is 8+ hours a day "a few" to you? Most young kids sleep at least 10-12 hours a day. If you are working for 8 hours and they are sleeping for 12, you are simply not spending much time with them. |
I have childfree, sahm and wohm friends. If we say, "I did x because I didn't want Y," we assume it is a personal, individual decision and not meant to cast judgement on anyone who did Y who can hear the statement. It's not always about you, people. |
These conversations are exhausting because if you're a person who actually didn't have better choices than working and day care, you'll probably get a lecture on how another household with a SAHP just made financial sacrifices instead of buying a big house, going out to restaurants, buying new cars, etc. Never mind that these "sacrifices" were made on a single, stable income that was 3x your entire HHI, you had both your kids in apartments with no dishwasher or washer/dryer, you never ate out, etc. Probably just should have been more responsible (aka going to law school). |
Of course SAHPs spend more 1-1 time with their kids than working parents. How would someone who isn't with their kids 40+ hours a week spend the same amount of time with their kids as someone who is staying home with their kids and not working? |
You're just talking about how YOU would be as a SAHP, not how all or most SAHPs are. Maybe your best if you were to SAH would be to turn on TV and take kids to Costco but that certainly doesn't describe the SAHPs I know. |
I think you are mistaken. There's just simply not a chance that you spend more 1-1 time with kids than a SAHP unless the SAHP is outsourcing a ton of childcare. Your kids never play in the basement or nap or watch TV when you're with them? And how much time during the day are the SAHP neighbor's kids doing that? 2 hrs out of a 8+ hour work day...your math isn't mathing. |
NP but I can assure you, you do NOT spend more time with your kids than a SAHP. It's impossible. "Quality" time is debatable but in your initial post you didn't say quality time you said 1-1 time. |
I was a sahm for a couple years and actually there were some days that were mostly running errands to places like Target. This isn't really the point though. I didn't feel the need to fill my days with "enrichment activities" because the reason I stayed home was simply to spend time with my DD and and enjoy that time together. No I did not teach her to speak french or do pirouettes and she still has normal kid issues like picky eating or sometimes being shy at the playground or whatever. I didn't stay home with her to optimize her as a person. It wasn't to play the long game on college apps. I just really loved hanging out with her and I though it would be great for both of us and our relationship if we got a couple years of togetherness. So yes I took her grocery shopping and to Target and to get oil changed. I also took her to the park and to museums. I also hung out at home with her. Yes I sometimes let her watch TV while I made dinner or just took a break and no it was not exclusively high minded educational programming. I limited screen time but still used it sometimes. She's a really great kid. She is actually a whiz at school though I don't think that has much to do with me being a sahm for a time -- I think she's just a bright kid who likes school and that would have happened regardless. She's also on the shy side and slow to warm and I also think that was fairly inevitable too -- it's just her personality and she was like that as a baby too. I'd take her to mommy and me stuff and she'd hang back from the other babies and play on her own. I don't think you can fundamentally alter a child's nature by staying home or putting them in childcare. But we have a great relationship. She trusts me and we communicate really well. She feels really loved and accepted and safe at home. I think you can give a kid this without staying home but staying home is how I gave my kid this. No regrets. I also personally really enjoyed it. If I had hated it then I would have just gone back to work and found another way to build our relationship and trust. This isn't rocket science. I don't judge anyone else for their choices. I think it's weird how some of you are talking about being a sahm though -- as though all sahms are either aggressively optimizing childhood 24-7 or they are uneducated dullards planting kids in front of the TV. I don't know anyone who fits either of those descriptions and they feel like weird fantasies you are projecting because of your own issues and feelings about motherhood. |
Not considering my children's benefit from my being a SAHM when they were born and very young, I am so grateful that I MYSELF was able to be home with my kids. I would have missed experiencing so much and my life is so much richer for that experience. It makes me sad that my husband did not get to experience the same and I will be forever grateful to him for enabling me to have that time. |
There is some truth to it. No I’m not offended. |
Weird all those working dads |
You could also hear, instead, "I was paranoid that I would feel like someone else was raising my kids" |
This is *your* logic we are talking about, and clearly you are deeply confused. A random woman saying “I don’t want someone else raising my kids” has absolutely nothing to do with you (unless you have just offered to raise her kids). |
It's interesting to me that this thread is almost 20 pages long and no one has mentioned that a lot of the SAHP situations people are mentioning here (staying home for 1-3 years when kids are very young) are really just extended parental leaves and that in countries with better parental leave policies and a culture of people actually using leave there is no debate between SAHPs and working parents of babies or very young toddlers because you are not considered a SAHP just because you stayed home with your baby. Everyone stays home with babies (including men in some countries). It's normal to take extended leave from work with kids and then return to jobs when they are old enough to go to a preschool-like environment where they are walking and talking and interacting.
Like the US is one of the only countries in the world where mothers of 8 months old babies are going toe-to-toe over whether you should be a SAHP or a working mom at that age. In sane places it would be irrelevant which lifestyle you chose -- either way your baby would be home with either you or your spouse during that year. I guess we have to pretend that actually it's normal or even good for babies to spend the first year of life in daycares or with paid caregivers because we live in a place that is insane and not family friendly? I genuinely don't want anyone to feel bad for going back to work. But come on. The rest of the world knows that babies are better off with their families during that first year. |
If I were 2 I’d much rather go to Target with a parent (feeling safe, calm and hopefully chatting a bit and absorbing content knowledge while also learning to tolerate silence) than in a typical daycare.
Few toddlers thrive when corralled from one activity to the next on someone else’s schedule while hoping another kid doesn’t bite them. |