What's wrong with being a SAHM?

[Roseandlily]

I am not a feminist (I don't think). I currently earn more than my partner but when our baby is born I will be a stay at home mother. I love the idea of striving to be the best mother, home maker, having the tea on the table for when he gets home stuff. I love the idea of it all. But when I talk to people and they ask "oh what's your plan, how long to you plan to take off work?" And we both say I won't be going back and this will be me at home for say the next 10years give or take.

I would like to add that we would like to have 3 children so I will be at home until the last child starts school.

I don't care about amazing holidays we have done that :) or fancy cars, both had what we wanted and now have got sensible cheaper cars. We are married and have a lovely home.

What do feminists think is so wrong with this? And why do people make me feel weird about this?

Painful, it often feels like a judgement. I think it is often meant as one.

Whenever I've read it on here, it's definitely been a warning, because it's a huge risk that needs to be accounted for when making plans.

Marriage, shared accounts, good life insurance coverage, keeping up your career part time all mitigate this risk - they keep your options open. I know too many women who've found themselves trapped (my sister who can't afford a tank of petrol to visit my parents because her and her husband have separate finances, and she is SAHM so has virtually no money), a friend of a friend who's partner died, and she found herself kicked out of the house they'd shared for 10 years by his children because she had no stake in it, and he didn't have a will, to take that risk myself.

Ultimately, the 2 women I am concerned about and want to warn, are my 2 dd. It's not a judgement

We are all vulnerable. Maybe a different type of vulnerable but vulnerable all the same. For example, armour protects a person from impact but it also affords must less movement.

Why would I be bored? I think most people have jobs which are pretty boring - or at least routine - to some extent.

Lovely for you, Natalia. But I think you misread me.

I'll repeat - I don't think there's anything inherently wrong or bad or anti-feminist about being a SAHM. But the SAHMs I know who are exhausted and bored and resentful tend to be in a bad place because they've slipped into a damaging pattern of how the man lives vs how the woman lives based on cultural ingrained sexism, which neither party intended going in. It isn't inevitable - but it is something to watch out for.

Spaghetti, so how would you have managed my particular risks? Managed advocating effectively for a child through SEN process and flexible schooling? Managed to not get breast cancer? Managed having people care for you through the treatment? (It would have to be very expensive insurance indeed to cover all the help you need through treatment).

53rd And equally, I know plenty of working mothers who are exhausted and resentful and doing jobs they don't enjoy, because they've slipped into a damaging pattern of living up to a certain lifestyle that can be bought by two incomes which they now regret as they feel that they don't get to spend the time with their children they'd have liked. Also not inevitable, but something to watch out for.

There isn't a perfect choice. You can't have everything (at the same time, at least!) because you can't be in two places at once. So you make the choice - yes, on the basis of thought and consideration - which works best for you and your family in your own particular circumstances.

Clarity, if you think womens jobs are insecure and at the mercy of exploitative bosses then presumably mens jobs are equally precarious. Why risk family ruin by having one earner in a unpredictable job.

OP I am a SAHM and DH works full time. I have only became a mother 2 years ago and am enjoying it so far. Before that I was self employed in a creative industry so very flexible - should be easy enough to set up again, but my point is, I had very little job security/no guaranteed income before DC anyway. You are the breadwinner currently so just pointing out that our circumstances are different, it made a looooot of sense for me to give up work.

Our set up is:

• Joint mortgage
• All joint bank accounts except one savings account in my name (with 'his' money in!) and an ISA each
• Both have life insurance
• Both have wills
• DH who does his fair share of housework - your job is to look after DC, not do EVERYTHING. You are a stay at home MOTHER, none of those words suggest anything to do with cleaning :)
• DH who loves his job, enjoys working, appreciates that he would hate to be a SAHP
• Packing away a fair chunk of DH's salary each month in case shit hits the fan.

I plan to go back once all the kids are in school. Set up my own business or something. We are very fortunate though.

If DH dies, well, he has life insurance.
If we divorce, everything is joint, so while it will be shit, we should be OK. Maintenance would be a good amount. I don't see us divorcing! But most married couples wouldn't I guess.

There's a lot to consider but the set up definitely works for us currently. If it stops working, we'll mix things up.

Why yes, Natalia. And if the OP's post was "what's wrong with wanting to work full-time with children?", I would be pointing out those things too. But it wasn't, was it?

53rd. Indeed not. But the nature of the question lent itself (on my interpretation, anyway) to a balanced discussion of the issues. Which involves putting both sides across.

Clarity, if you think womens jobs are insecure and at the mercy of exploitative bosses then presumably mens jobs are equally precarious. Why risk family ruin by having one earner in a unpredictable job.

Because one person being able to wholly concentrate on their career is often more financially lucrative. From there, investments become the safeguards.

The people I know have jobs, not careers. Neither dp nor I have ever been offered the chance to work longer hours and become more successful.

What about health? That too is precarious. Or elderly parents. Or kids needing extra input. You can't say 'life is unpredictable so it's better to rely on one wage earner', because with respect, that makes no logical sense.

I think a feminist can be a SAHM but I think it is important that you reserve the right to change your mind.

You might love it (indeed many women do) but you might absolutely hate it. At the moment you have a theoretical idea of what being at home with your DCs will be like.

Also something like 50% of marriages fall apart (even more for cohabiting couples). You need to protect yourself financially

I have been a SAHM, worked part-time and full time and they all have their pros and cons.

Because one person being able to wholly concentrate on their career is often more financially lucrative. From there, investments become the safeguards.

This point is often missed in these debates, although, to be fair, it is probably really only applicable to very high earning professional jobs.

One of my SAH friends was a corporate lawyer for a City firm. She went back to do a bit of project work, which she said was okay, if boring - and paid about 20% of what she'd have got for the same "time" if she'd been full time. So, yes, she and her DH could both do this and split the childcare and earning between them.....but they'd have a lot less money as a family. And significantly less financial security than they have with one SAHP and one high earning, long hours working parent. Depends on your circumstances.

What about health? That too is precarious. Or elderly parents. Or kids needing extra input. You can't say 'life is unpredictable so it's better to rely on one wage earner', because with respect, that makes no logical sense.

If you read all my posts Morris, you should see I am not saying that. I am saying that we cannot negate all vulnerabilities. Instead we should be adaptable and tenacious to be prepared to do what is needed for our families and ourselves as the need arises. Different people encounter different opportunities, encounter different challenged and have different strengths and weaknesses. This makes for different people being vulnerable differently even if put in the same situation.

Financial dependence is not exactly synonymous with being vulnerable. If you are successful at managing relationships, if you are financially dependent sometime in your life the impact can be lessened or completely negated. People who only have unsuccessful relationships are reliant upon having unbelievably good insurances and paid support if they become dependent on others for care due to health issues.

I think most professional careers its incredibly difficult to return with a big gap being out of work on your CV. Most women I know who gave up work never returned to work again and I think its at least important to realise its a complete career killer.

But surely the point, from a feminist perspective, which is what the OP is about, is that it's virtually always the woman who stays at home. For most men (and their employers) the idea that they might be the one to give up paid work isn't on their radar. Once a baby stops being breastfed (or isn't ever) then there's nothing a woman can do for their DC that a man can't, but it is still so ingrained in our society that childcare is woman's work. Should that ever change, then being a SAHM will be a feminist choice.

(And of course there's the problem of wifework - that, regardless of whose working and earning, everything to do with the house and family is down to the woman to plan and execute.)

For all those saying how employment is exploitative, etc. then why is it OK for men to do this? Why is the choice to stay home almost always made by women?

Spaghetti, so how would you have managed my particular risks? Managed advocating effectively for a child through SEN process and flexible schooling

Suggested that DP do it while I concentrated on my career.

Managed to not get breast cancer

Men are at risk of getting sick too.

A friend of a friend gave up her lucrstive legal career so her DH could concentrate on his also lucrative legal career. Shame he also developed a secret gambling addiction and lost his job, house and also marriage.

She now lives in a council flat, with her 2 children (who also had to leave private school) and is in a minimum wage job. He doesn't pay a penny in maintenance. Her being 15 yrs away from her old career wasn't a huge selling point for prospective employers.

I was a SAHM mum for 8yrs and I have nothing against it but It has taken me a good 7 yrs to get my career back on track. I had to restart on minimum wage job and do professional qualifications competing against young employees with no caring responsibilities.

I was lucky because my DH wasn't an arsehole. But I've known many women whose DH has had a complete personality change upon become a father and there is really no way of predicting this.

It's
Your choice.
I chose to go back to work and so glad i did
DH got made redundant and I was able to pick up the slack for a few months.
The qualifications for my work have changed over the last 10 years and it is more difficult to get in. So over the years ive had in house training to keep me current.
I liked the idea of being a perfect housewife. By the end of mat leave I wad ready to go into work mode!
Keep your options open. SAH maybe best for you but it may change over time!

Equally my DH's lucrative legal career has gone from strength to strength despite his wife working .

He didn't need someone to do everything for the family so he could devote himself to it and absent himself from domestic life.

I was with you clarity, until this...

'If you are successful at managing relationships'

That's is the whole POINT. You can't successfully manage an abusive relationship. Women end up dead, trying to do that. Or a husband who has affairs. Women need to be able to exit relationships, if need be.

It's a terrible insinuation, that women who find themselves separated/divorced/alone are in that position, because they can't manage relationships

He didn't need someone to do everything for the family so he could devote himself to it and absent himself from domestic life

Excellent!

My DP is a high earner. His occupation more-or-less assumes a SAHW looking after him and travelling with him. There are long hours involved as well as frequent moves. I refused. I'm a definite minority though and I am often held to account for this and told I am 'mean'. I think his career has suffered to some extent, but that's really not my problem. It also means he has to cook, clean and shop for himself when he's in places that don't provide accommodation. However, he's been offered contracts where he has seen the money sign and it's like the old cartoons where this appears in the eyes and it is all the character can see. I've suggested that he negotiate for more leave, shorter hours but 'KERCHING!!!!' wins the day. If he and other men were really concerned about sexual equality and dismantling gender roles then they'd fight for more time with their families or indeed looking after themselves in other ways if they don't have families...

There's nothing unfeminist about being a SAHM. It is work and very important work.

But people on a feminist board are going to point out the risks to women. Just as they'd point out the risks to women in a variety of jobs.

You could of course become financially better off if your DH decides to invest money from his career. But he might decide not to.

Your kids could have a high standard of living if your DH decides to spend his money on them. But he might decide not to.

I was married to my DH for twenty years. I was a SAHM for much of that time. He became financially and emotionally abusive. He earns a very high salary. I don't earn enough to pay rent and so am living with a sibling. There won't be money for me from a house sale, because DH ran up massive debts on his own hobbies.

So I now basically have nothing financially, have had to leave behind everything I know, and there are very many women in my position. I am in no way unusual.

Now, I am still glad I was a SAHM, because getting to spend all that time with my kids was so amazing. Money isn't everything. But you have got to really be prepared for the eventuality that you could end up in poverty and insecurity, because it happens to many women, and none of them believe when they get married that they will be the one it happens to.

I don't believe being a sahm is a feminist choice. It offers no challenge to the status quo

But the status quo is now women returning to work after a year of mat leave.
Most women work in some capacity these days.

So most definitely choosing to be a sahm you are challenging the staus quo.