Justifying long term SAHM to DDs?

[whenwilltherebegoodnews]

I have a few friends who, because their DHs are high (6 figure) earners, are able to be SAHMs, and have no intention of ever returning to work. These women are all at least degree educated and previously had successful careers.

I just wonder, in such a situation, how a long term SAHM encourages her DD to realise her academic/career potential, if the example she sets is that her education is only a short term requirement until she meets a high earning man?

I'm not trying to start a bun fight, I'm genuinely interested. My own mother is university educated, and has always worked in some capacity, successfully managing her own businesses with being the main carer, and encouraged me to be financially independent.

Personally, I feel I have invested too many years, and too much money, in my education and career to give it up forever after only 10-15 years. I like to think I am setting a good example to my DD that career and family are not mutually exclusive.

So how does a long term SAHM reconcile this? Am I thinking too simplistically?

'if the example she sets is that her education is only a short term requirement until she meets a high earning man?'

Basically this OP is saying that SAHMs don't need to be educated.

Why would you put such a sexist statement in the feminist section if you did not want a bunfight?

thefallenmadonna, I guess my situation was slightly unique then, in so far as we worked in the same field, and my view was that if I could be flexible, so could he. Or failing that, support me financially so that I could make our family situation work.

But moving away from the personal, of course a woman's career is as important as a man's, the only point I was making is that child-rearing is also a joint responsibility, and that is also a condition of equality and I don't think we disagree on that.

Fide, i'm very happy thankyou. You can have a different viewpoint on MN you know, i checked the rules.

It wasn't your right to a viewpoint I was querying "Happy", it was your NN. I'm morbidly curious about how on earth you chose it.

Agree stealth bf is not a reason to sah, I bf my ds1 til 18m having returned to work ft at 11m. With ds2 I aim to bf til 2 but will be returning to ft work at 10m. (my dh will work pt).

I'm a bit puzzled at the point that a (nt?) 14 and 16 yo need a parent at home. I remember being 16 and on study leave home alone thinking it was the bees knees having the house to myself and having to make my own lunch etc, it seemed terribly sophisticated and was probably an important step towards becoming independent.

This thread has really saddened me actually. Where are all the men wringing their hands over these decisions?

The men are too busy bearing the whole financial burden for the family.

Loving the need for women to justify their life choices and apparently their existence in a section devoted to feminism.

"I'm a bit puzzled at the point that a (nt?) 14 and 16 yo need a parent at home" because my kids still need support. Because they love coming home to a welcoming homes filled with the smells of fresh cooking.

Because they love to sit down with me and unload their day, they love a cuddle and a kiss when they come though the door. They appreciate someone there to pass the sick bucket or make lemsip when they are ill.

Do these things have no value?

My children are 11 & 16 and no longer need childcare. I am genuinely bemused that a 16 year old on study leave needs 'looking after'. My DD1 earns money looking after other people's children (babysitting) - she can certainly look after herself & her wee sis when she gets home from school.

Teenagers need space and independence - my older girl is going to be on her own overnight shortly, in charge of the pets, and she cannot wait. She will be leaving home in a year or so, it is important she learns independence and responsibility now as preparation for flying the nest.

If I wasn't working, it wouldn't be because I had children to look after.

The men are too busy bearing the whole financial burden for the family.

Maybe you could set up a support group for the poor lambs. They don't even realise they are being victimised - they clearly need their consciousness raised! Most of them are even labouring under the impression that they freely chose their own lifestyle

I think there's probably more value in a 16 yo being able to make their own bloody lemsip given that in a couple of years they could be expected to live as an independent adult. Deary me!!

Spouting they cant afford childcare is just an excuse and should have been thought of before

Lack of affordable childcare is a huge barrier to women returning to work.

For us it was just impossible as I only worked contracts which required full time but were offered on an ad hoc basis so we couldn't afford ongoing fees.

I was at home with my children fir six years and it was hard work but so many positive things too. I don't regret it at all.

I work part time in a McJob now but have interview for ft position at my old pay grade. We are wrestling with holiday provision and school pickups for three children if I get it.

Ft work can be a logistical nightmare due to
Lack of childcare options

ithaka if you think that an 11 year old is capable of looking after themselves then I can't explain any more.

"I think there's probably more value in a 16 yo being able to make their own bloody lemsip given that in a couple of years they could be expected to live as an independent adult. Deary me!!"

so you would never make your OH a lemsip?

My 16 year old works too although he is still at school, he also has set up his own online business- so well capable of looking after himself.

As it happens I am a carer for my mother and alos work 30 hours a week running my own business from home. Being here for my teenagers is an extra bonus!

Yes of course I'd make him one if I was around, but I'm not sure it sits well as a valid reason to sah!! But you have now revealed that actually you aren't a sahm after all so I suppose it's rather a moot point!

I do consider myself a SAHM though- the fact that I earn while I am here is a bonus.

ithaka if you think that an 11 year old is capable of looking after themselves then I can't explain any more.

If you are incapable of basic comprehension, then it seems pointless me explaining. I thought my post was pretty clear that my 16 year old looks after children, including her wee sis when necessary. There, not so difficult to understand really, is it?

I think that is not a 16 year old's job. It's a parent's job.

And the reason I made my post (gah, being taken off subject by pointless sniping) is to illustrate that my children don't need childcare, ergo if I didn't work it would be for reasons other than childcare responsibilities.

As it happens, both DH & I work part time, which is a luxury we can afford. It does make it easier with the 11 year old, but we will continue to work PT, even when the kids have left home, so it is not childcare that impacts on our working choices any more.

That is what interests me, reasons for not working that are not childcare related.

I don't see why a SAHP needs to justify it to their DD. They may wish to discuss context etc. No doubt they will wish to point out that each family and situation is individual. Fat worse would to speak in general terms about what is 'right' or 'best'. Those conversations are both sexist and really really shit parenting.

Why though? What business is it of yours if someone chooses not to work. All this over the fence peering and judging others choices very odd get a life! The only post of interest on this thread was summer flowers. That's my worry for women too.

I suppose because the OP asked and I was interested in the answers. I only know one woman who never worked after having children (my MIL) and she is very sad and thwarted. I am interested in women and families and people. Maybe it is just nosiness, but I suspect we are all a bit guilty of that on mumsnet.

" I only know one woman who never worked after having children (my MIL) and she is very sad and thwarted"- that's a sad and thwarted view.

Your MIL may well have been "sad and thwarted" even if she had worked.
I am of an older generation and I have known dozens of women ( indluding my mother, and many aunts and neighbours) who gave up working after children.
Most of them were certinly not "sad and thwarted".

Contributions to life and fellow humans are not always measured in financial terms.

Not when the purpose is to pat oneself on the back whilst internally congratulating yourself on your own perceived superior life choices which is all this really isn't it?

And if you want "sad and thwarted" you could equally hang around the champagne bars in the city and chat to the late 40s women who have worked incredibly hard, realised they have left it too late for marriage and children and are freaking out when partnership is just more of the same. Some of them are my friends and it's shit for them. Life is too broad to judge like the op is trying to prompt people to do.