AIBU to think SAHMs are lazy?

[Fluffyscrubberdo]

As a stay at home mum how often do you get this judgement online vs real life?
It seems no one really says it in real life but there seems to be so much vitriol on here that there must be a fair amount of people who think it.
Has anyone made a rude comment to you in person?
Or are you a person who think sahm’s are lazy?

AIBU to think sometimes a sahm is in a family’s best interest?

It's not about hoovering and housework.

Many jobs require you to be at work and prioritise working hours. In many jobs, travel is expected, over-time is not even "overtime", it's just flexibility around work commitment (which work both ways)

You cannot and will not be considered for the position if you miss breakfast meetings because you had to do the nursery drop off, if you refuse to be around later in the day because you have to pick-up from the child-minder. It will not be a positive that you stay at home randomly because your kids are too sick to go to their nursery or child-minder, or just stay home when they are old enough for school.

You can't be at work and taking your kids to clubs, to parties. There's only so many favours you can ask from friends.

You can't have days off everytime the school is closed, for holidays, for election days, because there's a burst pipe

Some jobs you can juggle more or less easily, a teacher cannot just drop everything and run to their own kids leaving the class alone and someone to take over. My friend who works security in a London airport couldn't manage without her husband working from home and her mother living next door, her shifts can start way too early to leave young kids alone.

It's very easy to pretend you can have kids and work as normal, but it's simply not true. Or not in every field. Some jobs are fine and flexible, no evening, no weekend, no travel.

There wouldn't be any SAH dads if it was always so easy to juggle everything.

But the examples you mention still have two working parents which is my point. My dad was an oil and gas executive with extensive travel. My mum was a principal teacher. Neither had to give up their job so the other could advance in their career.

I really dont want my children brought up to know that they if want to have children and a relationship, that it's only possible if one person works. That somehow an equal partnership is one person sacrificing their career and earning potential while the other person just carries on as before.

You have misunderstood my post, you seem to think ALL I have taught my children is how to do housework! My children do not think that is ALL a woman can do.
my daughters are 4 and 6 and they believe they can do and be whatever they choose and won’t need a man to do anything for them. The same way my single mother taught me.
it is an option, but not their only option in life. They also have women in their lives who are single parents, married parents, divorced parents, women who are in relationships who work full time, part time and not at all.

life is about options and choices and that is what I’m teaching my daughters. Which is exactly the same lessons I would have taught my children if they’d been born male!

You don’t really fhink this do you? Not really? You know single parents, dual career, all have successful careers without someone at home, right, all in the sort of jobs you list?

You work round each other, you have good child care, my husband and I made it work, when I travelled he was at home and vice Versa, we were able to do the majority of school drop offs and pick ups and when we couldn’t we had a fab child minder who did it for us, she then went to a private boarding school as a day pupil. So if we were late she could have breakfast or dinner there, wrap around care, even in state schools is now a thing.

no one needs a stay at home parent, as said, dual career, single parents, all able to do the sort of job requirements you list, with no issue.

I am not saying mothers who work do anything less than I do. People seem to keep missing that.

I have never claimed I do anything WOTH parents do or that it’s hard to be a SAHP. That is something working parents keep pointing out to me, when I am aware.

I have chosen not to work and just do the “domestic labour” side of life and parenting, as is my choice.

I generally think that people see other people's choices (e.g. to be a SAHM) as an implied criticism of their different choice (e.g. to stay at work. Or vice versa). So they feel defensive - and this is where the meanness can creep in.

My sister and I have DC the same age. We made different parenting choices. She would constantly pick away at what I chose to do, stressing that her way was better. And it was better- for her! Our choices were best for our family. Her choices were best for her family. She just couldn't see it that way. She definitely saw my choices as me saying 'your choices are WRONG' rather than the truth, which was 'your choices would not work FOR ME AND MY FAMILY because our situations are different'.

Why can’t team work be each person playing to their strengths? Rather than splitting everything to “prove” something?

I also don’t think most of the SAHMs on this thread have claimed it is a “noble profession” but that it is a choice we have made that suits our family.

most SAHMs don’t speak negatively about WOTHMs.

I think also for many it’s not really much of a choice to start with.

as we know the majority are working class women, often in low paid roles, so if it’s work and pay all your earnings in child care or stay home and do it yourself and not have to do the crappy job, the choice is a no brainer.

the issue is I think they then don’t wish to go back to work, when the kids go to school,and it becomes less favourable for the family and more for the parent who initially stopped.

and then often resentment creeps in. Defensiveness, making normal quick jobs major deals, like pretending dealing with finances is a major activity, or building up holidays and wrap around care as something no one can outsource.

up thread someone went on about jobs with anti social hours, like no one could do these jobs unless childless or with a parent at home, utter nonsense of course, but it’s a form of defensiveness.

i also see it a lot on the inevitable divorce threads, women claiming their ed husband was only successful as they stayed home, again utter nonsense, but it’s a form of defensiveness and personal justification for life choices.

I haven’t RTFT but I’ve just gone back to work after mat leave spent with 3 and 1 year old kids (no nursery for the either), and I couldn’t wait to get back to work! A day at work is significantly easier than a day looking after two toddlers while simultaneously trying to do all the cleaning, cooking, laundry etc.

My colleagues have never thrown up on me, made me cry, screamed at me for attention etc. Work feels like a break tbh.

That said, I imagine being a SAHM is significantly less taxing when all the kids are in school.

The girls didn’t want to repilicate it at all. So yes they modelled inequality, but it certainly wasn’t seen as enviable

This is a really interesting point. For the first time, young men are more interested in getting married and having families than young women. And some people speculate it is because men looked at their mum taking care of their dad and said 'I want that!' . While women looked at the same dynamic and said that 'sod this!'

It's not about what you have taught them. It's about what you're modelling to them. Of course you've taught them alls orts of things, you've had all the time in the world to! What you're modelling is something completely different and saying they see other people do other things and know they have choices doesn't come close to touching the real truth that we all know and is scientifically proven in study after study, children grow up to emulated the relationships they saw modelled at home as children most of the time. It's why children who witness their mother being disrespected grow up to marry a lazy husband who doesn't respect her, it's why sons who see their dad's treat their mothers like shit usually end up divorced or with a downtrodden wife, it's why divorce is more common in children of divorced parents and children who see healthy relationships modelled have healthy relationships and respect their own self worth. It's why it has been proven, in several studies that daughters who have working mothers achieve more highly because they have hard work, ambition and juggling work and children modelled to them and sons of working mothers are found time and again by several studies to have more equal relationships because they grew up with true equality where mum and dad both do everything modelled to them. These outcomes which are well researched and documented prove that knowing what the choices are doesn't stand up to what is actually modelled to children most of the time. SAHMs are more likely to have SAHM daughters. It's a simple fact that cannot be disputed and is proof of the subconscious power of modelling. So no, actually, I don't think your kids are as free to choose and as you think they are just because they know other women have careers.

It's an individual choice and I agree people do works for them. But personally for me, true partnership is us both working and both earning and both contributing to the financial and physical upkeep of the house and home.

We both live here, we both chose to have children. It isn't about "proving anything". It's about us both showing up for our children when they are ill. Both being involved in their education by doing drop offs, parents evening. That we both value and take pride in where we live by making sure it's clean and tidy. It's about showing our children, we chose to have them and that both their mum and dad are prepared to make sacrifices for them and they are the most important things to us. Not that it's just one parent doing all the sacrificing and grunt work while the other carries on with their life and career as before.

That's my choice for our family. Yours is different which is of course fine. And I've seen MANY comments from SAHM parents towards working mums on here. Usually along the lines of why bother having kids if we dont want to spend time with them, how using a nursery is an institution etc etc.

I mention ONE example where dad worked from home, many can't, where they have a grand-mother doing child-care and can't afford not to work (but have no childcare to pay)

There are many jobs where you cannot do the same job with kids. You just can't, and what you can do wouldn't be fair on the kids if your partner wasn't around to pick up the slack.

It's great to be a principal teacher, but practically, how does it work when you have to leave work to pick up one of your sick kid, how does it work when you have to stay at home? Some schools are understanding but only to a point?

And maybe, some parent do NOT want to miss sports day etc. They could, but they don't want to?

If you want kids, you make a choice. You can't carry on as before.

I have no judgement either way, just saying in reality it's not possible to keep your career the way it was pre-kids. Not for everybody.

Slightly off-topic but is there a reason you persist in using the word "pretend" when you mean "claim"?

*edited to say that actually you aren't the only one on this thread. I find it an odd expression though, reminiscent of children's make-believe, but perhaps I'm just not 'down with the kids'.

I'm not quite sure I get your point. I completely agree with your point that if you want kids you can't carry on as before. But does this only apply to women then? Why are all the husbands of stay at home mums then just carrying on as before completely unable to make any sacrifices for their kids.

And most kids are not off sick constantly like its been described on here as if its some catastrophic impact on your career. Even in nursery years, me and my husband have managed this with little impact on our careers. And as they get older, the time they are off is fewer and fewer. I have single parents who are teachers who have managed. My mum did.

Its hard if you havent any flexibility. Endless school days off, in service days, ortho apts. My daughter had a 7 wk block of speech therapy. So that wouldnt work at all doing full time and time off. I guess if family are helping with childcare its prob alot easier.

I get their point. Marriage protects you in terms of a divorce but there's no actual protection via marriage for people reliant on their partner's income before a divorce.

Also, possibly because English not being my first language, I do come up with weird or slightly wrong expressions. I haven't really mastered the language just yet. It's possible I never will 😂

I also think that at being a SAHP might work for some families but what are the back up plans for when it suddenly doesn't work. What happens if the sahp becomes seriously ill with a long term illness, or has an accident that results in serious injury or god forbid dies. Who runs the household then or takes care of the children? And vice versa too, what if the earning parent is suddenly thrust into a position where they can't work. What happens then?

Funny, have you ever considered that modelling behaviour can make children want the opposite from what they see?

I saw my DM be a single (completely solo) parent until she remarried when I was 18, she had 2 marriages and 2 subsequent divorces. That showed me what I didn’t want in a relationship around my child/ren.

I wanted and have children to be brought up in a loving home with 2 parents who are equal in their input to their children’s lives, regardless of what you seem to think

Of course I've considered that 🙄 it is, demonstrably, the minority though.

Copying what was modelled to them as children, in adulthood, is what happens most of the time. Its well documented in research so stop trying to act like parental modelling of equality and relationships doesn't matter and everyone just has free choice. If it were true it wouldn't matter what you do as a parent because your children would just choose the outcome they want for their lives regardless of what you did making any effort pointless in the first place. No one just doesn't bother trying to model the best way to do things to their kids because they'll just choose what they want regardless do they? Stop pretending it has no impact, it's dishonest.

In our family, my DH would be more than capable of looking after all the household tasks and children if I was rendered incapable. And in fact, he does if I go away with friends. I am not one of those wives who comes home to a home like a war zone, laundry not done, unclean children, etc.

our financial position is that if DH couldn’t work, we would be ok for a substantial amount of time. And while I could find a job, it wouldn’t cover our outgoings, but we wouldn’t need it to

There is way too much scaremongering about these types of scenarios.

If I were seriously ill- DH would do the school run & pay for ASC.

If I died- we stayed in our first home and planned carefully for this (we both lost a parent as children ourselves, so we never take our lives for granted). My DH would instantly drop to 3 days and again, utilise wraparound care. We ensured he could afford to do this by not taking on a bigger home/over extending ourselves generally.

If he died- I would return to 5 day school hour work at my children’s school (I actually have an open, serious job offer there from their HT). My mum was SAHM for 17 years and found work easily when she needed to return.

I actually think we are in a way better position financially than couples we know who both work but have taken on bigger mortgages, car loans and credit card debt. We own our car outright, have paid off our house and have zero debt.

How many dual income couples could genuinely stay living in their current home with their current lifestyle exactly as it is if one of them left?

You take out insurance. With each of our dc we took out insurance for 18y. Dh had a combination of life insurance and critical illness insurance privately and through his employer, I had critical illness insurance.

More problematic is if the SAHP finds that she hates it, or that all domestic tasks devolve to her.

As with everything, it comes down to the personality of the person. If someone is lazy they will be idle and do the bare minimum, someone who puts everything into it isn't.

I think the debate you're implying is more about being a sahm when DC are at school?

I would say life would be easier for a sahp in many ways; no morning rush to nursery then to pick up after work, but on the other hand it can be a very tough gig with LOs 24/7.

I found PT was best of both worlds, getting to be with DC and doi g activities with them on days off, makes you value your time with them more.