Husbands with SAHMs that prefer they work

[Anonymous]

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.

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."

I'm the original previous poster you're quoting -- of course "[k]ids do not need parental care 24/7 to be 'optimized' as people." That is a straw man. But if you are working a full time job, we are talking about putting little kids -- babies even -- in the care of someone else during the vast majority of their waking hours. That is not "sharing childcare with paid caregivers." That is having someone else -- a stranger -- raise your children. And in my observation, that stranger typically doesn't love your child as much as a parent, and is not as well educated or thoughtful. If you believe that that is as good as having a parent raise the child, you are either delusional or have little confidence if the abilities of the parents to raise children.

And in light of that, to brag about the fact that you worked and had your children raised by others despite "hav[ing] millions," seems particularly selfish. But that is your decision to make, obviously.

I'll step in here and say what we're all thinking. Dude, stop! Yes your lovely and "thoughtful" and well-educated wife – maybe she's the PhD SAH mom upthread? – Works for you. We get it. Thou dost protest / defend too much and all that. Some of us do not believe that loving a child the most makes one the best full time caregiver for that child, all things considered. Different strokes.

And FWIW I think you sound like an elitist asshole who's backtracking, also. You're probably ugly, out of shape and balding away in your associate office. We all know the type.

Ha! I love the "you doth defend too much", followed by the insults. That's ok though. My original point was that there are people who appreciate the stay at home spouse and that it can contribute to a very happy, peaceful home, which is hard to outsource. Things went sideways responding to my offhand slight about childcare workers. People get defensive though about their choices. I'm just speaking my mind about how I view the child rearing options. I understand that you feel that someone else would do a better job raising your children. That's fine for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all fun and games until breadwinner DH wants a younger, perkier wife.

Thanks to staying home I'm in the best shape of my life at 40. Maybe you're prematurely ageying from trying to juggle ft work and kids- but I look fantastic

Yeah, I have to say -- based purely on observation -- SAHMs usually look better than WOHMs. Maybe there is a self-selection bias at play though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all fun and games until breadwinner DH wants a younger, perkier wife.

Thanks to staying home I'm in the best shape of my life at 40. Maybe you're prematurely ageying from trying to juggle ft work and kids- but I look fantastic

Who watches the kids while you work out? Because I work, I can exercise frequently because I have full time childcare.

What is "ageing"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all fun and games until breadwinner DH wants a younger, perkier wife.

Thanks to staying home I'm in the best shape of my life at 40. Maybe you're prematurely ageying from trying to juggle ft work and kids- but I look fantastic

Yeah, I have to say -- based purely on observation -- SAHMs usually look better than WOHMs. Maybe there is a self-selection bias at play though.

+1

[Anonymous]

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.

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."

I'm the original previous poster you're quoting -- of course "[k]ids do not need parental care 24/7 to be 'optimized' as people." That is a straw man. But if you are working a full time job, we are talking about putting little kids -- babies even -- in the care of someone else during the vast majority of their waking hours. That is not "sharing childcare with paid caregivers." That is having someone else -- a stranger -- raise your children. And in my observation, that stranger typically doesn't love your child as much as a parent, and is not as well educated or thoughtful. If you believe that that is as good as having a parent raise the child, you are either delusional or have little confidence if the abilities of the parents to raise children.

And in light of that, to brag about the fact that you worked and had your children raised by others despite "hav[ing] millions," seems particularly selfish. But that is your decision to make, obviously.

I'll step in here and say what we're all thinking. Dude, stop! Yes your lovely and "thoughtful" and well-educated wife – maybe she's the PhD SAH mom upthread? – Works for you. We get it. Thou dost protest / defend too much and all that. Some of us do not believe that loving a child the most makes one the best full time caregiver for that child, all things considered. Different strokes.

And FWIW I think you sound like an elitist asshole who's backtracking, also. You're probably ugly, out of shape and balding away in your associate office. We all know the type.

Ha! I love the "you doth defend too much", followed by the insults. That's ok though. My original point was that there are people who appreciate the stay at home spouse and that it can contribute to a very happy, peaceful home, which is hard to outsource. Things went sideways responding to my offhand slight about childcare workers. People get defensive though about their choices. I'm just speaking my mind about how I view the child rearing options. I understand that you feel that someone else would do a better job raising your children. That's fine for you.

Dude ... You write like a woman. Seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all fun and games until breadwinner DH wants a younger, perkier wife.

Thanks to staying home I'm in the best shape of my life at 40. Maybe you're prematurely ageying from trying to juggle ft work and kids- but I look fantastic

Who watches the kids while you work out? Because I work, I can exercise frequently because I have full time childcare.

What is "ageing"?

So you work ft then leave your kids "frequently" to work out? When do you see them, dear?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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."

I'm the original previous poster you're quoting -- of course "[k]ids do not need parental care 24/7 to be 'optimized' as people." That is a straw man. But if you are working a full time job, we are talking about putting little kids -- babies even -- in the care of someone else during the vast majority of their waking hours. That is not "sharing childcare with paid caregivers." That is having someone else -- a stranger -- raise your children. And in my observation, that stranger typically doesn't love your child as much as a parent, and is not as well educated or thoughtful. If you believe that that is as good as having a parent raise the child, you are either delusional or have little confidence if the abilities of the parents to raise children.

And in light of that, to brag about the fact that you worked and had your children raised by others despite "hav[ing] millions," seems particularly selfish. But that is your decision to make, obviously.

So it's okay for you, as a man with a SAHW, to pursue career and other personal goals for 40+ hours a week, because your spouse is the caregiver? That's how you satisfy yourself that your kids don't need more of you?

I am also guessing your 3 children are young. My youngest is 14, and so I can see how my relationship with them is going to turn out, or glimmers of it. Despite using 50 hours a week of paid childcare for more than 8 consecutive years, my kids are turning into fabulous people with good interpersonal relationships.

I'd be happy to spend more time with my kids and my wife. One of us has to work though, and we chose me. Obviously, if my wife worked full time outside of the house, we would barely have any parent time with the kids. Given how little time kids are awake and engaged at a young age, it seems crazy to have the vast majority of that time go to daycare workers, nannies, whatever. That just seems wrong to me, but if your kids are "fabulous people," then I guess it worked out just fine for you.



So in other words it's okay that you barely have any parent time with your kids, since your wife has a lot of time with them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would you have the same commitment to SAH if you didn't have the comfort of a trust fund?

With my kids before school age? Absolutely.

I thought we were talking about families with older children who are in school full day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all fun and games until breadwinner DH wants a younger, perkier wife.

Thanks to staying home I'm in the best shape of my life at 40. Maybe you're prematurely ageying from trying to juggle ft work and kids- but I look fantastic

Who watches the kids while you work out? Because I work, I can exercise frequently because I have full time childcare.

What is "ageing"?

So you work ft then leave your kids "frequently" to work out? When do you see them, dear?

Not that poster, but some of us have flexible jobs. You know, because we're senior and respected at the office. Something you wouldn't fathom.

[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?

Here is what I don't understand.

1st... the question was for parents with kids in school
2nd... you are thankful the kids are raised by your wife not somebody else... less educated... what about teachers, teachers aids, etc... is that okay or is she going to homeschool. I have never seen a local daycare without workers that have years of experience or a college education.
3rd... what if the house was not clean, she did not cook and she had depression... then what would you do?
4th... i get that you don't want to have any responsibilities at home, that makes it easy on you, if she wanted to go back would you take on 1/2 the household duties or would you say... go for it but it is up to you to take care of these things since you are not interested
5th... how many hours a day do you see your kids, what time do you get home and what time do they go to bed... does bonding with them disinterest you? Do you think an hour here or there is enough?

1. no, that was not the quest

2. I think kids needs change over time, but I do believe that in the early years, kids spend too much time at school. But no, we aren't home schooling.

3. Get her the help she needs.

4. I wouldn't expect that she'd do all the household work in addition to working full time. That's crazy.

5. I don't see my kids that much -- about an hour or two in the morning and an hour or two at night, depending on the day. I'd like to spend more time with them during the week, but it's just not possible with a full time work schedule. I'm thankful that they have more time with their mom.

You don't think seeing your kids for 2-4 hours on a weekday is a lot? Boy, will you be in for a surprise once your kids are preteens and teens. They are never home lol!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all fun and games until breadwinner DH wants a younger, perkier wife.

Thanks to staying home I'm in the best shape of my life at 40. Maybe you're prematurely ageying from trying to juggle ft work and kids- but I look fantastic

Who watches the kids while you work out? Because I work, I can exercise frequently because I have full time childcare.

What is "ageing"?

So you work ft then leave your kids "frequently" to work out? When do you see them, dear?

Have you ever worked a full time job? There's something called a "lunch break."

And my kids are gone from 8 to 6 many weekdays, with sports, student government, etc., plus school.

How much time do parents, working or AH, spend with their teenage children during the weekdays, do you suppose? And are you saying full time workers shouldn't take more time away from their kids to self care?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all fun and games until breadwinner DH wants a younger, perkier wife.

Thanks to staying home I'm in the best shape of my life at 40. Maybe you're prematurely ageying from trying to juggle ft work and kids- but I look fantastic

Who watches the kids while you work out? Because I work, I can exercise frequently because I have full time childcare.

What is "ageing"?

So you work ft then leave your kids "frequently" to work out? When do you see them, dear?

Not that poster, but some of us have flexible jobs. You know, because we're senior and respected at the office. Something you wouldn't fathom.

Of course. You are super high powered, earn a ton, are passionate about your job and have total flexibility to work out/golf/play tennis and vacation whenever. I totally believe you. You sound just like all WOH I know. Totally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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."

I'm the original previous poster you're quoting -- of course "[k]ids do not need parental care 24/7 to be 'optimized' as people." That is a straw man. But if you are working a full time job, we are talking about putting little kids -- babies even -- in the care of someone else during the vast majority of their waking hours. That is not "sharing childcare with paid caregivers." That is having someone else -- a stranger -- raise your children. And in my observation, that stranger typically doesn't love your child as much as a parent, and is not as well educated or thoughtful. If you believe that that is as good as having a parent raise the child, you are either delusional or have little confidence if the abilities of the parents to raise children.

And in light of that, to brag about the fact that you worked and had your children raised by others despite "hav[ing] millions," seems particularly selfish. But that is your decision to make, obviously.

So it's okay for you, as a man with a SAHW, to pursue career and other personal goals for 40+ hours a week, because your spouse is the caregiver? That's how you satisfy yourself that your kids don't need more of you?

I am also guessing your 3 children are young. My youngest is 14, and so I can see how my relationship with them is going to turn out, or glimmers of it. Despite using 50 hours a week of paid childcare for more than 8 consecutive years, my kids are turning into fabulous people with good interpersonal relationships.

I'd be happy to spend more time with my kids and my wife. One of us has to work though, and we chose me. Obviously, if my wife worked full time outside of the house, we would barely have any parent time with the kids. Given how little time kids are awake and engaged at a young age, it seems crazy to have the vast majority of that time go to daycare workers, nannies, whatever. That just seems wrong to me, but if your kids are "fabulous people," then I guess it worked out just fine for you.



So in other words it's okay that you barely have any parent time with your kids, since your wife has a lot of time with them?

I think it's better than both parents having limited time with the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, I'm sure kids are appreciative of having a parent dedicated to the home and their needs. But my kids are proud of having a mom who is accomplished outside of the home and are happy to have a nice home jointly run by mom and dad. Whatever works for your family!

+1

I hear kids at preschool all of the time asking their nannies or caregivers "why can't mommy pick me up?" or "why does mommy have to work?" or the worst, when another child asked me "why don't I have a mom on the field trip?" Kids notice these things. Whether is affects them long term or not, we won't really ever know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all fun and games until breadwinner DH wants a younger, perkier wife.

Thanks to staying home I'm in the best shape of my life at 40. Maybe you're prematurely ageying from trying to juggle ft work and kids- but I look fantastic

Who watches the kids while you work out? Because I work, I can exercise frequently because I have full time childcare.

What is "ageing"?

So you work ft then leave your kids "frequently" to work out? When do you see them, dear?

Not that poster, but some of us have flexible jobs. You know, because we're senior and respected at the office. Something you wouldn't fathom.

Of course. You are super high powered, earn a ton, are passionate about your job and have total flexibility to work out/golf/play tennis and vacation whenever. I totally believe you. You sound just like all WOH I know. Totally.

I'm medium powered, eh about my job, but yeah, I generally can spend 3 hours a week during the work day exercising. I've never been told I couldn't take a vacation when planned. How many WOHMs with 20+ years of work experience do you know?