Another working parent survey - load of rubbish or not?

[UnquietDad]

here

Interesting to see how this is squared with all those surveys claiming children are unhappier in nursery.

Have just been enlightened of this thread, by UQD, nice man.

It's all subjective. And presumably this is based on peoples own answers to questions.

I've commented on my blog, and linked to the coverage in the Times and by their Alpha Mummy.

www.singleparentdad.blogspot.com/

UQD, to kids nice things aren't as important or valuable as spending time with their parents

whereas nice things are important to us as parents

its all a very hard balance

I've been a SAHP for 3 years now, since my DD1 was 2 and I was pregnant with the second. After 3 years I have reached that point where I need to go back to work because I need a different focus in my life.

I possibly could have been 'happier' if I hadn't given up work before #2 came along. I suppose it would have depended on what day I was asked the question.

Aside from the economics, I think becoming a SAHP it is a little bit like retirement. You need to replace the routine of working with something else. If you manage to make good friends and make regular time for a variety of activities (either with or without your children) then I think you will probably be just as happy not working. I failed to find a good community network of other SAHparents and after 3 years, the novelty of children's groups has worn off. I do some voluntary work and study but it is still not the same.

I quite like the NZ set-up (or what I know of it). Don't they have children's centres which are co-run by the parents? I would have loved to have one regular place to go with the children. Spending too much time in my own home is certainly not good for me.

Anyway, what's my point? For some people, the negatives of work can outweigh the benefits. It would be nice if someone cared about how to make SAHParents happier (there always will be some for at least a few years) rather than pouncing on the idea that only work makes mothers happier. I don't believe it is the paid element of work that women miss as much as the social-side, feeling valued and having a regular thing to do.
Excuse i eloquent post. I'm meant to be getting daughter #1 ready for school!

"The above question is not necessarily the right one, or the only one. More accurately, "Would you rather a) have a day playing with your friends and not see mummy and daddy till the evening but also live where we do and have nice things, or b) be at home all day but be living somewhere not as nice and not have as many nice things because, with only one of us working, mummy and daddy would be skint? Hmmmm?""

See, by asking that question you are transmitting values to a child that nice things and a "nice" area have a greater value. One doesn't actually have to buy into this world view nor transmit it to one's child.

"The report says that more effort should be put into improving the quality of part-time jobs, where women often suffer career disadvantage." - I agree very strongly with this statement.

Lazycow - " I think the reality is that most young children would rather their parents were at home. I appreciate that may be contraversial and may WOHM parents may prefer not to accept that but I strongly suspect that is the case.

I rationalise my decision by saying it is better for our family as a whole that I work, which I believe it is. However I know full well that ds would be happier if I (or DH) was at home full time." - I greatly admire your honesty

What a 2 or 3 (or even 4 or 5) year old child prefers to happen right here and right now is not necessarily what is best for him or her. As I walk out the door in the morning DD does sometimes express a bit of disappointment that I am going to work. But she would not actually be better off if I didn't work. She would mind not getting those brand new gap jeans last weekend. She would mind not taking tennis or ballet -- both of which would be cancelled if my income was eliminated. She would mind a lot of things. Just as when she demands a cookie at 5:00 and I say "no", she minds at that very point in time. But it is still better for her to eat her vegetables before she is then offered a cookie as dessert.

As a parent I am better able to judge what is good for DD than she is at the age of 4.

"As a parent I am better able to judge what is good for DD than she is at the age of 4."

Of course you are, Eleusis.

However, I would add that I think it is also important to acknowledge a child's feelings.

So - if a child is unhappy about a parent working and being left in childcare during the day, it is vital that parents listen to their child talk about those feelings and the parent explain why, all things considered, they are going to work anyway.

"However, I would add that I think it is also important to acknowledge a child's feelings." Of course!

We do talk about it. The conversation goes like this.

DD: Mummy, what's going to happen today?
Eleusis: I'm going to work, and you are going to school.
DD: Ohhhhhhh [pouty face emoticon]
Eleusis: But we can have fun on Saturday. What do you want to do?
DD: Go to the creche.
Eleusis:

Sounds complicated, Eleusis .

On more serious note, we actually have this type of conversation regularly with my stepsons, who are confronted regularly with the fact that my daughter spent her early years at home with her mother (me) whereas they spent their early years with a nanny.

Since their mother is quite unable to say that she needed to work to support them (she is independently wealthy, quite apart from the fact that my partner always earned enough to support the whole family), they are forever asking why they received what they perceive as less favourable treatment and were left with a nanny. We do need to talk about quite often... the feelings and reasons are complex and they are old enough not to easily be palmed off with short answers.

But, their views may very well have been influenced by yours. And my children are never going to hear me feel sorry for someone who has to work. And they are never going to here me say I work in spite of the negative impact on them because of course I don't think it does impact them negatively.

Eleusis - actually, they are children and not terribly influenced by views (and we have always waited for them to ask the questions, not spontaneously pronounced on anything, they are much more (selfishly) interested in their own comfort .

They complain about having to take the bus (they prefer the car); they complain about having to carry their suitcase (it's heavy); they complain that we take them on holiday to remote Greek islands (they prefer Club Med). Etc. Wanting their mother at home is the same sort of issue.

Oh, I don't know. Possibly they are just pushing buttons that get reactions. Kids are like that. It's possible they are wiser than you are giving them credit for.

Anna888 - I agree with Eleusis on this. I know my ds would prefer me at home and I also know that money etc means very little to small children.

I do also however know how unhappy I would be staying home and accepting that we would continue to live in our very small flat for the forseeable future. My unhappiness would be very bad for my son, I already have evidence of that in the way his behaviour changes for the worse when I am visibly unhappy or under stress.

In addition to this I take the long term view that unless I ensure that I can take care of myself, particularly when older, my son may end up with a great deal of financial problems and/or guilt about my needs when he should be focussing on his own life. If I give up work and have no real income to take care of myself when older that may also have a massive effect on my son's life.

I cannot really know how my ds will see my decision when he is older but I sincerely hope he will see that I took the long term view and tried to do the best I could for him and for all of us in the situation I had at the time.

I regularly acknowledge with him that I know he doesn't want to go to nursery but that mummy and daddy have to work to pay for our home and food (not strictly true we could afford our current mortgage on one salary but certainly not a house with a small garden which is our current modest aim. I also say that sometimes mummy doesn't like to go to work (also true) but that at the moment she has to.

I tell him I've missed him loads at the end of a long day and that I thought about him a lot when at work etc. I also do my best to ensure he is getting very good care at the nursery albeit not necessarily the care he would prefer currently.

In doing all these things I do the best I can for my son and myself. I would not say that financially I HAVE to work as we could manage on my dh's salary if we had to but I choose to work anyway to improve the quality of our lives.

In the end I ask myself at the end of my life do I want to look back and say

'Well I spent the early years of ds's life with him so that's OK even though the financial implications mean that I am currently old, ill and unable to financially take care of myself and thus am a burden on ds'

or do I want to say

'well I did the best I could to make sure ds had the best opportunites I could give him even if it meant that sometimes we weren't always together'

On balance I prefer the latter though I can see how others might prefer the former.

Also there are many lucky people who don't have to choose between the two.

Oh Eleusis, they aren't you know . They are just children working out (very slowly) that the world doesn't always revolve around them - hence all the discussion of their feelings to help them understand that things weren't always designed with their needs as only priority.

Lazycow - I don't really understand your point... since you seem to be agreeing with me

Anna, aren't they older, like teenagers? If so, surely they are influenced by your views?

Anna - I agree with you that 'young' children usually prefer to stay at home with their parents and I acknowledge that.

but I also agree with Eleusis that this is not always the best thing for the child and the family as a whole in the long term and that the parent needs to take a longer term view.

What the best decision is depends on individual family circumstances.

Eleusis - they are 10 and 12 and, for obvious reasons, I am hardly the most important influence on their thought processes.

They have a mother, father, nanny, maternal grandmother, paternal grandparents and maternal great-aunt (to name but the main people in the family sphere) plus friends, school etc who have all been around a lot longer than me and who they continue to talk to a lot more than me.

Plus they are boys - quite self-interested .

Of course, if you wish to believe that I am doing some insidous brainwashing, you may... but really, it's all me-me-me at that age.

We also get - why are you sending our sister to private school when we went to state school? Every possible injustice is raised, you know

I sometimes wonder whether we aren't having the wrong debate - historically, men and women have always both had to work - whether that was work based in the home, or outside the home. Children have always been cared for by people who aren't their parents. The image of the middle class woman as a homemaker, devoting herself to her children is largely a 1950s idea, popularised by the need to get women out of the workplace to make room for returning servicemen. That's not to say that we shouldn't alter our working patterns when we become parents, or that we shouldn't put pressure on government and employers to recognise that a significant proportion of the adult population in this country are parents or have family responsibilities. Yes I'm sure that if I asked my DD whether she's rather she and I stayed at home all day than she went to school and I went to work, she would say yes, because that's immediately appealing. But the truth is, adults by and large have to work, and need to work in order to define themselves, children have to go to school, and it's best for younger children to have good quality childcare to ensure that they are safe and well-occupied while the rest of the world is functioning around them.

Does that make any sense?!? Probably not.

but families are smaller these days and usually there is not an extended family/ friends network to look after the children.

I don't think the child necessarily needs the mother or father at home but they need reliable constant loving care. a frustrated depressed stressed mother/ father is not the best option.

our choice was for one of us to look after the child/ children for the first few years. we are currently able to do this and it suits us.

but often parenting is more the art of the possible

Bramshott - there isn't much evidence to support the idea that throughout history babies have been primarily cared for by people other than their mothers.

Remember - for the great majority of babies always, their mother's milk has been their main form of sustenance. When it wasn't, they died. Historically, wet-nursing is well-documented and has always happened but as a minority form of feeding.

Weren't children primarily 'cared for' by older children?

Survey shmurvey
but posting here so it comes up on threads I'm on later

I know I'm personally a LOT happier for workign oth. Funnily enough no-one ever asks my dh or ex dh whether they think they ought to be working oth. Never once.

I'm sorry, I'm not really 100% sure what I'm saying , but I do feel that if you'd asked a woman in any century before the 20th whether she was a 'working mother', she wouldn't really have understood the question.

I get asked "is it a Mummy Day or a Grandma Day?" and a sad pout if the later

tough titty

I have to (need to) work so I don't bother reading surveys as I can't do anything about whatever 'evidence' they come up with anyway