school. My husband has suggested he work more overtime so I don't have to work at all and it is tempting as I dislike my line of work. I couldn't give a shit what anyone thinks!

@Spikeyball please read my reply again, I specifically made an exception for disabled/MH children, by the sounds of things your child falls into that category! No judgement here I promise you.

@zzzzz I'm not going to keep going round in circles here, nowhere did I say or even imply that being paid makes something more life enhancing or admirable! Stop suggesting that I did. And the tone of judgement in your "just because you think wrap around care is the same as being cared for by a parent at home" comment is noted. Thanks very much for making your (judgemental) feelings known about my future parenting choices, which if you read my comments on this thread you will note is not a discourtesy I have extended to any other posters on here.

Yanbu but others on this thread are because they seem to need to justify themselves by the bog standard dig at working mums. Please do explain why a sahp is 'better for the kids' trinity66. Go on. Dh and i both work part time. Please Do explain why that is 'worse' for the kids

yanbu but others on this thread are because they seem to need to justify themselves by the bog standard dig at working mums. Please do explain why a sahp is 'better for the kids' trinity66. Go on. Dh and i both work part time. Please Do explain why that is 'worse' for the kids

I'm not a SAHM...........I've said this multiple times on the thread, I work full time as does DH. In an ideal world I think it's better for the kids to have a parent look after them............I really don't see how this is such a controversial statement to make, I'm not putting anyone down I understand it's not always possible, bloody hell I can't even do it myself. There is alot of over sensitive souls on here

Um, because working parents can and do look after their own kids. That isnt the unique perspective of somebody who doesnt work

Um, because working parents can and do look after their own kids. That isnt the unique perspective of somebody who doesnt work

I never said they couldn't though?

Apart from a short period, I've worked throughout my children's lives.

They're now 18 and successfully and happily navigating the next part of their lives.

I'd be interested to know who raised them if not DH and I. I owe whoever it was a beer because they did a steriling job.