Stay at home mums

lostinrates

onlyroz wrote: »

A career is not a luxury. It’s the reward you get for obtaining a decent education and working hard. Anyone can do this regardless of their gender or background.

For me, a career in any of the fields I've worked in would risk not seeing my husband properly for stretches of time. Because one of us has acareer that means last minute cancelled plans and holidays it means the other one is best staying flexible. It wouldn't matter which of it was, we like having time together!

poet123

Gingham_Ribbon wrote: »

That's naive. Not everyone has the ability to pursue further education as it requires a level of intellect that not everyone has.

Not everyone has the luxury of being able to afford further education.

Not everyone was able to succeed in school, to enable them to pursue further education. There are myriad reasons for this, including home background.

And not everyone WANTS a career. Some people choose family over career. Some people choose a job that pays the bills so they can spend time doing what they really enjoy out of work.

Career is ONE option among many and is only available to a limited number of people.

I think that is a very fair comment. Many peoople do not have the family backgorund to get themselves into a positiion where a "career" as opposed to a "job" is an option.

I watched a documentary last week about young carers, and one of my thoughts was that most of those kids had no opportunity to pursue further, or higher education, because of their caring role. No matter how bright those kids were, other things came first.

So, .it is naive and a little insulting to say the same opportunities are available to everyone.

tooldle

Please do not write off carers, many are able to pursue the avenues open to them. I know one such person who is now pursuing his PhD at the age of 24, only a few years later than his year group. What is important is a can do attitude, and a will to suceed.
I agee that many people do have "job" rather than "careers", but if you are lucky enough to enjoy either, I cannot see how sticking with it, translates into being selfish.
To the sahm's who are governors, volunteers etc, well this is work too. Personally I would not distinguish dependent upon the receipt of a wage packet.

poet123

tooldle wrote: »

Please do not write off carers, many are able to pursue the avenues open to them. I know one such person who is now pursuing his PhD at the age of 24, only a few years later than his year group. What is important is a can do attitude, and a will to suceed.
I agee that many people do have "job" rather than "careers", but if you are lucky enough to enjoy either, I cannot see how sticking with it, translates into being selfish.
To the sahm's who are governors, volunteers etc, well this is work too. Personally I would not distinguish dependent upon the receipt of a wage packet.

No one is writing off carers, merely pointing out that if you have other responsibilities education and a career is not a given.

Other posters have stated that earning money is what sets an example to your children, indicating that monetary reward is what is important.

Gingham_Ribbon

tooldle wrote: »

Please do not write off carers, many are able to pursue the avenues open to them. I know one such person who is now pursuing his PhD at the age of 24, only a few years later than his year group. What is important is a can do attitude, and a will to suceed.
I agee that many people do have "job" rather than "careers", but if you are lucky enough to enjoy either, I cannot see how sticking with it, translates into being selfish.
To the sahm's who are governors, volunteers etc, well this is work too. Personally I would not distinguish dependent upon the receipt of a wage packet.

I think it's wonderful that some carers are able to pursue further education. That's the exception rather than the rule though. Intellect and finances have a large part to play, even if everything else is available.

Regarding volunteering - this can be fitted in round child-care. If the same applies to any paid work the person is doing, I think it's a realistic comparison. Usually though, paid work involves having to sort out someone else looking after the children, which is the main difference.

Re being selfish - it's not selfish to pursue a career, nor is it selfish to be a housewife/husband. As long as the needs of the children are met and the parents are satisfied that they're both in agreement with what goes on, there's no problem.

RoxieW

I'm torn on this one. Ive been both SAHM and working full time (often staying away from home) mum and I feel I currently have the balance right of working part time. However of course there are sacrifices that come with working part time but at the moment the benefits out way the negatives.
It has always made more sense for me to be the SAHM as my OH already had a well paid, steady career when we started out family. So it was abit of a no brainer. However, If we had both been in the same position then it may not have been quite so clear cut. That said, I can't imagine being happy to have anyone other that myself at home with my lo's.
I think the bottom line is that I stay at home for my children, not for my husband. I would find it incredibly demeaning if my role in life involved ensuring that my husbands sock drawrer was arranged and that he had nothing to do at the end of the day other than relax. A sahm works just has hard as a working person and deserves support on evenings and weekends in my book.
I think the article illustrates all that is wrong with SAHM's tbh. The smug self satisfied women convincing themselves that

RoxieW

Cont - computer gremlins lol!
Smug self satisfied women convincing themselves that they are fulfilled by their step ford wife roles. I am an ambitious intelligent woman with a career of her own, but for the moment, I am putting my children above that. When they are at school and nursery will I fully intend to have a full time rewiring career of my own and am utilizing this time to work towards that.

poet123

Playing devil's advocate, what is demeaning about being a homemaker? the tradtional male/female roles do work for some.

Is it easier to be at home doing as you will, seeing friends, doing voluntary work, studying, looking after aged parents, and living well on your husband salary, than working every hour god sends for an unappreciative employer, having little personal time, drifitng apart.....to many it certainly is.

Should we judge, or consider ourselves superior if we work in paid employment outside the home? Only if we are blinkered to the different choices available.

RoxieW

Some people may not find it demeaning but I do. As another poster said, it's different if you are looking after pre school children but once children start school I would hate to be at home revolving my life around cleaning etc. I have a brain, ideas, ambitions, dreams that I want to fulfil for myself, not simply enable my husband to fulfil his.
Also, in the days of half of all marriages ending in divorce, I don't think it's wise for any woman to leave herself without means to support herself independent of her husband.
To answer the childcare question, as we have three children, childcare costs would pretty much swallow up a second wage. But as the children get older that will become less so and you have to keep in mind the end game. I also find other benefits to working such as mental stimulation, a sense of personal pride and achievement (not proud of your childrens achievements but of your own as an individual) and security that I can't get from being a SAHM.

lostinrates

RoxieW wrote: »

Cont - computer gremlins lol!
Smug self satisfied women convincing themselves that they are fulfilled by their step ford wife roles. I am an ambitious intelligent woman with a career of her own, but for the moment, I am putting my children above that. When they are at school and nursery will I fully intend to have a full time rewiring career of my own and am utilizing this time to work towards that.

I find that a little offensive. It does not follow that as someone who is not in paid employment I am not ambitious nor intelligent.
Nor, as a sahw, am I smug....I'm for choice to do what works best for each household. SAH works best for us, ATM. If DH had more regular hours, for example, I might well get a job, and there are things about working I miss, but not enough to make them more valuable than the things we gain from me not working.