To want to be a stay home mum?

[wanttostayathome]

So I've got about 6 months left of my maternity leave, and I already know for a fact I don't want to go back. I love being a mum and I want to take another year or two off to raise my baby before she starts school.

Financially, it would be tight and although probably doable we'd have much less disposable income. My DH thinks I should go back for the money and also to have some balance between mum life and the old me.

I however disagree. There's nothing more I want from my life than to raise my baby but I don't know how to approach this conversation with him, as I know my POV isn't the done thing and I should want to be able to juggle career and family.

So, AIBU?

Yes he has said he wants her to return to work. But what if she gets depressed or develops anxiety? What if the child doesn’t settle? He may have to rethink. Does he want more children and if so when? He may just have to accept his wife needs more flexibility. Life changes when you have kids and it’s no good just expecting to plough on as you did before with no consequences for anyone.

@min00 yes, having kids is a major life change for both parents, and both parents need to be open to flexibility. Depression, anxiety, stress ( not to mention all life's other curve balls such as physical illness, redundancy) can affect anyone

@DuploSubmarine

Sorry, you do sound extremely irrate. I mean, really, are you OK?

I mean...it WAS a general comment about the thread. You didn't even know which poster you were responding to because you were so keen to spew indignation at someone. So it's no wonder you misread it. It made perfect sense as a general comment. I said "...wohps on these threads...".

You are so angry you can't hold a sensible conversation. Why though? Seriously, you need to watch your blood pressure. Must be through the roof.

And you sound like you are a person who makes ridiculous statements but can't back them up.

Such is life.

Of course mixing up 2 adjectives is a sign of not being able to hold a converstation or being angry.

What do you mean "can't back them up"? It was a general comment on Mumsnet...not a Masters dissertation.

Anyway, I agree with others re the op fwiw. It's fine to be a sahp, but clearly, everyone has to be on board and we do like knowing that there are two incomes, just in case something goes wrong with either one.

What do you mean "can't back them up"? It was a general comment on Mumsnet...not a Masters dissertation.

Yes a general comment about nobody in particular with nothing to back it up that you don't like be picked up on.

On mn, if you make a comment people can respond. A little bit shocked you don't understand how it works.

@min00

Yes he has said he wants her to return to work. But what if she gets depressed or develops anxiety? What if the child doesn’t settle? He may have to rethink. Does he want more children and if so when? He may just have to accept his wife needs more flexibility. Life changes when you have kids and it’s no good just expecting to plough on as you did before with no consequences for anyone.

What if HE gets depression or anxiety? What if he's happy to go part time along with OP to allow for unforeseen parenting challenges?

He doesn't want to be the sole earner and right now there's no reason he HAS to be. If the situation changes in the future, they can reconsider. But he shouldn't be strongarmed into it by a laundry list of theoretical possibilities that might or might not happen, with no consideration of what it might mean for him. That's manipulative.

@DuploSubmarine I see the pack is now coming for you!! You called out bullying pack like behaviour and this won’t sit comfortably with the ones doing it!! So be prepared to have your words twisted.

There are some women on here who seem to just enjoy ganging up on a minority of posters and it really doesn’t matter what you say, they will find fault and nitpick.

Every single SAHM thread I’ve seen on MN has ended the same way. With one or two women who at one point defended SAHMs being ganged up on by a larger group of working women (many who will claim to fully support SAHMs of course).

@Anotherlongroad I am now making a tea too, whilst half playing with my toddler and being annoyed at myself for wasting chunks of my Saturday morning arguing with a group of women who literally just want someone to gang up on online. I hope you are enjoying your Saturday too and am so glad you have been on this thread! Xx

@Nyxs

What do you mean "can't back them up"? It was a general comment on Mumsnet...not a Masters dissertation.

Yes a general comment about nobody in particular with nothing to back it up that you don't like be picked up on.

On mn, if you make a comment people can respond. A little bit shocked you don't understand how it works.

Yes, I'm on board for a conversation. Do you want to talk about my comment, knowing that it was not directed at you or anyone in particular?

I do think wohps on threads like these get very vicious. Clearly a small but vocal minority and not all wohps, of which I am one.

They tend to call sahms either foolish or lazy or heavily imply it and there is often a gang mentality about it. I have noticed it after many years on mumsnet. But do you honestly claim never to have seen this? If you search for some sahm threads, it won't take long to find "it's just a fancy way of saying unemployed", "when your high earing husband runs off with his secretary you'll be left destitute", "your poor husband having to fund you" and so on.

[quote Babysharkdududududu]@DuploSubmarine I see the pack is now coming for you!! You called out bullying pack like behaviour and this won’t sit comfortably with the ones doing it!! So be prepared to have your words twisted.

There are some women on here who seem to just enjoy ganging up on a minority of posters and it really doesn’t matter what you say, they will find fault and nitpick.

Every single SAHM thread I’ve seen on MN has ended the same way. With one or two women who at one point defended SAHMs being ganged up on by a larger group of working women (many who will claim to fully support SAHMs of course).

@Anotherlongroad I am now making a tea too, whilst half playing with my toddler and being annoyed at myself for wasting chunks of my Saturday morning arguing with a group of women who literally just want someone to gang up on online. I hope you are enjoying your Saturday too and am so glad you have been on this thread! Xx[/quote]
Ha! So I see. Put the kettle on. Mine's a tea.

These threads always go the same and it's such a shame.

Bar one comment I've not seen evidence of SAHMs being overly criticised. It's a valid choice provided all parties are in agreement.

It's sad to see women (yet again) being accused of being materialistic for choosing to work. Comments like this are insulting and deeply misogynistic.
Choosing to work is just a valid a choice as choosing to be a SAHP. Women have enough type deal with without judging each other.

@SpinsForGin on point!

But there's one (or perhaps two!) posters on here who don't want facts to get in the way of a bunfight. Odd!

Bar one comment I've not seen evidence of SAHMs being overly criticised

That may be true on this thread, but it's very difficult I imagine, for sahms not to feel attacked and defensive on threads like these, as certainly, in my experience, comments on Mumsnet are generally anti sah. Probably because most parents woh these days, even if it's just part time.

I've seen a protracted argument on here and it was not all coming from the sahps by any stretch.

Generally, on mumsnet, I've seen many comments which are very anti sah and I do have to question why that is tbh, since everyone claims to be making the choice that makes them happiest.

Occasionally you'll see some absolute nut saying childcare is the work of Satan, but they generally, (rightly) get shot down immediately. Not so when people are openly critical of sah, on mumsnet in general and in my experience (before I'm asked for full Harvard referencing)

Well, this is the thread we're posting on and which is relevant here.

If you genuinely feel that MN is critical of SAHM then surely it would make more sense to start your own discussion thread about it. Or stay away from MN if it's not your bag. It just seems bizarre to get so aerated on a thread where, bar one ridiculous comment about Cosmo, posters have consistently said that SAHP is a valid choice provided both partners are on boards.

@DuploSubmarine

Bar one comment I've not seen evidence of SAHMs being overly criticised

That may be true on this thread, but it's very difficult I imagine, for sahms not to feel attacked and defensive on threads like these, as certainly, in my experience, comments on Mumsnet are generally anti sah. Probably because most parents woh these days, even if it's just part time.

I've seen a protracted argument on here and it was not all coming from the sahps by any stretch.

Generally, on mumsnet, I've seen many comments which are very anti sah and I do have to question why that is tbh, since everyone claims to be making the choice that makes them happiest.

Occasionally you'll see some absolute nut saying childcare is the work of Satan, but they generally, (rightly) get shot down immediately. Not so when people are openly critical of sah, on mumsnet in general and in my experience (before I'm asked for full Harvard referencing)

That's interesting because I actually see more judgement aimed at working mothers. It doesn't take long for them to be called materialistic or to be asked why they bothered having children. The narrative is always that women work for luxuries while men work to provide for their family. We need to stop that shit.

@SpinsForGin

Yes agreed it’s been much more vitriolic towards WOHM on this thread!

@TheDuchessOfDork thank you for a much more balanced reasoned helpful post.

We have a gender flipped situation in our marriage where my DH has been considering being a SAHP.

Clearly I could not as we could not pay the mortgage & bills on his salary, but we could off mine.

He has read the thread and laughed at some posters saying they’re just jamming their fingers in their ears whilst screaming that they are listening…

The thread has helped him rule out being a SAHP full time and precipitated a really honest conversation between us- so at least it’s helped in that respect!

If he left work and a couple of years later our marriage broke down (though obviously we aren’t planning on that!) whilst he’d get half the house and my pension he just wouldn’t be able to get on the property ladder again alone, his circumstances would be much reduced. He is keen to keep going and exploring 3 days a week.

The narrative is always that women work for luxuries while men work to provide for their family.

Totally agree - men provide for their families, women are money hungry grabbers who no doubt spend it all on hair extensions and gin.

But on mumsnet, I feel as if the pendulum swings the other way entirely and you're a total idiot if you "lose your independence" by being a sahm. Your dh WILL run away with his secretary and you WILL be destitute. Honestly, is a sahm starts a thread on anything financial, she will be told in no uncertain terms that she is worse off being a sahm, which is not always the case. Even women who are single and child free are likely to earn less than men. So actually, the advice to keep working come what may so your salary matches or exceeds your male partner and therefore you'll be able to pay all the bills after the inevitable run off with the secretary incident, is nonsense. Odds are, you will not achieve that whether you go back to work after 2 weeks with a baby or 2 years. Some women earn a lot more than their male partners, but it is overwhelmingly overwhelmingly other way round generally. Is that because all women are lazy or bad at their jobs? Most women do go back to work after dcs, so it isn't that they've all...what is it...Sat around reading cosmo and getting fatter for a decade is it?

Here's an idea...how about people make their own choices without being judgemental cunts about other people? Because no matter how smart you are, you do not know the circumstances of the random sahms on mumsnet. So everybody pipe down. (This applies to any hilarious comments saying women who work are all materialistic too....but I actually don't think anyone said that exactly)

[quote Bothyboo]@SpinsForGin

Yes agreed it’s been much more vitriolic towards WOHM on this thread!

@TheDuchessOfDork thank you for a much more balanced reasoned helpful post.

We have a gender flipped situation in our marriage where my DH has been considering being a SAHP.

Clearly I could not as we could not pay the mortgage & bills on his salary, but we could off mine.

He has read the thread and laughed at some posters saying they’re just jamming their fingers in their ears whilst screaming that they are listening…

The thread has helped him rule out being a SAHP full time and precipitated a really honest conversation between us- so at least it’s helped in that respect!

If he left work and a couple of years later our marriage broke down (though obviously we aren’t planning on that!) whilst he’d get half the house and my pension he just wouldn’t be able to get on the property ladder again alone, his circumstances would be much reduced. He is keen to keep going and exploring 3 days a week.[/quote]
Oh well if a man thinks we're being silly, he must be right.

So as I said, if you feel that generally, MN is skewed against a certain group, surely the logical thing to do is to start a sensible discussion of your own about it? Or stay away from MN and use other forums if you feel MN is a lost cause?

I mean, if I felt that MN in general terms was swayed against a particular group (be it SAHM, WOHM, vegetarians, home edders, whatever) and this really bothered me, I would start a grown up, reasoned discussion thread about it. What I wouldn't do is jump on a thread where everyone (bar one poster) was discussing the issue reasonably and start ranting!

One ridiculous poster mentioned SAHM reading cosmo and getting fat. Everyone else has said SAHP is a valid choice provided both partners agree. It's just nonsensical to start ranting here - on this thread - that everyone's ganging up on SAHM

@DuploSubmarine

Oh I’m sorry- does his dick exclude him from considering being a SAHP?

@BettyCarver

So as I said, if you feel that generally, MN is skewed against a certain group, surely the logical thing to do is to start a sensible discussion of your own about it? Or stay away from MN and use other forums if you feel MN is a lost cause?

I mean, if I felt that MN in general terms was swayed against a particular group (be it SAHM, WOHM, vegetarians, home edders, whatever) and this really bothered me, I would start a grown up, reasoned discussion thread about it. What I wouldn't do is jump on a thread where everyone (bar one poster) was discussing the issue reasonably and start ranting!

One ridiculous poster mentioned SAHM reading cosmo and getting fat. Everyone else has said SAHP is a valid choice provided both partners agree. It's just nonsensical to start ranting here - on this thread - that everyone's ganging up on SAHM

Who is ranting? I made a pretty low key comment in support of the sahms on here and another poster got mightily upset about it.

I've since clarified, extremely calmly what my view is.

I'm not irate or offended. I'm not even a sahm!

I am simply saying that generally mumsnet does go that way and I can understand why sahms sometimes feel attacked or victimised on here. This made you suggest I should leave the thread or even the site.

The discussion has moved on a lot and as the other poster said to me "you comment and others respond - I'm surprised you don't know how mumsnet works by now".

The cosmo and getting fatter comment I took as pretty tongue in cheek tbh. I don't think anyone was really offended by that as it was so silly.

[quote Bothyboo]@DuploSubmarine

Oh I’m sorry- does his dick exclude him from considering being a SAHP?[/quote]
Yes, that's exactly what I said (being sarcastic obviously).

The whole divisive 'picking a side' thing is weird anyway. It implies that if you do one thing (either WOH or SAH) then you would hate doing the others. Quite an odd way to think.
It really is, especially because life circumstances can change and family demands can change.

I've long come to the conclusion that the people who feel the need to be so unpleasant about different family set ups either feel insecure about their own set up or are blindingly arrogant to think that the choices they've made for their family are somehow superior.

Haven't read the full thread, but sure it's been said. You both have to be on board and in agreement to you being a SAHM. It'll just stir up resentment otherwise
Well said, it's been said by most posters too, well those who aren't busy trying to turn the thread into a poor us mumsnet hates SAHP/ SAHP vs WOHP thread

No, I didn't suggest you leave the thread or site. That is untrue. I suggested that if you feel that generally anti- SAHM is an issue on MN, it might be worth considering starting a discussion about that issue.

The issue on this thread is about whether the OP should unilaterally decide for her dh that he becomes sole breadwinner- which I think each and every one of us has said, no, or course she shouldn't.

@DuploSubmarine

Right ok then so what was your point because you haven’t made it?

The reason I think MN feels hostile to SAHMs is something well beyond the content of the comments themselves. It’s the simple fact that any thread with SAHM in the title tends to go ballistic and will always run to 1000 posts. It’s the fact that people (who are not SAHMs and claim to never want to be) are so bothered and have so very much to say about it - that’s what feels odd and strangely hostile. You can’t imagine why, anyone who is not a SAHM, would give a hoot, let alone post ad infinitum with some ‘view.’ The ‘view’ I’d often a thinly veiled agenda / insecurity and the very fact so many even feel the need to take a view on SAHMs speaks volumes, far more than the words themselves. I often think, if people need to come on a SAHM thread and go on and on about how “it wouldn’t work for them,” “financial vulnerability,” “good role model for children,” “need stimulation,” etc etc etc (we all know how it drones on), it just comes across as if they’re trying to convince themselves. A bit like ‘the lady doth protest to much..” Otherwise, I can’t imagine why anyone would care about mums who SAH, let alone get so vitriolic about them.