Husbands with SAHMs that prefer they work

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I, for one, learned a tremendous amount from my DC's preschool teachers. Because they have degrees in child development, unlike myself!

And many of us prefer to learn about our children and their needs by actually raising them. So- sounds like everyone's happy!

So just to confirm – when your kids go to kindergarten, the teachers are raising them? Right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a SAHM to teens and tweens. I have a few advanced degrees and never thought i'd be in this situation. I always thought "what the hell do these women DO all day long?". I've intended to go back for years. But the truth of the matter is that I don't know where to begin. I've been out of the workforce for 15+ years. It's a completely different world out there. I didn't keep in touch with old colleagues. Also, my children are very active in sports - they all play at least one, up to three travel/select sports, plus high school sports each season. I start driving children around at 4:15pm and conclude around 10pm, every single day. I'm sometimes in my car up to 6 hours a night. I can't imagine doing that after a full day of work. Not to mention all of the things that people who work during the week do on the weekends, I can't do. Dry cleaning, grocery store, hardware store, Target, whatever.... I'm usually at a gym/field/court/etc. And that is sometimes 6am-8pm. Could my kids cut back on activities, sure. But if I'm home, they don't need to.

I think may be some resentment , financially, but I also thing that my husband knows the reality is that our household would be a disaster if I worked. AND he'd have to do a LOT more. I get up at 6am every day to make lunches, walk the dogs, etc. If I was working the same hours he was, we'd be sharing that responsibility. I take the kids to school every day - again, he'd have to pitch in on that. Grocery shopping - yep. Carpool - again, yes. I think he does understand that and appreciates it.

I think it sucks on many levels but it is where we are at right now, and I don't really know how to change it.

So, what is your DH doing while you're driving kids around all evening? Staying at home with the other kids? Coming with (so basically he's driving the kids around too?) What is he subject to after his Full day of work? A house that's vacuumed, but a wife who won't be home until 10pm? Doesn't sound like a happy situation to me.

Working. He travels for work often and when he doesn't, he works until at least 8:00pm. Gets home around 8:30 at the earliest. He will pick up a child if he's in town and there is a practice that he can get to.

I should also note that I don't cook or clean that often. We have cleaning help. I cook, but it's not the greatest food because if you aren't home around dinner time, it's kind of hard to make dinner.

So I guess my job is to be a chauffeur from the hours of 4-9, and do the errand of the household during other hours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I, for one, learned a tremendous amount from my DC's preschool teachers. Because they have degrees in child development, unlike myself!

And many of us prefer to learn about our children and their needs by actually raising them. So- sounds like everyone's happy!

So just to confirm – when your kids go to kindergarten, the teachers are raising them? Right?

My kids are in K 2.5 hours a day. I don't see how 12.5 hours a week compares to the average hours (40+ when you allow for commute) that the average child in daycare spends. Do you? Plus comparing a newborn or infant and a 5 year old is inane in terms of the sheer amount of nursing/nurturing/total dependence a baby has versus a 5 year old. I rely on teachers to help teach my children academics just like I rely on their swim coach to make them competitive swimmers. No one would love or nurture our babies like we would- period- so the choice to have a parent care for their own offspring didn't sound as wildly far fetched to us as it does to some of you. I also wouldn't want my 5 year old in k then long days of aftercare or endless camps all summer. They are still little at 5. If you prefer that lifestyle great- we didn't think it best for our kids when we had the option to have a parent home with no financial strain.

[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:Here is how I look at my situation:

My wife stays at home -- we've got three young kids (the oldest just started school). And man, it is GREAT, and I'm thankful she's willing to do it. I couldn't. It is constant attention to schedules and activities and the hearts and minds of the little ones. She cooks healthy food, keeps the house reasonably clean, does the laundry, pays the bills, and keeps up the social connections.

I'm thankful that the raising of the kids is not in the hands of some minimum wage preschool workers or uneducated nanny. I'm thankful she is constantly teaching the kids about the world, about morals, about important concepts that will make them more successful and happy teens and adults. I'm thankful that because she does all she does during the day, we have time to connect as a couple when I'm home from work. We have a great marriage and a peaceful, happy, intellectual family. When I hear and read about the hustle of two working parents, it sounds soul crushing. Why would any resent that?

Ahhh ... the irony.

How is that ironic? Do you think it is immoral that I'd rather have my children spend their formative years being cared for by someone who loves them deeply, is extremely well educated and intelligent, and thoughtful? If you need two working parents to get by, then so be it. But if you think that your children get care as good from their preschool or the nanny you found from some website or listserv, that either speaks to your delusion or the lack of better options at home.

Immoral? Nah, just elitist and myopic. It's not about money – I guarantee I could buy and sell you. It is the idea that someone who is not been afforded the same educational and life opportunities as you and your wife - and gasp! May be a different race – is somehow ill-equipped to teach morals and worldly behavior. Unless the worldview you want to promote is "don't let those poor brown hands touch my kid!"

Someone calling someone elitist while simultaneously saying "I could buy and sell you". If you represent working women I'm glad to be on the intelligent other side.

Deserved response to "if you need two incomes to get by, so be it."

What a loser.

No- not a deserved response. It's a response that clearly identifies the posters deep insecurity with their own life choices.

It's a tacky, classless thing to say, especially from someone claiming to be so happy with their own life.

Hardly. He'd definitely have come back with "sorry you're so poor you have to outsource childcare." Total racist douchebag.

I'm the previous poster you are referring to -- I think you are projecting with the racism. The preschools my kids have gone to have had largely white teachers, as far as I remember. They were fine people, but I'd much prefer my wife take care of my kids. If you feel that these preschool teachers do as good a job as either parent in your house would, I think you are delusional or are aware that you'd do a bad job raising your kids. Either way, race has nothing to do with it.

Did you, or did you not, write "minimum wage preschool teacher or uneducated nanny?"

Yes, I wrote that, and I explained why that has nothing to do with race.

New poster here. We all know what you meant and that you're trying to backtrack. The vast majority of the low-paid daycare workers and nannies in this area (many of whom are incredibly loving caregivers) are not white. To pretend you don't know that and werent alluding to it is absurd. Or maybe, you "just" look down on people who make less money and have been given less opportunity in life? In which case, I stand corrected, you're awesome.

NP: I don't have a horse in this race, and I'm not defending her snobby attitude towards daycare workers, but she didn't say anything about race. You are putting words in her mouth. Using the "race card" for speculative, chickensh-t things, causes it to lose its effectiveness for when it would actually be valid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think DHs who resent their SAH wives are ones who are low earners and need the additional income.

Agreed. I bring a trust fund to the table and my husband is a high earner. Our three kids are in early elementary school. I'm happy keeping our home running smoothly and cooking healthy meals, allowing the kids to be active in sports, and to enjoy our low key relaxed summers. Anyone who would judge us for being happy with how our family runs has their own issues.

What mutual interests do you and your husband share, other than your children?

Are you implying that couples who have different careers have mutual interests automatically? How silly.

Because of our set up we are able to enjoy our mutual interests (travel, skiing, golf, hiking, good food and wine etc) without having to coordinate two work schedules or constant childcare/nannies. We get to include our children in our interests when we choose. That flexibility is worth way more than the $180k I used to make. We simply don't need it and I don't understand why I should take a job from someone who does need it- especially when we mutually enjoy our lives just as they are.

Lovely. Glad it works for your family. Do you personally have any intellectual type interests, or are your interests the leisure pursuits you mention above?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to be 40 and starting at an entry level position.

You're right. Much harder than sitting home, not contributing your fair share.

It really shouldn't be THAT hard, if you were interested in helping your family, had a career before (you have a shorter curve on learning and understanding the politics in most offices). Not to mention, you have the motivation of having an entry leveL job that won't likely be sucking all your soul and time.

I think being insensitive to the reality that you are 40 doing the jub that most 25 year Olds are working is very hard on your self esteem. You are never going to get somebody on board to working with insensitivity.

Most people think they are "helping" their family by taking the burden off the husband.

I am not advocating for aSAHM to stay at home after kids go to school but thinking it is not a big deal from being a lwyer to a govt secretary, for the benefits, is insensitive$

Most entry level jobs are soul sucking and long hours, it those with connections, experience, etc that have more leave and cush jobs.

Men need to start taking on the household duties to show they are a team instead of acting like this is not a team effort. Get a job, it's not that hard... not a good approach.

Women need to keep their jobs even when they have infants, to force their husbands to do the housework and kid stuff. It doesn't benefit the family if one spouse gives up a good paying job because the other spouse won't do his or her share at home.

So your only way to manipulate your husband into helping you is to thrust your baby into daycare right away?

Sounds like you married poorly. My husband is a great dad and husband - because I married a great man- not someone I need to mother more than I need to mother my babies.

It sure helps if your spouse understands from the get go that there's no division of labor based solely on gender, yes.

Agreed! We loved our time as DINK's and now still divide labor equally - just differently.

I managed to do that without having to manipulate him with a daycare baby.

What's a "daycare" baby?

[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:Here is how I look at my situation:

My wife stays at home -- we've got three young kids (the oldest just started school). And man, it is GREAT, and I'm thankful she's willing to do it. I couldn't. It is constant attention to schedules and activities and the hearts and minds of the little ones. She cooks healthy food, keeps the house reasonably clean, does the laundry, pays the bills, and keeps up the social connections.

I'm thankful that the raising of the kids is not in the hands of some minimum wage preschool workers or uneducated nanny. I'm thankful she is constantly teaching the kids about the world, about morals, about important concepts that will make them more successful and happy teens and adults. I'm thankful that because she does all she does during the day, we have time to connect as a couple when I'm home from work. We have a great marriage and a peaceful, happy, intellectual family. When I hear and read about the hustle of two working parents, it sounds soul crushing. Why would any resent that?

Ahhh ... the irony.

How is that ironic? Do you think it is immoral that I'd rather have my children spend their formative years being cared for by someone who loves them deeply, is extremely well educated and intelligent, and thoughtful? If you need two working parents to get by, then so be it. But if you think that your children get care as good from their preschool or the nanny you found from some website or listserv, that either speaks to your delusion or the lack of better options at home.

Immoral? Nah, just elitist and myopic. It's not about money – I guarantee I could buy and sell you. It is the idea that someone who is not been afforded the same educational and life opportunities as you and your wife - and gasp! May be a different race – is somehow ill-equipped to teach morals and worldly behavior. Unless the worldview you want to promote is "don't let those poor brown hands touch my kid!"

Someone calling someone elitist while simultaneously saying "I could buy and sell you". If you represent working women I'm glad to be on the intelligent other side.

Deserved response to "if you need two incomes to get by, so be it."

What a loser.

No- not a deserved response. It's a response that clearly identifies the posters deep insecurity with their own life choices.

It's a tacky, classless thing to say, especially from someone claiming to be so happy with their own life.

Hardly. He'd definitely have come back with "sorry you're so poor you have to outsource childcare." Total racist douchebag.

I'm the previous poster you are referring to -- I think you are projecting with the racism. The preschools my kids have gone to have had largely white teachers, as far as I remember. They were fine people, but I'd much prefer my wife take care of my kids. If you feel that these preschool teachers do as good a job as either parent in your house would, I think you are delusional or are aware that you'd do a bad job raising your kids. Either way, race has nothing to do with it.

Did you, or did you not, write "minimum wage preschool teacher or uneducated nanny?"

Yes, I wrote that, and I explained why that has nothing to do with race.

New poster here. We all know what you meant and that you're trying to backtrack. The vast majority of the low-paid daycare workers and nannies in this area (many of whom are incredibly loving caregivers) are not white. To pretend you don't know that and werent alluding to it is absurd. Or maybe, you "just" look down on people who make less money and have been given less opportunity in life? In which case, I stand corrected, you're awesome.

NP: I don't have a horse in this race, and I'm not defending her snobby attitude towards daycare workers, but she didn't say anything about race. You are putting words in her mouth. Using the "race card" for speculative, chickensh-t things, causes it to lose its effectiveness for when it would actually be valid.

I'm the previous poster (husband of a stay-at-home mom). I'm really not backtracking or bringing race into at all. As I said in a previous post, it always seemed to me that the majority of the nannies, au pairs, and preschool teachers I've seen have been white. So race really has nothing to do with it.

Playing the race card is classic ad hominem -- instead of addressing the merits of the argument, you go with personal insults meant to somehow diminish my points. I believe that having a loving, well educated, thoughtful parent at home with my children is far superior to having an uneducated (or poorly educated) stranger, possibly with a bunch of other children to look after, being the major influence on my children during the first 5 or 6 years of life. I think that people get defensive about that, and I see why. But it's not racist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is how I look at my situation:

My wife stays at home -- we've got three young kids (the oldest just started school). And man, it is GREAT, and I'm thankful she's willing to do it. I couldn't. It is constant attention to schedules and activities and the hearts and minds of the little ones. She cooks healthy food, keeps the house reasonably clean, does the laundry, pays the bills, and keeps up the social connections.

I'm thankful that the raising of the kids is not in the hands of some minimum wage preschool workers or uneducated nanny. I'm thankful she is constantly teaching the kids about the world, about morals, about important concepts that will make them more successful and happy teens and adults. I'm thankful that because she does all she does during the day, we have time to connect as a couple when I'm home from work. We have a great marriage and a peaceful, happy, intellectual family. When I hear and read about the hustle of two working parents, it sounds soul crushing. Why would any resent that?

Ahhh ... the irony.

How is that ironic? Do you think it is immoral that I'd rather have my children spend their formative years being cared for by someone who loves them deeply, is extremely well educated and intelligent, and thoughtful? If you need two working parents to get by, then so be it. But if you think that your children get care as good from their preschool or the nanny you found from some website or listserv, that either speaks to your delusion or the lack of better options at home.

If your wife wants to SAH, and you can afford it, great. It's in no way necessary though and children partly educated in childcare settings aren't worse off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is how I look at my situation:

My wife stays at home -- we've got three young kids (the oldest just started school). And man, it is GREAT, and I'm thankful she's willing to do it. I couldn't. It is constant attention to schedules and activities and the hearts and minds of the little ones. She cooks healthy food, keeps the house reasonably clean, does the laundry, pays the bills, and keeps up the social connections.

I'm thankful that the raising of the kids is not in the hands of some minimum wage preschool workers or uneducated nanny. I'm thankful she is constantly teaching the kids about the world, about morals, about important concepts that will make them more successful and happy teens and adults. I'm thankful that because she does all she does during the day, we have time to connect as a couple when I'm home from work. We have a great marriage and a peaceful, happy, intellectual family. When I hear and read about the hustle of two working parents, it sounds soul crushing. Why would any resent that?

Because the 0-5 years last a short while, while earning potential lost is often gone forever.

A. You don't need to resent this on behalf of someone else.
B. Some of us don't GAF about lost earning potential. I don't need more money! I already have more than I need.

You have more than you need, because you're married to someone who works or because you have a trust fund or because you are otherwise independently wealthy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thought she'd go back.

If you're honest with yourself, can she? Does she have any chance at all of getting anything other than a low-paying job that will just mean she expects you to do a lot more at home?

If you read the career threads, the hiring managers won't look at people with more than a year away from work regardless of their academic pedigree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under no circumstances would any woman allow a man to not work for 5+ years without small or special needs kids to deal with. If the roles were reverses most of you would utterly without pity.

And under no circumstances do men give birth and care for babies.

+1 million. It's your body that gets ruined, not theirs. It's a shame how we have grown to devalue women for anything but a paycheck.

Speak for yourself. I'm 51 and my girls still pass the pencil test after 2 kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a SAHM to teens and tweens. I have a few advanced degrees and never thought i'd be in this situation. I always thought "what the hell do these women DO all day long?". I've intended to go back for years. But the truth of the matter is that I don't know where to begin. I've been out of the workforce for 15+ years. It's a completely different world out there. I didn't keep in touch with old colleagues. Also, my children are very active in sports - they all play at least one, up to three travel/select sports, plus high school sports each season. I start driving children around at 4:15pm and conclude around 10pm, every single day. I'm sometimes in my car up to 6 hours a night. I can't imagine doing that after a full day of work. Not to mention all of the things that people who work during the week do on the weekends, I can't do. Dry cleaning, grocery store, hardware store, Target, whatever.... I'm usually at a gym/field/court/etc. And that is sometimes 6am-8pm. Could my kids cut back on activities, sure. But if I'm home, they don't need to.

I think may be some resentment , financially, but I also thing that my husband knows the reality is that our household would be a disaster if I worked. AND he'd have to do a LOT more. I get up at 6am every day to make lunches, walk the dogs, etc. If I was working the same hours he was, we'd be sharing that responsibility. I take the kids to school every day - again, he'd have to pitch in on that. Grocery shopping - yep. Carpool - again, yes. I think he does understand that and appreciates it.

I think it sucks on many levels but it is where we are at right now, and I don't really know how to change it.

I lost you there.

That is one effed-up life you are living. Sheesh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is how I look at my situation:

My wife stays at home -- we've got three young kids (the oldest just started school). And man, it is GREAT, and I'm thankful she's willing to do it. I couldn't. It is constant attention to schedules and activities and the hearts and minds of the little ones. She cooks healthy food, keeps the house reasonably clean, does the laundry, pays the bills, and keeps up the social connections.

I'm thankful that the raising of the kids is not in the hands of some minimum wage preschool workers or uneducated nanny. I'm thankful she is constantly teaching the kids about the world, about morals, about important concepts that will make them more successful and happy teens and adults. I'm thankful that because she does all she does during the day, we have time to connect as a couple when I'm home from work. We have a great marriage and a peaceful, happy, intellectual family. When I hear and read about the hustle of two working parents, it sounds soul crushing. Why would any resent that?

Ahhh ... the irony.

How is that ironic? Do you think it is immoral that I'd rather have my children spend their formative years being cared for by someone who loves them deeply, is extremely well educated and intelligent, and thoughtful? If you need two working parents to get by, then so be it. But if you think that your children get care as good from their preschool or the nanny you found from some website or listserv, that either speaks to your delusion or the lack of better options at home.

Immoral? Nah, just elitist and myopic. It's not about money – I guarantee I could buy and sell you. It is the idea that someone who is not been afforded the same educational and life opportunities as you and your wife - and gasp! May be a different race – is somehow ill-equipped to teach morals and worldly behavior. Unless the worldview you want to promote is "don't let those poor brown hands touch my kid!"

Someone calling someone elitist while simultaneously saying "I could buy and sell you". If you represent working women I'm glad to be on the intelligent other side.

Deserved response to "if you need two incomes to get by, so be it."

What a loser.

Why is that a deserved response to the two-income comment? (That was my comment, by the way.) I'm just saying that if you need to have all parents work to stay afloat, that needs to be respected. If both parents just want to work rather than having one stay home with kids, just be honest about the realities of the child care situation.

As for elitist and myopic, again, how so? Daycares -- and we have occasionally sent our kids to relatively very good ones -- are at best just entertaining the kids and keeping them from hurting themselves. There are too many kids for real, individualized attention, and frankly, the "teachers" rarely seem very smart or thoughtful. Certainly not as smart or thoughtful as my wife, and certainly do not love my kids as much or care as much about their development as people. Again, I'm sure it is fine, but it is clearly a step down. Let's just be honest about this. I think a lot of the working moms here feel guilty and lash out at any suggestion that the kids are receiving subpar care.

The whole thread is about resentment though. And the point is, why resent someone who is willing to stay home with kids and take care of the household?

Please don't resent my husband, even though he has a wife with her own career and life, and mutually agreed on great childcare with her. Our kids are too old now for childcare, and I'm so glad I didn't waste my potential SAH. And we have millions, too, so no, we didn't continue working just for the money. Kids do not need parental care 24/7 to be "optimized" as people; I do not at all agree that sharing childcare with paid caregivers is "clearly a step down."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I, for one, learned a tremendous amount from my DC's preschool teachers. Because they have degrees in child development, unlike myself!

And many of us prefer to learn about our children and their needs by actually raising them. So- sounds like everyone's happy!

so it's okay to not "actually raise" your children if you outsource that job to your spouse, instead of a paid caregiver? What about another family member?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is how I look at my situation:

My wife stays at home -- we've got three young kids (the oldest just started school). And man, it is GREAT, and I'm thankful she's willing to do it. I couldn't. It is constant attention to schedules and activities and the hearts and minds of the little ones. She cooks healthy food, keeps the house reasonably clean, does the laundry, pays the bills, and keeps up the social connections.

I'm thankful that the raising of the kids is not in the hands of some minimum wage preschool workers or uneducated nanny. I'm thankful she is constantly teaching the kids about the world, about morals, about important concepts that will make them more successful and happy teens and adults. I'm thankful that because she does all she does during the day, we have time to connect as a couple when I'm home from work. We have a great marriage and a peaceful, happy, intellectual family. When I hear and read about the hustle of two working parents, it sounds soul crushing. Why would any resent that?

Good for you! If people can afford it, it's the best way to go. Unfortunately some can't and are resentful, some on this board obviously.

I worked on and off but was able to stay home, loved it. Great meals made every day, house clean, bills paid, happy marriage years later.

I'd be bored to death making great meals every day and cleaning house. I don't need to SAH to pay bills.