Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think being a SAHM/housewife is not the same as someone claiming benefits?

1002 replies

Jajana · 01/05/2022 08:00

Was chatting to my sister and was talking about how my MIL is a housewife (sorry not sure if that’s the correct term). She said that being a SAHM/housewife is no different to someone claiming benefits and would rather claim benefits than rely on someone for an income!

Bearing in mind, FIL runs a very successful business and all of the money MIL receives is from private funds - not through the state.

Am i being reasonable to think being a SAHM/housewife isn’t the same as claiming benefits?

OP posts:
hihellohihello · 03/05/2022 15:35

By other family member do you mean their dad?

It may be unusual but that's what we did.

Of course, Dad is included - he is a family member. Or it could be a grandparent or aunt or whoever else in the family.

So do you value the SAHD role as equal to the SAHM role? Do you view your role as equal to your children's father's? If you do why devalue the the role of a SAHM? (Which is implied when you say the working parent does the same and works too.)

Topgub · 03/05/2022 15:40

@hihellohihello

He's not a sahd

I never said he was.

We both worked (almost full time)

Topgub · 03/05/2022 15:42

@pinklavenders

Women might value caring/nurturing roles more highly than men?

why?

Why would women value them more than men?

Sex shouldn't dictate what value we place on caring for children or other caring roles, surely?

hihellohihello · 03/05/2022 15:45

Topgub · 03/05/2022 15:40

@hihellohihello

He's not a sahd

I never said he was.

We both worked (almost full time)

So you must have been in the unusual situation of both your occupations harmonising with each other's to such an extent one was able to work whilst the other stayed at home on a daily basis.

That is not the experience of many.

VelociraptortheClown · 03/05/2022 15:48

Why don't you tell her you're seriously considering getting a full time job and will therefore need to rely on her for childcare and help with household duties on weekdays? That will shut her up

womaninatightspot · 03/05/2022 15:49

Completely different. Often the Sahm is providing support/ childcare which enables the other person to earn what they do. There is nothing wrong with claiming benefits when you need them though.

Topgub · 03/05/2022 15:57

@hihellohihello

Meh. I never said otherwise.

I said it was capable to do what a sahm does and work.

I know, because I did it.

Mumwantingtogetitright · 03/05/2022 16:08

womaninatightspot · 03/05/2022 15:49

Completely different. Often the Sahm is providing support/ childcare which enables the other person to earn what they do. There is nothing wrong with claiming benefits when you need them though.

Yes, but if they are earning some sort of mega salary (which the vast majority are not) it would be easy enough for the working parent to outsource most of the stuff that a SAHP does. And if they aren't earning megabucks, then they really didn't need a SAHP to progress to where they are anyway.

Walkaround · 03/05/2022 16:08

This thread certainly has plenty of deeply unimaginative, unempathetic women incapable of understanding differing circumstances and personalities. Imvho, a family which has found a way of juggling work and caring responsibilities that works well for it, however that is achieved, is more valuable to society, and more productive overall, than a family with an unhappy arrangement. It’s just a fact that the best arrangement for one family is likely to differ from the best arrangement for another, and having to prioritise self-protection over best care is a sign of a society that is failing to value sufficiently those who provide care.

Walkaround · 03/05/2022 16:08

This thread certainly has plenty of deeply unimaginative, unempathetic women incapable of understanding differing circumstances and personalities. Imvho, a family which has found a way of juggling work and caring responsibilities that works well for it, however that is achieved, is more valuable to society, and more productive overall, than a family with an unhappy arrangement. It’s just a fact that the best arrangement for one family is likely to differ from the best arrangement for another, and having to prioritise self-protection over best care is a sign of a society that is failing to value sufficiently those who provide care.

Skelligsfeathers · 03/05/2022 16:30

Mumwantingtogetitright · 03/05/2022 16:08

Yes, but if they are earning some sort of mega salary (which the vast majority are not) it would be easy enough for the working parent to outsource most of the stuff that a SAHP does. And if they aren't earning megabucks, then they really didn't need a SAHP to progress to where they are anyway.

But why would they want to outsource it?
What kind of fucked up state have we got to, when people can't see why it would be beneficial to a child to have the majority of it's day to day care done by a parent who loves them?

Yes, i am aware that due to our terrible economy it is impossible for most people to provide for a family on one wage, but let's not kid ourselves that it is the best thing for children to be at nursery from 8-6 every day.
Let's not kid ourselves that it is best for parents to be run ragged trying to work full time, commute, look after children and run a house.
It is not. Our balance is all out of kilter.

Mumwantingtogetitright · 03/05/2022 16:57

Skelligsfeathers · 03/05/2022 16:30

But why would they want to outsource it?
What kind of fucked up state have we got to, when people can't see why it would be beneficial to a child to have the majority of it's day to day care done by a parent who loves them?

Yes, i am aware that due to our terrible economy it is impossible for most people to provide for a family on one wage, but let's not kid ourselves that it is the best thing for children to be at nursery from 8-6 every day.
Let's not kid ourselves that it is best for parents to be run ragged trying to work full time, commute, look after children and run a house.
It is not. Our balance is all out of kilter.

No, I appreciate that some won't want to outsource, and that's fine if they don't want to and can afford not to. My point was merely that people don't usually need a sahp to facilitate their career progression. Some may want this arrangement though, and that's absolutely fine. We all do what works for our families.

As for the 8-6pm in full time nursery thing, I agree actually that that isn't ideal, but I know very few dual income households who have actually gone down that route. So many people are able to work flexibly these days in one way or another. We never had dd in paid childcare (nanny) for more than around four hours a day when she was very young, and didn't use it at all when she was at school as dh and I were able to work flexibly around each other, but I know so many other ways in which people have organised things.

Personally, I believe that dd gained more from the time that she had with her lovely nanny than she would have gained by having had a few more hours with us, as the nanny brought different skills and strengths which complemented our own. Of course, we were lucky enough to be able to afford that, and not everyone can, but most people find a way of managing things in a manner that works for their family.

My dd is nearly an adult now, but she has had many of the same friends since she was tiny. Some had SAHPs when they were tiny, others had mums who worked part time, others had both parents working full time. Quite honestly, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between them at this age - none of the different ways of managing the early years appear to have had any impact on their wellbeing and mental health, their confidence levels, their success at school etc. I think we all overthink this stuff when they are little, when ultimately all that matters is that they know they're loved and that their needs are met.

pinklavenders · 03/05/2022 16:57

Sex shouldn't dictate what value we place on caring for children or other caring roles, surely?

No nothing should dictate anything!

But women may intrinsically prefer and get more fulfilment out of a nurturing/caring role than men. Why do many more women than men choose jobs in this sector?

pinklavenders · 03/05/2022 17:02

Yes, but if they are earning some sort of mega salary (which the vast majority are not) it would be easy enough for the working parent to outsource most of the stuff that a SAHP does.

Sure, they could outsource most of their life so they can work for an outside employer!?

Topgub · 03/05/2022 17:12

@pinklavenders

Because women are brought up to think they should get more fulfillment out of it.

Even if they don't

A woman who opts to not get fulfillment out of it is viewed as odd.

And for gods sake dont admit you dont absolutely love every single second of being a mum! Or that sometimes you would rather be elsewhere.

OK for men to admit that but never women.

pinklavenders · 03/05/2022 17:13

And if they aren't earning megabucks, then they really didn't need a SAHP to progress to where they are anyway.

That makes even less sense to me..?

How can you claim that a family doesn't 'need' a SAHP? That family may derive huge benefits from it, regardless of whether they're earning 'megabucks'!

Topgub · 03/05/2022 17:13

@Skelligsfeathers

Those aren't the only 2 options

Mumwantingtogetitright · 03/05/2022 17:15

pinklavenders · 03/05/2022 17:02

Yes, but if they are earning some sort of mega salary (which the vast majority are not) it would be easy enough for the working parent to outsource most of the stuff that a SAHP does.

Sure, they could outsource most of their life so they can work for an outside employer!?

As I've said above, I get that individuals might not wish to outsource and that's fine. That's where there may be specific benefits to individual families of having one parent SAH. However, at a societal level, I don't believe that there are net benefits.

That isn't intended to denigrate the role of the SAHP at all. If it works best for you and your family, then it is an entirely valid and reasonable choice. I am merely saying that the value created by SAH primarily benefits your individual family rather than society as a whole, so when we talk about the role of a SAHP being valued, then it will mainly be valued by those who benefit directly.

pinklavenders · 03/05/2022 17:16

@Topgub we'll have to agree to disagree Smile

Although I do agree that no job in the world is 'loved every second'!

Topgub · 03/05/2022 17:20

@pinklavenders

I think its a bit depressing so many women still think that they're designed to look after kids

Mumwantingtogetitright · 03/05/2022 17:25

pinklavenders · 03/05/2022 17:13

And if they aren't earning megabucks, then they really didn't need a SAHP to progress to where they are anyway.

That makes even less sense to me..?

How can you claim that a family doesn't 'need' a SAHP? That family may derive huge benefits from it, regardless of whether they're earning 'megabucks'!

We're going round in circles.

Yes, the family may derive benefits from the arrangement but my original point was about the benefit to wider society. Someone said that the SAHP was enabling the WOHP to contribute. My point was merely that very few working parents actually need to be "enabled" in this way, although they might personally find the arrangement of having a sahp preferable.

Studies have repeatedly shown that there are no real benefits as far as outcomes for the children are concerned, so ultimately, it boils down to a lifestyle choice for individual couples and what suits them best. What benefits one family won't necessarily benefit another, and that's fine. We are all different.

LeeMucklowesCurtains · 03/05/2022 17:31

Topgub · 03/05/2022 17:20

@pinklavenders

I think its a bit depressing so many women still think that they're designed to look after kids

Why though?

Why do you care that I want to be with my children more than I want to go to work?

I like looking after them and the house. Why does it seem to to bug you so much that it makes some women happy?

hihellohihello · 03/05/2022 17:34

I am merely saying that the value created by SAH primarily benefits your individual family rather than society as a whole, so when we talk about the role of a SAHP being valued, then it will mainly be valued by those who benefit directly.

But what benefits individual families does benefit society and it enables that family to function optimally which in turn puts them in a positive position in order to be able to contribute.

For example, if someone suffered a stress disorder from trying to juggle work and caring responsibilities they might not be in a position to positively contribute and might have to receive costly care and help from the State in order to recover. It would only be once they were well again that they would be able to contribute again. Someone else might be in a very similar situation if they were not well suited to caring full time for small children at home. Staying at home to care an advocate for a child with additional needs might benefit them to allow them better prospects and greater independence in adulthood.

pinklavenders · 03/05/2022 17:36

@Topgub why do you find it depressing that other women are happy and fulfilled with 'their' choices?

Mumwantingtogetitright · 03/05/2022 17:51

hihellohihello · 03/05/2022 17:34

I am merely saying that the value created by SAH primarily benefits your individual family rather than society as a whole, so when we talk about the role of a SAHP being valued, then it will mainly be valued by those who benefit directly.

But what benefits individual families does benefit society and it enables that family to function optimally which in turn puts them in a positive position in order to be able to contribute.

For example, if someone suffered a stress disorder from trying to juggle work and caring responsibilities they might not be in a position to positively contribute and might have to receive costly care and help from the State in order to recover. It would only be once they were well again that they would be able to contribute again. Someone else might be in a very similar situation if they were not well suited to caring full time for small children at home. Staying at home to care an advocate for a child with additional needs might benefit them to allow them better prospects and greater independence in adulthood.

Yes of course, there are benefits to people - both men and women - having choices about how they live their lives. I am not arguing that people shouldn't have the choice, as it's obviously better if individuals can live in a way that fulfils them personally, whether that involves WOH or SAH or whatever.

My point was merely about the wider social benefits of the SAHP role in particular, because people always complain on these threads that the SAHP contribution isn't sufficiently valued. My point was individual families are the ones who benefit from this arrangement, rather than society as a whole so as long as your partner values what you contribute, it shouldn't be necessary to look for validation elsewhere.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.