SAHM or private school for DC(s)

[Gatorade]

I have a 4 month old DD and I am starting to think about what I want to do in relation to going back to work and future school options (these decisions appear to linked as affordability starts to come into the equation).

We could comfortably afford for me to be a SAHM and send DD to a private school (well pre-school nursery first, but then through the private school system), this again would be ok for a second DC. The difficulty would be if we have more than 2 DCs, if we are lucky enough we would like 3 or 4.

If we were to have 3 DCs I would need to work at least 3 to 4 days a week to ensure that we could maintain our lifestyle (which is quite basic really, we are not extravagant people) and fund the school fees from earned income.

I am not too worried about my own future career, I feel I have achieved what I wanted to in terms of work before I had DD and if I don't have a professional career again in the future (if, for example I take 10+ years out of the workplace) this wouldn't concern me.

So my question, what would be more beneficially to my DD and future children, having a SAHM or going to private school?

This, genuinely, is one of the most interesting threads I've read in ages... Possibly because it's a topic close to my heart of late, but alos because of the range of choices and opinions expressed...

And yes, your background makes a huge difference to your priorities...

We were totally, unbelievably skint when I was growing up ? my Dad was 60 when I was born, retired when I was 4. My mum had given up her job as a teacher when I was born to be a SAHM, and didn't return when my dad retired ? I'm not sure why, I think she felt it was her duty to be there, even though Dad could cope better than she could just fine. She did part-time jobs, which paid badly, and as I got older I could never understand why she didn't go back to the classroom, where she could have earned more and used her skills, especially when I was in secondary school and out of the house at 6.45am and not back until 5.30pm. But her choices meant we lived on Dad's state pension and whatever Mum earned from bits and bobs (and before you ask, yes, I did go to private school from 11, but on a full scholarship so everything, including uniform, transport, music lessons the works, was paid for...), which was, basically, bugger-all. Lack of money was a constant source of stress and anxiety for them and for me, and I always felt a degree of guilt about it from really quite a young age.

So, for me, financial security is a huge priority, I don't want my girls to be worrying about money as children, or seeing their parents fretting about it all the time, or feel guilty about even expense that they cause, when there is an alternative. But also I want them to see that Mummy has a job she loves and not to feel responsible for her giving it up, as I did... But I also want them to know that I am available for them, if and when they need me. My new studio is five minutes from my house and ten minutes from school...

But, OP, not sure if you've run for the hills as it's all getting a bit contentious...

I think if there was a take out from this, it's that there are a hundred and one ways to cut the career/children pie, and, although some posters have strident views, I think it's clear that there's no one size-fits-all-solution...

Your LO is very young, still, you have time to think this through ? you can go back to work, and, if you hate it, or the compromises you have to make to do so, you can re-think/try a different path.

Of course, once you have 2+ DCs under 3, you may be desperate to get out of the house and into work... The most demanding boss in the world is nothing compared to the irrationality and unreasonable demands of a couple of 'terrible twos'...

Sometimes, (and today is SO one of those days,) my studio is a haven of peace and tranquility, where I can drink an entire hot beverage before it's stone cold, and hardly ever have to break up any fights...

db
xx

Another important thing to remember is that we are all as far as I can see on this thread incredibly privileged woman. We are talking about job satisfaction and career progression and making choices. For most women i suspect we might as well be speaking Greek. They work because they must, or the mortgage doesn't get paid.

I totally agree with the background comment.

I grew up in poverty, also with a SAHM who ended up doing bits and bobs and a dad who was an artist (very ispirational, but very poor!).

My childhood was marred by poverty, I felt exactly like DB, one of my first memory is my mum scrapping for money to buy bread, I remember being hungry a lot when I was young and we never had money for anything at all.

I would never ever want my children to be in that position and that's why I would only SAHM if I had substantial earnings/savings (like Bonsoir and others) and that security behind us. As I don't then the irrational spectre of my childhood is always going to be there to haunt me and push me to continue earning, even though I can't say I love my job...

Agree Seeker...
We are (in the main) privileged, I recognise that not everyone has the option to make these kinds of choices.

It's still a valid debate though... for all sorts of reasons.

Yellowhouse, I know what you mean... For similar reasons I don't think I could ever not work, even if I didn't have to...

I know I should be grateful for having both parents at home when I was growing up, the sacrifices made blah blah.

But to be completely, brutally honest, what I really could have done with, was a lot bit LESS bloody parental attention, a bit more money in the family coffers and a lot less anxiety/guilt.

db
xx

Great thread.

I'm off back to work late next year after 7 years of being a SAHM. The job I'm going back to is going to involve travel and periods of being away. I'm scared to death about the effect this is going to have on the DC but have planned everything to make sure they experience the least amount of disruption as possible. DH is coming to the end of his time in the armed forces and within 3-5 years is likely to be a SAHD or part time worker, made possible by my wages and his pension.

My mum worked 8-5 when I was a child, she regrets it, is still in the same job now and she hates it, it's given her depression and she keeps telling me to stay at home with the DC but I can't imagine being at home any longer, I hate the fact that I'm financially dependent on DH, he is quite a bit older than me and I have a VERY small private pension and no security, he can't get life insurance because of his work, if he was to die I would be screwed.

OP - you have a while before you need to make a decision, your feelings will be stronger/clearer as the months go on.

grew up in scheme,big family.working poor scrapped by
work is vocational and financial for me. I want to work.nursery booked 12wk pg.it's important for me to earn and demonstrate to my dc that mum works too.

@seeker I work because I must, or my mortgage wouldn't get paid. I'm not privileged at all, I don't really consider growing up in a skanky council flat as being privileged. I have an interesting (allegedly) ob which I'm very good at but I don't think working like a trojan all your life actually makes you privileged. It makes you someone who works like a trojan. Privileged people are people who grew up in luxury or at least security, people who have inherited money, people who don't have to work.

I grew up in a country where all women worked. It was really unthinkable to try imagine what all these women would do if they didn't work? All this time? Bake cakes?

My mother always worked and gave me so much attention, more than enough; if she stayed at home it would have become traumatic, I needed some space away from her care! Don't get me wrong, I love her a lot and we have a very good relationship; but post 18.00 there is still a lot of time to talk, do things and enjoy the parenthood, especially given now kids come home at 16.00.

I have to say I am an academic and priviledged to have a meaningful job, not daily dread; but even in the academy, as Xenia says, men can have it all, while women often feel that they have to choose - between an intellectual career and having a family. Why? It feels like all the achievements of the XXth century are undone. Will we soon go back to a situation where boys are taught maths while girls are taught singing and dancing, and embroidery? There seems to be some updated version of this in the UK. In some other countries there is a real paternity leave that the father takes to take care of the baby while the mother goes back to work for these few weeks, often after the mother has taken her leave first, and very good state childcare. So in the end, is this about values, or structural? Most likely, structural-cultural

"Privileged people are people who grew up in luxury or at least security, people who have inherited money, people who don't have to work."

I agree.

wordfactory, only people who HAVE money can afford the luxury of saying "money is not important". It IS very important if you do not have it!

Ah- different definition of privilege in this case. I meant "In a privileged position" in that decisions can be made about expenditure, housing, whatever that makes choices possible. Rather than silver spoon privilege. Sorry.

But I think Seeker was pointing out that this thread is about the choice to return to work or stay at home... and the fact that so many of us (not all, by a long way) are able to have that choice means we are privileged...

And the fact that we are talking about being fulfilled by our work, enjoying what we do outside the home. Again, this isn't the case for so many people.

I wouldn't consider myself 'privileged' by background, and while we could just about scrape by without my salary, it would be hard and would mean a lot of changes to the way we live.

But I don't have to go out to work to a drudge job I hate just to keep food on the table. Having had experience of doing voluntary work on hugely deprived council estates in the inner city, and spending a fair amount of time with the desperately poor in rural Kenya, I recognise that I am, by any realistic scale of things, incredibly fortunate. Even if I don't have great personal wealth, or a luxurious upbringing, I have sufficient resources to have choices, and that makes me really, really lucky...

db
xx

Don't know if its the same where anyone else is but here at least a third of the parents I see on the school run are fathers. They are SAHD or work flexibly around the children while the mothers are the main earners. Am sure that wasn't the case when I was at primary school a father in the playground would have been a much talked about event in rural Somerset in the 70s .

I haven't run for the hills yet designerbaby , I'm really enjoying reading the different points of view and it's helping me to consider what matters most to me and my family. I'm not really commenting much now as having not yet been either a SAHM or working mum I don't really I have much to add. Thanks for everyone's input though, it's a great help to me.

The point on background is indeed very interesting but doesn't explain everything. I work, my sister is a SAHP for now although will probably return to teaching at some point when her children are at school. As the older sibling I probably have more concrete memories of money being tight in the early 70s although we weren't poor compared to what our parents had come from.

I definitely place more importance on a degree of financial independence than she does and never seriously considered giving up work altogether.

Kerala we have alot of dads doing school run at our primary as well. Not a third, but still plenty. I don't know any SAHDs, they all work but mostly self employed and therefore have a bit more flexibility.

'It's only "muggins mum" if you don't consider raising children to be an important job.'

Seeker, on the whole you sound so reasonable here that I was a bit disappointed to read the above statement because once again there is an underlying suggestion that WOHPs are NOT doing that important job of parenting.

I do consider raising children to be import but I also consider my job to be important. In fact my dp and I both combine both successfully.

And I agree with what Xenia says that the whole argument of needing and wanting to be a SAHP for the benefit of the children has a very bitter ring to it when you find out that the majority of parents who actually do this are women who end up sacrificing a huge amount in the process.

Bonsoir, I think it's important to recognize that your experience is really not typical of most SAHMs in that you have a source of money independnet of your husband. That also means your comments about mothers worrying that giving up work will lose their identity are also not as pertinent to you as they would be to most women. If giving up work means being entirely financially dependent on your husband but also you having very little time which is not wholly structured around the needs of your children and possibly money is tight for the whole family, then preserving a sense of your identity is a very real problem.

Bugger, I knew it ould sound like that, fivecandles- and I didn't mean it to. It's really hard to say what I mean without potentially offending anyone, but here goes.

Parents who work outside the home of course think raising thir children is an important job- but the time thet have to actually do it face to face is necessarily limited. So they put huge amounts of time and energy and money into finding the right person to do it when they aren't there. And they value that person vey much. But for some reason that I don't fathom, a woman who chooses to raise her own children doesn't seem to be seen as doing a valuable job- while a woman who raises someone else's children as a career is seen as making a valuable contribution. I think this is odd. My dp would have to pay a nanny to look after his children if he was a single parent- how come i'm a Stepford Wife, or a handmaiden or worse names from Xenia if that money goes to me instead of to an employee?

mm... I think what you say is problematic when your children are school-aged. Then, the time spent by parents with children may not be very different whether or not you are a SAHP or a WOHP.

I also question what you mean when you talk about parenting being a 'valuable' job. The idea of what it means to be a good parent differs from person to person. For some it might be being there for the children's every waking minute, for others in might be being to pay the mortgage in order to live in a nice area or paying for private school as on this thread.

In fact, I'm in the fortunate position of being able to work school hours so for me it's not a case of EITHER beign there for my children OR working outside the home. I do both. I am there at the school gates every single day at 3.30. Interestingly I'm not the only WOHP there either. Of course, it's not possible for all jobs to be flexible but it's amazing how many families cope either by splitting the school run between mum and dad or sharing with friends or enlisting the help of grandparents. It's not necessarily the case that if you are a WOHM then your kids spend long periods of time with a nanny or in after school club.

'a woman who chooses to raise her own children doesn't seem to be seen as doing a valuable job- while a woman who raises someone else's children as a career is seen as making a valuable contribution'

I do think it rests on the exclusiveness of a SAHP - she ONLY parents and doesn't earn an income or pay taxes or do a job which might produce something or help others unless voluntarily - but the fact that a WOHP does both - your nanny might have her own children but does all of the other stuff AS WELL.

It does bother me that it's almost always women who talk about bringing up your own children AS an all-consuming and valuable job. It also bothers me that when they're doing this and saying how worthwhile it is they often don't talk about what they're sacrificing and their vulnerability in terms of finances and identity and so on.

"It's not necessarily the case that if you are a WOHM then your kids spend long periods of time with a nanny or in after school club"

No, of course it's not. But if I had stayed at work mine would have done.

And it's not a matter of spending every waking hour with them- I don't and never have.

Please understand that I don't think a model where both parents work all hours is good. But I wonder in how many families, if mum were to do some hours paid work, then dad could do less.

Because again, to me, it's important that dh is as important and present a parent as I am.

Again, I recognize that so much of this is down to problems with society and the workplace not being set up for this model.

But seeker, what I wonder, is why more women don't put up more of a fight with their employers or partners or ride out the early years for the sake of the long-term instead of being so ready to give up work.

Honestly, I see so many working mums run ragged because they're not prepared to relinquish the housework and then they blame the work for the fact they're not being able to do it all and give up. Why don't they have it out with their husbands and their bosses?

But then how many boys simply follow the model set for them by their own parents. If their mum was at home with the kids, then they expect their wives to do the same. Or to hold down a job and still be a domestic goddess.

Why couldn't you have gone back to work part-time? Why couldn't your workplace have been flexible? What was your job?

Fivecandles.
Why does it bother you what other women feel about bringing their children up. I talk about bringing mine up as an all consuming valuable job, because it is. I also have many hobbies and interests and don't care what people think about my choices.
I decided I wanted to be there for my dcs all the time, others choose differently.

Well, once your kids are in school it's not an all-consuming job is it?

I'm mainly in the debate out of interest rather than criticising others' choices. I'm finding seeker in particular very cool and reasoned and I'm interested in what she has to say unlike the way some SAHPs often get very defensive very quickly.

And I think, as I've indicated earlier, if being a SAHP was soemthing men and women chose equally then it might be less of an issue. But there are lots of reasons why large numbers of women choosing or being pressured for all sorts of reasons to give up paid work for extended periods of time might be problematic. And these are issues which are important to discuss.