I'm not sure it needs to be an either/or scenario. For most of us, I imagine, it's been some combination of both that flexed over time.

I would also point out that not all DC grow up wanting or having the ability to go to college so you might be "saving" for something different. We have friends whose DCs have gone the military route (either Academy, ROTC, or straight enlistment - with GI Bill for after), one whose kid had/started a landscaping thing in HS and wanted to stay in it (just taking a few CC classes/lawn application certifications) and others have SN/LD kids for whom post-HS ed just isn't in the cards for them.

I am glad, though, you used SAHP rather than just SAHM. Our household has operated with both at various times and with both of us working.

Take it as it comes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the parent wants to SAH, then that is definitely more valuable. But not every parent is happy in this role, and that matters.

This isn’t borne out by data. The crippling effect of college debt is.

It’s a bit complicated. Yes there’s data that women with working moms end up earning more than women with SAH moms, but there’s also data on the negative effects of early daycare (especially in the first year and/or long hours) on a significant number of kids.

So not exactly clear cut.

There's a happy medium. As a PP stated, you don't have to save $500K for college for one kid so you feel you have to take a high paying stressful job where you are hardly home. Most jobs aren't like that.

But to not save any money for college for your kid if you are able to is a disservice to your kid.

FWIW, my parents were low/middle income, and they could not save for college because they were also trying to save for retirement, which IMO, is much more important than saving for college. So, I worked my way through college, and it was tough. I didn't enjoy my college years.

I have done it all - sahm, work PT out of home, work PT at home, work FT out of the home, work FT at home.

I have been very fortunate to have this flexibility. Not everyone does. We have saved enough for in state college for two kids and a decent amount for retirement. The last thing I want for my kids is to have to pay college loans AND take care of us when we retire. I am currently helping my parents financially.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's best for kids is stability, however you can manage it. Sometimes that means working, sometimes it means not working.

We did both (SAHP and funded 529). Our income grew (a lot) over those 18 years with kids. We were modest in our 529 contributions, knowing we'd likely be in a position to also pay as we go if needed, and still we ended up having more than enough. On top of that, this year's bonus alone could have covered most of our youngest's tuition, but he got merit awards, and we have a funded 529, so we don't need it for that. Our oldest also got merit awards and will graduate with a lot left over in the 529 for grad school if desired.

My point is, in making your decision, keep in mind that your family compensation will most likely grow over time. You can also decide as you go along and make changes to work/SAH as warranted.

This is such a classic out of touch DCUM post- humble bragging and acting like this is most people's experience. "this year's bonus alone could have covered most of our youngest's tuition but get got merit awards"

Well, it's true. But the point was that we could not have ever imagined that when we made the choice to have one of us SAH and live on the lower of our two salaries. You watch what happens and adjust as you go.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stay home for 3 yrs, back to work for the other 15.

+1 best of both. Your kid will be thankful that they have a fully funded college account when they start picking which colleges to apply to. They won't remember (or care) that you were not home with them all day when they were 4 or 5.

Each family is different. Each kid is different.

I have a friend who is very successful and has 3 kids (two upper elementary and one middle). Her kids are all struggling and could really use my friend. One child is struggling both academically and socially. It stresses my friend out, but she says she has so much going on at work that she can’t deal with the kids. I’m not sure her kids will turn out well and in her situation, a mom home would be better IMO than a fully funded college.

I don’t think it is all or nothing. What if mom was around and college is mostly funded.

I’m a SAHM and if that was the choice, I would work for college fund. DH earns enough so I can stay home and also pay for college, grad school, etc.

This is a great example of why we need women working. So POS stop perpetuating this nasty stereotype. “I’m not sure her kids will turn out well because she is working! She needs to be at home, barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen otherwise NO CHILD WILL THRIVE!” Gmafb. Studies show men with working moms are smarter, treat their partners better, are more likely to contribute to household chores and child raising. Instead of whatever bulls*** you are teaching, completely letting fathers and men off the hook. Maybe you should go sit in a corner and stop bringing us back to the ‘50s.

What you just wrote does not even remotely resemble today SAHPs. It just doesn't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the parent wants to SAH, then that is definitely more valuable. But not every parent is happy in this role, and that matters.

This isn’t borne out by data. The crippling effect of college debt is.

It’s a bit complicated. Yes there’s data that women with working moms end up earning more than women with SAH moms, but there’s also data on the negative effects of early daycare (especially in the first year and/or long hours) on a significant number of kids.

So not exactly clear cut.

It will vary by family. Always ensure retirement is fully funded. For most, SAHP for birth to three is beneficial, then back to work.

If one of your dc has special needs, then SAHP and throw as much money towards that child as possible. My parents didn’t take care of my sister’s moderate special needs. She never learned the necessary coping skills and she still needs a lot of support as an adult. If she’s still around when my parents go, we will be helping her with executive functioning tasks like a teenager. I hope to outlive her, so I don’t pass that burden onto my own children.

Anonymous wrote:If the parent wants to SAH, then that is definitely more valuable. But not every parent is happy in this role, and that matters.

This isn’t borne out by data. The crippling effect of college debt is.

Anonymous wrote:What's best for kids is stability, however you can manage it. Sometimes that means working, sometimes it means not working.

We did both (SAHP and funded 529). Our income grew (a lot) over those 18 years with kids. We were modest in our 529 contributions, knowing we'd likely be in a position to also pay as we go if needed, and still we ended up having more than enough. On top of that, this year's bonus alone could have covered most of our youngest's tuition, but he got merit awards, and we have a funded 529, so we don't need it for that. Our oldest also got merit awards and will graduate with a lot left over in the 529 for grad school if desired.

My point is, in making your decision, keep in mind that your family compensation will most likely grow over time. You can also decide as you go along and make changes to work/SAH as warranted.

This is such a classic out of touch DCUM post- humble bragging and acting like this is most people's experience. "this year's bonus alone could have covered most of our youngest's tuition but get got merit awards"

Statistically? College. But it doesn’t have to be $500,000 college per kid, it can be $200,000 which should not take 18 years to accrue. So it’s not an either/or.

If the parent wants to SAH, then that is definitely more valuable. But not every parent is happy in this role, and that matters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's no reason a SAHP shouldn't get a job while the kids are in school.

Clueless people say this. School is not even 8 hours long. Its six. Aftercare is hard to get into, expensive, and low quality, as are summer camps.. Also, sick days and holidays exceed pto. So show me these miracle jobs that magically align with school schedules? Also every weekend will be spent as a family cleaning and grocery shopping while eating takeout most nights.

FWIW I do work, because I actually do have one of these unicorn jobs where I wfh part time for very good pay in a technical/specialized field. Took me 10 years and an Ivy masters to get it. I have no illusions about how easy they are to find. And because of that I have to outsource some cleaning and childcare. There’s no shortcuts for the work to get done in a home if you have kids.

Well, I did with a part-time job as an architect. Some days the kids had aftercare sponsored by the school. My kids also quite enjoyed their summer camps.
As for sick days, well, I just didn't get paid. My employer understood I was a parent when I was hired. Part of the bargain was that I didn't need health insurance or any other benefits.
No, I'm not a superstar principal of a firm but that isn't my priority.

NP here
Well, not everyone is an architect.
Also, not every job will allow you to just take time off as needed and not get paid. There are some jobs where if take too much time off, they just fire you completely. Employers need reliability.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The flip side of this is I am so grateful my parents have the financial means for a comfortable retirement and to pay for care if they eventually need it. That's a bigger deal than having college paid for. Though both are nice.

Either way, college and retirement are both more attainable with two incomes.

Not always. My income was on the lower end in a helping profession so by the time we paid for child care, we'd owe money. And with older child, the driving is daily after school so paying someone would be a wash.

Right, the standard “I can’t get a job because we’ll be poor-er!” Lie. Whatever helps you sit on the sofa all afternoon!

So, who would drive my kid if I couldn’t? It would take my entire income for a driver. I wish I could just stay in the couch given my health issues. If I spend more post tax on help than I earn what’s the point of working. I’m glad to be home and doing things like caring for my family and mil. We are fine on one income and will pay for college and grad school.

Anonymous wrote:I’m a SAHM and there’s no way I could justify being one if college was not fully funded

So weird how unfettered capitalism has made so many feel that they need to justify taking care of their kids.

Anonymous wrote:There's no reason a SAHP shouldn't get a job while the kids are in school.

Clueless people say this. School is not even 8 hours long. Its six. Aftercare is hard to get into, expensive, and low quality, as are summer camps.. Also, sick days and holidays exceed pto. So show me these miracle jobs that magically align with school schedules? Also every weekend will be spent as a family cleaning and grocery shopping while eating takeout most nights.

FWIW I do work, because I actually do have one of these unicorn jobs where I wfh part time for very good pay in a technical/specialized field. Took me 10 years and an Ivy masters to get it. I have no illusions about how easy they are to find. And because of that I have to outsource some cleaning and childcare. There’s no shortcuts for the work to get done in a home if you have kids.

Well, I did with a part-time job as an architect. Some days the kids had aftercare sponsored by the school. My kids also quite enjoyed their summer camps.
As for sick days, well, I just didn't get paid. My employer understood I was a parent when I was hired. Part of the bargain was that I didn't need health insurance or any other benefits.
No, I'm not a superstar principal of a firm but that isn't my priority.

When you’re a stay at home mother you tend to have stay at home friends. We have all been able to do it, from the middle class to the super wealthy. It’s not always either or.