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

milliebear00001

Downshifting groceries

weezl74 wrote: »

Hi Millie

I think I understand your point, and I do see it's validity. I just wonder though if the way your OH and BIL were raised (financially speaking) can be held responsible for your BIL's reaction and his view on money, luxuries and bankruptcy. If it were solely responsible, then your OH would also have gone down this route, but your post implies he hasn't, and I'm glad of that. Some people have thrifty parents and admire it and carry on living that way until their adulthood and beyond.

I wonder if it is more about the personality of the child and the mix between that and the way the financial choices are explained to the child? One example which might explain the difference between 2 child's reactions to thrifty parenting such as the one you've described between your OH and his BIL might be as follows:

Child 1: personality: dynamic, active, proactive likes to take control
child 2 : laid back easy going, fairly passive more allowing of circumstances just to happen to him
Mum: also fairly passive and her explanations of things to her child are based on circumstances rather than proactive choice.

(none of these are 'Bad' personality characteristics)

Real-life scenario: Child 1: 'mum I want a new bike like Jack's!'
Mum 'oh well I'm sorry but we just can't afford it...'
C1 'why not?!'
Mum 'well you know Daddy doesn't get very much money each week and we haven't got enough to have food and to buy expensive toys...'
C1 Over time, and quite a few similar interactions, thinks 'I will never allow this to happen to me:eek::mad:' a reaction of his proactive nature to the percieved 'victim of circumstances' his mum has unwittingly portrayed...

whereas child2 may not see it this way:
C2 'can I have a bike?'
Mum 'oh well I'm sorry but we just can't afford it...'
c2 'oh...... maybe I'll play on Jack's sometime...':)

I don't think I've illustrated this very well! But my point is that I don't believe that the amount of money a family has can create a situation where a child goes into an extreme reaction to it and ends up in a difficult situation like bankruptcy. This has to be to do with a mix between the child's temperament and the parents temperament and way of explaining things to the children.

I really hope this doesn't sound like a criticism of BIL or his mum, simply that I can't see it was just because they had one wage.

Oh no, I agree that how things have turned out for him is absolutely partly because of his personality. The main difference, is that my OH was hard working at school, went to university and got a good job. My BIL went straight to work, and although very successful in his chosen job, could never live within his means becasue something within him always wanted 'the best'. I do think though, that this was a 'reaction' to the financial difficulties the family had. I should perhaps have said, that there was some resentment on the part of the rest of the family, that mum refused to go to work. She was/is quite traditional, and saw her role as a homemaker. Her sons (and husband) would have preferred her to have worked outside the home when the children were older, in order to ease things, and take some of the financial pressure off.

I guess my main point was that the children themselves don't feel they hugely benefitted from having their mum at home, once their primary years were over, and think they all (as a family) could have had a better time of things, had their mum contributed more financially. She made the choice not to work outside the home, but this choice, was less about benefitting her children, and more about her own preferences.

In contrast - my family didn't have much money either, but NOBODY who lived near us did either. I think this is a crucial difference. To me, not having money was normal. To my OH it singled out his family as 'poor'.

I agree that children need to know the 'value' of things, rather than their price, but as a teacher, I see the competitiveness about 'stuff' all around our children. Many, many children find it very hard to understand why their friends have the things they can't have. It's very hard to explain to them in a way that makes sense, and even the best of parents have to accept that the outside influences on their children are manifold. What you instill in them at home is often not what the 'pack mentality' is outside!

weezl74

Having a lodger

Ah! yes I see

Sorry I misunderstood.

I agree that the outside influences are huge. My aim as a thrifty mum will be to not make it so darned obvious that Fergus is singled out and ridiculed, I would hate that!

I'm wary of being the mum in 'about a boy'!:o

But I'd love him to become the sort of boy who will question consumerism and materialism and find his own way in the world.

Obviously I have a way to go, today nothing is concerning him more than how to get his monkey to squeek while he dribbles on it.

galvanizersbaby

Downshifting groceries

milliebear00001 wrote: »

Oh no, I agree that how things have turned out for him is absolutely partly because of his personality. The main difference, is that my OH was hard working at school, went to university and got a good job. My BIL went straight to work, and although very successful in his chosen job, could never live within his means becasue something within him always wanted 'the best'. I do think though, that this was a 'reaction' to the financial difficulties the family had. I should perhaps have said, that there was some resentment on the part of the rest of the family, that mum refused to go to work. She was/is quite traditional, and saw her role as a homemaker. Her sons (and husband) would have preferred her to have worked outside the home when the children were older, in order to ease things, and take some of the financial pressure off.

I guess my main point was that the children themselves don't feel they hugely benefitted from having their mum at home, once their primary years were over, and think they all (as a family) could have had a better time of things, had their mum contributed more financially. She made the choice not to work outside the home, but this choice, was less about benefitting her children, and more about her own preferences.

Milliebear - my own mother was similar to your DH's mum so I can see where your coming from.
As a child I recall my parents rowed pretty much constantly about money until they divorced when I was 18 - then the years following they rowed about how to divide the money etc...:rolleyes:

Sami_Bee

Downshifting groceries

weezl74 wrote: »

I had a 'up your income using mystery shopper/surveys etc' option

Well I do this but not in order to stay a SAHM more as something 'grown up' to do and so I feel like I am contributing a little - I like to use the money/vouchers I get to buy my little luxuries because I don't like to have to ask OH for extra money to buy things for my self IYSWIM

weezl74 wrote: »

Ah! yes I see

Sorry I misunderstood.

I agree that the outside influences are huge. My aim as a thrifty mum will be to not make it so darned obvious that Fergus is singled out and ridiculed, I would hate that!

I'm wary of being the mum in 'about a boy'!:o

But I'd love him to become the sort of boy who will question consumerism and materialism and find his own way in the world.

Obviously I have a way to go, today nothing is concerning him more than how to get his monkey to squeek while he dribbles on it.

I'm sure you won't be that mum tho (unless you cut his hair as badly as I've cut Chris's but when he's at school )

Both my Parents worked, my mum was SAHM until I was 3 when I had my free nursery place and I went to a childminder the other half of the week but I never experienced the 'missing working parent' because we only had one car and my mum worked at the school I went to so We used to drop Dad off at work and pick him up on the way home. Even though both parents worked we were not well off and didn't have holidays abroad etc. I went to school in a middle class area but I was never singled out as the poor kid and I never resented that my friends had bigger houses, holidays to disney world etc so I agree that personality comes into it too.
It pains me now I know that when I was at high school and my sister and I both wanted a pair of Kickers as our school shoes my mum bought them for us and that week only had about £20 left to spend on food:o (she didn't tell us at the time) These are the sacrifices parent make tho and its why I love mine lots!

duchy

It's all very well to say if you have ambition and have a highly paid job then the other partner can stay home and be a SAHM/D however the other side of that coin is that the high earner is likely to be working far longer hours than the 9-5er and the SAHM/D is able to do so only at the expense of the other partner who likely sees very little of their children.
I was in that situation and I'd have far rather worked too and had a normal family life with both parents involved than the nicer life style but my husband always missed all the important to our child events and had a lot less quality time with him when he was small.
Ironically it took us splitting up (almost entirely due to his work lifestyle) for him to realise he had got his priorities wrong and he ended up with far greater interaction with our son as he had to make time for him and access visits instead of him living in the same house. If you asked him now-he'd definitely have done things differently.

ella_ella_ella

Downshifting groceries

weezl74 wrote: »

Thank you to the 140 people who have completed the poll:T:T:T:T. It is great to have a large response to help me with my decision making, and this sample size feels more valid than anything I can gain by just asking a few friends.

Sorry if I missed it but what are you trying to decide Weezl? (apart from the obvious, obviously!! )

ella_ella_ella

Downshifting groceries

duchy wrote: »

It's all very well to say if you have ambition and have a highly paid job then the other partner can stay home and be a SAHM/D however the other side of that coin is that the high earner is likely to be working far longer hours than the 9-5er and the SAHM/D is able to do so only at the expense of the other partner who likely sees very little of their children.
I was in that situation and I'd have far rather worked too and had a normal family life with both parents involved than the nicer life style but my husband always missed all the important to our child events and had a lot less quality time with him when he was small.
Ironically it took us splitting up (almost entirely due to his work lifestyle) for him to realise he had got his priorities wrong and he ended up with far greater interaction with our son as he had to make time for him and access visits instead of him living in the same house. If you asked him now-he'd definitely have done things differently.

I guess like everything about this thread it all depends on the individual circumstances of the family. My husband never misses out on anything, he has been there for every injection, appointment, shoe fitting but if he was working long hours and missing out like your husband then I think we would probably re think our situation.

weezl74

Having a lodger

ella_ella_ella wrote: »

Sorry if I missed it but what are you trying to decide Weezl? (apart from the obvious, obviously!! )

erm.... it probably is a bit obvious:o;), but I think it's just how extreme I should be with my cuts and money saving in order to be at home for longer.... something a bit like that!

It came up when DH and I were discussing whether handwashing nappies is worth it!

ella_ella_ella

Downshifting groceries

weezl74 wrote: »

erm.... it probably is a bit obvious:o;), but I think it's just how extreme I should be with my cuts and money saving in order to be at home for longer.... something a bit like that!

It came up when DH and I were discussing whether handwashing nappies is worth it!

Lol, I was just being nosy and wondering what your situation was as you have been rather quiet since starting this!! :D

pollyanna24

barnaby-bear wrote: »

one ONE salary?

Haven't followed the threads completely, but we got our mortgage for £185K based on both our salaries. Now that bf is a sahd, we manage to pay it with my salary of "just" £31K.

So I guess the answer is, "Get the mortgage before the two salaries go, but make sure you can still afford it."