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”.

Where I asked if she was okay and if she needed a little break after she told me what I could and couldn't do? That's a bit extreme, do they even review what's actually reported?

This is the thing. Either we value the unpaid work itself - regardless of which hours it happens - or we don’t. Not sure why BF and taking your child outside is more valuable between 9-5 than between 5-8 🤷🏼‍♀️ -
acknowledging of course the childcare element, and the development stuff some sahps do (I’d hazard a guess not all). But that’s not the stuff OP lists as valuable.

I don’t know any stay at home parents. Myself, my colleagues, friends and family members all returned to full time work after maternity leave (six months in place - standard at the time). I didn’t go to any baby groups so didn’t meet any new parents who may have decided to stay at home.
If it wasn’t for Mn, it’s not something I would ever think about.

Why ask me? I went to quote and it was deleted.

I was genuinely asking you to quote so thanks for looking.

I see her comment to me was also deleted... bizarre.

No, I didn't. I told you not to bother (because there was no point, as I see no point in engaging with you on the topic). Obviously you can do whatever you like, but it's a waste of your time. Hope that clears it up.

(Additionally, I didn't report you, just FYI.)

As I said much much earlier on this thread, the thing which should be valued is raising happy, well adjusted children to become positive citizens with good values. Which can be done whether parents stay at home or not.

so perhaps we should give a metaphorical medal to all parents who do that - mums and dads.

I suspect though, that one or two posters on here would still want a bigger medal 😂

The big difference that I think always gets lost in these discussions is that, historically, the children of the working classes with working parents were also usually working themselves.
We have developed this odd, rose-tinted view of what 'the village' looked like.
Children were much more a part of the community from a much younger age. They weren't 'looked after' in the way we envision now, with all the focus on them and their development.
They were doing chores, fetching and carrying for neighbours, being useful, often helping with piecework women did for money at home. Nobody was concerned about what was 'developmentally appropriate', nobody had heard of the pre frontal cortex that isn't fully developed until mid-twenties, yada yada.

Children were expected (and needed)to be useful as soon as they physically could be, and in employment as young as they could be.

Baffles me really that some people think our kids are so hard done by in nursery, to be honest.

But I am sure that not every Mum would choose to stay at home, I was a child in the 1970s and had several friends whose Mums worked.

Thank you for clarifying and I will continue engage as I please as it's an open platform.

No worries, about the reporting, I didn't report yours either.

Wishing you a pleasant day!

See that was nice. Why waste it by your last sentence?

I was referencing the whole point of the thread: the OP wanted extra validation for parents who don’t work…

These kinds of threads come up quite frequently and I never understand what the posters are looking for.

Presumably it IS valued by the individuals and families concerned, which is why you’re doing it. Who else needs to value it? It isn’t relevant or of benefit to anyone else, so why would they ascribe value to it?

Just do what works for your family.

Okay. That's a rather different take than the original post I replied to. 'Bringing up' has a more holistic meaning than you now seem to be suggesting you meant. It's the whole process from birth to adulthood, not whether you were available for a few hours extra each week. Yes, children may experience a different style of caregiving during the hours they are in daycare in comparison to the hours they are with their parent. I would suggest 'nurturing' is a qualitative experience, not a quantitative one though.

'Cooking from scratch' does perhaps imply a particular style of parenting (wholesome, nurturing) but one which is entirely unrelated to whether parents work or SAH. In that sense, I'm not sure it was an entirely uncontroversial phrase to use. It is certainly debatable whether SAHPs are genuinely cooking from scratch any more than working parents.

It's very petty. I don't want nor need a medal. In fact, that's never been what I've been trying to say on this thread, and I don't think that's what you've been saying either! I think both of us have mostly talked about how it would be great if parents could make those kinds of decisions without financial pressure pushing them into choices they don't want to make?

Eta: And I think that's what most people have wanted? More freedom to choose? Not validation.

She didn't want EXTRA validation.

Exactly. The OP was about SAH being ‘undervalued’. If a SAHP genuinely feels that, I would wonder a) why they don’t value what they’re doing and b) whether their partner doesn’t value it.

What millions of other families do isn’t relevant.

Exactly.

@ObelixtheGaul

The big difference that I think always gets lost in these discussions is that, historically, the children of the working classes with working parents were also usually working themselves.
We have developed this odd, rose-tinted view of what 'the village' looked like.
Children were much more a part of the community from a much younger age. They weren't 'looked after' in the way we envision now, with all the focus on them and their development.
They were doing chores, fetching and carrying for neighbours, being useful, often helping with piecework women did for money at home. Nobody was concerned about what was 'developmentally appropriate', nobody had heard of the pre frontal cortex that isn't fully developed until mid-twenties, yada yada.
Children were expected (and needed)to be useful as soon as they physically could be, and in employment as young as they could be.
Baffles me really that some people think our kids are so hard done by in nursery, to be honest.

I mean, it's not a perfect analogy and I don't think I would want Victorian or pre-Victorian childcare standards to be a benchmark for how we should be raising children today.

But I agree with you that this preciousness about children having to be with mum all the time in a sanitised environment where there are no intrusions from anyone outside the family and a parent's attention is never distracted from her children is unachievable and probably not even that beneficial.

I've said this many times before but there is no credible evidence for the damage that childcare supposedly does to children, despite many many efforts over the years to find it. The vast majority of the "benefits" of remaining at home beyond about 18 months accrue to the mother as opposed to the child, and those wash out over a few years anyway.

It's definitely more pleasant and less stressful not to be charging around going to childcare, onto an office then back again etc. I can't blame anyone for wanting to avoid that if they can. But the long-term benefits to both the mother and the child or having a working mother in my view far exceed the marginal benefits of having a few extra years going to baby groups and walking around the park.

"But I agree with you that this preciousness about children having to be with mum all the time in a sanitised environment where there are no intrusions from anyone outside the family and a parent's attention is never distracted from her children is unachievable and probably not even that beneficial."

I can't remember anyone saying this.

Why do you need to do so much prep the evening before when you are at home with the children? Surely cleaning, laundry, tidying etc can all just be done as you go through the day with the children helping?
When i was at home with a 1yr old and a 3yr old by 7pm in the evening i was sat on the sofa chilling and i generally also got 2 hours to myself from 1-3pm while they napped in which i could usually spend 1hr of it prepping for dinner later + doing a bit of tidying up, then have a 1hr lunch break to myself watching tv, scrolling my phone, doing a home workout, chatting to a friend /my mum on the phone. Days at home with young children arent always super intensive and full on?!
Now working full time we manage to do all the cooking/cleaning/laundry etc around our jobs, its not that bad if you just do little and often and get the kids to pitch in.

Yes, in fact she repeatedly praised working mothers, and nurseries...but also expressed that she was made to feel guilty for staying home with her child, that society seems to see doing so as worthless, and she would like it if it wasn't seen as something valueless that needed to be justified.

That's not wanting extra validation, that's expressing a feeling of being negatively judged, and wanting not to be.

Yep.

And the vast majority of us have replied ‘great, enjoy being a SAHP, that’s clearly what works for your family.’ Why is that not enough, that she’s doing what she has chosen? 🤷‍♀️

I disagree with this. In my opinion, what's happened (as happens with a lot of threads on here) is that parents who work full time and use childcare (nurseries in particular) have taken her OP as a personal slight.

She didn't criticise parents who work.