Are you offended when someone says they “didnt want someone else to raise my kids”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it rude to say I didn't want to be a SAHP because I wanted my kids to be raise in a stimulating environment instead of spending their days watching tv and running errands to Costco.

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.

No, if I were SAHP, I’d be at museums and parks and hiking. BUT I Don’t need to stay at home to do that. I have a very flexible schedule and I get home at four and we go to the park and we hike and we go to the museums and we go to the zoo.

I’m talking about all the moms in my book club who were like oh my God I ran so many errands this week. I had to go to Costco three times and then I went to Michael’s and I had to go to three stores before I found the correct fall pillows that I love.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get it, because it’s true, even if people don’t want to admit that’s what’s happening when children are in full-time daycare. But in polite society we avoid saying things that might hurt someone’s feelings, regardless of whether it’s truthful or not.

But it’s not truthful. My kids went to daycare, and, sure, their daycare teachers, who were all wonderful, provided care during the workday. But my spouse and I made the decisions on how to parent, which included finding great caregivers.

If your children go to daycare for 10-11 (7-6 or 7:30-5:30) hours a day for the first 4-5 years of life and sleep 10-12 hours a night then you are not spending 4-5 hours with them each day 70% of the week. How is this controversial? You are outsourcing a lot of parenting duties to other caregivers. Someone saying that they don’t want to do that is not wrong. And I’m saying this as a full time working parent.

I actually did the math with my neighbor who was a SAHM and I did spend more 1-1 time with my kids than she did.

1st. My H's time counted and I know many of SAHP's who are the 1st to tell you that their H does nothing, works late, travels a lot.
2nd: She did not take into account napping, time in front of TV, time they were in the basement playing and she was futzing around.

I don't think a SAHP should be connected at the hip and I think that independent time is valuable but the reality is she was not spending more 1-1 time with her child than I was.

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.

And there’s the rub. I think because she is home so much she doesn’t even think about doing things with her kids.

I think because I’m not home all day as soon as I get home I want to get outside I take them to the park, Or we go for a hike, We hit a museum, Or walk around the zoo.

in fact when I get home from work the neighbor whose H was sick and she asked me to watch her kids, I immediately pick them up and take them with me to do these things.

The woman who is complaining that she wasn’t chosen to be the caregiver is like sure just send them to my house. They can watch TV or play in the yard while I make dinner or entertain my child in the basement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get it, because it’s true, even if people don’t want to admit that’s what’s happening when children are in full-time daycare. But in polite society we avoid saying things that might hurt someone’s feelings, regardless of whether it’s truthful or not.

But it’s not truthful. My kids went to daycare, and, sure, their daycare teachers, who were all wonderful, provided care during the workday. But my spouse and I made the decisions on how to parent, which included finding great caregivers.

If your children go to daycare for 10-11 (7-6 or 7:30-5:30) hours a day for the first 4-5 years of life and sleep 10-12 hours a night then you are not spending 4-5 hours with them each day 70% of the week. How is this controversial? You are outsourcing a lot of parenting duties to other caregivers. Someone saying that they don’t want to do that is not wrong. And I’m saying this as a full time working parent.

I actually did the math with my neighbor who was a SAHM and I did spend more 1-1 time with my kids than she did.

1st. My H's time counted and I know many of SAHP's who are the 1st to tell you that their H does nothing, works late, travels a lot.
2nd: She did not take into account napping, time in front of TV, time they were in the basement playing and she was futzing around.

I don't think a SAHP should be connected at the hip and I think that independent time is valuable but the reality is she was not spending more 1-1 time with her child than I was.

Whether you are currently working or staying home, I hope you aren't tutoring your DC in math.

Oh did I hurt your feelings to learn I might spend more quality time with my kids than you do?

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.

Yeah, I spend more one on one time as well as quality time both I do both.

[Anonymous]

Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Point being that when you work from home and have young kids, you are less efficient at work so something that may take 2 hours can get stretched to 5.

Not if they are napping.

Are you kidding? Kids do not nap all the time. Do you only have one kid? Give it a rest.

I actually used to cuddle with my toddler when she napped. When she was a baby, I napped when she napped.

Kids are mostly at school during their childhood and when they aren't they nap... a lot.

No I didn't nap during the day do you have narcolepsy?

I don't work when the kids are awake. I work when they are asleep or I engage with them, or they are at school or preschool or playdates.

Yes I have more than 1 kid but I don't have 3 under 5 that would make it hard.

No one with a reasonably demanding full time job is providing full time childcare and parenting young children at the same time. You can’t do both at the same time well. Remember? This was proven again and again to many of us during the pandemic.

It’s already been proven by showing schedules that for an infant, They are with nanny for maybe 3 to 4 waking hours.

Children don’t stay infants for long

And that schedules also been shared. The children were with their father in the morning, Went to preschool, Took a nap, And was with a caregiver less than two hours in the afternoon before mom got home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

Right. In other countries, women are expected to take years off their career to earn low wages (think $250 a week) as parental leave. Then because they can’t find a spouse or partner with a high neighbor salary, they are expected to return to work. Not as great of a deal as many make it sound.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mom of two teens here with two observations:

1) my kids friends are all really great, smart, well mannered, kind kids. I couldn’t tell you which ones had SAHMs and which ones had WOHMs if I didn’t know their parents (I know many but not all and it’s a mix of both working and non working parents - they all raised awesome kids).


2) this concept of raising your own children is a relatively new phenomenon. Ever heard of the term “it takes a village”? I also have seen some studies that say that working parents now spend significantly more time with their children than stay at home moms did 20-30 years ago. Probably because there isn’t really a village anymore.

Interesting how everyone is just passing by and ignoring this post. As a mom of older ES kids, I agree - all of my children's friends are wonderful kids. Some of them have SAHMs, some of them have two working parents. They're all great kids. If it makes you ladies feel better to put down working moms and tell us we're ruining our children forever, then fine, go ahead, but my kids have turned out great so far, even with a mom who sent them to daycare.

I agree that there are great kids of working parents and great kids of stay at home parents. But the topic isn't about outcomes/how the kids turn out in the end as a result of who raises them. The topic is about who IS actually raising the kids and, although I'd never say this to anyone and think it's totally rude to do so, you can't really argue that parents who both work and whose kids either go to daycare or have a nanny or a grandparent or whoever take care of them are being 100% raised by their parents. They hardly even see their parents. They spend most of their time w/ someone other than their parents. It's just not possible that their parents are the main ones raising them.

Except every parent with kids in school or preschool do this and you are saying only the SAH person is raising their Child, even though the working parent sees the child just as much.

This thread is largely about kids who are not yet school age.

Though also lots of preschools are not full time so are not meant to be full time childcare -- my child attended a half day preschool starting at age 2.5 which was great and helped her get ready for kindergarten. It was 3 hours a day.

And even once you have school age kids... my kid is off today and tomorrow and monday. He's been sick 4 days in the last month due to RSV and a bad cold going around his school. 10 weeks off in summer. Winter break (2 weeks) and spring break (1 week). Random PD days throughout the year. And the kicker -- school ends at 2:30pm.

Even once kids are in school SAHP see their kids a lot more than full time working parents. And I say that as a working parent. You can't deny facts.

He was in school for 3 hours (ours was 4) then he naps for 2 hours in the afternoon, that is 5 of the 8 hours for you (6for me).

So 3 hours (2for me) difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

And in those countries, aside from the quota of women leaders, women's careers have a very low ceiling.

There are trade-off but they are often unacknowledged in discussions centered on bashing American parental/maternal support.

Almost always unacknowledged.

How women are completely expected to take the full leave, childcare isn’t available, and the parental leave is not much money at all. How women are always expected to take long leaves and it’s more difficult to get hired.

No thanks. I’m not interested in staying home for an entire year to earn $20k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a reason for why one spouse chose not to work or works from home/at a flexible part time job? Or is this an acceptable turn of phrase?

It's an absolutely valid statement. Many of my friends didn't want their children to be raised by strangers, some had the privilege to do it themselves or get family to support while others had to send them to daycare or leave them with nannies.

It might be shocking to the SAHP crew, but have you ever considered it’s actually developmentally superior for a few hours of the day for the child not to be attached to the parent at the hip?

SAH doesn't mean the kid is attached at the hip, just like going to child care doesn't mean neglect.

I agree, which is why I don't think SAHP spend that much 1-1 time with kids, definitely not more than working parents.

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?

Because of those 40 hours 20 are sleeping, of the other 5 are with the dad who does morning routine. So that is 15 hours a week, 3 hours a day .

NBD.

Hmmm. This is fascinating math.

1st: morning routine doesn't count to the 40 hours does it? If dad is getting kids up and dressed and breakfasted before he goes and works a 40 hour work week that doesn't come out of the SAHP's time with the kids does it? It comes out of the rest of the time (which is important to remember -- SAHPs aren't nannies an don't just show up on the doorstep at 8am. We'll come back to that.)

2nd: only babies sleep that much. And that's assuming you only have babies and that your kids all have the same sleep schedule. Surprise! Kids are always getting older and they NEVER have the exact same sleep schedule.

3rd: SAHPs don't work a 40 hour work week. No workers rights for unpaid parents remember? No overtime either. When I was a SAHP my DH left for work at 6:30am and came home at 6pm. That's -- count 'em -- 11.5 hours a day or 57.5 hours a week.

4th: SAHPs don't stop working when their partners get home. Their partner worked all day too. So just like working parents they keep parenting even in the evening and on the weekend. In fact SAHPs generally do the vast majority of childcare even when their partners are home because it is more efficient for them to do so. If a SAHP wants to "share the load" outside of their normal working hours then you have to be extremely intentional about it because you are the default parent and will be taking the lead on all the parenting that happens after hours especially the hard stuff like potty training and sleep issues and picky eating.

The idea that SAHPs spend 15 hours a week with their children is stupid. Even I -- someone brainless enough to enjoy caring for children all day and do so on purpose -- have the math and logic skills to see that.

[Anonymous]

No, bc I feel the same way. But I would never say that to my FT WOH friends, which are the majority, bc they might read between the lines that I’m implying that they’re not raising their own kids (vs me expressing a choice of my own) and that would be hurtful!
I do feel kind of uncomfortable at the “I admire you - I could never do what you do and be w my kids all day full-time” comments though. It comes across to me as 50/50 either fakey, or really sad for their kids.

[Anonymous]

There are, like, 3 posts here from the child’s perspective. This debate should we about their health and comfort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mom of two teens here with two observations:

1) my kids friends are all really great, smart, well mannered, kind kids. I couldn’t tell you which ones had SAHMs and which ones had WOHMs if I didn’t know their parents (I know many but not all and it’s a mix of both working and non working parents - they all raised awesome kids).


2) this concept of raising your own children is a relatively new phenomenon. Ever heard of the term “it takes a village”? I also have seen some studies that say that working parents now spend significantly more time with their children than stay at home moms did 20-30 years ago. Probably because there isn’t really a village anymore.

Interesting how everyone is just passing by and ignoring this post. As a mom of older ES kids, I agree - all of my children's friends are wonderful kids. Some of them have SAHMs, some of them have two working parents. They're all great kids. If it makes you ladies feel better to put down working moms and tell us we're ruining our children forever, then fine, go ahead, but my kids have turned out great so far, even with a mom who sent them to daycare.

I agree that there are great kids of working parents and great kids of stay at home parents. But the topic isn't about outcomes/how the kids turn out in the end as a result of who raises them. The topic is about who IS actually raising the kids and, although I'd never say this to anyone and think it's totally rude to do so, you can't really argue that parents who both work and whose kids either go to daycare or have a nanny or a grandparent or whoever take care of them are being 100% raised by their parents. They hardly even see their parents. They spend most of their time w/ someone other than their parents. It's just not possible that their parents are the main ones raising them.

Except every parent with kids in school or preschool do this and you are saying only the SAH person is raising their Child, even though the working parent sees the child just as much.

This thread is largely about kids who are not yet school age.

Though also lots of preschools are not full time so are not meant to be full time childcare -- my child attended a half day preschool starting at age 2.5 which was great and helped her get ready for kindergarten. It was 3 hours a day.

And even once you have school age kids... my kid is off today and tomorrow and monday. He's been sick 4 days in the last month due to RSV and a bad cold going around his school. 10 weeks off in summer. Winter break (2 weeks) and spring break (1 week). Random PD days throughout the year. And the kicker -- school ends at 2:30pm.

Even once kids are in school SAHP see their kids a lot more than full time working parents. And I say that as a working parent. You can't deny facts.

He was in school for 3 hours (ours was 4) then he naps for 2 hours in the afternoon, that is 5 of the 8 hours for you (6for me).

So 3 hours (2for me) difference.

The idea is that working moms and sahms have similar hours with their kids is just patently absurd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are, like, 3 posts here from the child’s perspective. This debate should we about their health and comfort.

The debate is about comments between women and whether they are rude.

Truthful comments can still be rude.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a reason for why one spouse chose not to work or works from home/at a flexible part time job? Or is this an acceptable turn of phrase?

It's an absolutely valid statement. Many of my friends didn't want their children to be raised by strangers, some had the privilege to do it themselves or get family to support while others had to send them to daycare or leave them with nannies.

It might be shocking to the SAHP crew, but have you ever considered it’s actually developmentally superior for a few hours of the day for the child not to be attached to the parent at the hip?

SAH doesn't mean the kid is attached at the hip, just like going to child care doesn't mean neglect.

I agree, which is why I don't think SAHP spend that much 1-1 time with kids, definitely not more than working parents.

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?

Because of those 40 hours 20 are sleeping, of the other 5 are with the dad who does morning routine. So that is 15 hours a week, 3 hours a day .

NBD.

Hmmm. This is fascinating math.

1st: morning routine doesn't count to the 40 hours does it? If dad is getting kids up and dressed and breakfasted before he goes and works a 40 hour work week that doesn't come out of the SAHP's time with the kids does it? It comes out of the rest of the time (which is important to remember -- SAHPs aren't nannies an don't just show up on the doorstep at 8am. We'll come back to that.)

2nd: only babies sleep that much. And that's assuming you only have babies and that your kids all have the same sleep schedule. Surprise! Kids are always getting older and they NEVER have the exact same sleep schedule.

3rd: SAHPs don't work a 40 hour work week. No workers rights for unpaid parents remember? No overtime either. When I was a SAHP my DH left for work at 6:30am and came home at 6pm. That's -- count 'em -- 11.5 hours a day or 57.5 hours a week.

4th: SAHPs don't stop working when their partners get home. Their partner worked all day too. So just like working parents they keep parenting even in the evening and on the weekend. In fact SAHPs generally do the vast majority of childcare even when their partners are home because it is more efficient for them to do so. If a SAHP wants to "share the load" outside of their normal working hours then you have to be extremely intentional about it because you are the default parent and will be taking the lead on all the parenting that happens after hours especially the hard stuff like potty training and sleep issues and picky eating.

The idea that SAHPs spend 15 hours a week with their children is stupid. Even I -- someone brainless enough to enjoy caring for children all day and do so on purpose -- have the math and logic skills to see that.

1st we are talking about a child spending time with a PARENT and you don’t count your child’s father as a PARENT.

I’m sure if we count the hours each of us are with our kids it will double what you and your H spend with your kids since you don’t even count your H as a parent

2nd they are either an taking 2 naps or in preschool no matter the parents status so the hours work out to be the same.

3rd: I’m sorry your H chose a career that needed such long hours and was an absent parent, that so sad. It probably to pick up your slack. My H and I didn’t need to do that since we are both parents.

4th: that’s a very sad pathetic story. My H and I both can equally parent and we did it together so my kid had the benefit of 2 completely involved parents. You might want to rethink your parenting model.

I can’t imagine your kids are never not attached to your hip so yes our hours with our kids are pretty close to equal and if you count my H’s vs your H’s hours we lap you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mom of two teens here with two observations:

1) my kids friends are all really great, smart, well mannered, kind kids. I couldn’t tell you which ones had SAHMs and which ones had WOHMs if I didn’t know their parents (I know many but not all and it’s a mix of both working and non working parents - they all raised awesome kids).


2) this concept of raising your own children is a relatively new phenomenon. Ever heard of the term “it takes a village”? I also have seen some studies that say that working parents now spend significantly more time with their children than stay at home moms did 20-30 years ago. Probably because there isn’t really a village anymore.

Interesting how everyone is just passing by and ignoring this post. As a mom of older ES kids, I agree - all of my children's friends are wonderful kids. Some of them have SAHMs, some of them have two working parents. They're all great kids. If it makes you ladies feel better to put down working moms and tell us we're ruining our children forever, then fine, go ahead, but my kids have turned out great so far, even with a mom who sent them to daycare.

I agree that there are great kids of working parents and great kids of stay at home parents. But the topic isn't about outcomes/how the kids turn out in the end as a result of who raises them. The topic is about who IS actually raising the kids and, although I'd never say this to anyone and think it's totally rude to do so, you can't really argue that parents who both work and whose kids either go to daycare or have a nanny or a grandparent or whoever take care of them are being 100% raised by their parents. They hardly even see their parents. They spend most of their time w/ someone other than their parents. It's just not possible that their parents are the main ones raising them.

Except every parent with kids in school or preschool do this and you are saying only the SAH person is raising their Child, even though the working parent sees the child just as much.

This thread is largely about kids who are not yet school age.

Though also lots of preschools are not full time so are not meant to be full time childcare -- my child attended a half day preschool starting at age 2.5 which was great and helped her get ready for kindergarten. It was 3 hours a day.

And even once you have school age kids... my kid is off today and tomorrow and monday. He's been sick 4 days in the last month due to RSV and a bad cold going around his school. 10 weeks off in summer. Winter break (2 weeks) and spring break (1 week). Random PD days throughout the year. And the kicker -- school ends at 2:30pm.

Even once kids are in school SAHP see their kids a lot more than full time working parents. And I say that as a working parent. You can't deny facts.

He was in school for 3 hours (ours was 4) then he naps for 2 hours in the afternoon, that is 5 of the 8 hours for you (6for me).

So 3 hours (2for me) difference.

The idea is that working moms and sahms have similar hours with their kids is just patently absurd.

It seems absurd until you actually write the hours down and then you realize that the minuscule amount of hours that a SAHP gets with their child versus a working parent is not big enough to justify it as a reason to stay home.