Anonymous wrote:The thing is, obviously the quality of "aftercare" programs vary by school. Hell, even within a specific school, the quality probably varies by day. Is it great for kids to be parked in front of a TV with a dozen other kids at their school watching Dora the Explorer from 3-6? Probably not, in my opinion, but it also won't completely destroy them forever if they are living otherwise fulfilling lives. Most adults I know waste 3+ hours a day on things that are probably not good for them. Is it great for kids to have extra dance class, or supplemental languages, or arts, or whatever? We can disagree on whether it's healthy for kids ages 3-6 to be scheduled that much in general, but I know a lot of kids who really enjoy the things they do and learn in aftercare, when it's actually an enrichment program, rather than a glorified parking lot.

I have never seen any kids at my kids' school watch TV. They have a healthy snack every day, spend part of the time in the gym playing a mix of supervised and unsupervised games (e.g., some kids will be playing kickball or tag and some will be jumping rope or something), and part of the time in the cafeteria where there are a huge number of "stations" they can choose from every day--books and bean bags, legos, board games, boxes of toy cars etc., a giant play kitchen, etc. etc. Plus they do some kind of craft every day and have a homework area. In nice weather they have occasional water play and field trips. All in all, my kids do way more in their 2-3 hours of aftercare every day then they would do at home (it's always more fun to play with someone else's toys....), plus they get to play with their friends instead of Mommy. Anyone who feels sorry for kids in aftercare is an idiot. At my kids' school, anyhow, they are having a blast.

Anonymous wrote:School is cruel to children. I think I'll strap my son to my back so he's never apart from me. Never never never.

School is cruel to children. I think I'll strap my son to my back so he's never apart from me. Never never never.

Anonymous wrote:Good lord people, raise your own god damn kids.

Good lord, support your own god damn self, leech.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So OP, what you're saying is that you depend on your husband for money so you can watch your kids all the time instead of "out-sourcing" their care?

What if he didn't make enough money for you to do this? Would you not have married him? What if he gets laid off? What if he quits his job and doesn't find another? Would you find work? What if the pressure of being the sole breadwinner stressed him to the point of killing him? What would you do then? What if he got tired of your judgmental ass and divorced you? What would you do then? At some point in your life, you may have to do things you are currently judging, and you had better hope that people don't judge you like you judge them.

Some folks are working to support their families, not to afford a huge house or new cars every two years.

True, but - AND GET THIS OP - some of us women also work because we want to, because we are smart, educated and accomplished and have no desire to stay at home all day watching The Chew and filing our nails until the kids get home from school. My son has an intelligent, independent woman as a mother and I am proud that I can be a great role model for him so that he will grow up to be a man who respects women for ALL that they can do, not just as some domestic caretaker for him and his children. So judge me all you want. . .I am judging you because you obviously have nothing better to do with your day than sit on your ass posting drivel like this. Why don't you go out and do something your kids can be proud of while they are at school?

Word.

Good lord people, raise your own god damn kids.

Obviously the PP meant "attempt" instead of "attention."

I SAH during the pre-K years as I flet that was a very important time to be at home. I had 4 kids in 4.5 years (not twins) so I can assure you I was not sitting back watching soaps. We didn't even have a TV as there was no time to watch it (well we had a TV screen but no cable).

Once my youngest was in school I could have worked as my life at that point was not stressful however due to where we live and after school activities I still wanted to be at home for before and after school so in the end I stayed home. I spend one day a week cleaning the house, doing the yard work, and other house related tasks or appointments are scheduled for that day, one day a week volunteering at the kids school, one day a week volunteering in another location, one day a week helping my elderly mother (taking her grocery shopping, to the bank, cutting her grass, etc) who lives an hour away and the last day I keep open for whatever didn't get done M-Th - usually a couple more loads of laundry, a bit of baking, sometimes lunch with a friend, weekend grocery shopping. It is still busy but not stressful. Our evenings and mornings are low stress and we get to spend a lot of quality time together in the evenings and on weekends. We have time to do sports and homework without it being rushed and overall it works well.

Anonymous wrote:I was just talking to a SAHM of teens (she teaches rec center classes during school hours) and she told me that she actually feels it's more important for her to be a SAHM now than it was when her kids were my age (2 and 3). I really hope we can continue to afford me SAH as the kids get older. I have a PhD, so maybe I can find some part-time flexible consulting work for during school hours.

y
My mother worked when I was a teenager. We were all fine. there was a guy I dated briefly who was a total bad boy. his mother was a sahm. it didn't make a bit of difference. he was pretty clever and manipulative.

I think when kids are teens, parents will see other teens who have problems and try to find a reason. they like to blame the parents. So some sahm will see her teen's friend have issues and the teen's friend's mom happens to work, and then she blames that and says, "i'm so glad I can be home for my teen, otherwise she'd be like that." but it's anecdotal. and for every story like that, there's a story like mine, where it was the teen with the sahm who had problems (perhaps b/c his mother was a helicopter mom all his life and he was rebelling). my siblings and i were fine as teens. we didn't get into any trouble. we didn't feel neglected. we all had activities anyhow. it was fine that my mother worked, because financial stress was something we sensed as kids, too. it was better when my mother was employed. i think also that she was better. she was more confident and gave us some space, which all teens need.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was just talking to a SAHM of teens (she teaches rec center classes during school hours) and she told me that she actually feels it's more important for her to be a SAHM now than it was when her kids were my age (2 and 3). I really hope we can continue to afford me SAH as the kids get older. I have a PhD, so maybe I can find some part-time flexible consulting work for during school hours.

Can I just ask why on earth you got a PhD if your intent was to be a SAHM for 20 years? Where I come from, you maybe get a BA if this is your life goal, but you certainly don't spend 10+ years and go into debt for a PhD you will never use.

I WOHM, but have to say you make a lot of ill-informed assumptions in your post as you attention to insult that poster. Talented candidates will be fully funded at many top flight programs. If PP wanted to be an academic, perhaps that did not work out. Many of my friends with PhDs have found themselves unable to make a reasonable living in a very difficult academic job market. I was lucky that my doctorate landed me in a decent position. Not everyone has that.

What on earth does this mean?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of us don't have a choice, asswipe! We have to work to put food on the table.

Name-calling is so tacky.

But really: What do you drive? What kind of home do you live in? What kind of neighborhood? What extras could you trim back on? Yeah, it's an inconvenient truth but you could do it.

I drive a cheap honda that's good on gas (and paid for, even though it's looking rough and has lots of mileage). My spouse takes public transportation. We live in PG county. We don't go on vacations. We shop at discount stores. I haven't bought a new item of clothing in a couple of years. We don't go out to eat unless we have to for some family (relatives) function. We do our own cleaning, our own yardwork and our own maintenance (my spouse is very handy). Our house is older (so, no, it's not a mcmansion). We have no gym memberships or things like that. We work out at home.

And if/when we have a kid, we'll still both need to work and use daycare.

Not that you or anyone else have to justify your choices to OP and the shrews on here chiming in to take her side. They need to lives if this is how they get their jollies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was just talking to a SAHM of teens (she teaches rec center classes during school hours) and she told me that she actually feels it's more important for her to be a SAHM now than it was when her kids were my age (2 and 3). I really hope we can continue to afford me SAH as the kids get older. I have a PhD, so maybe I can find some part-time flexible consulting work for during school hours.

Can I just ask why on earth you got a PhD if your intent was to be a SAHM for 20 years? Where I come from, you maybe get a BA if this is your life goal, but you certainly don't spend 10+ years and go into debt for a PhD you will never use.

I WOHM, but have to say you make a lot of ill-informed assumptions in your post as you attention to insult that poster. Talented candidates will be fully funded at many top flight programs. If PP wanted to be an academic, perhaps that did not work out. Many of my friends with PhDs have found themselves unable to make a reasonable living in a very difficult academic job market. I was lucky that my doctorate landed me in a decent position. Not everyone has that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of us don't have a choice, asswipe! We have to work to put food on the table.

Name-calling is so tacky.

But really: What do you drive? What kind of home do you live in? What kind of neighborhood? What extras could you trim back on? Yeah, it's an inconvenient truth but you could do it.

I drive a cheap honda that's good on gas (and paid for, even though it's looking rough and has lots of mileage). My spouse takes public transportation. We live in PG county. We don't go on vacations. We shop at discount stores. I haven't bought a new item of clothing in a couple of years. We don't go out to eat unless we have to for some family (relatives) function. We do our own cleaning, our own yardwork and our own maintenance (my spouse is very handy). Our house is older (so, no, it's not a mcmansion). We have no gym memberships or things like that. We work out at home.

And if/when we have a kid, we'll still both need to work and use daycare.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was just talking to a SAHM of teens (she teaches rec center classes during school hours) and she told me that she actually feels it's more important for her to be a SAHM now than it was when her kids were my age (2 and 3). I really hope we can continue to afford me SAH as the kids get older. I have a PhD, so maybe I can find some part-time flexible consulting work for during school hours.

Can I just ask why on earth you got a PhD if your intent was to be a SAHM for 20 years? Where I come from, you maybe get a BA if this is your life goal, but you certainly don't spend 10+ years and go into debt for a PhD you will never use.

I was fortunate enough to have an employer who financed my PhD (i worked professionally pre-kids).

I didn't get a PhD just to have work options. I did it also for personal achievement. And at that time, i certainly didn't know what my Future would hold in terms of WOHM/SAHM

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP,

You could have phrased your post with less judgment, but I mostly agree with you. I'm a working Mom and my daughter started preschool last year. My husband and I adjusted our schedules so that we could both pick her up twice a week and my Mom/Dad picked her up on Fridays. It worked great until my Dad got sick. So we moved to aftercare.

On the one hand, I like it in warm weather because she got to go out and spend free time with her school friends. On the other, I didn't like that she spent 9 hours at school (we usually picked her up around 5:15). And I really didn't like it when the weather was not good, so those 2 hours were spent indoors.

This year she's in pre-K and we will not do after-care. I just don't like keeping her there so long and I don't want to pay for the luxury of her staying only an hour (the amount of time I'm comfortable with her staying in aftercare). I also don't like that the "quality" of care changes in aftercare.

During bad weather, wouldn't those 2 hours be spent indoors with you? Or would you just send her out in the rain/snow/freezing cold anyway? You really have some misplaced mommy guilt if this is what upset you.

No mommy-guilt and not sure why you had to phrase your comment in such a combative way. While I love her school, the side where aftercare is held looks a bit gloomy. And indoor play at school is usually spent watching a movie, doing an activity, etc. While great, my DD doesn't like those days in aftercare. She loves it when they get to go outside and play on the field and/or on the playground.

But it doesn't answer the question which was, if you were at home with her, what would YOU do with her during bad weather that would be infinitely more exciting than aftercare?