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 ?

Absolutely. He's paying very generously into a private pension in my name.

There are under 300k homes that have a pool in the UK, that is a very small circle.

He's a perfectly good father, just a father with limitations. Does your husband have a condition that means you can't leave your children who aren't yet at an age that they can keep themselves safe with him? No, didn't know that was the case until we were married with children. Makes it much harder when you can't even shower without having to remind him to make sure he keeps an eye on the kids and doesn't get distracted so they don't have an accident.

Is this thread only for “regular” families? I grew up working class so I am under no illusions but I do appreciate that everyone has different reasons for being a SAHM and I don’t think we should assume whether one person has it easier than another. We can’t just view this issue from our own experience and assume everyone has the same situation as us. I see a lot of people on this thread only wanting to address parents with neurotypical children without health issues, for instance. I think we can all make fewer judgments about each other’s choices.

I did all those things when I was a SAHM but I did it for my kids whose faces lit up when they saw me at school during the day, and it turns out it's a really good way to keep the CV up. It doesn't just die and community involvement seems to be valued by employers. I also did two more degrees while at home.

That's understandable and I know that AL is probably saved for sports day etc pr school holidays....but then those who do have time eg the SAHP are enabling the trips and other activities to happen....alongside the teachers and school staff who are WOHP....so both benefit from each other.
I say this as someone who was a SAHP until my youngest started school and gradually worked from pt to FT as my DC got older.

If he can afford to support his partner to do this, he can probably also afford to pay someone to do it.

it’s a vital role early years though I would say. Not so much when kids are older, particularly when teens etc. It’s a lifestyle choice then. Personally I would never want to be financially dependent on a man so it wasn’t for me.

What condition is this exactly?

I don't feel the need to share that here. It can probably be inferred. He was still a good and involved father when he was home though and the kids got past the constant need of supervision stage, so it didn't last forever.

I live in Canada. It’s not that unusual to have a pool here.

Reason for asking is that from your posts you are implying he is a high flyer, but he is not able to look after kids? Just curious as to what sort of role this is.

I think personally no-one actually gives a shit unless your the type to call yourself a "full time mum" as opposed to mothers who work and also raise a family and keep a home. You never stop being a mother no matter where you work.
My children spend my working hours with grandparents who feel privellaged to look after their grandchildren and vice versa, thats also precious time and memories that are extremely important in a child's life.
Sometimes being a SAHM is a necessity, but it is in no comparison work wise to a mother who goes out to work, runs a house AND raises a family, especially once babies start going to nursery. IMO.

Well OP, I have RTFT and after 33 pages, I think it’s fair to say YANBU as this thread has proved.

His role is also a lot of personal information to ask for, but it doesn't involve looking after kids.

Then you are very fortunate in one sense.

I would not be ok with all of the responsibility for family life and home, and all of the looking after the children. That would not be for me, or I suspect a lot of other people.

@Sleepydoor brrr 🥶

That’s fine, but he doesn’t seem very capable.

Yes, I am, but it's also part of his plan to set us both up so, as a couple, we are better off collectively when the time comes. I've earned contributions myself, but it is minor compared to what he has put in.

Ok, I've just put the heat on for half an hour!!! It's nearly July!! No point in a pool here!

Are you ok though with him basically not having a part in any family life?

😆 it gets warm in the summer here, I swear!

Most people aren't capable in one area or other, it doesn't mean they aren't capable in others.

Indeed.

Some posters appear to want to restrict the conversation to able bodied/neurotypical kids simply because it it blows holes in their argument. All parents are equally entitled to a view.

He has plenty of part in family life. Why wouldn't he? He works a standard full time week.

Come on!

All these very senior high flying men who need their wives to stay at home as they cannot be trusted to even notice if their children are around?