Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

For thinking SAHMs are making themselves financially vulnerable

655 replies

PeasOff · 24/07/2022 18:25

Would or do you depend on your partner financially?

Do you have a backup in place in case of breakup or for your retirement?

OP posts:
Topgub · 27/07/2022 12:09

@CecilyP

Legal staffing ratios have nothing to do with vulnerability to abuse which is what pp was talking about.

Topgub · 27/07/2022 12:16

@howmanypets

You really don't have to read between the lines to see what you really think.

Topgub · 27/07/2022 12:17

@Dinosauratemydaffodils

Yes, often better for my family translates to better for my oh which brings us back to the sexism

howmanypets · 27/07/2022 12:26

Imagine, for a second, there were threads all the time on the lines of "WOHM - are you financially vulnerable.?" And on these threads, there was a "hardcore group" (to borrow pp's phrase) going on and on and on - "Your husband must think this.., Your children must think that .., Sorry you are actually vulnerable ..,, You think you're better than me ..,. The Statistics .... nah nag nah.,,"

You would not be "bothered" by these women in any meaningful way, but you would think WTAF? You might think they are trolls just on the wind -up. But probably it would be a mixture of feeling sorry for them and wondering what has happened to them that they're so obsessed.

CecilyP · 27/07/2022 12:29

Topgub · 27/07/2022 12:09

@CecilyP

Legal staffing ratios have nothing to do with vulnerability to abuse which is what pp was talking about.

Abuse? No one’s mentioned abuse! Just generally more vulnerable and dependent on adults and needing extra care.

Topgub · 27/07/2022 12:33

@CecilyP

Yes they have

MrsBwced · 27/07/2022 12:34

@Topgub
Well not intended that way. It was an observation of my own children, they needed more time at some stages than others. My time and other peoples.

CecilyP · 27/07/2022 12:38

Topgub · 27/07/2022 12:33

@CecilyP

Yes they have

Would you be able to quote them? I remember a previous poster using vulnerable; I can’t remember any mention of abuse.

Topgub · 27/07/2022 12:42

@MrsBwced

Fair enough

@CecilyP

Sleepstandingup, page 21

SleepingStandingUp · 27/07/2022 12:48

Topgub · 27/07/2022 10:35

@SleepingStandingUp

I think being unable to leave your child because you're worried about abuse is irrational tbh

this works both ways.

It does

I think its more often about the effects on the woman/society though than the child

Youre much more likely to see sahm say its for the good of the child

Perhaps it OS irrational but as humans we make lots of decisions based on our heart not hard logic. And it isn't just ABUSE but also the lesser stuff. Being able to explain if they enjoyed it or were sad, if they were fed enough, if they were ignored or picked on by another kid etc. Just because it isn't rational to you doesn't mean it isn't a reason some people want to stay home whilst their kids are small but will send them to school.

I also often wonder why sahm think what's best for their family wouldn't be best for everyone. Whato they think other people are doing thats so different?
well did you have a baby who was in and out of hospital for 18 months having operations? And actually whether it was longer couldn't he known in advance? If not then what was best for us was based on our very specific circs. Oct

Topgub · 27/07/2022 12:50

@SleepingStandingUp

No.

I didnt.

But why would that mean it was best for you to be a sahm and not your oh to be a sahd?

CecilyP · 27/07/2022 13:45

SleepingStandingUp · 27/07/2022 10:20

@Topgub but generally they're more able to vocalise it. I know lots of people who say they'll send DC to school when they can tell them what happens. Of course that's a massive simplification of abuse etc and it doesn't necessarily work that way but a non verbal child is vulnerable in a different way to a verbal child.

Is this the post you mean? It is after your post of 10.11 which simply said

No, I don't think that's true.i don't think a 5 yo is any less vulnerable than a 3 yo.

with no reference to abuse but definitely referring to something earlier in the thread. No, matter; I doubt if staffing ratios in nurseries are so high because the government thought staff would be abusing children!

HooverIsAlwaysBroken · 27/07/2022 14:22

I find it sad that women seems to be so keen to put each other down. Ultimately,

a) if a woman is happier /better off working and arranging suitable care for the DCs what is the problem?

b) if a woman is happier staying at home, accepting a financial hit and facilitates for her family, what is the problem?

I think women can give each other advice, warn of dangers, etc., but we are all adults.

I was a stay-at-home mum for almost 10 years, now back in a reasonably well paid job (but paid much less than if I had kept working). I had a difficult childhood and loved making my children’s childhood amazing, maybe as a way to heal my own? Now they need me less and I am happily working full time (a huge chunk of my current salary goes into my pension every month, agreed with DH). My husband was able to get ahead in his career and we have joint savings.

I feel incredibly lucky to be back in a challenging work and am relaxed about “what could have been” in terms of career. I am now planning my remaining career rigorously and have about 20 years left - with renewed purpose and energy. I am using all my life experience to do a better job and to climb the career ladder from where I am now. I did the right choice for me (hybrid). For individual reasons, other women will make different choices.

and for the record, two of my friends have DHs who were stay at home dads. That was the right choice for their specific families.

Topgub · 27/07/2022 14:29

@HooverIsAlwaysBroken

The problem is (as highlighted by your post) is that its viewed as a woman's problem

Not a parents problem.

sydenhamhiller · 27/07/2022 15:25

HooverIsAlwaysBroken · 27/07/2022 14:22

I find it sad that women seems to be so keen to put each other down. Ultimately,

a) if a woman is happier /better off working and arranging suitable care for the DCs what is the problem?

b) if a woman is happier staying at home, accepting a financial hit and facilitates for her family, what is the problem?

I think women can give each other advice, warn of dangers, etc., but we are all adults.

I was a stay-at-home mum for almost 10 years, now back in a reasonably well paid job (but paid much less than if I had kept working). I had a difficult childhood and loved making my children’s childhood amazing, maybe as a way to heal my own? Now they need me less and I am happily working full time (a huge chunk of my current salary goes into my pension every month, agreed with DH). My husband was able to get ahead in his career and we have joint savings.

I feel incredibly lucky to be back in a challenging work and am relaxed about “what could have been” in terms of career. I am now planning my remaining career rigorously and have about 20 years left - with renewed purpose and energy. I am using all my life experience to do a better job and to climb the career ladder from where I am now. I did the right choice for me (hybrid). For individual reasons, other women will make different choices.

and for the record, two of my friends have DHs who were stay at home dads. That was the right choice for their specific families.

Sometimes I really wish there was a ‘like’ button.

Such a measured, generous post - thanks OP!

I have 3 children, between 10 and 18.I have been SAHM, working at home, working p/t and working F/t in those past 18 years.

I feel the same: some people love working f/t. Some people love being a SAHM and are lucky enough they can afford to do so. I am working more than I would like for the balance of family life, but financial needs must. Each to their own.

TartanGirl1 · 27/07/2022 15:29

Topgub · 27/07/2022 14:29

@HooverIsAlwaysBroken

The problem is (as highlighted by your post) is that its viewed as a woman's problem

Not a parents problem.

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

TheresNoFog · 27/07/2022 15:33

Sometimes I really wish there was a ‘like’ button.

Yes I liked @HooverIsAlwaysBroken post.

TheresNoFog · 27/07/2022 15:46

Topgub · 27/07/2022 14:29

@HooverIsAlwaysBroken

The problem is (as highlighted by your post) is that its viewed as a woman's problem

Not a parents problem.

It was never my problem (for the short time I quit work). It was a discussion we both had. I wanted to, he would rather work. I used my time at home to get a better job than before so benefited me. My DH didn't miss out.

I loved the baby time and couldn't give a shit if this winds you up.

Staynow · 27/07/2022 15:56

I loved being a SAHM, my 25 year marriage isn't likely to survive much longer and I will probably be working poorly paid jobs to get by - but I couldn't regret being a SAHM for a minute. No amount of future money or security could have changed that for me. I made sure though that our mortgage was paid off asap and there was a decent amount of savings in the pot plus he has a good company pension that will be split. I've never found a job I've loved (unfortunately) so I'm so glad I was able to be a SAHM as it was something I felt I was very good at.

xogossipgirlxo · 27/07/2022 16:01

In theory. In practice I feel very much vulnerable working full-time when I get cancer and won't make any money while being off work. It's not that simple. I think women married to high earners are in much better position than married couple with joint income of i.e. 45-50k while one gets sick. Wealthy ones at least have proper insurance policy, good pension pot etc. You will always have time to go to shitty job.

xogossipgirlxo · 27/07/2022 16:02

*let's add, I don't consider in my post above women married to low earners and not working

MsTSwift · 27/07/2022 18:15

Absolutely sahm are not a homogeneous group to be pitied and looked down in. Why does having skills that mean you can take a few years out then go back to work mean you live in a “strange bubble”. Some right weirdos on this thread!

TartanGirl1 · 27/07/2022 18:23

MsTSwift · 27/07/2022 18:15

Absolutely sahm are not a homogeneous group to be pitied and looked down in. Why does having skills that mean you can take a few years out then go back to work mean you live in a “strange bubble”. Some right weirdos on this thread!

Because you seem to think your bubble is the norm whereas there are actual statistics that prove your bubble is extremely fortunate.

Topgub · 27/07/2022 18:33

@MsTSwift

Lol.

Sahms aren't a homogeneous group!

Then fails to recognise that they won't all have the skill they do

The majority (according to the stats) don't.

StoneSquirrel · 27/07/2022 19:14

blueshoes · 26/07/2022 19:03

A few posters mentioned well paid jobs that women can walk back into even after a break of more than a few years.

Can someone elaborate because they would be good jobs for dds to go into.

@blueshoes I had no problem getting back on my career path after five years away but I was very well established in my career (City - investment banking) before I took the break and had a really network. A number of friends were similar (Magic Circle law etc) but all are generally Oxbridge with stellar and rapid career progression pre DC . Also helped that there was no financial imperative for any of us to go back so didn't feel we needed to 'settle' for lesser offers than before DC. I don't think there is a specific area that is open to this. A lot depends on how good you are at what you do.