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 ?

My dad was a sahp and he was an amazing role model, as was my mum who worked. I look up to and adore both of them and it isn't to do with who worked and who didn't. I wish we could dispense with this particularly nasty bit of judgment. This whole conversation always ends up as trading well-worn insults.

Since we’re just talking facts here, then yes, the parent how drops their kids off at school and picks them up at 3:30 is doing more than the parent with wrap around care. Just facts.

Boring boring boring

This is why it's utterly foolish to make generalisations about SAHPs.

That we can agree on. And the reverse is true as well.Not all working parents are the same either.

Well that's patently not true but if you're holding the line that a SAHM is "doing more" because they spend a couple of hours extra in the same space as their child each day then that's your prerogative.

Since we’re just talking facts here, then yes, the parent how drops their kids off at school and picks them up at 3:30 is doing more than the parent with wrap around care. Just facts.

I dropped DD off at 8 (so that's one hour less ) went to work, then picked her up at 3:15! Do I work more? Less? Do I win something? Do I get a cookie?

SAHPs can spend their time however they choose.
Well, no, my time is dictated by the needs of my toddler

Yes! All the cookies for you! But will @MrsSunshine2b tell you your kids are more likely entitled and poorly behaved because they are not in daycare? That’s the question.

When is time not actually time?

I haven’t RTFT.

Firstly, these threads always end up the same way. No one agreeing which is ‘harder’, being a SAHM or going out to work, people trying to justify why one is harder than the other or why being a SAHM is a contribution or not.

The reality is that quite literally everyone’s situation is different. Being a SAHM of neurotypical school age children with a partner who earns well and is also a good parent is probably easier than working FT. Being a SAHM of three kids under school age, probably harder than being out at work. Notice I said ‘probably.’ Because unless you are literally that person, you don’t know. Finances, mental health, whether you like your job, whether it’s secure, whether your kids are generally easier or more tricky, what’s going on in your wider personal life etc etc. It all has an impact.

The thing I do disagree with though, is those who say if you’re working outside the home you’re doing as much with your kids as those who are at home FT with under school age kids and no childcare, you’re not. It’s physically impossible to be, because you’re at work. You are outsourcing the care of your child(ren) whilst you work outside the home, and therefore, someone else is ‘working’ by looking after them. Hence SAHMs of children not at school, with no childcare, ARE working because otherwise the kids could look after themselves, no?

I have done both. FT work, part time work, fully SAHM. They’ve all been hard in different ways. It’s not a competition or race to the bottom. Mums who choose to stay at home are not lazy and nor are they not contributing to society. Mums who chose or have to go out to work are not bad parents or letting other people ‘bring up’ their kids. Every family is different.

This is not a SAHM but a lady who lunches!

Hence SAHMs of children not at school, with no childcare, ARE working because otherwise the kids could look after themselves, no?

So only a specific subset of SAHMs for a specific amount of time?

Got it.

@Sleepydoor I probably ruined her for life because I was a SAHM (before she started school) AND put her in nursery, at first two mornings a week and when the funded hours started 5 mornings a week.Kid doesn't stand a chance. I guess I should share my cookies with her.

My point was that whether you think being a SAHM or not is ‘work’ or is a ‘contribution’ (I do, by the way!) no one can possibly argue that you’re not working if you’re looking after kids who would otherwise need looking after by someone else.

Bored with you now.

I’m holding the line that a working mom is not doing her job plus everything the SAHM is doing. In your very narrowly prescribed scenario, that doesn’t apply to everyone, the working parent is doing what, 80% of what the SAHP is doing?

Depends on the job.

Do find it amusing the presumption that all those who WOH have an easy ride. For me, my mat leaves were a piece of piss compared to my job. I had a tidy house, went for coffees and walks, didn't have to rush out of the house in the morning. Bliss. Would've given my right arm to stay at home but sadly money didn't allow.

Then why quote me and try to continue it?

You've already had a couple of posts deleted.

When you're in a hole learn to stop digging. There's no point in engaging further, you're welcome to the last word.

Most do in your town. In quite a few places we looked at living they do not, or some do, some don't and the ones that do tend to be tougher to get into with a more expensive catchment.

Current school has breakfast club but not after-school apart from ad hoc and variable activities...

You are not working. You are at home with your children. By your logic we are all working when at home with our children even at the weekends.

I pay for professional childcare for my children. They are looked after in a setting with people who have relevant qualifications and whose actual paid job it is to care for them. They need to care for them in a certain way too. They cannot for example sit and watch tv all day (not saying all SAHMs do, but no one is checking this and you don’t have to perform to certain standards).

I have to laugh at your username and the fact that you replied to her to tell her she can have the last word. 😆

The irony is not lost on me 😆.

This is interesting. I used to work in childcare and early years and believe me, some of it is not great. (Not saying all, some are amazing.) But honestly, if you believe leaving your baby or young in a nursery for 10 hours a day guarantees professional, good childcare, you are mistaken. Especially with the government insisting on crazy ratios. One nursery ‘professional’ cannot do an amazing job of looking after 3 under ones. They can’t. They can do an adequate job, they can (usually) keep them safe but you’re kidding yourself if you think it’s a fail safe. Many nursery workers are on NMW and overwhelmed with paperwork and staffing issues. And Ofsted. My point is, maybe I was wrong to say SAHMs are ‘working’ using my logic, but the idea that ‘professional’ childcarers are better than SAHMs is just wrong. They MAY be ‘better’ than some SAHMs sure, and I agree, some SAHMs probably do stick their kids in front of the TV all day. But the argument that childcare is better because workers are ‘trained’ is flawed.

I will just add, a lot of SAHM do a lot of jobs around the house that they would outsource if they were working. I know not everyone has the money to do so, but most of the working moms I know outsource a tone of stuff that SAHP would do themselves. So maybe some of the people characterizing SAHP of school age children as ladies who lunch should consider that.

I also don’t get the argument being repeated that since you can do a shitty job of being a parent, we shouldn’t give any credit to the people doing it full time. So, nanny can get fired is working but sahm is probably a lazy slattern eating bonbons while her toddler sits in a playpen all day. Nice!

Honestly, I think people blow this issue out of all proportion (probably because they have too much time on their hands 😉)

Raising children is a choice and it is tough. Being a sahm is valid choice but it is not a career or job, it enables the other parent to work on a lot of cases and a huge contribution.

It is not the same as working and raising children, similar to single parenting being compared a married couple where one works away.

I have worked both part and full time and been a married and single parent. I would never be a sahm because I love my job and have a passion for my work as I do my family.

I don't judge sahm but feel often the way some of them describe their choices as a selfless act do imply that working mothers neglect their families when actually often the choice suits their family and is convenient if they don't like their career etc.

Often though the sahm mothers I have known do more than their fair share in school
Activities, play dates and are the friends who organise and plan the events