To wish I could be a SAHM

[iwouldbuyyouadress]

There is no way that this will ever happen. Even going part time is not an option.

But ah to not have to be charging around at 5:30 in the morning. To get home in the daylight. To see my child’s teacher. To not have to be cramming everything into the weekends. To attend baby and toddler groups with youngest and have ‘mum friends.’

Won’t happen.

Nice to think about though.

Thanks for clarifying @G5000 and I do agree with what you've just posted. It needs to be an equal partnership in one way or another or it would bet ugly and resentful.

*get

i can completely understand how the grass looks greener but honestly being a SAHM is not all that! i'll be going back to work, hopefully part time, and aiming not to have it all but for the best of bath!

I do feel a bit grumpy about "facilitated men", ie. those who can spend long hours at work and go away at the drop of a hat because their wives do all the childcare. It can make for an office culture which is harder for parents who do have childcare responsibilities.

Obviously I don't think individual SAHMs should be held responsible for their husbands' office cultures. The criticism should be directed at the office culture, not the SAHMs. But when certain posters say "Oh, my DH has done better at work than he otherwise would have because I take care of all the domestic side", I think "Great for your family, but not necessarily great for everyone else".

@TheOrigFV45 can I ask how you managed on that arrangement before your children were at school? I'm in a similar position and would love some insights!

facilitated men

@bibliomania

I completely agree! I fucking hate that this is the state of things. And, what often happens is the SAHM loses out in the long run.

Have you ever seen a thread where a (frequently unmarried) SAHM has taken the hit to her career, her facilitated man has played a blinder at work at her expense and now he's run off with his colleague who didn't do the SAHM thing and earns the same as he does?

I mean, obviously this is the worst case scenario, but the system fucking stinks for all women.

He thinks he's responsible for his success and doesn't understand why others can't mimic what he's achieved or even the time he dedicates to work.

From the thread you just posted a link to @bibliomania, which I think is bang on.

Based on some posts on here though, some women are guilty of this^^ too. But you are absolutely right and so is the op of that thread.

My point was only about the men and women who think the mans career has been facilitated by the sAHM. That may be true but it’s shouldn’t. We are quite happy to accept helpless men who need their lives run for them to progress their career, without celebrating the women who manage to do it alone

Yes, that thread was an eye-opener for me - I think the phrase "facilitated men" is a brilliant one and needs to enter the lexicon.

@windmills88

I'm afraid to say I only started working from home full time when my younger son was already at school. Before then I was office-based.

However, I still could have done it as I would have sent him to nursery just like he was when I was working in the office.

For me though, it came at a good time. I think I would have struggled with younger children - that feeling of wanting to collect them from nursery but knowing you need to work. It's easier when they have the core hours at school. I do use after school care a couple of times a week, and DS has after school clubs which come and go, and other days he comes home and entertains himself until I finish. At 10, he's quite able to do that, but I find it hard mentally.

I’ve done both. I worked when my children were babies because I found being at home with them awful! I stopped working when my youngest was two. They are now at school and it’s definitely easier but still very busy and in a schedule for activities.

I think there is stress either decision. Time (rushing around juggling everything) versus money (lack of pension, feeling vulnerable at times). Overall I worry a lot about money. I think I needed to change my job rather than give up my job. I was recently offered a part time job but the money was a fifth what I had previously earned full time! For the stress of juggling and disruption to the kid’s lives, it wasn’t worth it financially. However if the money was better, a part time job would be the best of both worlds.

It's not all its cracked up to be!

I sometimes fantasise about being a SAHM when I'm waking up in the dark/unable to find time to clean my house properly/missing my DD.

I know without a shadow of a doubt that Id hate it if I had to do it for any serious length of time.

The issue for me is the "all or nothing" nature of it -- you either work all the hours god sent or you don't work at all. I am a lone parent and live in London so for me there's absolutely no way I'd get a job with reduced hours which paid what I need.

I'd never want to be totally without work, the loss of sense of self, purpose, isolation would do me in. But it would be nice to feel that my DD was a clear priority over work -- sometimes the nature of work makes me feel she is an afterthought squeezed in around it :(

@windmills88 I work from home with a 9mo DD. Basically I use nap times and then work in the evenings and at weekends when DH is around to watch her. She goes to bed at 6.30 and I work from 7-10ish usually several nights a week, plus she naps for about two hours in the afternoon. At weekends, DH will have her for a few hours more. I also use her independent play and meal times to do stuff like respond to emails and minor admin stuff.

It does mean that I don't have that much 'downtime' to myself and I end up staying up from 10-12 watching crap on TV just to have some 'me' time, but it also means I get to spend every day with DD and not have to put her into childcare before I want to.

I think when she's a bit older we might do a day or two half days of nursery a week, but for now I'm happy to sacrifice some time to myself so that we can spend so much time together while she's so little. In terms of actual hours I work, it's less than full time, but because I actually work pretty solidly during those times I get enough work done to be full time in terms of earnings.

I'm very grateful to be able to do this, though, and I think it does require a supportive partner as well as a baby with an easygoing temperament who sleeps decently. A high needs baby wouldn't be compatible with that lifestyle I think.

I’ve done all versions except traditional part time. So ft with nanny, wahm with and without cc, sahm

The hardest on all of us was the ad hoc consulting work where I’d have to be at a meeting at say 4.00 Wed not much warning sometimes. I used a nanny but she couldn’t guarantee being free. Then Dh would get home and I’d have to hand the dc over and say I’ve got work to do which caused irritation both sides. Full time was easier, great after school nanny did the work I was paid for and didn’t take anything home.

bibliomania

"Obviously I don't think individual SAHMs should be held responsible for their husbands' office cultures. The criticism should be directed at the office culture, not the SAHMs. But when certain posters say "Oh, my DH has done better at work than he otherwise would have because I take care of all the domestic side", I think "Great for your family, but not necessarily great for everyone else".

Hear hear. I also don't blame SAHMs who have been the "facilitators" as individuals its a no brainer for many families if the man vastly out-earns the woman. But I also can't help thinking that the perpetuation of this state of affairs continues to make life difficult for women who have through no choice of their own -- to do everything and I sometimes wish they would acknowledge this.

Having to factor in childcare/school runs etc and not being able to engage in pointless presenteeism is still very damaging to women's careers in industries like mine despite the fact that there's little evidence that any of this shit makes you more effective. All the senior men bar a few have SAH wives or partners and are able to do vast amounts of networking/being seen/presenteeism which I'm not able to do. And they will probably do better than I will financially and will be harder to fire.

So when someone pipes up to say her being a SAHM has helped support her husband's stratospheric career development I do sometimes wonder if she has stopped to think of the way this continues to hold back women like me in numerous ways.

Surely the solution longer term would be to remove the stigma around the necessary infrastructure of being a working parent (ie being looked down upon for flexible working, not having to do endless after-hours drinks events) so women who do have to work could be acknowledged (and remunerated) appropriately and the men who are currently working all hours could spend more time with their families. Just a thought...

I've been FT, PT and SAHM since having children. They all have benefits and pitfalls.

Being a SAHM works for us as a family. DS1 has sensory issues and some SENs and finds a school day much tougher than his 10 hour nursery days. He usually emerges from school ready to blow and needs quiet 1:1 time for a while to defuse. Full time wrap-around care in a cramped, mixed age room was awful for him.
Life was manic. DH pulls his weight, but when he's away which can be short notice, I had to do everything solo. Co-ordinating joined-up parenting is another layer of mental load. I was on the go 17-18 hours per day between planning/ marking, dealing with children, formal work hours, squeezing in pick-up, a few hours of family life then resuming planning and marking when the DCs were in bed.

As a SAHM, I seem to have found plenty of other ways to keep a certain level of chaos and urgency in life I don't enjoy the domestic burden and it does dent your connection with the world and sense of worth. The personal time is great though.

Part-time was generally good but there is more than your fair share of work as some areas of expectation don't go down with hours and salary. Teaching 3 days a week still averaged out as full-time hours compared to a 9-5 role, plus there is more domestic load.

Different balances suit different individuals and families. SAHM to school age children definitely beats babies/ toddlers (I remember the relief of dressing in nice clothes and being alone in my car looking forwards to herding reluctant teenagers ). Assuming no substantial changes to life, I can't see me voluntarily seeking work until the DCs no longer need wrap around care. Fortunately in my field, supply work is a fairly easy entry route back in, plus I've kept up relevant voluntary work.

@BeatriceTheBeast oh, I see what you mean. Still think it’s much easier being a SAHM though as you can fit in all your chores around your child’s downtime. When you’re working you have to do it all when you get home, which leaves you barely any time to actually see your kids. If I had the money there’s no way I’d carry on working when I could be at home with my child, personally. We’re all different though.

My eldest who is in primary does activities after school eg drama, tennis, football which leaves the weekends free & also helps me as I can pick up him a bit later. He wants to do this so would be doing if I didn't work. I find it easier to do house admin at work as my mind is clearer &

So many clichés on this thread

The worst being the assumption that being a SAHM is universally easier than being a WOHM irrespective of the number of children involved, their temperaments/SEN/age etc. It also neatly glosses over the fact that all jobs are not equally hard and some are actually objectively not particularly taxing for the majority of the population. There are so many variables involved with being a SAHM or WOHM that such generalisations are never going to hold true across the population but they still create a stigma that SAHPs are lazy women (as let's face it most SAHPs are women) that have taken the easy option.

Another gem is that it's a privilege to be a SAHM. As discussed so many times in this thread, lots of women are trapped in the SAHM role for financial reasons and insisting that they should be grateful for this is pretty shocking. Even when a family has elected to have a SAHP then why is the SAHP the privileged one? If it's a mutual decision to have a SAHP then surely the whole family will enjoy the privilege of this, especially where the other parent actually prefers to WOH. Again, the whole privilege idea is rooted in the belief that bring a SAHP is a comparative doddle to being a WOHP.

Finally, the whole argument that as a WOHP I do everything a SAHP does AND work. If we are talking about children not yet at school then this one completely baffles me and seems so ridiculous that I can only assume that those that trot this argument out must mean to be intentionally goady.

@Bumpitybumper in fairness I found life a lot easier when I was on maternity leave. Staying on top of work and then staying on top of home life, making sure I’m a good parent to dd is difficult to juggle.

I don’t think you can say WOHP are being goody for saying that. Everyone has different lives, what may seem easy to me might be the hardest thing to someone else and vice versa. Best to not judge when you don’t know the situation.

@MustardScreams
I was specifically talking about WOHPs being goady when they claimed they did everything a SAHP of non-school aged children did AND worked. I mean surely short of the SAHP neglecting their child(ren) or putting their child(ren) into childcare for exactly the same amount of time as the WOHP this would be impossible?

My wider point was that generalisations about SAHPs were problematic and couldn't hold true for everyone. In your specific circumstance with your specific children, income level, approach towards being at home, support network, job etc you found maternity leave easier than being at work. Fine! What wouldn't be fine is to extrapolate that SAHPs always have it easier than WOHPs. I know reading the last part of your post that we are in agreement on this.

@Dongdingdong I know what you’re saying but I think “easiness” isn’t right. Firstly there is more mess created entertaining a child at home, or even not actively entertaining them. Mine was like a tornado.

Then there’s the isolation. It was really hard so in that way I would never find it easier.

Having done both I would do working but then I love my job and could afford to do it until free hours/tax free years.

Having said that SAHP and the kids at school. 100% jealous 😂

I’ve been SAH for many years and I think there are many factors which make it viable as opposed to difficult -

• Like most things, it boils down to money essentially. If the loss of your income doesn’t make much difference to the overall family finances, then it may well make sense to SAH

• Your personality - do you actually find children interesting? Not everyone does. Do you need the structure of a job, or do you prefer to structure your own day (around the kids)!

• Your DH’s attitude - does he actively prefer you to be at home? What would be his attitude to childcare - Would he prefer not to use it if at all possuble? Does he value the benefit of you being there with the kids more than your income? Does he travel a lot or need to work long hours and needs to be “facilitated?” Is he likely to treat you as a skivvy if you’re at home, or will he respect you in that role?

Where you live- if you live in an isolated area, being SAH will be much harder and lonelier than if you’re in a town or city with lots going on for kids in your doorstep and everything very accessible.,

• How sociable are you - you need to get out and about every day if you’re a SAHM and it helps if you can easily make friends with other mums in the same boat so your kids have others that play with etc,

• Financial set-up - If your DH is one of these that insists in separate finances and that malarkey DO NOT BE A SAHM!

• Identification - is your job important to how you define yourself? Or are you not particularly bothered?

• Motivation - what motivates you most in life - your work, your DC or both? In which lifestyle choice would you feel most fulfilled on a personal level?

Job - do you actually enjoy your job or is it just a means to an end?

• SEN - are there any additional needs that your children have because this obviously makes a difference

• How many children if you actually have?

I’m sure there’s lots more factors, but that how I see it anyway.