Yet another article re: why mothers should return to work

[boogiewoogie]

Just snatching a couple of minutes during a coffee break, will come back. What do you think of this?

YR - but it is true that some women live lifestyles that bears no relation to their own earnings. And if the husband does let them down, they can have a very hard time indeed. What looked like the life of a lady of leisure turns out to be, in fact, unemployment.

Nk - could you please shorten your name a bit - it looks like your child put their hand on the keyboard when you were picking your nickname - lol

Xenia, you are 'Susan from London', right?

I agree with the article and with Xenia's posts. Even in the most stable and loving marriages things happen which can completely throw the family finances. It's common sense to nurture your earning capability, even if it means reducing it somewhat in the main childcaring years.

The fact is, it's only in the past 100 years or so that women haven't worked once they had children, except in the upper classes, where the men didn't work much, either. Women just strapped their babies to their backs and went back out into the fields.

However believing that the article is true doesn't mean that it's right to just accept that this is the way life is. I am lucky in that both myself and my husband work part time to support our family, and enjoy both fulfilling careers and time with our children. We earns the same as we would if he was slogging his guts out full time plus, and I was twiddling my thumbs getting bored at home. Not everyone works in industries which would support flexible working like this for women and men. They usually could support it, but don't, because the men and women don't push for it.

I read an article at the weekend about schools offering extended hours care for children and one commentator said something along the lines of "instead of/as well as developing work-friendly schools, shouldn't we be concentrating on school-friendly work?" I couldn't agree more.

At least you don't think I actually chose it!

but nk those sorts of women are very rare (the type that have boob enhancement and vaginal surgery to keep the husband happy, do lunch and nails all day while nanny looks after babes) they are so very rare or am i living in the wrong part of England ? most of us SAHM's are only in it for a short period of time and we won't starve if dh fecks off with his secretary

"Women just strapped their babies to their backs and went back out into the fields".

Quite, we can't do that now, which is why some of stay home.

I don't think the problem relates only to the wives of very rich men. Women whose husbands were on average incomes can also find themselves in trouble if he pisses off. The problem begins if they have no income and therefore no borrowing power and so on, If everything material that they value is dependent solely on his income, then some pretty unpleasant changes have to be made.

I think you are right though - some women are only staying at home for a while. I also think a lot of women use the small baby period almost like a sabbatical to regroup and retrain.

NK - yes - I am never going back to what I used to do because becoming a mother has completley changed my attitude to work and life. It has been such a positive force. It is probably true for many other women too. I had considered self-employment and running a business in my 20's but never took the risk as I was too scared of not having decent university qualifications. Now I have the qualifications, but don't want to use them for the benefit of an employer.

blimey wordsmith - yep the good old days - so glad they are past - lets stop sniping sisters - mothers of the world unite we have nothing to lose but our vague yet persistent and nagging guilt!

I wasn't implying that they were the good old days! The very fact that i said that it should be something that both mums and dads took responsibility for surely implies that i don't think 'guilt' is an option?

YR you are right there ar enot many 'ladies who lunch' type SAHM out there. BUT there are a lot who end up continuing to be SAHM long after they planned to be back at work because they

1. cannot find a job as they have been out of the market for too long
2. got used to being a SAHM and have less motivation to work
3. truely believe being a SAHM is the best for evryone
4. when kids go to shcool they find uit is actually HARDER rather than easier to work as schools hours are way less 'family friendly' than nursery etc as they have these annoying things called 6 week summer holidays, half terms, inset days and oh yes they start at 9 and finish at 3.

Now I really really applaud you being a SAHM BUT I think you are deluding yourself in beliveing that when you decide to go back to work it will be easy to do. I realise you don't want to do what you originally were doing and you want to work for yourself, butto make that sucessfull you often have to worker harder for less money than working for somone else (and it can inpinge on you mum bit - just ask justin what she ws doing less then 2 weeks after having a baby!!)

That is what this whole article is about, you seem to think there are loads of women out there being able to pick up their careers or find new ones after being out of the market for 2 + years. I can assure this is not that case and this is what the article was saying, short term gain MAY lead to klong term PAIN it is about balance risk, which I know you like doing.

The other thought I had and I know this thread wasn't meant to be about wohm versus sahm which is good because it's very often a false dichotomy. Many women are sometimes one and then sometimes the other. And perhaps there is a bit of part time work along the way. Or a long stint in an office followed by some months freelancing at home. Not to mention all those (to my mind) amazing women who study for degrees and new qualifications when the babies are in bed at night.

sorry wordsmith - I didn't actually think you thought they were the good old days - just found it interesing you mentioned it - the guilt comment is related to the whole thread which has been snipey inparts - but mainly was a clearly failed attempt at a light hearted commentary - I will slink back to my cubbyhole

Crunchie - I also think some women are actually quite scared of going back to work. They worry about lost skills, about whether they will still be any good, if anyone will want to employ them. They can lose their working nerve a bit. But that is hard to admit to so one hears less about it.

Your career (if you ever had one which most don't) is shot to pieces if you take 5 years out in just about any carrer you want to name whether you're male or female. It's a gender neutral issue. Fine if you had no career before anyway. Fine if you don't want to go back. Fine if you are in a business area where 5 years off doesn't matter but not Fine if you make the 5 year sacrifice (and for many women it is not a huge joy, it's horrible housework, childcare thing they can barely stand and they think their husbands lead the life of Riley getting out there all day having fun at work etc.) and then your husband has 25 more years of fun work and you are rooting around on muymsnets threads trying to find out how to get into a job in as a school assistant or how to do pyramid selling or TEFL or whatever that basically means no fun career and the children run off and don't really want you much when they are getting into their teens and you're redundant at home and no one wants you back in your career either. Loads of women end up in that situation and I'm not convinced they all think the 5 years they had a home was worth the consequences of the next 25 years, consequences their husbands don't largely have. It's a big sacrifice in order to have the pleasure of changing nappies which the child will never remember.

On good and bad old days, yes women have always worked. I remember in the 1970s we had I think Wilson saying the White Heat of Technology was going to get people working say 3 or 4 hours a day only, no one in awful work like down the mines and men and women just working a few hours a day as computer etc would allow them to lead that kind of a more relaxed life. It never happened. I earn in an hour just about the minimm wage week's wage. So in theory I could do an hour's work a week and people survive on that but I don't. I could be the idle lotus eater but I love the work. I do it not because of the money but because it's an enjoyable way to spend time.

Blimey, Xenia. They should end it all now!
Why wait for death. Hand out the cyanide pills.

oh please xenia, i thought we sorted out the changing nappy and how they won't remember on that other thread ?

NKffffffffee0f7f95X1118efd8f2d, are you going for "most memorable MN name"?

nk - lol !

Isn't the big mistake for women actually to really give two shits about what any other women think of you if you're happy with your life?

i'll be telling the husband to be more careful when crossing the road !

YR - no need. Just make sure the insurance payments are up to date.

xenia, it has to be said you spend an awful lot of time posting on mumsnet for someone who says she is a workloving high powered career woman! when i was working v hard / earning buckets of money i certainly wasnt able to post on here in the prolific fashion you do..... had to take lengthy sabbatical from high powered career to concentrate on my mumsnet habit....

good point hunker - i think most of us here don't give a mokey's but it's like everything else on mn, isn't it, it needs to be discussed to death, going round and round in circles like some bad nightmare where you just keep changing dirty nappies all day !