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 is a personal choice and nobody else's business.

I've done both - worked an excess of a 40 hour week plus the three kids (husband works out the country a lot and I have no family help) and it nearly fucking killed me. Everyone was stressed. Everyone was unhappy. I give hats off to parents who both work full time AND have to do all the chores, housework, cooking, life admin etc.

I stay at home full time now, I love my life though it can be like groundhog day but it is what it is and it works for us. There's constant housework, constant cooking, constant ferrying etc but now at least I have a half hour during the day to eat to myself, and a couple of hours in the evening after they go to bed and no mental stress anymore. It isn't a life for everyone, and not everyone can do it financially/mentally, but it works personally for us.

We all have our own difficulties in life, or things that others would find difficult but we find brings us contentment/peace,

Yep. I've seen it way too many times.

I'm unfortunately watching it play out now. It's not just the financial struggles that she would go through if they do break up; it's the way it gives him all the power. She runs around like a mad thing trying to make the relationship work, because they both know that if the relationship ends, she's the one who is going to struggle. Even without a break up, everything is on his terms.

It does depend on circumstances. I stayed at home until my ds was six then worked 10 hours a week.but he's disabled, I'm disabled and I was caring got my mother who was terminally ill.

But yes a sahp with no health issues , no additional responsibilities and 1 or 2 kids with no additional needs would absolutely get leisure time

Do you understand the effect on a workplace culture of the vast majority of senior roles being held by men who never need to consider the impact of work on family life? Do you understand how much harder it is for men and women who want to have a more equitable balance of career and family when their employer has literally never needed to give this a drop of headspace?

Do what works for your family. I genuinely do not judge. Do not, however, attempt to frame the sacrifice of a woman’s career at the altar of her husband’s as some kind of meaningful contribution to society.

Ok, if staying at home is leisure and nothing else (even when the kids are not actually in school) then why on earth can't men do everything that these SAHMs do as well as work? This would be great for their partners who wouldn't have to do any domestic chores or childcare because the men would do it all. Imagine the career prospects of the completely unencumbered women in this model.

If the men complain just tell them that it's all 'leisure' anyway and that they need to stop banging on about how it's additional work for them.

@Morph22010 yes as long as it's paid that's fine

OP of course you aren't less than anyone else for looking after the kids when infants.

I work full time in a well paid role. My choice have been questioned multiple times by family and women im my kid's school.

The problem of being a SAHM is fast forward a few years when kids are finishing primary and you are at home wondering what you did. I see it all the time around me as my kids are at that age. And then there is only the choice of a low paid wage or keep staying at home. (Despite the myth here that you can catch up where you were in your career 8 years later). Some of SAHM do a little business on the side or take a hobby or do charity work. But basically they have thrown their financial independence and good luck with that.

This issue should be brought up at secondary school level. Men would generally not ditch their careers so easily and they are always considered good dads. That is what we need to question. Our financial independence should never be compromised.

Of course men can and many do. Many women can and do it. But a subset of men just cannot be bothered and are enabled by their wives who believe this myth of husband who can head up a large department but cannot load the dishwasher or run the washing machine.

As a lone parent I see being a SAHM as both a privilege and a curse.

Why do some people feel the need to have their choices validated by others?

Who cares what someone thinks of your choice to work or stay at home?

I’m a SAHM and have been for many years. It works for our family right now. I have so much respect for all mums.

I couldn’t care less if people don’t think I’m financially contributing to my family or not. Only mine and my husbands opinions on this are important.

I agree with this when there are children nunder 4/5

Once 30 hours kick in/school, my view shifts. Wraparound childcare costs are minimal compared to what can be earned working and also there's nowhere near enough housework/family admin to fill the time kids are at school. I know a few SAHM of school age kids and they aren't "working", a huge amount of their time is spent on leisure activities like gardening, exercise, shopping, hobbies, seeing friends.

We have taught our girls to aim for STEM careers but we haven't taught our boys to aim for caring ones

This is a very interesting point that is never considered

The thing is... If women are fucking stressed (which many are) from having to balance too much, this feeds through to the kids. I have seen an acquaintance of mine absolutely bawling her child out at the school gate for losing his jumper, and when I messaged afterwards to see how she was and if I could help, it turned out work was a shit show and everything was just too much. Her husband conveniently works away in a job he loves with lots of travel 🙄. I've spoken to him at events, he's living the dream and has lots of interesting anecdotes to tell. And "yeah, yeah, Sarah's fine, kids are all fine".

There is so much pressure on mums, working or not, not only to hold it together but also smile, smile, smile while they're doing it 😡!

I have no issues with SAHP or working parents.

It often makes sense to have one person SAH.

Although I think the best solution would be for both parents to go PT (if possible) because I don’t think it’s fair for one person to have all of the financial responsibility and the other to not progress in their career.

But if you have school aged children then being a SAHP isn’t contributing to the household.
I have read threads on here about SAHP to secondary and college aged kids, who don’t need childcare.

Yes they do the cooking and cleaning but working patents do this too.

I know my BIL was a SAHP which worked well at first but once they started school there was no reason that he couldn’t get a PT job.

I personally would struggle to be in a relationship with someone that would see me working 40+ hours a week, whilst they had the house to themselves 6 hours a day 5 days a week and claimed that they needed that time to do the cooking and cleaning.

Well, yes, that's a good thought. My DH couldn't have done his career without someone else to be there with the children and he certainly would never have progressed to the level he has if he'd been a single father, or even just had to take equal responsibility for childcare. That's a fact. Maybe his workplace would have dealt with the issue if this had been his reality and maybe that would have also changed things for women in the same field (very few). However, I wanted to be home with my children, so contributing to reforming the workplace will have to be someone else's job. I'm not making the trade off.

I was a SAHM until my youngest started school, since then I have worked part time. Absolutely loved both!
The DC had very calm pre-school experience. Went to lots of toddler groups, spent time with friends, etc. No issues if they were ever sick, no rushing around trying to get out in time for work. All very relaxed, and I loved it.
Now I work around school hours in a job I love that pays well. Best of both worlds.
I would hate to have a life where we were stressed, running around all the time, exhausted etc. I never really understand why busyness is seen as a sign of success!
Just make the choice that works for you in your situation and don't worry what anyone else does, it really doesn't matter!

Depends what childcare you use and whether you work PT or FT. I don't judge anyone for what they choose to do for their family - every family is different and has different wants / needs. Personally, I don't choose to send my preschooler to a nursery setting or childminder. For me, those are not the best places for my preschool aged child to be. Other people disagree and think it is actively advantageous for a preschool child to be in such a setting. That is totally their choice and I fully respect it.

I went back to work after just over a year of Mat Leave to a good job, decent salary, 3 days a week. We chose to use a nanny for our 1yo as the only option that felt ok for us. My salary just about covered the costs associated with employing a nanny. She was amazing and we loved her and still do but in the end, all things considered, it seemed the right thing for all of us for me to stop work and look after my little one. I don't regret it for a second. You're right that, if you looked at someone that working full time, they'd have to be a pretty low earner to bring in less than the cost of childcare, especially if you use a nursery or childminder. However, for us, there is absolutely no way we'd want our child in one of those settings for a small increase in household income. Granted, there are other trade offs associated with being out of the workplace for a considerable period, but they aren't enough to counteract what we feel the benefits are to put child of the current set up. Emphasis fully on what we feel - others will feel very differently and that is absolutely fine.

Anyway, the short version is that you don't necessarily have to be on a very low income to make childcare something that doesn't pay - it depends on your choices and circumstances and what you want for your children.

Interesting question, Bumpity.. If we're doing some blue sky thinking, then I think it's quite rare for there to be roles that only one person ever can do. I think more people have the capacity to be a specialist surgeon than will be specialist surgeons, and if there were lower barriers to entry, more could do it. One barrier is sacrificing family time. So if careers become less about the "facilitated" model, we create bigger pools of people able to do them - more of a job-share model.

@LookingForEnergy of course for some people it isn’t about finances but for many it is (just look at the posts on this thread) It’ll be interesting to see whether we’ll see a decline in the SAHP as childcare reform is introduced

I wish I hadn’t had to go back to work (part time) when my son was 10 weeks old. He was just so little. I feel as though I missed out in some really precious moments just to sit at my desk doing crap that I didn’t care about. Sadly, my ex-husband was in so much debt that we needed the pennies that I brought in even after paying the nursery fees. I could cry every time I think about it.

She runs around like a mad thing trying to make the relationship work, because they both know that if the relationship ends, she's the one who is going to struggle. Even without a break up, everything is on his terms.

Sadly I've seen this too. Also the rush of men leaving SAHMs once the kids are late teens. Mum gets the house but is left with sod all earning power or pension, its only a year or too before child maintenance stops.

Unless I’ve missed something, I don’t think you have claimed that your choice to SAH was a wider contribution to the workplace or society, so my point is likely not directed at you.

This. My daughter and son in law both work full time and one looks after the child when the other is working ( when he's not at school). They both also do equal shares of housework etc. Been that way since the child was born apart from 4 months of mat leave

Yes and I do actually think it's a shame when someone who would love to stay at home with their young children doesn't have the choice at all because of having to bring in money for those few short years. It would be nice if everyone had the option to decide what they wanted to do.