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?

Mildred - I’d say diversification is always good, if you can. As I said, my husband had a few years as an options trader. Overall, he found it soul-destroying. He’s never worked for anyone since. He’s not the corporate type. He founded and sold a .com and is now he has another company and is a non-exec director to maybe 8 or so others which are very diverse. Nothing has ever been fixed with him.

I came to London initially for an opportunity in ballet which was fine for a few years until I sustained an injury. So that was that. I then stayed, and did a part-time MA at the Tavistock which was the foundation to the clinical child psychotherapy training. But I couldn’t commit to the clinical training at the time (late 20s) as it was a 4-year commitment leading to a doctorate, but mainly it was extremely expensive. Also, looking back, I was too young to have undertaken it then. I didn’t have the life experience and years behind me to do it justice. Anyway, then I met my husband and married very quickly and I had 4 kids during my 30s. It was extremely full on. But never boring for me because I find child development fascinating and here are four of my own! Anyway, once I had the headspace to actually think, I realised the clinical training would still not have been feasible for me, given my family commitments. So change of tack and more recently I’ve just finished another MA (far more manageable) which qualifies me as an adult psychotherapist (I’m done with kids). This is the next challenge for my late 40s and 50s and I’d like a private practice. I’ve been out of employment 18 years (can’t believe it) , but I’ve survived and I’m not insane and still optimistic even at my age! Just got the eldest two through the whole “A-levels” and “GCSEs” shenanigans, so we’ll see what’s next for me.

I should add that you can use talents positively as a stay at home mum too. I think my mum did. I dont think she wasted her talents in that she was an incredible mum and excelled.

Tbh I wouldn't be a sahm if I wasn't married or couldn't afford one wage and both weren't on the mortgage or both own their home. If one of you has to give up work for a length of time to look after both of their children the deal should be if you were to spilt up, everything should be fairly divided. I would love to say some men or (I guess women, not to be sexist but it's very rare) would not just leave their partner high and dry from sacrificing their career to look after both of your children but it really does happen and you need to be sure it won't happen to you.

My mum was a stay at home mum for a lot of our time growing up but worked later when we were older and so am I. But I'm completely secure knowing if we did split up it would be equal. I intend to work when my oldest is in high school which is in a couple of years time and I feel lucky I can spend their younger years at home. If you were like my grandma she never worked except maybe a Saturday job before she married and was looked after by her husband the entire time and outlived him. She does fine financially not rich at all but just comfortable.

My Grandmas both worked opposite shifts to my Grandads when my parents were young, my mum did the same. My dad would come home at 5 and my mum would go to work in a bar at 7. I wonder if there was more flexibility then. I felt like we had the best of both worlds growing up, always a parent present but all the nice things from having 2 incomes. When we went to school my Mum started her career again and got a 9-5 job and my grandparents had us after school.

@DelBocaVista

It's horrible to everyone.

Yep. It has become a really horrible place. I'm on the verge of deleting it completely which is a shame because I've received and given lots of support over the years but it's just plain nasty now.

Incidentally, I've lost count of how many times I've been told I'm a terrible parent for working ft. You really can't win.

There's nothing wrong with working full time, please ignore anyone who says otherwise. Just like there is nothing wrong with being a sahm if it is the right decision for you. Ignore the nastiness. Agree that it has got worse over the years, I was reading an old thread from years ago and it was on AIBU and it was so supportive.

@Sweak you asked why folk are negative towards sahms, it's because many think they are being lazy or feel that the sahm brigade make them feel guilt for working because they are disadvantaging their

The majority of Mumsnet members work outside the home for various periods. SAHM often present their decision to stay at home as being the best way to parent. By default that insinuates that people who are working at all are letting down their kids.

And yes, me being at home with sod all to do but "family admin" whilst my kids were at school was incredibly lazy and self indulgent!

I agree with @Treacletoots and @Hardbackwriter

Tbh you seem very unaware that other jobs and professions will be affected by years out of the market.

For some couples it makes sense for the higher earner to be the one to keep working (which is obviously statistically more likely to be the man).

But the type of woman who deliberately sets out to find a rich bloke, often fulfilling particular criteria such as being stunning, probably doesn't give a shit about what society thinks. Just like how somebody who sells coke to obtain a lavish lifestyle of cash and fast cars probably doesn't give a shit either. They'd rather do that than work in a factory or on the bins and it's a conscious choice. If you haven't got a good education/prospects or just aren't academic then it's probably even more attractive.

@MrsAmaretto but surely you must have felt that the family as a whole benefited from this set up. At the very least it meant that you had more free time as a family to focus on other things then chores in the time you did get to all spend together. I don't see that as self indulgent at all putting what benefits the whole family first

[quote MrsAmaretto]@Sweak you asked why folk are negative towards sahms, it's because many think they are being lazy or feel that the sahm brigade make them feel guilt for working because they are disadvantaging their

The majority of Mumsnet members work outside the home for various periods. SAHM often present their decision to stay at home as being the best way to parent. By default that insinuates that people who are working at all are letting down their kids.

And yes, me being at home with sod all to do but "family admin" whilst my kids were at school was incredibly lazy and self indulgent!

[/quote]
Well me and plenty of the sahm 'brigade' on this thread have been able to explain our choices without bringing any working parents down. We've said it was best for our circumstances. That's not saying it's the best for everyone. In fact me and others have stated several times it's not for everyone and that's fine. It's a shame in your previous post you weren't able to show the same level of courtesy

It's a shame you haven't been able to see this thread for what it is...a thread about being decent to others and accepting other people have different choices. It's not a sahm Vs wohm thread like you are trying to make it

@crabbitandproud

I agree with *@Treacletoots and @Hardbackwriter*

Tbh you seem very unaware that other jobs and professions will be affected by years out of the market.

I don't think you've actually read my comments fully then. But by all means beat that drum as it's a good way for you all to dismiss the point I'm making. Being a sahm isn't a disaster like MN makes out!

Sweak
Thank you very much. I don't think it could have been timing. Location wise I was trying within an hour radius for all jobs and was willing to properly commute for higher paying jobs because we would have been paying more hours childcare so yes probably living in a big city there was a chance I could have found a job. I write feel good adult fiction-yes, crazy amounts of work to make it in self publishing, I work while the kids are at school, I'm up until 1 4 nights a week writing, and on a Sunday and school holidays I get up between 3 and 5 and work until about 10 so I can have a proper family day. Very high highs and quite low lows but I love it!

FloconDeNeige
Thanks so much!!

@Fixitup2

My Grandmas both worked opposite shifts to my Grandads when my parents were young, my mum did the same. My dad would come home at 5 and my mum would go to work in a bar at 7. I wonder if there was more flexibility then. I felt like we had the best of both worlds growing up, always a parent present but all the nice things from having 2 incomes. When we went to school my Mum started her career again and got a 9-5 job and my grandparents had us after school.

It might well feel like the best of all worlds to the children but I know a few families with this set up and it's absolutely gruelling for the adults, and really hard on their relationship. I don't know anyone who has chosen to do it when it wasn't a financial necessity.

@Hardbackwriter I absolutely agree long term working opposite shifts to your partner is no good for your relationship.

you asked why folk are negative towards sahms, it's because many think they are being lazy or feel that the sahm brigade make them feel guilt for working because they are disadvantaging their
There is no 'brigade', SAHP are not a homogenous group.
I fully admit the life I have at the moment is the easiest one and it also happens to suit my current family circumstances very well too. If that's lazy then I guess I am.
Many SAHP don't have such an easy life and it's so unfair to judge them as being lazy.

The majority of Mumsnet members work outside the home for various periods. SAHM often present their decision to stay at home as being the best way to parent. By default that insinuates that people who are working at all are letting down their kids.
I find there's usually one or two SAHP per thread who will say something negative about using childcare or working parents, usually after multiple negative or patronising posts from WOHP.
The majority of comments are SAHP presenting the decision to stay at home as the best way to parent in their family situation also many SAHP who say they don't have a choice in the matter or who have very limited choices.

@MrsAmaretto if you were sat at home being lazy then you are extraordinarily unimaginative.

Totally agree with Kottbullar. This is the problem with these threads. “SAHM brigade” indeed. How ridiculous.

I find people always look to justify thier own decisions. Therefore if they decided to work, you get all the reasons why you shouldnt be a sahm, and vice versa to reaffirm thier own decisions. This doesn't just apply to the work debate either. I went back to work full time after 1 year mat leave, and the amount of comments om that from sahm mums or those working part time was endless for a while. Even yesterday (after 9 months back) my hairdresser asked how on earth i cope working full time with a wee one. Its never been asked to me by men though and my DH has never been asked this question.

[quote Bul21ia]@Hardbackwriter I absolutely agree long term working opposite shifts to your partner is no good for your relationship.[/quote]
Well it was great for mine!
Its pretty standard in Healthcare depending on what role you are in and works brilliantly.
We both worked 12 hour shifts, the other at home with DC, no CC costs, a parent always there and DH loved his days with the DC as did they.
I would get home to a clean house and dinner cooked for me
It does depend on your partner being hands on and willing to do their share on CC and chores.
To me it is far better for children to have hands on fathering as an example and yes it does take compromise and flexibility between the couple but both sharing parenting, work and both parents enjoying time at home.
Im out the otherside now and retired at 55.
I went back PT as I love my job.
Im surrounded by women who gave up work to SAH and are very very bitter that they are looking at working until 68 as the result of that choice.

We both work four days a week and so both have a day at home with the children alone and it is great (especially for the working one who gets to work with no faff around childcare that day and come home to dinner!), and I really agree with you about children seeing active fathering and the sharing of the load, but that's very different to working opposite shifts. It's great it worked so well for you but the couples I know who have done it have found the downsides - working a night shift then going straight back to care for children, barely seeing their partner, getting very little time together as a whole family - massive, and I really don't think it's the 'solution' to both working as it was presented.

@Hardbackwriter

We both work four days a week and so both have a day at home with the children alone and it is great (especially for the working one who gets to work with no faff around childcare that day and come home to dinner!), and I really agree with you about children seeing active fathering and the sharing of the load, but that's very different to working opposite shifts. It's great it worked so well for you but the couples I know who have done it have found the downsides - working a night shift then going straight back to care for children, barely seeing their partner, getting very little time together as a whole family - massive, and I really don't think it's the 'solution' to both working as it was presented.

Sometimes we worked opposite shifts but not if it involved staying up to care for pre school DC after a full night shift as thats downright dangerous . Once they were at school it was much easier and often it depends on how well you cope with nights, DH preferred them. I dont know anyone who would risk their DC in this way.

They have flexible working so set shifts or work PT and then pick up extra shifts when they can.
In Midwifery 3 - 12 hour shifts is the working week with a 4th shift per 4 week roster.
Easy to arrange your work/ life that way.
Interesting that you immediately jump on all the negatives though.
It worked really well for us, we both enjoyed the best of both worlds and still had family time which we treasured.

Nothing is perfect but I did find the SAHM jumped on it with negatives.
"How do you trust your DH with your DC?"
Being the main one

"How do you trust your DH with your DC?" Being the main one

To be fair I'm a SAHM and have had this comment when I've been away with friends etc.
My husband gets annoyed as his family offer to take the children and invite him for dinners etc when I'm not at home but nobody offers me any help when he's working away four nights a week.

@TheNinny

I find people always look to justify thier own decisions. Therefore if they decided to work, you get all the reasons why you shouldnt be a sahm, and vice versa to reaffirm thier own decisions. This doesn't just apply to the work debate either. I went back to work full time after 1 year mat leave, and the amount of comments om that from sahm mums or those working part time was endless for a while. Even yesterday (after 9 months back) my hairdresser asked how on earth i cope working full time with a wee one. Its never been asked to me by men though and my DH has never been asked this question.

This is totally true. Many parents on both sides of this fence feel self-conscious and anticipate criticism and judgement from other people so a lot of the rhetoric both on the part of SAHMs and WOHMs is somewhat self-justifying. Because it goes right to the heart of one of the most emotive topics there is: how you care for your children.

If I unpick my own personal attitude: I am a single mother who works FT so there's no element of choice in it for me whatsoever because I have no other income and support. I have - if I'm totally honest -- wondered in the past in self-doubting moments whether using so much FT childcare has damaged my child.

I have come to the conclusion, now my DD is 10 and thriving, that it most definitely has not: my daughter is mentally well-adjusted, doing well at school and we have a close bond. Not being smug and this is anecdotal, but this is what I've observed.

I therefore now feel a degree of anger when people pop up on here (and elsewhere), with these pat comments like "I don't know how you can leave them when they're so little" or "You never get the time back". It's so self-evidently unhelpful and inflammatory for people like me when there's never been any choice and now I realise it hasn't hurt my daughter I feel a degree of vindication. That may be selfish and spiteful but that's how I feel.

No doubt on the other side of the debate there are SAHMs who are bright, engaged and active and who are justifiably pissed off about people insinuating that they are lazy, thick spongers. I would be.

But the killer point for me is that no-one has ever offered any demonstrable evidence that using childcare does any harm to children. While it has demonstrably been shown time and time again that numerous women are left up shit creek when they have no means of support while raising their children. So its not a like-for-like argument.

This doesn't mean that SAHMs are not doing the right thing for their families - many of them have thought long and hard about it and they and their children will thrive. And they absolutely have every right to push back when they are told they are thick and lazy.

But I just wish some SAHMS would stop for a few seconds and think a bit before they parrot out this inflammatory stuff about how they did it because they "will never get the time back". If you're lucky enough to have had this choice can you please take a minute to think about those who didn't have it. And that there's absolutely no evidence at all that your choice to spend all this precious time at home with your kids is ultimately doing either you or your kids any favours.

But I just wish some SAHMS would stop for a few seconds and think a bit before they parrot out this inflammatory stuff about how they did it because they "will never get the time back". If you're lucky enough to have had this choice can you please take a minute to think about those who didn't have it. And that there's absolutely no evidence at all that your choice to spend all this precious time at home with your kids is ultimately doing either you or your kids any favours.
Absolutely this!
My theory is that they have given up jobs/ careers for their family so it has to be better and give their DC some mythical advantage.
Yes it may be highly beneficial for their family due to their individual circumstances but there are a million different set ups and other parents have completely different lives and values.

Ultimately there a many ways to bring up DC and the vast majority of parents bend over backwards to ensure their DC are happy and well cared for.
Poverty is the single most damaging factor for children other than abuse and sadly many of those still living in poverty are working parents.
We need to make it easier for families to achieve work/ life balance and I would fully support initiatives surrounding flexibility, career breaks but also men taking responsibility for parenting/ better child maintenance.
I have every admiration for single parents, you are there for your DC and who would want the toddler years "back" anyway?
😂