Stay at home mum of 1 child? Frowned upon?

[Spudulanky]

Why do other people/mums care?!

The child is school age.. its gossiped about.. but why??

honestly why???

Although personally I'd be really bored.

Why? I ended up a sahm because of postpartum mental health issues after the birth of dc1 and it's been many things...but boring absolutely not.

I gained another degree. I do a lot of volunteering, at the school, with Home Start, I'm on the board of Trustees for a charity, I help at Scouts. I get to use my skills, chairing meetings, successfully applying for funding grants and I get plenty of adult conversation.

Like most things in life...it's what you make it.

I think that a society where we're all working crazy hours is a bad one. Overall I think we'd be better off if most parents both do PT work
I agree with this.

I just can't get my head around this either.

Have your experienced many jobs in your life? You seem utterly convinced that this is the only way to expand your world and be an interesting person but many jobs are the absolute opposite of how you portray them. Many jobs are monotonous in nature, niche and increasingly lonely as WFH creeps in more and more. Nobody wants to sit around a dinner table talking to Keith from accounts about the latest tax reforms. People's occupations are often the least interesting thing about them unless you happen to work in a similar field or have a special interest in it. I'm not diminishing these roles as someone has to do them but it is ridiculous to pretend that everyone has an exciting, interesting career!

I also think the idea of financial independence is an interesting one. Most couples combine finances and make financial decisions together. Noone in that setup has real financial independence either and yet this is never seen as an issue. Independence is rooted in the power dynamics of a couple and are a lot more complex than whether one is a SAHP or not.

I’ve just been saying on another thread how wrong we have gone as a society that both parents HAVE to work and put their children into childcare whether they want to or not.

They might have a huge amount to talk about, their hobbies interests, music, books, politics, current affairs

perhaps. But from my experience the type of person who gets fulfilment from making house all day isn’t that kind of person. Sparky, curious people tend to need more from life.

there are multiple ways to contribute obviously. Raising children, paying taxes, helping people who need help. But if a person spends their days caring for one school age child and does nothing else, their contribution is lower than most others and the community will judge them for it.

My mum was a stay at home mum/housewife/whatever for years. She has a huge thirst for knowledge, is insanely financially savvy and deals with all my parents finances. She’s an ace at quizzes because she has such a breadth or knowledge. If I need any advice it’s her I go to, not my working father, siblings or friends.

You don’t seem to know very many people if you think only people who work can be interesting or interested.

Case in point regarding jealousy .

OP if you can afford to be a SAHM you will get many women jumping up and down in faux horror.

Enjoy your lifestyle and ignore them all.

I also think the idea of financial independence is an interesting one. Most couples combine finances and make financial decisions together. Noone in that setup has real financial independence either and yet this is never seen as an issue. Independence is rooted in the power dynamics of a couple and are a lot more complex than whether one is a SAHP or not.

fundamentally not true. The partner with the career and income will have far more options - and a much more comfortable life - than an non earner in any break up.

I think it gets people’s backs up because in a way you want a SAHM to say ‘I have a lovely, easy life’ snd often on here and in real life sahms talk about how busy they are. One sahm i know of moans to me how busy she is!

I always wanted to be a sahm but now glad I work. I think my children (primary age)being in some childcare benefits them as they have to learn to be more independent and appreciate being at home when they are.

My mum was a stay at home mum/housewife/whatever for years. She has a huge thirst for knowledge, is insanely financially savvy and deals with all my parents finances. She’s an ace at quizzes because she has such a breadth or knowledge. If I need any advice it’s her I go to, not my working father, siblings or friends.

What generation is she from? Because, agreed my mum was the same (until she retrained at about 40) but she hated being at home so did those things to ‘feel alive.’ If she were my age no there’s no way she’d have been a SAHM because her thirst for experiences was there

This is me. I’m autistic and every job I’ve had has lead to burnout and depression. Being a SAHM has been lovely, even though it’s been harder work than most of those jobs !

People have given loads of examples of SAHM who have been really active and engaged in a variety of things. The SAHM's I know are the same.

You also get boring people at work, of course, who have limited interests.

Like others have said if your child is in school
You aren't a stay at home mum
Your just unemployed (which is totally fine ) as im sure you have loads of things to do around the house and it's difficult to find a job to fit around your child's school pick ups /drop offs etc

You’re being utterly ridiculous.

You’re suggesting that women who choose to stay home have no interest in life outside of their own four walls? My mum chose not to work until much later life. She chose to stay home. She’s amazing and I’m so glad she stayed home for us.

She was interesting and funny and fascinating when she worked and when she didn’t work. I have other friends who work part time from home, so no leaving the house or socialising through work and they’re incredible too. And we rarely talk about work.

You must have a very narrow social life.

I imagine that you have an above average salary but many people by definition will be earning an average wage or lower. Some people will only ever earn minimum wage or just above it. These people aren't massively detrimented by being a SAHP in the same way you would have been.

On the other end of the spectrum there are people with so much wealth that there is enough financial wealth to go round even after a divorce. This is fundamentally different than those who are fighting over a very limited pot of money.

There are those that have been a SAHP but have the ability and qualification to get back into the workforce more easily or start a business. I have known women retrain to become teachers, nurses and project managers after years as a SAHP. Loads of people do a career change later in life and it's really no different to that. Of course though, it all depends on having the financial resources you fund this change which is why settlements etc are relevant.

God some of the comments on here are a bit mean, sorry. Maybe I'm just inefficient but I reckon I could easily lose the 6 hours a child goes to school for. Cleaning, gardening, exercise, lunch for me, washing up from breakfast and lunch, make dinner, maybe do some batch cooking for the weekend or other dinners, do a bit of searching on FB for second hand toys etc, supermarket shop.... It'd easily go!

Not to mention, if you stay at home you'll no doubt be expected to do everything mornings, evenings and weekends because you're "off all day" - so if that's the case then you really should be taking a nice coffee break and a longer break a couple of times a week.

It sounds lovely if you have a nice partner and you use your time well - it must mean your weekends are much more free for everyone to have fun as a family, but I don't know why people think "what do you do all day"!

I am back to work now after maternity leave and honestly it's such a break after 14 months at home. If I stayed at home until school years, I think I'd do it on the proviso I get an equal number of years off work with them in school to make up for it!

I also don't know who these people are who keep saying they work full time and see their child the same as you. My husband's hours mean he is out of the house for 10+ hours a day, and mine are at least 8-9. Kids are in school for 6 hours usually so you're doing 2 to 5 hours more childcare per day than a full time worker, or else they are not actually full time.

I hate how many people on Mumsnet seem to think childcare and housework aren't much effort and you should be doing all of it unless you work 50 hour weeks. I can only assume they have potato babies that just sit there because mine is a whirlwind of chaos!

If it helps, nobody I know would ever express an opinion either way on what parents do. It's none of anyones business! It's a noisy minority that have these strong opinions one way or another I think.

@stardii You can't work full time and collect at 3pm

I do.

So does my DH

So do all my colleagues

Who said they 'make house all day',? TBH I'd rather speak to someone who enjoys their life, regardless of what they do, than a judgemental one!

My DH is an equal partner and we share parenting, housework, etc.

No need to sacrifice and yes we have it all.

Just because you have a vagina doesn't mean the housework is your sole responsibility

Jealously that you are in a position to make this choice.
Ignore them. Enjoy your time.

I'm always surprised by these posts because we are part of a small close school community and I barely have a clue about what most parents do or don't do. There are some mums who turn up in riding gear. No idea if they own a stables, work in one or don't work at all but have a horse. Similarly there is a dad who does pick-up. No idea whether he works nights, doesn't work or is flexible. Why would I?

I just struggle to believe parents are really that invested in what other families do.

Who concluded that they do 'nothing else' (except you)?

You are a fan of the sweeping generalisations aren't you?

Firstly, I am talking about power dynamics within a couple. Just because someone has more earning power and arguably more options outside of the relationship this doesn't mean that they have more power in the relationship. If this were true then it would be impossible to have a truly equal relationship as there is always going to be one partner earning more than the other (sometimes many multiples!). Surely you know of couples where there is a big earning differential and yet decisions are made jointly? Why do you think couples with a SAHP are any different?

Secondly, you declare that 'all' earners have more options than non earners. This just simply isn't true. It's totally possible that a SAHP could have another source of money (trust fund, property, rich parents) that provide options or that they actually have more earning potential than their partner. The earning partner might not be earning much at all and non earner could be highly skilled and qualified. Not all sectors penalise time out of the workplace in the same way.

You must have a very narrow social life

I wish I had a friend like you. I'd just love to hear you have no conversation other than your job. Everyone wants a bestie like you.

you must be very boring

@SpiderPlanter im responding to you politely with every post, with my thoughts. But you keep ending on insults. It’s not good for debate.