SAHM/Homemakers - What do you do all day?

[Fruem]

Those who choose to be a SAHM/homemaker, who don’t ‘have’ to work, what do you do all day?!

I’m talking the SAHM’s who don’t work from home. Who don’t have to look after the kids all day etc.

If you’ve done cleaning/washing/shopping etc. How do you fill your day?

Paying taxation is neither here nor there- there is still one only person in the couple paying it

So your gripe is that SAHM’s don’t pay taxes?

I've said it before on threads but I did work out once that if dh and I earned his then salary between us, we would pay less tax and have kept child benefit.
Society got more tax from our family unit by dh being the sole earner.

Same here IWannaSeeHowItEnds

Are you one of the posters saying I enable my husband to have a brilliant career for which he needs to work 12 hours a day and never see his kids? If so than probably. I don’t think many people would enjoy that life man or woman. I am - I enjoy my life, my kids enjoy their lives, my husband enjoys his life, has a good relationship with the kids - spends all his free time with us - not at the football, the betting shop, the pub, the gym, playing golf etc- with his family. So we're doing just fine, thanks for the concern though.

The posts earlier in this thread chein and iwanna. You’re taking this really personally when it relates to earlier conversations here

If being a SAHM is fine, if it suits you fine - but the constant criticism of those who do work and the little nit picking on how it is better for everyone and supporting their man - is all fine until the divorce.

Wasn't criticism or picking at anything. Not once did I say the kids of working parents suffer. When I said about the SAHP being the only one to suffer I was referring to the fact they have lost their career, pension & other perks & are screwed should things go wrong. Everyone has a lovely life at the expense of someone else.

But as you can see above cherry, those posters mentioned upthread have said they’re happy with the arrangement. Who the fuck are you to tell them otherwise?

And my dh could argue that he is enabling me to support our children's daily lives in the way that I want. Partnership see?

But if I had to advise dd on what to do, I'd say cling onto your job, despite the lack of financial reward because you never know how things will pan out - divorce rates are high and some people turn into utter shits during a separation

This. I think it's a huge risk to be a SAHM. The divorce courts are full of people who thought they had strong marriages and it would never happen to them

possibly people gravitate towards partners / husbands / wives that will facilitate the kind of family set-up you envisage. So if you know (even unconsciously) that you would find it highly stressful if you couldn't be around for your children day to day, then you're more likely to look for a husband who will facilitate that. If you're a very career-driven man but you want DC, you're more likely to end up with a wife whose instinct is to be a SAHM

I'd never thought of this, but I think it's spot on. My DH and I both work and I like the fact that we have a broadly 50-50 / equal relationship. I don't think I'd feel comfortable being supported financially. Horses for courses, as I realise others feel differently

I think what needs to change more than anything else is what happens if there is a divorce. IMO the money should continue to be split and the wohp should not he allowed to leave the sahp financially disadvantaged

I'm all in favour of absent parents supporting the children financially, but I think it's pretty hard to justify swanning around doing yoga, walking the dog, going to the gym, at your ex's expense when you're not even together any more

Chocolate1984 it is possible to mitigate against some of that. For example since becoming a SAHM we have paid into a private pension for me.

Surely most SAHMs do look after theIr kids all day though? If I don't financially need to work when my twins are old enough to go to school, I'd still go back to running my business in a casual way, I can't imagine not doing something like that (although after being run ragged by twins for 5 years maybe i will feel different about it!)

Very happy with my arrangement FYI! Cherry you seem to have a real issue with men working in the corporate world?!

Who am I telling otherwise? If men are satisfied by working 12 hours a day and never seeing their kids let them get on with it. I just think it’s a sad old life.

My friends aren’t men working 12 hour days thoug

You said ‘I can’t imagine anyone being happy with that life’. A poster then came on to she was in fact happy with that life. I think lots of things are sad, I wouldn’t presume that other people can’t be happy in that situation.
You keep going on about working 12 hours but surely that’s fairly standard, especially if you’re adding in a commute? When I worked pre DC (another corporate monkey here) I was out of the house at least 12 hours a day. One of the reasons I wanted to be a SAHM.

all much as I chose to sah it did come with sacrifices in terms of earning potential and career progression etc. I agreed to that on the basis that my dh protects me financially with his earnings. If we parted company and I could earn the same as if I'd never been out of the workforce, then happy days and I'd require no spousal support. But we all know that isn't likely. So given that choice for me to sah was joint, that dh has enjoyed an easier career ride and home life, I do not see that post divorce he should continue to get the benefits and me not. It is making my sah of greater consequence than we agreed to iyswim.

Cherry whatever makes you think SAHM don't pay tax?? Those who had a good enough salary before DC and have a DH with a salary that means they can be SAHM will at least have savings in the bank, maybe even investments, all for which they will pay tax, and it will also contribute to the overall wealth of the family. You don't really think that all SAHMs don't have 2 pennies to their name?? We're not living in a Jane Austen novel you know.

Many families are better off financially and consequently pay more tax by having one parent work in a less restricted way, than if both are working around the DC and each other and possibly "curtailing" each other's earning capacity to some extent. I know many families who have moved into a different wealth bracket, not from plugging away doing long hours, year upon year, but because one of them had an opportunity to go the extra mile to get a bonus / payout / IPO etc and they took it. Maybe it meant a lot if travel or stress, but if it pays off, everyone benefits. So even in the worst case of a separation, SAHMs may be in a better financial position than if they had been single and working all those years.

To be honest, very few women become long-term SAHMs if it's too financially restricting. For instance, if you knew you could earn a comparable income to your husband, you're far more likely to be be tempted to return to work. You might take the hit for the pre-school years because you don't want to use childcare, but probably not be a SAHM indefinitely.

I always find that working Mums that criticise SAHM and also SAHM who criticise working Mums are jealous. If people are so
critical on something that doesn’t affect them than to me it’s jealousy and they wish they could be in the others shoes. Otherwise why do they care?

At the end of the day we’re all Mothers doing the best for our dc to suit our given situation; surely that’s all that matters!

But imagine you were a brilliant surgeon, or a brilliant scientist, or a brilliant headteacher or MP. Surely you can see how sad it is to have those women give it up to use their abilities raising children, when the reality is those abilities could be saving and changing lives everywhere?

The obgyn who delivered my children by c-section decided to stay home with her children once she had her fourth. My GP did the same once she had twins. Looked up the obgyn recently and discovered that she had gone back to work as a science teacher in a boarding school (school specialised in sport her children were into) and her husband had also retired from his highly lucrative financial career and was running a not-for-profit.

I was reared by a mother who insisted we should always have careers of our own and I will do the same with my daughters but I also don't see why I should have to value someone's contributions based on what some corporation or government decides is a suitable wage.

cherrycokewinning on the one hand you are utterly dismissive of the "corporate monkey" men and yet think women should only be valued if they are in similar corporate monkey jobs?

Where did I say that?

Btw I’m not saying brilliant surgeons aren’t becoming SAHMs. I’m saying it’s a shame they’re not remaining as brilliant surgeons

I get paid £40k a year for doing nothing. Marvellous. Director of my husbands business so makes sense for us both to be paid £40k a year from a tax perspective rather than him earn £80k and be a higher rate tax payer!

I drop the kids, walk the dog, smoke a few fags, watch a bit of telly and clean the house/prepare tea.

I love it! Easy money

To be a feminist is to have choice. And I was surprised to find that I choose to be a sahm for a few years (per child). I never imagined I would. But I have chosen to and continue to choose to. It won't be forever.