Would you leave a £250,000pa job to be a SAHM?

[misosoup]

Ok, I've changed my name for this, not quite sure why....

I really enjoy my job and it is pretty well paid but since I returned to work after having DD2 I have been thinking a lot about this.

I can afford not to work, dh's income is nothing like mine but still above average although it will clearly be a huge drop in our standard of living.

And I miss the kids do much during the day... I spend 2 hours per day with them plus weekends. There is no way I can cut my hours any more and part-time is out of the question.

But I have worked so hard to get here, against all odds. I don't want to throw it all away.

Avoiding all the pro's and con's for a minute - Miso, I was a trader and now still work in an investment bank but on part-time basis (still on dealing floor, mgmt level), so it can be done. If you've got the balls to trade, you've got the balls to go to your boss and request flexible working. All the HR departments are terrified of not being seen to be doing the right thing, so will be a lot more flexible than you think. I was first on the floor of my bank (other than the admin staff) to request part time, and now there are a dozen of us doing it and bosses are over the moon because it is working well. You can switch from trading your own book to structuring or to research or to business or risk or transaction mgmt with minimal effect on career or salary. you've got bugger all to lose by asking and if they mess you about you have added bonus of being able to sue for discrimination....

But if you're at a Japanese bank, then you're probably stuffed.

The point is Poppets, for me, that whilst i need to work to fund living costs, when I am here, I do actually enjoy it. Time spent with adults and doing something a little more taxing than drawing/painting/building/playing/cooking/cleaning, not being responsible for two other little beings for a couple of hours. To be able to go to the toilet without being followed, no clambering over stairgates. There is nothing wrong with that. Really there isn't. I have been very fortunate, in that, whilst I need to work, I have managed to find a job where I get the best of both worlds. Largely because of the cost of childcare, but also the desire to spend as much time as possible with my children. These jobs are few and far between.

I dont know if you are aware, but, it is actually cheaper for working parents to work full time, because childcarers (nurseries AND childminders) charge more for part time hourly rates than for full time places. This is to maximise their own earnings. The difference in cost can be up to 40% extra to look after children on a part time basis, and nurseries usually limit their hours to "sessions" ie only mornings 8 till 1pm or 1pm till 6pm or full days.

My childminder charges me double what my hourly rate at work is to look after my two children. Its fortunate that I work extra long unsocial hours to make up for that.

uwila how upity can you get, have you heard yourself?

Whitecloud I totally agree.

But why is it deemed an old fashioned notion to want to stay at home and nurture your own children? There has been such a huge shift in our culture within the last 20 odd years but why? it's because people 'must have'
people are so much more obsessed now with having stuff (not just people on a big income, this goes right through the classes and income brackets)
This has to have a direct influence on the modern idea of mother going back to work so soon after having children.

People hiding behind the idea that they have no choice make me want to question, as whitecloud has, what about the kids? what would they want? what is their right? what is really best for them? are our children being failed because of our 'must have' society?
Just take a look across the channel; france, italy, germany. How can we have such different ideas about family values to them? Is it because we are programmed, in this country, to believe that going back to work straight after kids is the 'right' thing to do?

-we get help with childcare costs, we have huge investment in childcare services and we are continuosly drip fed a corperate money money money work work work pension pension investment blah blah from the country leaders.

good old fashioned values are what I stand for.
and so do the kids.

"But why is it deemed an old fashioned notion to want to stay at home and nurture your own children?"

I don't think it is; it is rather old fashioned to think that's what every woman should be doing, though.

lol at ks and the hand gnawing.

my response to the op is this: no, I wouldn't leave a 250k job to be a sahm, I'd work 2 months and then leave to be a sahm/novelist/activist/lady of leisure (depending on what mood I'm in) and live for the rest of the year on 40-odd k. in fact I'd live for some of the following year too, if not all of it.

VVV, I just personally struggle with the idea that some mothers don't see the real importance of taking just a few years out to spend with their babies. Even if it is dull or boring -do you really think that anyone would be able to care for your child as well as you could; being the mother. Even if you do think that, what about how the child feels about that? there are some cases where the child just needs their mum, and no matter how much anyone else tries, they are never going to be able to fill your role complety.

KW is it old fashioned to believe that that is what every child deserves?

In your opinion has the culture not shifed at all then in the last 20 odd years?

shifted

but poppet, I am not looking for this.

"and no matter how much anyone else tries, they are never going to be able to fill your role complety. "

I'm very happy with being my children's mother - there's no vacant role to be filled.

I would be very surprised if anyone wanted what you're suggesting we do.

well how very, very upsetting and depressing.

not only do us people who have to work for a living have to go to work, leaving our kids with strangers, but we have to put up with people like poppet calling us selfish and wondering why we had children in the first place. then telling us that we really could afford to give up work if we tried hard enough.

some would argue why have children when you can't financially support them on one salary alone? but if we had waited till then, biology would have made it impossible. a whole generation of people who missed the housing boat are in the same situation. i hope history will not judge them as harshly as you.

it just adds insult to injury really.

reading report after report which tells us that our children are no better than those left in orphanages.

I should be more thick skinned than this, and am taking it far too personally, but it hits right below the belt tbh.

There are 2 or 3 people that I know would do as good a job as (if not better than) me, and they currently do play an active part in my childcare arrangements. I am pretty confident that my children are happy with that, judging by the excitement on their faces when they see these people. That speaks volumes to me, anyway.

I don't think there are many working parents that send their child off to someone whilst they work, who they don't think could do a good enough job in their absence.

I disagree with your assumption that because someone makes an adverse choice/decision to you, that it is because they "dont see the real importance". There are probably many other factors involved in their choice that you "dont see the real importance" of. Does that make you wrong too? I think it just makes us different and diverse.

hei, I'm Italian and I'm the only one among my Italian friends who is a sahm. True in Italy maternity leaves are longer, but taxes are also higher...

hei, I'm Italian and I'm the only one among my Italian friends who is a sahm. True in Italy maternity leaves are longer, but taxes are also higher...

My decision to SAH was based on 1. I didn't particularly like my job, 2. DH earned just about enough for us to afford for me to give up work if we made a big effort to budget hard and 3. (this is not in order of importance) what happens in the first two years of anybody's life are the most crucial. I had confidence that I would do the best for my children for their first two years. Also Floating On The Med makes valid point re. children NOT needing constant stimulation. Just like tiny children not needing a low fat diet - "muesli malnutrition" isn't it called? Babies and toddlers are different to grown-ups, or maybe very similar? - I truly believe because I've been persuaded by the arguments of Penelope Leach et al that they need love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love, consistency and security. Now that I know how hard it is to love young children every minute of the day, I'm glad that they weren't in the care of people who were paid to look after them rather than actually love them.

"do you really think that anyone would be able to care for your child as well as you could; being the mother."

Yes. I have loads of faults. Fathers, mothers, grandparents, nannies all can do a very good job. We're not talking about putting children out to wet nurses for 5 years or shipped to Cumbria for 4 years because bombs are falling on London. Just having someone else care for them during the working day. Children can benefit from that variety of people in their lives as long as they have consistency and konw that those who love them will be there including fathers. A nursery school teacher when the children are 3 won't love them. An evening babysitter won't but those people don't damage the children in their care who still see their parents on a regular basis.

So it's morally and psychologically neutral decision in my view unless the parents (male or female) cannot themselves cope with leaving the child with anyone other than a parent in which case they need to organise things accordingly.

ha! taxes are higher in spain too, but maternity leave is 16 weeks.

GQM, excellent post

there's a difference though between a child makin their own fun cos mummy has to get on and do a few chores and mums who just leave them to their own devices all day, cos they just aren't very good at the creative, imaginative thing - not everyone is and also maybe cos they would rather be elsewhere. i love spending time with my ds, but since i have returned to work and my studies i find the time i have with him is far more beneficial and interesting as opposed to when i was on matl eave and with him all day and we never really did a fat lot tbh!

well, Italy is the country of mamma...
ehm, not really. It si vitually impossible to get part time. if you want to get back to work after say 3 years, ha forget about it! If you want to save enough money before having children to stop working forget about it as well as lots of people's salary is ridiculous even if they have degrees, specialization etc, we used to have, at least in the north, a great network of nurseries, but they are not enough anymore, ups, sorry about the rant, absolutely out of place.

Some days just about anyone would be a better parent to my children than I am. Halfway through some mondays I'm desperate for Wednesday so I can go to work and have some time to myself, a pee on my own and a proper lunch break. But that's just me.

I really do think that xenia is just winding us up. A lot of the posts are very self righteous and patronising. Not all SAHMs are the same. SAHMs should get treated with the same amount of respect as WMs.

You can be an SAHM and still be a feminist, if you want to stay at home to care for your child how is that not liberating than working long hours and not seeing them often? I'm part time employed but a full time mum. I started work after ds was 18 months and although I'm glad to be at work again, I really cherish the times I have with him and am hurt when he prefers another adult over mummy.

I've given up a day and given up a volunteer role with the nct and feel tons better for it.

Women should just be respected for their choices.. sadly we are still a long way off from that

But why do women choose to stay home more than men? Surely that suggests they're conditioned for it or something like that. Why aren't there as many men at home as women on mumsnet?
I hope I don't patronise anyone. I think the balanced posts have been mostly from the working mothers. It's teh stay at home oines who seem to feel threatened. I don't feel threatened by stay at home mothers or guilty. I thik I made the right choices for our family. Don't see why the SAHMs can't also respect both choices and not assume their way is best.

Oh give it a rest Xenia - you can bore for Britain. Every time I keep searching on "Threads I'm On" this thead pops up with another tedious rambling post from your good self....[sigh emoticon]