Giving up £60k job that I love to be SAHM

[Moomo]

After a lot A LOT of thinking I have pretty much decided not to go back to work and to be a SAHM - at least for a couple of years. But am giving up a £60k job that I really enjoyed to do so. DH earns £30k so it will be a massive drop in our income but I just can't face going back to work and leaving DS in childcare.

I was just wondering if anyone else has done the same thing and whether friends/family etc have been supportive as most people I tell think I am totally crazy and try and convince me not to do it. I'm not so worried about my career but a bit worried about the loss of income - we can still pay mortgage, bills etc but will be alot less luxuries/no saving/pension etc.

Would be really interested to know if anyone else has done the same/similar thing and how it worked out. I'm pretty confident of my decision but when everyone around me tells me I'm crazy I have moments of self doubt!

(obviously my typing is more accurate on their

And apologies for the mini hijack!

OP

My DH and I each work 2.5 days and look after DD (13 months) for 2.5 days. I earned about the same as you FT and DH now earns about the same as your DH.

It was a big salary drop but we moved out of a prime central City location to rural Cumbria where I am from and where prices are a bit cheaper. We also have less money to do stuff. However we are back in the area I grew up in where my parents, several friends still are, so we have a nice feeling of connectedness.

Each to their own, but for me personally the thought of DD being in childcare made both DH and me feel very upset. It was juyst never going to be for us. I guess a lot depends on how much you define yourself through your job - if it means a lot to you, then it will be much harder to give up. For me, my job isn't a huge part of my identity, though I recognise that it brings benefits of being stimulating, having nice colleagues, doing work of public/ national relevance etc.

To be frank I feel able to enjoy my 2.5 days at work because I know that DD is at home with her daddy.

I'm in a fortunate position, I know.

My priority is my child and always was! Come on, Pammi, just because you are a SAHM it doesn't mean your are prioritising your kids any more than us owrking mums.

DD has always been at the forefront of my mind - that is why I went back to work when she was so tiny, to pay the rent for the house over our heads, to pay for food and clothes and for us both to live.

Turned out I thought if I have to work I am going to bloody well work my way up the ladder and make a success of my life. Which I did.

LadyB: miaow.

Ditto Cristina.

My actual point to the OP was that she should do what's right for her and her family, not what anonymous MN posters with their own ishoos say. The OP, and only the OP, can know what's right for her, and she will act accordingly. We all have our own slant on it, but that's essentially irrelevant to her.

Well if that was your point IHJL why the hell didn't you say so? I'm afraid I think that's a steaming crock of shit and you're backtracking madly on a thread full of women who actually enjoy their careers.

I don't really think it's bitchy to tell you to sod off considering you've just told most of the women on this thread that we're not 'proper' mothers. Now that is bitchy. And a bit sad.

I know this thread is all about emotional response but there is some merit in being practical here.

There's a massive difference between £30k a year and £90k a year in terms of income. Far bigger than the difference between £200k a year and £600k a year.

So how well you can adapt to relative poverty is going to be an issue tbh. £30k is below the average for household income. It'll be constant watching pennies. Going wild will be a coffee out. Dispiriting. Also dispiriting will be not being able to contribute to university fees, music lessons etc.

i think most bases have been covered, but just to point out how expensive kids get as they get older.
this week, for my DDs (age 4 and 6) i have paid:

• £352 for next terms swimming lessons and 1 week intensive swimming (30mins day for 5 days) over the summer hols
• £180 for next terms tennis lessons
• £56 for DD2's ballet lessons

and i am not working at the moment.... but we can afford to live well on dh's salary, but there will come a time when i will need to go back to work (secondary school fees if required, university to pay for...) so do take the advice to keep your hand in / freelance / minimal part time / unpaid leave which you can then add a maternity leave onto and bingo they will be at school before you know it.

babies & toddlers, if you are not paying for childcare, are relatively cheap!

OTOH what are your dh's career prospects? dh is earning almost what our joint income was before i went on maternity leave with DD1. He wouldn't have got the promotions/progressed without me at home supporting him and taking care of everything here.

LadyB: please read the thread properly before you accuse people of backtracking. My comment on 08 July at 13.44 read thus:

"Moomo, I hope you won't let the comments on here influence you either way. People feel very strongly about the way that they do or don't combine parenting and work, and they all have plenty of evidence to back up their own beliefs and needs. I could cite endless evidence for my own conviction (namely that children are better off being cared for at home by a parent for at least the first three years) - but others would simply counter it with evidence to show the opposite.

Ignore what anyone else says or does. Make your decision based on your little family. Don't try to second-guess what might happen or how you might feel in the future: so much can happen between now and then. You have one child at the moment: it's very trite, but you won't be able to go back and have his childhood again. You need to decide what's best for you all now.

FWIW, when you're a SAHM, every hour - nay, every minute - can sometimes seem like several years. But when your son is five and starting school, those years will seem to have gone terrifyingly quickly."

So where exactly is the backtracking to which you are referring?

If you feel that you're not a 'proper' mother as a result of what I believe is right for my family, that's your own issue. I haven't said that at all. I've said repeatedly that my perspective is based on what's right for my family and me, and that others obviously feel differently. I don't think that's bitchy, even if you do.

I was referring to these comments which immediately preceded my post so it wasn't difficult to figure out what I meant.

Comment 1(Ditto nursery 8-6, five days a week, 47 weeks per year). God, what a thought.

Comment 2 Child A is with nanny from 7am-7pm Monday - Friday, 47 weeks of the year. Who is his/her primary carer? Surely nobody could say it was the parents.

So frankly this:

I've said repeatedly that my perspective is based on what's right for my family and me, and that others obviously feel differently. I don't think that's bitchy, even if you do.

is a crock of bullshit. If it's about you and your family, then there really is no need to have a pop at mothers who (gasp) choose to return to work.

Let's hope you're never in difficult financial straits which might mean you'll have to swallow everything you've said

It wasn't a pop. It was a fact. How can anyone be a primary carer if they don't do the primary caring? I don't mean that they love the child less, or that the child loves the nanny/CM/keyworker more. Of course they don't, and it should go without saying. But the primary carer is the person who primarily cares for the child, namely does all the mundane, routine stuff with and for them. If you are at work for most of the year, you simply cannot be the primary carer. That isn't bitchy: it's a fact.

I did then get frankly horrified about the idea of a small child being in nursery for that amount of time. I personally think it is wrong for children to be in nursery for so long, and there is much evidence to say why. But, as I said, there is also evidence that could be cited to the contrary, should anyone choose to do so.

I'm not having a pop at mothers who return to work. If anything, I'd be having a pop at the whole of society being skewed in a way that puts children's needs in second place and makes life miserable for mothers (and fathers) who would actually like to be at home with their families.

lol at a nursery worker being the primary carer of my ft nursery-going child.

Iheart, you are completely ignorant. How could you be otherwise - you never had a child who attended enough hours of nursery for you to make an informed comparison.

I don't think my dcs are confused who their primary carers are, even if yours might be.

I guess you have to add all those mundane hours of childcare to big up your ft SAHM role to 'primary carer'. Otherwise, it really is just mundane hours of childcare ...

"FWIW, when you're a SAHM, every hour - nay, every minute - can sometimes seem like several years."

ROFL. Have you thought of working?

Iheart, how does society put children's needs second place and make your life (of wanting to be at home with your dcs) miserable, exactly?

Thought you were living your dream life of 'prioritising' your dcs.

What are you going to do when your DC go to school IHJL? Presumably their teachers will then be their primary carers given that they're going to spend so much more time with them than you do

Oh I was trying to stay away from this but as you can see I have failed.

IHJL there are lots of things you are not taking into account because you don't use childcare in the way others do. Please be reassured that not many kids are in nursery / with nanny full-time in the way you are thinking of.

Fathers play their part, as do grandparents. Maternity leaves can be up to 13 months and are repeated for later children. Extra holidays can be bought. Sabbaticals can be taken. There are breaks in contracts for the self-employed. There is night-time parenting to consider. There can be continued breastfeeding. All these things can be behind the iceberg of an ostensibly FT WOHM's childcare.

It does not add up to 7-7, 5 days a week, 47 weeks of the year. There was a thread on this the other day.

Coming to this rather late, but just to add my experience, I stopped working nine years ago when I had dd1, now ds will start school in September - the time has flown by and I wish I could do it all again! Not quite sure what I'll do with myself now they'll all be at school, but I am quietly confident that it will all be okay, and even if I just fill my time with voluntary work, it was soooo worth it.

with regards to income, it much depends really on the size of your mortgage and other outgoings, and where you are in the country. I do think it's possible to live comfortably on that amount, especially if you don't fall for that ridiculous belief of "you might have to spend money on school fees"! No you don't, your children can get a perfectly good education in the state sector.

Oh, this is so frustrating.

One at a time, ladies.

Blueshoes: why might my children be confused? You are confusing me now.

Sorry, but I stand by the primary carer being the one who primarily cares for the child every day.

Society doesn't make my life miserable ffs! I've not been miserable once since giving up work: I am living my dream life now. I am lucky. I'm talking about the women who would (I did use the word 'would' in my post, but you evidently overlooked it) hugely prefer to be at home with their children, but who have to work in order to survive and pay ridiculous mortgages for ridiculously priced houses.

Quattro: I did have a job. Every second felt like a lifetime sentence, never mind several years. That's the main reason I left it. It didn't feel like that until I had children.

LadyB: as my children go to private schools, they're only there for about four weeks per year. We've already had a week of the summer holidays, and have nine more to go. I think that probably makes me the primary carer.

Iwantcats: absolutely. I am talking about the small minority of children who are in nursery for that kind of time. I'm glad it's a minority. If I had a f/t job with a 60K salary and wanted to keep my job, I'd employ a nanny. I have known some fabulous nannies (some rather better than the children's parents!)

Well bully for you. You could have a nanny if you choose because you can afford one and that's acceptable. You can afford private school so that's also okay. So basically if I could afford to do all the things that you deem acceptable for me to work, that would be fine.

So again - this is nothing about you and what you think is best for your family (and I'm glad it all works for you, truly). It's about you deciding that women who can't afford to pay for the Very Best for their children are a bit shit.

I'm sorry you didn't enjoy your job too - that's really not much fun. But some of us don't have children as an escape from the drudgery of FT work, some of us (like your husband presumably) have them as a way of enriching our happy lives.

I really am mystified why you are being so horrid to IHJL now. Fwiw, I understand what you mean IHJL and I agree with you, even though we couldn't afford school fees in a million years.

I am 'being horrible' because she has told me and all other WOHMs on this thread and another that we are not actually proper mothers to our children if we go back to work. I find that pretty offensive

emkana - the reason is quite simply that people get pissed off reading this kind of shite from mothers who are clearly bored/jealous/unhappy in some way.

The parents are the primary care givers - whether they work full time, part time, or not at all. What is so difficult to understand about that fact?
And if you happen to stay home, why would you be so obsessed with trying to convince yourself that a parent who works must be handing over primary carer responsibilities to a CM/nanny/nursery? Smacks more than a little of trying too hard. If you are secure with your situation, then don't be resentful of other people who enjoy theirs!

OP - I think it definitely worth exploring the options of flexible/pt working with your employer. Just so you are aware of your choices. Hopefully you will be in a position where it doesn't have to be all or nothing.

FWIW I earn almost the same as DH, but he works ft and I work 50%. I would never get such a good part-time job if I had left my job when I had DD and then tried to get another one at a later date. My boss wanted to keep me, and I was able to call the shots to a certain extent.

I work mornings only, 5 days a week, and my DCs are in (my employers) nursery for 4 hours only per day. They love it, and they still spend the majority of their day with me, and have the same routine every day.

THREE of my SAHM friends's husbands have been made redundant in the last 12months. It is a horrible situation to be in, and I am glad that we have chosen to 'hedge our bets' IYSWIM.

Oh good lord. What?? On what planet did I ever say I could afford a nanny?? This is getting more and more bizarre. I couldn't afford a nanny in several thousand years. I said I gave up my job. I'm talking about la-la land where other people earn the kind of money that would pay for a nanny if they wanted to. Academia wouldn't ever pay that even if I hadn't given up my job.

I can afford private school because we have a 100 percent scholarship on the grounds of DS's phenomenal brightness. Is that acceptable, or do you still dislike me for finding ways to avoid schools in special measures?

Good lord. How far from the OP have we come? All she wanted to know was whether other women have given up jobs and survived. The answer is yes, and lots of them are glad they did so.

As for my husband: no, you are wrong again. You are making assumptions. I am not revealing anything about my husband or what he does - it's his business to do that or not - but you really, really don't have a clue. No reason why you should, but please don't jump to conclusions about him or what he does.

Violethill, there is much envy and resentment on this thread. It is not coming from me. Why on earth would I envy people who are doing what I wouldn't want to do in a million years? As for making assumptions about what my children do and don't need or want: that is just low. If I said that other people's children are probably 'bored shitless' at nursery, it would be spiteful and untrue. The same goes for what you said.