Why are people on here so pressed about the existence of SAHMs?

[DaffodilsandCoffee]

It’s fair enough to point out the existence of certain downsides are risks, but there seems to be so much spite and resentment on here. Why are some posters do angry at the existence of women who prefer to do all the childcare themselves rather than outsource some of it? Also, are they equally as angry at SAHDs? (I know it’s not as common but I personally know 3)

Well needs must snd in most cases today, with the cost of living what it is, most families need two incomes. I get that. And of course, women want to work for all sorts of reasons that aren't just financial and far be it from me to argue with that.

But, where possible, if a woman wants to be with her baby and the husband can facilitate that, then he absolutely should. Where my husband comes from, men are expected to do this. They wouldn't insist their wives leave the baby with someone else and go to work, unless they needed the money. That would be seen as shameful, to be perfectly honest. I suppose if the wife couldn't cope with being at home, then they would have to get support in. But no man would expect his wife to go back to work before she's ready, and if you have 4 children, as we did, at 2 year intervals, that would be a decade before they're all in school and any husband should understand that 4 kids is a lot and why pay someone else when the mother is already there ?

why pay someone else when the mother is already there ?

What if the mother doesn't want to spend a decade looking after children? Or the man doesn't want to bankroll this indefinitely?

@mijas you seem to be invoking the example of where you come from which sounds fairly patriarchal and old-fashioned as the gold standard by which men and women in 21st century Britain should live by.

I can see there are scenarios where it may suit a woman to remain at home for a period but I think its fairly extreme to present this very conservative and old-fashioned way of life as the standard which modern men should live by. And to suggest that a man's failure to support a woman to opt out of being economically active indefinitely should be a source of shame is pretty backwards. It's all extremely rigid and not how most people live these days.

So yes then?

Thats some thinking I simply can get on board with.

I absolutely don’t think anyone should be forced into being financially solely responsible for a family, because the other person chooses it.

My dd is gay. If her girlfriend tried this on, I would be super unimpressed.

Thats not a joint decision. It’s one persons decision and societal expectations and pressure. It’s also framing women as the default parent, whose decisions are final.

That said, I am half South Asian and I avoid any man who buys into it that sort of thing. Simply not for me.

If you husband is happy, doing something because he has to, fair play to him. And you.

because he should absolutely 100% support the mother who can't work because she's looking after his child. He shouldn't need to be asked. He should be proud to do so and it's the least he can do, frankly. This is basic stuff. And if he can't grasp that, he is a disgrace and has no business having children.

again the language is interesting. ‘Can’t’ work or doesn’t want to work? But using can’t makes it sound like there’s no alternative.

and ‘his’ children. Not ‘their children’, as though women only pop out children for their husbands. As though they weren’t that bothered about having them. But it does make it sound like it’s all for the happiness of the husband and all sacrifice on the mothers part.

I

But, where possible, if a woman wants to be with her baby and the husband can facilitate that, then he absolutely should

That should be discussed and agreed pre babies though and re evaluated regularly. At points in my relationship I've been the only earner and the higher earner. If dh needed (or wanted) me to work then I'd need to get a job. Otherwise it leads to resentment which leads to disgust.

Personally I think the thread you describe is one of the bigger arguments against sahms, I.e. some men are assholes and given domestic abuse often starts during pregnancy/post partum...women do need to be careful. Especially if they don't have fall backs in the shape of savings, pensions etc.

Sinara - Sorry I hadn't seen your question. I'm saying that - finances permitting - if a woman wants to be with her children then yes, he should facilitate that. Why wouldn't he want his kids to be with their mother? Why pay for some other woman if you don't need to?

In any case, he should not think of his salary as "his money." I would have zero respect for any married man with that mindset.

To be clear -

I'm not talking about scenarios where the wife being SAH would mean a massive financial strain. I'm talking about where the extra salary doesn't make that much difference .

Nor am I (obviously) talking about cases where the woman finds she can't cope being a SAHM or wants to get back to work. This is perfectly valid and, if you don't want to be a SAHM, definitely don't be one.

I only said 'his children' with reference to the other thread because I don't think they're married and he is the father of the baby (not someone she got together with later).

But it’s their baby.

not his.

I still can’t get onboard with your opinion. I think sahp should be a choice. Not something that is done because one party would feel shame if they didn’t.

It positions both men and women badly. Some people simply don’t want to be solely financially responsible for the entire household for the rest of their lives. I certainly don’t.

I think projecting shame, especially cultural shame, onto someone to force their hand isn’t ok. Buying into it, isn’t ok. But that is probably because of my cultural background. Imposing parental roles based on sex doesn’t sit well with me.

Where my husband comes from, men are expected to do this.

What backward delightful place might that be???

Lol - I think we are saying the opposite. So yeah, you are wrong

I don’t think either party is obliged to pay for the other to not work. Nor should either party be obliged not to work because the other wants.

I wouldn’t want to pay for my ex not to work. Doesn’t make me less of a woman.

Women can work just because you have a child doesn't mean you can't work. Unless your DH is on a high salary most people mam or woman NEED to work!

Women can work just because you have a child doesn't mean you can't work. Unless your DH is on a high salary most people mam or woman NEED to work!

Totally agree with you @mijas
terrifying to think other people don’t. This sadly how sexism runs so deeply in both men and women.

Well actually that’s suggesting they can afford childcare?? Which is very expensive in the UK and many people can’t.

This argument is such a terrible way women attack one another from both sides of this “working mum” or “SAHM” card.

firstly, those who claim they are just far too intelligent to stay at home looking after kids…I’d love to know what some of their jobs are. It’s also suggesting that a SAHM parent couldn’t be studying part time, or reading challenging works of psychology before bed, or listening to a thought provoking podcast at nap time… and also if you actually throw yourself into play with children, whether that’s imaginary play, chasing/running about/crafts/construction play…whatever that is it is actually a lot less boring and perhaps more of a skill to be present and in the moment? Of course there more mundane aspects…nappies, mealtimes etc…but very few careers are so intellectually stimulating at all times. There’s a lot of mundane and drudgery in most things…
also - women are allowed to enjoy their jobs, to want have a career, or just like working in their local supermarket because they enjoy chatting to people or whatever? Those mums that would like to stay doing their jobs whatever they are for whatever reason don’t love their kids any less or care less about their development. Women should be able to choose!
perhaps it’s great for kids to see mum and dad enjoying careers, juggling a busy life, a mum that loves being at home, a mum who wanted a career break to spend time with them when they are little, a mum who likes doing child focused activities, a mum who is ambitious and career driven, a mum that earns more than dad…whatever it is?! We all have different opinions on raising our kids and love our children equally. It’s the same as does a mum choose to stick to a nap schedule or go with the flow?! No one would suggest one way was worse than the other - just different!

Im ashamed to say that I used to massively judge people (mums) that gave up working totally when they had a baby. Then I had my first child and suddenly I realised that my job that was just OK was something I didn’t want to go back to. I was relatively senior and earning a lot of money. I never thought I would want to be “financially dependent” on a man. But (thankfully my partner doesn’t see it as his money and I don’t do the majority or the housework either) was very supportive of how much my opinion had changed. I don’t do it because I’m counting on him being with me forever, I do it because I choose to. If I had a crystal ball and could see that he leaves me for someone else in 5 years time, I would continue as this isn’t about the money (for me) I’m doing what I choose to and enjoy. I can still have intellectual conversations with people, I’m well read and I think my opinion is valued by people who know me! Do I sometimes feel a pang of embarrassment when people ask if I work…sadly, yes. But I don’t judge them and just hope they don’t judge me in return?!
I can guarantee there aren’t threads with men tearing each other apart for how much they earn and how involved they are or not with childcare!

@Foxglovers assuming you are based in UK.... and speaking as a single parent. You get help towards your childcare costs. Or if there's 2 parents it's much more easier to work opposite to one and another... you have a lot more options when 2 people live in the same household

There's many advantages when you have 2 parents on the house. However if your looking for excuses not to work your going to find plenty.

I could say the same it coats me £160 a week and that's just for 4 days it's not viable for me to work the 5th day during the week!

I also have to Uber daily to work... its a sacrifice I make though and LONG TERM when DS leaves primary it will have been worth the money!

Sorry that was for holiday club during the school holidays for 4 days £160!

We're all different and we all have different priorities. I waited a long time to have my son and there was no way I was going to rush off back to my crappy job after having him. I loved every minute of the 4 years I looked after him. Luckily my husband is a decent human being and also agreed that me being at home was best for all of us, especially our son. Who's going to love and care for him best? A loving parent or a child mnder? Be honest with yourself when you answer that.
This forum is so weird. You would think it would be supportive of mothering skills, not dismiss them as nothing, or call SAHPs unemployed.

I will give you an honest answer. People can bond with your child really well. When my sister was young one of the nursery staff swore she never wanted kids. However my mum put my sister in nursery from quite young and one particular staff member got so attached she even asked my mum if she could take her home for the weekend (my mum let her) She was fond of her... and she ended up having her own baby in the end!

Obviously you love your baby the most as the mother but plenty of people will do a fabulous job of caring too!

@Redandbluebunny

What happened after 4 years?

Who's going to love and care for him best? A loving parent or a child mnder? Be honest with yourself when you answer that.

A child in child care, isn’t lived any less by anyone?

Does your child feel less loved by their Dad? Because their Dad worked?

I can’t comment on how well they are cared for as mine never used it young. We worked our jobs so they didn’t have to. However, it also depends on what you mean care. Caring is paying the bills. Caring could be seen as making sure there’s enough to keep a roof over their heads. Or (where people choose to keep working because they want to) could be providing the child with a private education, or hobbies or holidays or extra tutors.

Agreeing that you should be a Sahp, does not make your husband decent. It means you are just 2 average people who agrees in something. The implication being that if people don’t feel they need a sahp, they aren’t decent is very odd.

i think you last sentence give a good answer to the ops questions. People aren’t pressed by sahm. But the ones who think the status of Sahm should be held up as some sort of ideal or a paragon, can be annoying.

Your a parent. Your choices are your own and impact, only your family. No one else is going to put you on a pedestal for making that choice.

Just like working parents aren’t.

Also don’t understand why so many sahm are upset by the term unemployed. You aren’t employed. There shouldn’t be such emotional attachment to that word.

I don’t claim to work multiple jobs because I have a job and am also a parent.

Its hypocrisy to say ‘you cant call us unemployed’ while also saying ‘children of working parents arent loved and cared for as much as children of sahp’

Who's going to love and care for him best? A loving parent or a child mnder? Be honest with yourself when you answer that.

Honestly? Love, yes the parents. But then again, I would also want my DH to have the opportunity. As we have read, husbands of SAHMs work very big important jobs all hours and are never home, so we did not want that.

Care best? His childminder probably. She loved to play all kids of games with them, do arts and crafts, teach them songs and letters, go out on all kinds of expeditions and treasure hunts and whatnot. Not to mention there were always other children there to play with. Yes I could have forced myself to do messy play with shaving foam and go to toddler groups daily, but that certainly would not have been good for my mental health. I did of course play with DC, but I simply cannot keep small children appropriately entertained full time. People are different.

Of course one can argue that women like me should never have kids at all. I've never heard this said about men though who continue working and don't spend all their days in local Mini Mozart or Pottitunity classes. Funny.

Who is going to love and care for him best? A loving parent or a childminder?

Leaving to one side the gross the sexism of this post: would you pose this question of a working father? Thought not.

Loving a child and caring for a child well are not the same thing. Most parents (even bad ones) love their children more than a paid childminder could. That doesn’t automatically make them the most suited person to spend six hours doing baby gym or taking them to the park or reading to them.

A loving parent can and should do all of this sometimes. But they are not diminished by not wanting or being able to do this as a full time job.

Generally childminders and nannies choose these jobs in part because they are temperamentally suited to them. So it’s not automatically the case that a parent will do a better job. And certainly not that a female parent will automatically do a better job than a male one.

Who's going to love and care for him best? A loving parent or a child mnder? Be honest with yourself when you answer that.

My children had super relationships with their nanny/key nursery workers. They brought a lot to their lives. That didn't mean their parents loved them any less.