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:

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 do you have to be the default parent? Why did you have kids with someone who is so incompetent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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 do you have to be the default parent? Why did you have kids with someone who is so incompetent?

I chose to be the SAH default parent which has worked very well for us in our situation. My husband is awesome and we have a great marriage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 do you have to be the default parent? Why did you have kids with someone who is so incompetent?

I chose to be the SAH default parent which has worked very well for us in our situation. My husband is awesome and we have a great marriage.

My high schooler would also be happier not attending school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 do you have to be the default parent? Why did you have kids with someone who is so incompetent?

I chose to be the SAH default parent which has worked very well for us in our situation. My husband is awesome and we have a great marriage.

My high schooler would also be happier not attending school.

Well.....good for your kid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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 do you have to be the default parent? Why did you have kids with someone who is so incompetent?

Not the pp, but I chose to marry someone with a demanding job. Perks being that he can support our family and I can stay home or work part time and be there for the kids. My husband is more than competent, but that doesn’t mean he can take off whenever he needs to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 do you have to be the default parent? Why did you have kids with someone who is so incompetent?

Not the pp, but I chose to marry someone with a demanding job. Perks being that he can support our family and I can stay home or work part time and be there for the kids. My husband is more than competent, but that doesn’t mean he can take off whenever he needs to.

+1

[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.

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!

Do you have comprehension issues? The crazy PP was saying she has been on 24 hours a day 7 days a week 52 weeks a year for like 20 years. I never made such a claim, so I'm free to be on the internet all I want when I'm not taking care of my kids.

[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.

BTW, I posted one of the posts above and none of the rest, so you are responding to multiple people who think you have issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

NP. +1 All my friends are the same. But if you makes you feel better to think that your choices are (1) work and be the default parent and go crazy or (2) stay home, then go ahead. But many of us will say that isn't the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

NP. +1 All my friends are the same. But if you makes you feel better to think that your choices are (1) work and be the default parent and go crazy or (2) stay home, then go ahead. But many of us will say that isn't the case.

My husband and I work well as a team and in *our* unique situation it has worked much better for me to SAH especially in the early years when my husband was both working full time AND taking college classes at night. Everyone's life is a little bit different from your own. Remember that.

[Anonymous]

^Also, look at the bolded comment about the female engineer and the doctor. They have struggles that maybe you can not begin to appreciate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^Also, look at the bolded comment about the female engineer and the doctor. They have struggles that maybe you can not begin to appreciate.

Sigh. You are seriously intolerable.

[Anonymous]

I could totally check out as soon as DH comes home if I wanted to. I have to breastfeed our baby, though. Other than that, once he's home, he's in charge of the kids.

[Anonymous]

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.

I would say other posters derailed the thread by jumping on that post. Her point, I think, was that her partner is never the one on call, so she can't just take off. I can appreciate that. I work outside the home, but on the few days I have had her for there to myself, I know I can't count on my partner to do pick up or whatever if I am unavailable or running late.

So yes, while it is theoretically true of every parent that we are always on call, some people have more leeway than others for time to themselves with a fallback partner.

Do you see the difference? And it doesn't matter if you are SAH or WOH when you are in this situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

NP. +1 All my friends are the same. But if you makes you feel better to think that your choices are (1) work and be the default parent and go crazy or (2) stay home, then go ahead. But many of us will say that isn't the case.

+100000 most SAHMs I know really do think these are the only two options. With the number of flexible and telework friendly jobs here plus the ability to outsource all housework easily, it’s a huge mistake to stay home. It’s really unnecessary.