Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I am the high earner in my household now, and I wouldn't want to support a SAHD.
Amen sister.
Amen+
Really?
I am not currently the breadwinner, but DH has been at home in the past for a couple of years, and I really liked it. I would love it if my husband would be a SAHD permanently. We could move to the city where I have the best career options, and we have more family support. I wouldn’t have to stress about being home on time to relieve the nanny. I could travel for conferences and speaking engagements without guilt or worry about leaving my kids with someone they don’t know or burning out my nanny. Sick days, snow days, etc. wouldn’t be an issue. There would be no “second shift.” Being a WOHP with a SAHP backing you up is a great deal.
I am one of the PPs who doesn't want to have a SAHD.
None of those benefits are worth the stress of being the sole income earner and never getting a chance to scale back a career. Also, I think there is something to being forced to make both parents figure it out. It is so easy to get distanced from kids because someone else is doing the day to day, and just become the weekend fun parent.
My kids are teens now and I'm really glad we muddled through together when they were younger. We have a close, tight-knit family and our kids have watched us jointly compromise for years. The kids themselves know they also have work around the house and they also pitch in.
I know there are many ways to raise a family and I do not support all the nasty WOHMs who take swipes at SAHMs (or vice versa). We found something that works and worked, and I wouldn't change it. My SAHM friends are wonderful people who have also raised great kids. I want to be totally clear that I am not saying anything anti-SAHM. My only point is that I would not want to support a SAHD.