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”.

Why should they be subsidised at the extent of the tax payer especially when there is no indication by any measurable metric that children of SAHM turn out better? If the mother staying at home full time was the biggest factor in shaping a child's development, then you'd expect their children to turn out 3x better, brighter and well adjusted considering that they are with them 12 hours a day vs the 4 hours a day of working mothers. But they are not 3x better. They're exactly the same on a population level. Almost like it is the quality of the parent and parenting itself that determine what the child turns out like rather than if their mother worked or didn't work.

And it's ridiculous that some people on here are criticising working mothers for prioritising "material gains" or being "materialistic" over thinking of their child. As if making enough money to be financially independent, put a roof over their kids head, being able to leave an abusive marriage and not be destitute, putting food on the table or being able to fix the car or boiler if it breaks or being able to help their child out with medical bills, a house deposit, music lessons, sports opportunities, travel etc. is akin to wanting to work so they can afford to eat bonbons out of their designer handbag.

Why should working mothers and fathers paying tax subsidise SAHM's so they can be paid something akin to a salary for staying at home? Besides, I thought that "having a child was it's own reward"?

I never knew that SAHP’s children went elsewhere for half the day.

See I can’t separate free childcare for working parents from paying the equivalent to SAHP.

It's because it's Women's Money (TM) so we want to earn it for inherently materialistic and frivolous reasons. And don't get me started on those awful shrews who actually prefer working for their own personal fulfilment!

Whereas when men go out and earn the exact same money , they're being Providers. Something to do with the cavemen, I think.

I find it bizarre that some people think a child who goes to childcare/nursery are being raised by said place and not their parents.

The obvious difference is that subsidising childcare supports employment and creates employment. Paying parents to stay at home doesn't. It isn't the same thing.

One thing helps economically and the other doesn't.

But we have a problem with neets? Maybe we could sort that by freeing up jobs for them?

Probably therein lies the problem. It's about money.

Thats not how jobs work.
And if it was, how would swapping around who is unemployed help?

Why should the government and tax payers fund a person's choice to have a child and be a SAHP?

Duh. Other people's money at that. It doesn't grow on trees you know

People who want to be with their children aren't "unemployed" , because they don't claim unemployment benefits. They just stay at home because they have children.

They also don't claim free childcare.

It also helps to ensure that people are in employment paying taxes, something I've absolutely no issue with it. I'm happy to work, contribute

I'm not quite sure how we're to fund a tax to enable people to stay at home if we're therefore taking more people out of paying said tax.

I really don't care what decisions people make. We're all mums raising the our children whether we work or not. The idea that one group should be "valued" more by society is ridiculous. Working mums are paid because they are valued more by society as mums. We're paid because we're working paid employment. Which being a stay at home parent is not.

I partly agree. I think raising kids well is difficult but definitely worth while. I also think you should keep your foot in the door and try and work part time although I know its not always that simple for some.

I focus on me and mine and I feel like it's a good balance!

Ok. I have never claimed free childcare. It's other people's money.

I was responding directly to your comment about paying people to stay at home. Goodness me.

Goodness me indeed. The Government pay for childcare. It shouldn't matter who provides it.

It does matter who provides it, for all the reasons that have been explained to you by multiple people.

I can't speak for this poster. Personally I find the comments referred to above along the lines of "why bother having children if you don't want to look after them?" or "You'll never get the time back!" (always with an imagined breezy smile) not offensive exactly but very upsetting.

I find it breathtaking that people cannot conceive that there are millions of women who don't have the choice to take years off without work and whose children depend on them for food and shelter.

I'm very relaxed about people discussing the virtues and vices of raising children vs using childcare but the idea that people would seek moral or ethical superiority over other people with less choice than them seems both stupid and vindictive to me.

But it does because of economics.

It isn't exactly about money. It's about individual benefit vs societal benefit.

If there was clear evidence of better outcomes for children with SAHPs, then there would be a valid argument to support parents to choose that option,, and that would need to be weighed against the likely economic impact.

As the evidence shows that it doesn't really make any difference to the outcomes for children if their parents SAH or WOH, then it simply comes down to the economic impact alone.

There will be never be free childcare so that’s not something you need to worry about.

I returned to work nine months after DD1 was born. I found out I was expecting DD2 the week before I returned. I worked until a week before DD2 arrived and in the nine months I was back in the workplace I had no work/life balance. I was permanently exhausted (not just from pregnancy), constantly overstretched, and trying to manage what felt like two full time roles. I always felt I was letting down DD or my employer. And I had a SAHH! After DD2 arrived I decided to take a five year career break until they were both in school. I felt no guilt whatsoever. I didn’t care if anyone valued my decision or not … it was right for me and my DDs. I enjoyed it so much, I decided to home educate and never returned to my previous career. I mourned the loss of it for sure but I divorced the SAHD, worked around my DDs and never regretted a moment I spent with them … enjoy your time with your DC and fuck what anyone else thinks!

👋👋👋