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.

Can't believe this is still going on.

It's fine to care what you are called. It's fine not to care what you are called. It's not fine to assume that what someone calls themself is a personal slur on you or you're parenting.

That was basically the premise of the OP. She was pissed off that a SAHM on TV referred to herself as a f/t mum because she took that to imply that the mum in question considered her (OP) to be something less than a f/t mum. That's surely just her own anxieties either about WOTH or about what others think of her because there was no evidence to suggest anything else.

last post in response to nkf BTW

Lol at not circus stuntman!
I am not Spartacus!

hehe, new trend call yourself what you are NOT...I am not an astronaut....

Thank you for the voice of reason duchesse.

As has been pointed out a million times before, there is no definitive evidence on whether staying home all the time/ not staying home all the time is good/bad for children. None. There are various different pieces of 'research' which often show conflicting outcomes. If you want to look at statistics, then I believe the most reliable ones show that there is a link between children doing better academically, having successful work lives and forming good relationships, and the economic well being of the family and whether the parents have remained together. In short, the better off a family is and if the parents don't split, the greater the likelihood of the children doing well. But as with any stats, there are so many variables that you need to judge your own situation independently. A child may well be better off with parents who separate than who continue to argue and stay together. etc.

As duchesse says, it's having the choice whihc is the key thing. If you have the choice to not work, then don't if you don't want to, but don't kid yourself it will make your children turn out any differently. And vice versa.

The reason these threads turn so emotive is I guess because a lot of people don't have a choice - they are trapped by being unable to afford good childcare so can't work, or trapped by not being able to afford to give up working.

So all of us lucky enough to have a choice should count our blessings. And stop talking about the nonsense of 'full time mums and dads'

That's where the OP came in. But the debate moved on. Perhaps she does feel anxious about her role. I think many mothers feel guilt about what they do or don't do regarding their children.

What this thread went on to reveal is that many people do feel that working mothers aren't full time mothers. The defence of the term does hint at a negative view of working mothers.

And worrying about your choices as a mother is not, to my mind, a sign of insecurity either. I think it's a sign of thoughtfulness and intelligence.

It is a pity, thedolly. I agree with you there.

maybe we should all namechange ...

nfk, whislt undoubtedly hurtful things have been said by either side....really....the term full time mum does not imply anything other than that the erson is a mum that does not do any other paid and unpaid work....and therefore it is, imo, still silly to be offended by it, as OP was...

Yep, and SAHMs insecure about their status and people looking down on them. Not nice either. And so goes another morning spent in forumland.

it is relevant lockets, because of the reasons outlined countless times above. The fact that a few weird people think that if you aren't at home all day, then you stop being a mum or dad. It's also relevant because actually the vast majority of parents are in paid employment, and therefore to keep some perspective in this debate, we need to remember that!

Fairlady, I see your point but the debate moved on as debates like this always do. To be honest, if it had stayed at the some woman on the lottery programme level, I wouldn't have posted. It's the feelings and prejudices that the post threw up that were interesting.

Oops, this is better.

what term would distinguish between all mums and those who are looking after their dcs in the daytime instead of paid work?

daytime pre school child carer?

sounds as if you don't do it at night time!

24 hr unpaid child care ~ giver in a parenting role and home setting?

sounds like a social services description!

lol....at IamNOTspartacus....

Why do you need to distinguish? If somone asks what do you work you can say "not in paid employment, at home looking after the kids". No need for this full-time muminess which becomes part-time at weekends when your DH is around etc.

oh, and nfk, maybe whenever we encounter such silly opinions that spread predjudice (sp?) we should just all think...."loon" and ignore...lol....although, not challenging it mihgt not be good neither.......

'but don't kid yourself it will make your children turn out any differently'

I know, I'll just give up my well paid job/commit career suicide to SAH and look after my kids but I'm sure it won't make any difference at all to how they turn out

cthea, because it is such a long way to say it, surely....like asking you to say , "I a -insert as appropriate here- as well as looking after my children which I then share with dh..."