To suggest that a new mum who "has" to go back to work, reluctantly, after maternity leave, could down-size from her five-bedroom house and thereby afford to stay at home?

[Twoddle]

I have a good friend who really does have to go back to work when her maternity leave ends later this month. She and her husband genuinely can't afford to live without both their salaries so, as much as she'd like to stay home longer, she can't.

Another friend's sister, however, was pulling the "It's all right for some mums, hanging around at home all day - some of us have to go back to work" line. Knowing that she lives in a four-bedroom house and is having a loft conversion and buys everything new for the home and for the soon-to-arrive baby and has a bit of a clothes-buying habit ... well, I tactfully and carefully suggested to my friend that maybe her sister didn't have to return to work so soon if it was important for her to be at home for longer with her child. I said she could downsize to a smaller home, maybe cut back on some spending, and then be able to afford to extend her maternity leave - if she so wished.

Said friend warned me through a steely glare never to say such words to her sister, and the atmosphere was abysmal between us for the rest of the evening.

Was my suggestion so unreasonable, in the circumstances?

Silly me for playing devil's advocate ...

...I'm with Unquiet Dad's sentiment.
How far do you go down the downsizing department for it to be acceptable to you that she REALLY needs to go to work?
The whole "poor me" line that she's pulling could easily have been taken out of context (could very well be tongue and cheek) - i actually know of no working woman who thinks stay at home mums "hang around at home all day"

YANBU to think it, but you shouldn't have said it.

On your reasoning none of us can say "poor me, I have to go back to work". We could all claim benefits as mothers of young kids and sacrfice all luxuries that benefits can't afford.

Workers often think stay-at-homes have it easy, stay-at-homes often think workers have it easy. The only people qualified to comment with authority are those who've done both. And I mean recently.

Re: "downsizing to a smaller home"

In the current climate, that's a ridiculous suggestion really, assuming she's a home-owner.

a) downsizers are one of the key losers in the current housing slump
b) moving costs money, a lot - stamp duty and removals alone could easily cost 10k
c) mortgage deals at the moment are horrendous - they could move to a smaller home and still be paying a comparable mortgage to what they do at the moment.

Perhaps your suggestion was met with a steely glare because it is rather stupid?

Good points auntie, esp (c)

nah the crux is to me that friend's sister was rude and deserves to be shot down with a response

the OP did not say to the pregnant woman 'you should think of downsizing'

the OP said to a pontificating relative who was doing the whole 'poor her' skit that she could if she wished consider her choices and possibly not have to return to work if she didn't wish to.

That's a bit of an assumption in itself, UQD - what about stay at home mums who think workers have it hard (and is one of the reasons I stay at home, come to that!). I know I'm lucky, I know we've made lots of sacrifices as a family to choose this lifestyle. I don't expect everyone else to make the same choices or want the same things out of life.

Still is bloody annoying when someone "pronounces" thinks like that in a way that is clearly designed to pass judgement.

This isn't WOHM vs SAHM, this is "people who just get on with whatever they choose" vs. "complete utter tosspot"

Some people genuinely have to go back to work. They have no choice. And no-one should judge that.

However, I do think that there is this section of society who feel they shouldn't have to compromise, or sacrifice, when a child arrives. But rather than being upfront about it they choose to play on peoples' sympathies and claim they have no choice but to go back to work, when in actual fact with a bit of sacrifice they could maybe afford not to go back, or to work less hours. I think this is very patronising to those people who genuinely have no choice but to go back to work following the birth of a baby.

My sister is one of these. She constantly cries poverty and says she has no choice but to work all the hours god sends. And yet she seemingly can afford to pay out £120 a month for jym membership, plus extra for tennis/swimming/martial arts lessons for the kids, and other lessons for her/her dh. They run two cars and have just bought a 4 bedroom house. And until her ds1 went to school she was paying out nearly £1000 in nursery fees. And no they are not in debt.

Now if she wants to live that lifestyle that's up to her. But if she didn't want to work there are a lot of cutbacks she could make in order to save money which would mean she maybe didn't have to work as many hours.

But she chooses not to. She is not forced to pay out all that money, it is a choice.

good points Auntie that downsizing isn't really practical in current economic conditions. The comments about SAHMs were rather rude, so I have a lot of sympathy for twig's POV.

Agree with motherinferior about the guilt thing.

I find it's "socially unacceptable" for mothers to say they don't want to stay at home.

Lots of people said "poor you", "bet you wish you were at home" etc. when I went back to work both times after the DS (at 3mths).

I am NOT prepared to give up a job I love and make the financial sacrifice.

but I find myself saying "I had no choice" because that's what people want to hear.

[mentally prepares herself to be more militant and less concerned about what people think in the future]

OK, that was a very general comment based on some of the arguments I have seen on here!

I think sometimes not everyone is in a position to do as they wish. Even those who appear to "have a lot".

She's pregnant with her first child - she hasn't got a clue what being at home with a child entails. Therefore argument is pointless because I'm sure she won't make that sort of comment once she actually knows what it does involve.

[hides after icecreamsoda's post]

I don't have membership of a gym, honest, I make do with a weekly step class in the village hall

Ah good point, Weegle - hadn't spotted that. Best to write it off as pre-parental prattery

I think I am a bit chippy about this because of the kind of comments my mother sometimes makes about "cutting back" - implying DW could give up work if we:

• sold the washing-machine
• sold the dishwasher
• didn't have a car
• didn't have a computer
• or a phone
• didn't go "jetting off" to see friends for weekends

i.e. lived like she did in the 1950s...

lol UQD I can sympathise with that. My mum starts off on a "the youth of today never have to WAIT for anything". Because we bought a new camera. That we'd saved up for 2 years to buy. When she'd just come back from a South American cruise that she'd decided at the last minute to go on

Can't believe I am posting on this thread but here goes.

Ime we should all mind our own business (usually). I work, I have one very rude friend, well more a friend of a friend who happens to be a SAHM. She makes lots of comments about why I work how I can bear to leave my dds, how much I actually earn after childcare (i.e.does it make it worth if financially) etc etc.

Ultimately she doesn't seem a very happy woman (and this has nothing to do with whether I work, she works or no one works!

Actually RubberDuck's last post put it better in her last line. I wish I had thought of that first.

We could all do more (well, less in this case IYSWIM) if we cut back, but at what expense? Sell a car to afford X, Y or Z, downsize the house... it would be like all the hard work they have done already was for nothing. Esp. when it comes to their home. We are struggling ATM with a £250 increase in mortgage, we could easily sell up and get a council house but that's just not how life works. If I had a lovely home for my children, but had to work then i'd do it (apart from not being able to work, but if I could...).

Yes - what MI said.

It often seems / feels unnaccceptable for women to be able to say 'I'm going back to work, want to keep my career going, have sorted excellent child-care for baby, and am prepared to run mysel ragged with a schedule that also ensures lots of quality time with child, byeee', and unfortunately your proffered opinion about 'her baby needs her, she is prioritising lifestyl ove poor neglected child' line will have exacerbated this - hence 'keep back' warning signs.

You inadvertendly walked into a minefield. best to keep shtumm in these maters unless your opnion is actually sought.

UQD you have a washing machine?? How extravagant!

I agree 100 % with Twiglett. It is bloody rude to go on about 'people hanging about at home all day' when referring to SAHMs and 'it's alright for some'. No wonder the OP was pissed off.
Of course the woman has the perfect right to go back to work and spend her dosh on whatever she likes. She doesn't have the right to pull the poor me stunt and at the same time be rude about other people.

Did Twoddle proffer that line Blu? Have I missed a post?

Totally agree about keeping schtum though.

but sometimes it's the little things that make the diference.

Dsis could join the cheaper jym down the road. It would cost her only £70 so she would save £50 a month plus all the money she was shelling out on lessons etc. But she won't join the cheaper jym because she's a snob and thinks the people who belong to it are beneath her.

She could give up one of her cars. She and BIL work for the same company so there really is no need for both of them to drive to work and leave their two cars in the carpark.

I don't think people should have to go without luxuries. But you don't have to have luxury at the top end of the scale in order to enjoy it.