Looking after your own children IS work

[Bumpitybumper]

Oxford Dictionary definition of "work":
activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a purpose or result

AIBU to suggest that the people that suggest that looking after one's own children isn't work are wrong and in some cases are actively trying to devalue and undermine the people (usually women) that do the majority of childcare?

Would be really interested to understand how anyone can read this definition and argue that looking after children isn't work.

@Dooofle

I didn’t say society should be grateful. I said those hours of child rearing need to be carried out by someone and are of value to society.

Presumably none of the working parents are leaving their kids to entertain themselves during the hours they are at work. They appreciate that ensuring their children are looked after all the time, and not just in the evenings when they’re there, is important.

And presumably we’d all argue that raising decent people who will become the workforce and society of the future will benefit that society (or be detrimental, depending on how well or poorly that task is carried out by all concerned).

Beetroot you're completely missing the point.

A lot of parents work. Their babies weren't left naked, starving and fending for themselves.

All of the things you have said are also done by working parents (or childcare professionals).

FWIW I'm a SAHM and pay shit load of tax. Work that one out

Let me guess. You have taxable gains or income?

Dooofle you stated that caring for children has zero value for society.

That's drivel.

'And presumably we’d all argue that raising decent people who will become the workforce and society of the future will benefit that society (or be detrimental, depending on how well or poorly that task is carried out by all concerned).'

You've completely changed your mind now, then!

Lol only a SAHM could make a ridiculous post like this

@Beetrootrocks

??

Oh sorry rain, I misread that as dooofle.

I agree that it's important to society that children are looked after.

Find it bizarre that anyone would say there's no value in it.

I agree that it's important to society that children are looked after.

Well, sure. If you decide to have children, there's a considerable social cost to not raising them properly.

I didn't say there's no value in childcare. I said being a SAHP benefits only the immediate family unit. Being a SAHP is not a requirement of caring for a child.

BeetrootRocks

Why so many people have decided to redefine the word to only include paid work is odd to me.

Because language isn't static. It evolves over time. And because successive governments and officialdom over the last couple of hundred years have chosen to use the word 'work' to signify something extra on top of the normal day-to-day labour of a family and household. You make it sound as though a few disgruntled WOHPs have suddenly decided to change the definition. They haven't.

I'm sorry to hear that you find your children such hard work, OP. Hopefully, it will get easier as they get older.

I have never really seen parenting as work, personally. Yes, it requires some effort, but so do all relationships in my experience. I don't find it harder to be with dc than with any other family or friends - quite the contrary, actually, I'm probably at my most relaxed when I'm with dd.

'There is value in people looking after their children

To that person's immediate family unit, yes. To society?? I'm not sure.'

If people neglect their children it is bad for society.

Obviously.

Beetroot you realise that being a SAHP or neglecting a child aren't the only options?

So if someone says they have been working on their car,

You would say this is an incorrect use of the word because work only means paid work

Ok.

Most people would accept that statement as fine, I would say.

We also need to change words like homework, housework, clockwork

I'm not suggesting people neglect their children beetroot. You're being willfully obtuse.

I'm saying you don't not need to be a SAHP to care for or raise a child.

Is the dishwasher working?

Well I've not paid it, so no

You stated quite clearly that there's no benefit to society in people looking after their children.

Obviously people will argue with that! And not just me. Plenty of people in the thread were ???

“There's nothing wrong with being a SAHP. But I really don't agree that it's valuable to society.”

These bloody mums! How dare they want to stay with their own children. Just imagine! What could they possibly think they could have to offer their own children? Strike them down in flames, I say, Useless!! Children should just be put in a cupboard 8am-6pm. Or get another woman in to “just do childcare” and pay her minimum wage - because the children won’t notice the difference. Who cares? The whole thing has no value anyway. Meanwhile, the mums could be day in oh-so-valuable meetings in offices, or sending valuable emails inbetween MNing. Then, they’d be really VALUABLE humans.

You're trying to suggest that I think people should neglect their children as the alternative when that's quite obviously not what I was saying.

@MarginalGain

We have an aging population and we need people to decide to have children. Rearing these children (whether with the help of SAHP, working parents, nannies, nursery workers, teachers, childminders and any combination of the above) is an important and worthwhile task that will ultimate benefit and become society as a whole.

Not only is it of benefit to society when people look after children, it is also of benefit to society when people look after themselves.

There are a great many people who end up in precarious situations due to age or mental and physical health.

So if someone’s managing to take care of their own health by cooking nutritious food, exercising, socialising, getting into a good sleeping routine, maintaining positive relationships, keeping their house maintained, that’s a kind of work.

It’s the most important work of all - a bit like putting your own oxygen mask on first on a plane. It’s doing the work of maintaining your own health as far as you are able, and that makes you more able to contribute to society.

No I'm not saying you think children should be neglected

But that you seem to take a very individualistic and materialistic view of what is valuable and what is not.

Having children in a society that are cared for and fed properly and so forth is of value to more than just that individual child/ their immediate family.

@Oooom

These bloody mums! How dare they want to stay with their own children. Just imagine! What could they possibly think they could have to offer their own children?

Again that's literally nothing like what I've suggested.

I completely understand why people choose to be SAHMs, I would happily be one which I've said over and over again.

If I were though I wouldn't expect anyone else to be grateful for it. It benefits me and my family.