Being a stay at home Mum?

[yummymummy1988]

I'm now a stay at home mum to my 10mo DS, my DH was supportive of my decision not to go back to work. Most days go by fairly quickly, although to be honest we don't do much in the way of going to groups or anything.
Two questions really, do you think I am holding him back by it being the 2 of us at home the majority of the time?
And did you feel like less of a person when you decided to become a SAHM? I have friends and hear of women with babies similar ages who are working FT or running businesses and manage.. I'm home all day and my DH is lucky if he comes home to the bed made and tea in the oven! Just feeling a bit useless really.

If you financially depend on a man you’re not equal partners, regardless of how it’s described
I just don't agree. There is SO much more to the balance of a relationship than the finances. If we split up I would have been secure financially and he would have been the one looking for somewhere to live.
My career break was the best thing ever for my career.

It's a pretty sad reflection on your relationship if you judge the balance of it based on how much money each of you earns.
As for being reliant on another adult - we rely on each other. Emotionally, practically, financially.

Spending time with my children was more important to me than furthering my career. Trying to do both can something I didn't enjoy.
I was confident that we had a strong enough relationship that we weren't going to split up (I was right)

But the most important thing is that the decision I made, made me happy. I was happy, my children were happy, my husband was happy. Life is about being happy. WE, as a couple, were financially secure enough to make that happen.

Tipsy,yet again you’re having a go at me.and putting a face to lessen the PA
Read my posts really carefully,I do not address you or anyone else I such terms
Clearly something I post or something yiu think I represent irks you

As for make up, I have an expansive colour range.as make up.like clothes suits mood and occasion

You however,again,chose to make a cliched gag that I Power dress as that’s what women who leave their children with strangers in nursery for 40+ hr week do. Right?

Probably lipstick. yes actually I think it’s a fact, working mums who put babies in nursery 40+ hours per week all power dress.
Or , then again, maybe it’s the same nonsense as ”sahms are prickly with me because I have a career, they have cognitive dissonance and are jealous”.
See. Assumptions. Ridiculous aren’t they.

No.again. You’re off at a tangent.trying to justify what you write
Lame gags and so on
I’ll continue to post,feel free to interject,as you do

Thanks for the permission lipstick

It’s how mn works tipsy.i post,you post,and other folk post.on it goes
You didn’t seek permission nor do you require it.but you know that already

Lipstick, if you were independently wealthy (inheritance, property, whatever) would you still have chose to return to work full time? I’m just wondering if you work full time because you enjoy your job so much or if it is purely financial?

Good question!Without a doubt I’d continue to work.its not about money at all.it helps,mind
I love my job,it suits me, it’s academically interesting,suits my personality.like my colleagues
Work is important to me,I was raised to stick in at school,not depend on a man.

These threads are tricky. Basically no one wants to feel shitty about their choice (understandably) particularly when it comes to such an important subject as how you raise your children or were yourself raised. There is research supporting both models (though for different reason) and people tend to (subconsciously) cherrypick the research that backs up the choice they have already made.

What I find interesting though is that in all the (justified) talk about equality the standard is set by a male, testosterony , capitalist set up. For a woman to be successful she must do what men have traditionally done. That’s great. But why does no one tell young men that they should aspire to do the roles that women have traditionally filled? Because caring is not valued as highly as producing. And that is a bit of a problem in my opinion.

In a capitalist model,you’re disadvantaged without capital.thats how it goes
Your fundamental mistake is to conceptualisie tasks/jobs as women’s roles
No point harking to a simpler/different caring should be valued model
That doesn’t fill a basket at Tesco,pay mortgage.so if woman financially dependent on a man she’s at risk

Lipstick I do agree which you will see from my previous posts. BUT the pp who says that capitalism has things the wrong way around is entirely correct. Care is just as valuable as earning money and you see how long society would last without unpaid carers (not long). Care should absolutely be valued (and compensated) and other countries e.g. Norway and Finland offer more generous remuneration for SAHMs and more support for when they do get back to work. To write it off as unrealistic is to just bow to capitalism. My preference would absolutely be for a society that values care and I think people should fight for that by forcing male partners to take an equal role in caring and domestic labour. Once it starts being men's work as well as women's work, it will start to break down some of the stereotypes that women are naturally suited to staying at home.

Until that happens, I think women need to be aware of the risk they are taking and I only say that because of my experience of seeing so many who thought they were financially secure but were left with very little when their marriage broke down, often at the instigation of their husband.

I think it's good to have the debate and opposing views. I genuinely didn't understand why someone would want to be a stay at home parent - this thread has given me those perspectives.

Obviously I think my set up works the best - that is why we are doing it haha!

I do think that my husband is equally as 'good' at looking after our children as I am. I also think the nursery we use is great - there are also childminders and nannies who I know are fab.

I get loads of fulfilment from working - much more to it than the pay check, as does my DH. We also both get loads of fulfilment from parenting our children. We share and we are equal - if we were to split I would look to be equal with another partner...it is attractive to me to be on an equal footing in a relationship. That is just my view - I would be uncomfortable being financially dependent (even saved equally for my maternity leave so ha wasn't paying when I was off).

Providing you are happy that is all that matters. I know lots of toddlers in FT nursery, full time at home and other mixes... They are all fine and happy!

:)

The most important part is that you are happy with the choice you made. Weather you are a sahm / full time mum or like yourself staying at home most days with dear child. Don't feel bad because of what you think others will perceive.

I wanted to be a sahm but after the birth and post depression, realise sahm is not for me. I find it boring, lonely and was having very hard time making mummy friends. So I started going back to work not long after for 2-3days pw just to keep me sane. my son is now 3, I still only work part time and I still don't have any mummy friends to hang out. (Majority of his friends at nursery have full time working parents). We used to go to playgroup when he was younger but now he does 2 classes after nursery and most afternoon we go to playground or anything to keep him busy. I would love to do play date but I'm shy and find it stressful (I always worry how other mums would judge me / my son as he is very boysterous). I know I shouldnt feel this way but I can't help it.
I'm trying to enjoy every single moment we spend together as other says kids grow up so quickly.

Ok, can't be bothered to read the bickering in the full thread so for what it's worth here's my opinion. I had a good career, good pay (£40k a year) and liked my job. I am now a SAHM to a 1 and 3 year old and LOVE it. I may or may not go back to work, I will certainly be paid less if I do but I don't care one bit. I have always wanted children and want to look after them myself. I don't mind how other people chose to bring up their children, that's their business but personally I can't see the point of having kids and then getting someone else to bring them up. It's not an easy option, some days are really tight, my DH works away a few days a week and it can be lonely but it's for such a short period of time and you never get these years back.

OP just wanted to give you my opinion if it helps. I totally wanted to be a SAHM but after about a year I was feeling quite low, isolated, under stimulated even though I was out and about at groups and with other mum friends. Only you know how you feel. But I can tell you now, the day I went back to work and dropped DD off at nursery I felt I had claimed something of my previous self back and have been happier since. Be fair to yourself - you can't make a decision without trying both ways. Could you do 1day a week with someone/nursery looking after your little one and just see how you feel? Strongly encourage you not to exclude yourself from the workplace just because your husband has a good job!

OP, try the SAHP board (under Parenting); maybe the people on it will be less rude and patronising than some who've responded to you on this thread.

The OP clearly wasn't asking for a course in Feminism 101, or to be told that by SAH she risks being left high and dry if/when her husband walks out. She was asking from reassurance from people who had made a similar decision - and she got it, but those posters have been drowned out beneath the tidal wave of indignation and judgement and snide comments at her life choices. Shame on you.

Confused as to why she shouldn’t be told about the risks if dh walks out and she has no independent income. That clearly is a risk, as many thousands of women can attest (and some have here). Why is it wrong to point it out? Is it good to make these decisions from the ostrich position?

Karlos the op has already stated that if something happened like her and her DP splitting up that she would return to work if necessary.

I think it would be ridiculous for women wanting and able to be a sahm to return to work just “in case” their partner leaves them. If we lived like that there are many things people would never do just in case something happened.

Personally I think the ideal scenario is working very part time. Myself and quite a few friends work 2/3 days per week and have used nursery or grandparents for childcare.

I found my children having 2 full days in nursery beneficial as they got to do things I really have no interest in like crafty stuff, messy play, baby yoga etc. This meant I felt no guilt in not going to playgroups or other baby activities. I hate stuff like that and had no interest in making mummy friends.

I think being a sahm and staying in every day would eventually become boring but I don’t necessarily think you have to attend organised groups. I filled my days with walking our dog, play parks, soft play, swimming, visiting family etc and never ever missed being at work or felt bored.

Both my children are at school now and I still only work 2 days a week, we manage well financially so I have no intention of going back full time. If anything I think kids need parents around more as they get older.

OP just wanted to give you my perspective. I am a qualified professional who was planning on going straight back to work full-time after mat leave. I started to feel funny about it around the ten month mark so cancelled the nursery place and became a SAHM. I felt that DS was too little to be left all the time and I was jealous if the nursery spending all that time with him and bringing him up. We have had the best tie. Some days are hard but it's worth it. My DH pays the big bills but I work freelance so I have some income.
DS is now just over two. We go regularly to playgroups, which he has needed for interaction as he's got older. We do playdates, we seem to live at the library some weeks, ad we try and get out every day. But. He's getting bored now I think and needs more social interaction with other children. So, he is now hopefully going to his original nursery. I've also been offered a professional level post.
What I'm saying is it I'd possible to have a career break and be a SAHM for as long as it works for you. Going to groups helps. It doesn't have to be an isolating experience.

Oh and working in a post where you have the holidays off helps too!

Don't doubt yourself op. If you and your Dh are happy with your decision and your son is happy then it's fine. Don't compare yourself to others that are working at the same time, this is their equally valid choice and has no more or less value.

With Dd I went back to work at 9 months because that's what I wanted. With DS I took 2 years because that's what worked for all of us at the time. I now work part time (but almost full) and am happy with this too. Different patterns for different stages. You've got time to work again when he's a bit older if you want or need to.

Well said blackgrouse, I choose to use a car for transport. There is a risk I might get into an accident.
I choose to commit to marry one person, there’s a chance that when I’m 50 he might leave me. I will have missed out all those years being single tied to one man who theoretically could leave me ( I hope not but the statistics speak for themselves).
I choose to Drink red wine every weekend and have a takeaway. I have a higher chance of health problems.
I choose to work slightly less hours on a flexible system , therefore I have reduced my earning, pension contributions and realistically zero chances of promotion until I go back full time.
Why would choosing to be a sahm be any different. Any choice has some degree of risk.
If we all worried about the chance of a negative outcome every time we did something no one would ever do anything with the slightest risk attached to it. Why not stay in bed wrapped in cotton wool. Then again the bed bugs could get you.

You are absolutely correct tipsy

Well said blackgrouse, I choose to use a car for transport. There is a risk I might get into an accident.

But you have insurance, right? Your analogy would be more accurate if people say don't get married and have kids in case you get divorced, which nobody is saying. You can actually be a SAHM and still protect yourself by insisting that your partner pays into a policy to reflect that you are missing out on a pension. I have seen a lot of husbands paying huge amounts into their own pensions but with no thought for their wives who will not have access to a private pension of their own on retirement age. You can also keep up to date with skills, think about freelance work etc.

The thing I pointed out is that its very easy to say 'ah, I will just go back to work if I get divorced'. I had a client who had worked in PR 15 years ago. She couldn't even get a job stacking shelves in Tesco. She did get a job as a home carer though but that is a difficult and low-paid job. There may be exceptions but unless you have tried getting a job in middle age with no work experience, it's impossible to know how hard it will be.

I am not talking about a 2 year career break either. I am talking totally giving up any career plans and thinking divorce will not happen to you. If I was to do that, I would insist on assets being transferred to my name plus a pension scheme being set up. I would not take the risk of being fucked over having provided all the childcare and homemaking work for god knows how many years.

The worst thing is though that the whole system is stacked in favour of men. My preference would be that there be much stricter rules of compensation for SAHPs on divorce as well as state payments and an enhanced state pension to reflect the fact that SAHPs are performing a valuable role and making a financial sacrifice. As things are at the moment though, it's a risk.

I agree Wildbluebells that women need to ensure they are not putting themselves in a risky financial position but money isn’t everything.

Myself and DP started out fairly equal financially, by the time we had our second child DP was earning more and the balance had tipped to him being in a better position if we had split up. At this point I decided we should get married as it would put me back on a more equal footing. Very unromantic but I am quite a cynical and pragmatic person. Everyone’s situation is obviously different, for some women remaining unmarried would be better for them financially.

At the end of the day your children are only children for a relatively small amount of time. I felt I would never look back and regret having a career, I would certainly regret missing spending more time with my children. I suppose it depends how important your career is to you.