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.

Do children really do better at school with a parent at home ?

Ds goes to a very high achieving school majority both parents work

And those that I know who went on from his junior to high school with the most offers both parents defiantly worked and are high achievers themselves I think this is more likely than a parent being at home

Yeah but you don’t parent “to achieve a particular result” (unless you hothouse your child into being a doctor who will look after you when you’re old )
You just love and nurture the child and the future unfolds in mysterious ways in front of your eyes. Sometimes out of your control.
It is time consuming and elements of bringing up a child are certainly work (toilet training, teaching manners, supervising homework etc) but parenting as a whole... I don’t think it meets the definition of work really. It’s a relationship, not a series of tasks.

@EnthusiasmIsDisturbed of course it is possible to have a child excel at school with both parents working. It's just that statically kids do benefit from a parent at home

so even though most women on here don’t seem to think it is work just, something that everyone does and not a big deal at all, Government statisticians seem to think it’s unpaid work done mostly by women www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/articles/womenshouldertheresponsibilityofunpaidwork/2016-11-10

It's just that statically kids do benefit from a parent at home

Source for this?

My understanding was that the most reliable indicators of achievement were education level of mother and household income.

Not that school achievement is the be all and end all, but if we’re going down that route.

The general idea that looking after children is of no benefit to society

People haven't said that. They have said being a SAHP is not. Not saying I agree again but you've completely twisted what people have said into something different.

Obviously we have to care for children whether that comes from a SAHP or in the form of nurseries, nannies etc...

They are talking about the literal act of staying at home to provide that care rather than working.

@LaurieMarlow so you assume sahm are not as educated? in fact it's because I am I know I want to be extremely hands on in all my childerns education so I can make sure they are getting the most out of it and know that education does not stop when school hours end

"Do children really do better at school with a parent at home"
Of course not. It could be argued the opposite, in that parents who work, are setting a good work ethic to their children and put more quality time to their offspring.

The attitude to 'women's work' as

No effort
Of no value to society

While in fact all this unpaid labour keeps everything propped up

Is an attitude I'm surprised to see being propagated by women in 2020!

It harks back to very old fashioned ideas about how men should be rewarded for the work they do (whether in a paid job, or with kudos when they are out with kids doing the shopping or whatever) while women should get 'their' work done quietly, effortlessly and for free. And if people are paid for 'women's work' it is low value.

Women all over the world do, and always have done, the majority of domestic work, often while also working for money.

This is a trick of capitalism I think? Or something. All the unpaid labour is essential to keep everything going. But at the same time, it's inconsequential and not really anything at all.

This thread is very interesting but I can't get to grips with some of the attitudes at all.

so you assume sahm are not as educated?

No. My understanding is that mothers’ education is a strong indicator of performance regardless of whether she works or not.

Jeez I despair of this site sometimes.

I want to be extremely hands on in all my childerns education so I can make sure they are getting the most out of it and know that education does not stop when school hours end

True of many, many WOHP also.

www.edcor.com/a-mothers-education-level-impacts-her-children/

ifstudies.org/blog/the-many-ways-mothers-education-matters

lots of women complaining that "men's" work gets recognised and housework doesn't... well 5he obvious solution to that is that if there were no SAHMs then that kind of menial work wouldn't be gendered... and if your husband / partner does pull his weight get rid of him

“What is the benefit to society that only a SAHP can provide?”

Well obviously children are part of society and, for the most part, most children would prefer to be with their mums than a nanny or keyworker. So that’s one important benefit.

Like anything else, the more time you have to focus on something, the more you will tend to do.

I have a DD who is dyslexic. Because I’ve been SAH, I’ve been able to read up and become quite knowledgeable about how to help her, in a way I don’t think I could have undertaken had I been working. Because the school were useless, I devised a whole plan for her tbh, over some years and it wasn’t easy. She went from being virtually told she would need a special school at the age of 6, to getting all 8s/9s at GCSE. Maybe she’ll be more “valuable to society” now in an economic sense, which is how some people apparently understand value. Who knows? I’d say she has more options though.

When my son was home revising for his GCSEs, I was able to support him in the day and keep him on task. He also got all 9s. I pretty much went though the history curriculum with him.

All my DC have done the 11 plus for schools in London and I’ve had more time to get informed about this and to help them get through.

I was able to do quite a lot of running around for them in the day if they needed stuff from certain shops etc. Again, not a big deal, but it did free up time at weekends etc do we could get on with the more important stuff.

I’m not asking for any recognition here or gold star or whatever. I’m just saying that there are a few areas In which I believe I’ve been able to go the extra mile and my kids have had more help and opportunities because I’ve been a SAHM. I really don’t mean to sound smug. But the pp asked several times so I’m being honest from my personal experience.

Also, I’m not claiming to do my husbands job by any means, but my being here does give him a lot more flexibility and he’s been able to progress a lot further than if he’s had to worry about getting home at a particular time each day. His work benefits society economically and he would say I’ve facilitated him doing that. Again I know that’s not a popular thing to say on here, but the fact is, if you look at very successful men who work well above and beyond, it is often the case that they have a particular family structure. It is what it is.

I also do quite a lot for his elderly parents and visit them at least two days a week. Some people might need to rely on the state for this kind of support.

I’m involved in various charities and fundraising that I might not have become involved in had I been working full-time.

Again, none of this is a big deal, but bring SAH is like anything else. It is what you make of it. And as for “society”, my children, in the here and now, are the most important members of society - as far as I’m concerned anyway

That's an individualistic solution though when what's needed is a change in societal attitudes. The chipping away approach makes change v gradual and of course things can go backwards. There are a lot of women on this thread who feel that all the domestic work that has to be done, including childcare, is low to zero effort and value. Apart from anything else this feeds into the pay rates of women (and men in those roles) who are employed to do those things (if women doing it see it as a nothing, then I don't think men will disagree!).

Why women are so keen to say all this stuff is not work (or labour, or whatever word people want to use) is beyond me.

Oh and I’m also doing a second MSc in the last year or so which will hopefully benefit society when I do return to work on a self-employed basis.

Loads of SAHMs use the time to retrain once the DC start school. And they do a lot of voluntary work too.

My post was answering themark

And of course you can still look after children when you are in paid employment but probably not at the same time. A lot of mothers and fathers in full time paid employment have to our source their child care e.g nurseries. But of course they don’t outsource all of it. Also to all those stay at home mothers out there unless you are spending all your time watching tv and going for lovely lunches, you are all most likely to be doing some unpaid work, which does NOT just benefit your family unit but benefits society at large as your children will pay taxes or be productive members of society which will pay for pensions and services. Same with working mothers who do unpaid work that is cooking dinner for children, checking their homework etc etc. If you did not do this unpaid work, society would fail in a spectacular fashion. Also I have been called a troll, haven’t got a clue and someone who knows nothing about work because I have stated what is really mainstream economics and social policy thinking. Looking after children is unpaid work with social benefits outside the family unit. It is also unpaid work which is still done primarily by women. And from my perspective of course it can be harder than paid employment. Women may do it to benefit the family unit, just like people work in paid employment to benefit their own family unit. Just answering the AIBU. Is looking after children work? Of course it is!

Cosima1 if you are doing jobs which involve looking after your children cooking for them cleaning for them rest assured most economists and policy makers in gov will think you are doing unpaid work with societal benefits. It s the simple truth. It’s not making a big deal out of Nothing!

Just seen you are doing voluntary work and looking after elderly parenta too. All unpaid work with benefits to society as it will save taxpayer lots of money in terms of social care for parents etc. Who knows whether someone like you would contribute more to the state in paid employment?

I just realised while I’ve been a SAHM, I did renovate three properties and I sold them on. So probably I might be allowed to call that “work” (even though it just felt like a break from the family tbh). A change is as good as a holiday, so they say and it was a bit joke that But I genuinely didn’t feel I was “contributing to society” particularly, just because there was an economic element to this. I was blatantly trying to make as much profit as possible for ourselves, obviously. So if I was in fact to deem myself a property developer by profession, I wouldn’t regard myself as contributing to society any more than so do now. I guess it’s a bit like the saying, “charity begins at home” - for me I felt like the most important contribution I could make over the past years since having DC was at home. But that will change as they get older.

I have to support my ds to do his homework less so as he gets older but plenty of encouragement (as many other working parents)

Otherwise it wouldn’t get done ...

This isn’t a five minute task

My issue with all of this is that these things are being described as if they're work or jobs when actually they're just parenting.

If a bloke came on here and talked about babysitting his kids, he'd quite rightly get torn a new one. But here we have a whole thread talking about looking after your own children as if it's something remarkable. It's important yes, but why try and place a financial value on it for any other reason than to justify choices which no one should have to justify?

If you do these things all day, or if you do them in a few hours, if you can spend 30 minutes packing a bag or 2 minutes packing a bag, it really doesn't matter. The commodification of something as natural as parenting is a sad state of affairs, it reflects the overarching discourse of this society which is reductionist and focussed largely on money as opposed to people.

Well there economic value and then there’s human / societal value and sometimes these may overlap, but often not.

Has anyone actually talked about ”babysitting their kids?” I haven’t seen that.

Has any SAHM claimed to be remarkable?

A few people have listed tasks, sure, but if you think about it, it’s a shame they feel under pressure to do this at all.

'The commodification of something as natural as parenting is a sad state of affairs, it reflects the overarching discourse of this society which is reductionist and focussed largely on money as opposed to people.'

Well sure but saying it is of no value to society, economy etc is also elevating paid work over unpaid. Which is also focusing on money and ignores the fact that unpaid caring, domestic work, voluntary work etc keeps everything ticking over.

Well there economic value and then there’s human / societal value and sometimes these may overlap, but often not.

My issue is that what is repeatedly talked about on here is the economic value, why are we perpetuating this? It's as though people feel the need to justify something which doesn't need justifying

Has anyone actually talked about ”babysitting their kids?” I haven’t seen that.
Not in so many words but repeated reference to looking after your own kids or outsourcing childcare which is massively reductionist and doesn't account for the complex role of a parent.

Has any SAHM claimed to be remarkable?
No one (SAHM or WOHM) has claimed to be remarkable but there's a hell of a lot of one upmanship on here (on both sides), people trying to justify why their role as a stay at home parent is valuable, how much the impact of what they do with their child will contribute to better exam results, improved economic contributions in later life etc.

A few people have listed tasks, sure, but if you think about it, it’s a shame they feel under pressure to do this at all.
Exactly my point, why join in with trying to commodify something which is much more than a list of tasks? It undermines it. Why play the game of making everything about money and making economics the measure of success? It sets parents apart from each other, creates division and conflict. When arguments get ridiculous (organising bags for example), it undermines one perspective and magnifies the difference which creates more division.

And on that note, it isn't the 1950s anymore men and women are both capable of parenting and if we continue to talk about women's work, well... it doesn't need saying really does it?