Why is MN so horrible to SAHMs?

[Sweak]

I'm sure this will go down like a lead balloon, but it's been bothering me.

Every post I see written by a sahm, no matter what her issue is, has at least 5 posters telling her she must get a job Or implying she's lazy and even worse 'contributes nothing.'

Lots of posts under the guise of telling women they need to protect themselves financially are criticising this choice (not always but many). I would never dream of criticising a mother for working so why is it acceptable to criticise those who decide to stay at home to be with their children? (I claim zero benefits fyi in case that's a suggestion). I accept that a very very long period out of work will leave you vulnerable if you split due pension, but 5 years or so? The pre school years...I don't think so. Obviously being a sahp is only going to work if you have a decent partner who shares income.

And finally so many posters implying that by being a sahm you are making it basically impossible to be employable ever again unless you run the PTA!

Full disclosure...I'm a sahm, and have been for four years, but I've decided to return to work. I've secured a job for sept (teacher), and got the second job I had an interview for so the suggestion sahm are making themselves unemployable for having a few years out doesn't ring true! However due to MN my confidence about getting a job was so low.

Can't we just support each others choices in life even if they differ to our own?

@TheKeatingFive

Just because you are a sahm or thinking of becoming one, doesn't mean you don't understand basics like pensions

It’s very common to find SAHP who’ve taken that decision without thinking about pension provision. I’ve seen it time and again on here.

I mean, it’s an issue for working people also, very few of us pay enough attention to our provision. But actively leaving the workforce for a period of time has a big knock on effect. Which many are doing absolutely nothing to mitigate.

Pension poverty is a big issue for women. Their working patterns play a big role in that.

Perhaps we should see more of these patronising comments levelled at part time working mums too then? Or even women taking multiple maternity leaves?

I would argue there are some who haven't considered the pension issue adequately. However, plenty have and have taken the gamble.

I personally think the pension issue is for long term sahms to very very carefully consider. 4-5 years is going to have an impact yes, but it's not the disaster many on MN make it out to be

Whilst this sounds well meaning, I do think it is patronising. Being a sahm is a risk just like lots of decisions in life are. Just because you are a sahm or thinking of becoming one, doesn't mean you don't understand basics like pensions
I haven't said people who are a SAHP don't understand pensions.
The poster was saying that people don't talk about the benefits of being a SAHP and only focus on the risks. I'm only pointing out that the reason people will talk about the risks and financial implications is because it's something that quite a lot of posters on those threads haven't considered.
There's thread after thread after thread of but DP says I can stay I the house if we split... DP says he will share his pension... DP says I can have whatever money I like... DP says that he would never make me and the kids homeless... I can always go back into work and because I'm in a good position now... no I'm not on the deeds of the house but DP said it's just a piece of paper... something about common law marriage...

That's before getting into how many threads there are further down the line to the effect of "I became a SAHP and am living with DP's house. I'm not on the deeds, have been out of work for 7 years and now want to leave the relationship, but I can't because I've not got the means to fund a house of my own and the childcare costs. AIBU to think that I should have 50% of the property when I've stayed at home?" Then there are always dozens of posters arguing that the fact an adult didn't bother to make an informed decision is proof that the law should be changed to remove the option of legally single cohabitation for everyone else.

Plenty of women make informed choices regarding working or staying home.
Plenty of women don't make informed choices and then others get arsey or defensive when other people suggest research around the situation would be wise.

Perhaps we should see more of these patronising comments levelled at part time working mums too then?.
Give over with the patronising rubbish.
It's not patronising to encourage women to make informed choices and to present that information on relevant threads.

As a group, we need to wise up and we need to be advocating that all women have access to the information required to make informed decisions because society is not set up to protect us.

4-5 years is going to have an impact yes, but it's not the disaster many on MN make it out to be

It’s about more than just being a SAHM, yes. Most of us, not in receipt of decent defined benefit pensions aren’t doing enough, particularly in the early years of our career.

Add 5 years out, just as others are beginning to take it seriously and start saving, then yes that probably is very significant.

But yes it’s different case by case. Someone who has been very diligent in contributing beyond the ‘norm’ through their 20s can better afford a break than others.

@LolaSmiles

Whilst this sounds well meaning, I do think it is patronising. Being a sahm is a risk just like lots of decisions in life are. Just because you are a sahm or thinking of becoming one, doesn't mean you don't understand basics like pensions I haven't said people who are a SAHP don't understand pensions. The poster was saying that people don't talk about the benefits of being a SAHP and only focus on the risks. I'm only pointing out that the reason people will talk about the risks and financial implications is because it's something that quite a lot of posters on those threads haven't considered. There's thread after thread after thread of but DP says I can stay I the house if we split... DP says he will share his pension... DP says I can have whatever money I like... DP says that he would never make me and the kids homeless... I can always go back into work and because I'm in a good position now... no I'm not on the deeds of the house but DP said it's just a piece of paper... something about common law marriage...

That's before getting into how many threads there are further down the line to the effect of "I became a SAHP and am living with DP's house. I'm not on the deeds, have been out of work for 7 years and now want to leave the relationship, but I can't because I've not got the means to fund a house of my own and the childcare costs. AIBU to think that I should have 50% of the property when I've stayed at home?" Then there are always dozens of posters arguing that the fact an adult didn't bother to make an informed decision is proof that the law should be changed to remove the option of legally single cohabitation for everyone else.

Plenty of women make informed choices regarding working or staying home.
Plenty of women don't make informed choices and then others get arsey or defensive when other people suggest research around the situation would be wise.

have been out of work for 7 years and now want to leave the relationship, but I can't because I've not got the means to fund a house of my own and the childcare costs

• well this would be an issue for any woman who is unmarried living in a house you aren't on the deeds to. A job may make leaving the relationship easier or it might not.. a pp stated how it made it harder for her as she wasn't entitled to certain financial aid. Again it's about individual circumstances

**don't make informed choices and then others get arsey or defensive when other people suggest research around the situation would be wise.

I can see why they do...they don't have a time machine. Berating someone for choices already made doesn't help

@LolaSmiles I think you make good points.
Perhaps I'm just being sensitive, but I do still feel very much that the default position is that being a SAHM, even in the short term, is something to be ashamed of on mumsnet. I haven't noticed that so much outside of mumsnet.

Whereas somebody asking about taking a career break for travelling, for example, would probably be encouraged

The thread is “Why is MN so horrible to SAHMs.” It became a discussion about the financial risks involved in being a SAHM after the OP mentioned she hadn’t had that much difficulty getting back into work and, for reasons only known to them, some people don’t seem to want to hear this. I don’t know why - I think it goes against the stereotype of SAHMs as financially doomed that they have in their minds.

The truth is, as with most aspects of life, there are the rules but, just as often, there are exceptions to the rules. I can totally understand how some women would find the idea of becoming a SAHM unimaginable. I get that. Many SAHMs will be in precarious financial positions but equally, many will not. That’s all I’m trying to say. I wish people on here knew more SAHMs in real life because then they would see this for themselves. As long as you go into it with your eyes wide open and with your husband’s full support, it’s really isn’t the hapless, doom and gloom scenario that gets depicted on here. It really isn’t inevitable, depending on how you go about it.

There are loads of marriage dynamics that are unusual to me. On MN I’m surprised to read how many couples have separate finances. There are married women living like second class citizens in their own homes because they’re in a lower salary than the husband, but they seem to have misinterpreted this as “independence.” Personally, I wouldn’t touch a relationship like that with a bargepole, but when other women explain their reasons for separate finances, I do t just dismiss them. I try to just listen to their first hand experience of a life that’s different to mine and respect that it works for them. But when you are a SAHM and you try and explain why it doesn’t have to be as precarious as people seem to want to believe, you get patronised; or it’s insinuated that you’d husband might be slagging your off in the office (always an anecdote about that), or even that your experience is several degrees from the norm so shut up.

@LolaSmiles

Perhaps we should see more of these patronising comments levelled at part time working mums too then?. Give over with the patronising rubbish. It's not patronising to encourage women to make informed choices and to present that information on relevant threads.

As a group, we need to wise up and we need to be advocating that all women have access to the information required to make informed decisions because society is not set up to protect us.

No I won't give over. I, and others, do find it patronising.

In some cases it's very important to raise the issue. But if the poster has explained they aren't in any financial vulnerability (not all sahms are) then it should be left alone.

Worse still are the posters telling a sahm in difficulty who has recently started looking for work, or just got work, she was stupid to make herself financially vulnerable.. it's done now, and she's taking action.

- well this would be an issue for any woman who is unmarried living in a house you aren't on the deeds to. A job may make leaving the relationship easier or it might not.. a pp stated how it made it harder for her as she wasn't entitled to certain financial aid. Again it's about individual circumstances

A woman without kids is more likely to be working so not reliant on her DP. But she would be given advice to contribute to bills but not to the mortgage, don't pay for furniture or renovations and save money rent money to buy her own property.

It may seem patronising but sometimes you need to see it in writing from strangers.

@paloma10

The thread is “Why is MN so horrible to SAHMs.” It became a discussion about the financial risks involved in being a SAHM after the OP mentioned she hadn’t had that much difficulty getting back into work and, for reasons only known to them, some people don’t seem to want to hear this. I don’t know why - I think it goes against the stereotype of SAHMs as financially doomed that they have in their minds.

The truth is, as with most aspects of life, there are the rules but, just as often, there are exceptions to the rules. I can totally understand how some women would find the idea of becoming a SAHM unimaginable. I get that. Many SAHMs will be in precarious financial positions but equally, many will not. That’s all I’m trying to say. I wish people on here knew more SAHMs in real life because then they would see this for themselves. As long as you go into it with your eyes wide open and with your husband’s full support, it’s really isn’t the hapless, doom and gloom scenario that gets depicted on here. It really isn’t inevitable, depending on how you go about it.

There are loads of marriage dynamics that are unusual to me. On MN I’m surprised to read how many couples have separate finances. There are married women living like second class citizens in their own homes because they’re in a lower salary than the husband, but they seem to have misinterpreted this as “independence.” Personally, I wouldn’t touch a relationship like that with a bargepole, but when other women explain their reasons for separate finances, I do t just dismiss them. I try to just listen to their first hand experience of a life that’s different to mine and respect that it works for them. But when you are a SAHM and you try and explain why it doesn’t have to be as precarious as people seem to want to believe, you get patronised; or it’s insinuated that you’d husband might be slagging your off in the office (always an anecdote about that), or even that your experience is several degrees from the norm so shut up.

even that your experience is several degrees from the norm so shut up.

That pretty much sums up the response to me saying I found a job relatively easily. I do acknowledge my profession is in demand so it might have taken longer if I did something else...but I'm certain I would have got a job eventually!

People who have been to prison for 5 years plus still get jobs (obviously not teaching!). I'm sure sahms can get one too.

it’s really isn’t the hapless, doom and gloom scenario that gets depicted on here.

Exactly what I was trying to say in my op. You put it more clearly though

@mainsfed

- well this would be an issue for any woman who is unmarried living in a house you aren't on the deeds to. A job may make leaving the relationship easier or it might not.. a pp stated how it made it harder for her as she wasn't entitled to certain financial aid. Again it's about individual circumstances

A woman without kids is more likely to be working so not reliant on her DP. But she would be given advice to contribute to bills but not to the mortgage, don't pay for furniture or renovations and save money rent money to buy her own property.

It may seem patronising but sometimes you need to see it in writing from strangers.

Why shouldn't a working woman without children contribute to the mortgage? If she lived in a rented home she would have to pay rent.

I agree it's not ideal she's not on the deeds but maybe the relationship is relatively new and he doesn't want her on the mortgage.

I can see why they do...they don't have a time machine. Berating someone for choices already made doesn't help
Of course they don't have a time machine, but when the poster (along with dozens of others) seem to think everyone else should lose the right to cohabit without automatically handing over your assets because some adults don't do their research, it's hardly surprising that people object to pushes to remove their rights due to other people's poor planning.
Many adults with children deliberately choose to cohabit rather than marry to protect their children's inheritance. The "automatically give me half because we live together and i didn't wise up" people are happy to remove other people's ability to protect their children's inheritance because they didn't do their research. There are many adults who choose to cohabit without marrying because they wish to be legally separate, but on the "it's unfair I'm not entitled to assets" threads people are happy to remove other people's ability to cohabit freely.
The response to all of this is that it's so unfair that adults who walk blindfolded into being financially dependent on another so others who do their research should lose their freedoms.

MyPetSaurus
I think it depends on the person's security.
If someone single says "I'm going to have a career break and go travelling because life's too short", they'll probably get a congratulations and some questions about their house insurance if they're a homeowner. They're also financially independent and funding their own travel, own living expenses and will sort themselves out when they return.

If someone says "I'm going to give up my financial security, travel the world with DP because he can fund our travels by working remotely as we travel", then the replies would be very different and posters would be rightly advising caution.

@LolaSmiles

I can see why they do...they don't have a time machine. Berating someone for choices already made doesn't help Of course they don't have a time machine, but when the poster (along with dozens of others) seem to think everyone else should lose the right to cohabit without automatically handing over your assets because some adults don't do their research, it's hardly surprising that people object to pushes to remove their rights due to other people's poor planning. Many adults with children deliberately choose to cohabit rather than marry to protect their children's inheritance. The "automatically give me half because we live together and i didn't wise up" people are happy to remove other people's ability to protect their children's inheritance because they didn't do their research. There are many adults who choose to cohabit without marrying because they wish to be legally separate, but on the "it's unfair I'm not entitled to assets" threads people are happy to remove other people's ability to cohabit freely. The response to all of this is that it's so unfair that adults who walk blindfolded into being financially dependent on another so others who do their research should lose their freedoms.

MyPetSaurus
I think it depends on the person's security.
If someone single says "I'm going to have a career break and go travelling because life's too short", they'll probably get a congratulations and some questions about their house insurance if they're a homeowner. They're also financially independent and funding their own travel, own living expenses and will sort themselves out when they return.

If someone says "I'm going to give up my financial security, travel the world with DP because he can fund our travels by working remotely as we travel", then the replies would be very different and posters would be rightly advising caution.

I do actually see your point and agree with what you are saying. I do think if someone's already made choice and it's not worked out there are ways to explain/support without having a go at them for decisions already made

I think the points you make are important and really explain why marriage isn't just a bit of paper

“People who have been to prison for 5 years plus still get jobs (obviously not teaching!). I'm sure sahms can get one too. “

@MyPetSaurus

Amongst the women I know it’s a mix of factors that mean they’re struggling to return to work.

A lack of confidence, needing to renew professional memberships/qualifications, not being up to date with developments in their profession. The longer out then the harder to get back in.

Amongst my friends who were SAHP there is a reluctance to use breakfast club/after school club to enable them to work. There is definitely some negatively attached to using paid childcare at all for some people. This means that they want a job that is school hours and flexible. These are like hens teeth.

Of course DH has had those extra years to climb the ladder and is now earning too much for them to possibly have any flexibility to help. Which is a husband problem but definitely is a massive part of the issue.

[quote Piepinkie]@MyPetSaurus

Amongst the women I know it’s a mix of factors that mean they’re struggling to return to work.

A lack of confidence, needing to renew professional memberships/qualifications, not being up to date with developments in their profession. The longer out then the harder to get back in.

Amongst my friends who were SAHP there is a reluctance to use breakfast club/after school club to enable them to work. There is definitely some negatively attached to using paid childcare at all for some people. This means that they want a job that is school hours and flexible. These are like hens teeth.

Of course DH has had those extra years to climb the ladder and is now earning too much for them to possibly have any flexibility to help. Which is a husband problem but definitely is a massive part of the issue.[/quote]
I've seen this as well. After a certain point the DH's "right to priority work" becomes so established that its very hard for the SAHM to push back against this.

I have a friend who has been off work for 10 years: her kids are both well established at primary and her DH supports the whole family. She claims to be desperate to get back into the workplace but won't use breakfast or after school clubs because the DH says its a shame for the kids to be away from their mum unnecessarily. It's absolutely daft: not least because she's already done the hard SAHM bit and its only an extra hour in the morning and evening.

It will take a mindset shift on the part of the whole family to make that shift and potentially for the DH to subsidise her for a bit to do unpaid work etc to get back into the game. But he always sees that as a trade-off to be made against kids having time with their mother. He's not abusive or a bastard by any stretch of the imagination but its really quite an unconstructive approach.

If she had stayed in paid work or gone back to work earlier she wouldn't have to be pushing water uphill like this and it would just be built into the fabric of family life. It's much harder to do all this when you've been economically unproductive for a decade than if you've had a year's mat leave.

People who have been to prison for 5 years plus still get jobs (obviously not teaching!). I'm sure sahms can get one too

I'm not sure this is a useful comparison.

As a very experienced careers guidance professional I know that anyone who has been out of the labour market for a prolonged time is more likely to find it challenging to return to work, particularly if they previously worked at a senior level or had a job that requires specialist knowledge or skills.
At no point am i suggesting that it is impossible and it can very much depend of the sector and the individual. But it is an issue.

@Sweak I think it's a case of being a SAHM isn't the norm now and lots of women now enjoy working or have to work and can't understand putting yourself in a position of just looking after a family and home and being dependent on a partner for finances. Because they feel that way they see a SAHM as perhaps being a bit lazy or boring because they work their life will be alot busier doing everything a SAHM does and working so to just stay home seems bizarre. Some people measure their success and achievement in life by their job others like me I'm a sahm /housewife don't and I think it's hard to understand from each others side sometimes

@DelBocaVista

People who have been to prison for 5 years plus still get jobs (obviously not teaching!). I'm sure sahms can get one too

I'm not sure this is a useful comparison.

As a very experienced careers guidance professional I know that anyone who has been out of the labour market for a prolonged time is more likely to find it challenging to return to work, particularly if they previously worked at a senior level or had a job that requires specialist knowledge or skills.
At no point am i suggesting that it is impossible and it can very much depend of the sector and the individual. But it is an issue.

Of course it's an issue. The smaller the gap the easier it will be.

I'm making the comparison as it's not as bad as many on here make out. I'm not saying they can necessarily return (initially) at the same level either. That's the trade off for staying at home.

What I'm saying is its not a complete disaster for your employability to have 4-5 years off (as it's implied on MN) I'm not saying it has no impact at all

[quote Tittyfilarious]@Sweak I think it's a case of being a SAHM isn't the norm now and lots of women now enjoy working or have to work and can't understand putting yourself in a position of just looking after a family and home and being dependent on a partner for finances. Because they feel that way they see a SAHM as perhaps being a bit lazy or boring because they work their life will be alot busier doing everything a SAHM does and working so to just stay home seems bizarre. Some people measure their success and achievement in life by their job others like me I'm a sahm /housewife don't and I think it's hard to understand from each others side sometimes[/quote]
I think you have a good point about how we measure success in this country.

Sweak
Yes, I would agree there should be no berating. It's possible to strongly object to those pushing for law change that would limit most people's freedoms to account for other people's choice to drift into substantial life changes without doing their research without being unpleasant to the person who is in a tricky situation.

On the whole, whilst there's always a few rude people, most of the time people flogging the 'Get Informed' horse are doing so because the OP or others are advocating a level of foolishness in the decision making that makes the OP vulnerable.

In my opinion people should back off if it's clear a woman has made an informed decision, but are reasonable if the crux of their thinking is "but DP is a nice guy and he says...".

** overwrote my own text

In my opinion people should back off if it's clear a woman has made an informed decision, but are reasonable in highlighting implications if the crux of their thinking is "but DP is a nice guy and he says..."

@LolaSmiles

Sweak Yes, I would agree there should be no berating. It's possible to strongly object to those pushing for law change that would limit most people's freedoms to account for other people's choice to drift into substantial life changes without doing their research without being unpleasant to the person who is in a tricky situation.

On the whole, whilst there's always a few rude people, most of the time people flogging the 'Get Informed' horse are doing so because the OP or others are advocating a level of foolishness in the decision making that makes the OP vulnerable.

In my opinion people should back off if it's clear a woman has made an informed decision, but are reasonable if the crux of their thinking is "but DP is a nice guy and he says...".

Yes all that sounds reasonable

What’s fairly typical for the demographic of SAHMs I’m able to directly comment on, is that they generally become a SAHM at the age of maybe 30. These are invariably professional women with at least a first degree. However, I’m not sure any of them are particularly concerned about re-entering the workforce at the point they left off. Those who are, tend not to become SAHMs, to be honest. I think, at this stage, a lot of women have been working for almost a decade and now welcome a shift in focus - like a reset, if you can call it that.

If you have several kids it can easily be a decade before they’re all in school. In that time, you change. You’re a different person at 40 to the person you were in your 20s and you may well have a different perspective and want different things at that stage of life.

At this point, you notice quite a lot of women retrain and I’m now seeing this quite a lot. To be fair, they have the privilege to do so because of the DHs income and I’m not denying this or saying it’s available to everyone. Nevertheless, it’s very common in my experience and it’s a certain type of career trajectory at this point which will enable women to work for themselves and more on their own terms in a way they can still fit around the growing family. So I have friends who have retained as nutritional therapists; psychotherapists, etc - roles you couldn’t have been taken as seriously in when you were younger. I have friends who have started very successful .com businesses. One friend did such a job of getting her three kids into a particular school, she now runs a successful tutoring agency. Personal trainers, yoga instructors is another one that enables mums to work flexibly. Interior designers, all sorts of things really. Things that wouldn’t have occurred to them in their 20s probably.,

It’s not really true that these women sit at home brain dead and losing confidence. I don’t recognise that depiction. I was having coffee with a friend the other day who has also been SAH a long time and she showed me a whole website she is being funded to produce to help women from certain ethnic minorities feel less apprehensive about accessing GPs and healthcare. She even goes around community centres and schools now and gives talks about FGM as she herself is from a country where this is shockingly still the norm. Women may not be reaching the dizzy heights of corporate success, but really they are doing all kinds of things.

Somebody upthread mentioned confidence loss. For my part, I don’t feel as if being a SAHM has made me lose confidence in terms of general life. What I have experienced though, is it is easy to allow a subtle shift in your relationship to set in if you’re not careful, in which your needs / agenda / time become subsumed into his. My husband has been very facilitated and while it was worth it in family terms (financially speaking), they do get a little too used to you being there as default and everything taken care of. So you have to be careful there. Being a SAHM definitely wouldn’t suit all women, but for those who find they are suited to it, you just have to own it and make of the opportunity as you will. It totally depends on what your first profession was; whether you even want to go back into that; how long you are planning to SAH for and what the barriers to the-entry are. This will be totally unique to every individual and I think as long as you weigh up the pros and cons and have your husband’s full support, you can definitely mitigate against the doom and gloom scenario that gets purported as inevitable on MN.

What I'm saying is its not a complete disaster for your employability to have 4-5 years off (as it's implied on MN) I'm not saying it has no impact at all

It really does depend on the sector.
A big problem we have is that there is very little support for women returners to work or any adult needing careers support tbh.