thinking its mad, how everyone assumes your going to return to work, when your dcs start school?

[milkgoddessmakesthefinestmilk]

im not planning to, i want to be the one that takes dd to school picks her up from school is there if shes sick or on holiday.

don't school children have about 3 months of hols a year?

It's not a question of pride. What matters is that children should have positive role-models. Children often repeat parental patterns. It's a sad fact that a child raised with low expectations, on benefits etc is less likely to break the parental mould.

It's obviously possible to be a positive role model as a sahm/p - clearly many sahm/ps will have good work ethics - but I'm not sure about the long-term effects of sahmdom on equality in the workplace.

findtheriver - I am not carping on about you attacking SAHM - read the post I was quoting you!!!!! I was just saying that although you accused me of being a one-track record you haven't said anything new yourself for a very long time.

I then went on to make a perfectly valid point about how children don't feel proud about their parents work because they are too young to give a damn about it and that having parents who work makes no difference to their aspirations.

Quattro - the first person to mention pride was FTR - she wanted her children to be 'proud' of her work.

For example, 9.24 30/5/08 - "As I've said before, my children enjoy having two parents who are loving, caring, involved in their lives and they are proud of the fact that we both have interesting and worthwhile roles in wider society as well as in the home."

There probably is an earlier quote but I can't be bothered to trawl through and find it.

Abbey - your point earlier today was spot on.

However, this whole thread is getting very dull. Usually these threads offer a chance for a discussion but this one is just boring.

The issue about whether we work or not is one of choice. It is not a permanent decision if you don't want it to be. I can go and get myself a career anytime I like - I have never felt I was restricted just because I was female - I just don't think like that. People are people - if some of you want to make it a feminist issue then you carry on. I am pleased to have been a SAHM and I will no doubt be pleased with whatever else I chose to do in the future because I have had the choice and if I don't like I will change it.

'For example, 9.24 30/5/08 - "As I've said before, my children enjoy having two parents who are loving, caring, involved in their lives and they are proud of the fact that we both have interesting and worthwhile roles in wider society as well as in the home."'

Yes, that is a quote from me. Exactly what problem do you have with it? It isnt criticising SAHP or WOHP or in fact saying anything negative at all. It's a very positive affirmation I think.

You know, I'm beginning to think that some people are disappointed not to find something they can have a pop at, and therefore try to invent something!!

My children's pride in me is not tied up with my job. Their aspirations have nothing to do with what I do for a living.

They are not valid reasons for me or anybody else going to get a job if they chose not to have one.

You seem to have forgotten but we are having a discussion about whether or not mothers should go to work and why they should be criticised for their positions.

The way a discussion works is that you put your points and the rest of us consider them and put our own points across or vice versa. If you can't cope with that then don't join a discussion board. There is no persecution here.

My children's pride in me is not tied up in my job. Their aspirations have nothing to do with what I do for a living either.

I can cope with discussion thanks niecie - it seems that you are the one who seems intent on 'misreading' posts because you want them to be saying something different so that you can disagree with it

Niecie - I have just looked back over this thread and copied some of my posts here. Personally I can't the evidence of 'attacking' SAHM (which you have accused me of) or the inability to understand how discussion works (ditto0. Maybe you need to read what's there, rather than making assumptions!

'Agree AbbeyA. People are the sum total of who they are. I don't define myself by my job. Or by being a wife. Or by being a mother. Or a daughter. I am all of those things. '

'I totally agree with that sentiment riven. That's why I phrased my post very carefully: I want my children to have aspirations. I have my own.
I think it's terribly unhealthy for parents to have specific aspirations for their children. It's unfair. They are their own people, with their own lives to lead. I don't mind what they do, as long as they have choices open to them, and they are happy. But I would be very sad if they didn't have their dreams of what they want to experience in life.'

'Life is about embracing opportunities and achieving our potential in all aspects. And hopefully being a role model for our children to aspire to that too.'

'I am not attacking SAHM. I believe that people should put themsleves in a position where they have choice AS FAR AS POSSIBLE and then make a choice, being aware of the potential upsides and downsides of that choice.
Me? I am a working parent, as are most parents. I don't define myself by my work, but my professional success is an important dimension of my life. I have lots of other exciting elements to my life too. And the most important thing in my life is my family. I am not missing out on anything!'

personally I can't see* the evidence

"children don't feel proud about their parents work because they are too young to give a damn about it and that having parents who work makes no difference to their aspirations."

I think that having parents who work makes a difference to children's aspirations - for example there is plenty of evidence to show that children brought up on benefits have lower academic and personal aspirations. This isn't always the case of course there are children who buck every trend (witness riven) but there's enough evidence to show that it is generally damaging to be brought up in poverty.

Niecie I think you are mentally making a distinction between parents staying at home and poverty. Of course if one parent earns a significant amount enabling the other to stay at home, then the children are not being brought up in poverty. And equally having two working parents (on minimum wages for example) does not necessarily insulate children from being brought up in poverty.

The issue you have not addressed is what sahmdom means for equality in the workplace.

You have also not addressed the issue of what it means in terms of role models for children to see a non-working mother throughout their childhoods (remember the OP thinks it is "mad" for women to work even after children have gone to school). It cannot be anything other than negative for women as a whole for children to think that a woman's sphere should be restricted to the domestic. You dismiss it as an issue but that is not the same as addressing it.

I think it depends on the attitude of the sahm too. I think for a daughter to grow up with a sahm who very much believes that staying at home with your children is the only way, then she will probably grow up thinking she will have to do the same. I am so happy my mother worked my whole childhood, because I feel like I have never had the same issues of guilt as many other wohms have. My grand-mother also worked her whole life and had a great career (quite unusual in her days) so I also had a mum wihtout these guilt issues. I think it has made a huge different to my life. I think this guilt must be so tiring to live with.

I think when our children grow up with an increasingly ageing population, the sahm-option will have gone anyway. I am guessing we are the last generation to have that chioce, because in the future we really need all the tax payers we can get. We might as well go out and ask for improved working-conditions and better work-life balance for parents and get the male population involved in doing their share of the childcare now. I think this will make it much easier for our daughters in the future!

Very good post Quattro.

I think most SAHMs eventually return to paid work, maybe when the kids are at school, maybe when the kids have left home so i doubt it does much for the equality in the workplace. When a SAHM goes back after raising kids, they are unlikely to keep going off on maternity leave which it could be argued would make it easier for employers (BTW I am in favour of maternity leave but I know some in business are not).

I don't think SAH is a bad example. How is it a bad example to care for someone while another person earns the money. it's about teamwork, this shouldn't have to be BOTH partners doing HALF the exact same thing, surely it makes sense to share the work out and not involve a 3rd party, doing it all yourself.

"Or kids who resented their parents never making sports day" - thats a big generalisation. I work and have not missed one event in DS's reception year - people can and do go to these events who work.

Even though I have no daughters, I wouldnt want them bought up to think mums stay at home doing the housework and little else - Quatto makes some very good points.

Many working parents cannot attend though. DS friend ets very upset everytime as his mum cannot go to plays etc.

Even if you have sons, I think it's important for them to see that mums have a life outside looking after them and the home. Possibly even more so than if you have only daughters.

I wonder if there is a connection between how many men whose wives complain they do nothing round the house on MN and mothers who didn't WOHM? I can't imagine the two are unconnected somehow.

I found it harder to work when my DC were at school than previously. The main problem in my area is the school holidays. After school used to be a problem but there is now a club.

I chose to be a SAHM because I remember as a child how thrilled I used to feel when my Mum would come and support me in any school based activities, I also remember when she started back at full time work, I was v sad.

I guess I am fortunate to be able to choose whether to SAH and for my children, especially my DS1 (11), he needs to continuity of having me around.

Agree HappyMummy.
And if a woman goes out to work and still does all the housework then she's nuts!! Being a good role model for your kids includes picking a partner who doesn't dump on a woman I think!

One thing I would add is, where possible, when my DD starts school (she's 8 months old) I will probably take up some sort of self employment as this offers me some flexibility for school hols. A few yrs ago I was instructing first aid and thoroughly enjoyed it, my boys thought it was pretty cool too!

As a SAHM I try not to create an environment of being the person who slaves away, I delegate many jobs to my boys so they understand that it isn't just down to women to take on domestic tasks.

This thread is about sahms with school-aged isn't it? We are not talking about setting examples to toddlers here, we are talking about older children. A Sahm taking 10 years+ to raise children (because this is what we are talking about if she has several children and stay at home until seconday school) is very unlikely to bounce back into a great career/job. Of course it happens, but it is not the general rule. Certainly if I was sent a cv from someone who had not worked for over 10 years it would make an excellent paper-plane. A cv from someone who has taken 2-3 years out to raise children is totally different.

I was going to write that I have never missed sports-day, but Iof course I have. In fact I have never been to one because my children want DH to be there as he has more chance winning the parent-races. The main thing is that a child always have a parent to these days, not that it must be mummy.

'Apart from my 16 yo who no parent on the planet could please' - lol riven. Know that feeling!!