If you sah how many hours are you off duty of childcare?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t a thread about being “on call.” OP asked about times you are supervising children.

That one PP derailed it with her weird post about how she can't go to the beach during the day and drink a margarita. Just like, you know, .... everyone.

The point is, DP, that when you are the one "on call" you are not free to do anything that you want. You can do stuff around the house and yard, you can exercise, you can run errands and volunteer. It's not like you are free to take day trips. Plus, whatever you do has to fit within the family budget so it's not like you can take sailing lessons while the kids are in school or even expect to take college classes because if something comes up you'll be the one dealing with it.

It's not like you are retired or on vacation, you aren't earning a paycheck yourself. You also miss out on the perks of working like holiday parties, awards/recognition, office lunches, work dinners, going for cocktails with coworkers and that sort of thing. That is not to say that all working moms get those sort of perks but many of them do. I likely would have had I continued to work.

PP (“this thread is not about...”). I am a SAHM. I see what you are saying, but come on, you know there’s a difference by being on-call vs supervising your child. I really think that’s not what OP is asking about. She’s talking about actively supervising children. Nothing against your situation, but I think it’s just a different topic.

Yes, the hands on heavy duty childcare changes as they get older. There is A LOT less of that. You are still not free to go and do whatever you want to do because you are the one keeping tabs on your older kids whether they are directly in front of your nose or not. The duties change but the role is still the same.

Very few 5 year olds ditch school, can't say the same thing about teens. If dh is at work concentrating on meetings and I'm off having a spa day, no one is filling that role.

Oh please. So when your kids are at school you just sit in your car in the parking lot and hold on to your phone in case it rings?

The great thing is I owe you zero explanations as to what I do all day or why I chose to do things this way. Suffice it to say that my husband and I find value to me being at home and that is enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t a thread about being “on call.” OP asked about times you are supervising children.

That one PP derailed it with her weird post about how she can't go to the beach during the day and drink a margarita. Just like, you know, .... everyone.

The point is, DP, that when you are the one "on call" you are not free to do anything that you want. You can do stuff around the house and yard, you can exercise, you can run errands and volunteer. It's not like you are free to take day trips. Plus, whatever you do has to fit within the family budget so it's not like you can take sailing lessons while the kids are in school or even expect to take college classes because if something comes up you'll be the one dealing with it.

It's not like you are retired or on vacation, you aren't earning a paycheck yourself. You also miss out on the perks of working like holiday parties, awards/recognition, office lunches, work dinners, going for cocktails with coworkers and that sort of thing. That is not to say that all working moms get those sort of perks but many of them do. I likely would have had I continued to work.

PP (“this thread is not about...”). I am a SAHM. I see what you are saying, but come on, you know there’s a difference by being on-call vs supervising your child. I really think that’s not what OP is asking about. She’s talking about actively supervising children. Nothing against your situation, but I think it’s just a different topic.

Yes, the hands on heavy duty childcare changes as they get older. There is A LOT less of that. You are still not free to go and do whatever you want to do because you are the one keeping tabs on your older kids whether they are directly in front of your nose or not. The duties change but the role is still the same.

Very few 5 year olds ditch school, can't say the same thing about teens. If dh is at work concentrating on meetings and I'm off having a spa day, no one is filling that role.

When did OP ever say anything about “doing whatever you want”????
This thread is amazing. The responders who are actually sahm’s with active childcare responsibilities are counting naptime and making dinner as “off-duty,” meanwhile working moms and sahm’s whose kids are all in school are claiming that they do round-the-clock childcare....

My working husband is not the one making sure that our teenager filled up the car with gas and has made it from point A to point B or is handling 'X' problem in which kind of way. The physical demands of childcare are not great now but the mental/emotional energy is amped up big time. Our kids are relatively easy and responsible kids, too. But they are kids...and they need monitoring.

If your kids are still little, you probably won't really appreciate what I'm talking about until your kids are older. You'll see.

Omg, I am not doubting you. You obviously have a chip on your shoulder. Clearly OP is talking about PHYSICALLY taking care of children.

+1000

PP, you need to step away from the internet and go back to all the active parenting that you do all day long.

You’re on the internet, too. But - whoa what a slam!

Shouldn't you be focused on your kids? Someone might need a ride!

Good one!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Never, really. Even when they are at school I'm the one on call. It's not like I can head to Rehobeth and for a beach day and relax and drink margaritas. I can get stuff done around the house, I can run errands, I can work out but I need to be ready to snap to it and pick a kid up as needed.

This is true for almost everyone.

It’s not true for her husband. Or mine.

Well, its likely true for all moms whether they sahm or not, we're all on call.

Agreed. DH and I both WOH. I'm the one on-call, always. In 3 years, he's taken one sick day home with DD, and that occurred while I was out of town on business travel.
I'll admit it is a bit messed up (especially because he earns more leave than I do), but that's how it goes.

If you are going out of town on business travel you are not on call all the time. You just aren't. Either your husband has responsibility for the kids or you have flown a relative in or you have a nanny.

Some of us have jobs that don't require travel. We are on call, all the time, just like you say you are, and we also work. So cry me a river.

I'm the PP who had business travel. 2 weeks in 3 years. That's it. And, yes, grandparents assisted for most of that.
So, fine. I wasn't "on call" for 2 out of 156 weeks.

That is two weeks more than I've had in the past 19 years, DP. But, your situation was one reason that dh and I decided that it would be good for me to SAH in the first place. It was not easy for us financially at first but after a point it started to pay off. Again, there is no one "right" way. What was hard for you when they were little probably became a lot easier for you as your kids got older. You now have a 2 career family and your kids are less work - there is definitely a benefit to doing things the way that you have done them.

My child is 3, so I wouldn't exactly call it "less work" just yet. But, yes, there's pros and cons to both approaches. I guess my whole point was that, at least in my experience and that of nearly all of my friends with children of similar age, one parent is the "on call" parent, whether that's a SAHP or not. With the exception of 2 weeks' worth of business travel for me, my DH has never once had to worry about leaving work early or being called out of a meeting to pick up DD. I don't have the same luxury.
But, since I've actually caught a break for 2 weeks in that regard, my opinion is irrelevant.

Is that due solely to the nature of your and your husband's jobs? On days that my husband is in a meeting at the Pentagon, for example, he's not going to be available to run and pick the kids up. However, on days that I'm meeting with clients or in court, I am also not available to run and pick the kids up. On normal days we are both available and then it's a discussion about who can do it more easily. Sometimes it's me, sometimes it's him. So if your husband *could* leave work to pick the kids up, you need to let him know that that's part of being a parent. If he's a pilot and can't land a plan to be able to get to school, that's a different story.

Partially. DH is in a SCIF on occasion and not reachable via phone. But, for that matter, so am I - we are both engineers who spend at least part of our days in classified areas. I'm just always cognizant of the fact that I need to step out and check my phone frequently. He doesn't do that. I've made myself flexible enough at work to be available via phone as necessary, and I have management that has "been there, done that" with young kids and knows that I may need to bail on short notice. His management would also be flexible with him; it just never comes up because I'm always the one to handle things. I am closer to home/daycare, but that is literally the only reason I'm the default. The issue has been addressed with him repeatedly; nothing changes. It is yet another reason we are one and done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t a thread about being “on call.” OP asked about times you are supervising children.

That one PP derailed it with her weird post about how she can't go to the beach during the day and drink a margarita. Just like, you know, .... everyone.

The point is, DP, that when you are the one "on call" you are not free to do anything that you want. You can do stuff around the house and yard, you can exercise, you can run errands and volunteer. It's not like you are free to take day trips. Plus, whatever you do has to fit within the family budget so it's not like you can take sailing lessons while the kids are in school or even expect to take college classes because if something comes up you'll be the one dealing with it.

It's not like you are retired or on vacation, you aren't earning a paycheck yourself. You also miss out on the perks of working like holiday parties, awards/recognition, office lunches, work dinners, going for cocktails with coworkers and that sort of thing. That is not to say that all working moms get those sort of perks but many of them do. I likely would have had I continued to work.

PP (“this thread is not about...”). I am a SAHM. I see what you are saying, but come on, you know there’s a difference by being on-call vs supervising your child. I really think that’s not what OP is asking about. She’s talking about actively supervising children. Nothing against your situation, but I think it’s just a different topic.

Yes, the hands on heavy duty childcare changes as they get older. There is A LOT less of that. You are still not free to go and do whatever you want to do because you are the one keeping tabs on your older kids whether they are directly in front of your nose or not. The duties change but the role is still the same.

Very few 5 year olds ditch school, can't say the same thing about teens. If dh is at work concentrating on meetings and I'm off having a spa day, no one is filling that role.

Oh please. So when your kids are at school you just sit in your car in the parking lot and hold on to your phone in case it rings?

The great thing is I owe you zero explanations as to what I do all day or why I chose to do things this way. Suffice it to say that my husband and I find value to me being at home and that is enough.

It sounds like you are not allowed to work or do anything else you might want to do because you have teens that ditch school on a regular basis, can’t put gas in their own cars or even keep track of how much gas they have, and can’t be trusted to drive where they say they’re driving. Is that correct?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t a thread about being “on call.” OP asked about times you are supervising children.

That one PP derailed it with her weird post about how she can't go to the beach during the day and drink a margarita. Just like, you know, .... everyone.

The point is, DP, that when you are the one "on call" you are not free to do anything that you want. You can do stuff around the house and yard, you can exercise, you can run errands and volunteer. It's not like you are free to take day trips. Plus, whatever you do has to fit within the family budget so it's not like you can take sailing lessons while the kids are in school or even expect to take college classes because if something comes up you'll be the one dealing with it.

It's not like you are retired or on vacation, you aren't earning a paycheck yourself. You also miss out on the perks of working like holiday parties, awards/recognition, office lunches, work dinners, going for cocktails with coworkers and that sort of thing. That is not to say that all working moms get those sort of perks but many of them do. I likely would have had I continued to work.

PP (“this thread is not about...”). I am a SAHM. I see what you are saying, but come on, you know there’s a difference by being on-call vs supervising your child. I really think that’s not what OP is asking about. She’s talking about actively supervising children. Nothing against your situation, but I think it’s just a different topic.

Yes, the hands on heavy duty childcare changes as they get older. There is A LOT less of that. You are still not free to go and do whatever you want to do because you are the one keeping tabs on your older kids whether they are directly in front of your nose or not. The duties change but the role is still the same.

Very few 5 year olds ditch school, can't say the same thing about teens. If dh is at work concentrating on meetings and I'm off having a spa day, no one is filling that role.

Oh please. So when your kids are at school you just sit in your car in the parking lot and hold on to your phone in case it rings?

The great thing is I owe you zero explanations as to what I do all day or why I chose to do things this way. Suffice it to say that my husband and I find value to me being at home and that is enough.

It sounds like you are not allowed to work or do anything else you might want to do because you have teens that ditch school on a regular basis, can’t put gas in their own cars or even keep track of how much gas they have, and can’t be trusted to drive where they say they’re driving. Is that correct?

Well, none of the above is true that I'm aware of. But, let's just say that I was a teen once, so was dh and I'll leave it at that

[Anonymous]

Evenings and weekends are split depending on what is going on. Husband is very active and involved and does a lot of the transporting to activities when he can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t a thread about being “on call.” OP asked about times you are supervising children.

That one PP derailed it with her weird post about how she can't go to the beach during the day and drink a margarita. Just like, you know, .... everyone.

The point is, DP, that when you are the one "on call" you are not free to do anything that you want. You can do stuff around the house and yard, you can exercise, you can run errands and volunteer. It's not like you are free to take day trips. Plus, whatever you do has to fit within the family budget so it's not like you can take sailing lessons while the kids are in school or even expect to take college classes because if something comes up you'll be the one dealing with it.

It's not like you are retired or on vacation, you aren't earning a paycheck yourself. You also miss out on the perks of working like holiday parties, awards/recognition, office lunches, work dinners, going for cocktails with coworkers and that sort of thing. That is not to say that all working moms get those sort of perks but many of them do. I likely would have had I continued to work.

PP (“this thread is not about...”). I am a SAHM. I see what you are saying, but come on, you know there’s a difference by being on-call vs supervising your child. I really think that’s not what OP is asking about. She’s talking about actively supervising children. Nothing against your situation, but I think it’s just a different topic.

Yes, the hands on heavy duty childcare changes as they get older. There is A LOT less of that. You are still not free to go and do whatever you want to do because you are the one keeping tabs on your older kids whether they are directly in front of your nose or not. The duties change but the role is still the same.

Very few 5 year olds ditch school, can't say the same thing about teens. If dh is at work concentrating on meetings and I'm off having a spa day, no one is filling that role.

When did OP ever say anything about “doing whatever you want”????
This thread is amazing. The responders who are actually sahm’s with active childcare responsibilities are counting naptime and making dinner as “off-duty,” meanwhile working moms and sahm’s whose kids are all in school are claiming that they do round-the-clock childcare....

Great observation. Really.

Show me where a wohm says she does round-the-clock childcare.

The wohms are responding to the ridiculous PP who started talking about being "on-call" 24 hours a day. The point was that most moms, working or not, are "on-call" if their kids need them (illness etc).

Keep up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t a thread about being “on call.” OP asked about times you are supervising children.

That one PP derailed it with her weird post about how she can't go to the beach during the day and drink a margarita. Just like, you know, .... everyone.

The point is, DP, that when you are the one "on call" you are not free to do anything that you want. You can do stuff around the house and yard, you can exercise, you can run errands and volunteer. It's not like you are free to take day trips. Plus, whatever you do has to fit within the family budget so it's not like you can take sailing lessons while the kids are in school or even expect to take college classes because if something comes up you'll be the one dealing with it.

It's not like you are retired or on vacation, you aren't earning a paycheck yourself. You also miss out on the perks of working like holiday parties, awards/recognition, office lunches, work dinners, going for cocktails with coworkers and that sort of thing. That is not to say that all working moms get those sort of perks but many of them do. I likely would have had I continued to work.

PP (“this thread is not about...”). I am a SAHM. I see what you are saying, but come on, you know there’s a difference by being on-call vs supervising your child. I really think that’s not what OP is asking about. She’s talking about actively supervising children. Nothing against your situation, but I think it’s just a different topic.

Yes, the hands on heavy duty childcare changes as they get older. There is A LOT less of that. You are still not free to go and do whatever you want to do because you are the one keeping tabs on your older kids whether they are directly in front of your nose or not. The duties change but the role is still the same.

Very few 5 year olds ditch school, can't say the same thing about teens. If dh is at work concentrating on meetings and I'm off having a spa day, no one is filling that role.

Oh please. So when your kids are at school you just sit in your car in the parking lot and hold on to your phone in case it rings?

The great thing is I owe you zero explanations as to what I do all day or why I chose to do things this way. Suffice it to say that my husband and I find value to me being at home and that is enough.

Perhaps don't antagonize others on here then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t a thread about being “on call.” OP asked about times you are supervising children.

That one PP derailed it with her weird post about how she can't go to the beach during the day and drink a margarita. Just like, you know, .... everyone.

The point is, DP, that when you are the one "on call" you are not free to do anything that you want. You can do stuff around the house and yard, you can exercise, you can run errands and volunteer. It's not like you are free to take day trips. Plus, whatever you do has to fit within the family budget so it's not like you can take sailing lessons while the kids are in school or even expect to take college classes because if something comes up you'll be the one dealing with it.

It's not like you are retired or on vacation, you aren't earning a paycheck yourself. You also miss out on the perks of working like holiday parties, awards/recognition, office lunches, work dinners, going for cocktails with coworkers and that sort of thing. That is not to say that all working moms get those sort of perks but many of them do. I likely would have had I continued to work.

PP (“this thread is not about...”). I am a SAHM. I see what you are saying, but come on, you know there’s a difference by being on-call vs supervising your child. I really think that’s not what OP is asking about. She’s talking about actively supervising children. Nothing against your situation, but I think it’s just a different topic.

Yes, the hands on heavy duty childcare changes as they get older. There is A LOT less of that. You are still not free to go and do whatever you want to do because you are the one keeping tabs on your older kids whether they are directly in front of your nose or not. The duties change but the role is still the same.

Very few 5 year olds ditch school, can't say the same thing about teens. If dh is at work concentrating on meetings and I'm off having a spa day, no one is filling that role.

Oh please. So when your kids are at school you just sit in your car in the parking lot and hold on to your phone in case it rings?

The great thing is I owe you zero explanations as to what I do all day or why I chose to do things this way. Suffice it to say that my husband and I find value to me being at home and that is enough.

Perhaps don't antagonize others on here then.

I don't know why you are trying to argue with me, I really don't. I tried to explain why I SAH, I have attempted to explain that when you are the volunteer default parent that you are never truly off duty. You are taking exception to that and I am going to guess that your own situation is vastly different than mine and you simply can not relate at all to what I am saying. That's fine.

The female engineer earlier in this thread explained how difficult it is to work full time and ALWAYS be the default parent. It sucks. A doctor earlier tried to explain how she was literally having to leave her office because she was the parent on duty. That sucks.

My life doesn't suck. There are things that I truly miss about working but I do not miss or want the home/life balancing act. I am glad to be the parent at home. I love it actually. I think dh would have been miserable in my role even though he is a truly good dad to our kids. That said, he has the ability to leave and be gone for two weeks if that is what he needs to do. I, at this time, do not have that option which is o.k. because I willingly signed up for this.

I hope you are equally happy with your choices DP.

[Anonymous]

^home/work

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t a thread about being “on call.” OP asked about times you are supervising children.

That one PP derailed it with her weird post about how she can't go to the beach during the day and drink a margarita. Just like, you know, .... everyone.

The point is, DP, that when you are the one "on call" you are not free to do anything that you want. You can do stuff around the house and yard, you can exercise, you can run errands and volunteer. It's not like you are free to take day trips. Plus, whatever you do has to fit within the family budget so it's not like you can take sailing lessons while the kids are in school or even expect to take college classes because if something comes up you'll be the one dealing with it.

It's not like you are retired or on vacation, you aren't earning a paycheck yourself. You also miss out on the perks of working like holiday parties, awards/recognition, office lunches, work dinners, going for cocktails with coworkers and that sort of thing. That is not to say that all working moms get those sort of perks but many of them do. I likely would have had I continued to work.

PP (“this thread is not about...”). I am a SAHM. I see what you are saying, but come on, you know there’s a difference by being on-call vs supervising your child. I really think that’s not what OP is asking about. She’s talking about actively supervising children. Nothing against your situation, but I think it’s just a different topic.

Yes, the hands on heavy duty childcare changes as they get older. There is A LOT less of that. You are still not free to go and do whatever you want to do because you are the one keeping tabs on your older kids whether they are directly in front of your nose or not. The duties change but the role is still the same.

Very few 5 year olds ditch school, can't say the same thing about teens. If dh is at work concentrating on meetings and I'm off having a spa day, no one is filling that role.

Oh please. So when your kids are at school you just sit in your car in the parking lot and hold on to your phone in case it rings?

The great thing is I owe you zero explanations as to what I do all day or why I chose to do things this way. Suffice it to say that my husband and I find value to me being at home and that is enough.

Perhaps don't antagonize others on here then.

I don't know why you are trying to argue with me, I really don't. I tried to explain why I SAH, I have attempted to explain that when you are the volunteer default parent that you are never truly off duty. You are taking exception to that and I am going to guess that your own situation is vastly different than mine and you simply can not relate at all to what I am saying. That's fine.

The female engineer earlier in this thread explained how difficult it is to work full time and ALWAYS be the default parent. It sucks. A doctor earlier tried to explain how she was literally having to leave her office because she was the parent on duty. That sucks.

My life doesn't suck. There are things that I truly miss about working but I do not miss or want the home/life balancing act. I am glad to be the parent at home. I love it actually. I think dh would have been miserable in my role even though he is a truly good dad to our kids. That said, he has the ability to leave and be gone for two weeks if that is what he needs to do. I, at this time, do not have that option which is o.k. because I willingly signed up for this.

I hope you are equally happy with your choices DP.

No one cares why you SAH. The only discussion I see going on here is that in some relationships, one parent is expected to be the default parent and be available to tend to the kids. The point some PPs are making is that transcends WOH/WAH/SAH.

I really don't know what you are going on about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t a thread about being “on call.” OP asked about times you are supervising children.

That one PP derailed it with her weird post about how she can't go to the beach during the day and drink a margarita. Just like, you know, .... everyone.

The point is, DP, that when you are the one "on call" you are not free to do anything that you want. You can do stuff around the house and yard, you can exercise, you can run errands and volunteer. It's not like you are free to take day trips. Plus, whatever you do has to fit within the family budget so it's not like you can take sailing lessons while the kids are in school or even expect to take college classes because if something comes up you'll be the one dealing with it.

It's not like you are retired or on vacation, you aren't earning a paycheck yourself. You also miss out on the perks of working like holiday parties, awards/recognition, office lunches, work dinners, going for cocktails with coworkers and that sort of thing. That is not to say that all working moms get those sort of perks but many of them do. I likely would have had I continued to work.

PP (“this thread is not about...”). I am a SAHM. I see what you are saying, but come on, you know there’s a difference by being on-call vs supervising your child. I really think that’s not what OP is asking about. She’s talking about actively supervising children. Nothing against your situation, but I think it’s just a different topic.

Yes, the hands on heavy duty childcare changes as they get older. There is A LOT less of that. You are still not free to go and do whatever you want to do because you are the one keeping tabs on your older kids whether they are directly in front of your nose or not. The duties change but the role is still the same.

Very few 5 year olds ditch school, can't say the same thing about teens. If dh is at work concentrating on meetings and I'm off having a spa day, no one is filling that role.

Oh please. So when your kids are at school you just sit in your car in the parking lot and hold on to your phone in case it rings?

The great thing is I owe you zero explanations as to what I do all day or why I chose to do things this way. Suffice it to say that my husband and I find value to me being at home and that is enough.

Perhaps don't antagonize others on here then.

I don't know why you are trying to argue with me, I really don't. I tried to explain why I SAH, I have attempted to explain that when you are the volunteer default parent that you are never truly off duty. You are taking exception to that and I am going to guess that your own situation is vastly different than mine and you simply can not relate at all to what I am saying. That's fine.

The female engineer earlier in this thread explained how difficult it is to work full time and ALWAYS be the default parent. It sucks. A doctor earlier tried to explain how she was literally having to leave her office because she was the parent on duty. That sucks.

My life doesn't suck. There are things that I truly miss about working but I do not miss or want the home/life balancing act. I am glad to be the parent at home. I love it actually. I think dh would have been miserable in my role even though he is a truly good dad to our kids. That said, he has the ability to leave and be gone for two weeks if that is what he needs to do. I, at this time, do not have that option which is o.k. because I willingly signed up for this.

I hope you are equally happy with your choices DP.

To be fair, there are many of us who don’t think working and having kids is that hard. My kids are rarely sick. I don’t find doctors appointments to be that challenging. I can’t imagine quitting my job to make our life easier. It already is very easy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t a thread about being “on call.” OP asked about times you are supervising children.

That one PP derailed it with her weird post about how she can't go to the beach during the day and drink a margarita. Just like, you know, .... everyone.

The point is, DP, that when you are the one "on call" you are not free to do anything that you want. You can do stuff around the house and yard, you can exercise, you can run errands and volunteer. It's not like you are free to take day trips. Plus, whatever you do has to fit within the family budget so it's not like you can take sailing lessons while the kids are in school or even expect to take college classes because if something comes up you'll be the one dealing with it.

It's not like you are retired or on vacation, you aren't earning a paycheck yourself. You also miss out on the perks of working like holiday parties, awards/recognition, office lunches, work dinners, going for cocktails with coworkers and that sort of thing. That is not to say that all working moms get those sort of perks but many of them do. I likely would have had I continued to work.

PP (“this thread is not about...”). I am a SAHM. I see what you are saying, but come on, you know there’s a difference by being on-call vs supervising your child. I really think that’s not what OP is asking about. She’s talking about actively supervising children. Nothing against your situation, but I think it’s just a different topic.

Yes, the hands on heavy duty childcare changes as they get older. There is A LOT less of that. You are still not free to go and do whatever you want to do because you are the one keeping tabs on your older kids whether they are directly in front of your nose or not. The duties change but the role is still the same.

Very few 5 year olds ditch school, can't say the same thing about teens. If dh is at work concentrating on meetings and I'm off having a spa day, no one is filling that role.

Oh please. So when your kids are at school you just sit in your car in the parking lot and hold on to your phone in case it rings?

The great thing is I owe you zero explanations as to what I do all day or why I chose to do things this way. Suffice it to say that my husband and I find value to me being at home and that is enough.

Perhaps don't antagonize others on here then.

I don't know why you are trying to argue with me, I really don't. I tried to explain why I SAH, I have attempted to explain that when you are the volunteer default parent that you are never truly off duty. You are taking exception to that and I am going to guess that your own situation is vastly different than mine and you simply can not relate at all to what I am saying. That's fine.

The female engineer earlier in this thread explained how difficult it is to work full time and ALWAYS be the default parent. It sucks. A doctor earlier tried to explain how she was literally having to leave her office because she was the parent on duty. That sucks.

My life doesn't suck. There are things that I truly miss about working but I do not miss or want the home/life balancing act. I am glad to be the parent at home. I love it actually. I think dh would have been miserable in my role even though he is a truly good dad to our kids. That said, he has the ability to leave and be gone for two weeks if that is what he needs to do. I, at this time, do not have that option which is o.k. because I willingly signed up for this.

I hope you are equally happy with your choices DP.

To be fair, there are many of us who don’t think working and having kids is that hard. My kids are rarely sick. I don’t find doctors appointments to be that challenging. I can’t imagine quitting my job to make our life easier. It already is very easy.

I personally have zero interest in being the working default parent. To me that would be very hard and I would resent the heck out of my spouse. Others make it work for them. Thankfully we can choose these things for ourselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t a thread about being “on call.” OP asked about times you are supervising children.

That one PP derailed it with her weird post about how she can't go to the beach during the day and drink a margarita. Just like, you know, .... everyone.

The point is, DP, that when you are the one "on call" you are not free to do anything that you want. You can do stuff around the house and yard, you can exercise, you can run errands and volunteer. It's not like you are free to take day trips. Plus, whatever you do has to fit within the family budget so it's not like you can take sailing lessons while the kids are in school or even expect to take college classes because if something comes up you'll be the one dealing with it.

It's not like you are retired or on vacation, you aren't earning a paycheck yourself. You also miss out on the perks of working like holiday parties, awards/recognition, office lunches, work dinners, going for cocktails with coworkers and that sort of thing. That is not to say that all working moms get those sort of perks but many of them do. I likely would have had I continued to work.

PP (“this thread is not about...”). I am a SAHM. I see what you are saying, but come on, you know there’s a difference by being on-call vs supervising your child. I really think that’s not what OP is asking about. She’s talking about actively supervising children. Nothing against your situation, but I think it’s just a different topic.

Yes, the hands on heavy duty childcare changes as they get older. There is A LOT less of that. You are still not free to go and do whatever you want to do because you are the one keeping tabs on your older kids whether they are directly in front of your nose or not. The duties change but the role is still the same.

Very few 5 year olds ditch school, can't say the same thing about teens. If dh is at work concentrating on meetings and I'm off having a spa day, no one is filling that role.

Oh please. So when your kids are at school you just sit in your car in the parking lot and hold on to your phone in case it rings?

The great thing is I owe you zero explanations as to what I do all day or why I chose to do things this way. Suffice it to say that my husband and I find value to me being at home and that is enough.

Perhaps don't antagonize others on here then.

I don't know why you are trying to argue with me, I really don't. I tried to explain why I SAH, I have attempted to explain that when you are the volunteer default parent that you are never truly off duty. You are taking exception to that and I am going to guess that your own situation is vastly different than mine and you simply can not relate at all to what I am saying. That's fine.

The female engineer earlier in this thread explained how difficult it is to work full time and ALWAYS be the default parent. It sucks. A doctor earlier tried to explain how she was literally having to leave her office because she was the parent on duty. That sucks.

My life doesn't suck. There are things that I truly miss about working but I do not miss or want the home/life balancing act. I am glad to be the parent at home. I love it actually. I think dh would have been miserable in my role even though he is a truly good dad to our kids. That said, he has the ability to leave and be gone for two weeks if that is what he needs to do. I, at this time, do not have that option which is o.k. because I willingly signed up for this.

I hope you are equally happy with your choices DP.

To be fair, there are many of us who don’t think working and having kids is that hard. My kids are rarely sick. I don’t find doctors appointments to be that challenging. I can’t imagine quitting my job to make our life easier. It already is very easy.

I personally have zero interest in being the working default parent. To me that would be very hard and I would resent the heck out of my spouse. Others make it work for them. Thankfully we can choose these things for ourselves.

Why are you assuming I’m the default parent? My husband and I are equals and coparenting. That’s my issue with SAHMs - so many don’t think it’s paosibly to have a successful career AND have a husband who pulls his weight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t a thread about being “on call.” OP asked about times you are supervising children.

That one PP derailed it with her weird post about how she can't go to the beach during the day and drink a margarita. Just like, you know, .... everyone.

The point is, DP, that when you are the one "on call" you are not free to do anything that you want. You can do stuff around the house and yard, you can exercise, you can run errands and volunteer. It's not like you are free to take day trips. Plus, whatever you do has to fit within the family budget so it's not like you can take sailing lessons while the kids are in school or even expect to take college classes because if something comes up you'll be the one dealing with it.

It's not like you are retired or on vacation, you aren't earning a paycheck yourself. You also miss out on the perks of working like holiday parties, awards/recognition, office lunches, work dinners, going for cocktails with coworkers and that sort of thing. That is not to say that all working moms get those sort of perks but many of them do. I likely would have had I continued to work.

PP (“this thread is not about...”). I am a SAHM. I see what you are saying, but come on, you know there’s a difference by being on-call vs supervising your child. I really think that’s not what OP is asking about. She’s talking about actively supervising children. Nothing against your situation, but I think it’s just a different topic.

Yes, the hands on heavy duty childcare changes as they get older. There is A LOT less of that. You are still not free to go and do whatever you want to do because you are the one keeping tabs on your older kids whether they are directly in front of your nose or not. The duties change but the role is still the same.

Very few 5 year olds ditch school, can't say the same thing about teens. If dh is at work concentrating on meetings and I'm off having a spa day, no one is filling that role.

Oh please. So when your kids are at school you just sit in your car in the parking lot and hold on to your phone in case it rings?

The great thing is I owe you zero explanations as to what I do all day or why I chose to do things this way. Suffice it to say that my husband and I find value to me being at home and that is enough.

Perhaps don't antagonize others on here then.

I don't know why you are trying to argue with me, I really don't. I tried to explain why I SAH, I have attempted to explain that when you are the volunteer default parent that you are never truly off duty. You are taking exception to that and I am going to guess that your own situation is vastly different than mine and you simply can not relate at all to what I am saying. That's fine.

The female engineer earlier in this thread explained how difficult it is to work full time and ALWAYS be the default parent. It sucks. A doctor earlier tried to explain how she was literally having to leave her office because she was the parent on duty. That sucks.

My life doesn't suck. There are things that I truly miss about working but I do not miss or want the home/life balancing act. I am glad to be the parent at home. I love it actually. I think dh would have been miserable in my role even though he is a truly good dad to our kids. That said, he has the ability to leave and be gone for two weeks if that is what he needs to do. I, at this time, do not have that option which is o.k. because I willingly signed up for this.

I hope you are equally happy with your choices DP.

To be fair, there are many of us who don’t think working and having kids is that hard. My kids are rarely sick. I don’t find doctors appointments to be that challenging. I can’t imagine quitting my job to make our life easier. It already is very easy.

I personally have zero interest in being the working default parent. To me that would be very hard and I would resent the heck out of my spouse. Others make it work for them. Thankfully we can choose these things for ourselves.

I have zero interest providing unpaid labor for a man. You quit your career to further his. You no longer contribute to a retirement account in only your name. Your retirement is dependent on your husband. Your healthcare - everything. You’re so influenced by the patriarchy that you don’t see how messed up the situation is.

Instead you should have kept working and demanded your husband do his share. Don’t have more kids if he doesn’t.