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?

I went back to work at six weeks after both my children were born. I find small babies quite boring. I was born in the 1960s and a lot of those stay at home mothers in those days were living lives of quiet desperation and the local GP was doling out valium like sweeties. If your marriage was dire, it was very very difficult to leave because most women had nil or very limited earning power. Lots of women didn't have access to a car and/or couldn't drive.

Yes, it was perhaps a simpler life but it was pretty awful in terms of limited household appliances (like no fridges or washing machines), handwashing everthing and using a mangle, limited entertainment, cooking everything from scratch, never eating out and so on. If you were gay, it was truly grim and you might even be arrested if you were unlucky. Young women in those days were routinely channelled into nursing, teaching, and working in an office. Contraception was unreliable pre-Pill (and no don't tell me about how reliable condoms were because they weren't and aren't) and people quite frequently ended up with more children than they wanted or could afford. Shotgun marriages were not rare. And single women with babies almost never got to keep them. Medical treatment was less advanced and lots of things that are curable or preventable now weren't then. Clothes were expensive and most likely if you were a women you were putting up with the euphemistically named "roll-on" girdles, suspender belts and tampons hadn't been invented yet.

My mother regretted her lack of opportunities and told me to pick from accounting, law or medicine. She was very firmly of the view that a woman should be able to support herself in case of being a spinster, widowed or divorced. My mother had no illusions about the joys of being a SAHM and I suspect she was born earlier than your mother.

Actually, not working means a serious risk of poverty if the family unit breaks down (which about half of them do). That’s much worse for a child than going to childcare.
Childcare is associated with positive benefits - not all children benefit at all from being care for exclusively by their parents - that’s why deprived families are entitled to more free childcare. In countries in Scandinavia which have a higher quality of life overall, SAHMs are virtually unheard of.

In the 50's many women were trapped in unhappy, abusive relationships being financial dependent on their husbands; many children started to work early and had zero chances of progressing in education because families were dead poor, and yet we still see women romanticizing this life-style as women nowadays are greedy and selfish!

It's infuriating.

@Sevendayhigher you and your dp are making the choices that you think are best for your family. I imagine you are taking into account the possibility of more children and another paid maternity leave (if that is what you plan), the partial support for funded childcare hours in the future, retaining a place in the job market for when your dc goes to school, the longterm benefit of you having a career and investing in a pension, the potential positive mental health benefits for you of being at work and retaining an independent life. Of course all of that is a balance, and on a day like today with a poorly little one it seems like a struggle too far.

Your dm has fixed views, which are not realistic in terms of the decisions you and your dh have made. She's not going to change her mind so I'd avoid giving her an opportunity to engage in the debate. Today was hard, but have confidence in the overall decisions you have made.

fwiw, I am retired with grandchildren. If I hadn't worked during the 70s, 80s and 90s I would probably still be working now, I wouldn't be able to support my dc in providing either regular or emergency care for dgc, and dh and I would be struggling to plan for the future on his pension alone.

I'm so glad you're already in therapy, speaking from experience it is very helpful when one has a 'tricky' mother....!!

You are giving your son a wonderful gift in showing him how a mother can be both a wonderful parent and also have her own fulfilled, meaningful, empowered life.

Gabor Mate says the greatest thing we can do for our child, is to be happy in ourselves. Earning money and having a professional profile gives you choices that SAHM's tend to forfit.

I'm proud of you!

Absolutely. One size doesn't fit all.

I do find it interesting how defensive some working mums get around this topic, though.

I'd stop working from her house and not make any conversation like the ones in your OP.

My mum is the same but for the opposite reason, I moved away from my hometown to London for my education and she thought I was crazy because 'people like us' (poor and from the north) don't go to university, especially not in London. My sister is a SAHM just as she was and she compares us all of the time and talks about how I could be a SAHM if I moved back there.

I want more than the basics for my children, it was miserable growing up with the bare minimum. I will always encourage my children, especially my daughters, to have a career.

My mother has exactly the same opinion as OPs mother, same conversation had, guilt trip included.
She also thinks that people want all the extras, Netflix, monthly extras, luxury food everyday, that they didn't need.
It's almost as if she's saying her generation had it harder so the children got their mum at home all day
I think part of this is justifying her choices, she never had anywhere near a full time job, bits here and there.
But also, i don't think she had a particularly happy life as a sahm. It's a way of avoiding any regrets in her life and justifying it to herself while putting our choices down, at the same time.
I don't argue with her (on that anyway), although I do tell her I love my job, which grates I'm sure!

I’m in my 70s and like most of my contemporaries, I worked. I’d encourage every mother to work for their security, pension and self esteem. Your mother is talking nonsense.

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 wouldn't send an unwell 14 months of to nursery. That's what annual leave of emergency leave is for.

As for your mum, you know she is unreasonable. Not working is a huge luxury these days which hardly anyone can afford. Ignore her.

I think she's overstepped. Firstly your husband needs to be on accessible public transport - I'm in west mids and it's ok but I'm always so jealous of the way londeners can get about on public transport. Secondly maybe it does you good working, maybe it wouldn't be the best thing for your family for you not to work. We aren't in the 50s, life's moved on, EVERyTHiNG is different. Take no notice, and carry on living life how you want to. Avoid conversations like these with her, she doesn't understand and is out of touch. Probably cheaper to go and live in Spain and cut yourself off from everything but you're not going to do that are you!

Ok, so maybe I no longer qualify as a "young person" but this is an "avocado and Netflix argument". I have a cheap car bought outright, I spend about 1k on two holidays per year. My mobile contract is £360 annually (only because I upgraded 6-year-old phone last year so this will go down to £120 next April). Even if I were to give up all these "luxuries", I hardly think additional 1,5k a year would suddenly allow me to buy a house in London or any other part of the country. So why wouldn't I live my life a little right now if it makes no difference to my purchasing powers anyway? We only have one bloody life!

There are far too many people with rose tinted glasses on about "the old days."

No one actually wants to go back to an existence where a woman's life was skivvying after her husband and catering to his preferences 24/7.

Where it took several hours to do one load of laundry manually, spending hours of your day on completely pointless tasks like cleaning your front step to give you something to do and keep you trapped.

Where prizes on game shows were new crockery sets that would be the highlight of your year. Where the jingles on said game shows described women as "dollies" and the presenters were never women, but they were allowed on as short-skirted simpering red-lipsticked blondes who weren't allowed to speak and could only gesture.

Where women couldn't get involved in the stock market, where they were expected to only want to get married and have babies, where it was impossible to get divorced without people judging, where and abuse and physical hitting of wives and children was normalised, where being gay was considered an actual crime.

It's also a positive that people have technology, plenty of options for entertainment, and a generally much more enriched life through all stages.

I'd rather rent my whole life than go back to any of how it was before.

Women need to work, if anything for their future pensions and needs during retirement. A life of poverty is no good for anyone. Your mother needs to zip her lip.

I’m struggling to see what “good points” your mum made?

• It is pretty much impossible to live on only one salary in 2025. Those that do have a partner who is a high earner not the “normal” Joe Bloggs. I don’t know any SAHP where the one earner does a normal MW job! In the 50’s they lived on one salary where the earner had normal jobs. So this point of hers is mute.
• move across the country just so you can afford a small house so you can stay at home with the children?? Erm..why would you want to? In a few years they start school then what? You are stuck in a part of the country away from family and friends just so you get a few years at home with them?
• people in the 50’s were happy with what they had blah blah…yeah but as parents do we not want better for our children? I grew up with a holiday once a year and I LOVED that time with my family. Holidays were the best part of the year. So guess what, I take my kids on multiple holidays a year and lots of day trips out. They are special to us creating happy memories but guess what, I have to work to be able to do this. Do I waste money on having the “best” house or car or lots of presents at Xmas, No. instead we spend our money on creating memories together.

There should be no shame in working as you are also teaching your children that you need to work hard for what you want. To have a good work ethic. It also stops the old stereotypes of the woman stays at home and does everything.

Did you not just say Oh fuck off. 😳 Probably not, I would have.

My first house when I bought it in 1997 (not 1950 - that hiuse in 1950 was £3k to buy it), in 1997 a 2 bed terrace was 33k. I was earning 11k a year. 3 times my salary. The rent on that property was about £200 a month (if I remember right). I was single parent so one salary.

That same house now is 145k, with minimum wage being around 12k. 12 times the salary. The rent on that is close to £700 a month (shocking), meaning if one parent wanted to work, they couldn't live in a 2 bed terrace in a shitty part of the UK.

Tell her to stfu. I hate it when old people start blithing on about how the younger generation don't go as hard as they did back in their day. Out of touch with no grip on reality, simple as that.

I mean, this is not to mention the costs associated with living, not the fancy ones like sky and mobiles, but nappies, food, energy, taxes etc.

I'd be telling her when she started again that she may be a " little bit out of touch" and that one parent working isn't sustainable for most families in the current climate, she may be remembering the 50s with rose coloured glasses but the world is a very different place now for parents, and as she isnt a parent of a toddler, her advice is unsolicited and not welcome. Thanks but no thanks.

Oh come on. Kids of that age are permanently unwell. If he had a raging temp or was throwing up I agree but don't be judgy when you don't know what was wrong with him.

Exactly, you don't know how I'll he was so no way of knowing if he was really well enough for nursery.

You've had some good advice already OP. I think it's very common for older generations to have out of touch ideas about how they feel life 'should be' for young families, without really appreciating the realities. Although to be fair I suspect we're all guilty of idealising the past to some extent.

To add a slightly different slant on the 'standard of living' and money argument - and speaking as someone who was a SAHM for years, not entirely by choice but due to having a child with SEN who struggled with childcare settings - I think for many people it does their mental health good to work, even if they don't 'have' to financially. Technically we could still afford our general standard of living if I didn't work but I am so much happier working!

Without wishing to inflame a SAHM v WOHM debate - God knows there are enough of them on here already! - I think it is actually quite a positive thing for DC to realise that they are not the entire centre of a mother's universe and that she has value outside the home. I also think (as the mother of sons) that it is good for boys in particular to see women working in a professional capacity - and not just as men's equals, but deservedly their superiors in some roles.

One of the many things I love about my DH (who works in a senior finance role) is that he has always treated colleagues as equals regardless of whether they are male or female, has regularly reported to women more senior than him during his career and does so completely matter of factly, and has always spoken about female colleagues - whether they are his superiors, team member direct reports or peers - with respect and professional admiration. Of course that's partly because he's a decent human being but I am also sure that a lot of his attitude towards women in the workplace is thanks to his mum - who, guess what, always worked.

I know it's easier said than done @Sevendayhigher but please try not to let your mum guilt and goad you. And try and find a better place to work than your mum's house!

The fetishising of the 50s is the weirdest thing, it's 70 years ago - were women even allowed to apply for mortgages or other forms of credit then?! Trust me as someone born in the 70s absolutely no one, not one ever said we should be aiming to live like women at the turn of the century.

I don't mean to project onto your relationship with your Mum OP, but I find it perfectly likely if you were a SAHM full-time you might be hearing about how hard-working your DH is and what a weight of responsibility he has for you all, in short, wherever you are, you'll be in the wrong.

It sounds like you're doing the best you can with what you have and that's great. You might make changes if you feel you need to and that's a great thing to model to children. A PP has nailed it up thread, you're an adult now and the expert on the subject of your family!

a) tell her that being a SAHP is a luxury these days.
b) ask her to pay your half of the mortgage so you can be at home.

Who would be jealous of a mother that can't stay at home with her child? I have had the career, had the chance to live and work abroad, i have had the brand new cars, fancy dinners etc but nothing absolutely nothing compares to my time at home with my children. Lying in hospital after having had a heart attack that nearly ended my life i wasn't thinking about my job or the money and new cars it was my children i thought about. The many months recuperating gave me plenty of time to think and look back. Nothing matters other than your children.
Kid yourself all you please but those days at home raising them are the be all and end all. Your children benefit from your presence, always. Nobody ever lay on their death bed wishing they had bought that 4 bedroom with a cinema room but they sure as hell wish they had spent longer with their children.
Now i understand that these days in many cases 2 wages are needed to put food on the table but at least be honest do you need to earn as much as you do or is it a case that a 3 bed semi is not good enough for you and only 5 star is acceptable when you holiday.

I loathe this argument that gets trotted out by people saying women who work only do so because they "want more luxuries" and everyone should be grateful with a bit of dull austerity and cut their cloth in order to be a SAHM.

Firstly because its economically boneheaded: if you live anywhere in the South East (and lots of places outside the South East) it's just not possible to have a decent start of living on one income. Never mind private school and going to the Maldives and skiing, I'm talking about being able to afford a house big enough for your children.

Secondly what is actually wrong with wanting to improve your life, bring in more money and give your children better options? Why is a couple of extra years of baby and toddler groups and hanging around for eight hours a day with your kids a worthwhile tradeoff for a much greater degree of financial security and freedom?

And most importantly because it ignores the elephant in the room which is the ability to be financially independent and to protect yours (and your children's) financial needs without reliance on another human being.

Everyone should be free to decide what works for them in terms of working vs staying at home but the audacity of the people who lecture working mothers about being greedy and "wanting more luxuries" leaves me speechless.

As PPs have pointed out you just shouldn't be getting into a discussion with her on this topic. Her opinions are outdated and foolish and there's no upside.

Us women can never get it right!

That may be your personal opinion, but it certainly isn’t a universal or a particularly widespread one.