SAHM with kids in school? Dealing with judgement?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t say it to your face but I agree with her.
- Independently wealthy and working in a meaningful job

What is your definition of meaningful job?

For me personally, I work at a nonprofit that helps marginalized girls pursue STEM careers (not in DC area). But I would say anything that utilizes your personal passions and/or contributes to society in a meaningful way (ie, improves the lives of others or society at large). I recognize that not everyone has the option to work at a job that they choose for reasons other than money, but the idea of never doing anything but what some of the SAHMs describe here day in and day out is frankly, to me, pretty pathetic. YMMV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s envious. End of story.

definitely this.

So what would you say about women who have plenty of personal money and choose to work? And also have wonderful relationships with their children?

Content, successful women like this don't bash other women for making different choices like OP is describing - they are happy with their lives and happy for others as well.

Sure, but that doesn't mean the woman OP describes is envious. It always boggles my mind that SAHMs can't fathom that people work for reasons other than money - despite the fact that they're all over this thread, and the world. Many, many women could stay home but choose not to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s envious. End of story.

definitely this.

So what would you say about women who have plenty of personal money and choose to work? And also have wonderful relationships with their children?

Content, successful women like this don't bash other women for making different choices like OP is describing - they are happy with their lives and happy for others as well.

Sure, but that doesn't mean the woman OP describes is envious. It always boggles my mind that SAHMs can't fathom that people work for reasons other than money - despite the fact that they're all over this thread, and the world. Many, many women could stay home but choose not to.

So what's the right word then if not "envious"? Should we say "miserable"? "bitchy"? Why drives these people to bash others for making different choices? They aren't just disagreeing with their choices, but intentionally making pointed, hurtful comments.

[Anonymous]

Who cares.

Jeff shut this nonsense thread down already.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s envious. End of story.

definitely this.

So what would you say about women who have plenty of personal money and choose to work? And also have wonderful relationships with their children?

Content, successful women like this don't bash other women for making different choices like OP is describing - they are happy with their lives and happy for others as well.

Sure, but that doesn't mean the woman OP describes is envious. It always boggles my mind that SAHMs can't fathom that people work for reasons other than money - despite the fact that they're all over this thread, and the world. Many, many women could stay home but choose not to.

A good majority of SAHMs used to work. I for one was happy working. I loved being DINKs - we were always free to work late, go on work travel. I liked working most days. It could be a challenge but it could also be fun and very rewarding.

Then kids came along and it was time to make some choices. Ultimately, I decided to quit work (not because I hated working or didn't like my coworkers - not true!) but I simply felt that it was the best thing to do for my family at the time. We had logistics involved in our decision that other people may not have. I totally 100% get that we are not all the same and it's never going to be a one size fits all solution.

The frustrating thing is when people talk in absolutes - "SAHMs" vs "WOHMs". Honestly, I often find that I have more in common with working moms than I do with many stay at home moms. There are plenty of SAHMs/Working moms I don't relate to. There are plenty of SAHMs/Working moms that I relate to quite well. We are not all "the same". Not by a long shot.

[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:She’s envious. End of story.

definitely this.

So what would you say about women who have plenty of personal money and choose to work? And also have wonderful relationships with their children?

They are liars or their children are very young. No one always has wonderful relationships with their children, no matter what their working status.

So in your opinion why donstay at home moms claim they have better relationships with / “are doing it for” their children, despite research showing no effect on kids?

Because they probably do have better relationships. There is a long way between “better” and “wonderful.”

And every study that I have ever seen shows that when families are in the situation described above (stable marriage with plenty of money), that the kids are better off with stay at home mothers.

There aren't any large, peer-reviewed studies that say that. I am familiar with the academic work that is considered accepted, valid research, and there aren't any that say the bolded.

https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/bul-136-6-915.pdf

You have now seen this meta analysis. You’re welcome.

Uh, that doesn't say what you think it does. Do you understand academic work?

I am not great at statistics, but I can read a discussion.

"By and large, moderator analyses indicated that early maternal employment was associated with beneficial child outcomes when families were at risk socioeconomically, particularly in the context of families with single parents and on welfare; these findings support the compensatory hypothesis of employment for these families (e.g., NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2003). In contrast, other analyses indicated that employment was associated with negative child outcomes when families were not at risk financially (i.e., when families were middle or upper-middle class); these findings support the lost resources hypothesis for these types of families (e.g., NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2003)."

"The results of this meta-analysis suggest that early maternal employment in sole-provider families may bolster children’s achievement and buffer against problem behaviors, perhaps because of the added financial security and health benefits that accompany employment, as well as improved food, clothing, and shelter because of increased income and the psychological importance of having a role model for achievement and responsible behavior. In contrast, early maternal employment may be detrimental for the behavior of children in two-parent families if the increases in family income do not offset the challenges introduced by maternal employment during children’s early years of life"


I am not saying that people need to make personal family decisions based on population studies. Everyone has individual factors that they need to take into account. But research does show that maternal employment has an effect on kids.

Sigh. Yes, it's clear that you aren't great at statistics. Or academics, either. I give up.

This was the statement you or a PP made:

"every study that I have ever seen shows that when families are in the situation described above (stable marriage with plenty of money), that the kids are better off with stay at home mothers."

It's just wrong. You should stop saying it, because you sound very ignorant. And I have been both a SAHM and WOHM, currently WOH but likely to SAH again, so I don't have a "side" here. Do whatever you want, but stop lying about the academic research out there to make yourself feel better. Also, just know that when you wildly exaggerate academic research, it makes you sound desperate and defensive to those people who know the literature well.

I am happy to be wrong, but can you explain where I am wrong?
I didn’t wildly exaggerate academic research. I quoted from a research paper that is a meta-analysis of over 60 studies. I have also read Ellen Galinsky’s book on this same subject, and it pretty much says the same thing. There is only an advantage to mom working when it relieves some kind of real or perceived economic pressure. Otherwise, it’s a disadvantage.

I don’t know where these studies are that show that it doesn’t matter, but I am not really sure they exist. I haven’t seen them. I do think that there is a general myth about their existence in mainstream media though.
I am not a conspiracy theorist or anything, but working moms make great employees. They work hard, are good at their jobs, and only cost $0.80 on the dollar compared to a man doing the same work AND there is no cost to society to care for their children. It doesn’t surprise me that you FEEL like these studies exist, but I don’t think they really do.

Well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's great that you're happy with your choices and "status quo" and you shouldn't let the petty judgments of others dilute your pleasure. At the same time, maybe there is a middle ground between pure-SAHM and more natural states of being. Would you consider taking casual work or volunteering? A nice example of the former is working a few hours a week (usually weekend afternoons) as a sign-spinner. You stand in front of a retail location, normally on a busy thoroughfare and spin a large rectangular sign in elaborate, fast-moving ways. This type of marketing is very popular with mattress retailers, as merely one example. It's also a great workout and fun way to interact with the community. Opportunities in volunteerism are even broader. Consider becoming a greeter at the local library, soup kitchen, or hall of records. What do you think?

Dp. Sign spinner sounds like one of the worst jobs! Boring and you are a hazard to drivers. No thanks!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's great that you're happy with your choices and "status quo" and you shouldn't let the petty judgments of others dilute your pleasure. At the same time, maybe there is a middle ground between pure-SAHM and more natural states of being. Would you consider taking casual work or volunteering? A nice example of the former is working a few hours a week (usually weekend afternoons) as a sign-spinner. You stand in front of a retail location, normally on a busy thoroughfare and spin a large rectangular sign in elaborate, fast-moving ways. This type of marketing is very popular with mattress retailers, as merely one example. It's also a great workout and fun way to interact with the community. Opportunities in volunteerism are even broader. Consider becoming a greeter at the local library, soup kitchen, or hall of records. What do you think?

Dp. Sign spinner sounds like one of the worst jobs! Boring and you are a hazard to drivers. No thanks!

I feel like "sign spinner" poster is the newest notorious DCUMer. She's up there with the Royal Stan and Lightly Fried Tuna. She HAS to be the trolliest troll who ever trolled.

[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:She’s envious. End of story.

definitely this.

So what would you say about women who have plenty of personal money and choose to work? And also have wonderful relationships with their children?

They are liars or their children are very young. No one always has wonderful relationships with their children, no matter what their working status.

So in your opinion why donstay at home moms claim they have better relationships with / “are doing it for” their children, despite research showing no effect on kids?

Because they probably do have better relationships. There is a long way between “better” and “wonderful.”

And every study that I have ever seen shows that when families are in the situation described above (stable marriage with plenty of money), that the kids are better off with stay at home mothers.

There aren't any large, peer-reviewed studies that say that. I am familiar with the academic work that is considered accepted, valid research, and there aren't any that say the bolded.

https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/bul-136-6-915.pdf

You have now seen this meta analysis. You’re welcome.

Uh, that doesn't say what you think it does. Do you understand academic work?

I am not great at statistics, but I can read a discussion.

"By and large, moderator analyses indicated that early maternal employment was associated with beneficial child outcomes when families were at risk socioeconomically, particularly in the context of families with single parents and on welfare; these findings support the compensatory hypothesis of employment for these families (e.g., NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2003). In contrast, other analyses indicated that employment was associated with negative child outcomes when families were not at risk financially (i.e., when families were middle or upper-middle class); these findings support the lost resources hypothesis for these types of families (e.g., NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2003)."

"The results of this meta-analysis suggest that early maternal employment in sole-provider families may bolster children’s achievement and buffer against problem behaviors, perhaps because of the added financial security and health benefits that accompany employment, as well as improved food, clothing, and shelter because of increased income and the psychological importance of having a role model for achievement and responsible behavior. In contrast, early maternal employment may be detrimental for the behavior of children in two-parent families if the increases in family income do not offset the challenges introduced by maternal employment during children’s early years of life"


I am not saying that people need to make personal family decisions based on population studies. Everyone has individual factors that they need to take into account. But research does show that maternal employment has an effect on kids.

Sigh. Yes, it's clear that you aren't great at statistics. Or academics, either. I give up.

This was the statement you or a PP made:

"every study that I have ever seen shows that when families are in the situation described above (stable marriage with plenty of money), that the kids are better off with stay at home mothers."

It's just wrong. You should stop saying it, because you sound very ignorant. And I have been both a SAHM and WOHM, currently WOH but likely to SAH again, so I don't have a "side" here. Do whatever you want, but stop lying about the academic research out there to make yourself feel better. Also, just know that when you wildly exaggerate academic research, it makes you sound desperate and defensive to those people who know the literature well.

I am happy to be wrong, but can you explain where I am wrong?
I didn’t wildly exaggerate academic research. I quoted from a research paper that is a meta-analysis of over 60 studies. I have also read Ellen Galinsky’s book on this same subject, and it pretty much says the same thing. There is only an advantage to mom working when it relieves some kind of real or perceived economic pressure. Otherwise, it’s a disadvantage.

I don’t know where these studies are that show that it doesn’t matter, but I am not really sure they exist. I haven’t seen them. I do think that there is a general myth about their existence in mainstream media though.
I am not a conspiracy theorist or anything, but working moms make great employees. They work hard, are good at their jobs, and only cost $0.80 on the dollar compared to a man doing the same work AND there is no cost to society to care for their children. It doesn’t surprise me that you FEEL like these studies exist, but I don’t think they really do.

Well said.

I mean, it seems blatantly obvious that when money isn't an issue, kids and families are going to be better off when one person can dedicate themselves entirely to meeting the needs of the rest of the family. Kids can stay home when they are sick instead of being dumped off with some tylenol, healthy food can be made and put on the table at a reasonable time, kids have more downtime to just play, kids have more time with a parent to go over problems and have their emotional needs met. My entire family is MUCH happier when I'm not working. But you know what? I'm important, too, and being a stay at home parent wasn't working for me. So I went back to work, and even though things are better for everyone else when I'm not working, they're perfectly adequate with me being employed.

I think the vast majority of people are doing what works best for themselves and their families. I also think the vast majority of people on this planet would choose not to work if they had a choice, and if you have a choice you should consider yourself very lucky.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would you consider taking casual work or volunteering? A nice example of the former is working a few hours a week (usually weekend afternoons) as a sign-spinner. You stand in front of a retail location, normally on a busy thoroughfare and spin a large rectangular sign in elaborate, fast-moving ways. This type of marketing is very popular with mattress retailers, as merely one example. It's also a great workout and fun way to interact with the community

I took the trouble of extending this idea and would appreciate a response.

I have always dreamed of being a sign spinner. I am a lawyer, but should I ever need to obtain another job, I shall look no further than sign spinner. Spin sign, spin!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would you consider taking casual work or volunteering? A nice example of the former is working a few hours a week (usually weekend afternoons) as a sign-spinner. You stand in front of a retail location, normally on a busy thoroughfare and spin a large rectangular sign in elaborate, fast-moving ways. This type of marketing is very popular with mattress retailers, as merely one example. It's also a great workout and fun way to interact with the community

I took the trouble of extending this idea and would appreciate a response.

I have always dreamed of being a sign spinner. I am a lawyer, but should I ever need to obtain another job, I shall look no further than sign spinner. Spin sign, spin!

I know a sign spinner and she hated it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would you consider taking casual work or volunteering? A nice example of the former is working a few hours a week (usually weekend afternoons) as a sign-spinner. You stand in front of a retail location, normally on a busy thoroughfare and spin a large rectangular sign in elaborate, fast-moving ways. This type of marketing is very popular with mattress retailers, as merely one example. It's also a great workout and fun way to interact with the community

I took the trouble of extending this idea and would appreciate a response.

I have always dreamed of being a sign spinner. I am a lawyer, but should I ever need to obtain another job, I shall look no further than sign spinner. Spin sign, spin!

I know a sign spinner and she hated it

I keep reading salad spinner. Think I might have a salad for dinner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would you consider taking casual work or volunteering? A nice example of the former is working a few hours a week (usually weekend afternoons) as a sign-spinner. You stand in front of a retail location, normally on a busy thoroughfare and spin a large rectangular sign in elaborate, fast-moving ways. This type of marketing is very popular with mattress retailers, as merely one example. It's also a great workout and fun way to interact with the community

I took the trouble of extending this idea and would appreciate a response.

I have always dreamed of being a sign spinner. I am a lawyer, but should I ever need to obtain another job, I shall look no further than sign spinner. Spin sign, spin!

I know a sign spinner and she hated it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would you consider taking casual work or volunteering? A nice example of the former is working a few hours a week (usually weekend afternoons) as a sign-spinner. You stand in front of a retail location, normally on a busy thoroughfare and spin a large rectangular sign in elaborate, fast-moving ways. This type of marketing is very popular with mattress retailers, as merely one example. It's also a great workout and fun way to interact with the community

I took the trouble of extending this idea and would appreciate a response.

I have always dreamed of being a sign spinner. I am a lawyer, but should I ever need to obtain another job, I shall look no further than sign spinner. Spin sign, spin!

I know a sign spinner and she hated it

Nonsense!

[Anonymous]

OP, I hope you're volunteering or otherwise doing something to contribute positively to the world.

If you don't want/need to work, that's fine, but to sit on your butt all day and do nothing is pretty unacceptable.