Husbands with SAHMs that prefer they work

[Anonymous]

Black and white thinking is a sign of emotional immaturity and low intelligence. So all of you have done badly by your kids regardless of household choices just in giving them horrible genes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So lots of holes in your thinking. First, you pretend to know all about daycare - there are some great, high quality centers and home daycares in this area - but you know nothing, NOTHING about them because the random drop off daycare your non-working wife drops them off at so she can grab her mani-pedi doesn't count. You can't talk about the merits of having a SAHM and be an expert on daycare. Sor.

Also, you conveniently leave out how much it sucks for your kids and you that are a paycheck while your wife "raises" them. Again, can't have it both ways. If working parents are having their kids raised by the lowly daycare staff and nannies who take care of them during working hours then you can't be raising your kids if you work. Many parents who both work actually stagger stuff so they both see the kids a lot - my husband goes in at 9 after kids get on the bus and I'm home by 6 when I don't WFH 2x a week. I'm betting you've never stayed home with a sick kid, gone to a dr. appointment with your kid, or volunteered for a field trip? My husband does and did all the time and you can really see it in his relationship with our kids.

Also, we used high quality daycare at my husband's work for a few years, then switched to a nanny. Our nanny was "uneducated" but she is the kindest, most patient, hardest working woman I know and my kids benefited greatly from her love and experience. She also taught them fluent Spanish. There are so many advantages to having others help raise your kids.

You also have no idea how your wife will feel about all this in 10, 15 years when the kids don't need her as much and she has been out of the workforce for over a decade. Maybe it will work out, maybe it won't, but your smugness about it all is not really appropriate at this time.

If your current situation is working for your family, that's swell. But to act like it would be perfect for every family or you just can't fathom why others make different choices, is just silly and makes you look foolish.

Look, I work and will always work because my income is critical to our family. But I do think you're being unnecessarily defensive with the guy by going on the attack. I don't think he's telling you how to do things; he's telling you what worked for him.

My kids have been in daycare and nannycare all their life. Do I think they had great childcare? yes, absolutely. Do I think that I would have provided it better? Absolutely. I love them more than any daycare worker could, and I know more and am more educated than any of their childcare workers. That doesn't mean their teachers have been uneducated, or didn't love them. It just means I love them more, and would have done better. It would have been perfect with me, but that's impossible. So we are going for good, which means high-quality preschools. Good is fine. Good is good. It doesn't hurt my feelings to say excellent is better than good but excellent isn't always possible. We'll live, kids are fine. Again, I don't doubt that your kid had great childcare. But to deny that care given by loving, educated mothers is not the gold standard is..sort of silly. And I know why people bristle at this; we hate the idea that we are giving the kids anything other than the very best. But that's the reality. We, well most of us, cannot achieve the best. We drive acceptable cars, we have acceptable jobs, we live in acceptable houses, there's always more perfect out there. We have it good. Good is fine. It's not as good as perfect or excellent, but that's OK, really.

That's it - it's anathema to say anything less than the best is good enough for our kids. I would never have had kids if becoming a mother meant I had to give up my career. I feel that strongly about WOH. Because of that, we knew we needed long term childcare, and found it with a nanny, who stayed with us until the kids were in full time school. To us, having good but not perfect childcare enabled us to both have careers, and that is meaningful to us.

Well said. Very true.

[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.

They have more time to exercise and take care of themselves. Duh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids say what they feel and I care (deeply) how my kids feel. That's why I believe a parent should be home with them and they deserve two loving involved parents. You can't just pretend that all family situations turn out beautifully.

These parents who never see their kids (I'm talking about the double nanny type families) - we can agree to disagree that that is any way to raise children.

So if they say they want you to be like Larla's mom because she is a surgeon and saves lives... you will care deeply about their feelings? and you will change your life because you daughter feels like Larla's mom is better?

You can pretend that your situation will turn out beautifully... but you don't have a crystal ball and most likely your kids will not turn out exactly as you have planned.

Not PP, but if my kids say that want to be X even if I did Y I would fully support and appreciate their decision because my kids are their own people and will make a life for themselves however they decide. (Within limits, wouldn't be happy if they decided to become a drug dealer).

BUT I would be greatly disappointed if my kids thought a person was "better" than another person because of their profession. Maybe a *profession* is "better" - a better fit - but not a *person*. I hope they would judge people based on other qualities like kindness. Because you can be a surgeon who "helps" people and still be a major a-hole - definitely not something I'd want for my kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Aren't you glad you got a degree to be a chauffeur and errand runner? Sounds fulfilling.

No, you're right. (although judgmental as hell...and it's *multiple degrees* ). That was sort of the point of my rant. I started off being a SAHM when my kids were little because the cost of two in daycare wasn't THAT much more than my salary after taxes and I thought I'd give it a shot, because we could swing it. Almost 16 years later, I'm in a terrible position. I have no one to blame but myself. I own it. But it's extremely challenging to change it now. I really wouldn't know where to even begin. It's a terrible feeling.

Don't beat yourself up! You should feel good about the sacrifice you made for your kids. The sacrifice is still ongoing.

First, you need to cut back on the sports and other extracurriculars. I know from my own family situation that that really eats up a huge amount of time, and I just don't believe it is necessary to be in involved in everything to have healthy, successful kids. I think that high achieving parents often go overboard on activities with their kids, and I do wonder whether there is sufficient marginal value after a while with additional activities.

Second, try volunteering. I know it's actually not that easy to find an interesting volunteer gig, but the DC area has so many non-profits that there is bound to be one that works. Maybe you could find one in your field -- I don't know.

Thank you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Look, I work and will always work because my income is critical to our family. But I do think you're being unnecessarily defensive with the guy by going on the attack. I don't think he's telling you how to do things; he's telling you what worked for him.

My kids have been in daycare and nannycare all their life. Do I think they had great childcare? yes, absolutely. Do I think that I would have provided it better? Absolutely. I love them more than any daycare worker could, and I know more and am more educated than any of their childcare workers. That doesn't mean their teachers have been uneducated, or didn't love them. It just means I love them more, and would have done better. It would have been perfect with me, but that's impossible. So we are going for good, which means high-quality preschools. Good is fine. Good is good. It doesn't hurt my feelings to say excellent is better than good but excellent isn't always possible. We'll live, kids are fine. Again, I don't doubt that your kid had great childcare. But to deny that care given by loving, educated mothers is not the gold standard is..sort of silly. And I know why people bristle at this; we hate the idea that we are giving the kids anything other than the very best. But that's the reality. We, well most of us, cannot achieve the best. We drive acceptable cars, we have acceptable jobs, we live in acceptable houses, there's always more perfect out there. We have it good. Good is fine. It's not as good as perfect or excellent, but that's OK, really.

You really didn't get my post. He (and I don't think this was a dude, sorry, this was an unappreciated SAHM), ONLY listed the pros of their situation, without considering the other aspects. I don't agree that moms need to be with their kids all day every day in the early years, or that is better. Fine if you think that, but not everyone does. If I did I would have quit work in a heartbeat but I think my staying in the workforce outweighed any of those advantages, and that is my point. Every action has a reaction and I don't think having a SAH parent for years is the optimum. I just don't. I think it work just fine, and I support women who make the choice (and men) but I don't think it is optimal. It does work better for some families, if the working parent works crazy, inflexible hours and the SAH parent really, really didn't want to work, for example. But I won't agree it is optimal for every family.

Our daycare workers were mainly young childless women with tons of energy and patience - most moms are not going to have endless patience for their own kids. Agree that it is best for mom not to rush off to work at 2 and 4 and 6 weeks which is a reality for some, but I don't think that is who we are talking about on this thread.

Precisely. The earlier PP's inherent assumption that having a SAHP is inherently superior was smug and annoying. I work, as did my mother and grandmother, and I do not think that decision means DH and I have settled for something subpar or less ideal for DD. Her daycare teachers have introduced some concepts that I wouldn't have tried to teach her at such an early age, I doubt I would have the energy to develop a weekly themed curriculm like they have in her current 2-3 year old class, nor could I teach her spanish, or provide the socialization. I do think it would be suboptimal if she were there 11 or 12 hours a day, so we stagger schedules so she spends no more than 8 hours there. If we thought her daycare teachers were simply babysitting kids and not imparting any knowledge, care, or life skills, we would find a different provider. I can understand why some people choose to SAH, and that's great for them. But I do not think their kids are getting something better than my child; it's just a different choice for a different family.

[Anonymous]

SAHM here. At 55 it's not easy to find a job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Look, I work and will always work because my income is critical to our family. But I do think you're being unnecessarily defensive with the guy by going on the attack. I don't think he's telling you how to do things; he's telling you what worked for him.

My kids have been in daycare and nannycare all their life. Do I think they had great childcare? yes, absolutely. Do I think that I would have provided it better? Absolutely. I love them more than any daycare worker could, and I know more and am more educated than any of their childcare workers. That doesn't mean their teachers have been uneducated, or didn't love them. It just means I love them more, and would have done better. It would have been perfect with me, but that's impossible. So we are going for good, which means high-quality preschools. Good is fine. Good is good. It doesn't hurt my feelings to say excellent is better than good but excellent isn't always possible. We'll live, kids are fine. Again, I don't doubt that your kid had great childcare. But to deny that care given by loving, educated mothers is not the gold standard is..sort of silly. And I know why people bristle at this; we hate the idea that we are giving the kids anything other than the very best. But that's the reality. We, well most of us, cannot achieve the best. We drive acceptable cars, we have acceptable jobs, we live in acceptable houses, there's always more perfect out there. We have it good. Good is fine. It's not as good as perfect or excellent, but that's OK, really.

You really didn't get my post. He (and I don't think this was a dude, sorry, this was an unappreciated SAHM), ONLY listed the pros of their situation, without considering the other aspects. I don't agree that moms need to be with their kids all day every day in the early years, or that is better. Fine if you think that, but not everyone does. If I did I would have quit work in a heartbeat but I think my staying in the workforce outweighed any of those advantages, and that is my point. Every action has a reaction and I don't think having a SAH parent for years is the optimum. I just don't. I think it work just fine, and I support women who make the choice (and men) but I don't think it is optimal. It does work better for some families, if the working parent works crazy, inflexible hours and the SAH parent really, really didn't want to work, for example. But I won't agree it is optimal for every family.

Our daycare workers were mainly young childless women with tons of energy and patience - most moms are not going to have endless patience for their own kids. Agree that it is best for mom not to rush off to work at 2 and 4 and 6 weeks which is a reality for some, but I don't think that is who we are talking about on this thread.

Precisely. The earlier PP's inherent assumption that having a SAHP is inherently superior was smug and annoying. I work, as did my mother and grandmother, and I do not think that decision means DH and I have settled for something subpar or less ideal for DD. Her daycare teachers have introduced some concepts that I wouldn't have tried to teach her at such an early age, I doubt I would have the energy to develop a weekly themed curriculm like they have in her current 2-3 year old class, nor could I teach her spanish, or provide the socialization. I do think it would be suboptimal if she were there 11 or 12 hours a day, so we stagger schedules so she spends no more than 8 hours there. If we thought her daycare teachers were simply babysitting kids and not imparting any knowledge, care, or life skills, we would find a different provider. I can understand why some people choose to SAH, and that's great for them. But I do not think their kids are getting something better than my child; it's just a different choice for a different family.

8 hours a day seems like a lot of time in childcare! 2 or 3 year olds are only awake for half the day, at most. It also seems hard to believe that you couldn't teach as much or more, or provide socialization, if you were really trying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's boil the ocean down here. Leaving the workforce to care for your kids is great. We all agree. A parent is a better caregiver than anyone else. No one will ever care for my precious snowflake better than me or DH. No argument.

Fast forward 20 years. Unplanned divorce. WOHs better off financially long term than SAHs. Fact.

Let's just also consider greater humanity here. Women should contribute to society in more ways than raising kids. Raise kids and be independent just like men. Men also need to step up in parenting. My snowflake's first word was "Bye Felicia" according to the nanny.

Yet another important factor: women should be able to have full fledged careers even if they decide to have children.

[Anonymous]

WHY in the world are you people so easily baited back into the stupid debate over SAHM vs. WOHM. Is it the same jerk that keeps resurecting the debate with a different "innocent question"? Who cares! Mind your own business. People chose to live differently, and none of us are in a position to judge. Get a life & get back to your work or taking care of your kids or whatever else useful you could be doing. This conversation is a waste of time EVERY single time it's raised here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel like a lot of you posting here have really young kids. My kids are older and I am around a lot of older kids/teens. What I think is that people vastly overvalue SAH vs WOH. I think all things considered, it's a pretty minor factor. I see kids of both SAH and WOH excelling (and I mean in all ways, including emotionally). I also see the opposite.

Things that seem to matter way more than SAH or WOH, as far as I can tell: mental health of family members, family stability, alcoholism, anger issues, marital strife, financial strain, addiction issues. These things transcend WOH or SAH status. SAH/WOH might impact one or the other (like OP who resents his wife) but it's incidental to the real problem.

Those of you who are insistent that one way is best, like the husband posting here, or the WOHMs who talk about SAHMs being bad examples, you sound sort of desperately controlling to me. You are frantically scrabbling for SAH or WOH like it's some sort of magic charm that will make your kids the best. It's just not like that. There aren't magic charms in life and things are really complex.

My kids are 16 and 14, and I would agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kids say what they feel and I care (deeply) how my kids feel. That's why I believe a parent should be home with them and they deserve two loving involved parents. You can't just pretend that all family situations turn out beautifully.

These parents who never see their kids (I'm talking about the double nanny type families) - we can agree to disagree that that is any way to raise children.

I agree that having one parent who never sees his kids but thinks his kids will be ok because the other parent SAH is no way to raise children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SAHM here. At 55 it's not easy to find a job.

Retail is usually hiring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids say what they feel and I care (deeply) how my kids feel. That's why I believe a parent should be home with them and they deserve two loving involved parents. You can't just pretend that all family situations turn out beautifully.

These parents who never see their kids (I'm talking about the double nanny type families) - we can agree to disagree that that is any way to raise children.

I agree that having one parent who never sees his kids but thinks his kids will be ok because the other parent SAH is no way to raise children.

I agree and I think this is a common trap of the SAHM lifestyle.

[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

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.

They have more time to exercise and take care of themselves. Duh.

I'm a exhausted WOHM but not because of my job. It's because I have to get up so freaking early to make sure my middle schooler makes his bus. Granted, I could nap if I were a SAHM....