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.

did i mention the full time nanny and the 6 month holiday to our private caribbean island?

well then in that case you are a very spoilt little devil. I'm disgusted.

The French reward large families through tax allowances, I think (there is a falling birthrate) and good child care. We tend to a more benefits type reward and I am not sure we have that balance right.

I said apparently because that is what is said, not that it's my view. In fact my brother's view is that the best sign of success for men like him amongst his friends is the ability to be able to afford a non working wife - it's a kind of status symbol he says - I earn enough to that my wife doesn't have to work, show off, show off. It's rather old fashioned. Not sure how many women amngst his contemporaries shows off that she has a stay at home husband. Look at me I'm so rich my spouse doesn't have to work.

good grief this is proving to be quite a thread for airing everyone's grievances isn't it? Why is it that we can't just accept that people are different and just because some parents choose to raise their children differently from others they are not necessarily wrong, just different. I work and pay taxes but I don't mind for a minute that some of my taxes go to provide benefit to single mothers to stay at home and look after their children. Goodness knows if I were ever to end up in the position of being a single mother, I would probably appreciate some benefits! Neither do I mind that some mothers earn £250K working their metaphorical balls off in a job that I wouldn't do for twice that money - that's their choice! I would much rather even more of my measly taxes went on supporting other people's children than paying for the war in Iraq. Lighten up and live and let live, people!

pass the spliff

Xenia i cant believe your letting "spliff" be the last comment.

i thought you were right wing?

Rhubarb: PLEASE NOTE, i am using your comments to spark off my own thoughts about the general state of families/benefits etc. I am not getting at you directly.

"No mum should be forced to leave her young children in childcare because society says that everyone has to work and pay their way."
But surely it is up to the individual to decide whether they can afford to have children or not. the world doesn't need more people in it, and we're no longer tilling hte fields when we needed more people in our families to help out. So why should society at large support those who choose to have children when the are not in a financial position to support them without benefits?

"How about fair pay for workers? If my dh was on a fair wage I wouldn't have to work!"
Now this one I do want to respond to you personally on. If your DH isn't being paid minimum wage, or getting a minimum of 4 weeks holiday or getting statutory sick pay he is being employed illegally. You can and should fight this.
If he is working a f/t week and is over 21 his minimum earnings should be £11,128 a year based on a 40hr week. Minimum wage DOES apply to casual workers, contracts etc.

So why should society at large support those who choose to have children when the are not in a financial position to support them without benefits?

I should not have had my kids then.
Regardless of what i have paid 'to the state' in the past and what dh still pays.

Dont want a scrap btw, just want to maybe hear more opinions on this.....i think.

I think it is about time that the government realised the benifits to a child for it's mum or dad to stay at home with them. I understand that it is not for everyone, I decided to stay at home and I never thought I would say it but I do miss work and the social aspect that comes with it. However I am a childminder I have to do this as I could not afford to live not working. My partner works and his wages mean that we do not qualify for low income so we cannot recieve benifits. Money is very tight and luxuries are none existant anymore but I love being at home with my son, I just wish it could be a little easier

surferchick, same here. we are not classed as low income either but are eligible for tax credits of some kind -i have not looked into it and child benefit, which i believe everyone gets, regardless of their income, £11kpa or £500,000pa.

Hi LadyFlowers, I would not consider you to be "on benefits" if all you are getting is child tax credit/child trust fund (which as you pointed out, everyone gets) and claim child tax credit. The tax credit is just tax relief/rebate ie means you/dh are paying less taxes to Gordon Brown out of your working income than you/dh otherwise would. You ARE still paying your own way.

riab - if dh tried to assert his rights he would be laid off, let's just take a look at the REAL WORLD shall we? Construction workers like him are employed on temporary contracts to cover work as and when, if they start asserting their rights they are made unemployed and the company states that the work dried up, very common in that industry. Plus it's a small world round here, once he starts making a fuss no other construction company would employ him. So it is for many people.

As for people only having the children they can afford, again let's get back to the REAL WORLD shall we? Both of mine were unplanned, as are many babies, you only need to look at Mumsnet to see the number of accidental pregnancies that are on this site alone.

My ds goes to nursery 4 days a week from 9-3.30 and he is just 2.5. In my cosy ideal world, all parents (not just mothers note) would be given the choice to raise their children themselves until the age of 3 when the child is of nursery age. I think in those formative years it would be highly beneficial for both parent and child to stay together.

The family is falling apart and we are criticised for having the most ill-behaved teenagers. Perhaps that is because mums are too busy working and when they get home they are too knackered to give their kids the time they need. No family meals, no family time at all.

Rhubarb, I don't think working mothers are the cause of Britain's ill-behaved children. Which "REAL" WORLD are you in?

Incidentally, just because some reporter says Britain has the worst behaved teenagers doesn't mean we do.

Rhubarb - did you see my post of 5.01 yesterday about not needing to take a lunch hr if you only work for 5 hrs? (been a lot of posts since then)

I wouldn't fall into the trap of justifying your choices FITF. You were entitled to the benefits you received and you shouldn't be made to feel guilty for doing your best for your dd. If other people feel their tax contributions are being spent unfairly, they can go and live somewhere that doesn't have a welfare state and turn a blind eye to people starving and freezing to death every winter. Personally I like the fact that I live in a civilised society which safeguards its children and families from the worst extremes of poverty, but of course not everyone shares that preference. I think it's a bit rich for Uwila to be calling others selfish for their choices though.

FITF, certainly don't resent you claiming benefits, because I feel ok about contributing to a welfare state,( although i do have issues with how the benefits system is structured, but this is mainly around sick/disability benefits ),.My issue would be that it was not necessarily the best option to give up work..why could you not look aftr your child, and work...maybe even part time ? It sounds like you have a lot to offer the society your child lives in.....I am not just a parent, but a worker too..I guess I just don't understand why some women think it is only possible/desirable to do the parent bit.There seem to be so many disadvantages to this to me.

iota - hi, yes I did thanks. But you see, I already work through my lunch hour for free. Such are the demands of my highly paid job!

I like my job, I like the confidence it gives me, but I don't like having to put ds in nursery.

No Uwila, working mums are not the cause of the ills in this country and actually I do believe the statistics about the teenagers. But the government are paying mums to go to work, and punishing them if they don't. I get more handouts if I work than if I don't, which is effectively forcing me to work to stay on top of bills, what choice is that?

And floatinginthefire - pay no attention! When dd was born I stayed at home to care for her, I did all the housework, the finances, I took her to toddler groups, I was her teacher, I decorated and I baked and I gardened, I went to a college course and I volunteered at a school one morning a week. Many people tried to tell me that I didn't work, as if what I did didn't justify a wage! I like to think I did a bloody good job in raising dd and everything else I did! Which is why I feel so much now for ds that he isn't getting that time from me. He is very clingy now and makes a fuss if I go out of the house, I can't help thinking it's because I leave him almost every day for 6.5 hours

Make the most of your time at home, you are doing an invaluable job and forming a close bond with your children, you treasure that. Childminders get paid to do half of what you are doing right now! It's about time the government saw just how much hard work sahm's do and how vital they are in bringing family values to this work obsessed society!

Rhubarb, your DS is not grumpy/clingy because you spend 6.5 hours a day away from him, that is utter nonsense ! I spend 12 hours a day away from my 5 children,( 6 months- 5.5 ), and they are not grumpy or clingy but happy,( well most of the time ! ),well balanced, confident children.The difference between you and I ? I am happy and confident about my choice, and I think pretty well balanced too.Your son is picking up on your insecurities/unhappiness.It is NOT about hours clocked up.....that is so wrong.It is about quality of care and interaction.You are playing an absolutely vital role in society by being economically active,it is so important to your son and daughter....and I'm not just talking about £££, though there is that too.You are being a vital role model to your daughter especially,( and all other girls too ),so give yourself a pat on the back....and love yourself a little more !

Rhubarb - on the basis that the Govt are not likely to start paying out money for SAHM's any time soon, would it be worth your DH trying to find another line of work which pays better or at least offers a bit more security?

Or are there places where his skills would be more in demand so he would get paid more? Thinking of london - olypmic village etc, where trades people are in very short supply?

OTOH, would you feel any better about things if you took an evening job, so that DS didn't have to go to nursery? That way maybe DH could have them in the evening and put them to bed, but at least you will have spent the day with them? I would have thought that evening work wouldn't be too hard to come by, although it isn't likely to be particularly fulfilling - stacking shelves or whatever?

From living in France are your language skills good? Could you earn money from tutoring instead?

FWIW - I have always WOTH for at least a little of the week since having children and while I do understand that it can be knackering, I think it is possible to do that and still be a family! 20 hours a week is only a small part of the overall time you have to spend with them!

Mozhe - I think that is all well and good for you and I do agree to some extent with your views. But the fact is that Rhubarb isn't happy with the situation - she doesn't want to do this, but has to to make the books balance!

On that basis I think it is a little optimistic to expect her to be full of confidence and joy at the situation!

And her DS is probably clingy and upset because unlike your children and mine, he is used to having his mum around all the time and I think it is quite natural for him to take some time to adjust to the new situation.

I think it is just too glib to expect everyone to see things the way you do - it is fantastic that you are happy with your choices - but Rhuby hasn't got a choice and that is pissing her off! Big time!

If someone can find dh a better paid I would be over the moon, absolutely! It would be the best Christmas present ever!

But the work has to be in this region (Cumbria) because he also wants to be with his family. He is a fully qualified digger driver, but hasn't got a licence for lorries or buses. He's a good mechanic, i.e. he can repair cars and things, but no qualifications there. CAT me if you think you can help!

I think I am lucky with this job in that it is working for a company that I like, the hours are flexible so I can drop dd off at school and pick her up, once ds is in school it wouldn't be a problem. BUT it is terribly paid for the hours and responsibilities that I have, which makes me feel bad.

I have spent a lot of time bringing ds up, I worked in France too, but nowhere near the hours I'm working now. I saw a lot more of him in France and of course the huge difference there was that his dad also had a huge influence on him from an early age. So one of us has always been there for him. Now we've taken him out of that country, into a new one (for him) and straight into the nursery. The fact that he seems unhappy makes me unhappy and I have seriously thought of packing it all in to be with him, but my job is stable and we need that right now.