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.

I couldn’t agree more about the current paternity allowance being pitiful, I’d love to see it being extended too. It also has implications if your baby is rushed to the NICU (our DS was, my DH was literally pushing me in a wheelchair chasing him round the hospital. We both spent the first week of his life sat by an incubator for 12 hours a day then at home without him through the nights whilst an incredible team of nurses cared for him tirelessly without us. I established breastfeeding entirely without my baby with my DH helping with syringes initially then hospital pumps. Many of my DH’s work colleagues said they would have not begrudged him having an extra week at home to make up for it, which was kind of them).

We met and spoke with many families who were there far longer than us, affecting both maternity and paternity leave experiences very negatively. One Dad told me he was at risk of losing his job due to the time he’d needed to take off work splitting duties with his wife (1 needing to travel to the NICU whilst the other needed to get their older child to school). It’s one I regularly raise with my local politicians, MP, and sign petitions about, as it’s a very important issue how families with premature and/or seriously ill babies are treated.

I think with situations such as a baby in NICU or even a child in hospital, especially for long periods of time there should be some kind of financial help. It's already such a difficult situation and parents shouldn't be worrying about finances on top of that.

The sahm that are receiving benefits may not be if they as well as their husband worked.

2 of them working and paying tax are not economically inactive.

There's all sorts of permutations. The above is what I was saying about the the husbands who are paying for sahm

The article brings together research from many studies. A lot of research on attachment is UK based and finds negative effects of long hours of daycare on children's attachment and behaviour. The younger the child and the longer the hours, the more negative the effects. However, if the main caregiver at home is depressed or has attachment issues this also has a negative impact on a child so the findings need to be considered alongside the parent's emotional state....and also financial situation.

I have taken the time to read the articles you have attached. There is no evidence to suggest that this phenomena is exclusively down to gender. The studies don't take into account the qualifications, experience etc of those involved so there is no concrete proof, rather speculation. The Russian example is not a great one as the discrimination laws in Russia are decades behind the UK, so I can very well believe women are discriminated against. It's still legal to beat your wife over there!

'Male nurses earn more than female nurses, male teachers earn more than female teachers.' Again this is far too reductionist. Does the male teacher have a doctorate in Physics and been teaching for 25 years vs a female teaching Art for 5 years? These very important factors are never taken into account.

Gender pay gap in the UK - Office for National Statistics

Some interesting takes from this article:

'The gender pay gap measures the difference between average hourly earnings excluding overtime of men and women, as a proportion of men's average hourly earnings excluding overtime; it is a measure across all jobs in the UK, not of the difference in pay between men and women for doing the same job.'

'Our measure of the gender pay gap is the difference between average hourly earnings excluding overtime of men and women, as a proportion of men's average hourly earnings excluding overtime. It is a measure across all jobs in the UK, or across all jobs within a group, such as a specific occupation. It is not a measure of the difference in pay between men and women doing the same job, and with similar skills and experience.'

'In April 2024, median hourly earnings excluding overtime for full-time employees were £19.24 for men and £17.88 for women; for part-time employees, they were £13.00 for men and £13.40 for women.'

Why do you suppose PT men are paid less than PT women? Could it be they are doing different jobs....

The janitor vs maid comparison is another Red Herring. They are two different jobs. Where is the study of female janitors vs male janitors? If we are to make genuine comparisons a like for like study is the correct way, not apples to oranges.

Another interesting study:
The commuting gap: women are more likely than men to leave their job over a long commute - Office for National Statistics

@SouthLondonMum22

'I think the issue with shared leave is that most mothers simply don't want to share.'

So we agree women aren't necessarily the 'default' they actually want to be the SAHP.

We could apply that what if logic to anyone receiving benefits. There are bigger fish to fry than SAHMs in relation to benefit recipients.

From what I've seen, the UK studies are very mixed and find both positives and negative when it comes to nurseries/having working mothers.

For example, girls with mothers who aren't SAHM's are less likely to be in poverty as adults.

As I've said, no one is immune to influence from society when it's ingrained from birth.

The issue is other people assuming women are the default parent when it isn't always the case and it being acceptable in society for there to be lower standards and less pressure when it comes to fathers.

But it's relevant in relation to being economically inactive

The ambiguous influence of society which is not something anyone of us can determine in any tangible way. Therefore, I prefer to put the main responsibility of decision making to the individual and credit people with the ability to do so.

We have societal norms. All societies do. This shows that society can have a massive influence and our choices can and do affect society as a whole.

Explain your point please?

I'd love to know what percent of SAHMs with partners actually do receive benefits. I've looked into it and can't find any studies on the matter but considering the criteria that has to be met to receive UC as a couple, I'd wager practically none.

I don't deny society can influence us in a manner of ways, I simply deny the level of this influence.

I don’t know any who do, I certainly don’t (only the standard child benefit that everyone gets). The only one I know who does is on disability benefit (which is a separate issue, as another Mum I know claims that too who also works 3 jobs).

I know one SAHM who’s husband is a high earner who has actually lost out on child benefit. Now, on the surface one could argue ‘oh well, they can afford to go without it’. However, if a couple where both as individuals earn below that threshold, but together they earn tens of thousands of pounds more than my friend’s DH, then they can still keep that benefit. This directly discriminates against single income families, and is disrespectful and wrong. The organisation Mothers at Home Matter have long been campaigning against this discriminatory behaviour towards SAHPs.

I agree.

I also don't know any SAHMs who receive benefits.

'To qualify for Universal Credit, your partner must also meet specific requirements. You must both work fewer than 16 hours per week combined and have a monthly household income of no more than £2,000 after deducting rent or mortgage payments and childcare bills.
Additionally, your partner must receive benefits such as Income Support or Jobseeker’s Allowance, or have an annual income of less than £18,000.'

Realistically, in the absence of exceptional circumstances what couple with one being a SAHP would be making less than £18k pa.

@SouthLondonMum22
What research shows that girls are more likely to be in poverty if their mothers stay at home? I can't find it. A quick search on google found that the economic background of a girl is the biggest indicator of wealth/poverty later in life.
I have looked at the research on attachment and it is not mixed. There are negative effects of putting children under 1 in daycare for long hours in terms of attachment-in all studies.
If by mixed findings, you are referring to older children, then I will agree with you. Attachment issues decrease as a child gets older. Over 2 is better for daycare.
There are some cognitive benefits to daycare over 2 years but these don't outweigh emotional attachments in my opinion.

Sorry, it doesn't actually say poverty if they grow up with SAHM's like I thought it did from memory but it did show that working mothers are more likely to have daughters who tend to have higher paying jobs.

''It found daughters of mothers in work have better careers, higher pay and more equal relationships than those of stay-at-home mothers.
This effect was particularly pronounced in Britain and the US, the study, based on data from 24 countries, found.''

Working mothers benefit daughters, study says - BBC News

This study also shows that there is no negative effects on children's behaviour when it comes to mothers working, it actually showed that girls with SAHM's actually showed more behavioural difficulties at age 5 than girls with working mothers.

''University College London researchers studied data on 12,000 children and said the best arrangement was where both parents lived at home and worked.''

Working mothers 'do no harm to children's behaviour' - BBC News

You have little to do with your time.

My husband could do that now too, as he works from home three days a week. This is only since Covid. Neither of us could work from home until then. It would have made such a difference.

I can't figure out whether you have a "strong point tbh. It's not coming across here. Thanks for the insult. It really adds nothing to your argument.

Now who is lacking in self awareness? I'm angry at the way WOHMs are spoken to but I am so far from insecure you couldn't begin to imagine it. Unlike you, I have already successfully reared my children and made a fucking awesome job of it. They are all doing well, are happy and high achieving.

I have no regard for your opinion, and it's now going into minus with every post. My own post was relating what my experience were and you couldn't wait to belittle and insult me - "scenarios that didn't happen" are my lived experience and it's disgusting that you see fit to disparage something so personal to me.

Your sense of superiority is implied in every single post.

Ive no idea. As I said it was in response to a poster that said that SAHM s often have husbands earning a fortune and paying enough tax for both of them. Merely putting the other side across

I do know that a couple with 2 kids, rent if £600 a month and one parent working earning £40k will get £128 a week universal credit. Obviously lower paid people get more.

That's just out of the real world. Most couples couldn't afford this extended leave and it would only further disadvantage women.

You could always take a career break too.

Income of 40k with 2 kids