to be annoyed at this new term of 'full time mum'

[blondie80]

i know i'm not being unreasonable.

a woman on that lottery 1-100 show on sat night referred to herself as a 'full time mum'

i take it she meant sahm instead.

i have no bones with anyone's choice as to what the do, sahm of wohm.

but... i was so annoyed i felt she was referring to wohm as - part timers??

does she forget that we do the same stuff as well as a full week at work!!

i was with my mother when we watched the show, and she has 4 dc who have left home, and says she is still a full time mum regardless.

ok rant over.

ah being ironic then lockets

"It really is ridiculous this idea that you might only be a full time parent if you don't work"

Just as ridiculous as the implication that if you are a "SAHM" you don't work.

Although not as ridiculous as the whole stupid argument.

not true that wohms 'do the same stuff' as sahm.

if you're not physically there for 8 plus hours a day you must employ someone else to do the things you would do if you were there.

surely your own paid employment demands that you focus on the job in hand when you are paid to be there? you can't be bandaging a grazed knee or breaking up fights at toddler group if you're in a meeting 15 miles away (for example)

i'm not doubting that you work your arse off both at home and at work by the way, its just that when you're at work, you're at work, not saying it's better or worse.

I did it the other way around though lockets! I almost went to work to pay the nursery!!

Seriously - day nursery fees for two kids took nearly all my salary, but I wanted a) my children to have the experience of a few hours per week at this particular nursery - and boy it was worth it! and b) to be able to keep my hand in with my career. It would actually be impossible to rank those two things in order of importance. It might seem like a detail, but actually it does lend another persepctive to this debate - because I categorically believed that my children had an enriching experience to be with me most of the time, but also with other adults and children. So it's not as simple as saying that working parents pay to enable them to go to work. I also know many parents who aren't in paid employment who use playgroups etc so presumably they are paying other people for reasons other than working themselves - usually the reason being that it's socially beneficial to the child.

Anyway, the important thing here is that you don't stop being a mum or dad while you do all these things - even if twopeople desperately wants us to!

Of course you are not spending your days in the same fashion. The dispute is whether paid employment makes you not a full time mother. Do you have to be there for every single waking minute? Or not? If you regularly take your kids to grandma for a day and spend the time relaxing, are you more of a working mother than someone who works one day a week?

More of a full time mother I mean.

i think what annoys SAHMs is the idea that 'full time parents in paid employment' actually work harder than those who don't work outside the home. i don't think they do; both are equally hard.

I thought they were annoyed by the lack of a pay cheque. I know I would be.

I think this is a really stupid argument anyway. What's the point of it?

I think the point is that we all get to sling around a few prejudices and polish our haloes and congratulate ourselves on having got it more right than other people while feeling a bit guilty. Another night on MN really.

lockets - My children went to nursery part time, yes. The nursery was so utterly fantastic, that I would have liked to send them there for a certain number of hours per week whether I'd worked or not. However, I couldn't have afforded it without working! And I was very keen to keep my hand in career-wise, so it kind of killed two birds with one stone.

So the point I'm making is - yes, the nursery did in reality provide care while I worked a certain amount of hours each week, but if I'd been stinking rich, I would have sent them even if I'd spent the time sitting at home! You see, this whole debate is far more complex than the OP thought it would be!

nkf - I think you have a point there!!

well it's not something you get into for the money nkf! i think the phrase is labour of love, but that's parenthood whether you 'work' or not.

the point is guilt, i think. whatever you choose, someone's going to think it's a bad choice/pointless/demeaning/selfish (delete as appropriate)

the think is though, that when someone says " I am a full time mum" they don't actually try to imply anything other than that they are mothering full time (as in a physical there sense)....they don't make a judgement at all...the judgement is a perceived judgmement by those that are in paid employment....

Oh, and whilst I still think lots about my Kids, etc....now that I am a full time student I simply don't have as much time to give them....yes, they will always be my priority, but I now have also other stuff to get on with....