follow from working mums threads, well someone was bound to do it!

[lucyellensmum]

Xenia, i must be one of the lucky ones then because my DP doesnt find his DD hard work, any more than I do - he would love to be around more for her but someone has to shut the bank manager up. Yes it must have been a struggle to pay the hired help at such a young age - does that sound bitchy, then i guess it is - jealousy does that, but well, im Ms average with average house, average bills, average aspirations and i dont see anything wrong in that. I actually worked my arse off for my ordinariness and am proud of where i am. Penis envy maybe xenia - no, thats not nice LE behave - my god, id never be so rude to someone's face but this is a free forum. Our DD2 was unplanned and has turned our lives upside down, was just about to be reaping financial rewards for years of academic hard work so i wondered if i was going to feel resentful to my little one for changing my plans, i was this far from getting a horse, lifetime dream, but thats out of the window now for at least another five years i guess. But actually no, i just thank god for her every single day, every smile, every giggle and every cuddle - shes my little angel and i dont think i would have survived the past few years without her. So here we are, still stuck in our modest terrace in a crappy street in a rather trendy and fashionable seaside town and i am happier (and more knackered) than i have ever been. Xenia please do not take this as a personal attack on you, its not meant that way just putting my side of the coin across. I'm sure you realise you are quite lucky and i certainly recognise you may have had a pair of balls at one time but have worked them off to get where you are so much respect for that - but take it from me, your babies aren't babies for long - i worked when my dd1 was wee (16 yr now) and she was with my parents more than me, i regret it sooo much i can't tell you. I have another chance (thank god - again).

Anna - i know lots of people who work harder than investment bankers,(nurses, teachers, university lecturers (now there's a bunch who deserve their pay packets if ever there was one) or at least as hard with no where near the return, so its not just a matter of degree but maybe a matter of starting points. But its only money at the end of the day and people chose their careers for many different reasons. AGain, im just expressing my view point. And we are far from on the poverty line by the way so this bitter diatribe is not through jealousy just mindful that everyone has a different challenge.

SAHM v WOHM is soo overrated
we all have different lives and wnat them lied differently
why interfere unless there is a problem
not eberyone wants to work
not eevryone wans kids full timg
fgs get over it please

eb's point is valid. I don't think working mothers are over sensitive on this. Some stay at home mothers in more inflammatory comments seem to suggst you're either a parent, seeing the smiles,playing with the children etc or you're a working mother but in fact working mothers love those things too - it's why we had children and it's not very nice to say to us that we have somehow opted out of motherhood or don't do it. We do do it - we just spend fewer hours doing it. I actually prefer that it's fwer hours but that doesn't mean I never want to spend time with the children, far from it. Also my oldest is 22 years now so I've had a good few years of it so may be that also gives you a longer term perpsective than someone in the honeymoon period with a gorgeous new baby.

On lucy's jealousy thing a lot of the time we've been fairly average anyway. It was only when I was getting up to year 15 or something of working full time and into my career that there were particuarly huge financial benefits. I think when we both worked hard as teacher and me, junior other person half of each of our salary went on childcare and most of the rest on the mortgage just like most people. I still never regretted having so many children and the first three so quickly. It was hard but fun and just like lucy writes I would not have been with out even if the alternative might have been 20 child free years travelling or whatever else people choose to do.

I don't agree most nurses and teachers work harder than most people in the city actually. You do often work 20 hour stretches and often over 24 hours without sleep. No nurse or doctor I know works those hours. Of course if you regard childcare as work that is very hard too.

Thank you Xenia. I think the most important thing to remember is that it's NOT the case that parents who work outside the home are in any way 'less' of a parent. Anyone who believes that is basically dismissing the majority of parents - certainly about 99% of the fathers I know and probably at least 75% of the mothers I know work outside as inside the home, and I certainly don't think they'd agree that they're not good parents! The evidence of their clever, sociable and well brought up children would also suggest that they are doing a great job! One point Xenia makes quite consistently is that it's quality not quantity that matters when it comes to parenting. Why do some people find this so hard to accept? Why has 'quality time' become such a derided term to knock working parents with? My own mother was around 24/7 and it didn't make her a better parent. I'm not suggesting for a moment that my childhood was deprived - it wasn't. It was very normal. But my memories are NOT of non-stop wonderful interaction with my mother. I remember spending quite a lot of time playing either alone or with my siblings while my mother got on with household chores,and also of being dragged around coffee mornings (for some reason my mother didn't realise that i found these interminably boring!). And as I grew older, I think the fact that my mother didn't work, and then eventually ended up doing low status jobs in the misguided belief that it needed to 'fit around the children'was actually a source of great pressure. No child should have to experience the feeling that their parents have put their lives on hold for the kids sake. I believe children need to be loved unconditionally within a secure and stimulating environment, knowing that they are the most important thing in their parents lives, but not being the ONLY thing in their parents lives.

Children of working and non working parents today have more interaction with their parents than children did 30 years ago when mothers sent children out to play for the day. Generally most parents are better at psychology than they used to be - I suspect that is all and we've gone beyond the priority being feeding and keeping warm children and moving more to trying to satisfy their emotional needs.

Quality matters but some quantity too. One good hour a week doesn't compensate in my view for having a parent around in the evenings in the week. I do think you need just as with work an element of being present but if you work and have under 5s then I don't think it matters thay your presence if after 6 rather than all day.

Under 5s don't remember a single thing usualyl of those 5 years but they will be damaged if they aren't loved or are harmed by their parents or those wholook after them so I'd never say those years don't count but where I differ from some no working fathers and mothers is that I do believe the care can be from several loved adults or a nanny, childminder, granny or nursery.

My mother worked for 13 years but then stopped when we were born and she had a dreadful time of it once we were about 10. She really felt her role was done in a sense and resented my father's career taking off as a psychiatrist. It was him on TV. Him working very long hours, him getting all the appreciation publicly and she was really clever yet she didn't choose to go back to work. He would never have stopped her. But that wasn't why I always worked. My mother's issues were also she didn't recover easily from my sister's death and other things which were unrelated to whether she worked or not.

I do remember however the conversations at lunch time - my father came home for lunch every day as people did more in those days - imagine that now... so he drove us to school, then came home for lunch, very involved 1960s father and he did all the night feeds once I'd stopped breastfeeding which must have been rare for a full time working father... anyway the lunch time conversations - my father talking about XYZ interesting schizophrenic case and my mother sadly saying and I did 5 loads of washing but I'm sure no one is interested in that.

The question you all need to ask yourselves is why are you all getting so het up about this?

If you are happy with the decision you've made to either SAHM or WOHM then what on earth does it matter what other people think.

We are all adults here, we know that we each have our own set of individual circumstance and personalities. Based on these, we work out which is best for us. Then get on with it and stop worrying about what everyone else is doing.

Being judgemental benefits no-one.

Not sure why the phrase "quality" time seems to be the preserve of the working parent. Most SAHMs have quantity and quality time with their children. And I don't think SAHMs are justifying their choice by claiming that it is better for their children - evidence shows that it is better for their children.

Having said that, I don't have a problem with either situation. Many women have to work. End of. Others choose to for various reasons and, if they are happy with that choice and the care they have organised for their children, fine.

I have chosen to do part-time work which means I am around for my children when they are not in school and I know for a fact that they appreciate that (mind you, mine are all at school now and the older two can be left for short periods). However, I do appreciate that I have a choice. Not all parents do.

What 'evidence' is that then?

I odn't agree with that evidence Freckle but I certainly agree with you that stay at home parents can give good quality time to their chilren. Some adults are just hopeless with children full stop and it's better if some of them are out working. I don't think I'm too bad but I'm not good with difficult children over long periods so I have just managed myself life accordingly and I haven't seen the chdilren suffer over 22 years.

The why get het up point is a good one. I would like to see a lot more publicity on why it benefits children society women and families if women work full time. If that puts the noses of stay at home mothers out of joint - tough. They'll haev to live with it just like working mothers robustly seeing how happy their chidlren are can laugh at the those who say we damage our children by working.

The reason I think it's even worth contributing is that I think a lot of girls are still pushed into sexist models either by society or their parents or their husbands so i do still feel there is a message to get out there about who fun and nice and good it can be to have a lovely career plus a load of children too, to show that that works and it isn't a horrible situation to be in - as working mother with under 5s, that is can be a positive great thing to do. I don't think that message gets out enough. Every article about working mothers is about struggle adn difficulty. So I think we need to show how it works for so very many mothers who would not have it any other way. That's the reason I write but I don't feel het up or insulted or upset over my choices because I can see they were right.

There are any number of reports available to show that, in the early years at any rate, a child is better off being with a parent than in nursery care or with a non-parent. As I said, I am not criticising choices, but it is disingenuous to suggest that SAHMs have to justify their choice by claiming it is better for children when the evidence is there to show that it is.

have a read of this...

Ebenezer - I too am fascinated by why people get het up about it. It's as if the debate touches something raw in women/mothers and yet I can't quite put my finger on why.

Ebenezer - I too am fascinated by why people get het up about it. It's as if the debate touches something raw in women/mothers and yet I can't quite put my finger on why.

I'm not sure people are getting het up about it. All I can see is various posters putting forward their views. There are constant articles in the press berating either WOHM or SAHM, depending on the weather, and obviously people may be a little pissed off with the suggestion that they are not doing the best for their child/ren in their circumstances.

Freckle - but the debate often turns personal. That's what I've observed.

Well, I can see that. It happens on a lot of threads, not just ones about whether to work or not. But does that equal getting het up?

saddens me really as intelligent allegedly well balanced women the sniff of SAHM Vs working mum discussion and the red mist descends and all starts getting humphy

Feck sake step back - deep breath
everyone is entitled to their choice and u may not agree but well thats life

i wonder what is it that riles and provokes such vitriolic responses

in real worlds no one really cares or discuses it, honestly

why does this topic provoke such emotion...

Well, I think it can do, Freckle.

I don't think you discuss it in RL because it is so emotive. You could easily offend someone.

PPB - I agree. People keep their thoughts to themselves in RL.

yes in RL most people are far more easy going willing to converse and not wind each other up or be rude

MN offers anonymous platform, so imo peole jump in with all kinds of opinion /anecdotes/stuff they read in daily mail/and general chuff whent comes to this emotive opinion

The saddest thing of all is that men are never criticised. We have a very long way to go when women and men are treated equally on this planet. That what we as women should be working towards as many articles critical of male parneting choices as women. For example more women find men disappear after divorce and don't parent at all yet all the press articles you see are about men being denied by women the right to see their children. It is as if women have been the world's whipping boy since about 5000 years ago or so.

xenia, i agree with your comment re men getting an easier ride. I used to wonder if the bond wasn't as strong until i saw DP with dd and then i just realised that some men are simply shit. DD1 father never wanted to know so he falls into that category however he is never given a second thought. How many children do you have? it sounds like you have hoards?

I think this is an emotive subject because either choice, for most women, has compromises - working mums see less of their children and have to do two jobs (sorry but i think doctors, nurses, lecturers etc do work exeedingly hard and it doesnt always stop because they are not at the office but thats another debate). SAHMs often (as i do) think that they could be financially more secure (not cos im scared he will leave me eitehr - i do feel guilty that he has to do it all though)>

I think its wrong to say that men take none of the heat. they do. I realise that there are a few jerks out there who don't pull their load but I don't think most men are like that.

Where do HE mums come in the whole only one job thing for SAHM's.I HE and I do the normal housewife and mother stuff.How do people feel about this?

???