Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone's boundaries and capacities are different regardless of SAH or WOH. We all know (or are!) SAH parents who stay home precisely so they CAN be involved with the PTA, have more time for working out or working around the house, be the one who volunteers to pick up random things for the kids' classroom, etc. So it's a little rich to sneer that yes, you stay at home, but you are still omg too busy to do these things. The better tack is to graciously hold your boundary if there is ever an incorrect assumption of how you specifically choose to use your time: "I'm sorry, I'm not available to do x at y time." Don't make it a thing.

Well said. And it's certainly reasonable to assume that a SAHM has more free time than a WOH mom!

Not if the children are under the age of 3 (or 4, depending on when they start PK). Being the full time caregiver for a 2 year old will absolutely melt your brain. The idea that it's easier for someone in that situation to do things for other people is crazy. To go back to OP's original point, imagine if you hired a nanny to care for your 2 year old and then the nanny was like "ok, but I've got a bunch of volunteer stuff to do for the PTA at my kid's school, and also I need to run some errands for some of my friends and neighbors, and pick up my sister's friends from school because she has a real job."

A 2 year old is a full time, exhausting job. Full stop. Anyone with kids, whether you SAHed or not, should know that. If you have ever spent 2-3 hours caring for a child this age, you should understand that it does not lend itself to a leisurely life of volunteer work and getting in workouts. When I was a SAHM of a child this age, I probably showered twice a week and regularly just ate cheese slices and an orange for 90% of my meals because I barely had time to take care of myself, much less do favors for friends.

Being a full time parent is exhausting and time consuming, no one is disputing that. The point that a lot of you are missing is that it’s not actually a job - no one is paying you for it, it’s not labor in the Marxian sense. And because of that, you are not accountable to anyone else for your time or performance. You have total flexibility and determination over your day.

Tell that to the 2 year old! Can I watch you explain Karl Marx while he screams at you that he wants yellow cheese, not white cheese, and he wants it RIGHT NOW! You could sell tickets to this little pay and become a true capitalist!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have more time than someone that works all day and has child care and household responsibilities at night. Makes sense?

Time for what, though? You don't have time to do anything alone. Ever. When I worked, I could easily carve out 10-45 minutes to take care of something alone if I needed to. I SAH now and get zero minutes without children. Every time I use the bathroom, it's interrupted. You can drag kids to CVS or whatever, but that's not really "free time" as it'd take 30 minutes where if you could step out alone, it'd take 5 minutes. Plus, household responsibilities by working parents are cut. They aren't making lunch (and most times nannies prep dinner for kids at least). I have to try to make doctor's appointments on off hours because I literally don't have 10 minutes to sit through a phone menu in silence and look at my calendar to make an appointment. It's far easier to get stuff done during an office job than while watching kids at home. 4-5 hours of my day are out and about with the kids so doing small things like responding to an email or paying a bill online or buying new underwear for your kids online isn't doable. I'm no mommy martyr, I love my life, but acting like SAHPs have the ability to chat on the phone for an hour is a joke. It's "time", but it's not "free time".

How old are your kids? I have days like this, but also this is why God gave us Netflix.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I SAH for about 4 years and definitely agree that free time was not always a benefit (especially once naptime went away!), since if there's no money to outsource lawn care, house cleaning, special enrichment classes etc it's all on you to fill those roles.

But my kids loved going to the store with me when they were 2, so I'm not sure that's something I would avoid. I'd hand them things to put into the cart, we would check out the fresh flowers in the deli section and name the colors, and find so many new and different things to talk about.

I felt that way too until Covid happened and I stopped taking my kid to the store. Then I discovered anew that grocery shopping without a 2 year old is much, much easier than doing it with one. I also don't mind taking my kids to the store and when I was a SAHM it could be a welcome distraction because they viewed it as a form of entertainment and I could get an errand done in the process. But the idea that grocery shopping with a small child is "leisure time" is deranged. It's not.

Exactly. These are the same people who frame a mother getting a 10 minute shower in peace once a week as "self care".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being home with kids may not mean a lot of free time, but it’s certainly more FLEXIBLE than working outside the house. I can run that errand / watch that friend’s kid when they have an emergency / make that phone call, because I can either rearrange my day to make it work or do it while I’m doing other stuff. I have a baby on two naps right now, but when I have a toddler on one nap I LOVE midday errands. I would so much rather walk around the empty grocery store showing him all the different fruit as we shop than sit at home intensively parenting. I would love to have phone calls while I’m making lunch or folding laundry.

But then, I also prefer to call myself a housewife vs a SAHM. I don’t have my attention entirely on my kids the whole time I’m at home. I am also cooking, cleaning, and making all the arrangements for our lives. I wouldn’t want a nanny doing that for HER life, but if I had a WOH job I’d love to pay someone to do it for ours…

Depends on the kid and the job. Lots of people with WFH jobs have that exact flexibility. And some people have more challenging kids than others. I had a 3 year old who went through a phase of having enormous meltdowns any time our schedule changed in any way. That didn't feel flexible AT ALL. Doing basic stuff like going to the grocery story required a ton of work on my part to get my kid ready for that slight change in routine. I would have watched a friend's kid in an emergency, but I also would have known it would almost certainly cause massive struggles with my extremely strong-willed kid.

Anyway, there's just no way to compare these things. Some kids are easier. Some ages are easier. Some jobs are easier. You absolutely cannot assume that a SAHM has more free time or greater flexiblity than someone with a job (hello, the whole point of OP's post is that nanny is a job, and it's not super flexible or filled with free time, so why would you assume being a SAHM is?).

Yes, it definitely depends on the kid. But the difference is that being a SAHM is like being a freelancer and being a nanny is being an employee. Either way you have stuff you have to get done, and it's rude to assume that because someone isn't answerable to an outside "boss" that they can do whatever you want them to do! But it's also true that if your spouse is hit by a car and you need to go to the ER, your SAH or freelancer friend will probably be able to rearrange their day more easily to watch your kids more easily than your nanny or WOH friend.

Anonymous wrote:You have more time than someone that works all day and has child care and household responsibilities at night. Makes sense?

Time for what, though? You don't have time to do anything alone. Ever. When I worked, I could easily carve out 10-45 minutes to take care of something alone if I needed to. I SAH now and get zero minutes without children. Every time I use the bathroom, it's interrupted. You can drag kids to CVS or whatever, but that's not really "free time" as it'd take 30 minutes where if you could step out alone, it'd take 5 minutes. Plus, household responsibilities by working parents are cut. They aren't making lunch (and most times nannies prep dinner for kids at least). I have to try to make doctor's appointments on off hours because I literally don't have 10 minutes to sit through a phone menu in silence and look at my calendar to make an appointment. It's far easier to get stuff done during an office job than while watching kids at home. 4-5 hours of my day are out and about with the kids so doing small things like responding to an email or paying a bill online or buying new underwear for your kids online isn't doable. I'm no mommy martyr, I love my life, but acting like SAHPs have the ability to chat on the phone for an hour is a joke. It's "time", but it's not "free time".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone's boundaries and capacities are different regardless of SAH or WOH. We all know (or are!) SAH parents who stay home precisely so they CAN be involved with the PTA, have more time for working out or working around the house, be the one who volunteers to pick up random things for the kids' classroom, etc. So it's a little rich to sneer that yes, you stay at home, but you are still omg too busy to do these things. The better tack is to graciously hold your boundary if there is ever an incorrect assumption of how you specifically choose to use your time: "I'm sorry, I'm not available to do x at y time." Don't make it a thing.

Well said. And it's certainly reasonable to assume that a SAHM has more free time than a WOH mom!

Not if the children are under the age of 3 (or 4, depending on when they start PK). Being the full time caregiver for a 2 year old will absolutely melt your brain. The idea that it's easier for someone in that situation to do things for other people is crazy. To go back to OP's original point, imagine if you hired a nanny to care for your 2 year old and then the nanny was like "ok, but I've got a bunch of volunteer stuff to do for the PTA at my kid's school, and also I need to run some errands for some of my friends and neighbors, and pick up my sister's friends from school because she has a real job."

A 2 year old is a full time, exhausting job. Full stop. Anyone with kids, whether you SAHed or not, should know that. If you have ever spent 2-3 hours caring for a child this age, you should understand that it does not lend itself to a leisurely life of volunteer work and getting in workouts. When I was a SAHM of a child this age, I probably showered twice a week and regularly just ate cheese slices and an orange for 90% of my meals because I barely had time to take care of myself, much less do favors for friends.

Being a full time parent is exhausting and time consuming, no one is disputing that. The point that a lot of you are missing is that it’s not actually a job - no one is paying you for it, it’s not labor in the Marxian sense. And because of that, you are not accountable to anyone else for your time or performance. You have total flexibility and determination over your day.

Anonymous wrote:I SAH for about 4 years and definitely agree that free time was not always a benefit (especially once naptime went away!), since if there's no money to outsource lawn care, house cleaning, special enrichment classes etc it's all on you to fill those roles.

But my kids loved going to the store with me when they were 2, so I'm not sure that's something I would avoid. I'd hand them things to put into the cart, we would check out the fresh flowers in the deli section and name the colors, and find so many new and different things to talk about.

I felt that way too until Covid happened and I stopped taking my kid to the store. Then I discovered anew that grocery shopping without a 2 year old is much, much easier than doing it with one. I also don't mind taking my kids to the store and when I was a SAHM it could be a welcome distraction because they viewed it as a form of entertainment and I could get an errand done in the process. But the idea that grocery shopping with a small child is "leisure time" is deranged. It's not.

Anonymous wrote:Being home with kids may not mean a lot of free time, but it’s certainly more FLEXIBLE than working outside the house. I can run that errand / watch that friend’s kid when they have an emergency / make that phone call, because I can either rearrange my day to make it work or do it while I’m doing other stuff. I have a baby on two naps right now, but when I have a toddler on one nap I LOVE midday errands. I would so much rather walk around the empty grocery store showing him all the different fruit as we shop than sit at home intensively parenting. I would love to have phone calls while I’m making lunch or folding laundry.

But then, I also prefer to call myself a housewife vs a SAHM. I don’t have my attention entirely on my kids the whole time I’m at home. I am also cooking, cleaning, and making all the arrangements for our lives. I wouldn’t want a nanny doing that for HER life, but if I had a WOH job I’d love to pay someone to do it for ours…

Depends on the kid and the job. Lots of people with WFH jobs have that exact flexibility. And some people have more challenging kids than others. I had a 3 year old who went through a phase of having enormous meltdowns any time our schedule changed in any way. That didn't feel flexible AT ALL. Doing basic stuff like going to the grocery story required a ton of work on my part to get my kid ready for that slight change in routine. I would have watched a friend's kid in an emergency, but I also would have known it would almost certainly cause massive struggles with my extremely strong-willed kid.

Anyway, there's just no way to compare these things. Some kids are easier. Some ages are easier. Some jobs are easier. You absolutely cannot assume that a SAHM has more free time or greater flexiblity than someone with a job (hello, the whole point of OP's post is that nanny is a job, and it's not super flexible or filled with free time, so why would you assume being a SAHM is?).

I SAH for about 4 years and definitely agree that free time was not always a benefit (especially once naptime went away!), since if there's no money to outsource lawn care, house cleaning, special enrichment classes etc it's all on you to fill those roles.

But my kids loved going to the store with me when they were 2, so I'm not sure that's something I would avoid. I'd hand them things to put into the cart, we would check out the fresh flowers in the deli section and name the colors, and find so many new and different things to talk about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone's boundaries and capacities are different regardless of SAH or WOH. We all know (or are!) SAH parents who stay home precisely so they CAN be involved with the PTA, have more time for working out or working around the house, be the one who volunteers to pick up random things for the kids' classroom, etc. So it's a little rich to sneer that yes, you stay at home, but you are still omg too busy to do these things. The better tack is to graciously hold your boundary if there is ever an incorrect assumption of how you specifically choose to use your time: "I'm sorry, I'm not available to do x at y time." Don't make it a thing.

Well said. And it's certainly reasonable to assume that a SAHM has more free time than a WOH mom!

Not if the children are under the age of 3 (or 4, depending on when they start PK). Being the full time caregiver for a 2 year old will absolutely melt your brain. The idea that it's easier for someone in that situation to do things for other people is crazy. To go back to OP's original point, imagine if you hired a nanny to care for your 2 year old and then the nanny was like "ok, but I've got a bunch of volunteer stuff to do for the PTA at my kid's school, and also I need to run some errands for some of my friends and neighbors, and pick up my sister's friends from school because she has a real job."

A 2 year old is a full time, exhausting job. Full stop. Anyone with kids, whether you SAHed or not, should know that. If you have ever spent 2-3 hours caring for a child this age, you should understand that it does not lend itself to a leisurely life of volunteer work and getting in workouts. When I was a SAHM of a child this age, I probably showered twice a week and regularly just ate cheese slices and an orange for 90% of my meals because I barely had time to take care of myself, much less do favors for friends.

Being home with kids may not mean a lot of free time, but it’s certainly more FLEXIBLE than working outside the house. I can run that errand / watch that friend’s kid when they have an emergency / make that phone call, because I can either rearrange my day to make it work or do it while I’m doing other stuff. I have a baby on two naps right now, but when I have a toddler on one nap I LOVE midday errands. I would so much rather walk around the empty grocery store showing him all the different fruit as we shop than sit at home intensively parenting. I would love to have phone calls while I’m making lunch or folding laundry.

But then, I also prefer to call myself a housewife vs a SAHM. I don’t have my attention entirely on my kids the whole time I’m at home. I am also cooking, cleaning, and making all the arrangements for our lives. I wouldn’t want a nanny doing that for HER life, but if I had a WOH job I’d love to pay someone to do it for ours…

Wow, people are being jerks in this thread. OP, I am a working mom but was SAH when my kid was the same age and I 100% agree with you. Of course you are busy. My 2-yr-old was both a delight and a handful (though I'll be honest that 3 was harder!). I was an older mom so I'd been working in a pretty demanding field for nearly 20 years by the time I had a kid and took a few years off. I can tell you unequivocally that there were plenty of days as a SAH that were as busy/tough (or busier and tougher) than some of my hardest days in consulting. Particularly when my DH would have to go out of town for work so I'd be on my own with a 2/3 year old from the minute she woke up until the minute she went to bed. I've had to pull lots of late nights and even all-nighters in my career, but being alone or among other adults made those long days easier in many respects than my long SAH days. It is one thing to be productive and perform well when tired. It is another thing entirely to do so when tired and there is a small human saying your name every 3 seconds, or wailing from an ear ache, or refusing to put on shoes or brush teeth or whatever. I often used to think that some of my more childish colleagues and clients had helped prepare me for motherhood, but helping me develop a deep well of calm and patience in the face of extremely challenging behavior. But with those colleagues/clients, I knew at some point I would be done with them. With your child you are never done. Of course you are busy.

I have never had less "free" time than when I was a SAHM. Today, as a working parent (I WFH so no commute, thankfully), if I need to go to the doctor or call my parents or get my hair done or work out, I just have to arrange me work schedule to make it happen. Obviously this is easier with WFH, but even when I was in an office, I used to do stuff like get a manicure or grab food with a friend on my lunch hour all the time. And all these professionals acting like they they never have time for a personal call in the middle of their work day are lying. Sorry, but I work with very, very busy people, I have friends who are surgeons and corporate lawyers and school teachers. Every one of them have time built into their day where they could make a personal call. Maybe not a one hour call (for real, who talks on the phone to anyone for an hour these days? I wouldn't want it). But of course they could make some phone calls or get a work out in or whatever. Especially with WFH. These martyrdom posts from working parents are ridiculous. Get real, folks.

Anyway, OP, I may be the only one but I hear you. There are few things I've done in life that were harder than caring for a toddler 24/7, and that includes a demanding graduate school program, training for a sport at an elite level, and managing a team of 20+ people on projects for some of the most profitable companies in the world. People don't value that work, they assume it's easy, they think caring for children is something anyone can do. It's not. It's hard and childcare workers are almost universally underpaid. As someone who also did that work for free (and would again), I get it. Sorry all these other folks are too defensive about their own choices to see that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone's boundaries and capacities are different regardless of SAH or WOH. We all know (or are!) SAH parents who stay home precisely so they CAN be involved with the PTA, have more time for working out or working around the house, be the one who volunteers to pick up random things for the kids' classroom, etc. So it's a little rich to sneer that yes, you stay at home, but you are still omg too busy to do these things. The better tack is to graciously hold your boundary if there is ever an incorrect assumption of how you specifically choose to use your time: "I'm sorry, I'm not available to do x at y time." Don't make it a thing.

Well said. And it's certainly reasonable to assume that a SAHM has more free time than a WOH mom!

Not if she has full time nanny.

Anonymous wrote:I just saw the thread on the mom who wants to put it in her nanny contract that the nanny not use her cell phone while baby is awake.

I SAH with a 2 year old, and have two school age kids. I definitely use my cell phone during the day, but I DO try to hold myself to similar standards a WOH parent would hold a nanny - that is, I focus on my kid when he’s awake, so no, I don’t have time for an hour long phone call to chat with my parents, or to drive to pick up random things for the older kids classroom, or whatever. And ideally I’d not set up my two year old in front of the TV so I can workout or whatever else people think SAHMs have to a of time for but would NEVER let their nanny do!

That’s all. I find other SAH parents get that my hands are full, but I’m shocked how many WOHMs think I have all this time on my hands when they simultaneously seem aware that a nanny should be focusing on the kid.

OP, you need a reality check. No one is disputing that taking care of children is hard work. That's why many of us pay people a lot of money to do it! But taking care of your own kids is *not a job*. That doesn't mean it's not hard or tiring. But it means you're not obligated to anyone else's schedule or expectations. You don't have a boss dictating anything about your day. You don't have clients or patients or coworkers expecting you to show up on time to meetings, like most people who are employed. No one thinks your day is just wide open and leisurely, but you can set your own schedule and basically do what you want. If you think that doesn't allow you more freedom than someone who answers to a boss, you're kidding yourself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone's boundaries and capacities are different regardless of SAH or WOH. We all know (or are!) SAH parents who stay home precisely so they CAN be involved with the PTA, have more time for working out or working around the house, be the one who volunteers to pick up random things for the kids' classroom, etc. So it's a little rich to sneer that yes, you stay at home, but you are still omg too busy to do these things. The better tack is to graciously hold your boundary if there is ever an incorrect assumption of how you specifically choose to use your time: "I'm sorry, I'm not available to do x at y time." Don't make it a thing.

I can see this if you are a SAH parent to kids who are in school. But with a 2-year-old at home, it's a lot harder for her to volunteer for PTA than someone like me who WOH with two in elementary school.

You are missing the point. OP is complaining that people assume she has so much time. The details are irrelevant. Whatever your scenario, be clear when you aren't available or can't commit to something. You don't need to make it a dissertation on the persecution of SAHMs.