Thank god we don’t live in Sweden. AIBU?

[sw1v]

I was just reading in another thread that in Sweden, you are basically forced to send your babies into day care settings at the age of 1. Apparently 50% of 1 year olds are in full- time nurseries (very long days inc. parents’ commutes) and 95% by the time they are 2! Plus (unlike in the U.K.) there is apparently no minimum ratio for staff to children.

But what if you are a mother who simply doesn’t want to do this (or father)? I personally, would hate this. So how is it acceptable for ‘the state’ to be interfering in people’s personal spheres and family lives by making this ‘the societal norm.’ Is it because they are a high tax society and want more tax? Is this it? Well, it seems like an infringement on personal liberties to me (without wanting to sound too dramatic).

AIBU?

@sw1v

Well yes. However, to be fair, a lot of women are honest and, regardless of their career opportunities, they admit they couldn’t cope at home with 4 kids; they find it boring or overwhelming; they don’t have the patience or they just don’t feel cut out for it for whatever reason. Different strokes for different folks.

True, but those women choose not to have 4 children and that it that. Your husband decided to have them and dump them all on you.

Sorry but such hypocrisy here.

A woman (or man) could put their child in daycare or leave them with a nanny 40 hours per week. That is not ‘dumping’ the child apparently and all the whole they are ‘parenting.’

Yet a man who works hard and seizes opportunities available to him to secure a great life and future security for his wife to enable her not to be separated from her children is now a crap father and is actually ‘dumping’ his children. On their own mother . A mother who actively wants to take this on and would not expect anything less? Very odd.

It’s not “dumping.’ It called supporting each other. Respecting each others’ personalities, strengths and personal motivations in life. Working together to make the best life you can for your children - today and tomorrow. Sometimes couples are 50/50 on all tasks. So what? Other couples balance each other out. I would have thought this is obvious.

op are you genuinely saying that your partner is not capable of being left alone with your children? Regardless of the working/ not working parent scenario, that is incredibly sad, and pretty shocking.

I work and parent, however I am also capable of looking after my children alone.

I work full time in my career and parent as does DH.

If your husband got hit by a bus tomorrow how would you cope financially?

@sw1v

Sorry but such hypocrisy here.

A woman (or man) could put their child in daycare or leave them with a nanny 40 hours per week. That is not ‘dumping’ the child apparently and all the whole they are ‘parenting.’

Yet a man who works hard and seizes opportunities available to him to secure a great life and future security for his wife to enable her not to be separated from her children is now a crap father and is actually ‘dumping’ his children. On their own mother . A mother who actively wants to take this on and would not expect anything less? Very odd.

It’s not “dumping.’ It called supporting each other. Respecting each others’ personalities, strengths and personal motivations in life. Working together to make the best life you can for your children - today and tomorrow. Sometimes couples are 50/50 on all tasks. So what? Other couples balance each other out. I would have thought this is obvious.

The average man or woman who uses childcare for 40 hours a week is still generally ‘safe’ to look after their children for the 128 hours a week when they are not in childcare.

I’ve yet to meet the nanny/nursery worker/childminder who goes home with their charges at night because their WOHM parents are incapable of caring for them — they’d call social services.

@JudgementalCactus

If your husband got hit by a bus tomorrow how would you cope financially?

Seriously 😔

If you wanted to meet up with friends on weekend you couldn’t? Because he’d be alone with them?

He can look after them now. As I said. I’m talking about when they were newborn, 2, 4 and 6, something like that. I would not have left anyone with them at that stage - not my mum or a nanny. That’s just me. I was bf anyway. It was hard work but I was in the zone of it and you needs eyes in the back of your head. But, having said this, I had a cleaner so wasn’t juggling that. No work worries. I saw that as my job in that phase of life. I knew it wouldn’t go on forever and I got on with it. Yes, some days were hard, but overall I loved it. I would do the same again. Of course my husband changed nappies etc when he was home. But I wasn’t starting a company!

Is it cultural? That he wouldn’t look after them alone when they were young.

Sounds like the flip side to Swedish culture

So how many years was he not capable of looking after his own children?

Op you really aren't painting a healthy idea of a marriage, or parenting.

I can’t remember how many years it was, to be honest. It all a blur! But it wasn’t a problem for me. Some people think being with children all the time is horrific, but I found it a privilege. I wouldn’t have had 4 children in any other circumstances and he certainly wouldn’t have had 4 children if he couldn’t financially provide for them to be with their own mother. I don’t think that’s odd. I think that’s practical. We never even discussed it. It was naturally how it panned out.

It was natural that he never spent any time alone with his children for many years, and his only input was financial? This is far from an equal or healthy partnership.

Not being alone with them sounds extreme to me.

Maybe he’s used to it as a cultural thing

Well it’s hard to say if it was partly cultural or not. It’s like how long is a piece of string really.

In general, I loved my life and felt incredibly fortunate. I had fantastic friends, met loads of people and never thought anything of it. I had friends with husbands who were far less engaged. None of are dense or deluded. We all have degrees / postgrad degrees etc etc.

OP - what was your career before SAHM?

@sw1v

I can’t remember how many years it was, to be honest. It all a blur! But it wasn’t a problem for me. Some people think being with children all the time is horrific, but I found it a privilege. I wouldn’t have had 4 children in any other circumstances and he certainly wouldn’t have had 4 children if he couldn’t financially provide for them to be with their own mother. I don’t think that’s odd. I think that’s practical. We never even discussed it. It was naturally how it panned out.

What didn’t you ever discuss? Having four children? Whether someone was going to be a SAHP? Which of you was going to be a SAHP?

@sw1v

I don’t think ‘negatively’ of parents who change the same number of nappies and that kind of thing. Why would I need to take a view on other people’s relationships? I don’t caresbiut things like that. Yes, I was being honest that I probably wouldn’t have left my husband with the kids when they were little because he’s too preoccupied. But to be honest, I didn’t need him to be left alone with them, so it wasn’t a massive issue. I could do that as I didn’t have other stuff to worry about, to be perfectly frank. I understand many women might balk at that, but overall, it suited me. If it didn’t I wouldn’t have done it. You can have different roles in a marriage and still be equal. I’m not in a competition with my husband and never was. We don’t relate in that way. Why does it even matter?

You wouldn't have left your DH in charge if the children because he's too preoccupied??!!

I think you just made the case for childcare / equal responsibility right there

If you don’t mind, I’d rather not say because it’s quite specific and anyone who knows me might recognise me from it. But it wasn’t corporate or anything like that. I can’t get motivated by that kind of thing at all.

Well it’s hard to say if it was partly cultural or not. It’s like how long is a piece of string really.

I suppose whether it’s the norm for men not to look after their dc alone when they’re little.

“What didn’t you ever discuss? Having four children? Whether someone was going to be a SAHP? Which of you was going to be a SAHP?”

This is like 20 questions . I suppose I always knew that if I had children, I’d want to be with them. When I met my husband we were married very quickly. Yes we discussed we’d like maybe 4 children. But we didn’t discuss ‘roles’ as such because I suppose we just knew what we were doing.

I've been a SAHM in another Scandinavian country with a very similar system to Sweden's, and my experience was similar to Thatcantberights. From Monday-Friday the streets really do look as if the child catcher had rolled through with his giant net! Playgrounds and parks are deserted, and there are zero church toddler groups, swimming lessons, or any kind of music/dance/gymnastics/etc etc classes. No play cafes. No rhyme time or story time at the library, or any other children in the children's corner there. No other SAHMs to meet for a coffee, or go to one another's houses so the DC can play. There are free drop in centres for parents and children, but these are mainly populated by babies and very young toddlers (say up to 18 months, with the occasional older child). There is simply no demand for any of these activities, so they don't exist. This was in a major city, not rural. So yes, you can not care about what people think of you, but of course your experience if you choose to SAH will be very different from in the UK. What I found interesting is that many of my UK friends chose to work part time, and very much sought out the same opportunities to meet and socialize via these groups and classes, but that isn't the case there at all. I'm not sure what percentage of people work part time, so whether it's because the working hours are more family friendly and eliminate the need for part time, or whether it's a cultural thing (just no demand for these things even amongst mothers who do work part time) I'm not sure.

Have I time travelled back to the 50s?

Op I went back to work when my DD was 9 months old, luckily I live in a country where you work relatively part time until you child’s 1st birthday but at full time wage. I had a nanny for a while, then at 14 months I put her in nursery. No one forced me to but I thought it beneficial as it would reinforce her bilingualism (at home with me English was primary language) and it would help with socialisation and development. She came on leaps and bounds in nursery and when it was time for preschool (at age 3 and pretty much the norm here) she slotted right in. We had very high quality nursery care with excellent key worker/child ratios and a Montessori ethos. She got loads of experiences which she might not have got at home with me or my partner (not least because I hated messy play!).

Thanks to going back to work, my career progressed and I ended up in a senior enough position in her primary years to manage my hours and pick her up from school/wfh a few hours a day before it became the norm.

Just for a bit of anecdata, a family member who sniffed at my “palming off” my child while she stayed at home until they were all in secondary and, oddly enough, whose husband was always away “providing” and never looked after his own children, now has DC with mental health issues and anxiety whereas mine is confident and, apart from the odd teen strop, fairly issue free.

I applaud Sweden, early years childcare is pretty high quality where we are but the Swedes make it so much more accessible. I pretty sure they don’t force anyone to send their kids. My friend in Uppsala’s wife is a writer and pretty much a SAHM and her kids were at home much of the week BUT they still did 2 days in nursery for their well-being.

We should applaud schemes which enable women to work and achieve financial independence. Why should men have sole control over the purse strings? I’ve never been dependent on a man and quite frankly the idea fills me with horror!

Obviously I’m no more in the 1950s than you or the next person. I just wouldn’t want that sort of life. I’m happy you’re happy though. But I wouldn’t be smug about any teenager with mental health problems because that is not very nice and has nothing to do with anything.

It's perfectly possible and normal for fathers to be "able" to look after newborns

I breastfed ds until he was 13 months old - I was already used to expressing (because for a while we tried supplementing his feeds on the breast with EBM as he wasn't following the "normal" growth curve) when I went back to work when he was 4 months old. I still managed regularly to leave ds in the competent care of dh from when he was only a few weeks old - eg to go back to Pilates classes (once I'd had the "all clear" check ). Never dreamt to think that he wouldn't be capable - he was as experienced a "dad" as I was a "mum"

At the time, he was the higher earner of the two of us - but didn't begrudge the time he "had" to take looking after his own son

I hate hearing people talking about dads who "babysit" their own children - or worse patting them on the back for doing so

Dh and I took - and still take - and equal share in parenting.

Maybe the difference is that my parents worked full time and shared equally so it never occurred to me not to. And I married someone who also believed in equal partnerships.

And my best friend and her dh (both GPs, so hardly "easy" professions) also managed to maintain an equal partnership, sharing the parenting from newborn - and they had (have ) 4 children, one off whom has Special Needs. She was also a big influence on me, helping to demonstrate that such parenting is not just possible but that it's normal.

I'd like to hope that ds will likewise have the expectation of an equal partnership after seeing our positive example (if/when he gets married: he's only 21): it benefits both parents as they are both involved in their children's lives.