AIBU to think staying at home with children is undervalued?

[Amby99]

I’m not ignorant of the fact that staying at home isn’t financially possible or desirable for everyone, and I don’t think children who go to nursery are disadvantaged whatsoever . There are brilliant nurseries, brilliant working mums, and plenty of happy, healthy children being raised that way (and fulfilled and happy mothers)
However, I do wonder whether society (or the government) has become so focused on measuring “productivity” through paid employment that we’ve started to undervalue the work involved in raising a child.
Badenoch saying that the government doesn’t want to “punish working parents” in relation to childcare costs … it made me wonder why being a SAHM is so rarely viewed as valuable or productive in its own right.
Preparing my baby’s first solids, BF him, reading, playing, taking him outside, talking to him, letting him explore and generally being available. It feels like important work, yet because it isn’t paid it often seems invisible.
There are of course many advantages to nursery, and that work can be important for a mother’s identity, finances, career and mental health.
But why does the conversation seem to focus so heavily on encouraging parents back into paid employment, while choosing to provide that childcare yourself is rarely encouraged or valued in the same way? I’m not talking about mothers that sit at home all day feeding their child McDonald’s and claiming every benefit under the sun. I get why they may be encouraged back into the workforce and their children would be better off at nursery. BUT I’m sick of having to feel guilty of my choice to stay home. Every parent I know who was a parent in the 90’s stayed at home and it wasn’t so frowned upon.

I just think it should be seen as a worthwhile and valuable choice rather than something that needs to be justified because you’re “not working”.

You brought up guilt. You can't blame people for responding to it.

I don’t know. It’s a criticism of those that choose to stay at home but then whine that people who choose to work aren’t noticing their ‘sacrifice’ and aren’t agreeing that their way is the best.

No one way of bringing up kids is better than any other. Do what suits you and your budget and don’t let anyone make you feel guilty about your choice.

Of course it is.

''You'll never get that time back''
''Don't you miss them too much?''
''Why bother having children if you aren't going to raise them?''
and on and on....

Guess how many times I've heard those types of comments compared to my DH?

People keep mentioning 'sacrifices', but I don't feel like staying at home with my children was anything like a sacrifice. It was a joy, and I feel like most SAHMs of this thread have said the same?

The anger isn't directed at the choice itself. It's directed at the attitudes of some who make that choice.
On this thread we have been told that the children of SAHM recieve a better childhood and have better outcomes than those of working mums. And that this is a matter of such truth that we should be investing public money to pay those who make the choice.
So on one hand, working mums are doing something inferior, but on the other hand, we need them to keep doing it so their taxes can subsidise the mums who make the better choice.
Point out the lack of evidence, the lack of logic, fairness or reasonableness of these arguments, and the response is to assume victimhood "you don't respect us", attack "you prioritise money over your children" or suggest working mums have something to feel guilty about.
Is it any wonder that people get a little angry at the arrogance, entitlement and superiority on display here?

I agree.

Why is it a sacrifice to get to stay at home with your children?

Surely it’s something you get to do, rather than something you’ve had to do?

I don't really care about evidence, I just know my own children benefited noticeably from having me at home more than their peers with full time parents, and I think childcare should be more valued, but also ideally more parents should be able to choose to stay at home if they want to. I wouldn't have thought that that was a hugely hot take, but my own experiences got instantly picked apart and put under a microscope, when I didn't once do that to anyone else.

I do think a lot of the assumptions made around working are very classist/middle class focused, and never seem to take into account that a lot of people have fairly low paid jobs, not careers they need to be advancing.

Yes, I loved it, and I was very glad that we could manage it.

Because surely you accept that decision even being available to you makes you very much more privileged than the average mum?

Why would we praise privileged people and give less assistance to those who have to work to feed and house their children and use some government assistance to literally make the difference between making it through each month and not??

You're missing the point.

It isn't about whether or not you personally found it a joy or a sacrifice to SAH.

Nor is it about whether or not WOHMs feel guilty or not about going to work.

It is just irritating to see people presenting their personal lifestyle choices as choices that society ought to value as if their own particular approach to childcare is somehow superior.

It's great that you loved being a SAHP. I have friends who loved it too, and I'm happy for them. Nobody is bothered by that, but they will be bothered assumptions that they must feel guilty or that they aren't putting their kids' interests first etc.

The superiority goes both ways though.

I haven’t RTFT but have read enough threads like this one to know that there are usually lots of ‘I need to work my brain, me’ type comments on them from (some) people who look down their noses at women who stay at home🤷‍♀️

I stay at home (a child with additional needs in my case) and it’s really a thing. I often feel embarrassed to say I’m at home at this stage, especially as kids are teens now.

(I’ve just noticed I had to give my ‘excuse’ a sentence or two ago 😳 I don’t feel it’s fair on DS to keep telling people he has extra needs, yet I know if I do not I’ll be judged and judged harshly.)

I think all childcare should be valued more – both in nurseries, and at home.

I do wonder why my post roused such intense scrutiny when I literally just shared my own experiences, and said:
I think that governments who complain about women not having enough children, or those who complain about children not being ready when they start school, really need to understand that raising children is a job in itself, and value it through financial remuneration for active parenting, instead of expecting all parents to feel pressured to juggle work and parenting.

Now, you might think my above thoughts are misguided, but I'm not sure what there is to be personally offended by.

What am I exactly meant to feel guilty about? I love my children and I love my job. I have absolutely no guilt about working. In fact the time I have with my children i enjoy more and value more because I work.

I don't just work for a "scrap of material gain". I get enormous satisfaction from my work. I work with some of the most vulnerable people in society and know it makes a difference.

Thankfully it's 2026 and most have people have moved on that the best place for a woman is at home. Yes it's not perfect, but there has a never been a time when things have been but I'm grateful to be in a time now where I can balance work and be with my family. And thanks to flexible working so can my husband. My kids get the benefit of the presence of both parents rather than just the presence of one while the other carries the entire financial burden of supporting the family.

There seems to be a lot of anger from stay at home mums towards working mums. That we must feel guilty, or we're missing out on the "best years" or our kids are going to have attachment or behavioural issues or we won't be as close to our kids when the reality couldn't be further from the truth.

If that's a set-up your family thrives with, I think that's great! It doesn’t affect me in the slightest if parents both work full time, so why would I have any anger? It doesn’t make any sense.

That's what I did but did eventually go full time, in my forties.

Working part time with a small child was good.

My mother never went to work and I always wish she had :-).

It’s not anger at working mums, it’s disagreement at government for happily shelling out for babies as young as 9 months to begin spend 30 hours/week in a nursery as soon as SMP ends — giving many parents no options other than to return to work if nursery from that age if they don’t believe it’s the best thing for their own child.

Yes, I'm sure that some SAHM do feel judged and if people are going up to SAHMs and saying these things out of nowhere, then that's rude and disrespectful.
However, the comments today have been made in response to an OP specifically inviting opinions on her idea that we should value SAHM by paying them from public funds. Then she and others have proceeded to argue their cases by telling us how superior SAH is to working, and accuse anyone of not supporting them of being driven by greed, anger, guilt etc.
Agree with my (expensive, unfair and frankly daft) idea that benefits only me and others who've made my choice, or I will take it as a sign you feel guilty about your choices. That's not a good faith approach to discussion. It's manipulative.

You said your husband would have loved to have been a SAHP yet ended up working longer hours so clearly there's been some sacrifice if one parent is having to work longer hours and spend less time with their kids than they wanted to just because the other parent wanted to stay at home.

I don't find your post offensive if I accept it at face value. But in the wider context of the thread, there is an undercurrent to it which seems to somehow conflate "active parenting" and better school readiness with having a SAHP, which I do not find valid.

And yes, I think your suggestion is misguided. As a taxpayer, I am more than happy to see my taxes going towards things which actively support high quality parenting and child development, but I don't particularly want to fund other people's lifestyle choices when I don't perceive these to have any wider social benefit.

If you can’t afford not to work you can’t afford not to work.

I also think it’s bonkers there is a dichotomy between working parent and stay at home parent when almost every parent (mums let’s be honest) is doing some part time work somehow and the kid is in nursery or with care provider 1-3 days a week.

I was just talking about my experiences, and my experience is that active parenting benefitted my children more than their peers with full time working parents. Should I lie to avoid offending people? They all have their own experiences, and I'm not offended by those.

I also think that being a younger mum was beneficial to my children in certain regards – is that an offensive opinion to have too? We all have our different opinions, informed by firsthand experience.

You obviously do think it was a sacrifice. You constantly bring up how poor you were and the financial consequences.

I don’t know anyone who didn’t go back to work less than 4 days a week. Your career progressionnwould be on the back burner if you did.

No, he worked the same hours as he always did. He was just able to work longer hours than me and always had done, so earned more (aside from having a higher wage). If I'd been at work, he would've still had to work just the same, to keep his job. But here we go again, picking apart my choices in an attempt to find criticism, when I haven't done the same because it would be rude.