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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is why many people can't just get a job once their child is school age. It's cheaper and less stress to just have one parent on-call for all the p.i.t.a. kid related issues, especially if the other parent is a high earner. If we both worked, we have literally nobody to cover all the days when kids aren't in school and need care at home. I don't care who looks down on it. Half the families at my school have a SAHP because they have the same problem. Preschool is so few hours during the week we skipped it for all the children and just taught them to read and write and do math at home before they started K, also saved a lot of money there.

Before I had kids and was working, I didn't really feel I was doing anything all that important. So many of these jobs that people think are high status will be replaced by automation and AI. Might as well raise your kids and let the status obsessed folks do their thing.

And yet tons of working parents have figured out how to work and be able to care for their kids on sick days, etc. Sorry you couldn't, but that doesn't mean others can't.

Tons of parents have figured out how to care for their kids without needing two incomes. Sorry you couldn’t, but that doesn’t mean others can’t.

and tons of parents have decided that having a mom and dad is important instead of having just a mom and a dad who works so much he doesn't know how to parent and is never there to do so.

I'm a SAHM and my husband, who works full time, is very involved with the kids. He works a 9-5, never has to work nights or weekends and he has a short commute. He helps the kids get ready for school in the morning. He is home in time to play with the kids and/or take them to their various activities before dinner and then we have dinner together almost every night (only time we don't is due to a kids' activity, not due to my husband working). We spend all weekend together as a family. There are many different ways to have a family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would never voluntarily step away from the workforce and lessen my earning potential. What if my husband dies or we get divorced?
That is worse than my kids having different caretakers for 1/3 of the week when they are young. Also the kids eventually go to school so what do the SAHMs think then?

As for me, I will be in the situation of having at least one in the pre-school years for a few more years because we spaced them out about 3.5 to 4 years apart. So that phase lasts quite a while. After that I will probably consider working part time. My degrees are in education and psychology, and the brain development during the first years is what was the deciding factor to me. Homo Sapiens are wired to learn from a variety of environments, so I wanted them to spend as much time as possible working and playing and growing things outdoors, plus reading traditional paper books. And also having a ton of quiet time with dolls or legos, without the mental stimulus of other people’s children around them during the important mornings and afternoons when they aren’t tired. I believe a lot of our social ills with epidemics of over-diagnosed mental illness and social ineptitude are a result of the rearing in the first few years.

My DH has enough of a term life policy that I could pay off the house. And we are people who were careful about choosing mates, and honor our vows, so divorce is not a risk. I could always go back to teaching for “OK” pay and good benefits, but after the stock market performance of the last year, a comfortable retirement is actually a distinct possibility. LOL

Your smugness is so off-putting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My mom went back to work full time when I was less than two months old. My dad also worked full time. I had a combinations of nannies and then preschool before starting elementary school. It would never occur to me to say that I was raised by anyone besides my parents.

That's a pretty rude attitude toward child care providers.

Why? It's pretty normal for kids not to remember their early caregivers. Why would they feel they were raised by someone they don't remember. I'm not knocking the job because it's incredibly important, but don't expect most kids to remember and feel like they were raised by a non-parent.

If one doesn’t remember something does that mean it didn’t happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I assume the person saying is it either an idiot or insecure or maybe both.

It’s a rude thing to say.

I personally dislike spending large amounts of time with young kids. I love my kids but don’t want to spend all day playing legos and sitting at a playground. I didn’t do this stuff as an adult pre-kids and don’t want to do it now.

Well, not all parents feel the same kind of paternal love and affection towards their children. So, you fall in the range. You don't have to "like" playing legos or sitting in the playground or any other similar activity. BUT, you do have to like being with your young kids and find joy in that. You don't? Big whoops! We certainly don't give a damn.

I like my kids, I like to be with them and I think that I am lucky to be able to do that in the way that works for me.

[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.

This is why many people can't just get a job once their child is school age. It's cheaper and less stress to just have one parent on-call for all the p.i.t.a. kid related issues, especially if the other parent is a high earner. If we both worked, we have literally nobody to cover all the days when kids aren't in school and need care at home. I don't care who looks down on it. Half the families at my school have a SAHP because they have the same problem. Preschool is so few hours during the week we skipped it for all the children and just taught them to read and write and do math at home before they started K, also saved a lot of money there.

Before I had kids and was working, I didn't really feel I was doing anything all that important. So many of these jobs that people think are high status will be replaced by automation and AI. Might as well raise your kids and let the status obsessed folks do their thing.

And yet tons of working parents have figured out how to work and be able to care for their kids on sick days, etc. Sorry you couldn't, but that doesn't mean others can't.

NP of course it's possible to figure out how to work and care for kids on sick days. Doesn't make it desirable. Some people would prefer a less stressful life where they don't have to scramble to find childcare or reschedule work meetings or whatever to stay home w/ a sick kid. Some people would prefer to just be able to be there and take care of their sick kid without having to change a thing about work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would never voluntarily step away from the workforce and lessen my earning potential. What if my husband dies or we get divorced?
That is worse than my kids having different caretakers for 1/3 of the week when they are young. Also the kids eventually go to school so what do the SAHMs think then?

As for me, I will be in the situation of having at least one in the pre-school years for a few more years because we spaced them out about 3.5 to 4 years apart. So that phase lasts quite a while. After that I will probably consider working part time. My degrees are in education and psychology, and the brain development during the first years is what was the deciding factor to me. Homo Sapiens are wired to learn from a variety of environments, so I wanted them to spend as much time as possible working and playing and growing things outdoors, plus reading traditional paper books. And also having a ton of quiet time with dolls or legos, without the mental stimulus of other people’s children around them during the important mornings and afternoons when they aren’t tired. I believe a lot of our social ills with epidemics of over-diagnosed mental illness and social ineptitude are a result of the rearing in the first few years.

My DH has enough of a term life policy that I could pay off the house. And we are people who were careful about choosing mates, and honor our vows, so divorce is not a risk. I could always go back to teaching for “OK” pay and good benefits, but after the stock market performance of the last year, a comfortable retirement is actually a distinct possibility. LOL

Your smugness is so off-putting.

Only to you. I quite admire the prior PP who seems to have figured out how to parent and plan. It is wonderful that her children will be part of our society.

[Anonymous]

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.

+1. I had kids to actually be a mom. I wanted the experience and contracted out parenting as little as possible (although had to do some), whereas I know moms who want to work and were less interested in the day to day of parenting. What is wrong with acknowledging that?

Congratulations, you managed to come up with a phrase that was even worse than the OP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a huge difference to the kids though to have a more relaxed morning and to be able to come home and rest after school instead of staying in aftercare.

I stopped working when I had my kids, went back part-time when they started school and now that they are in high school I am increasing my hours close to full-time. I have always worked from home and have an intellectually stimulating job.

I realize that I am very lucky and not everyone has the same options as I do. I have no judgment, only sympathy, for those who would prefer to stay home with kids but have to work due to financial reasons.

I will never regret staying home with the kids when they were young. I truly believe that having one lovung and engaged parent stay home is the very best for the children. Those were also some of the best years of my life and I am forever grateful that I had the opportunity.

My husband and I both work full-time and our kids have never done aftercare, they come home right after school because one or both of us is home. Good for you and your set up, but stop acting like either kids who do aftercare are going to end up in group homes or that many working parents don't have their kids in aftercare.

That's great. But most working parents' kids ARE in after care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My mom went back to work full time when I was less than two months old. My dad also worked full time. I had a combinations of nannies and then preschool before starting elementary school. It would never occur to me to say that I was raised by anyone besides my parents.

That's a pretty rude attitude toward child care providers.

and teachers... clearly your children are being "raised" by teachers.

They are. It’s why schools are so important.

So you are not raising your children after all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is not an acceptable turn of phrase.

But I am not offended because it shows the low character of the speaker. Just as if they had said they work FT because “I wanted to use my brain”

But working parents say this all the time to SAHP. "I couldn't do NOTHING." "I needed to use my brain." etc.

I've never heard this comment in real life.

I've heard it many times. Fully 70% of the new moms group I was in said some version of this in our meetings -- "I'm so bored -- I can't wait to go back to work" or "I feel like I'm getting stupid spending all my time with a baby." It's a very very common sentiment among women who have established careers before having kids and especially highly educated women.

I think people are expressing their genuine feelings when they say this stuff but I remember silently thinking how it didn't resonate with me at all and I loved being on maternity leave and had essentially zero interest in going back to work. I didn't miss my office AT ALL and I felt plenty intellectually stimulated at home (I found learning about child development fascinating and also had more time and bandwidth to read more widely than I had when working). I still wound up going back to work but was miserable and quit my job to stay home for the next two years because it's what I wanted to do.

When I hear people say things like "I couldn't do NOTHING" or "I need to use my brain" I simply know they are wrong. That's it. I know it to be a a false assumption about what it is to stay home with kids. Or sometimes I think they would do it wrong -- there is a way of being a sahm that involves being brainless and lazy but there's also a way of going to work like that isn't there. You get out of it what you put into it.

But I also think when people say stuff like this they are likely trying to quiet doubts they might have within themselves about their own choices. It's not about me even if they are trying to turn me into some kind of foil.

eh.. that's you. I'm not interested in studying child development while being a sahm.

My brain did atrophy as a sahm. Reading about something is not the same thing as using critical thinking skills at work.

LOL. most people don't use critical thinking skills at work. Most people's jobs are incredibly boring and inconsequential.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think of it this way. If you had a 2-year-old and got divorced and got 50% custody, the child would only physically be in your presence half the time. In a different scenario, if you used to stay at home with your 2-year-old but switch to working 8 hours a day, you now also only have your child physically in your presence half the time. This is math.

If the verb “raise” is what is offending people, maybe moms should just say “I want to be around my child most of the day instead of have someone else around my child most of the day.”

Agree. I SAHMed when my kid was young because I literally wanted to spend time with her. I was an older mom and knew I'd only have one so I wanted to maximize the experience of parenting since I was only going to get to do it once. The thought of paying someone else to be with her all day struck me as silly in this context.

I don't think people who work when their kids are young are no "raising" their kids but they are having a different parenting experience. But guess what? People who have kids younger or who have 2 or more kids are also having a different parenting experience. Who cares? Do what's right for you.

So people (not women, but women and men) who work literally don't want to spend time with their kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My mom went back to work full time when I was less than two months old. My dad also worked full time. I had a combinations of nannies and then preschool before starting elementary school. It would never occur to me to say that I was raised by anyone besides my parents.

That's a pretty rude attitude toward child care providers.

and teachers... clearly your children are being "raised" by teachers.

They are. It’s why schools are so important.

So you are not raising your children after all.

Not alone, no, and none of us are. It’s good to realize that so we fully appreciate the people around us molding the next generation of young people. As parents we do our best, but are NOT the sole influencers, nor should that be the goal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think of it this way. If you had a 2-year-old and got divorced and got 50% custody, the child would only physically be in your presence half the time. In a different scenario, if you used to stay at home with your 2-year-old but switch to working 8 hours a day, you now also only have your child physically in your presence half the time. This is math.

If the verb “raise” is what is offending people, maybe moms should just say “I want to be around my child most of the day instead of have someone else around my child most of the day.”

Agree. I SAHMed when my kid was young because I literally wanted to spend time with her. I was an older mom and knew I'd only have one so I wanted to maximize the experience of parenting since I was only going to get to do it once. The thought of paying someone else to be with her all day struck me as silly in this context.

I don't think people who work when their kids are young are no "raising" their kids but they are having a different parenting experience. But guess what? People who have kids younger or who have 2 or more kids are also having a different parenting experience. Who cares? Do what's right for you.

So people (not women, but women and men) who work literally don't want to spend time with their kids?

Yet most her day won’t be with the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is not an acceptable turn of phrase.

But I am not offended because it shows the low character of the speaker. Just as if they had said they work FT because “I wanted to use my brain”

But working parents say this all the time to SAHP. "I couldn't do NOTHING." "I needed to use my brain." etc.

I've never heard this comment in real life.

I've heard it many times. Fully 70% of the new moms group I was in said some version of this in our meetings -- "I'm so bored -- I can't wait to go back to work" or "I feel like I'm getting stupid spending all my time with a baby." It's a very very common sentiment among women who have established careers before having kids and especially highly educated women.

I think people are expressing their genuine feelings when they say this stuff but I remember silently thinking how it didn't resonate with me at all and I loved being on maternity leave and had essentially zero interest in going back to work. I didn't miss my office AT ALL and I felt plenty intellectually stimulated at home (I found learning about child development fascinating and also had more time and bandwidth to read more widely than I had when working). I still wound up going back to work but was miserable and quit my job to stay home for the next two years because it's what I wanted to do.

When I hear people say things like "I couldn't do NOTHING" or "I need to use my brain" I simply know they are wrong. That's it. I know it to be a a false assumption about what it is to stay home with kids. Or sometimes I think they would do it wrong -- there is a way of being a sahm that involves being brainless and lazy but there's also a way of going to work like that isn't there. You get out of it what you put into it.

But I also think when people say stuff like this they are likely trying to quiet doubts they might have within themselves about their own choices. It's not about me even if they are trying to turn me into some kind of foil.

eh.. that's you. I'm not interested in studying child development while being a sahm.

My brain did atrophy as a sahm. Reading about something is not the same thing as using critical thinking skills at work.

LOL. most people don't use critical thinking skills at work. Most people's jobs are incredibly boring and inconsequential.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think of it this way. If you had a 2-year-old and got divorced and got 50% custody, the child would only physically be in your presence half the time. In a different scenario, if you used to stay at home with your 2-year-old but switch to working 8 hours a day, you now also only have your child physically in your presence half the time. This is math.

If the verb “raise” is what is offending people, maybe moms should just say “I want to be around my child most of the day instead of have someone else around my child most of the day.”

Agree. I SAHMed when my kid was young because I literally wanted to spend time with her. I was an older mom and knew I'd only have one so I wanted to maximize the experience of parenting since I was only going to get to do it once. The thought of paying someone else to be with her all day struck me as silly in this context.

I don't think people who work when their kids are young are no "raising" their kids but they are having a different parenting experience. But guess what? People who have kids younger or who have 2 or more kids are also having a different parenting experience. Who cares? Do what's right for you.

So people (not women, but women and men) who work literally don't want to spend time with their kids?

Her H clearly doesn’t want to be a parent.