what lengths would you go to to give your child a SAHM/D?

milliebear00001

Downshifting groceries

nancmat wrote: »

Going back after 9 months.. seriously?? I'm going back on Feb 1st 3 months after birth, mortgage and bills to pay and baby will be at a wonderful nursery where my mother works...

SAHM has never appealed to me to be honest, I enjoy my work too much and will hope to enjoy my day of and weekends with baby far more..

Is this your first baby? You won't know how you'll feel til the baby's here! I know lots of women who were adamant they were going back and then were desperate to stay home when crunchtime came. Also know some for (including myself!) for whom the opposite was true, although I lasted five years at home before getting my husband to swap roles!

flea72

feelinggood wrote: »

What counts as a decent wage? We could afford for me to stay at home on a salary of £22k. We could have easily managed on a lower income, by downsizing (we were in a 3-bed), not having the car, getting rid of luxuries like smoking, alcohol, internet and sky.

since i was replying to Skintchick's post, i was referring to her OHs wage at £36k as being decent

Also £22k could be classed a decent income, in relation to people who earn min wage

im just trying to point out, that some people are already cut-back to the minimum, but still cant afford to do it. Yes i could downsize, if i thought 5 of us living in a one-bed flat, would mean i could stay at home, and our lives wouldnt suffer because of it, then i would. we have looked at getting rid of our car, but public transport it rubbish here, so we just use the car as little as possible. Dont smoke, drink rarely, and luckily internet comes free with phone package (life without MSE, i might as well end it all now!)

Money gives people options, would you still be able to be a sahp, if your OH earnt min wage? ie could you just downsize, cut a few bills/luxuries. This country has a very large economic divide, and its only since the recent downturn, that alot of people are finding out what its actually like to live on minimal money - you should see the face of some city earners (who didnt think about rainy days) going and signing on - 'yeah i can survive on £60 a day!',.... 'what! £60 a week?'

Flea

galvanizersbaby

Downshifting groceries

skintchick wrote: »

I know! :rotfl:

Baby is due any time in the next five weeks, but we are aware of our ages and so I don;t expect to be able to work for many years as I want to stay at home until they all go to school at the very least.

Of course, life might not pan out that way but right now it looks OK so that's the plan, but it's also whay we don;t want a huge mortgage when we move as it's a real financial burden then.

Good luck - hope the delivery goes smoothly and it all goes to plan

ella_ella_ella

Downshifting groceries

skintchick wrote: »

Flea - the OP asked what lengths would go to to, not what lengths have you gone ot, so I answered based on what I'd be prepared to do.

In actual fact, I've not HAD to do any of those things but I would if I needed to.

You asked do I think we're poor? No, I think we are comfortable, and it's a nice place to be I admit.

As for space - it is OH and me I'm thinking about more than small children! WE need some space and it's not possible even now it's just the two of us, so will be utterly impossible with children in this tiny house.

It's also intriguing that you;ve decided it will take us ten years to have three children! We are planning on doing it quicker than that because of my age, and the age gaps we'd like to have between them.

But I do think you've misunderstood the thread. It was asking what you WOULD do, not what you HAVE done, so that's why I have posted on here.

I have to agree, I replied to this thread based on what I WOULD do, not what I HAVE done.

Rather than cutting back we have probably done the opposite since having our daughter, as I said earlier this could be to do with OH landing a better job with more money just as I left my job or because we work together as a team now but whatever it is we are much better off.

When I fell pregnant we lived in a 3 bed terrace with hand me down or ebay bought furniture, 2 years later we live in a four bed detatched newbuild, we have new furniture, I have a new car, we bought a touring caravan, I dont check prices in supermarkets, just pile it all in...

Maybe we could cut down but why should we? I couldnt live watching what I spent all the time, I couldnt go without my car or spend my days wrapped up in wolley jumpers to save on heating.

So, I HAVENT gone without anything on the list, but I would cut back if I HAD to

flea72

skintchick wrote: »

It's also intriguing that you;ve decided it will take us ten years to have three children! We are planning on doing it quicker than that because of my age, and the age gaps we'd like to have between them

no not ten years to have all three, just that most bodies can cope with a baby every 18m-2yrs, so on those time scales, theres usually 5yrs between youngest and oldest. so what i was saying was, by the time the eldest was 10, the youngest would only be 5, and pre-teenage years, children dont really stay in their rooms, other than to sleep, so its not like you need a bedroom for each one, from the day they are born, its something that could be contemplated when the youngest is reachign school age

Honestly, im just talking from experience, weve found we dont need bedroom space, but more living space, as we are all together in the communal areas alot more than the bedrooms. Although my kids have to share, due to only 3 bedrooms, even when we only had 2, they still wanted to share rooms. kids are like that, one minute they love their siblings, the next theyre at each others throats - own bedroom or not!

Flea

galvanizersbaby

Downshifting groceries

ella_ella_ella wrote: »

I have to agree, I replied to this thread based on what I WOULD do, not what I HAVE done.

Rather than cutting back we have probably done the opposite since having our daughter, as I said earlier this could be to do with OH landing a better job with more money just as I left my job or because we work together as a team now but whatever it is we are much better off.

When I fell pregnant we lived in a 3 bed terrace with hand me down or ebay bought furniture, 2 years later we live in a four bed detatched newbuild, we have new furniture, I have a new car, we bought a touring caravan, I dont check prices in supermarkets, just pile it all in...

Maybe we could cut down but why should we? I couldnt live watching what I spent all the time, I couldnt go without my car or spend my days wrapped up in wolley jumpers to save on heating.

So, I HAVENT gone without anything on the list, but I would cut back if I HAD to

I don't see why you should have to cut down if you can afford not to - why are you on a money saving site though

ella_ella_ella

Downshifting groceries

galvanizersbaby wrote: »

I don't see why you should have to cut down if you can afford not to - why are you on a money saving site though

Lol, I still like a bargain and I like the people here

flea72

ella_ella_ella wrote: »

So, I HAVENT gone without anything on the list, but I would cut back if I HAD to

IF being the main point

Flea

flea72

galvanizersbaby wrote: »

I don't see why you should have to cut down if you can afford not to - why are you on a money saving site though

And here we go again, if you have an income that allows you to be a sahp, without making cutbacks, then i dont see how you can have opinions on cutting back to be a sahp

We can all say we would do x, y z. But unless you HAVE to do x, y, z then you dont know how hard it is

Flea

galvanizersbaby

Downshifting groceries

flea72 wrote: »

no not ten years to have all three, just that most bodies can cope with a baby every 18m-2yrs, so on those time scales, theres usually 5yrs between youngest and oldest. so what i was saying was, by the time the eldest was 10, the youngest would only be 5, and pre-teenage years, children dont really stay in their rooms, other than to sleep, so its not like you need a bedroom for each one, from the day they are born, its something that could be contemplated when the youngest is reachign school age

Honestly, im just talking from experience, weve found we dont need bedroom space, but more living space, as we are all together in the communal areas alot more than the bedrooms. Although my kids have to share, due to only 3 bedrooms, even when we only had 2, they still wanted to share rooms. kids are like that, one minute they love their siblings, the next theyre at each others throats - own bedroom or not!

Flea

I've got 18m between my 2 children but because I'd had a c section I recall after the birth of my son being told to wait longer than the recommended 2 years - my daughter was a 'happy surprise' so I didn't wait the recommended time but it did take it's toll on me!
It's great now having a close age gap but when they were really tiny I often didn't know what time of day it was from one day to another

I would agree with the bedroom thing - I have found it's the living space that counts (I've also seen an awful lot of 4 bed houses with tiny lounges/kitchens) - don't know why they build them like that?
My 2 share a bedroom at the moment and although there is a bedroom each for them at their dad's they share out of choice at the moment
No doubt that will change though when they get older!