AIBU to think being a SAHM is undervalued and misunderstood?

[erereeee]

I’ve been lurking for a while and finally decided to post. I’m a SAHM to two young children, and I can’t help but feel like society (and even some people on here) massively undervalue what we do. It’s as if staying home to raise my children makes me lazy or unambitious, when in reality, I’m working harder than I ever did in an office.

From morning to night, I’m doing everything: cleaning, cooking, laundry, childcare, emotional labour, organising appointments, school runs, etc. The mental load is constant. Yet, because I’m “just” at home, people assume I sit around all day. Even my partner, who works full-time, makes the occasional offhand comment like, “Must be nice to chill at home,” which drives me up the wall.

I see posts on here about working mums and how they “do it all,” which is amazing, but can we acknowledge that being a SAHM is also a full-time job? I don’t clock out at 5pm. I don’t get annual leave. And honestly, if you added up the cost of hiring a nanny, cleaner, cook, and personal assistant, it would be way more than I’d ever earn in a 9-5.

Yet, when I meet new people, I always get that look when I say I’m a SAHM, like I’m somehow less intelligent or lacking ambition. Why is it so hard to just respect different choices?

Let’s keep it civil, but I’m genuinely curious to hear what others think.

I’ve been both sides of this. Crazy stressful city job with the kids in nursery full time and all the other chores to do AND a career break SAHM for 6 months. Without doubt, being at home is easier in terms of juggle and time. But you do you. SAHP is a privilege so enjoy it or go back to work.

I don’t think it’s undervalued but I also don’t think you’re doing anymore than any other mother really and probably doing less as they are also juggling work. I think you’re making yours, your children and your partners life easier and that’s great if it works for you.

Indeed, and if you do it, do it but don't expect to be "valued" for it in some woolly non-specific societal way or get some special status for it. It's a lifestyle choice and a perfectly respectable and valid one, but it doesn't give you hero status or the right to plead to be put on a pedestal.

I agree that the 'being valued' thing is a bit baffling. Surely you are valued by your family? Who else do you want this affirmation from and what form would that take?

I value those who work in childcare because they provide a service that enables me to continue my career. They don't get paid anywhere near enough and should be paid more.

I'm not sure why I should value someone looking after their own child.

Living off someone else’s money?! So shall she charge her partner for all the jobs she is doing such as childcare so he can go out to work with no stress??

It’s because OP is too busy ironing socks and organising appointments.

Can we bin off this argument yet? This actually what devalues sahm’s.
Women who stay at home do so because they either want to or they have decided as a family the sums don’t make sense.

Almost no one sacrifices their job so that their spouse can go to work with no stress and if they do frankly they are a total mug.

I don't really get your point. You wrote:

"What do you genuinely remember from your mother being a SAHM before you went to school? That isn't a memory bolstered by a photo, or a story you've been told, or anything like that?"

I took this to mean young kids don't make memories that young ( + the implication that therefore it's not important to be a SAHP). Now you say all kids make memories young - which is it?

To be fair, I have seen this argument (or similar) made multiple times on here. I'm not saying this is the case for every SAHM, but supporting their husband in their career by ensuring all domestic stuff is covered is the reasoning put forward by some.

Surely he'd just use paid childcare like many working parents do? I don't find it particularly stressful.

On this very thread, in fact.

"Imagine having to go to work 5 days a week, be a parent AND do all of the chores you’ve just mentioned - which is the case for most working parents"

"Do you think FT working parents have fairies to do all the stuff you do? We do all that too plus our 40 hours of work and commute"

"What many SAHM seem to forget is that working mothers do everything that a SAHM does and work"

Sorry to not name the three separate posters above - but this kind of attitude is rife on here aNx its what does my head in.

Nobody is disputing that people who work still have to "chores." Of course working people still have all that to juggle in less time and that's hard.

BUT BEING A SAHM IS NOT ABOUT CHORES OR HOUSEWORK.

Sorry to shout in capitals, but why are people seemingly incapable of comprehending the role and purpose of a SAHP in any other terms than housework?

This is why I get so frustrated on behalf of SAHMs because these threads in MN seem to attract people who either can't comprehend or are in denial about the whole basic point of being a SAHP which is that you want to be there for your child in the day because you think you have more to offer your child in that time, rather than someone who needs to be paid to do it.

Anyone can fit laundry and cooking and hoovering and other 'chores' into their weekends and evenings. I'm not saying it's easy. Life is obviously harder in this respect where two people work. It's not a competition. Of course working and juggling kids and everything else is harder, all things being equal.

But what you can't do is pretend that spending 12 hours a day with a child is the same as spending 3 hours with them, or whatever the case may be. I'm sorry if that aggravates some people, but it is a fact. It is what it is. That is why people are SAHPs. Again it is nothing to do with housework, which everyone does regardless or they get a cleaner. It is about TIME SPENT.

Working is parenting. It is vital for some, a preference for others. That's obvious and there need be no judgement about it. But if you are working, you are patently not doing 'everything a SAHM does' in terms of time spent because you are physically not there. You are reliant on someone else noticing, responding, occupying, feeding, playing, safeguarding, educating, socialising and providing emotional support to you children in your absence. Again, this is absolutely fine. But it's not any more compulsory or 'normal' or 'default' than a parent or parents wanting to do it all themselves.

@Completelyjo

Almost no one sacrifices their job so that their spouse can go to work with no stress and if they do frankly they are a total mug.

People do though. Or they certainly claim to. I have lost count of the number of times I have read posts saying: “me being at home has freed him up to focus on his career.”

Op, I appreciate what you are saying, but do you honestly think working mums clock off as soon as they finish work. They go home and start with household chores, organising the kids, helping them with homework, cooking dinner, parents evening, dental or gp appointments, laundry etc. Working mums have 2 full time jobs. My annual leave is used catching up on housework I havemt had chance to do. So your argument dosent fit right with me.

Yet plenty of SAHM's, including OP. Always, always bring up cooking, cleaning and other chores like working parents don't have to do it too. That's why those comments happen.

Surely it's about more than just time? It's about quality time which is also possible to fit in for working parents, it's just fitting it in to a smaller time frame which is harder but not impossible.

Agreed!

I was SAHM for 14 years as I worked out that I'd only have any money for me / the family (as opposed to paying for childcare) in a 5-week month and my job was in Admin so a break was not going to affect my 'career'. So I decided it wasn't worth the hassle and time management issues.

If I'd had a job with a clear career path, then I might have felt differently but as it was, I did a lot of volunteering (PTA, charities & as a school governor) which are needed and worthwhile and kept my CV fresh when I did go back to work.

One of the quotes you have cited here is mine. I’d just like to say that I don’t actually disagree with what you are saying. My point was in reference to the OP which said:

“From morning to night, I’m doing everything: cleaning, cooking, laundry, childcare, emotional labour, organising appointments, school runs, etc. The mental load is constant. Yet, because I’m “just” at home, people assume I sit around all day.”

The majority of these tasks have nothing to do with childcare. If this debate is purely about childcare, why did the OP make reference to cleaning, admin, laundry, cooking etc.? Had OP not mentioned these things, people probably wouldn’t be making reference to them in their replies.

@SouthLondonMum22 Well personally I don't know why SAHMs complain about housework and that type of stuff. I can definitely see how that's irritating to people who work.

But equally, when people claim they can't comprehend the purpose of a SAHM as anything beyond housework, that's also going to be irritating to people who are SAH because it spectacularly misses the point.

People are SAHMs feel they are the best person to care for their child - all day, not just evenings - and they don't want to compromise on that.

Some SAHPs have children with special needs or larger families. As if they are at home primarily to do housework!

It is a lifestyle choice. It is only of value to your particular family. That value doesn’t extend into wider society.

When the OP themselves bring it up, people are going to respond to it.

You do realise it's not literally hour-by-hour? Childcare only covers a small fraction of the wohm's life. She still has all the responsibility of running a home and a family, but has to accomplish that in fewer hours.

I have no idea why this appears to be so difficult to comprehend. The claim that working mothers somehow abnegate all parental responsibility because they work outside the home is so irritating!! And untrue.

I don't think this poster sounds angry at all. Are you ok?

@Xmasxrackers absolutely not.
She should provide financially for her family and he should provide equally at home.
It's called a partnership.