Are stay at home mums “unemployed”

[Protectmydaughter]

I only ask as my daughter is getting divorced and her husband’s lawyer has referred to her as unemployed rather than acknowledge her homemaking role; this feels so belittling. Are we being over sensitive? What do others think?

Brilliantly put.

It's definitely news to me that I don't feed my DC. My bank balance doesn't agree.

Please point to exactly where I said all of that - rather than something you just made up.

In many cases , with a lot of grandparent help. At least with people I knew.

I didn't have that .

Technically yes, but ‘unemployed’ refers more to those who are in between jobs and actively job hunting. Those who don’t have children and those who already have childcare in place ready to go.

Not at all, being a working mother is not financially advantageous for the woman in a divorce. She gets a lower award because she can fully or partially support herself and the dcs.

It is not about respecting or disrespecting. That is a complete red herring.

This is not Judge Judy, but a family court.

Exactly. My children are adults now but they don’t look like DH or I forgot to feed them while we were working. The eldest 2 have Masters and well paying jobs, so I don’t think we forgot to school them either

Mine aren't at school yet. Remind me in a few years that in needs to happen, yeah?

You’ve made this about working mothers, when it is not - at the crux of this thread of a husband fundamentally disrespecting his own wife, the mother of his children’s years of hard work which she has personally undertaken and not delegated, which no doubt he agreed with and has benefitted from? Why all the determination to label her as ‘unemployed’ instead of focusing on calling out his blatant disrespect?

You come across like you only think people who earn money are entitled to have power/are worthy of societal respect.

They have contributed 50:50 and deserve 50:50. If you disagree, then you are sexist and a misogynist.

True, but legal definitions don’t always match economics definitions.

The economically inactive category of the unemployed came about purely so that economists could calculate the unemployment rate in a way that looks better.

Well in my case I had 2 young dc - 2 under 2, no grandparental help. One dc was ill all the time. Dh wouldn't take time off work as he was self employed (and earned more).

Working whilst the dc were v young would have been almost impossible in my situation.

More offerings from your imagination.

We’ll have to agree to disagree.

That is very interesting, I didn’t know they had done that, but sadly unsurprising. Our society thinks our only value as human being is our economic value. Very depressing.

Similar circumstances here - but we managed to “feed and school” our children like every other working parent does.

Here too. Though like I said, they aren't school age yet but I'm fairly confident we'll remember to send them to school.

I have 3 under 3.

As I said it was mainly the high levels of illness that caused the problems. Not many employers are that understanding if you need to have constant time off.

But feel free to keep wheeling out the sarcasm. 🙄

It's clear that no one has implied that you would forget to send your children to school, just that if you are working full time you will not be available to drop them off at 8.45am and pick up at 3pm so someone else must be doing this. If they are pre school and you are working full time , you are not doing childcare all day so someone else must be doing this. So you are NOT doing all a SAHM does.

The post I am responding to is “Assuming she's supported him by being at home, enabling him to progress in his career. Ensuring kids are fed, schooled, etc etc”

How exactly do you think parents who work manage to do these things for their DC, or progress in their careers?

DH and I will flex our hours around each other just as we do with nursery which means one of us will always be able to do drop off and pick ups.

I wouldn't bother, they are too busy congratulating themselves on their super human ability to work full time and parent full time to listen to reason.

Of course there are women for whom being a SAHM makes sense. And it's a worthwhile job.

It mystifies me that we've persuaded ourselves that working for some management consultant or an insurance broker is SO MUCH better than looking after our babies. To the extent we would attack and denigrate women who make the opposite choice.

Victory of capitalism.

Not at all - I am simply replying to the post I have quoted word for word. I wasn’t aware that feeding your DC or sending them to school is considered super human.

Yep, and in addition to the 15 school runs per week, the school emailing constantly inviting you in… I am within the next few weeks attending a sharing school work session, Reception induction meeting, 2 different Sports Days going on all morning, on different mornings, 2 different music concerts…all at either 9.30am or 2.30pm…perhaps this is what his ‘unemployed’ wife was busy doing who he is now disrespecting so much eh?

Thank you for recognising what she has been doing instead of pretending this type of contribution doesn’t exist 😊

Agreed. These days many parents WFH anyway and are able to do the school run.

But some people have proper professions which actually involve working outside the hours of 8-3.

Yep. I WFH 99% of the time.