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.

@NoIDontWatchLoveIsland

I don't right now, I'm on maternity leave. DH and I earn more than enough that i don't need to work. I choose to work 4 days a week for various reasons. I'm very very happy

Well you don't sound VERY VERY HAPPY. You sound VERY VERY angry.

And putting a smiley face at the end of your post is irrelevant, because you have shown your anger, and your disdain for stay-at-home-mums throughout all your previous posts on here.

Shinycat

Call yourself what you want love, it can't make me respect someone for that choice.

@Shinycat

Are you bitter because people look down on you for doing fuck all between the hours of 9am-3pm (or school run time) because let's face it.. your house doesnt take 6 hours to clean all day every day, and you could have in fact got off of your arse to get a job.
Rather than relying on others to support your lifestyle (benefits or OH). Are you bitter because some people would rather work and fund their own children's hobbies and lifestyles but you choose not too because.. being a SAHM Full Time is the best job. (Including the hours where you're.. not look after the kids..)

I dislike laziness shinycat, so I won't lie, I don't understand what someone does all day when the children are at school. When I was at work between children DH and I fitted in all the home admin/jobs in addition to working.

Why do you need to be called a SAHM? Why is that better than being unemployed?

It's possible I won't return to work for a couple of years after this baby, and if I do so, I will describe myself as "not working at the moment". Because I am ok with that, it's our choice as a family and we afford it without any recourse to benefits of any kind.

Who are you benefitting by being a SAHM?

Yourself and your family.

Nobody else.

Ah, back to "there's no such thing as society".

100 years ago elderly people were taken care of by those not in paid employment, children were watched over by those not in paid employment and not roaming around in gangs.

By having a child who has attention paid to them, homework helped with, talents nurtured e.g. going to a sports lesson, music tuition. Etc. You are going to end up with a well balanced musician, artist, nurse, street sweeper.

If you have a child left home alone on YouTube and video games, crap ready meal parents out of the house at 7 back at 6 (yes they need to pay the bills and survive) you are not getting the same kind of child as the first.

I would prefer a society filled with the first kind of person rather than the second.

Young children require care. Male parents, female parent, paid employees. This doesn't stop because they are 6 or 9 or 11 or 15, you could even argue they need more care.

SAHP who actually parent, are benefitting society just as much as bus drivers or office administrators.

If your kids are at the age where they spend more time at school than home during the week and their school hours are FREE..
Find something else to bloody do during the day. You're a mum 24/7 yes. But you're not playing a mum role when the kids arent bloody about. You're just a regular person

By having a child who has attention paid to them, homework helped with, talents nurtured e.g. going to a sports lesson, music tuition. Etc. You are going to end up with a well balanced musician, artist, nurse, street sweeper. If you have a child left home alone on YouTube and video games, crap ready meal parents out of the house at 7 back at 6 (yes they need to pay the bills and survive) you are not getting the same kind of child as the first.

Hahaha is this serious?!

@NoIDontWatchLoveIsland

I think you're assuming that SAHP's with school-aged children ONLY look after their children, though. I work, but the SAHPs I know are all massively involved in organisations that benefit the community as a whole, .e.g. the landscaping example above. She works PT but does't really need to financially. She's also a Master Gardener who donates her time to improving (with permission) green spaces in our city.

Surely that's valuable work?

I know another parent with older kids who's currently fundraising for a local school that provides specialist education. She organises all sorts of events for them, applies for grants and funding (writes the entire applications) as she has expertise in that area. I think they both contribute greatly to society!

I've done both - SAHM and working mum. Working mum (juggling kids needs, house admin, job, commute etc) was much, much harder 'work'.

so I won't lie, I don't understand what someone does all day when the children are at school.

it only makes you a very boring person I am afraid.... I only work to earn cash, I personally don't need a job to give me something to do or a purpose, I pity people with so little interests that they have nothing.

You would expect people at home to get rid of ALL the chores and crap whilst they kids are at school, and have time to actually spend on their family? How hard is that to understand?

if someone has the luxury not to juggle everything when they come home, surely they would be very stupid not to?

Clearly some people are not that happy about their own situation, if you are so angry and bitter about SAHM, you just sound jealous. Insulting others is not going to help you, is it?

At the end of the day though does it matter? I’d rather there was a debate on how to value sahps better or to extend shared parental leave, support part-time working better, more school hours jobs etc as I think it is an important that children are able to spend time with their parents. For what it is worth, I’d have higher expectations of a nanny. At the moment, I’m faffing on my phone while my baby is playing. I’d not be happy paying a nanny to do the same.

This thread’s gone all weird. Seems to be a lot of resentment towards SAHMs! (And I’m not a parent so no skin in the game in either direction).

Of course it’s work! I’m amazed that people don’t view it as work. It has recognised economic value but is generally undervalued. The law considers it to be work when dividing assets in divorce. What it isn’t is paid work. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t work.

I don't understand what someone does all day when the children are at school.

Some people are lazy and do fuck all.

Some people deep clean the house, do 'emotional labour', plan meals, fix things in the house, mend clothes, curtains, visit lonely neighbors or look after elderly relatives, do the PTA thing, look after a garden, maybe grow food etc. Just because you don't have the imagination to be busy and productive it does not mean other people don't.

Another example. At one job I was a receptionist. All I had to do was answer the phone and let people in. At another reception job I did filing, took deliveries, room bookings, set out meeting rooms and cleared them away. Someone from the first company would say 'being a receptionist is just sitting around'. Not necessarily true that your experience is representative.

@NoIDontWatchLoveIsland
So if your argument is about jobs facilitating the circulation of money in wider society then there are plenty of professions including law and advertising that actually extract money from the wider society i.e. For every £ they earn they reduce wider society's spending power.

Of course it could be argued that some of these jobs generate a benefit for society that extends beyond the monetary but some don't. Also some jobs may help circulate money and generate wealth but are ethically incredibly questionable. Those working in the tobacco, alcohol, junk food industries (plus many many others!) arguably create an overall disbenefit for society.

Paid employment isn't all about helping others and facilitating economic growth.

It's not that hard to think of these job roles. Think pf

Who are you benefitting by being a SAHM?

Yourself and your family.

Nobody else.

bollocks. My SAHM friends are the ones volunteering at school, so my kids benefit. They are also the ones picking up the slack on inset days and various days off. So they benefit me.

Pretending that a parent is not important in their child's life is even more stupid. Some of us can work but have a support group so it works well for the kids. Choosing to stay at home for your own children is very commendable to.

When you hear the moans on Sunday nights and how much the majority of workers cry about "is it Friday yet", and let's face it not have the life-and-society-ground-breaking-important-career that they think they have... Being paid to work doesn't make you better or more important

I never said volunteering isn't valuable! But we don't need it. If we did, it would be paid.

If the local school was getting more in fundraising than it would cost to hire a fundraiser, they would hire one.

There's a bit of a grey area where someone is kind enough to do a role an organisation would otherwise have to pay, and declines the salary. I would class that as work, with the unpaid salary essentially being a form of donation.

None of the SAHPs I know do such volunteering etc. I know 4 well, they go to the gym a lot and spend vast amounts of time cleaning a la mrs hinch, a lot of time is spent on personal grooming and they all meet for coffee a lot. It's lovely that their can afford this. 3 of them have well paid partners happy to fund this. Sadly the other one's husband grumbles to mine a lot about her not working, its a real bone of contention which is tough on him.

I never said volunteering isn't valuable! But we don't need it. If we did, it would be paid.

HAHAHA

talk to the government about school funding will you.

Seems to be a lot of resentment towards SAHMs!
yes, it's jealousy. A lot of jealousy.

I am a bit jealous myself, but at least I own it. And at least I am paid to be on MN

How can I possibly be jealous when I could be a SAHM if i wanted to and I choose not to .

All the chores and crap do not take 6 hours every day. As I've said it's lovely if a family can afford to have a parent not working while kids are at school, but it's not as much work as a full time job, so I simply dislike use of the term "full time".

I never said volunteering isn't valuable! But we don't need it. If we did, it would be paid.

I've been grateful for help from Citizens Advice bureau when I couldn't afford a lawyer. They are unpaid (yes I know there are some paid staff).

Volunteers do so so much from the goodness of their hearts. That's one of the most idiotic things I've heard all day.

How can I possibly be jealous when I could be a SAHM if i wanted to and I choose not to

why do you resent them so much then?

Some people have a busy stressful job, some haven't. Some people have family help and support, others haven't? Why the need for this ridiculous competition?

Who cares if a SAHM choses to spend 5 hours making a costume whilst another one spends 15 seconds buying it in Tesco? YOU might be bored at home, others find things to do. Keep your job then, if you can't find anything better to do! You are also free to find a 2nd one to occupy your evenings and weekends, plenty of people work or study on top of family and job.

I never said volunteering isn't valuable! But we don't need it. If we did, it would be paid
Capitalism gone mad!

We don't as a society need everything that we are willing to pay for and we aren't willing to pay for everything we need. Just look at the vulnerable and mega rich in our society.

If the local school was getting more in fundraising than it would cost to hire a fundraiser, they would hire one.

Yes, but their salary would come out of that money, wouldn't it, resulting in less cash for the children! Professional fundraisers don't come cheap, but a parent with a background in fundraising who's chosen not to work for a while is a huge benefit.

Some people genuinely recognise that they've been v. lucky in life, by being born into situations or working their way into situations that mean they don't need to work. They actually want to give back to society- this fundraising lady is one of those people.

The ones I can't stand are the children of celebs, for example, who seem to do bugger all with their lives. What a waste of potential.