Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

I'm not against working Mums but this is going too far.

637 replies

Intefering · 25/06/2010 13:22

Name changed regular.

A friend of mine has 3 young children with a partner in the military. He is due to leave in 3 or 4 years time I think.

Said friend has told me that she will be re-joining the Navy when her youngest starts reception in 2 years time, several reasons why, money issues, she's worried that after 8 years being a SAHM she will be unemployable, she loves the Navy and nothing else career wise interests her.

AIBU to suggest that this is a ridiculous idea?! I doubt she's considered all the time away from her DC, how her DH will cope picking up the slack at home on his own. Yes she may have loved the Navy but that's behind her and she should concentrate on her responsibilities as a wife and mother.

I'm trying to advise her as her friend but I can't see past her incredible selfishness, how can she have all these kids just to abandon them? She's worried that in 18 years time when all the kids have left home she'll be in a miserable job having watched life pass her by, I really want to tell her that she should of thought of that before getting pregnant.

AIBU and if I am can someone tell me how this will work because I really can't see it.

OP posts:
Portofino · 26/06/2010 00:07

Me too. {grin}

My mum died when I was 4. I managed OK thanks. Children need concerned PEOPLE to look after them. Consistent, regular, concerned people is the optimum. Mothers, I am sad to say, ARE dispensable!

clam · 26/06/2010 00:12

Leave it, ladies. This must be a troll. If interfering really was a name-changing regular, then she'd know exactly what sort of response these sort of comments would get. "swanning off" for goodness' sake!

Loriycs · 26/06/2010 00:22

i didnt say she was leaving them thats your words.
I said children need there mums to be around, and im sure any widowed father would agree.

You can be PC all you like but you cant deny mother nature.

I guess this lady is not too maternal, not everyone is.

She doesnt have to be a stay at home mum, i couldnt manage that one either, but joining the the forces is another matter.

Well each to their own. What goes around comes around.

Quality · 26/06/2010 00:24

What goes around comes around?

That's unnecessary.

toccatanfudge · 26/06/2010 00:25

"Why have kids if you are then going to leave them to re join the navy? "

ermm - yes you did

and she's been a SAHM since she became a parent! Surely if she wasn't maternal she'd have found herself a job and pu the DC in childcare while her DH was still in the navy

Mind - having said that you can be perfectly maternal and still work.

justanuthermanicmumsday · 26/06/2010 00:28

i think you guys are being a bit harsh on this questioner.Steady on.

If her husband is going to care for the children whilst she is out working, then what's the issue? Ok so it may not be your ideal, but it's obviously hers. They will be with their father, not a complete stranger.

As for true friends not being judgemental, that would be a waste of a friend. To me a good friend would explain both sides of the coin, and then say you make the decision i may not agree with you, but you make the choice since you have to live with it.

Someone said why cant this woman have a life other than being a mother. Well i don't see why society at large seems to demean the role of a mother. It's as if a woman who says her job title is being a homemaker or mother is worthless unless she is in a paid job. Well i say stuff society, what kind of society are we making if both parents go out to work whilst strangers take care of our kids for most of the day. thats like 8 hrs spent with strangers and maybe 1-2 hrs before bed with the real parents.

Personally i also think children naturally want their mothers more it's a biological link. Scientific studies can prove this. But in this day and age it's not always possible, and even if it is not everyone views it that way.

Anyways in this case since the father will take care of the kids, i see no issue.

BaresarkBunny · 26/06/2010 00:29

Why do people seem to think that when you join the forces you spend every hour and every day away on tour/excercise?

toccatanfudge · 26/06/2010 00:29

a true friend wouldn't bitch about you behind your back on a public forum..............

toccatanfudge · 26/06/2010 00:30

because some people are ignorant Baresark

scottishmummy · 26/06/2010 00:37

i am happy to work ft and have children at nursery.thats my choice,the societal norm i chose to conform to (and all my colleagues and friends).and no amount oh heart felt bleating about why have em if you let strangers watch then resonates

solely motherhood,being mum doesnt fulfil me.at all.i would never chose it

working and being mum does fulfil me. i chose it

Portofino · 26/06/2010 00:45

I'm with you scottishmummy, only have to add the mention of the cold hard (necessary) casg that this provides...

Loriycs · 26/06/2010 00:51

to Quality...'why do you say what goes around comes around' is unnecessary , i think youve missed the point there or reading too much into things.
catch up tomorrow if i remember it, night all.

scottishmummy · 26/06/2010 00:58

cash is nice too portofino!work partially financial majority vocational.i chose to work.dp and i knew this was the deal

toccatanfudge · 26/06/2010 00:59

Loriycs - so do you still think you didn't say she was leaving?

TeenyTinyToria · 26/06/2010 01:00

Shiny - you said you don't understand how anyone can be happy in a career that takes them away from their family.

Well, I worked bloody hard to train as an actor, and just because I had ds quite unexpectedly doesn't mean that I'm going to jack in my career altogether. My job sometimes takes me away from my family for a week at a time, and sometimes I'm at home for months on end with no real work. I love my career, I am hugely ambitious and want to progress and be successful. I also love my children, and want them to be happy and well cared for. Why should I choose one or the other?

I find it bizarre that in this day and age, some people still think women should be full-time child carers. For some people, that alone is not fulfilling enough.

Quality · 26/06/2010 07:09

Loriycs, what did you mena by it? It was late last night and I was tired so if I misunderstood I apologise.

sarah293 · 26/06/2010 09:23

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

tortoiseonthehalfshell · 26/06/2010 09:32

I actually don't understand how people can choose careers that take them away from their families from long stretches of time either. But I don't have to understand it, since it's got owt all to do with me. And I only 'don't understand it' with reference to my own needs - I'm currently so utterly besotted with my daughter that I hate being home ten minutes late and I long for my days off with her. That's about me, not her.

And as I've said a million times on here, my husband and I delayed having children in order to set up a career path that meant he no longer had to travel; beforehand, he was in mining exploration and was away for 6 weeks at a time, and neither of us wanted to have a family if that much distance was involved. Our combined income is now about half of what he'd be earning alone if he'd kept that job, so we also had to delay children till we had saved enough to allow that paycut to happen. But we wanted to share childrearing, and we've made a lot of life decisions based around that one goal.

Again, that's us. You know what I've never thought of doing? Starting a thread to discuss how I can't get my head around all those families who choose one parent to SAH and one to work when clearly it's not as good as my set-up.

Because I can see that just because something works for me, doesn't make it a blanket rule. And I'm arrogant, but not arrogant enough to presume that I know What Is Best For All Children Always.

violethill · 26/06/2010 09:40

'You know what I've never thought of doing? Starting a thread to discuss how I can't get my head around all those families who choose one parent to SAH and one to work '

Well bloody said!! Sometimes with these long threads, where so many people get drawn in, it's easy to lose sight of what actually started it. If someone is genuinely happy with their choices and their situation, why the hell would they bother to start a thread niggling at anyone else's situation? It wouldn't occur to me to start a thread questioning why some parents choose not to work.

WidowWadman · 26/06/2010 09:41

"I said children need there mums to be around, and im sure any widowed father would agree"

Comparing a working mother with a dead one is blowing things ever so slightly out of proportion.

sarah293 · 26/06/2010 09:47

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

violethill · 26/06/2010 09:50

I also think you're spot on, tortoiseonthehalfshell, about recognising when something is fulfilling our needs, not necessarily our children's. I worked part time when my children were pre-school age. That was because I wanted to. I didn't want to work full time at that stage. I don't for a moment think it has made any difference to my children - if I had worked longer hours, or been at home all the time I'm sure they would be the same people they are now. DH worked full time pretty much all the way through, apart from a year or so when he was working flexibly, and it has made no difference to the children's relationship with him.

I wonder whether the nub of the issue is that for some women, they desperately want to see a measurable difference so that they can reassure themselves that those sacrifices they made - giving up a career, or resorting to low status jobs to fit around the children - have been 'worth it'? Maybe they need to believe their kids will pass more GCSEs, or be more capable in some way? Well, sorry to disappoint, but that won't happen! My eldest dd who is now an adult has a great relationship with us both, and chooses to spend time with us, so clearly having working parents hasn't had any negative effects, in fact if anything, it's perhaps made her take for granted that women have aspirations too. And in contrast, I know several young people who had a mother at home virtually the whole time they were growing up, who couldn't get away from home quick enough!!!

If you don't wish to pursue a career, then fine, but don't imagine it will make a difference to your children - they will do no better or worse than if you do!

sarah293 · 26/06/2010 09:57

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

posieparker · 26/06/2010 11:28

Quattro....."No doubt you will all flame me for being smug or something, but there is something missing or incomplete in women who identify themselves solely as being mothers."

Not going to flame you, just think that's a hideous and very revealing thing to post, says a lot about you. No wonder Claire Khaw's cronies thought out of of all Mumsnetters you were most likely to be her.

Besides this is not a normal, stay out of the dcs lives all the working week, job this is a go away for long stretches following full time being at home. Whether a mother or father was about to embark on such a dramatic change I think it's a poor decision. Not a selfish one but I can't imagine it working for any of them.

posieparker · 26/06/2010 11:39

Violethill......please don;'t say there's any difference and make a passive aggressive dig at SAHMs by saying their dcs couldn't wait to leave home. Whilst the outcomes for children are not so different for a child who has parents who are nearly always around and always around I am pretty sure a child's experience is shaped by their formative years and there will be differences for children who have one sahp and those that attend nursery 8-6pm, 5 days a week. It's pretty stupid to think there is no difference, maybe not better or worse but certainly different.