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?

This is my experience too, but it seems unpopular!

My now ex worked on his career.
20 years later, we got divorced, and life is a real struggle for me now.
I still cherish the time I had when they were small, but my advice to anyone is never to take for granted that your life won’t change unrecognisably in the future, and be prepared for it to happen. Sorry to say it, but if it could happen to me, it can happen to anyone.
Make sure that you could support yourself and your children financially, by yourself, if the worst DID happen.

This. This is where the fairy tale about women not needing financial independence because they are "in a partnership" is exposed for the blatant lie that it is. Those believing this can go on believing it but promulgating it to other women is downright dangerous. Men don't believe this lie. This is why they look after themselves and then screw over women on divorce.

Topgub - if men feel a strong burning desire to be SAHDs, they are at liberty to express this. What's stopping them?
Something tells me that if men, through history, had really wanted to be at home with their kids, we would be looking at a very different world today. Funnily enough, we are not.

Why do you think more men aren't SAHDs?

@mantramama something also tells me that if more women were in a position of power, there would be fewer wars and the world would be very different.

It is not helpful to continue to play to gender stereotypes that women's place is hearth and home and men go out into the big bad world and are the strong provider. If each person in a couple shared more roles rather than have rigid divisions of labour, that would foster understanding and less male depression. Which is why shared parental leave is so important and I am glad the younger male workers are increasingly availing themselves of this option.

Social conditioning has a lot to answer for. Men may not be clamouring to stay at home at this point, but I am sure they would want some form of parental leave or sabbatical from time to time to spend with their families if they were not disadvantaged at work or discouraged by their spouses.

I am not saying an individual SAHM is causing this, just that it adds to the weight of perpetuating the conditioning when we should be moving in the other direction for what is another good of society.

Something is only 'for the good of society' if it's what individual men and women want. Trying to enforce the 50/50 'ideal' on everyone, like a diktat, because it's what you've decided men and women SHOULD want, is as bad as saying women should all be at home.

Do you believe that socialisation, societal expectations around gender roles and stereotypes exist? Or do you genuinely believe that women, as a group, are more suited to the SAHP role and men are more suited to working and earing money?

@mantramama

That doesn't answer the question though. Why is it ok for your oh to work and miss out on his kids?

What would have happened in your relationship if he had insisted on being a sahp?

What's stopping them?

Social conditioning

Some Sahms really freak out at the thought of men being able to share care.

Like actual terror at the thought of it.

It's weird

But yeah. Men totally have an equal opportunity to stay home. Clearly none of them want to.

🙄

Of course I believe in social conditioning. You don't need to explain this to me.

But I don't believe that is the whole story. Far from it. I believe that although men and women are more similar than they are different, there are biological differences. A large part of social conditioning stems from these basic biological differences. Where else do you think it comes from? Society reflects human nature, essentially. If human nature was different, the way societies have evolved would be different.

You could erase the entirety of history and social conditioning and religion tomorrow and start again with a clean slate. Men and women would still organise themselves slightly differently, particularly after children come along, it's human instinct and you can just pretend it doesn't exist.

It's a bit of a pointless argument really, because the data is in: when good, reliable childcare is available, women's labour force participation increases , and so does the birth rate. Most women want to work. Most women want to work enough to limit their childbearing if said childbearing significantly limits their ability to work.

@mantramama

We dont have slightly different.

We have very very different

98/2 different

I believe that social conditional and societal expectations play a much bigger part in how society is constructed and how society has developed.
Biological differences have been used to put women in a place of oppression throughout history. This means we live in a world built by men which serves the needs of men.

My DH doesn't 'miss out' on his kids any more than any woman who works. What do you mean?

The way he reacted after our kids was different to the way I did. He wanted to provide for his family and this was very important to him. if that how he feels, that's how he feels. I wanted to be there for my kids. Never felt anything more strongly in my life. What is wrong with that?

We are no more 'socially conditioned' than you. You have just been 'socially conditioned' to be terrified about anything other than 50/50 in relationships. That's another type of social conditioning. Eventually it will be challenged and morph into something else.

Better to just accept that we are all socially conditioned - that's life - but all you can do ultimately is trust your own instincts. Because if you don't, or you try to do what people tell you you SHOULD be doing, you will be unhappy. And what is the point of that? You only get one life. Do what matters to you. Find a partner who complements you and the way you are and be honest with each other about what motivates you. Stop telling other women how they should feel.

I chose to return to work two days as a teacher because I had only completed one academic year as a teacher and felt if I didn’t go back, I would lose valuable skills and possibly never return to the profession which I worked/studied hard for for 7 years.

Had I been more established in my career, I would’ve been a SAHM. My children are now 8&5 and I still feel I need to be around to take/collect from school and get them to clubs etc.

when your child reaches 3, you will be able to access childcare which will do wonders for them socially and give you time with your youngest alone.

I would write down everything so you can consider returning and not returning. You can always change your mind, and go back to work, may be just not to the same job.

@mantramama

Do you never stop to think why it would be that you wanted to be there for your kids but your oh didn't and why you're ok with that? I wouldnt be.

And yes. We are all socially conditioned. Everyone is.

Accepting women as entirely reliant on men is terrifying, yes. It's a slippery slope that we have no hope of getting off of as long as these attitudes exist.

That is not the same as telling other women how to feel. No one is telling you how to feel. But your feelings have consequences

There is an inherent power imbalance in a relationship in which the man holds the money and resources. You can say women have power in a relationship. However, unless they have access to the ability to earn their own money and exert influence outside the home, they are at the mercy of the man whom they chose to be financially dependent on. The law moderates this power dynamic in the form of divorce/child support laws but so many women still report about being screwed over after 20 years of marriage and end up living in reduced circumstances if the man decides to decamp with his assets to younger and greener pastures.

An extreme example where men have completely taken over is Iran. Half the population is effectively enslaved to a male religious view of how women should behave. Look at the demonstrations now. These countries will find it very hard to progress. In the UK, we stand on the shoulders of the suffragettes and the rights they fought for. We have to use it or lose it.

Even if there is social conditioning on both sides (though I would argue that male dominance is far more entrenched), the traditional one is less beneficial to an equal society.

By all means choose what division of labour works best for your family. Just bear in mind it models a world that oppresses women and wants to keep them and their bodies in their place. Social conditioning makes you feel that is fine.

I work 4 days a week, I'd love to drop to 2 days a week if I could afford it. But I'd never leave completely, I think getting back into a good career in a few years would be so challenging.

"Do you never stop to think why it would be that you wanted to be there for your kids but your oh didn't and why you're ok with that? I wouldnt be."

Yes of course I stopped to think about that. It's absolutely astonishing that you think I wouldn't have. I have my eyes wide open. Trust me on that. I simply came up with a different conclusion to you.

As for, "I wouldn't be" - yes, I know this. You seem terrified at the prospect of men and women behaving differently. That's your particular social conditioning, speaking. I am not threatened by the fact I am different to my husband. I don't need another version of myself, thanks, Isn't it great that we live in a society where we can have CHOICE (some more than others, admittedly).

If I had wanted to work and use childcare, I would have done just that wouldn't I? Nothing was stopping me. I would have found myself one if your 50/50 husbands. I wonder why I didn't?

Women make discussions in all areas of life - degree choices, career (or not) choices. You can't dictate that all women shst their priorities in life should be; or tell them they SHOULD want to work full-time; any more then you can dictate to women what degrees they should do, or what to wear. If a woman is different to you, you can't use 'social conditioning' as a stick to beat her with. It's so odious and patronising, I have to tell you.

There is a valid point in there for SAHMs about looking after your long-term financial security. But again, don't ASSUME SAHMs have not considered this. The context of their lives will be different to you. Many will be far less financially vulnerable than you - this is the very reason they can be a SAHM at all! Even for those who are not, it's a risk they have decided to take with their eyes open. But they have decided the benefit of being with their kids outweighs the potential financial risk. Women are at liberty to make their own decisions, without being patronised.

blueshoes - I am not financially oppressed in the least. I am better off (financially) due to my decision to be a SAHM than if I had been working. So are my children. That's why we did it this way. I would also be better off if we split, then if I had been working all these years. I am not dense. I would not risk my children's financial security. If I was worried about any of that, I would not have been a SAHM. The only difference if I had been working is we would have all been more tired; the kids would have had less focus / homework help / emotional support / ferrying about / consistency. We have 5 kids. It's no walk in the park.

I'm a SAHM but my son goes to nursery 5 aftenoons per week. I think if you can work part time thats the best option as you get the best of both worlds. I freelance from home but on an adhoc basis, ideally I'd like a job for the social side and financial independence. I've loved being a SAHM but couldn't do it without the 5 afternoons at creche per week. It means I get quality time with my son every day. My concern with going back to work is that I used to find my job stressful and that really travelled down into my mood, meaning that I know when I work I can be distracted during the evenings/weekends with my son and he doesn't get the best of me and I feel bad about that - so I think if you have a stress free job it helps. I'm also grateful that I've been able to spend so much time with him as he changes every day and I know I'll never get that time back and I won't regret sacrificing my career to spend time with him. Equally I'm aware that one day he will leave home and its important I've got some sort of job/side line to keep my busy.
Tricky one isn't it? I don't think it's possible to have and do it all and I think that's OK. But I think if you can work part time absolutely do that. And try a childminder if nursery doesn't work for you. My son still screams at creche drop off. I don't think he hates it, just thinks he prefers being at home as he has both parents (husband works from home) attention

@mantramama

I'm not terrified of men and women behaving differently.

I just dont accept that they should when it comes to parenting.

Because I believe in equality.

Which means men taking equal responsibility for their children.

If you dont want or care about equality then that's up to you.

It's mot something I'll ever accept though. Especially not for my kids

Part of the issue is that taking care of children and raising a family is completely devalued as an occupation. The only contribution that's worth anything - evidently from this thread, and in wider immediate society - is making money. Many adults believe they can only learn skills, communicate and feel valued at work, via the gift of payment, professional praise, getting to the next rung, whatever.

As long as we view raising a family through the lens of "well, that's pointless, get yourself into an office and LIVE," the argument just goes round again.

I don't subscribe to it. I had a well paid, senior position in the City, but I'd done that. It was time for me to do something else - I didn't want to compromise either being a parent or my job at the time. And, yes, there absolutely would be compromise, because life.

I learned how to be a parent, I learned to make friends outside of an office environment and how different that was, I saw my children grow and learn about the world, and it was fucking amazing. I found it profoundly fulfilling, and it grew and stretched me in a way that my career could never reach.

Anyone writing off raising kids as brainless, mindless unpaid drudgery is only seeing a very narrow picture. But what about the money? Many SAHP have thought about that, worked for decades before having kids and actually have a sensible financial provision in place. To assume they've wandered blindly into financial dependance is reductive.

I started working freelance when there were enough hours to do so, so I've changed direction again, and again, I discovered a new skill set, a new way of working, and absolutely loved the autonomy and freedom.

There are three stages so far me in this relevant period - work, being SAHP, and freelancer. All were enriching and vital in different ways. Being a SAHP was good for me, I really loved it, and I'm enjoying the next stage.

There's so much venom on this thread, attack after attack on women making their choice about how to live their life. What's key for me is that no one believes the other side: neither believes the other one is truly happy, and so they think if they just keep digging, and criticising, and being just a bit more insulting, someone's going to break cover and admit that their life is shit.

In real life, if you think someone hasn't made adequate financial provision for themselves, or if you think that someone is strung out and miserable because of trying to be happy working parent, do you take them by the shoulders and shake them repeatedly, screaming into their face what a fucking stupid, inadequate idiot they are? That's basically this, and every other, SAHP thread.

If work is so amazing, how come there are 200 threads every day on all the nightmare problems at work? Stress of child care, stress of colleagues, stress of the grind, being underpaid and under appreciated. On this thread, work is the life-affirming, sunny uplands of unshakeable self-esteem and high reward, sprinkled with the elixir of money.

If raising kids is so amazing, how come there the same number of threads about the daily problems of doing so? To hear people like me, you'd think that every child wakes up smiling, is a bundle of utter joy all day and never refuses a single mouthful of organic coconut puree.

The reality is that neither choice is perfect, because life isn't like that, but these threads never reflect that.

I honest think that there is a ton of protesting too much about one's own choices, and these threads attract people who are really defensive about their choice, and are desperate to sound really happy. The middle of the road folk on every other MN thread, with nothing to prove steer clear.

But I'm here, so which am I? Being a SAHP worked for me. I think society needs a reset that benefits the family. Nothing in the world would get me back into the office, because I've discovered a new career path. It makes no difference if you believe me or think that I'm doing exactly what I said - protesting too much It doesn't matter.

And that comes back to my other point, if someone says they're happy with their choice, believe them and respect it. Then we wouldn't need to do this crazy 'I'M HAPPIER THAN YOU ARE' bullshit which is just women beating each other up, and fuck knows we don't need that right now.

And yes. We are all socially conditioned. Everyone is

Agree - but the dominant social conditioning is towards women being nurturing, self-sacrificial and putting men first.

I loved the balance (for me and kids and financially) of working part time. After mat leave I went back 3 days a week and put DC1 in nursery those days. When DC2 was born I took a year mat leave again and then had them both in the same nursery on the same days for a while. Once both are at school I'll either keep my days or adjust my hours but I'd like to be there for at least some pick ups so won't go back to full time for the foreseeable