Not sure whether to be a sahm or not

[Flowerpicker1]

Had 2 under 2. My maternity leave is now coming to an end following the birth of my 2nd dc. Neither dc are in nursery. DH is on a good wage.

Have been given the option not to return to work if I don't want to. Dh can cover us. It would be part not full time anyway.3 days.

Not sure what to do. On one hand I'd love to be there for all of my dcs childhood but on the other I worry if I would cope. We don't have any family or support nearby.

If you work would you rather be a sahm and not put your children in nursery? Or have you done this and loved it/regretted it?

Having had my first start high school this year, I'd say think very carefully about your own financial position. When mine started primary, most of her classmates had 2 parents living (seemingly) happily together. There have since been several unexpected break-ups. The parents who weren't working at all have struggled most.

I didn't say 90% of toddlers spend most of their waking lives in childcare. Please read again.

I am saying that where babies and children are in daycare from 8am to 5/6pm five days per week, this is a very long day and far from ideal. You don't need 'evidence' to know that fgs. I doubt many families would actually choose this if it were not for economic necessity. Apsrt from the stress in babies and toddlers, mums will feel this type of separation more acutely than dads, in most cases. It's not 'sexist' to acknowledge the additional stresses on women as a result of societal expectations that they should be working full time with kids in childcare and just get on with it and pretend there are no problems and it's all fantastic.

If we follow that to its natural conclusion that means removing women from the work force almost entirely

I cant understand why anyone wants this

@mantramama

but if there's no evidence it's happening then it's a strawman argument

Personally the ideal is both parents splitting childcare between them.

Not always doable, but my ideal.

Nursery may not he my ideal but thats not the same as it being harmful. It's not.

That's not completely true. I've heard lots of stories of women who regret giving up their career. My career is something I'm incredibly proud of and it will be something I reflect t in positively when I'm older.

my mum gave up a lovely career to have me (early 60s, no choice) and has often spoken about it with me - not as a way to make me feel guilty, or try to influence my choices, but just when we've been talking about things. And I have been determined all my life that i will do what is best for me and my family, and that i won't tolerate the other parent ducking out.

I've been lucky in that i could make those choices, pretty much - apart from 3 years maternity leave that did nobody in my family that much good, it wasn't all dire but i spent many many hours contemplating not being around and crying when people couldn't see me - and my DH has been absolutely fucking stellar. Other families are different.

But how come so few of these discussions involve the DCs father cutting hours?

So for OP I'd say, how about you work 80%, your DH works 80% and you use nursery for the other 3 days (assuming you each have a different day off)
He might appreciate the time with the DCs when they are small too

(and agree that teenagers often require far more in terms of time-investment)

No it does not Topgub. As I said, there are no easy solutions. But I think we need acknowledging that women do feel more anxious about leaving babies than men and that is ok. Admitting difference is not 'sexist' - it's a step towards making sure the needs of women and babies are placed front and for most in his society is structured. Men should acknowledge our reality, rather than women having to quash themselves to fit seamlessly into capitalist structures. What are we aiming for exactly? How do we define a 'happier' society? It's definitely never going to be one size fits all women, put it that way. It never was and never will be.

@mantramama

It is sexist when those 'differences' are used to blame and control women

There's no evidence to suggest women would he happier not working at all.

No it does not Topgub. As I said, there are no easy solutions. But I think we need acknowledging that women do feel more anxious about leaving babies than men and that is ok.

that could be, of course, because they read and are confronted so much twaddle like this. All through history mothers have given their, often very tiny, children to others to look after while they get on with whatever it is they have to do whether that has been working in the fields, running a household and kitchen garden, taking care of a castle with staff and entertaining heads of state, being an artist etc etc

And in all that time where are the fathers? So yeah, it is a bit of a wrench, especially when you have people pointing at you and calling you a bad mother. They can all do one.

Women are free to choose how to live their lives, and so are men. But somehow only one of the sex-classes mentioned really are free to choose.

Your husbands opinion also counts. He might not want the stress of being the sole breadwinner You’ve said he wants to put your eldest in nursery.

What does he think?

It's one of my pet hates too!
It minimises woman's careers and positions them as something only selfish mothers have/aspire to.

I'm a mum and I work full time. Does that make me a bad mum? Of course not, just like my DH isn't a bad dad for also working full time.

Now, I fully admit that I am fortunate in that I work very flexibly which means I've never missed a school show, assembly, sports day etc. but judging by the other working parents at DSs school that's not particularly uncommon. It was standing room only at the assembly last week.

That god awful phrase does women no favours!

Topgub, I can't work out if you think men get to do exactly what they want or they are missing out? Also no-one ever said all sahm are doing so voluntarily. And I didn't stay at home with my kids to protect their future mental health, I did it because I wanted to

Well for the three days a week would you be paying childcare? Would it be worth the money?
How have you felt during mat leave, mental health wise? Being at home with kids all day can be tough and not suited to everyone. If work and young kids to contend with brings more stress I would stay home but if work is good for your well-being then do that. It just depends on how you feel.
If you have a run of the mill job I wouldn't worry too much about taking time out to look after your kids...childcare costs a fortune. How can anyone judge you for staying home with your kids when society makes it hard work just going to work.
Different if you have a career that means a lot to you though.

Exactly.

You think in the 20s/30s even 50s women were sat at home staring adoringly at their babies and preschoolers. Never leaving them for a minute?

Were they fuck.

They were parked in prams at the bottom of the garden kr in the close and the kids were kicked out to play, take the baby with you.

The idea of a woman doing nothing but look after 1 baby is a entirely modern idea. Cooked up by religious conservatism pushing back against women's lib

Yes women can feel a 'biological' need to be with their baby but c'mon. Most manage to find a balance with no trauma to either self or baby.

@Devoutspoken

Both.

@mantramama

I am saying that where babies and children are in daycare from 8am to 5/6pm five days per week, this is a very long day and far from ideal. You don't need 'evidence' to know that fgs.

But you do need evidence. If you're going to come onto a talk board full of women, most of whom are mothers, many of whom work and many of whom are anxious about finances at the moment and guilt trip them around the idea that they are damaging their kids by working, you bloody well do need evidence.

You can't just come on here and say: "you're hurting your kids, I can't really prove why but it stands to reason". Not good enough. If you want women start making changes to their lives which will significantly disadvantage them financially you have to have more than a vague sense that it's "not the done thing".

Since yours is already a part time arrangement, why not go back first and see how you feel? You could always quit and become a sahm if you find it too hard to juggle.

I am a sahm and there is no scope in my industry for part time work (or at least there wasn't, not sure about now). I have a lot of friends who were sahm who then went back to work, those who went back full time do not always enjoy it, but those who are part time seem very happy on the whole.

You think in the 20s/30s even 50s women were sat at home staring adoringly at their babies and preschoolers. Never leaving them for a minute?

yeppers. And the men didn't all skip merrily to work but had all the related stress of having to be the earner because if they were somehow incapacitated their family would be deep in the shit.

Yes there were outliers of women who worked and had careers. we can probably name a lot of them simply because they were so rare and stuck out.

I was a SAHM for 5 years. I absolutely loved it and I'm so glad I was lucky enough to do that. However, there were plenty of downsides - the main one being that I felt as if I had disappeared. My DH's career blossomed with me supporting him, whilst mine slid away. I felt like I had nothing that was just for me. My whole identity had morphed into being Mummy. We were ok financially, but we couldn't afford to save money and do "nice" things. All big decisions were dictated by our funds.

Now I am about to go back to work, full-time. It was very difficult to get this job. Most people weren't interested in someone who had been out of work for so long. It is the same salary that I was being paid 6 years ago, in a slightly more junior position.

Overall, I'm glad that I did it, because I got to spend all of those early years with my DC, and you can never get that time back. However, I can't help but wonder what my career would be like now if I'd only been off for a year or two. I now feel that I'm setting a good example for my children. I am also very glad to be earning money again. Now I can afford to send my DC to private school, and do nice things with them. I can save money for their future. Those things were not possible whilst I was SAHM.

I'm a SAHM who works from home and have managed to increase my hourly rate by double because of being able to spend time upskilling from home.

I wouldn't want to not work at all but we do have an arrangement where I don't have to work so anything I make can just go on day to day living for us and treats while husband pays the bills.

I feel very fulfilled because I have time for hobbies, I enjoy nesting. It also means our food budget is very low as I can source and cook very cheap meals, and obviously zero childcare costs.

I love being there for our child and it means the world to her. I also love that neither me nor husband are ever stressed since one of us has no household responsibilities and one no financial responsibilities.

If I could not work from home I would be working part-time again through choice and again for treats and daily expenses.

I've worked in childcare which would put me off every putting a young baby or toddler into one, as they were never happy being there all day and asked for mummy and daddy for about half the time they were there, wept, cried, and could not be nurtured properly in my opinion.

If you are working a job from home are you really a SAHM or more a WFHM?

I consider myself a SAHM because I work around the home and child instead of care for home and child around my work. Also because I don't have to work so there isn't that pressure, but ultimately it may just be because I enjoy it.

I also think there should be choice and not wanting to be at home all day is perfectly reasonable. I do. I love being at home all day.

Topgub - again I said nothing about women 'not working at all.' It's a nuanced discussion we are having here, surely? Of course there are pitfalls to women not working at all and all decisions are a delicate balance.

But I don't think it's helpful either to have this binary approach to life where you just brand every difference between men and women as 'sexist' and therefore something to be denied and done away with at all costs. It shuts down discussions and I think this can be quite dangerous actually.

In life, most people are aiming to be as happy as they can. Happiness takes different forms. Being able to work equally to men may indeed be optimal happiness for many women. But for others it will not be - because in gaining that financial agency, they are also aware they have lost a degree of agency over their babies / children day to day. If having a career was the definition of happiness and we were all the same, life would be very simple, wouldn't it? As we know, it is not. There is great value in women working. But there is also great value in care giving to our own children. It's not 'sexist' for some women to feel a need to prioritise that. It is 'sexist' to try to silence them or tell them their instincts have no value.

In my view, a 'happier' society would not be one where women are being told there is something wrong with them if they have different working patterns to their husbands or deviate from the "work full-time and just get childcare" lifestyle. It's ok to work full time but equally, it should be ok to want something different. Choice and a mixed society of SAHMs, full time working mums and everything inbetween and nobody tearing anyone down for it would surely be the natural reflection of a 'happier' society. It's the utilitarian principle of 'greatest happiness for the greatest number.' You won't get that by declaring "all women should be at home." That's been probed. But equally, you won't achieve a happier society by declaring "all women must work." Flexibility and choice are key to happiness, on an individual and societal level.

The MN view is going to be you have to work and maintain your financial independence, a view not without merit. I was a SAHM for about six years, while my children were little, honestly, they were the happiest years of my life and I really miss those days. It also worked really well for us as a family in that none of us were run ragged with not enough time to get everything done. Our evening were free for myself and my husband to eat dinner together (kids in bed at 7pm) and our weekends free for family time. I filled my weekdays with playgroups, swimming lessons etc. Giving up work was a risk, and we'll probably forever be paying the financial cost but I don't regret a single day. Having said all that, the life I led during those years would be hell on earth for some women.

I worked in childcare and the kids were absolutely fine.

They had a great time