SAHPs

[AvadaKedavra1]

So a little conversation on FB, well a debate.

Here is snippet:

Me: Those who choose to spend time as stay at home parents should be able to afford such a luxury. If you can't afford it, it's simple, go to work.

Poster: little bit ignorant.. I’m not saying their whole life I’m saying until their 5. Until they’re emotionally ready to be away from their parent

Me: Some people don't have that luxury. 5 years is a long time to be out of the workforce. Sorry but I want the best for my little girl and I want her to know when she grows up she can have a career as well as children. You won't have much luck apart from a minimum wage job if leave work for 5 years. Career gone. Poof.

Emotionally ready? I was 16 weeks when my mum went back to work full time and our relationship is great, she's my rock. I'm also a lot more realistic knowing my mum had to go out an earn a living. Christ these days it is a rare luxury for a mum to be at home for the first 5 years, it isn't financially sustainable for most. Besides, kids need to mix with other children, learn to be separated from mummy/daddy well before they go to school. My little girl will be just turning 4 when she goes to school.

You are the ignorant one if you are that blind sighted that you think it's that simple to just stay at home for 5 year when you can't afford it!

I definitely don't agree with 'let's stay at home for 5 years and rely on the benefit system to put food in my child's mouth'.

Ludicrous and entitled.

Was BU? What are your thoughts?

I’m a SAHM and it definitely isn’t a luxury. We aren’t well off, but we’d struggle even more with childcare costs if I went to work. I don’t see what it matters to you, to each their own

Science is clear. It is an inconvenient truth of our modern lives with much mass cognitive dissonance surrounding it
Science is not clear at all. It is only when you see t the piece of science you want to read and even then, calling science is argumentable.

The reality is that some kids do very well at nursery from a very young age and those don't as a result of a number of factors. You will have emotionally troubled kids who had a mum at home all through their childhood and some who went to nursery from 3 months old as much as you'll have very successful happy adults who had a mum and at home as much as those who were in FT nursery almost from birth.

People are constantly trying to justify their choice by belittling others. They also love to pretend that their choices are fully for the benefit of their kids rather than theirs.

It doesn't matter if one picked to be a sahm or a ft work long mum, just accept your choice and the consequences of that choice whatever they are. It's people who make a choice with likely consequences who then complained of the consequences and how unfair they are that annoy me whether they chose to work or not.

@SleepingStandingUp my salary isn't going up until April once I go back as I've already said.

As per my original gripe, it was with people who are SAHP for years relying on state welfare, not someone who is on crappy maternity pay during their leave having it topped up whilst baby a few months old. I came here to broaden my perspectives on the matter not take idiotic responses.

@donttakethebiscuit again, I came here to broaden my perspective on my opinion of people staying at home and relying on state welfare to do so with no eanred income.. I've not commented on SAHP as a whole at all. I'm also assuming you aren't related to my opinion as you don't solely rely on state welfare to fund your life.

I agree that being a stay at home parent is a luxury not an entitlement.

That being said, unless you’re on a decent wage/ have a partner making a decent wage then covering childcare can be Unaffordable whilst they’re little.

YABU for thinking the only way to show your daughters there’s more to life than just being a mother is too work yourself, and YABU for thinking there’s something wrong with women choosing to be housewives.

@SleepingStandingUp I probably shouldn't have used the words 'benefits britain'. I meant people who stay at home SOLELY relying on state benefits just because they choose not to work. You aren't one of those, your DH works to provide for you. Curious, why didn't you go back to work? Do you intend to at some point? Even still, your husband works to provide for you.

And until I posted this thread, I hadn't thought of a few things that have actually changed my perspective, like it's essentially the same to claim for childcare costs as it is to claim doing it yourself.

@Stinkytoe I have not said there was anything wrong with being a SAHP, it was about SAHP with no other income and choose not to work but solely rely on state welfare.

Even still following some reasonable responses on here I've seen and understand some different perspectives.

How odd to copy and paste a debate you’ve had with one person on Facebook. If you must have another debate (or argument) then just start one with your own opinions.

@TheRealShatParp I should have done that yes, but I wanted different opinions and was a bit lazy, I just cut and pasted to save me tine typing.

IdentifyasTired made some very valid points.

@TheRealShatParp I agree.

One: Not working until a child is 5 is a luxury, if you can’t afford to stay st home then get a job!

Other one: I want to continue to work, but no childcare support from family and so having to pay for it means I’ll be worse off so can’t afford to work!

Swings and roundabouts, everyone is just trying their best, so what if different people have different situations....that’s life, and why only one opinion doesn’t count for all.

Hope that helps

Why were you on a benefits support group in the first place if you don't claim benefits?

Curious, why didn't you go back to work? Do you intend to at some point? Even still, your husband works to provide for you
Well not entirely. He was the lower wage earner hence out entitlement to both lots of benefits. We couldn't cover what we cover and have any semblance of "extras" (money for school trips, a week break in the UK, magazines for DS, the odd night out with friends) and if fact probably couldn't cover the basics for long

@Bluestitch OP is in UC until she gets her £47 k salary in April

Oh seriously just piss off ad live your own life....ugh.
What a nasty thread.

Thanks Sleeping, missed that.

I'd probably be someone you'd criticise for being a SAHP OP. I don't work and we receive tax credits so technically a 'benefit mum' I guess. But a closer look into our circumstances and you'd see that one of my DC has SN. He was badly let down by the school system so I have to home ed him, limiting my ability to work ( but saving the state money as he isn't receiving the state education to which he is legally entitled). My DP works full time, lots of hours and a mixture of shifts including nights which would be impossible for me to work around. Not a career job (as he was a care leaver who didn't have family support or opportunities for further education) but better than minimum wage and lots of overtime available so not worth jeopardising so that I can be seen to be working too. The fact is you don't know people's situations, their finances, their support systems or their health issues. Maybe the woman you quoted became defensive because she was posting on a support group and you chose to criticize her based on knowing nothing other than that she doesn't currently work.

Childcare fees can be more than a wage once you need to pay for full days rather than just your working hours

Mumsnet is always the same. Privileged posters who can’t understand how the cost of childcare exceeds wages for some people. And obviously the person with the low wage is at fault because they should have tried harder to get a highly paid job. There’s no point trying to explain - some people genuinely can’t see past their own privilege.

@Cheeeeislifenow it wasn't deliberately nasty, I wanted to hear different views and I thought what better way than ask on mumsnet, well I guess I won't make that mistake again!

@Gogreen thank you

Mumsnet is always the same. Privileged posters who can’t understand how the cost of childcare exceeds wages for some people.

Yep, not everyone has high flying careers. Who do they think are staffing the nurseries they send their kids to, or supervising lunchtimes at school, or working in the supermarket they stop at on the way home from their well paid job? People doing vital work for low wages.

@Bluestitch the woman on the support group is fortunate enough to work from home.

Children with SN is an entirely different situation as are disabled adults. When I said 'benefit parent' I meant someone who is plainly choosing not work even though they can and solely relying on state welfare with no eanred income, you have a partner earning to provide.

Having said that, I've eaten a bit of humble pie since reading the responses and can see both sides now.

you have a partner earning to provide.

So it was single parents on benefits you were having a dig at then?

I can’t get that excited about people claiming benefits, in the grand scheme of state spending it really isn’t that much and these people can hardly be living it up on the amount they get. Children can’t be a privilege reserved for the wealthy and the reality is that house prices and the cost of childcare make life and especially life after children very expensive. I doubt people are giving up hugely well paying jobs to raise their children on benefits, it’s more likely a case of it not being a viable option to work after factoring in the cost of childcare. Not to mention the fact that a low income job will attract numerous benefits, maybe more overall than not working!

As others have said, you don’t know why other people’s backgrounds and circumstances are so you shouldn’t really judge their lifestyle choices. Even if someone purposefully has a bunch of kids of benefits forever, I certainly don’t feel jealous of them or their choices, it must be a very hard life even though it doesn’t involve work. I would think two parents in well paid jobs who can easily afford childcare and a cleaner etc have an easier life than someone scraping my on benefits. It doesn’t seem like this magically easy option to me. Regardless of the parents, choices, children need money to survive and need someone to look after them. I’d rather save my vitriol for corporate taxation arrangements.

A SAHP is a luxury but has very many downsides.

It leaves a person vulnerable to their partner or the state unless they are independently wealthy. It doesn't show a work ethic to children. If claiming benefits, research has shown it can mean limited outcomes for children (hence pupil premium), it can mean limited experiences due to lack of income etc.

I don't think it equates to a more emotionally stable chid, that'd disn to the actual parenting not the parents job status. Plenty of good and bad parents whether they are SAH or working.

Given the government pay for preschool, it's obviously more beneficial for many than being at home. If it made no difference , it wouldn't be high on the agenda to spend money on I would imagine.

I’ve been a parent for many years, and in that time I’ve worked pt, had an extended career break, retrained and now I’m back ft. I’m very lucky in that I have never had to claim benefits of any sort and I was able to make the choices I did to suit both myself and my family.

Having been a sahm for 10 years, I can understand why anyone might want to have quality time at home with their dc, and the loss of confidence in ones abilities that such a long break can bring. I can also understand that some women love their careers and don’t want to give them up when they have their dc, and that this doesn’t mean they love their dc any less than those that choose to stay home with them.

I think it would be helpful to spend less time judging women for the choices they make, and more time enabling all women to have the same options. I do think that if we can subsidise childcare, we could equally subsidise a parent to remain home for the early years if they so choose. Neither is the ‘wrong’ thing to do if it suits an individual family. I know how fortunate I am that I had choices available to me, and I would hope that everyone would have the same opportunities.

Only on Mnet looking after your own kids is seen as a luxury.
Good grief having a job where you can afford childcare is a luxury.
It's certainly not luxurious not to want to work for nothing, or working actually costing you.
I think it's a bit stupid to work for nothing when you could be with your kids.
Luxury, no.