Why is SAHM/ wanting children such a taboo?

[Jadeyspade]

I have always wanted to have a large family - 3-8 children would be my personal ideal however I understand why this would not be for everyone. I work outside the home however I prefer any work to be secondary to home responsibilities/ care of children.

It seems to me that to want a large family/ SAHM/ a family setup that would be completely the normal 2 generations ago - in these days (and especially on mumsnet) is a taboo?

My Grandmother was a SAHM with 5 Children - her role in life was "Wife and mother".. Deep down I have always wanted what she had. Since been an adult, I have worked extremely hard to get career/ delaying children etc to achieve financial stability. Despite this I feel trapped in this career and unable to afford the children I want despite working so hard. In all honesty, I would trade my career for the life my Grandmother had given the option

i am accepting that the reality is I may not fulfil my "large family dream" due to finances/modern lifestyle pressures etc however it seems to me that to admit to wanting these kinds of things in the first place e.g. SAHM/ a large family/ traditional setup attracts judgement and been frowned upon

I spoke to my 80year old neighbour recently - he was telling me that in his day, it was seen as a shame if a woman had to go out to work as it meant the husband not providing well for his family. I definitely feel it's a good thing that society has moved on from this and that women can choose careers/ not have children if doesn't want

However I feel it's a huge shame that society has gone so far the other way and on some level I don't think feminism has done all women favours. women are often forced through financial reasons to return to work and been a SAHM/ wanting children seems to be quite judged

I am unsure about feminism and it's place here. i basically believe if a woman wishes to work/ focus on career she should be free to do that. If a woman wishes more fulfilment in family life/ motherhood that's fine too.

I have been reading more recently about the rise of one child families/ threads about women feeling they have no choice to have a child/ another child due to nursery costs/ finances etc and think it's actually quite sad that society has gone so far this way in supporting family life

Thoughts??

I think it's because it leaves you vulnerable and dependent on a man. Throughout history it was (and still is) a terrible thing for many women and children to be so utterly dependent on one useless or awful man.

Then capitalism saw an opportunity to squeeze more out of each family (2x the income if both parents have to work) and so the cost of everything rose so much that 2 incomes are pretty much a standard requirement nowadays.

Because you would be totally vulnerable if he ducked off somewhere else?

Having lots of kids is fine, the problem is you are then financially vulnerable and completely reliant on another. That tends to not work out well for millions more woman. Most remain trapped too…can you imagine being trapped by another? Having no choice but to stay? Even if he changes or cheats…it gives men way too much power over another.

I'm not sure. SAHM isnt common here. Everyone is out working.

But I've been made redundant and fell into SAHM-ing. I love it. My bond with DS is amazing at the moment.

But I am actively looking for work but there isn't much about (architecture in a shit part of the UK!)

I feel constantly judged and ashamed for being unemployed / temporary SAHM 😔

I was a SAHM for 8 years with my two and I loved it.

I know two architecture firms who have been advertising for months and can't get anyone. You're very unlucky. Glad you're enjoying this career break

@justasking111 ahh so frustrating! It's my location! Rural UK - 100 miles from a decent city (smaller local city is hopeless!!). WFH isn't ideal in architecture. We might move though x

I haven’t seen anyone have problems with it IRL to be honest although it’s quite rare where I live in London.

I think the issues with it are the financial dependence on a partner which then means you can lose the ability to make choices if you end up in a depressing or worse abusive situation. Even now with us both working it would be very financially difficult for myself and dh to split up (albeit I am higher earner). We just couldn’t provide TWO decent homes for our kids.
Or some people may have an issue with your financial dependence on the state to raise the children, child benefits, tax credits etc. Because if you’re not working and your partner has an ordinary job it’s very likely you’d need financial help.

tbh I think parents should feel able to have the children they want. And fertility rate below the replacement rate of 2.2 children per couple (as it is in UK) will no doubt cause problems. Countries will have to rely on immigration for a working age population and that of course has its own issues.
Also think any parent that wants to stay at home should, glad I don’t feel obliged just because I’m the woman. My dh works less hours than me and has Fridays with the kids.

I don’t think it’s taboo at all I think for the reasons you’ve mentioned it will cause an eyebrow or two to be raised as people will wonder how you can afford to do that.

I don’t think you can blame feminism for the fact that we are getting poorer! It’s great that women can have careers now when it was harder before.

Whats not great is that we are living through a cost of living crisis. Both parents often now have to work to afford a house and the lower earner might need to give up work if nursery fees are too high.

Child benefit is pretty much non existent for a lot of families now, and the funded nursery hours don’t cover the cost of nappies, food etc so parents still have to pay a top up amount so it’s not really free.

We are all getting poorer in this country, and have been for some time.

I think feminism is just about women having a choice - not about there being a right or wrong choice. If you want to be a sahm that’s fine, if you want an occupation outside of motherhood that’s fine too. So the feminist principle isn’t flawed it’s just that society and its governments haven’t really got on board with the idea of equality for women. Women are often still unprotected financially if they choose to be a sahm and childcare options are still very limited for ‘working mothers’. Unfortunately ‘having it all’ just means having all the work- many women are pretty run down trying to juggle everything but for some of those women it is important to have an identity outside of motherhood. However, the children have to be looked after by someone and because childcare isn’t valued in society, it is often unpaid grandmas or poorly paid childminders/nursery staff who end up doing it. So perhaps it is a flawed feminist ideal if women only have these choices at the expense of other women.

As others have said, it's not about being a SAHP particularly but the loss of any power and security that often comes with it.

It all seems great when the relationship is going well. Have a couple of kids, lots of promises and good intentions but then it goes wrong and you're fucked if you have nothing behind you.

Nowhere to go if you want to leave because you have no money, potentially a big gap in work history, no savings that are yours.

You want to end the relationship but you can't stay in the house and cover the mortgage, you can't get a mortgage yourself.

My friend is absolutely strewed, in a low income job because she gave up the flashy career while he jetted around, climbed the ladder, earns a fortune.

So it's absolutely not about women's choices, it's about the potential impact of them.

I don't think being a SAHM if you have the finances to support it is looked down on. Women are advised to make sure they still have financial independence, which doesn't have to mean having a job, it can also be having full access and equal access to all household finances, ensuring you are on the mortgage and the house deeds and having legal contracts in place to ensure fair access to funds in the event of a relationship breakdown.

What I think is criticised and in my view, not unfairly, is when people choose to get pregnant knowing they cannot financially support their children. Any reasonable person thinks it is absolutely right that benefits be available to people who have had an unexpected change in circumstances meaning they need financial support, but to actively plan to bring another child into your family with the expectation that the government will fund that choice is different.

I have a friend who on the outside looks happy, lovely house , wife stay home , 2 children at uni. They have made sure she has a pension during the time bringing up children. She now refuses to return to work in any form - he has already had a heart scare & needs to slow down . But expectations of children & her is he will continue to provide the lifestyle :( it’s sad he’s terribly depressed.

My working class upbringing all the females worked, Granny’s on both sides. Only SAHM were middle class & as my Gran used to say the very wealthy just outsource - nanny’s & boarding school.

Did your grandmother have a choice in being a SAHM? Did your grandfather have a choice in going it to work?

It's easy to look back upon a past you never even lived with rosy coloured specs.

Life had moved on. Divorce is not a social taboo any more and it's certainly more prevalent than in bygone years. There's absolutely nothing wrong with being a SAHM as long as husband/fathers are on board with that too, but it's less prudent than it was years ago. At the end if the day, that's down to each individual's risk assessment.

What's not on, is looking at a man as though he's a failure and expecting him to work more, change his job etc.in order to fulfil your 'dream' if that's not what he wants from his own life.

Hit the button before I finished - husband & i share the workload. We both equal responsible for our home & children. I don’t think he would give up the relationship he has with his daughters & experiences just to work harder & longer hours. I’ve treasured the time I’ve had with them & have a balance.

As long as you are paying for this lifestyle yourself and not expecting the tax payer to fund it then great. Go for it.

Yes but doing something you don’t want to do your whole life as an ‘insurance policy’ doesn’t appeal and I can see why 🤷🏼‍♀️

If you make a rational choice to be a SAHP and you have a spouse who is in agreement and supports you practically, emotionally and financially (preferably via a contract, including providing a pension) it’s a completely legitimate option. Especially if you have a career you can return to at a later date.

I don’t think there is judgement as such re: SAHPs generally. It’s often the situations/partners people go into being SAHPs with that cause questions to be asked. So many people (the majority women) leave themselves incredibly vulnerable.

I know quite a lot and am one myself. They fall into two categories, husbands who work away/stupid hours for lots of money and those on benefits.

Experience makes me think it's nearly always a bad idea. Dh is mostly a good man, very much a product of his upbringing but since I ended up a sahm, he works and I do everything else, despite studying for degree number 3 and working ad hoc hours for the LA. The status quo suits him so everything I moot returning to work, he finds reasons as to why that would be horrific for our family. So basically I collect degrees and do loads of voluntary work in between making sure his life and that of the kids runs perfectly smoothly. Compared to many of the sahm's I know, my life is great because I can do what I want/go where I want/spend what I want but it still feels like a cage sometimes.

It's easy to look back with rose coloured glasses.

The reality is that many women were stuck with abusive or otherwise horrible men, the only other choice being poverty and shame. Real shame and judgement, as in being unwelcome in many spaces and discriminated against. Not your perception that people might be looking down or judging you for wanting more than 3 children, but this not actually impacting your life at all.

Thank feminism for the money you've been able to earn and keep in your own name - your own bank account. Thank feminism for the education that allowed you to type the above. Thank feminism for the subsidies that families get towards childcare and the fact that employers are willing to hire you and pay you a liveable wage instead of 'pin money'

I couldn't care less if you want to be a SAHP. Assuming that your partner/spouse is happy to support you financially, I think it's nobody's business but your own.

I do dispute the false dichotomy in your OP which seems to imply that women should be able to choose between a focus on career or motherhood but not both.

I am afraid I absolutely judge big families simply because of the impact on the planet.

It’s not taboo. It’s great if you can afford to, but just don’t expect hard working tax payers to fund you doing so.

I tried it for several months and quickly got bored, so I went back to my career before I lost my skills set/earning power.

It’s not for everyone.

Whatever you do, do not leave yourself vulnerable as you’ll be fucked if your relationship does not work out.

I see your point but the only way I'd even consider having a large family and dedicating my life that of home-maker cum SAHM is if I was completely independantly wealthy irrespective of my husband's financial position. Men can walk away relatively unscathed by the breakdown of a marriage - though they'll often have someone waiting in the wings, but women rarely so and if there are children involved absolutely not. Imagine finding yourself heading for divorce at the age of 48 with 6 kids having not worked for the last 15 years - how do you even begin to plan to make that work. Life now is not as it was in the past.

Agree with many of the points above. It’s clearly not taboo - there are loads of SAHMs around. Everyone above has pointed out the risks and the potential downsides that can leave you very vulnerable. If your grandma’s husband had been abusive, if they’d had a terrible marriage, if he’d changed after children - it wouldn’t have been great then and she’d have been truly trapped.

I think people also can smile a bit wryly when someone with no children says how they’re dead keen to have 6,7,8 kids. Reality is often different to expectations and kids can be v expensive - especially housing that many. It can sound rather naive and divorced from the reality of many. Are you in a relationship at the moment, planning kids? Is this entirely theoretical?

Also, Dad’s with big jobs/who run businesses can do school runs too. Mine does.

Men need to share the parenting of their children. No excuses.

You can work to earn money and also be a great Mother. It’s called working hard/juggling.