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 ?

The bigger point is we all want a society which doesn’t require both parents to work full time from babyhood onwards.

Choices in the best interest of the child are key.

Flexible working, affordable or even free childcare, better elderly care, and better women’s financial rights especially accrual of women’s pensions and upon divorce or separation. On all of this women should pull together. What do we need more of?

The 90’s called they want you back!!

it’s not just women!!!!! We will never ever get the balance when people like you are enabling husbands careers!

You stated that:
”Being a full time house keeper/ cook / cleaner and mum is way more taxing and way more work, than having a full time job.”

You’re wrong. That’s a statement not an opinion, and only based on your limited experience.

working full time and caring for children and housework is much harder than just caring for children and housework.

@Helpfullright it could be the woman who's working and the husband who's staying home.

It is, if he gets mega rich and you've massively helped him get there and it's also half yours if you're married. You sacrificed so he could get there. I know many families where that's how it worked.

How many men are mega rich vs how many women are SAHMs? The numbers don't add up.

You have a very narrow view of SAHMs that just doesn't apply to the real world.

A lot of women, especially those working part time are contributing financially, completing the bulk of childcare and still doing the majority of the cleaning, cooking, household admin and so on

Well just because you are being taken advantage of doesn't mean the OP's contribution isn't as important as her DH's.

@OrwellianTimes I said that's my opinion. !!

Also , in the other side , people who are employed in a part time role for only a few hours a week likely don't pay tax contributions on their earnings. Their low earnings and limited hours may not trigger contributions into their workplace pension. That happened to me when I reduced my hours.

I wonder whether these members of the workforce are seen as contributing to society?

This is awful. Why are we still promoting women giving up careers so men can have one?
I have a very successful career high up in finance. I travel for work sometimes and DH also has a very good job. We both contribute to housework and do equal cooking etc. I was always adamant that my son would be brought up to see this and that he should not expect his future wife to give up on herself and her own career ambitions etc to look after kids, cook his tea and clean the house.
Women are worth so much more than cooking and cleaning.

This exactly. There is merit in either decision and people do what’s best for them.

However, I think you’re right, OP, in that a lot of people don’t see being a SAHP as work (which it is - and I’ve found it 100 times harder than my office job!!)

I work full time but am currently on maternity leave with DC2, and I do feel that I’m less respected than when I’m working. I got told recently that I should be doing the 5-6 nightly wake ups alone and not asking for help because he works and earns all the money at the moment.

You get SAHMs on here complaining that their DH has no time to spend doing family stuff at all. Because he’s earning for two, basically.

Also the SAHMs I know - all kids are grown up now - their DHs are doing ok but not fantastically. It ‘s family money that has enabled them not to work, not their DH’s earnings.

Christ, who cares. Reading this women bashing women thread is so depressing. Everyone is bleating that ‘society criticises’ them, (mostly) all that is here is a bunch of women criticising everyone.

Hats off to the SAHM – little children drain your soul and it’s a noble feat which is quite literally full of blood, sweat and tears.

Hats off to the working mums – the relentless chase of trying to please everyone, including yourselves, and wear two uniforms is a thankless task.

Women are incredible.

I think being a SAHM to under school age is different once they’re at school.

Someone I know who is a SAHM to school age children says she needs to be there for illness, school holidays etc and whilst that is needed I feel it’s a shame to be waiting around like that with the majority of the time having 9-3 to themselves. I feel it’s a shame not to have something else going on that is separate to your children.

I also find it annoying when I hear how much they’ve always got to do when I think of how much I have to cram into my week and they seem very oblivious to how hard it is to work and have children.

Can you not just be grateful you can afford it and get on with it? Posts like this get people's backs up and you get more negative views than you would if you asked an open question.

You don't need to undermine working mums by saying it's more tiring and full on than working and parenting.

Since you asked: of course childcare is work, it must feel relentless, but do remember that working parents do their 8hrs at work and return to 16hrs of parenting and trying to manage their home. And definitely remember that you chose this and continue to choose it.

I'm a mum and a nurse, my mortgage won't get paid if I don't work. my life will be more tiring and challenging than most SAHMs, but I don't feel the need to start a thread goading and undermining people.

I agree with you OP but sadly mumsnet think everyone should be working full time and putting their kids into child care.

I’m a full time carer to by dd who is now a disabled adult, I would love to work but instead I’m living on carers allowance and am exhausted. As a single parent it’s been really hard work (it is work). I have lost friends because they imply that I ‘don’t work’ and assume I live a life of being lazy and scrounging benefits. I would like nothing more than to work but adult services keep reducing my daughters placement hours meaning I’m caring for her even more.

People will always judge.

Yes it is.

However, time and time again on here we see women who have been a SAHM only to get divorced and then have very little means of supporting the income they need once assets are split.

The reality is not being financially independent leaves women in a very vulnerable position.

Spousal support is rare nowadays with judges wanting a clean break.

I know women think it wouldn't happen to them but it does, all the time.

I worked very pt after my dc were born and it’s only because I’m lucky to be married to a good man that I am now enjoying a comfortable retirement.
My own work pension wouldn’t even pay our monthly council tax.

I’ve encouraged dd to maintain her career if only for her pension.

Being a shap is a fair choice if it’s affordable and what both parents want.
However it’s a huge risk to mostly women for their future finances.

@carshaker nothing with making someone's life easier. Your generalisations however (which seem to be driving your opinions) are based on some made up caricature of the SAHM. Married to a mega rich man (so it's all worth it?)but at the same time downtrodden, with no help or support, with a dick of a husband and expected to do it all 24/7. You can't have it both ways.

I would have loved to have been a SAHP and I think it is better for the children through the early and primary years as they have a calmer and less busy routine forced on them. I grew up with my mum always there to take me to school and pick us up and always there through the holidays. I wanted that for my children.

unfortunately I ended up as a single parent so had to do it all alone - work, house, kids. I never had the opportunity to raise them how I’d wanted to and they have missed out on loads that I wanted them to have in regards to my time.

I think working is fine if the rewards are high enough and you want to be there but we are quickly losing the choice to be home with young children as cost of living rises and society ignores the contribution of unpaid carers such as parents, and those who care for vulnerable loved ones.

I’ve done both. It isn’t easy either way. Currently I’m working, tired, trying to juggle school runs and a business that’s busy with more demand if I can make myself more available, but the kids/pets/house also need me. But as a SAHM I was fairly fed up, felt like a bit of a skivvy, but everything fitted in nicely, there was no opposing juggle. Either way my husband who’s paid a hell of a lot more than me has prioritised work and that’s fine because his earning power outstrips mine. But I’d have loved that single focus, it’s easier (I’m an awful multitasker).

Basically post kids with expensive limited childcare options we all have one thing in common, it’s not easy.

I've been a SAHM for years (with short periods of part time work at various points during this time), and this past year I've been a full time student so out of the home during the day, studying in the evening, plus all the work I need to do at home and that's definitely been harder than when I was able to spend all day doing what I needed to do once my youngest was older but staying home with a baby/toddler was very hard too.
My partner definitely appreciates my contribution, and pays me for this work. But its not for me any more, too isolating - this past year being a student made me realise just how much I miss being around people all the time. Adult people.

@Mairzydotes I have been a sahp and work part time now. I do pay top ups into my pension but recently dh and I looked and realised his pension is 3x larger than mine. We have doubled what we pay into mine (now £160 a month) and will continue to increase it. But it's strange paying 25% of my earnings straight into my pension

What about the SAHM's to husbands with 'Jobs' and not 'Careers' - What does the husband pour all his energy to whilst she takes care of everything at home?

@Q124 but maybe some women aren't that into their careers ? So they see on balance, husband is already quite successful, if I stay home and enable his career, we will be richer in the end.

Rather than me, trying to have some sort of career that I don't even want and that won't be as lucrative.

For example I have a good friend who was a teacher. Her husband has his own business. What was she going to do, try to go back to a tiny salary when she had twins, or stay at home with them and allow her husband the time and space for him to keep building his business? Was she going to force him to do night feeds or was she going to make sure he was rested so he could run a successful business which has made them very wealthy ? She's part of that success. He respects her massively. They've both made sacrifices to get them to where they are.

Of course it can work the other way around but it doesn't as much in reality.

Not all women are career driven.

Some people just don't want to put their children into care, so that won't change since that's a philosophical position rather than an access issue. I know I wouldn't have put my 9 month old in care at all, let alone for 30 hours, even if free.