to think some women feel entitled to free childcare from their DM/MILs just because they had help themselves?

[timetoban]

I’ve noticed this more and more lately on MN. Some women seem to assume that because their own mum/MIL head help with childcare that they’re now automatically owed the same from their DM or MIL. Why?

Just because one generation chose (or was able) to help doesn’t mean the next one is obliged to step in. Circumstances are completely different now. A lot of grandmothers are still working, have their own lives, health issues or don’t want to be tied into regular childcare. That should be allowed without guilt, expectations or criticism.

What bothers me is the expectation. I've seen people get annoyed or even fall out with their DM/MIL for not doing regular pick-ups and committing to regular childcare.

There is also a double standard. The pressure seems to fall much more on grandmothers than grandfathers. Even if a grandfather is retired and not working, the expectation is not there or much less for him.

Of course, if grandparents want to help and everyone’s happy with the arrangement, that’s great. I am not talking about those situations.

Also I know it is not ALL women.

@movintothecountry

https://ifs.org.uk/sites/default/files/output_url_files/BN234.pdf

Over the past 40 years, the UK has seen an almost continual rise in the proportion of
women in employment. The employment rate among women of ‘prime working age’
(aged 25-54) is up from 57% in 1975 to a record high of 78% in 2017.
This predominantly reflects an increase in full-time employment, from 29% in 1985
(when data on hours of work began) to 44% in 2017.
These aggregate changes are largely the result of a huge change in working patterns
at particular points in the life cycle, with far more women in employment over the
course of their mid-to-late 20s and early 30s.

It is also because women are now much less likely to drop out of the labour market
around the time they have their first child, and much more likely to stay in paid work in
the years following. Whereas only 41% of women born in 1958 were still in work 2
years after the birth of their first child, this figure was 58% for women born in 1970 –
even though the employment rates of these cohorts were essentially the same both 5
years before and 10 years after the birth of their first child.
This has led to a large rise in the proportion of working-age mothers in paid work: up from 50% in 1975 to 72% in 2015. The rise has been particularly large among lone
mothers and mothers of pre-school- and primary-school-age children.
Overall, the proportion of couples with children where only one adult works has
almost halved (down from 47% in 1975 to 27% in 2015) and the proportion where both
work has increased from 49% to 68%.

Maybe that's a better idea given that your support network will be young and able enough to help out when they can.

That's how we managed multigenerations of support to the old, young and disabled around work and having a social life.

Oh yuck how snobby of you! And sexist. cant you do maths? If a person is a grandparent in their 40s then neither they nor their child pushed out kids in their teens.

Todays grandparents are not mainly boomers. Many current grandparents born 1964 or later often in the 70s. Thats not a family pushing out teen pregnancies as you allege but simply 2 generations of births in their 20s or 30s

As each year goes on from now boomers doing any babysitting will be increasingly small so manage your expecations.

Any that are boomers mostly had their kids in the 20s and didnt benefit from all the prefanancy rights and childcare provision that exist now. They dont have the same pensions due to leaving work or going part time

Unless you are from the type of family who all waited until you were in your late 30s or 40s to have kids then increasingly few boomers are involved. And if you do wait to have kids until that age then you need to expect high chance your own mother will be dead or too old to babysit your kids. Thats the harsh reality of delaying having kids until your 40s

Either way younger grandmothers are still working. Boomer grandmothers are mostly too old.

The sexism is that all this expectation falls on the grandmother and not the grandfather

Neither set of grandparents were expected to do childcare , and in fact never did. However comments about me not working (I was a SAHM for a few years), the hours worked , the type of job (term time only) did annoy the crap out of me, because not only did they have enormous help and support from their own parents (both me and DH were sent away for months at a time in the summer holidays for example) we were also left alone on our own from very young ages. Even if I wanted to (I didn’t) you can’t just do that anymore.

“I don’t understand how…” . Of course you don’t. 🙄

Expectating things to continue as they have done, or to improve, is the norm.
Look at the junior doctors striking - they think they should be amongst the wealthier in society, like doctors were 40 years ago.
On MN, posters are unable to fathom that they can't afford to go out on day trips or to restaurants regularly like families did 20 years ago (ignoring that 20 years before that no one went out much either).

I think when mum's especially have their own mum running after them and providing lots of lovely flexible free childcare, they end up taking it for granted and become spoiled. So when their children have children they would rather stick their head in an oven than go out their way to provide any childcare ( you know, the sort they had all the time but still think they did it all themselves)

My last remaining grandparent died earlier this year. So my DS grew up with all his great grandparents plus numerous great great aunts and uncles.

We are quite a small family. My Dad just retired last year. In the years since DS was born (14 years ago) my parents have been doing the heavy lifting of looking after their aged parents- noone died before the age of 95.

When I was a child my great grandparents were long dead. The last one died when my dad was an early teen.
My grandparents all retired in their mid to late 50s. In fact one granny retired when I, her first grandchild was born so she could help.

My mum was a SAHM, but she had help with washing, ironing and cleaning and minding the children 2 days a week in her own house.

My parents went to a joint hobby once a week.

We stayed with grandparents every Friday night.

My parents went on numerous weekends away and on week long holidays without us.

We have had nowhere near that kind of help. But they have been completely tied up with their parents. They had DS over a weekend so we could go to a wedding. My granny (dementia) went missing and was found hours from home with a broken wrist. My DH had to get a v expensive taxi and lots of coffee to their house and stay with DS.

Now their other caring responsibilities are over we are staring to see the benefits. We are going away for a few weekends and possibly a week in September.

They pick him up from school and have him for tea one night a week.

But they were drained for years with caring for other people. I know they are upset they dont have the same relationship we had with our grandparents
Though they are still v close with my DS and my children. It's just that through bo fault of their own they were unreliable for so many years.

I think a lot of parents of that generation (born 50-60s) are in this squeezed middle when it comes to caring

@BeebeeBoyle, what a strange thing to say about junior doctors. I suggest you try reading something other than rhe daily mail.

I didn't say that. I was responding to the point that things are the state that they are in because of boomers and Gen X. I was pointing out that anyone who's 36 now has had the opportunity to vote in 5 elections and 1 referendum to impact government policy.

As it goes, I don't think the boomers or Gen X are responsible for the crash either, that was down to the bankers.

My parents had very, very little childcare from their own parents, due to a range of factors.

They were falling over themselves of offer any kind of help to us. We have always been grateful for their help.

Whether we can help care for any future grandchildren will depend on where our kids end up setting, their career choices and their preference (and that of their future spouses).

It’s not always straightforward.

IME it definitely goes in cycles for lots of families. The women that relied heavily seem to have no understanding of how hard motherhood can be without that support and therefore offer less support to their own DC.

I think the key difference is work. When I was brought up it was rare for the mothers to work as one salary was sufficient to support a family. As a result my GP never did a single minute of childcare as there was no need for them to do so.

Move forward a few decades and that type of household is no longer typical as many mothers now need to work which causes huge childcare issues.

We were older parents so knew that we’d have no GP support and therefore saved a huge sum, well in excess of 6 figures, to cover nursery and childcare. Without that we’d have had all sorts of logistical issues.

I think the bigger problem will come with the next generation when both parents still need to work and GP need to retire later and also don’t have the unearned property wealth that many of that age currently benefit from.

If people are struggling now without GP support how will they cope when their own DC need a similar level of assistance. In many cases they’ll have neither the funds nor the time to replicate the support.

In many ways it will be a significant societal shift as for the first time in living memory it is quite likely that future generations will have a worse standard of living than the previous one. That has never happened before and is something many people appear to struggle to accept.

@Givinguponmyhair

i disagree, I have young adult dc considering children currently, they will get substantial help with childcare fees through tax free childcare and the paid for hours, I got zero help. It was 2/3 of my modest salary then, just like now, except they get effectively a subsidy. A flat then was 6-8 x my salary , same now … our dc know we will be available for occasional babysitting eg so they can go out to a wedding or occasional date night but not regular childcare nor every weekend because we have lives too, I have done my 15+ years of not going out due to children, now I’m free.

My son’s MIL did all of their childcare as she worked part time and loved having them. I did the childcare for my daughter’s DD . Then my poor DIL died of breast cancer when DGD was only 4 so I stepped up and looked after my 2 DGC when mum worked part time .
Ten years later I’m still looking after my DGD 3 days a week while her mum works .
DGD has autism and is a school refuser . She is old enough to be on her own but is too anxious to cope so I go round to sit with her . She needs no care but just needs me to be there . She also won’t stay with anyone else .plans are being put in place to get her into a special school so hopefully my hours will reduce soon .

You are completely ignoring the fact that for families to have a SAHM that woman gave up her career and ability to pay into a pension

She must work until she is 67 to get SP. She is also living in current economic times where one income isn’t enough. She has to work and isn’t available for childcare. Maybe her husband is though?

I have no words for how much bollocks this statement is.

Hmm. I'm 65. DS and DIL, early 30s have a baby on the way.

Mother had me aged 23. My grandparents shouldered a huge amount of informal childcare from theor late 40s/50s. Let's say mother wasn't born with a many maternal instincts. Notably my grandparents worked albeit self employed with a farm and family businesses. I was the second child they couldn't have. Mother was never fully cognizant of the freedom they afforded her.

DH and I were mid thirties when our DC were born mid to late 90s. We had no formal grandparent help at all. We had to pay for it.

DS and DIL are on another Continent and I don't know if they will live in the UK again. Their careers are more portfolio based than ours were and they will be able to condense hours to free a day a week for childcare and reduce their childcare bills.

DD is likely to have DC closer to home but in Europe rather than the UK. Far more traditional professional roles but I suspect DD will stop working.

Both children have had significant financial support.

DH and I are still working, because we like work, although I am semi-retired. When we retire, we will have worked for 80 years between us and no, we will not be providing formal or regular childcare. Apart from the fact rhat if there are, hopefully, three or four grandchildren, at approaching 70, I doubt we'll have the stamina to properly look after under fives. This has been made clear to both children.

Obviously we will help in emergencies and babysitting but it will likely take us 48 hours to get to DS and DIL, knackered after a long flight, and probably 6-8 hours to get to DD from getting the call and onto a scheduled flight.

Finally, when our DC were under 5, mother was caring for her parents. Similarly DH and I presently have responsibilities for our 90 year old mothers. Who have always respectively lived 240 and 100 miles away from us. Most of our friends/DCs friends did not have grandparents on hand because mostly people had moved to London for work and grandparents were people who were visited in the holidays or who came to stay occasionally.

I only had one set of GP’s and they lived too far away for help. We’d see them in the school holidays.
They didn’t provide childcare on a regular basis (though we’d stay with them in holidays for a night or two as a treat).

My grandparents on one side were overseas and my English grandfather died in WW2. My Grandmother lived in another county and I didn’t even meet her till I was 8. My Mother received no help and neither did I. The women in my family always worked, my Grandmother was in the military, then a driver and then a housekeeper for a very wealthy family at a ‘ big house’. Her Mother, my great grandmother had helped run the factory her husband had owned. They were wealthy and had multiple servants, my Mother remembered visiting them as a child in the early thirties. Family money lost on both sides sadly.

I will help if able but I’m not going to be like my sister who did so much it was to the detriment of her own life. She was in her fifties working evenings mainly and doing almost FT childcare at some points.

I didn’t expect childcare from my children’s grandparents. I assumed they’d go into full time childcare as soon as I went back to work.

But after mat leave for my first baby, their grandparents immediately stepped in to offer childcare full time, which has been so beneficial for my children. I want to try to offer the same to my children when the time comes, if I can.

Also i don't get why there would be a specific focus on MIL or mums, granddads are as useless as grandmothers.

Why is it then that the grandmothers are doing more childcare? When do you ever see posts complaining that their DF/FIL won't do childcare?

More women over 50 work part time compared men. Is it sexism or a recognition of free time and capacity within families

People say this about helping each like it is simple. But the expectations and judgements do not really exist for grandfathers as they do for grandmothers. It is the grandmothers who get criticised.

It is mostly women who are getting upset that their DM/MILs had help with childcare but now they won't care for their own GC. They leave the men out altogether.

Approximately 40% of women aged 50–64 work full-time in the UK, with this demographic significantly more likely to work part-time compared to men. While over-50s employment has hit record highs, women in this age group are three times more likely to work part-time (28%) than men (9%)

Be realistic - this expectation is for grandmothers not grandfathers.

You sound coldly transactional.