Are there ramifications for being a SAHM?

[Anonymous]

It’s not especially relevant if kids “like” daycare. Obviously it’s much better if they do but it can still be an undesirable setup in terms of cortisol control, emotional regulation, exposure to aggression, etc. It can dictate how effective your own parenting is. Try doing oh crap or RIE when your child is in a center and you’ll be undercut all day long.

Daycares also allow so little risky play (understandably!) and food and naps are all based on convenience. An individual caregiver—dad, nanny, grandma—can allow a child much more independence and autonomy. That matters for everything from anxiety prevention to gut health.

Parents also mistakenly believe that all the enrichment found in daycares matters. It doesn’t—a toddler doesn’t need to be shuffled from art to cooking to French in siloed stations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It astounds me how so few posters consider or acknowledge the experience for an infant or toddler—what their day to day is like. It’s a completely different childhood when you can avoid both parents working long hours with maybe 4 months of leave total. Anything that can be done to stagger or extend leaves, to work part time, etc. will improve your child’s quality of life immensely.

My kids liked day care. It was warm and lovely and the kids were very well taken care of. It sucked for me to be managing being a new mother, pumping, and working, but they were fine. And now that they're older, I have a lot more flexibility in my hours because of the work I put in then. So it's not that I haven't considered my kids' experience, I just don't agree with this.

DP. My kids didn’t like daycare and didn’t thrive there and I still worked because they are not the only people on the planet, and they are still incredibly privileged.
I was in a small town where I was the only doctor in my specialty. I wasn’t going to SAH in order to give them some idyllic toddlerhood. My kids are a little neurotic, but they are fine, and a few people lived that might have died a lot sooner. I feel like it was a good trade.

The idea that we need to give over privileged children even more time and attention is ridiculous.

It’s so nuts. This notion that kids who go to daycare or have babysitters are in any way missing out is insane. I mainly work from home and have hours and hours a day with my kids. They just do a sport or a class after school. And they’re great kids!

And bc I work they will have fully funded 529s, they can go to camp, they can travel to Europe and we will be able to help them with down payment on first home.

Kids generally after the age of 7 desperately start to want to see less of their parents so silly to give up your whole life and comp for someone who will pull away in a way that’s developmentally appropriate after just a few years

Kids in daycare do have increased stress levels. It’s all a balance, and there obviously good reasons why parents work, but there can be impacts to kids that are not measurable. The first 3 years impact life forever.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2946618/

There are a lot of things that impact children’s lives. If your work helps children who are disadvantaged or born into poverty in any way, the advantages to those kids far outweigh the slightly increased cortisol levels of the typical DCUM seriously advantaged children.

[Anonymous]

I mean this OP is just so naive it is scary.

Yes, there are many ramifications.

Your "Employer" will be your husband. So you will be subject to his whims. And given the amount of men who want to ditch their wives every year, you will be very vulnerable.

Even if your DH is great, he could lose his job. My DH lost his job 7 years ago and has never found a new one. He grinds out a living doing freelance work. My job has kept steady money coming in and provided us with health insurance.

Your retirement savings will be decimated. Without a job, how will you save for retirement?? Beyond a 401(k), there's Social Security to think of. If you aren't making a decent living, then there will be little for you when you turn 67.

THINK!!!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not especially relevant if kids “like” daycare. Obviously it’s much better if they do but it can still be an undesirable setup in terms of cortisol control, emotional regulation, exposure to aggression, etc. It can dictate how effective your own parenting is. Try doing oh crap or RIE when your child is in a center and you’ll be undercut all day long.

Daycares also allow so little risky play (understandably!) and food and naps are all based on convenience. An individual caregiver—dad, nanny, grandma—can allow a child much more independence and autonomy. That matters for everything from anxiety prevention to gut health.

Parents also mistakenly believe that all the enrichment found in daycares matters. It doesn’t—a toddler doesn’t need to be shuffled from art to cooking to French in siloed stations.

If any of that mattered in some significant, uniform way, the many studies on daycare would find much larger and more consistent results.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not especially relevant if kids “like” daycare. Obviously it’s much better if they do but it can still be an undesirable setup in terms of cortisol control, emotional regulation, exposure to aggression, etc. It can dictate how effective your own parenting is. Try doing oh crap or RIE when your child is in a center and you’ll be undercut all day long.

Daycares also allow so little risky play (understandably!) and food and naps are all based on convenience. An individual caregiver—dad, nanny, grandma—can allow a child much more independence and autonomy. That matters for everything from anxiety prevention to gut health.

Parents also mistakenly believe that all the enrichment found in daycares matters. It doesn’t—a toddler doesn’t need to be shuffled from art to cooking to French in siloed stations.

Question to this poster. How are your kids now? Movers and shakers of the world? National leaders? Wealth along the lines of Warren Buffet or Elon Musk?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do what you want and what feels good for you in your relationship.

I always liked working. I derive satisfaction from working. I didn't derive much satisfaction from being a full time mom (which I essentially did for 3 years - though always was technically employed at the time, for purposes of keeping my resume fresh).

I hear a lot of women on this forum say that their husbands always continued to treat them as the same equal when they stayed home. That's great! In my case, I don't think I'd ever be attracted to the kind of guy who had the same respect for a sahm wife as he would have for a working wife. Because honestly that means he probably didn't put a whole lot of value in the accomplishments of a working wife. I have accomplished a lot in my career and education. It really is harder and more interesting than baby raising. So if a guy was like "my opinions of you won't change based on whether you continue working or not"..... . that's kind of weird, and not the guy for me. Consequently, my DH is very attracted to my professional success; we definitely weren't as connected or have the same energy when I wasn't working. But again - your DH and your relationship may be different, so you do you.

This is sad to me and I have a career. It’s sad for a few reasons including that you’re likely over the age of 35 and still think your career is that important in the grand scheme of things. I work for a few reasons but primarily for income and can’t imagine my DH thinking me pushing papers around and sending emails is really more important than my role raising children. This view also diminishes what has traditionally been a woman’s job since the beginning of time. It suggests that the only way you add value is if you have what was traditionally a man’s job. Bringing a life into this world and raising it isn’t enough for you. Instead you need to work for a corporation and send emails. Kind of gross. I think our nanny’s job is incredibly important and don’t think my job is more important or better than being the mother to my children.

This isn’t sad. You can value the role of taking care of a child without it being a full time all day focus. You can also acknowledge that there are a lot of advantages and pragmatic reasons to having two professionals in a family. Women also have been historically barred from working in professional roles. It’s 2024. Get a life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do what you want and what feels good for you in your relationship.

I always liked working. I derive satisfaction from working. I didn't derive much satisfaction from being a full time mom (which I essentially did for 3 years - though always was technically employed at the time, for purposes of keeping my resume fresh).

I hear a lot of women on this forum say that their husbands always continued to treat them as the same equal when they stayed home. That's great! In my case, I don't think I'd ever be attracted to the kind of guy who had the same respect for a sahm wife as he would have for a working wife. Because honestly that means he probably didn't put a whole lot of value in the accomplishments of a working wife. I have accomplished a lot in my career and education. It really is harder and more interesting than baby raising. So if a guy was like "my opinions of you won't change based on whether you continue working or not"..... . that's kind of weird, and not the guy for me. Consequently, my DH is very attracted to my professional success; we definitely weren't as connected or have the same energy when I wasn't working. But again - your DH and your relationship may be different, so you do you.

I am a career woman who also was SAH for a few years. It's the opposite to me: "career" in dmv area is just pushing papers and moving funds from point A to point B. Parenting to young kids is far more difficult and importnant, and I would never be attracted to a man who didnt consider parenting as equal as working a full time job.
It IS a FT job!

I agree with this. Staying home never made sense for my family financially, and I’ll always be a little sad about it. I generally think it’s better for kids to be predominantly in the care of a parent outside of school (I say this as a working mom with full time childcare.) It’s more important that parents be mentally healthy and financially stable though, so if both parents prefer to work - or need to - that’s the priority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not especially relevant if kids “like” daycare. Obviously it’s much better if they do but it can still be an undesirable setup in terms of cortisol control, emotional regulation, exposure to aggression, etc. It can dictate how effective your own parenting is. Try doing oh crap or RIE when your child is in a center and you’ll be undercut all day long.

Daycares also allow so little risky play (understandably!) and food and naps are all based on convenience. An individual caregiver—dad, nanny, grandma—can allow a child much more independence and autonomy. That matters for everything from anxiety prevention to gut health.

Parents also mistakenly believe that all the enrichment found in daycares matters. It doesn’t—a toddler doesn’t need to be shuffled from art to cooking to French in siloed stations.

People can't tolerate two kids for all day and expect low paid strangers to do it well.

[Anonymous]

*do it well for 20 kids

[Anonymous]

It should be a mother's individual decision of what she can or can't do, she is a better judge of her capabilities and circumstances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you educated and a professional woman in a decent job before becoming a SAHM? In that case, I can see it being harder to get back into the labor market at anything approaching your current/previous level.

DC job market is competitive -- there are a million educated, talented, smart people around. Why would someone hire someone else who'd been home for five years? You just wouldn't be very completive.

I had no problem returning to the workforce. I'm sure it varies by industry/role but this idea that it is impossible is outdated. I know several women who have done the same. We are in different industries but none of us had a problem finding a job after staying home for a period of time.

Did you return to a senior role, with perks?

This was my basic math— I took two years maternity leave, but didn’t leave my job. My job includes travel and other things I can experience with my kids. I do not want my kids to think women do primarily domestic work, but it could be equally damaging for them to think, Dad has a secretary, Mom IS a secretary.

Didn't have a senior role so that was not something I had to worry about. In the six years I have been back, I've been promoted and have a lot of flexibility. Happy where I am in my career now, mid 40s, with one teen and one preteen.

DP - I was manager level when I took a break in my early 30s, did a little freelancing while home for 7 years. Had no trouble returning to a job at the same level and have since been promoted several times. New company is much more flexible and family-friendly than where I worked when I had my first baby. If I'd had the same work environment back then maybe I'd not have left. But I really enjoyed my years at home and am glad I did that.

FWIW, I was hired by a working mom with slightly older kids who always worked. She doesn't care that I made a different choice.

It's not so much that you can't return to work is that you will never match what you could have had no matter how many times you are promoted. It;s not fair but that's the truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you educated and a professional woman in a decent job before becoming a SAHM? In that case, I can see it being harder to get back into the labor market at anything approaching your current/previous level.

DC job market is competitive -- there are a million educated, talented, smart people around. Why would someone hire someone else who'd been home for five years? You just wouldn't be very completive.

I had no problem returning to the workforce. I'm sure it varies by industry/role but this idea that it is impossible is outdated. I know several women who have done the same. We are in different industries but none of us had a problem finding a job after staying home for a period of time.

Did you return to a senior role, with perks?

This was my basic math— I took two years maternity leave, but didn’t leave my job. My job includes travel and other things I can experience with my kids. I do not want my kids to think women do primarily domestic work, but it could be equally damaging for them to think, Dad has a secretary, Mom IS a secretary.

It’s kind of sad that you assign value to humans based on their careers. That is what you are teaching your kids.

I don’t think it is. My kids love my secretary, and we value her enormously. But I don’t think it’s ideal for children to see women restricted to positions of support— at home or the workplace.

OMG. What a tool. How about teaching your kids that she is working to provide for herself and her family and that no job is beneath anyone?

Yeah that post gave me a chuckle. I've found that many of the kids I teach (teens) have a lot of respect for their mothers working hard in any job. Many of them clean houses or work in daycares. It seems the people who don't respect them are mainly the women on dcum.

They aren't wrong though. The truth is not all jobs are created equaly, and yes it does impact children if the only jobs they see women in are subordinate or back-breaking. There;s a reason there was take your daughter to work day back in the day

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It astounds me how so few posters consider or acknowledge the experience for an infant or toddler—what their day to day is like. It’s a completely different childhood when you can avoid both parents working long hours with maybe 4 months of leave total. Anything that can be done to stagger or extend leaves, to work part time, etc. will improve your child’s quality of life immensely.

My kids liked day care. It was warm and lovely and the kids were very well taken care of. It sucked for me to be managing being a new mother, pumping, and working, but they were fine. And now that they're older, I have a lot more flexibility in my hours because of the work I put in then. So it's not that I haven't considered my kids' experience, I just don't agree with this.

DP. My kids didn’t like daycare and didn’t thrive there and I still worked because they are not the only people on the planet, and they are still incredibly privileged.
I was in a small town where I was the only doctor in my specialty. I wasn’t going to SAH in order to give them some idyllic toddlerhood. My kids are a little neurotic, but they are fine, and a few people lived that might have died a lot sooner. I feel like it was a good trade.

The idea that we need to give over privileged children even more time and attention is ridiculous.

This isn’t a good look for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There may be more options than you think. It’s been my experience that employers will lie and say the only option is for you to do exactly what they want you to do, but when you sit down to give your notice, other options magically appear.

This is the time to ask for exactly what you want. If they can’t work with you, then you quit.

+1.

OP, I think women should have a backup/return to work plan. I don't know that I think a postnup is the way to go if you're going to do this for 3-5 years, but if you and your spouse decide you should be a SAHM long-term, then it's a good idea. Otherwise, maybe put resources towards you planning to on-ramp back to work in a few/several years.

I'm 52 and have seen several marriages that I thought were pretty solid fall apart in the late 40's. Cheating, growing apart, small cracks that become chasms over the years. And also several deaths. I don't mean to be a downer, but these things do happen.

I am 51 and seeing the same problems amongst women my age. Seemingly strong marriages for people aged in their 20s and 30s start to fall apart in their 40s and 50s. I’ve seen too many women with very comfortable SAH lifestyles divorce and have to return to entry level jobs or otherwise stay married and put up with poor treatment such as affairs, financial control and other sorts of problems. The women that have careers at this age have far more control over their lives

It is hard to think about your marriage at 50 versus the joy of having young kids in your 30s but it can be a very different place

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you educated and a professional woman in a decent job before becoming a SAHM? In that case, I can see it being harder to get back into the labor market at anything approaching your current/previous level.

DC job market is competitive -- there are a million educated, talented, smart people around. Why would someone hire someone else who'd been home for five years? You just wouldn't be very completive.

I had no problem returning to the workforce. I'm sure it varies by industry/role but this idea that it is impossible is outdated. I know several women who have done the same. We are in different industries but none of us had a problem finding a job after staying home for a period of time.

Did you return to a senior role, with perks?

This was my basic math— I took two years maternity leave, but didn’t leave my job. My job includes travel and other things I can experience with my kids. I do not want my kids to think women do primarily domestic work, but it could be equally damaging for them to think, Dad has a secretary, Mom IS a secretary.

Didn't have a senior role so that was not something I had to worry about. In the six years I have been back, I've been promoted and have a lot of flexibility. Happy where I am in my career now, mid 40s, with one teen and one preteen.

DP - I was manager level when I took a break in my early 30s, did a little freelancing while home for 7 years. Had no trouble returning to a job at the same level and have since been promoted several times. New company is much more flexible and family-friendly than where I worked when I had my first baby. If I'd had the same work environment back then maybe I'd not have left. But I really enjoyed my years at home and am glad I did that.

FWIW, I was hired by a working mom with slightly older kids who always worked. She doesn't care that I made a different choice.

It's not so much that you can't return to work is that you will never match what you could have had no matter how many times you are promoted. It;s not fair but that's the truth.

But I don't want anything else. Some hypothetical level of career success is worth less to me than the time I got to spend with my young children. I'm happy with my career and now earn almost as much as my DH who never took a break.

I understand the trade off is different for others. Sure, if you aspire to be the CEO you probably shouldn't and won't want to SAHM for a few years. And some fields I'm sure are less forgiving of time off. That's why there's no one right answer for everyone.