Anonymous wrote:No brainer. Work and continue advancing and building income (financial security) when kids are younger.

I did. I've worked hard the last 10 years (while my children have had excellent childcare), and now I'm in a position to retire at age 45.
Many of my friends quit to become SAHMs in their early 30's, and went back to work about 10 years later. They started back at much lower salaries and now have to work until age 67.

Unfortunately, a woman's prime earning years are around age 35-45. Being out of the workforce for most of that time is extremely detrimental to your family's financial security.

Don't let emotion overrule your decision

I stayed home for the first 8 years with my kids and then returined to a six figure flexible law job. I could afford to stay at home indefinitely but have no desire to retire in my forties. Everyone has their own best course,

No brainer. Work and continue advancing and building income (financial security) when kids are younger.

I did. I've worked hard the last 10 years (while my children have had excellent childcare), and now I'm in a position to retire at age 45.
Many of my friends quit to become SAHMs in their early 30's, and went back to work about 10 years later. They started back at much lower salaries and now have to work until age 67.

Unfortunately, a woman's prime earning years are around age 35-45. Being out of the workforce for most of that time is extremely detrimental to your family's financial security.

Don't let emotion overrule your decision

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I decided to go with option 2. Our kids are now 7 & 10 and so far it is the right decision. We are aggressively saving for their college so they have more options than DH and I did in our 20s. I personally think that will be more meaningful to them in the long term.

It won't. They want their Mom now. Not her money when they move out.

Do they also want their Dad now, not his money when they move out?

Mine absolutely do. However, my husband needs to work, therefore they get what they can ~ A loving caring Dad who WAH and a SAH mom. The answer to the knowledge that kids DO want to be around their parents isn't "well don't give them access to either parent since they can't have full access to both parents". At least, it wasn't for us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I decided to go with option 2. Our kids are now 7 & 10 and so far it is the right decision. We are aggressively saving for their college so they have more options than DH and I did in our 20s. I personally think that will be more meaningful to them in the long term.

It won't. They want their Mom now. Not her money when they move out.

Do they also want their Dad now, not his money when they move out?

Anonymous wrote:I decided to go with option 2. Our kids are now 7 & 10 and so far it is the right decision. We are aggressively saving for their college so they have more options than DH and I did in our 20s. I personally think that will be more meaningful to them in the long term.

It won't. They want their Mom now. Not her money when they move out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I agree. So much so, that my husband and I made it a priority to have one of us at home during all of these stages.

Which one of you?

In our family we chose the person who carries and nurses the baby. We also chose the person who needed the money, whereas I didn't;. Men deserve the right to be financially secure, as well.

So, "My husband and I made it a priority to have me (the wife) at home during all of these stages"?

I gave you actual reasons, but you don't want to see them, because you want to make this about gender. Your loss! If you can't look beyond whats between my legs to find out why my family made the choice that it did, I feel for you. I had financial security already, legally he didn't. Therefore, like everyone else who needs to work, he needs to work. Pretty simple. When Moms work because they need the money they are "good moms". When dads do it its sexist. Okay.

I didn't make it about gender. You made it about gender -- the person who carries and nurses the baby, right? That's gender. Also, if it weren't about gender, then half the time the parent staying home would be the mother, and half the time the parent staying home would be the father (for heterosexual couples). In reality, though, it's almost always the mother.

How you do your finances -- such that you have financial security without working for pay, but he doesn't, and your household doesn't -- that's up to you.

My apologies ~ when you asked the PP (who wasn't me) about which[b] parent stayed home I assumed you cared about gender, or you wouldn't have asked. My bad.

She *did* care about gender. Apparently, very much. So absurd.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I agree. So much so, that my husband and I made it a priority to have one of us at home during all of these stages.

Which one of you?

In our family we chose the person who carries and nurses the baby. We also chose the person who needed the money, whereas I didn't;. Men deserve the right to be financially secure, as well.

So, "My husband and I made it a priority to have me (the wife) at home during all of these stages"?

I gave you actual reasons, but you don't want to see them, because you want to make this about gender. Your loss! If you can't look beyond whats between my legs to find out why my family made the choice that it did, I feel for you. I had financial security already, legally he didn't. Therefore, like everyone else who needs to work, he needs to work. Pretty simple. When Moms work because they need the money they are "good moms". When dads do it its sexist. Okay.

I didn't make it about gender. You made it about gender -- the person who carries and nurses the baby, right? That's gender. Also, if it weren't about gender, then half the time the parent staying home would be the mother, and half the time the parent staying home would be the father (for heterosexual couples). In reality, though, it's almost always the mother.

How you do your finances -- such that you have financial security without working for pay, but he doesn't, and your household doesn't -- that's up to you.

Again, I'm the bolded PP, but I wanted to address this. You may enjoy living in a bean-counting relationship, where everything must be split 50/50 all the time, or else you get your feelings hurt, but that's not how my marriage works (or that of so many other people). My husband and I are a team. Whether one of us is working or staying home, we're both doing what needs to be done to take care of our family. We don't keep score - you stay home half the time, and I'll stay home the other half. How ridiculous. I'm the initial PP who said that we always made it a priority to have a parent at home - you're the one who turned it into questions designed to bait - "Which one of you?" etc.

I already stated this, but I stayed home until my youngest was in middle school - a good long time, for which I will be forever grateful. I now work PT and my husband and I make sure one of us is home when the kids are home. But you go right ahead and keep on asking snarky, baiting questions. It's only making you look insecure and bitter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I agree. So much so, that my husband and I made it a priority to have one of us at home during all of these stages.

Which one of you?

In our family we chose the person who carries and nurses the baby. We also chose the person who needed the money, whereas I didn't;. Men deserve the right to be financially secure, as well.

So, "My husband and I made it a priority to have me (the wife) at home during all of these stages"?

I gave you actual reasons, but you don't want to see them, because you want to make this about gender. Your loss! If you can't look beyond whats between my legs to find out why my family made the choice that it did, I feel for you. I had financial security already, legally he didn't. Therefore, like everyone else who needs to work, he needs to work. Pretty simple. When Moms work because they need the money they are "good moms". When dads do it its sexist. Okay.

Again, the PP is someone different - not me (the one in bold). However, I agree with her. The choices we make are ours alone. To the PPP, how would you feel if we questioned why you and your husband decided to leave your kids in daycare? You'd probably say that's no one's business but yours. Am I right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I agree. So much so, that my husband and I made it a priority to have one of us at home during all of these stages.

Which one of you?

In our family we chose the person who carries and nurses the baby. We also chose the person who needed the money, whereas I didn't;. Men deserve the right to be financially secure, as well.

So, "My husband and I made it a priority to have me (the wife) at home during all of these stages"?

The PP is not me - the person who stated we made it a priority to have a parent home. But why on earth would it bother you what choices others make regarding how they want to raise their children? Our choices have nothing to do with you.

As for me, I always knew I'd want to be a SAHM once we started a family. I married a man who had the same values, and he was 100% supportive of this decision. Now that our kids are older, I've returned to work PT, which is ideal for our family.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I agree. So much so, that my husband and I made it a priority to have one of us at home during all of these stages.

Which one of you?

I stayed home with the kids until they started middle school. Now I work PT and my husband has flexible hours as well, so one of us is always home when they are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I agree. So much so, that my husband and I made it a priority to have one of us at home during all of these stages.

Which one of you?

In our family we chose the person who carries and nurses the baby. We also chose the person who needed the money, whereas I didn't;. Men deserve the right to be financially secure, as well.

So, "My husband and I made it a priority to have me (the wife) at home during all of these stages"?

I gave you actual reasons, but you don't want to see them, because you want to make this about gender. Your loss! If you can't look beyond whats between my legs to find out why my family made the choice that it did, I feel for you. I had financial security already, legally he didn't. Therefore, like everyone else who needs to work, he needs to work. Pretty simple. When Moms work because they need the money they are "good moms". When dads do it its sexist. Okay.

I didn't make it about gender. You made it about gender -- the person who carries and nurses the baby, right? That's gender. Also, if it weren't about gender, then half the time the parent staying home would be the mother, and half the time the parent staying home would be the father (for heterosexual couples). In reality, though, it's almost always the mother.

How you do your finances -- such that you have financial security without working for pay, but he doesn't, and your household doesn't -- that's up to you.

My apologies ~ when you asked the PP (who wasn't me) about which[b] parent stayed home I assumed you cared about gender, or you wouldn't have asked. My bad.

Anonymous wrote:Option 2! I've worked fulltime through my children being in daycare and I hope to decrease my work hours to be available for driving kids to afterschool activities and volunteering as my kids get older.

This is my vote as well. I am finding I want more flexibility now that the kids are older. I have worked full time both ages, but I'm older and they have more things I want to be a part of now that they are older.

^^^well, strictly speaking, the person who carries and nurses the baby is sex, not gender.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I agree. So much so, that my husband and I made it a priority to have one of us at home during all of these stages.

Which one of you?

In our family we chose the person who carries and nurses the baby. We also chose the person who needed the money, whereas I didn't;. Men deserve the right to be financially secure, as well.

So, "My husband and I made it a priority to have me (the wife) at home during all of these stages"?

I gave you actual reasons, but you don't want to see them, because you want to make this about gender. Your loss! If you can't look beyond whats between my legs to find out why my family made the choice that it did, I feel for you. I had financial security already, legally he didn't. Therefore, like everyone else who needs to work, he needs to work. Pretty simple. When Moms work because they need the money they are "good moms". When dads do it its sexist. Okay.

I didn't make it about gender. You made it about gender -- the person who carries and nurses the baby, right? That's gender. Also, if it weren't about gender, then half the time the parent staying home would be the mother, and half the time the parent staying home would be the father (for heterosexual couples). In reality, though, it's almost always the mother.

How you do your finances -- such that you have financial security without working for pay, but he doesn't, and your household doesn't -- that's up to you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids are 12 and 15. I've been lucky enough to work part time (24-32 hrs per week) throughout my kids' lives, but as infants and toddlers, they still had to go to daycare, as we have no family in the area and I was too nervous to go the nanny route.

Looking back and at where we are now, I think flexibility has become more important in their later childhood (tweens and teens).

Despite what some may suggest on this site, you're not a bad mom if you work to secure your family's financial stability.

What if you're in a job that offers no flexibility? I'm a teacher and my hours will always be set.

Except for the 4 months you have off a year, of course. Thats pretty darn flexible.