To think we need a conversation / movement supporting stay at home dads

[enwarall]

Other posts on here this morning have got me thinking about how so many women feel caught between parenting, having a career and finding a balance between the two.

To me, the problem would go away if stay at home fathers were more normalised.

Why does ‘the choice’ always have to be the woman’s?

I think it’s usually a bit more complicated than that, less about societal norms & more about practicalities/finances/wants.

Finances being probably the biggest culprit- still now if you look at a heterosexual couples statistically the man is more likely to be the higher earner. Straight away then if you have a household where one person has to give up work or reduce their hours to do childcare it may only be financially doable if that person is the lower earner, and that is most likely to be the woman.

I also think partly it’s that for lots of women it’s not that we want someone else to do it, it’s that we want there to be a way we can have it all. I want to be the one who can stay home when my kids are unwell, attend their class assemblies and be the one who sits and has dinner with them but I ALSO want to be able to have a successful career, it’s not really that I want someone to take over the mum duties, I just want there to be a way I can do it all. I’m really lucky in that my role & employer does allow me to do both but I know that’s not the case for lots of women.

Of course we need to normalise stay at home dads. And many of us do our best to do this - including me and DH, because DH WAS a SAHD for many years. And yes, I am 100% behind campaigns etc to stop the ridiculous comments he got over the years etc.

But it's not like it's some big conspiracy. Most men aren't SAHDs because they don't think it's necessary. Many men who DO have a SAHM as a wife don't fully appreciate what she' sdoing and are happy to just leave it to her while telling themselves they're "facilitating" her being a SAHM.

The conversation is much more than about SAHD. It's about accepting and acknowledging the mental, emotional, physical burden of being a parent and equalising responsibilitiy for that rather than than leaving the bulk of it to the women.

still now if you look at a heterosexual couples statistically the man is more likely to be the higher earner

Is that the case in younger ages though? I mean, isn’t that difference in part caused by women having children? Women in their twenties aren’t out earned by men in their twenties.

Gov website: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn07068/
“There is little difference in median hourly pay for male and female full-time employees aged in their 20s and 30s, but a substantial gap emerges among full-time employees aged 40 and over. This links to parenthood – the gap between male and female hourly earnings grows gradually but steadily in the years after parents have their first child.”

It is still the case in younger ages yes, but less so than when older for the reasons you mention.

The gender pay gap overall is still at about 7-8%, but for those younger (in 20’s) the gap is smaller, it’s about 1.5-2.5% for 22-29 year old’s- so yes men are still statistically the higher earner’s even in their 20’s, not as much as when older though.

Even taking that into account though, there is a cost to a woman’s career just by virtue of being the one who has to grow & give birth to a whole other human, recover, maternity leave etc. I’m currently pregnant with my second child and have been quite lucky in that I’ve not needed any time off work during either pregnancy and my employer is great, but I have friends who have really struggled and needed huge amounts of time off while pregnant. One of my best friends had HG for example so was signed off for 6 months of her pregnancy, another friend developed severe PGP and has been signed off for 3 months so far. That has an impact on your career, then maternity leave & when you return your career is still impacted for lots of women because employer’s are just waiting for you to have another so you’re overlooked for progression, big cases/money, because you could go off again at a moment’s notice- it’s not fair but it is the way lots of employer’s still behave.

Well, I think what needs to be addressed is why the gender wage gap exists and how we can change the inequality between men and women's earnings rather than just accept it's the way it is as though that's inevitable. It used to be the case that a lot of women would automatically lose their jobs when they got married. It was accepted that women couldn't get a credit card or take out a mortgage. Before that, women not having the vote was 'just the way things are'.

The world can change and progress can be made. It's happened before, it continues to happen and we can push it further.

And I say this as the higher earner in my marriage and also as the person with the most flexibility which enables me to also be there for sick days and assemblies and sports days. It is possible to have both, and the more that employers are pushed to create flexibility where possible for all employees (not just women!) the more attainable that becomes.

Men can do this if they want but why would a woman want to have children and then just never hardly see them? I thought we were having kids because we found it enjoyable?

Disparity in earnings I’d imagine. Boys who aren’t academic can pick up a trade at college and end up out earning most professionals as brickies or plumbers whereas girls in the same position might go to the same college and end up as hairdressers and carers etc.

And dads don’t find it enjoyable?

You can find children enjoyable and also have a job.

No one seems to question dads working, whereas if women do it can be seen as a bit suspicious and neglectful.

It is quite odd really.

I think the same people probably also find it a bit suspicious and odd if the dad wants to stay at home too.

People with jobs still see plenty of their kids! My husband and I have always worked. Our kids have been in childcare and in school but we have always had breakfast with them, walked to whatever setting they were in (or taken them to grandparents who looked after them regularly), picked them up, read to them, walked to them, had dinner with them, put them to bed, spent weekends and holidays together. Over the course of a week, your kid can go to nursery or a childminder or grandma and grandpa and still have tons of time to spend with their parents.

There was also a lot I remember about the baby and toddler years that was not 100% pure unfiltered enjoyment, quite the contrary in fact! Loving parents don't have to cherish every minute or devote every second of the day to their kids.

I think there's a difference in maternal and paternal roles. We carry then and feed them and naturally have a closer attachment. They want us around intrinsically even when dad's are involved.

No I don't spend every moment with my child either but really did right up to about age 3 and think it's actually very important to do so. I feel we tend to lose the ability to connect with our children if they spend most of their young childhood with someone other than their mother and it results in women coming here, for instance, in despair that their teenager or even 8,9 year old will not listen to them at all and is off the rails and they hate parenting because of it.

I do work and have a separated co-parenting relationship and enjoy breaks from my child. I will be using childcare for my second child as I don't want to spend every waking moment with them as I don't believe that's healthy, but I do up to about age 3.

I'm not a dad but think the relationship is different between children and their fathers and children and their mothers.

Well that's nonsense and your feeling that a mother not spending every second of the first three years of her child's life with that child will lead to them going off the rails at age 8 is entirely unsubstantiated.

I don't believe so. I see a lot of people unable to connect with their children, on here especially.

The most equitable families I have known are where both parents go part time. It's a fabulous thing to see when kids have strong bonds with both parents. Alas I only encountered one of these where it was an opposite sexed couple, the others were lesbians.

Oh right, I didn't realise you had evidence!

I think many women WANT to be the SAHP. Men, much less often. I think the majority of career women ideally want the perfect work life balance rather than being the ones working all hours whilst her partner gets to spend all his time with the kids.

It is still the case for the majority than women are more likely to enjoy looking after the home and entertaining children than men. Fathers can become the best parent when the kids are teenagers, but by then, they don't need a FT parent at home and by then, fathers are more likely to be higher earners any way.

I think the best parents are one where both parents have a great bond and enjoy being with their children and also share responsibility for child related tasks. There’s absolutely no evidence to suggest that the mother being with their child up to age 3 produces happier or more successful offspring.

Unpopular opinion, but I don't think men can do what women do 🤷‍♀️. Both mothers and fathers are equally important, I don't think their roles are interchangeable.