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 ?

It's not that hard to install a simple pool. We had a pool but could hardly use it. Maybe if I'd worked more we could have installed heating for it. 😆

This absolutely annoys the hell out of me. If a woman chooses to not work outside the home so be it, but to have the narrative of for the husband makes my blood boil.

These women are putting massive risk of their income,career, pension. And by all means I support them doing it for their children but to enable a man to leapfrog his career, as a professional woman this drives me insane.

Equality will never take place while men have women enabling them to not play an equal part in child rearing.

@LookingForEnergy tell me to butt out if you don't want to answer , as it's completely irrelevant to the topic, but how do women with his condition/same severity cope with having children? Do they not have children, or only have them if certain things are in place ?

I could tell you stories that would turn your hair grey. Sure I could have worked but I'd have had to do it as a single mother.

And you are ok with this ? I wouldn’t be.

being a sahm is a luxury most can’t afford , they work , look after their kids , keep a household under constant pressure , you don’t realise how easy sahms have it

Wowza. Nice burn.

I do know a woman with his condition and it has been a huge issue when considering children. I would answer but I don't think it's my job to share her story here. Not having them or making arrangements for support would be the way. With a partner who is willing to be a SAHP, I suppose it's easier because that support is built in.

Many SAHMs stay at home because they have disabled children who require a lot more care/support.

So making sweeping inaccurate statements about how easy SAHMs have it reflects badly on whomever says it imo.

@LookingForEnergy thank you for answering, and totally fair enough.

I thought you were talking about his job? I'm confused.

In honesty, I was happy with it when the children were young and I had three preschoolers, because I was happy to be a SAHM at that stage. It was probably more stressful as we also had no family help so I could never switch off. I was less okay with it later when it was my turn to develop a career, but we were able to work through it. If I could go back I would do things a bit differently (I didn't understand the issues as well then), but we live and learn. I had no trouble going back to employment when my children were older but it was still very much as a single mother, which does impact my own career progression.

I was but then you asked me about him not being involved in family life, so that was a different question. Or maybe I'm thinking of a different post now. I'm confused. 😀

Of course it's work and valuable.

It doesn't start being work just because you pay someone for it, whether it is childcare, teaching kids, housecleaning, or whatever.

I don't think it's relevant whether there are more women doing it. There are more women in paid early years care too.

It contributes materially to the household, and so SAH mums and dads are, imo, completely entitled to claim half of the household resources, pensions, income, etc. Where the law doesn't support that I think it should.

Yes but I thought he delegated all family life to you because of his high-flying career? I presume he has that as he's making generous pension contribution for you - but he also has a condition whereby you can't currently trust him with the kids? Sorry, just trying to make sense of what you're saying, and no pressure to respond if you don't want to.

Ah okay. Yes, he has a high flying career. We're also past the stage where the kids need constant supervision, so that is more a past thing. Different life stages. He's also had a lot of help over the years since the constant supervision stage to help him learn to manage better. Meanwhile it has definitely impacted my own capacity to develop my own career due to so much having to fall on me.

The point about women enabling their husbands to build their careers by staying at home, sometimes this is true and does make sense. My husband has always, and will always, no matter what direction my career goes in, make more money than me. It’s just a fact. It’s a fact even if I hadn’t had children and had time out of my jobs. Therefore, it would have made absolutely zero sense for me to insist we split childcare equally or that we both went part time with our jobs, or that he was a SAHP.

It doesn’t bother me at all, but I can see how for women who have ‘better’ careers than me it would be very frustrating to be the one to constantly be picking up the slack with childcare, at the expense of my job.

That sounds very difficult x

Sorry but I call BS.
A high flying senior position male who cannot be trusted to look after young children? This is very niche.

Would you say that a professional nanny had a job? Would say that being a nursery worker isn’t work?

It has been at times but I am very fortunate because he is a good person and we have a good marriage. It did almost bring our marriage to it's knees at one point when I thought it was just straight lack of support. Sometimes you can't have it all and trying to just makes it harder.

My point was really that he couldn't have had his career if he'd also had to share the load of children equally (even when past the need of supervision stage). So some of us really do facilitate our DH's careers to exist in the form they do. Of course he could have stayed single and never had kids and done it on his own just fine, but that's not his situation. He is married and does have kids, so needed me to have it all.

FGS RTFT! We've been through that already!

You're a good person x

It might be less niche than you think. You aren't privy to the details of everyone's marriages and lives. You only see what it looks like from the outside and probably think choices are being made that are actually brought about by circumstance.

Or men who only want to engage when it’s in their interest.

A high flying capable male who cannot be trusted to notice his own kids. Wake up and smell the coffee!