Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Parenting

For free parenting resources please check out the Early Years Alliance's Family Corner.

Flip

1 2 ··· 7 8 9 ··· 36 37

Original poster

'SAHMS' that have full time childcare or help - a fantastic liberation or downright lazy?

906 replies

Enid · 21/02/2006 09:51

There are lots of mothers down here in Dorset who are (or whose husbands are) well off enough to afford NOT to work. I know a few and they all have full time aupairs or nannies. One of them has TWO nannies - one for each of her children.

It seems to be a matter of pride that you always take the nanny/au pair on holiday to help with your children. Also that the nanny/au pair takes the children to clubs and activities.

OK - I think it is outrageously lazy (and so does dh). What do you think?

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

expatinscotland · 21/02/2006 10:47

Exactly, soap.

I was talking to Mama last night, thanking her for the lovely ring she'd sent me. And she was just so lovely to chat to, as usual.

flashingnose · 21/02/2006 10:47

Caligula, you put it so much better than me .

satine · 21/02/2006 10:49

Oh it did register with my friend - she used to say "God, I don't know how you manage, I'd never be able to cope, you make me feel really useless" etc etc. I just used to say that I had no choice, and that I was sure she was far stronger than she realised. Actually I used to think "get over yourself, you lazy cow"

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about these subjects:

Families General parenting

harpsichordcarrier · 21/02/2006 10:49

ah come on ladies
being a SAHM is not about poncing around getting your nails done
what would Simone de Beauvoir have to say about that?
or, more to the point, Lowri freaking Turner??

muma3 · 21/02/2006 10:49

can i just say that i do have a life besides havng kids !!1
me and partner dont rarely go out together but we do have our time in evening and go out seperatly with friends . being a sahm and not having childcare doesnt mean you dont have 10mins/hour here and there to do what you need to do .
i do believe it is healthy to have time away from your children as it is heathy for them . and i do ! but back to OP i dont think you should have a nanny just to sit sround your house or go to get ya hair done ?

TinyGang · 21/02/2006 10:50

Oh, to have staff...

florenceuk · 21/02/2006 10:50

All you lot who get friends and relatives to help out occasionally - you don't know how lucky you are to have that! I'd pay just to build in the option of having time out on a regular basis. yes I am a wimp and self-confessed failure as a SAHM.

willow2 · 21/02/2006 10:51

I agree that full time childcare and not working sounds odd. But I suppose it depends on circumstances. One of my bf has four kids under the age of six (in fact, it was four under the age of five... but they're all a year older now!) one of whom has special needs. She has a nanny five or six days a week - but there is no way you could label her lazy. She is a fantastic mum, very hands on and remarkably calm considering. The fact that she has help allows her to spend quality time with each and every one of them - so she can take the oldest one swimming, or take one of the younger ones to playgroup etc - and still find time to research and fight for all the help that she needs for one of them. She is fortunate in that she has the means to pay for this - heaven knows how she would cope otherwise.

expatinscotland · 21/02/2006 10:51

Well said as usual, Caligula.

Caligula · 21/02/2006 10:51

What exactly is wrong with sitting around your house?

No one has yet explained to me why a virtuous woman doesn't sit around

Original poster

Enid · 21/02/2006 10:54

god I think it is desperate IMO

(to sit around doing bugger all)

OP posts:

Blandmum · 21/02/2006 10:55

I was a SAHM and my kids went to a creche three mornings a week (built hem up to it, they started at age 2)

It was my life line. I had no family support at all and when we first moved to this area not friends either....I knew no-one except dh and ddand dh was frequently away of long detachments. If I didn't get some form of break I'd have gone bonkers

Original poster

Enid · 21/02/2006 10:55

yes I can manage half an hour with Heat and a coffee

but the difference is that I dont find it drudgey to look after my children

OP posts:

cod · 21/02/2006 10:55

Message withdrawn

Caligula · 21/02/2006 10:55

Yes all day would be bad, but for two hours a day? Why not? If I could, I would.

I should be going swimming now...

TinyGang · 21/02/2006 10:55

Well exactly Caligula - one persons idea of 'lazy' isn't everyone's.

Original poster

Enid · 21/02/2006 10:56

it takes you 2 hours to read Glamour?

OP posts:

Caligula · 21/02/2006 10:56

Yes but cleaning up is drudgey. It's OK, but I'd rather go swimming or running or read

Original poster

Enid · 21/02/2006 10:56

cleaners allowed on this thread

OP posts:

Caligula · 21/02/2006 10:57

No, it takes me 2 hours to read Glamour, read a chapter of "Memoirs of an unfit mother" straighten my hair, do a meal plan and put some make up on.

florenceuk · 21/02/2006 10:57

I'm with Caligula - if I could sit around I would (actually I'd be in bed...)

cod · 21/02/2006 10:58

Message withdrawn

muma3 · 21/02/2006 10:58

martianbishop- i agree that you must of found it hard with no family im also in that position (although the children do go to their nans (not my mother). im lucky to have that and maybe i wouldnt be able to cope in the week without them going at a weekend.
plus both dd1 and dd2 went to nursery when they were 3 and so will dd3 when she is old enough

Original poster

Enid · 21/02/2006 10:59

personally I would go out of my mind with depression if I spent 2 hours a day in bed or sitting doing nothing

hence working part time

OP posts:

Earlybird · 21/02/2006 11:00

Some of the women I know who don't have office jobs, have a housekeeper who also looks after the children as/when needed. For the most part, their husbands work very long hours and while they provide the finances for a very comfortable life, they do not contribute any practical help around the house/with the children. In fact, the husbands often travel extensively for work and regularly work 12-15 hour days. So the wives/mums hire in an extra pair of hands for practical help.

Yes these women look great and spend time/money achieving the look - gym, hairdresser, shopping etc. But, they also coordinate complicated family lives and essentially act as their husband's PA. For example, several acquaintances are currently supervising extensive renovations of a new house (choosing all fixtures/fittings/paints/furniture/etc). Another is leading the resident's comittee for negotiating the freehold purchase of their building. Another is in the midst of coordinating a hospitality weekend for all the clients of her husband's firm (and their families, which totals over 100 people). Another is preparing to move the entire family to another country where they will be based for a few years.

These women lead exceedingly comfortable lives, don't hold office jobs, and they hire in help. They certainly aren't idle. And before you jump on me, I'm not condemning or supporting their choices - just sharing another perspective.

Flip

1 2 ··· 7 8 9 ··· 36 37