Staying at home with kids IS a contribution and it is also WORK

[carshaker]

A lot of people don't respect a mum who's ' just at home '. Like she's not really contributing to the family.

The reality is though, that it's very much a big contribution, even if it's not financial.

If you took away the financial risk of staying home long term, what's the issue with it? Why is it considered by many ( especially women ), less than ?

If this is a woman's choice, what's the issue ?

I appreciate that you understand that sometimes, it's less of a choice for a partner. I think it would be much easier for me to be a single parent and make it all work career-wise for myself. But the family as a whole works well so I just do what I can.

Nurseries have 1:3 for under twos not 1:6. DT’s nursery was 1:2 which as twins would have been the same if I’d stayed at home with them.

Yep. My mum worked in a shop, my grandmother was a school teaching assistant and my great grandmother did sewing in a factory. This idyllic fantasy of a SAHP back in the day was not a reality for many!

@ArseholeCatIsABlackAndWhiteCat because there aren't enough hours in the day? And who would look after the children while he's away?

You’re “on” 24 hours a day when you have kids whether you work or not. Being a stay at home mum is a contribution to the household, but it’s infinitely easier than being a working mum. I was a stay at home mum during the day, then went out to work in the evening and then stayed up all night with a sleepless baby. I’d have loved to be a stay at home mum. Sounded like a breeze.

I don't think SAHPs are "less than", unless the SAHP in question wants to witter on about how nurseries are child abuse or whatever.

SAHPs come from a place of privilege where they can not bring in a wage and their partner can pay the bills, and sometimes they forget that.

@Imbusytodaysorry "Im not saying mum should be home but Ideally I believe one parent works and one is at home for the kids needs.
People wonder why kids are so unruly because who brings them up ?
Single parents with no choice to work . Who brings their kids up ? "

Do you think we just leave them to run feral?

Working parents bring their kids up as well too you know.

I drop DD at school every day, DH picks her up, we're fortunate enough to work from home and have different eat start and end times so we can balance that.

If she's poorly we take it in turns to take leave from work to care for her, she gets a home cooked from scratch dinner most days, except for the occasional take away or freezer beige meal.

She goes to after school activities, has friends over and does sports activities at the weekends.

She's doing exceptionally well at school, gets great reports, admittedly she's just hit a 10 going on 14 stage and hormones seem to be kicking in so we're having random teary outbursts and the occasional sulky moody moment but I don't think that's because I have a job. I'm pretty sure children of SAHPs have hormones too.

If I were to look at her class, the most ill behaved kids have SAHMs, should I conclude from that ridiculously small and biased sample that working parents raise better kids?

No, then his business wouldn't be affected, if he washed his hands of us. I mean he couldn't run his business IF he wanted the family package and had to co-parent in a way that enabled my own career at all. If he was free from kids, he'd have no problem. Though his workplace did have to appoint him his own EA to help him manage his top level role there because of the same characteristics that would make it impossible for him to run his business if he didn't have someone to help him, and he doesn't have kids there.

He doesn't have to have the children AT ALL if you split up. Or just keep an every other weekend arrangement. Or get paid childcare or his family to help. Or just remarry/get another GF to pick up the slack. There is no reason at all why he couldn't just keep going as he is now.

He has options. Do you?

Everyone’s different. I was out of the house 7am-8pm minimum and on a 1/2 busy OOH rota. DH also worked crazy long hours plus emergency cover nights and weekends. We couldn’t get a live-in nanny to cover what we needed, didn’t help that we live in a rural area that’s difficult to attract nannies to at the best of times. Something had to give. GP hours tend to be much more family friendly (this is the reason why so many of our friends opted for general practice over other disciplines!)

@LookingForEnergy I honestly don't want to be a dick so I apologise in advance, but that's a very important point that gets forgotten in the whole "he couldn't do it without me". Actually he could, and if he's a particular type of dick (and you'd be surprised how many men become one after a split) his life can go wholly unaffected while you're left holding the bag. It suits men to make you feel like you're irreplaceable, but the reality is, you're not(that also applies to work places tbh).

I was a SAHM for about four years when my kids were small.

I think when people froth about this they forget that most of us only doing it temporarily.

Don't worry, guys, I've been a taxpayer for many years since. It's ok.

Both DH and I made compromises with our careers when DT’s were born. I stepped off the partnership track and DH moved out of the hospital consultant route to become a GP.

@Thepeopleversuswork

Well said that woman.

I'm almost exactly like your boss, lone parent and travel and I have always made it work.

Being a SAHP is a luxury but also a massive risk. Financial independence should be a priority for every woman.

i really hate this argument. We all work because we need to and because we want to not because we want to make a 'contribution'. I think the best thing to do is to make decisions for yourself and your own family and stop judging other people and their life decisions. We're all different.

SAHMs are heroes. It's more work than most paid work imo. Going to work is a break. I couldn't do it. (Unless they are at school).

@DallasCC

WE chose to advance his career like this. WE did.

To assume I had no say is patronising.

I’m not assuming you had no say and I have no problem with you living like this if you choose to.

What irritates me is the fiction that this is essential to support a career when I know very well from experience that it is not.

And while you shouldn’t have to structure your family’s life around the needs of othe people I would just ask you to consider that “facilitating wives” and the myth of their essentialness actually harms other women at work.

I think there is a huge difference in SAHP in babies/preschool and primary age kids, and being a SAHM to kids who are 11+ (barring any additional or medical needs) For the most part secondary age kids are out of the house 8-4ish, tend to have less illnesses (that would require a parent to stay at home) and don't need as close supervision.

You're not wrong about him being able to do it without me. He could. He couldn't do it with parenting responsibility, is what I mean. As evidenced by the fact his work had to appoint him a private EA to manage scheduling there. You don't know him.

In all honesty, I think I'd find it easier to manage my career as a single parent than relying on him as a parenting partner.

To ask how you get a bloody job 😐 http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/amiibeingunreasonable/5108616-to-ask-how-you-get-a-bloody-job

Have a read of this, SAHM now back at work. This is what a lot of us are saying.

You get divorced, you're shafted.

Instead of demonising SAHM who give up work, why not make it easier to re-train and go back to work. The issue is that SAHMs find it hard to find work after a break but many could easily return to the workplace. Instead of pointing out how silly they were to give up work, why not make it easier to slot back into the workforce?

It depends on the situation and the child/children.

Being at work was far easier for me.

As someone was a lone working dad for quite a while, I never had or needed any of the above. Becoming a parent doesn’t render you useless.

A lot of people don't respect a mum who's ' just at home '. Like she's not really contributing to the family

Both sides deserve respect. We don't give enough respect to stay at home mums in my opinion.

That's a pretty vague statement though OP. What people? Respect from whom? Bit odd to say you respect someone just because of a choice they've made in life, surely respect is something you earn from people who know you as an individual?

And why are you talking about 'sides'? There are no sides, just people making decisions on how to live their own lives. Who cares what complete strangers think about those decisions?

Yep

This

In a nutshell