To think SAHM with young DC deserve more respect

[CheekyFawn]

I work full time but currently on maternity leave looking after my 5 months old baby and a toddler DS who is 3 yo.
I just don't know where my time goes. Between breastfeeding baby, getting DS ready for preschool and tidying up the house, cooking meals etc, it just feels like there is no time at all even to have 5 mins of coffee break. I feel it was much better when I was at work couple of months ago when DS was in nursery that I used to get at least a lunch break for an hour or 30 mins at least or time between meetings to have a coffee and look at my phone in peace. I imagine this is I think how a day looks for SAHM with young DC and it's bloody hard. Many people just assume they are not doing much but I think they deserve more respect.

Lol at 'sat at home fathers' 😂I know a few men that describes very well.

Most of the decent ones do bond with their charges and some stay in contact with them even after they leave. They don't have to be family to your child. They just have to treat them in a kind and loving way, which let's face us, isn't too onerous with innocent little children. I disagree that they don't bond!

Childminders can make a decent income if they have the max number of children they're allowed to have.

So, how are you proposing to change the world?

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves

What the rest of us are objecting to is the idea that society should value their choices and accord them some sort of special respect for something that is essentially a personal choice.

Exactly.

The belief that children do better in a household with a SAHP is not backed up by any credible data whatsoever despite decades during which people have tried to prove they do.

The things that have been unequivocally shown to improve children’s life chances are family income and family stability and good, loving and consistent parenting.

What irks some of us is that the decision to stay at home is presented as a self sacrificing choice in the interest of the children.

No one would argue that they are intrinsically better parents because they are wealthy or because they are in a stable marriage. People realise that it’s in fairly poor taste to cheer something which is so blatantly subject to chance. Even when there is hard data to support the fact these are important positive factors.

But being a SAHP, which lacks the same body of supporting evidence linking it with better outcomes, is presented as a choice made in the interest of the children.

That doesn’t imply judgment or a lack of respect for SAHPs. But it’s irritating to have something whose benefits are so intangible and which is so obviously such a privileged position held up as being socially superior. Particularly to those of us for whom staying at home was impossible.

But from whom?

As a working mum, I feel that I'm respected and valued by my employer and by the people that I work with, and I'm respected and valued by my own family, but I don't feel that I'm respected and valued by anyone else... why would I be, really?

@mainecooncatonahottinroof - It's not going to be easy, for sure. But structural change can happen slowly. It already is, to some extent, just nowhere near quickly enough and those in low pay are, as usual, at the brunt end, with less options.

There are many things once deemed 'impossible' in the not too distant past - like net zero or sustainability initiatives. Not long ago, companies would have denied, deflected and resisted the very concept of this, but it's changing. It has to. And so do workplace initiatives that prioritise the needs of babies and children - so that mums AND dads can work more flexibly or take more time with children in the early, crucial years. But it won't happen until people (including women) break with internalised misogyny that looking after your own children = less 'value.' Also, when governments look at modern life through children's eyes and legislate accordingly for that - quality of life and balance, rather than GDP alone.

Clap for the nhs was something people did to make themselves feel better, it definately didnt make those of us risking our lives daily feel any better.
Same for award ceremonies, often a PR exercise, something which trusts can shout about that they are 'recognising staff value', and much cheaper than a pay rise 😂

From my perspective as a SAHM for almost 7 years, I don’t feel valued by society. The government and the press describe me as being ‘economically inactive’, which makes me feel I am only valued by them in terms of generating income. Caring for babies/toddlers is actually very active! The constant political campaigning and promises for more free childcare hours for babies/toddlers sends a clear message to me that they think I should be back to work, and any number of other professionals would be preferable to me caring for my own children, which I fundamentally disagree with.

The constant questioning about if I work/when I’m returning to work annoys me, as I value very highly my role as a SAHM, so it annoys me when people judge and assume my time would be better spent meeting a boss’s needs than those of my own husband and children.

Society clearly values money over time, and people who earn money over those who give for no financial gain. I also have had time to care for my FIL whilst he was dying, help my elderly neighbours, help my Mum with walking her dog whilst she had a broken ankle and volunteer as a school governor and to hear children read. I’m certainly not lazy/sat watching TV all day, and I don’t want to live in a society where people solely do things for money.

Fortunately, my DH, DS (6) and DD (3) do value my time, and their appreciation matters the most to me. My DS actually asked me recently why we don’t have a playroom. I explained that if we were to have a bigger house, I’d need to work, and so couldn’t do all his school runs/play dates/after school activities, etc. Would he prefer more money or more Mummy? Thankfully he said more Mummy! 🥰 Said he’d really miss me collecting him from school, everything we do together. So I will keep doing what I’m doing for my family 😊

It's totally obvious that by 'more respect' the OP just means she doesn't want to feel disrespected.

I dint directly relate to the OP as I never felt disrespected as a SAHM and I couldn't have cared less anyway, but still, I could imagine why some women might do and that's a bit sad, don't you think?

Anyone on here who interprets the OP as wanting more / special / extra respect, over and above any other iteration of 'mum' - well, with respect, that's clearly about you. It's obvious what OP means.

If a single mum posted that single mums should have more respect in today's society, the correct response would obviously be - 1) Yes and 2) Sorry you feel disrespected in today's society.

Not "OMG why should you need MORE respect than me. Why, why, why? What are you doing that I'm not? I don't understand, I don't understand. I don't understand.'

I'm quite old, and very little has changed in my lifetime so pardon me if I am cynical. I'm public sector so there was a little flexibility when my children were small but never anything that substantially would have worked for us. I stood still in my career to accommodate my family but I held out working FT and I'm very glad of that now that I am starting to contemplate retirement.

Maternity leave has increased, tick. Not in time for me, but whatever. It's a double-edged sword though for women of childbearing age. Career breaks, tick. (we have had those for quite a long time). It's not feasible for all mums to lose out on 3 years of salary, work experience, or pension contributions.

There's a will and a drive towards sustainability, net zero, etc. There's no will in the government or employers to create a better work-life balance for families. They don't give a monkey's.

It's really not about "value". It's about financial security and the ability to pay for your family in the middle of a CoL crisis. The government is not going to financially support women because they want to stay at home.

I think the way people work in the next generation will be very different @mainecooncatonahottinroof . I went to a talk at a top girls' independent school recently and the head was saying the average graduate (now) is projected to change career direction seven times. Many jobs and professions will cease to exist. Change will be so rapid we can't even begin to envisage it. People will no longer stay within the same corporate jobs or career tracks for decades, scared to step off the ladder. It will be much more common for people to work from home, perhaps with several projects or 'mini jobs' all at once. Everything will be more fluid, with the majority of people self-employed, or at least partly self-employed. People will demand better work / life balances. They just won't accept being told they have to be at work at 8am, when they have kids to drop off at 8.30 or whatever. This is the projection and it sounded pretty convincing.

I wish I shared your confidence. I wrote a dissertation for my masters in 2005, and the whole buzz then in the HR world was that homeworking (then referred to as 'teleworking') would be The Next Big Thing as tech was going to be ready to embrace it.

Twenty years on, the only driver for homeworking has been Covid, and even now a lot of employers are scaling it back. It's quite depressing.

I remain to be convinced that people will completely change career that many times in their working lives. How are they going to have the qualifications/experience to do that? I understand the world moves on and the working world will change and adapt in many ways, but I don't believe there's a utopia for workers around the corner.

The reality is, people have to earn a living, and I can't conceive of a world where employees set the terms for employers!

Not everyone will want to be self-employed either - no annual leave, no sick pay, no maternity leave, responsible for your own tax returns, etc. It sounds like a fairly retrograde step to me.

I have probably done 7 different things. I’m in HR now (and have been for about 20 years) but before that I was in finance, in education, in hospitality, ran a charity, ran a consultancy, was in policy and then wrote legislation. That’s 8 with the HR (within which I’ve been operational, strategic, a do-er and a manager and now a director). I’m currently studying law and astrophysics, so there’s room for a couple more before I retire too!

Well when you put it that way... I guess I worked in retail PT at school and in uni. My first job was selling advertising and then I worked for a short time as a PA before moving into HR. I stayed in HR for a bit and then worked in a more generalist HR/admin role before moving back into HR again.

The postgrad studies I undertook though all related to HR. Diploma in (as it was then!) Personnel Management, Masters in HR, Leadership and Management.

I guess I can't envisage my children, who have all graduated with very specific careers in mind, changing career that many times?

It's a great idea though! I would love to move into interior design or fashion styling! If I was younger I might give it a go!

@spaceisfree

If a single mum posted that single mums should have more respect in today's society, the correct response would obviously be - 1) Yes and 2) Sorry you feel disrespected in today's society.
Not "OMG why should you need MORE respect than me. Why, why, why? What are you doing that I'm not? I don't understand, I don't understand. I don't understand.'

You've mentioned single mums a couple of times here but its a very misleading comparison: you're not remotely comparing apples with apples.

Single mums face massive structural and financial challenges in society which hugely impact their ability to provide the best outcomes for their children. Single parent households are significantly worse off than are dual-parent households. Being a single parent is a structural double whammy which hugely limits your ability to improve your children's outcomes. Until fairly recently being a single parent was also a major social taboo - Margaret Thatcher made it a matter of public policy to discriminate against us.

A SAHM is entirely supported to care for her children so while she may have to watch money, she has far less of the financial constraints and can entirely focus on her children. Being a SAHM was also until recently the default position for women. A lot of people still regard it as the optimal position for a woman with plenty of people on Mumsnet arguing that women who work are damaging their children. You can argue that SAHMs don't get enough respect but you can't possibly argue that there is a taboo against them.

Single mums just want to be allowed to work and care for their children at something like parity to women in dual-parent households. They want sufficient money not to disadvantage their children, they want to eliminate the huge structural challenges against them at work and they want not to be looked down upon. They don't start threads on Mumsnet asking for society to "value" them.

I don't have any problem whatsoever with SAHMs but its a real stretch to claim they are some sort of persecuted minority.

I do feel sometimes that there can , very understandably, be fear with the idea of going back to work too. It’s so obvious from looking at working parents (particularly those like me with zero extended family help) that it’s a massive juggle and challenging.
I honestly believe that things shouldn’t be so expensive and that a family should absolutely be able to live on one wage but unless you are wealthy , will inherit or on the opposite (apologies) on max benefits and not working at all it’s very difficult these days to be a sahp.
I remember clearly as a sahm (I was working very p/t from home) thinking that it can’t be more difficult, it must be a break . News to me , it is more difficult and isn’t a break ! 😂
My house was pristine as a sahm with 3 small dcs, I absolutely had more time . All parents deserve respect but honestly working as a parent is much more challenging for me .

@Thepeopleversuswork - SAHMs are widely diverse across society. Is this not obvious? I find the need for people to constantly classify them and tell them who they are 'as a group' really odd. Some SAHMs may indeed feel disrespected. Especially ones who come on MN where they will be told that they do nothing all day that can't be fitted into an evening; they are financially vulnerable, poor role model, living off a man .... you know the rest. Perhaps they have no choice?

Does any other demographic get asked to justify what they do all day?

Who is anyone on here to declare who is financially vulnerable? Some SAHMs will be, some will not be. Just like any other woman, in any walk of life, working or not. There will be SAHMs in billionaire families and those on benefits - and everything imaginable inbetween across all ages, family structures and cultures.

There IS a societal devaluing of the unpaid (and paid) work of childcare. You can see, from threads about SAHMs and all the projections - people are so very triggered by the word 'value' in the same sentence as SAHM as if it's a personal affront to them! Too many woman have deeply internalised the type of misogyny -ie. paid work = value; childcare = less value (and should actually just remain invisible thanks very much because traditionally this was the female sphere). The patriarchy at work and women have internalised this as much as men.

The work of a SAHM may not be paid, but it is real. It is not invisible to those who do it and prioritise this - hour to hour, day to day. It does not need justifying any more than someone needs to justify why they work in an office or whatever and what they do or dint do all day. It happens in real time and cannot be squashed into a few hours of an evening, any more than any other job or role can. If mums and dads are not doing it, someone else needs to be. There is a purpose to it and it matters.

All women may feel devalued for many reasons. A woman working all hours who barely sees her kids while she sees many around her in the same economic trap, could also feel devalued in society. If that's how she feels, that's how she feels. It doesn't matter whether she's in a minority or majority or what anyone else thinks she is entitled to feel.

@spaceisfree

SAHMs are widely diverse across society. Is this not obvious? I find the need for people to constantly classify them and tell them who they are 'as a group' really odd.

Of course they are diverse but its the SAHMs themselves who set up this classification! not the wider world. WOHMs don't usually start threads asking to be "valued". SAHMs routinely start threads on here asking that they be "valued" by society in some nebulous way without specifying what being "valued" means and then get crotchety and defensive when people ask them to define this.

Who is anyone on here to declare who is financially vulnerable? Some SAHMs will be, some will not be. Just like any other woman, in any walk of life, working or not. There will be SAHMs in billionaire families and those on benefits - and everything imaginable inbetween across all ages, family structures and cultures.

That's true and there are plenty of SAHMs who are extremely well set up, much more so than most working mums. The fact remains though that even in situations where someone is married to a billionaire their financial security depends on their marriage. Again, I have absolutely no problem with people doing this if they are confident that it works and clearly it does work for some. But by definition they are not in full control of their finances.

There IS a societal devaluing of the unpaid (and paid) work of childcare. You can see, from threads about SAHMs and all the projections - people are so very triggered by the word 'value' in the same sentence as SAHM as if it's a personal affront to them!

I completely agree that society undervalues childcare as a job but what are you proposing as a solution? This argument comes up time and time again but what are people proposing as a tangible step to reverse this? That all wives should be paid a salary by their husbands to raise their children? That's essentially what the SAHM model already is: a woman is supported by her husband or partner to remain at home to care for the children. Are you suggesting more women should be incentivized to do this? Sorry, but a lot of women don't want to do this. So no, thanks.

So then when the financial "value" argument his been dismantled this argument usually circles back to a much vaguer idea of "value" in the sense of being acknowledged by society in a broader sense. But again the problem with this is why?

You say people are "triggered" by the use of the word "value" when it comes in the same sentence as SAHMs. I don't think anyone is "triggered", we just don't really understand why people who are already in the highly privileged position of being allowed to remain at home with their children have this bizarre special pleading for extra adulation for doing something which they want to do and are supported in doing? Particularly when a lot of us don't have that choice.

@Thepeopleversuswork - I can't explain this again but the OP is very obviously NOT asking for 'special adulation' over and above you or anyone else. The fact you interpret it in this way, with the greatest respect, is about you and your insecurity about your situation and options. Which I can also 100% understand because as you rightly say, you don't have the choice to be supported to SAH. But your insecurity and need to project comparisons between your life and 'SAHMs' is causing you to overreact, distort and exaggerate what the OP is actually saying. Again - she doesn't want anything special. She just doesn't want to feel devalued. Just like anyone else.

Whether you believe she is entitled to feel devalued amid all the whys and wherefores you present is irrelevant. She is telling you that she does, for her own reasons. Your context is yours. Hers is hers.

@spaceisfree

I can't explain this again but the OP is very obviously NOT asking for 'special adulation' over and above you or anyone else. The fact you interpret it in this way, with the greatest respect, is about you and your insecurity about your situation and options. Which I can also 100% understand because as you rightly say, you don't have the choice to be supported to SAH. But your insecurity and need to project comparisons between your life and 'SAHMs' is causing you to overreact, distort and exaggerate what the OP is actually saying. Again - she doesn't want anything special. She just doesn't want to feel devalued. Just like anyone else.

With great respect to you you are projecting here: you don't know me from Adam and have assumed a load of stuff about my "insecurity" which is bobbins. Since you've put it out there, I'm not remotely insecure about my position. If anything I'm quite proud of the fact that I've raised a child on my own with no support from anyone at all and managed to build a career and a position of decent financial security and if I had to do it all again I wouldn't change it. That doesn't mean I disparage anyone who isn't in my position, I acknowledge some luck has come into it.

But I'm not the one constantly starting threads saying: "Why doesn't society value me?" Why does society have to value one model over another?

Such a weird post. Why would you expect a round of applause for getting on with life with the options and choices you have open to you. I'm not insulting SAM'S or saying it's an easy job just don't know why I need to have reverence for them. I'll save my standing ovation for single working parents who I do truly admire.

" But by definition they are not in full control of their finances."

Of course SAHMs can be in full control of their finances. Another frequent projection / generalisation that's just self-evidently incorrect.

However, others will not be. Some may be financially abused even. Like any other married woman. Are they allowed to feel devalued?

OP simply asked that they were afforded the same level of respect as we generally afford people on society that are doing something that isn't easy and requires a lot of time and effort. She isn't asking for extra reverence or a round of applause.

Exactly this!

Most people in a marriage and potentially even in a long term relationship aren't in 'full' control of their finances. This implies that your partner has absolutely no say over finances and you are either controlling the family finances or you are operating completely independently of each other. Both of these approaches have obvious pitfalls so most people merge finances to some extent and the price you pay for this is that you lose some control. There is of course the other elephant in room which is that anyone that relies on government money to any extent also isn't in full control of their finances. When you really break it down very few people have complete and total control if they are part of a family unit.

@Thepeopleversuswork - I don't mean to single you out, but perhaps if people spent less time pontificating in circles and endless comparisons about 'SAHMs' and what they represent in 'society', then the OP wouldn't have felt devalued in the first place.

Maybe... but again, it's not the WOHMs who start the threads saying: "Why does society not value me!" Its SAHMs who start these threads (although the OP isn't actually a SAHM, she's just on mat leave and presumably has a small window in the world of a SAHM).

If the OP feels devalued then that's really between her and her family and the people around her. It's not the role of "society" (whatever that may be) to address whatever self esteem issues that a non working mother may have.

I don't start threads saying "why aren't single parents treated with more respect?" I don't expect some nebulous societal "value" to be attributed to my role. I just get on with it and expect not to be discriminated against and not to have unnecessary hurdles through in my way for the sake of it (and sometimes I don't even get that, but that's showbiz). But I don't think I'm particularly special.

We all have our crosses to bear and we all make the best of it for ourselves and our children in whatever way we can. But most other groups of parents aren't constantly demanding "respect" from society for something which is really a bit of a privilege in the first place.