To wonder why MN is so unpleasant about SAHMs?

[crinklyfoil]

While I know there are cases when women aren’t married and don’t own property and are in a vulnerable position, I’m not talking about posters who are concerned about women.

I’m talking about posters who believe that SAHMs have no say in finances, should ‘get a job’ and are somehow lazy.

A FT childcare place costs around £800 a month. If you have more than one child, realistically for many women, ‘getting a job’ will mean working at a loss. Not to mention problems with shift work at the lower paid end of the spectrum (retail work and care work.)

Is it really so awful that having a SAHM might just work really well for some families? That some women might thoroughly enjoy it and that it’s part of a mutually beneficial relationship in the context of the whole family?

Or should everyone just get a job, regardless of how miserable and poor it makes the whole family?!

There are some pretty unpleasant and smug posts on this thread.

Theres unpleasant posts going both ways. Which proves mn is unpleasant towards sahms. Its simply that some people are unpleasant to other people.

“Not to mention having a sahm as a teen can be utterly stifling.”

Are you saying parents of teens should stay out of their own homes? What hours am I allowed to be in then? Should I just bung my kids some cash and be off?

@CrouchEndTiger12

A FT childcare place costs around £800 a month. If you have more than one child, realistically for many women, ‘getting a job’ will mean working at a loss.

At a loss for how long?

One year mat leave. 3 years of paying for a nursery and then you get the free hours at 3. School at 4 and need wrap around care.

Calculate the loss of giving up work and never having the mothers salary again. It often isn't easy to go back to work in a well paid job after a decade out.

Not to mention having a sahm as a teen can be utterly stifling.

That only works if the household can afford to live with those losses for that amount of time.

We couldn't, we're £400 worse off a month with both parents working full time. It's not a loss we can absorb and still pay our bills. Yes, we'd be better off 10 years down the line, but our kids need fed, housed and clothed in the meantime. We've tried to reduce the impact to both our careers by taking it in turns, and taking 2 years each being the SAHP. But that only works for us because we both earn around the same. I can't apply our circumstances to other people.

@ax11

“Not to mention having a sahm as a teen can be utterly stifling.”

Are you saying parents of teens should stay out of their own homes? What hours am I allowed to be in then? Should I just bung my kids some cash and be off?

Maybe. They'd love it

I know several couples who both work full time who they wouldn't be able to do the hours their jobs require without the support of their parents or other family members providing childcare
I really don't understand this and why some claim that it isn't possible for both parents to have a career. There are different options to make it happen. Many manage to earn a good income working 9-5 or 6pm and do so around nursery/afterschool clubs/ childminders.

Those when both parents are expected to start early/finish late usually employ a nanny. Those who need to travel for their job have a nanny who is more flexible and can do nights on occasions or have an au pair.

So why are those options not available for some people? For the Au Pair and space, my friend had her kids share their room when they were younger so the Au Pair could have her room.

I really do believe that any parent whose career really matter to them always manage to find ways to do so.

because they were smart enough to pick a man who is a high earner

I’d want my daughter to pick a partner based on his personality, common interests, kindness etc not the size of his wallet and I would be horrified if she thought being female meant she didn’t have to fund her way in life. Likewise I’ve warned my son to watch for partners interested in what he can provide and to look for an equal instead.

Not everyone works just for the salary alone, it brings many other benefits and securities.

To be honest, I found the early teen years the most stressful in terms of being SAH (still in it). Less physically tiring, but more drama for sure. But then I do have 4 kids. If I had one or two it would be a comparative breeze.

I know several couples who both work full time who they wouldn't be able to do the hours their jobs require without the support of their parents or other family members providing childcare

You do realise it’s perfectly possible to work and not have family help. Millions do it. It’s as bad as the phrase “he can only work as I am home” .

@vivainsomnia

I know several couples who both work full time who they wouldn't be able to do the hours their jobs require without the support of their parents or other family members providing childcare I really don't understand this and why some claim that it isn't possible for both parents to have a career. There are different options to make it happen. Many manage to earn a good income working 9-5 or 6pm and do so around nursery/afterschool clubs/ childminders.

Those when both parents are expected to start early/finish late usually employ a nanny. Those who need to travel for their job have a nanny who is more flexible and can do nights on occasions or have an au pair.

So why are those options not available for some people? For the Au Pair and space, my friend had her kids share their room when they were younger so the Au Pair could have her room.

I really do believe that any parent whose career really matter to them always manage to find ways to do so.

Because they can't afford it?

We could both afford to work full time if we had free childcare, but we don't, so we can't.

Au pairs and Nannies are really expensive, do you think everyone with a career earns a 6 figure salary?

“You do realise it’s perfectly possible to work and not have family Millions do it. It’s as bad as the phrase “he can only work as I am home”

You do realise all jobs are different and it depends in the job? Or are you just thinking about your family set-up here (and maybe some people you happen to know)?

[quote DanniDuck]@Fizbosshoes

Man goes back to work weeks after a baby is born - no one bats an eyelid. Woman goes back to work weeks after baby is born - shes vilified for damaging the child for putting them childcare and "letting someone else raise her child"

Man stays at home with baby or toddler - hes a hero/breaking down stereotypes etc... Woman stays at home with baby or toddler - shes dependent on a man/scrounging/wasting her education/a poor example to her children etc etc

All very true. But I never see as much vitriol aimed at any group as I do at Stay At Home Mothers.[/quote]
Possibly because you goad people into making inflammatory statements and assumptions?

This thread is hilarious!

I can’t believe how many posters are so out of touch with the world outside Waitrose.

Why are they having families without earning good money and having a career?

Why don’t they plan for an au pair or nanny?

“Leeching” off husbands

“Wasting” their lives

They must really resent paying someone else to look after their children while they’re at work because they certainly have no respect for child rearing or education.

I know there are middle class bubbles who can be a bit out of touch but come on…

Statistically, women are more likely to be the lower earner compared to their husband.

I think covid has caused a lot of women to leave work to become SAHMs, because not all employers are flexible about time off when bubbles burst, or sudden leave for home schooling, or working reduced hours because after school club keeps closing. Not everyone can work from home. Commuting by public transport has become a nightmare for many, buses and trains often delayed or cancelled at short notice.

It one person is going to take a career break doesn’t it make sense for the lower earner to do so?

The jury is out for me. As Meg said on Motherland, I am just about on the give a shit side. I totally respect women or men who want to be full te parents, my husband was one as he's a Principal so did it for a summer as I had 20 days leave and we are lucky to have help which I guess a lot of people would also judge. I think SAHMing is lovely and probably the best but like Meg, I also made sure I was always there when mattered. How about not judging anyone, the only issue I have is with partners who think they are superior because they bring in the bacon because these are equal roles.

Jealousy perhaps - and/or insecurity/guilt over their own choices? When people are nasty it often comes down to one of those things. People who are secure and happy with their own lives don’t feel the need to put others down.

I have loved my time as a SAHM. The pre-school years were brutal but beautiful, and since they've all been in school it's been bliss. Motherhood and housewifery has been my 'career', and if people think I'm boring and unfulfilled then that's ok. I'm too happy to care. It'd be boring if we were all the same. I love having a slow paced life, and I adore my husband for making it possible.

Likewise the "my husband wouldn't have been able to have his successful career without me at home supporting him". I'm the main breadwinner in our house (we have two children) and my success isn't down to my husband's support

My husband’s career progression relied on me being flexible about moving to different parts of the country (changing my job each time) doing all nursery pick ups and doing most of the domestic work and holiday care. I took a lot of locum jobs when they were young so I could fit my hours around his. And I had periods of not working, eg when he needed support starting a new position and couldn’t take on much household admin or domestic tasks.

What annoys me is when women do this without the security of marriage if the relationship fails.

You should have asked 'why MD is so unpleasant'
so many mean people on here.

*why is MN

@IceCreamAndCandyfloss

I know several couples who both work full time who they wouldn't be able to do the hours their jobs require without the support of their parents or other family members providing childcare

You do realise it’s perfectly possible to work and not have family help. Millions do it. It’s as bad as the phrase “he can only work as I am home” .

You do realise you should read posts before quoting them.

But I'm well aware that different things are difficult for different people, and I'm not spouting my experiences as universal fact or using them to put other people down.

I’m in no way putting anyone down? Just saying that as parents who both worked full time long hours and did all SAHP jobs in the hours we weren’t working with no outside childcare or housekeepers at all one was a doddle compared with the other, and we weren’t working 4 jobs between us, we were working 2 jobs between us and then parenting and looking after our home environment on top of that.

No idea why it had to be a decision for you that one person had to work full time so one person had to be the SAHP with absolutely no other options? You can generally get creative and swing it so both parents can work full time and then swap to SAHP mode when you come home and tag the other parent going off to work. There’s heaps of permutations that allow this - we did many over the years our kids were young. My DH left his field of work for a decade as it was a pretty inflexible 9-5 industry so that he could take on flexible work so we could both work full time with someone always at home with the kids. It was more sensible for him to be the one that did that as I was the higher earner and had a job that could work essentially work any shift 7 days. If he had of been the higher earner and stuck in a 9-5, I would have been happy to step back and take a job with flexibility around that. When he returned to his field it was several levels lower than when he left but he made his way back up and is now steps ahead again and has been able to use various skills picked up in his time out of the industry to benefit him and look worthwhile on paper when he returned and went for subsequent promotions.

@StrangeToSee

Likewise the "my husband wouldn't have been able to have his successful career without me at home supporting him". I'm the main breadwinner in our house (we have two children) and my success isn't down to my husband's support

My husband’s career progression relied on me being flexible about moving to different parts of the country (changing my job each time) doing all nursery pick ups and doing most of the domestic work and holiday care. I took a lot of locum jobs when they were young so I could fit my hours around his. And I had periods of not working, eg when he needed support starting a new position and couldn’t take on much household admin or domestic tasks.

What annoys me is when women do this without the security of marriage if the relationship fails.

I think one person can facilitate the others career.

I just don't think it's a given. I do think on mn it's assumed a high earner can only do that if their partner sacrifices their own career. I think its situation specific, iyswim.