Stay at home mom

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s worried that you’ll be a SAHM forever. Unless one spouse is making a really high income or you have family money it’s going to be tight to run a household with 3 kids.

OP here.
My mom was a SAHM. My dad was just middle class. They made it work.

Why don’t you ask your mom how she did it?

[Anonymous]

There is really not anything morally superior about raising your own children full time. If you're worried about your husband and nanny... I think that's not about childcare.

I stayed home and home schooled. It was the most fun I could ever have imagined. (The idea sounds like absolute hell to many. Different strokes. Vanilla vs chocolate, ) My husband was frequently a little envious, even though he had his dream career.

Our kids have ivy league undergraduate and graduate/professional degrees and are incredibly successful financially, with equally credentialed and well compensated spouses. So far no one is stopping work to do childcare. They are all excellent parents.

Our choices were out of the norm. Is that the definition of "nutjob"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I let my DH know on our second date. He was thrilled because he wanted a SAHM wife but women here tend to be so career-oriented he was afraid to scare them off. Ultimately, you are choosing a more traditional marriage (and someone with similar traditional views) than an egalitarian one. There’s pros and cons to both, but similar views lead to a happier, more stable marriage. I would encourage you to make your views known early on in a new relationship.

I have a traditional and a very egalitarian marriage. But, DH and I are from a different culture than the majority US culture. Family is a priority. We both saved a lot before I became a SAHM. So, we did not get into this with our eyes closed.

Today, we are saving for our DD and DIL. When our adult children choose to have children, we will move near them and support them. Our aim is to provide childcare (also employ a nanny to help) and other kinds of support so that the families can thrive and our grandkids can have a good foundation.

I think you mean “if.”

No. I mean "when".

They are high earners and sensible. They have found good partners from similar families who also want children. The normal stressors of today's youth - student debt, lack of good jobs, unaffordability of housing, issues with childcare, burden of eldercare, money problems - these have been removed or mitigated to a large extent.

My kids are not going to struggle with all of this and they are not on their own. We are not from the "self-centered" culture.

Oh, I see. You’re one of those posters who claim your children “weren’t interested in sex” in high school.

Pretty sure PP herself wasn’t interested in sex until she was married and had to do it, so no surprise that she would think her kids are the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This entire thread is off the rails. These are such polarizing posts. Most women fall in between the extremes presented here. Some want to be home but can’t afford it. Some can afford it and want to be home but worry about lost wages over the long term. Some want to be home and can afford it so they choose that path for a few years. Some women hate being home even when they think they’d enjoy it. Some women hate working and wish they could be home. Some women find it is necessary to be home longer than planned (or when they don’t wish to be) because their children have disabilities requiring a lot of appointments during the workday. Some women are married to men who support their wishes to stay home. Some are married to men who resent it. Some believe they are safe in their marriage only to be left with nothing. Some end up being lucky and having a great long marriage. In the real world, I know women from every path and fortunately they respect that the path they have chosen doesn’t always work for someone else’s family or make someone else happy. They are respectful. They don’t judge SAHMs as lazy. They don’t judge working moms as neglectful. I think some of the people posting here just like the stir the pot.

You are leaving out the core issue which the strongly anti SAHM people are evading. What is best for the children, esp when very young? These are many women who were taught that being a SAHM even for a few years is simply bad because it means the mom is "stupid" and "subservient." Or the man will cheat, leave her, and she won't have the ability to get her career back. Being raised by Mom is better for kids, much, better, than being raised by strangers. Except if Mom is mentally unstable. There may be some self knowledge on the part if the ANTI SAHM Mom posters being expressed here

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This entire thread is off the rails. These are such polarizing posts. Most women fall in between the extremes presented here. Some want to be home but can’t afford it. Some can afford it and want to be home but worry about lost wages over the long term. Some want to be home and can afford it so they choose that path for a few years. Some women hate being home even when they think they’d enjoy it. Some women hate working and wish they could be home. Some women find it is necessary to be home longer than planned (or when they don’t wish to be) because their children have disabilities requiring a lot of appointments during the workday. Some women are married to men who support their wishes to stay home. Some are married to men who resent it. Some believe they are safe in their marriage only to be left with nothing. Some end up being lucky and having a great long marriage. In the real world, I know women from every path and fortunately they respect that the path they have chosen doesn’t always work for someone else’s family or make someone else happy. They are respectful. They don’t judge SAHMs as lazy. They don’t judge working moms as neglectful. I think some of the people posting here just like the stir the pot.

You are leaving out the core issue which the strongly anti SAHM people are evading. What is best for the children, esp when very young? These are many women who were taught that being a SAHM even for a few years is simply bad because it means the mom is "stupid" and "subservient." Or the man will cheat, leave her, and she won't have the ability to get her career back. Being raised by Mom is better for kids, much, better, than being raised by strangers. Except if Mom is mentally unstable. There may be some self knowledge on the part if the ANTI SAHM Mom posters being expressed here

Because I genuinely do not think it is worse for the children. It might be better, depending on how things go. And if the marriage is damaged, the family is broke (not stable on a low income but like, foreclosure and bankruptcy) or they divorce and the mom is in a bad situation, that's harmful to the children. As is having to financially support their parents because their parents didn't save enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This entire thread is off the rails. These are such polarizing posts. Most women fall in between the extremes presented here. Some want to be home but can’t afford it. Some can afford it and want to be home but worry about lost wages over the long term. Some want to be home and can afford it so they choose that path for a few years. Some women hate being home even when they think they’d enjoy it. Some women hate working and wish they could be home. Some women find it is necessary to be home longer than planned (or when they don’t wish to be) because their children have disabilities requiring a lot of appointments during the workday. Some women are married to men who support their wishes to stay home. Some are married to men who resent it. Some believe they are safe in their marriage only to be left with nothing. Some end up being lucky and having a great long marriage. In the real world, I know women from every path and fortunately they respect that the path they have chosen doesn’t always work for someone else’s family or make someone else happy. They are respectful. They don’t judge SAHMs as lazy. They don’t judge working moms as neglectful. I think some of the people posting here just like the stir the pot.

You are leaving out the core issue which the strongly anti SAHM people are evading. What is best for the children, esp when very young? These are many women who were taught that being a SAHM even for a few years is simply bad because it means the mom is "stupid" and "subservient." Or the man will cheat, leave her, and she won't have the ability to get her career back. Being raised by Mom is better for kids, much, better, than being raised by strangers. Except if Mom is mentally unstable. There may be some self knowledge on the part if the ANTI SAHM Mom posters being expressed here

Because I genuinely do not think it is worse for the children. It might be better, depending on how things go. And if the marriage is damaged, the family is broke (not stable on a low income but like, foreclosure and bankruptcy) or they divorce and the mom is in a bad situation, that's harmful to the children. As is having to financially support their parents because their parents didn't save enough.

It takes a village to raise your children, as long as the village doesn't include Mom. Got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is really not anything morally superior about raising your own children full time. If you're worried about your husband and nanny... I think that's not about childcare.

I stayed home and home schooled. It was the most fun I could ever have imagined. (The idea sounds like absolute hell to many. Different strokes. Vanilla vs chocolate, ) My husband was frequently a little envious, even though he had his dream career.

Our kids have ivy league undergraduate and graduate/professional degrees and are incredibly successful financially, with equally credentialed and well compensated spouses. So far no one is stopping work to do childcare. They are all excellent parents.

Our choices were out of the norm. Is that the definition of "nutjob"?

Do as I say, not as I do.

[Anonymous]

Hi OP, I was a sahm mostly, until our youngest went to school full time. I loved every minute. Here were the benefits and drawbacks for my family:
Drawbacks:
We were totally broke. Not quite to the "use a food pantry" brooke, but there was NO money for extras. None.

I did delay years of wage increases.

Positives:
I loved being home w my kids. We did every free thing in our city. Gave up our only car and used public trans everywhere. We went to museums, parks, shows etc going places every week

My husband didn't have to take time off work to stay home with sick kids or go to doc appts. Most people we know with kids in day care used up all their sick days on sick kids, and most of their vacation days.

I was able to teach both kids to read before kindergarten

I did tutor 5-8 hours a week some years, and for a year or two I watched a friend's baby at my home for a little extra money.

You might really want to stay home, but be prepared that unless your spouse makes a lot of money, and you are willing to live very frugally ( no vacations, no eating out, no cafes, no new clothes) even then u might not be able to swing it. We had a little, and I mean little, family help. It meant, for us, delaying college and retirement savings, too. (We were able to catch up). My mom stayed home w me but times were different. It wasn't as hard financially.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a SAHM. My youngest is a senior. DH has been mostly supportive. I do not regret being home but I have been unable to break back into the workforce. I tried a few years ago and didn’t land more than a handful of interviews and wound up very underemployed. Eventually, I quit. So make sure you understand the risks! Nowadays, it can be scary to depend on a man. I hope DD will keep working when she becomes a parent for her own security. I love DH but I would be in trouble if he walked out.

How did I get DH to support the idea? I didn’t set out to be a SAHM when we dated. My own mom worked. But I did always think it sounded like it could be nice so we bought our first home on one income so we’d have the option. When I did actually get pregnant, we realized how expensive a nanny would be relative to my salary, so we started to seriously consider my quitting. To reassure DH we could get by, we put all my salary in savings to see what life was like on one paycheck. It went well so we figured I’d stay home until K. It wasn’t without sacrifices. No fancy cars or trips. No shows or concerts. But we didn’t mind. However, the timeline reset with each child. DH really valued my contributions and how it made everyone’s life less stressful so it worked out. But in recent years with an uncertain economy and inflation, he has become understandably nervous. We are financially stable with college covered and reasonable retirement savings (though far from our goal). I think it’s a lot of stress for the sole earner. I admit I wouldn’t want my sons to be in that boat.

I’m always amazed by women on here and irl whose earning potential equals the one of a nanny. It’s almost fascinating how many low income women there are on this board. I’m glad you’re all finding husbands to support you, because otherwise it would be tough for you out there.

With overtime our nanny was averaging around $85,000 a year for our 3 kids, for the 8 years she worked with us. We offered benefits too. It’s nothing to sneeze at.

But the point is not how much you spend on nanny. The point is nanny’s salary was your own earning potential. If you were making $200k yourself you would have questioned the decision to stay home

Exactly. And 200k isn’t even a lot these days. When PP explains to us that she didn’t even earn more than her nanny, she’s really not portraying herself as a serious, educated adult person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are men who want this but they might not be attractive to you in other ways.

Men are generally turned off by laziness. It’s a lot to take on the sole breadwinner role in this economy.

Being a stay at home mom is not lazy. It’s a tough job, tougher than a 9-5 in many ways.

Sorry but no.

Many of us work AND raise kids. We do both. So don’t tell those of us who have ample experience in both that one is harder than the other 🙄.

It’s really not that hard to throw a load of laundry in, give your kid some rice puffs, and pay your bills on your phone with one tap (assuming bills aren’t on autopay).

When you are at work, for most of this group of high paid professionals, that's at least 8 hours a day M-F minimum. That's at least half if your waking hours. At most youre only half raising your kids. You really can't be two places at once. I'm talking about younger kids not school age so please no straw men.

Not true. A lot of work is remote or at least hybrid these days. Kids are in school for at least 6 hours per day. You’re only missing 2 hrs of time with them. Heck how much I love it when the kids come home and I take an afternoon coffee break with them and chat a bit. They do their homework and I work some more and we spend most of our free time together or they spend with friends or study/do homework. With remote work you get to spend the vast majority of the time with them if that’s what you want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a SAHM. My youngest is a senior. DH has been mostly supportive. I do not regret being home but I have been unable to break back into the workforce. I tried a few years ago and didn’t land more than a handful of interviews and wound up very underemployed. Eventually, I quit. So make sure you understand the risks! Nowadays, it can be scary to depend on a man. I hope DD will keep working when she becomes a parent for her own security. I love DH but I would be in trouble if he walked out.

How did I get DH to support the idea? I didn’t set out to be a SAHM when we dated. My own mom worked. But I did always think it sounded like it could be nice so we bought our first home on one income so we’d have the option. When I did actually get pregnant, we realized how expensive a nanny would be relative to my salary, so we started to seriously consider my quitting. To reassure DH we could get by, we put all my salary in savings to see what life was like on one paycheck. It went well so we figured I’d stay home until K. It wasn’t without sacrifices. No fancy cars or trips. No shows or concerts. But we didn’t mind. However, the timeline reset with each child. DH really valued my contributions and how it made everyone’s life less stressful so it worked out. But in recent years with an uncertain economy and inflation, he has become understandably nervous. We are financially stable with college covered and reasonable retirement savings (though far from our goal). I think it’s a lot of stress for the sole earner. I admit I wouldn’t want my sons to be in that boat.

I’m always amazed by women on here and irl whose earning potential equals the one of a nanny. It’s almost fascinating how many low income women there are on this board. I’m glad you’re all finding husbands to support you, because otherwise it would be tough for you out there.

But it also shows that men prefer to marry women like that. Low paid, subservant, easy to control . Even at expense of him becoming a sole breadwinner under high jobless stress whole life

The ones with personality disorders, for sure. Lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are men who want this but they might not be attractive to you in other ways.

Men are generally turned off by laziness. It’s a lot to take on the sole breadwinner role in this economy.

Being a stay at home mom is not lazy. It’s a tough job, tougher than a 9-5 in many ways.

Sorry but no.

Many of us work AND raise kids. We do both. So don’t tell those of us who have ample experience in both that one is harder than the other 🙄.

It’s really not that hard to throw a load of laundry in, give your kid some rice puffs, and pay your bills on your phone with one tap (assuming bills aren’t on autopay).

Agreed. Especially when the kids are in school. Then it’s like early retirement. If you have 2 kids under 3, and they’re at home, depending on their temperament and how much you do yourself it can be extremely exhausting work though. But age 3/4-18 are easy!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are men who want this but they might not be attractive to you in other ways.

Men are generally turned off by laziness. It’s a lot to take on the sole breadwinner role in this economy.

Being a stay at home mom is not lazy. It’s a tough job, tougher than a 9-5 in many ways.

Sorry but no.

Many of us work AND raise kids. We do both. So don’t tell those of us who have ample experience in both that one is harder than the other 🙄.

It’s really not that hard to throw a load of laundry in, give your kid some rice puffs, and pay your bills on your phone with one tap (assuming bills aren’t on autopay).

When you are at work, for most of this group of high paid professionals, that's at least 8 hours a day M-F minimum. That's at least half if your waking hours. At most youre only half raising your kids. You really can't be two places at once. I'm talking about younger kids not school age so please no straw men.

Young kids are napping for part of that time so you factor that into your calculation of all the time one has someone else raising their kids.

[Anonymous]

What's your career? Hopefully something easy like teaching so you can get back into it easily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are men who want this but they might not be attractive to you in other ways.

Men are generally turned off by laziness. It’s a lot to take on the sole breadwinner role in this economy.

Being a stay at home mom is not lazy. It’s a tough job, tougher than a 9-5 in many ways.

Sorry but no.

Many of us work AND raise kids. We do both. So don’t tell those of us who have ample experience in both that one is harder than the other 🙄.

It’s really not that hard to throw a load of laundry in, give your kid some rice puffs, and pay your bills on your phone with one tap (assuming bills aren’t on autopay).

When you are at work, for most of this group of high paid professionals, that's at least 8 hours a day M-F minimum. That's at least half if your waking hours. At most youre only half raising your kids. You really can't be two places at once. I'm talking about younger kids not school age so please no straw men.

What are you prattling on about? My kids are in elementary school + sports. And many parents have hybrid schedules, like me.