Stay at home mums

poet123

**curlywurly** wrote: »

Couldn't agree more. If my daughter saw me sitting at home all day while she was at school, what message is that sending? Living off off benefits, or off of a partner (doesn't matter which really to the point I am making), what message is that sending? And, thinking about it, I am not sure that the message is any better for a son ... that women's work is in the home and not in the workplace? That women should have no aspirations beyond the home?

Whe I was a sahm my kids never saw me sitting at home all day. I studied for two degrees, looked after my elderly parents, did voluntary work, and ran the PTA. And I supported my husband as he furthered his career, he could travel, work late etc knowing that there were no childcare/home issues that he needed to worry about.

Now, three of my kids are grown up, in professions, and I am back at work in a new career I love. So, it worked for us, and I suspect it works for many.

Nor is it about a "women's place" (who uses that expression today?:D) but where a woman wants to be, and where it suits her family for her to be. It is called choice, and we are lucky to have it, so to me it is not helpful to berate others for choosing differently to us.

sunshinetours

DaisyFlower wrote: »

Me too, I carried on working (albeit part time) in the knowledge that if anything happened I would still be able to support my child as would be in a better position to increase hours etc.

Taking years of the job market can mean you may never work again or are severly limited as to the jobs available. Working helps with many things as well as financial, adult conversation, self asteem, interests etc.

I also dont want to be dependant upon on another adult to provide for me, I cant imagine putting all the responsibility on one person to provide whilst the other benefits from that income whilst not contributing financially in any form. I also choose to have a child and part of being a parent is financially providing for that child.

Its also important that children see that they dont have to choose between working and children and that they can do both. Why go through all the years of education to stay home?

Benefit wise, I think that if one adult chooses not to work then there should be no top up benefits to support that choice.

I'm guessing that those who think thsi way may have had bad experiences with partners in the past. A successful "marriage" includes not feeling you are not contributing just because you don't earn a wage. Others have covered that far more eloquently than myself.
The last part of that para clarifies that thought in that providing financially is a pretty small part IMO of having children. Children really don't care whether you have money or not - they just want your time and love. Its not just picking on Daisyflower for saying that, I've heard that sentiment many times with people throwing money at their kids trying to make up for the fact they know they don't spend enough quality time with them

Not taking a suitable career break or re-arranging your career to give that time IMO, especially in these modern times, is a selfish choice for those who choose not to. However there are many selfish people in this world and that I accept is part of life.

Choosing to bring another life into this world and bring up that child is one of the most important things anyone can do. Unfortunately many choose not to see that

sunshinetours

**curlywurly** wrote: »

Couldn't agree more. If my daughter saw me sitting at home all day while she was at school, what message is that sending? Living off off benefits, or off of a partner (doesn't matter which really to the point I am making), what message is that sending? And, thinking about it, I am not sure that the message is any better for a son ... that women's work is in the home and not in the workplace? That women should have no aspirations beyond the home?

Wow - no difference between someone choosing to be on benefits or choosing to be a stay at home partner then....

The message it sends out is that strong marriages/partnerships can work whatever way those people choose

Choosing to live off the state is a totally different concept

onlyroz

andrealm wrote: »

I find it rather sad that you would be disappointed if your daughter made a personal choice in life that made her happy ( assuming that her being a sahm was a genuine choice and not a necessity because of childcare costs)

Would you be equally disappointed if she decided to work as a nanny? Or does a job only have worth because you are being paid for it?

Staying at home while your child is still a baby is fine - but I see little justification for an intelligent woman to stay at home when her kids reach school age.

To the people here who say they have degrees and then chose to become a stay-at-home-mum - I find that quite shocking that you would choose to do that when you could contribute so much more to society than ensuring your husband has freshly ironed shirts each morning. I agree with all the comments that say it's teaching your daughters a poor example.

poet123

onlyroz wrote: »

Staying at home while your child is still a baby is fine - but I see little justification for an intelligent woman to stay at home when her kids reach school age.

To the people here who say they have degrees and then chose to become a stay-at-home-mum - I find that quite shocking that you would choose to do that when you could contribute so much more to society than ensuring your husband has freshly ironed shirts each morning. I agree with all the comments that say it's teaching your daughters a poor example.

Yes, like ensuring the next generation are brought up properly, and grow into well rounded individuals

sunshinetours

onlyroz wrote: »

Staying at home while your child is still a baby is fine - but I see little justification for an intelligent woman to stay at home when her kids reach school age.

To the people here who say they have degrees and then chose to become a stay-at-home-mum - I find that quite shocking that you would choose to do that when you could contribute so much more to society than ensuring your husband has freshly ironed shirts each morning. I agree with all the comments that say it's teaching your daughters a poor example.

If there were plenty of jobs working 38 weeks a year between around 9.30 and 2.30 I guess there would be a huge move back to the work place. The reality is there isn't and thankfully there are plenty of partners who feel their children's well being is more important than satisfying others who don't get the concept of family life ( I iron my own shirts by the way)

**curlywurly**

sunshinetours wrote: »

Wow - no difference between someone choosing to be on benefits or choosing to be a stay at home partner then....

Yes I think it matters. But it doesn't matter to the point I was making (which is what I tried to say, ineloquently it seems, in my post).

sunshinetours

**curlywurly** wrote: »

Yes I think it matters. But it doesn't matter to the point I was making (which is what I tried to say, ineloquently it seems, in my post).

Just re-read it - my bad - as you say to the specific point you were making it is no different - apologies

I don't however agree with the rest!

andrealm

**curlywurly** wrote: »

Couldn't agree more. If my daughter saw me sitting at home all day while she was at school, what message is that sending? Living off off benefits, or off of a partner (doesn't matter which really to the point I am making), what message is that sending? And, thinking about it, I am not sure that the message is any better for a son ... that women's work is in the home and not in the workplace? That women should have no aspirations beyond the home?

You must live very near the school if she can see you sitting at home while she's at school.;) what sort of message is it sending? That in 2011, we should all have choices, a son could choose to become a sahd, perhaps, if his partner had a job that supported the family. Being a stay at home parent is no longer the sole preserve of women.

You live off benefits, not off of benefits, what sort of grammar is that to teach your children?:p

melb

what does "my bad" mean for heaven's sake?