My mother is guilting me about being a working parent.

[Sevendayhigher]

Hi,

This upset me today and I suppose I'm asking whether I'm being unreasonable for thinking that it's OK to work even though you don't absolutely, 100% HAVE to.

It was a difficult drop off at nursery today because my son is unwell (he's 14 months) and I work from my parents' house.

I mentioned that it's hard being a parent today where most households need a dual income just to sustain themselves. My mother told me that the main reason most households are dual income now is because they 'expect so much out of life, whereas in the 50s people were happy with what they had' (or words to this effect). Apart from the plethora of issues that the 1950s carried, which she agreed was true, I argued that most households could survive on one income fairly comfortably because housing wasn't as expensive as it is today, compared to the salaries that people make. Nowadays it's very hard to get a mortgage with one income, especially if you haven't had money gifted to you. And if you rent, that a crazy cost too. She argued it was the same as in the 1950s, except people didn't 'expect to go on holiday every year or go out for fancy dinners, and were happy with their little house that wasn't that great.' I told her that as a family, we would bloody love 'a little house that wasn't that great' - please can she show us one that we can afford on my husband's salary alone, like people did in the 50s?

She then told me that if we really wanted to, we could move into something like that and I could be a stay at home mum, but that we want to live in a 'fancy area' so don't. She told me we'd be able to afford a house on just my husband's salary if we lived outside London. Not true, but the main thing that irked me was the implication that I'm working my (genuinely low paid) job because we want to live a luxury lifestyle/won't 'lower ourselves' to a cheaper area. She even said that she'd have been prepared to move to the other side of the country if it meant she could stay at home with her children instead of going to work.

What also irks me is that I can see where she's coming from - in theory if we moved to Derbyshire or somewhere very far away we could potentially buy a house and I wouldn't technically have to work. It feels as if my mother is saying that it's not OK to not want to do that - as a parent you have to make every sacrifice in order to stay at home with your child. Even if it means giving up all your family's support around you/living in a place you're unfamiliar with. On a personal note, my husband is visually impaired and unable to drive, so moving out of a city is also very difficult for us transport-wise, but I feel like we shouldn't have to justify ourselves with this??

I know she'd just tell me that she was giving her opinion and I shouldn't be so sensitive about it, but am I being unreasonable to think that it's OK to work in order to not have to give up almost everything in your life? Or is the most important thing staying at home with your child?

Yep. Last time I checked financially providing for your children is part of parenting them.

So judgy. No it isn’t.

It has nothing to do with anyone else, mum included if you choose to work or stay at home. Wanting to work, does not make you automatically a bad mum. Staying home does not automatically make you a perfect mum. Do what you want, what works for your unit, and stick to your guns. Opinion is exactly that...opinion. There are pros and cons to every situation. Look for all the positives in yours.

Why are you dropping an ill child at nursery? Surely that's not ok? Both the risk to the other kids and your poor child being left are sick

Read the thread.

My dm was the opposite, she worked full-time throughout my childhood and couldn't understand why I wanted to be a SAHM to my 4dc. In fact when I had my youngest at the age of 42 she said I'd do anything not to work!
I'm now a gm and dd2 has worked full-time since her ds was 6 months old and dd1 is going back 3 days a week when her dd is 12 months old.
If I had my time again I would chose differently as I have been left with no career, no pension and a loser of an ex dh.

I think a lot of people do the opposite of what their own mum did. My mum was always very critical of my late GM who was a single mum in the 50s (almost unheard of at the time). She worked full time, managed to buy two houses with her own money and was financially secure with no need to ever rely on a man. My mum said my GM was selfish (she wasn’t at all - she’d been royally screwed over by my grandfather who left her when she was 8 months pregnant and had no option and everything she did was for my mum, who exhibited definite spoilt brat tendencies and still does). However, her hard work meant she was able to gift a mortgage free house to my mum and it was only due to that that my mum could be a SAHM (although she did also wfh). Interestingly, my siblings and I see my GM as an inspiration and role model much more than we do my mum. So maybe it swings back and forth for each generation and people want to do the opposite of what their parents did.
I personally wouldn’t want to be dependent on a man as I know so many women who have ended up in seriously bad places as a result.

I think one part of the problem is the description of life in the 50s your mum is quoting is very rose tinted.
Lots of people bounced along the bottom financially and women did to back to work, sometimes necessity, sometimes choice. Not all women found being at home with small children satisfying.
People were not content with what they had at all, they scrabbled their way to better food, houses, cars, heating and jobs. As soon as going abroad became viable financially, they went in droves.
If my parents are any example, they moved twice before I was 8 for better jobs. We ended up literally at the other end of the country.

Many more child care arrangements were non formal. My ExDP was looked after by his paternal grandma because his mum went back to work as they really needed the money.

Can you go and work in the library or something, away from this drip feed of unhelpfulness.

@Startinganew32

I agree with this.

Great Gran - basically raised my mum in spite of being working age.
Gran - career woman who did very little childcare (had my mum care for the little ones when her mum wasn't available).
Mum - freelancer SAHM. (She does brag about going back to work when my oldest brother was ten days old, putting him in a moses basket in the office, but avoids the q about post newborn stage.)
Me - Works compressed hours, son in nursery 3 days a week. Husband also compressed hours.

My mum was keen to stay at home, but it also has to be said that she's extremely uncomfortable with displays of affection. The fact I'm always kissing and hugging my son brings about a sort of pursed lips reaction. She was always doing things with us, we received good practical care, but she wasn't warm and affectionate. I don't think she knew how - she only kicks into gear if it's an 'emergency'.

I think we try to be the parent we think we needed.

Why is your mum going on about the 1950s - surely she wasn't a parent to you then? Or even an adult? Is she confused with the 1980s?

If you're on low pay and your DH is visually impaired and can't drive, she is being very insensitive telling you to move to the middle of nowhere.

I can't stand it when people say things like, "Stop moaning about how expensive life is in the South-East... look what you could buy in Northumbria / Wales / The Outer Hebrides." As if.

You are doing your best OP, so take no notice of your mother. It's not as if she's offering to help out by the sound of it - I heard in the 1950s there was no paid childcare and children were left with family members, if necessary. Tell her that next time.

I think the question isn't about 'having to work' but more that this is a much safer plan for everyone concerned.

1. Team work and financial burden - all the single-income couples I know feel the pressure a lot more intensely (regardless of whether it's the mum or dad who is the main breadwinner). When my DH was made redundant some years ago, he was in a much better position to negotiate the next position because my job was enough to keep us going. When I recently lost mine, I could make the decision to launch my own business because he's providing that safety net.
2. Cost of living makes it increasingly difficult on a single income and I can't see that improving any time soon so even if you don't need to work now, your additional income may be very welcome next year for example.
3. Vulnerability - in an ideal world, all adults should have the means to support themselves fully and be self-reliant; leaning on a partner to carry that burden for you is incredibly risky. I've been with DH for decades but the thought of not having a professional existence of my own would fill me with dread. I am raising my DDs to look out for themselves (with or without children down the line).
4. Parenting is a shared burden - it's not mum does 100% of the childrearing and homemaking, dad brings in the ££. I hate seeing that BS creep back into the mainstream. It's about PARENTHOOD: a shared burden in the home and outside it. If the partnership doesn't work because one of the partners doesn't want to play fair, then it's essential to know it's possible to disengage (and yes, it's always much harder in practice than in theory anyway).

This is incredibly rude. You don’t have to slate other people’s perfectly valid choices in order to feel better about your own! There is nothing wrong with either choice as long as your children are well looked after and happy. That will always be more important than my career, which I picked up again easily when my children went to school. I do not judge working mums though (I have been one for quite some time) - each to their own.

It’s just a phrase that means you don’t work outside of being a parent, not an insult to those who also have paid employment.