What would you choose

[DucksLikeRain]

A few random questions/thoughts:


2. Would you be adverse to your husband staying home and having the flexibility to set his own schedule (e.g., "do things I didn't have time for before while working full-time"), work paid jobs on occasion, and have no plans to get back into the job market? I know that we have a few women here who are the sole financial providers for their families, but not many. Assuming that you could earn as much as your husband (glass ceilings aside), couldn't your husband be the one to stay home while you go back to the full-time paid position?

I absolutely would be happy to have him staying at home. If my career were the one with the opportunities for advancement and growth in comparison to his, and he wanted to stay home, then we definitely would flip-flop our roles. For us the roles are not set in stone based on gender. It is important to us to have one of us home with the kids, and available to be home at any needed time as they are in school, to volunteer at the school and be as involved as the school will allow us to be, to do the upkeep on the cars ourselves rather than pay for it, to have an extensive garden and be able to care for it. All while making sure our evenings and weekends are 100% free and for family to do things together. This wouldn't be able to happen if we were both working. Something would have to give. For us and our family, the second income is what we decided to de-prioritize. If things were financially different for us we'd definitely have to take a second look at our priorities. But they're not different. And we've financially planned for so many things to come up. Divorce is the only thing we haven't "planned" for and that's just not something I am willing to "plan" into my life. My retirement is planned for and financed. Life insurance is in place, huge disability policies on my husband would have us taken care of comfortably should something happen to him. We've prioritized certain things in our life and me working is the bottom of the totem pole when it comes to those priorities in comparison to our situation.

[macksmom]

A few random questions/thoughts:

1. The discussion here seems to be mostly about the one category that has a number of posters saying that they'd never go back to traditional, paid employment. I wonder how much the choice to never go back (or to leave 100%) has to do with having a career versus a job. I'm thinking that it's alot easier to give up a job and less interesting to go back to one - although, no doubt, there are career women who make the same sahm choices, as well.

2. Would you be adverse to your husband staying home and having the flexibility to set his own schedule (e.g., "do things I didn't have time for before while working full-time"), work paid jobs on occasion, and have no plans to get back into the job market? I know that we have a few women here who are the sole financial providers for their families, but not many. Assuming that you could earn as much as your husband (glass ceilings aside), couldn't your husband be the one to stay home while you go back to the full-time paid position?

3. On the "earning your own money" concept, I won't speak for the other posters who've said that, but for me, the idea is not having my "own money." It's a work-ethic thing, as well as an issue of responsibility. (Which, again, is not said in any way to diminish the contributions of the sahm choice. Just how i see it for myself.) I bring in what i can to the family while still doing most of what is described by many of the sahms in this thread. I'm not there every day and alot of the week is punctuated by work so I do miss out on that time with my son (as does my husband), but I feel that I bring home much more than a paycheck, too.

No question, though, that there is a reality that says that women are significantly more likely to be improverished and even old and poor due to reliance on their spouse's finances. (meaning that divorce or death comes and the woman, who's been out of the workplace, losing all of those years of earning, earning potential, retirement, savings, and job experience, can never regain the footing that she's lost. It shows in the dismal statistics and most of those women didn't intend to end up in that spot, I'd guess.) I don't work to be defensive and my income is family income (not his or mine)... but I'm mindful of the fact that if something unexpected happens, I have a sustainable path to provide for myself and my son.

I think you are forgetting that when you enter into marriage you are entering into a partnership. The terms of that partnership will vary for each family depending on so many circumstances ie: career vs. job of either spouse, salary of both spouses, education, number of children, standard of living, religion, etc.... By someone saying they do not plan go back to work doesn't mean they are being absolved of earning their own way or contributing to the family. Who knows if there are funds set aside for this very purpose within that partnership? If both partners agree and want this for their family? It doesn't automatically mean a woman has fully agreed to be supported by her man for the rest of her life and has no provisions if that doesn't work out.

Personally that isn't my choice but I don't see why it should imply that it wasn't a personal decision agreed to by both partners. While I am not providing income I am more than making up for providing for my family in basically every other way. That is the system DH and I set in place as partners in sustaining our family and we are both comfortable with it. We both have life insurance and while I don't bring in any income if DH were to suddenly die I would be fine for at least a year where I can get my resources together and support myself and my children. I don't have any doubt I will be fine and make it on my own if I had to. But for now we are working as partners in a situation we think is optimal for our family.

[tanyachap]

I choose to work 3 days a week, which is about 21-30 hours, on average. IMHO, I have the best of both worlds and as close to an ideal situation as possible. My time working makes me appreciate my kids so much, and my time at home makes me appreciate my career. And I work from home 1-2 days a week, so I get to see my kids throughout the day even when I am working. I worked very hard for my degrees (and worked very hard paying them off), so I want to use them. I am a better mom when I get a little time away. I hope to be able to continue this schedule as long as possible.

Sounds great. I had a similar arrangement when DS1 was little and I loved it.

This! I feel my brain turning into mush if I don't do anything productive with it. I even worked (from home) during my maternity leave. Heck, I worked from the hospital the day after my C-section. I used to work with someone who went crazy (like needing medical intervention) after a couple of months of being a SAHM. They flew her mom in for childcare duties, she returned to work, and returned to normal. I suspect I'd be her if I had to do that.

Is it bad that I laughed out loud when reading this?! I mean I feel bad for the person but I felt close to that in the first months with both kids at home. I would not have chosen to be a SAHM but for several reasons that's what works for the time being. For me it was a difficult adjustment and it took me awhile to get used to it.

[tanyachap]

A few random questions/thoughts:

1. The discussion here seems to be mostly about the one category that has a number of posters saying that they'd never go back to traditional, paid employment. I wonder how much the choice to never go back (or to leave 100%) has to do with having a career versus a job. I'm thinking that it's alot easier to give up a job and less interesting to go back to one - although, no doubt, there are career women who make the same sahm choices, as well.

2. Would you be adverse to your husband staying home and having the flexibility to set his own schedule (e.g., "do things I didn't have time for before while working full-time"), work paid jobs on occasion, and have no plans to get back into the job market? I know that we have a few women here who are the sole financial providers for their families, but not many. Assuming that you could earn as much as your husband (glass ceilings aside), couldn't your husband be the one to stay home while you go back to the full-time paid position?

3. On the "earning your own money" concept, I won't speak for the other posters who've said that, but for me, the idea is not having my "own money." It's a work-ethic thing, as well as an issue of responsibility. (Which, again, is not said in any way to diminish the contributions of the sahm choice. Just how i see it for myself.) I bring in what i can to the family while still doing most of what is described by many of the sahms in this thread. I'm not there every day and alot of the week is punctuated by work so I do miss out on that time with my son (as does my husband), but I feel that I bring home much more than a paycheck, too.

No question, though, that there is a reality that says that women are significantly more likely to be improverished and even old and poor due to reliance on their spouse's finances. (meaning that divorce or death comes and the woman, who's been out of the workplace, losing all of those years of earning, earning potential, retirement, savings, and job experience, can never regain the footing that she's lost. It shows in the dismal statistics and most of those women didn't intend to end up in that spot, I'd guess.) I don't work to be defensive and my income is family income (not his or mine)... but I'm mindful of the fact that if something unexpected happens, I have a sustainable path to provide for myself and my son.

I think those are good points but of course being SAHM is a very legitimate choice and SAHM provide/contribute in different ways. However, the bolded part really holds true and is scary to me!!!! I have seen stats and they are scary. It is true that there is insurance and savings but I always fear long-term, full reliance on DH income and it is not b/c I don't trust him. But I have all these "what if" scenarios.

[Suja]

I think those are good points but of course being SAHM is a very legitimate choice and SAHM provide/contribute in different ways. However, the bolded part really holds true and is scary to me!!!! I have seen stats and they are scary. It is true that there is insurance and savings but I always fear long-term, full reliance on DH income and it is not b/c I don't trust him. But I have all these "what if" scenarios.

I think it's smart to be aware of the consequences of one's actions. The good thing for you is that you aren't in a field where a small break would mean having to start from scratch or changing career paths.

[tanyachap]

I think it's smart to be aware of the consequences of one's actions. The good thing for you is that you aren't in a field where a small break would mean having to start from scratch or changing career paths.

Yes, I won't have to start from scratch but I know I will take a hit. Once I am back, I will probably make $10-15 an hour less than before (I will get paid hourly since I will go back part time). Had I stayed, I would have been now paid $10-15 hour more than before. So we would be looking at $20-30 difference an hour. So you are looking at $1600-2400 difference in a monthly pay. That to me is significant.

[caligirl07]

A few random questions/thoughts:

1. The discussion here seems to be mostly about the one category that has a number of posters saying that they'd never go back to traditional, paid employment. I wonder how much the choice to never go back (or to leave 100%) has to do with having a career versus a job. I'm thinking that it's alot easier to give up a job and less interesting to go back to one - although, no doubt, there are career women who make the same sahm choices, as well.

2. Would you be adverse to your husband staying home and having the flexibility to set his own schedule (e.g., "do things I didn't have time for before while working full-time"), work paid jobs on occasion, and have no plans to get back into the job market? I know that we have a few women here who are the sole financial providers for their families, but not many. Assuming that you could earn as much as your husband (glass ceilings aside), couldn't your husband be the one to stay home while you go back to the full-time paid position?

3. On the "earning your own money" concept, I won't speak for the other posters who've said that, but for me, the idea is not having my "own money." It's a work-ethic thing, as well as an issue of responsibility. (Which, again, is not said in any way to diminish the contributions of the sahm choice. Just how i see it for myself.) I bring in what i can to the family while still doing most of what is described by many of the sahms in this thread. I'm not there every day and alot of the week is punctuated by work so I do miss out on that time with my son (as does my husband), but I feel that I bring home much more than a paycheck, too.

No question, though, that there is a reality that says that women are significantly more likely to be improverished and even old and poor due to reliance on their spouse's finances. (meaning that divorce or death comes and the woman, who's been out of the workplace, losing all of those years of earning, earning potential, retirement, savings, and job experience, can never regain the footing that she's lost. It shows in the dismal statistics and most of those women didn't intend to end up in that spot, I'd guess.) I don't work to be defensive and my income is family income (not his or mine)... but I'm mindful of the fact that if something unexpected happens, I have a sustainable path to provide for myself and my son.

I think these are good questions, the interesting thing where I live (so could be cultural) is that most sahm I know have given up a career, not just a job... the 15-20 in my circle (not close friends but general people I know) are all college educated women who left the workforce to stay home... now most of that circle is from church so that may be an interesting question as well... Also interestingly the older women from my church past child rearing age are mostly all at home still, most volunteer out in the community, schools, nursing homes, babysit for younger moms, teach occasional preschool type classes on the volunteer level... so again its a cultural norm for me to basically be a 'homemaker' forever...

Because that leads to your 2nd question... for us, gender plays a big role in our decision for our family specifically... We do believe in the traditional roles, not that mom can't work, but we would have both of us working before dh being a sahd... just not for us, he's a great daddy, but not meant to be with our kids all day every day nurturing them and what not Im sure some dads do an amazing job, but in our family it would be a disaster...not how the two of us are wired.

Again in our small circle of the world most moms I know are prepared for most of the 'what ifs' life insurance, disability insurance, retirement, college money for the kids etc. I do know thats not always the case though and it can be totally devastating to the woman and children if they loose the primary income earner. If I lost dh, our house would be paid off, and I would have enough money to stay home or job hunt for approximately 4-6 years at this point, while I may not find something in my career field I would find something to bring in money.

[KC's wifey]

I think you are forgetting that when you enter into marriage you are entering into a partnership. The terms of that partnership will vary for each family depending on so many circumstances ie: career vs. job of either spouse, salary of both spouses, education, number of children, standard of living, religion, etc.... By someone saying they do not plan go back to work doesn't mean they are being absolved of earning their own way or contributing to the family. Who knows if there are funds set aside for this very purpose within that partnership? If both partners agree and want this for their family? It doesn't automatically mean a woman has fully agreed to be supported by her man for the rest of her life and has no provisions if that doesn't work out.

Personally that isn't my choice but I don't see why it should imply that it wasn't a personal decision agreed to by both partners. While I am not providing income I am more than making up for providing for my family in basically every other way. That is the system DH and I set in place as partners in sustaining our family and we are both comfortable with it. We both have life insurance and while I don't bring in any income if DH were to suddenly die I would be fine for at least a year where I can get my resources together and support myself and my children. I don't have any doubt I will be fine and make it on my own if I had to. But for now we are working as partners in a situation we think is optimal for our family.

[SarahBaby1]

Im a SAHM now and love it. I worked full time when Lizzie was a baby and my MIL watched her. Now that Im home with my girls, I see how much I really missed when I worked. I will stay home until Caroline is in K and unless I have a few kids to baby sit, I will work part-time and be home before & after school.

[Rocio]

I have worked FT all my professional life, but I´ll start being a SAHM next month. It was our choice since we´ll be moving out of state and there will be a lot of changes in our lives. I´ll stay with our two kids (and the one on the way) home until they turn 5, ideally. I don´t know how this will turn out, maybe I´ll be tired out of my mind in a few months (very likely) and I´ll try to get them in daycare a couple of days a week, but for now I´m very excited to be able to stay at home with them.
I have a PhD, and although we´ve always eaten home-made food and our house has been in a mildly satisfying state of cleanliness most of the time, I do wish for time to bake (my culinary passion) and to do laundry on normal hours of the day instead of when everybody else is sleeping. I know being a SAHM is going to be hard, but I want to try this.
My plan is when they start going to school, and I start really having free time, go back to work part time. Probably not in my field, since a gap of 5 years really hurts your career, but I really don´t care. I love what I studied but having my children changed all for me, and right now my brain really can´t process anything that is not kid related

[kendra76]

I work because I am a better mom when I work... I have a personality that likes the excitement of my job but also enjoy my family life too. My DH is a SAHD. He loves staying home and would forever if he could. It works for us but would not work for some families. We gets tons of crap about it, but seriously I love the balance.

[CAAinMN]

I voted but then duty called and i didn't get to reply! LOL!

I would totally stay at home till college or later. I am hoping DH's career path puts us in that category, which i know we are well on our way. As i have no college degree to fall back on and not sure if i want to go back to school. It took me over 10 years to pay off my student loans, why would i want to do that again? I would have to find new things to do with my time...i guess i can say one thing, but really won't know what i will do until faced with it.

[june1baby]

Right now I am the sole financial provider for my family. My DH is a SAHD, who does an awesome job. I'd love to switch, and he would too. He was laid off right after we had our first daughter, and has had trouble finding work. I make about twice what he made, so financially it worked out for us. But still, if he found a job we would trade places. Being home with the kids is something I have always wanted to do, and still hope to one day. I would go back to work when they are in school. Like some of the others have said - my Mom stayed home with us while we were young, then returned to work when we were in school. She and my Dad, as a team, cooked all our meals, kept an organized and clean house (with our help with the chores, of course), and still went to all of our games, coached our teams and were very involved in our activities. I think I could do the same when the kids are in school.
If I had the opportunity to be home, I would absolutely love it. While I was out on maternity leave, DH picked up a job. I realized once again that I love to be a home maker - I love cooking, I love cleaning, I love being with the kids and fostering their growth. I have an awesome career and I've been lucky enough to be successful, but I would give it up to have more time to spend with my family. Now, on nights and weekends I don't want to miss a single second with my children. I also think that if I were home M-F, I'd feel more able to take a Saturday afternoon and spend a couple hours alone with DH on a date. As it is right now, I can't imagine giving up that time with my girls. I feel bad about that, because I do miss the time with my husband, and I know he needs that too.

[i.<3.cheesysmiles]

I never intended for it to sound as if I don't think that being a SAHM is not providing in some way. That was not at all my intent and I hope you ladies know me well enough to know that My point is staying home AFTER the children are grown.

I don't mean to sound disagreeable I am just having a hard time wrapping my head around the thought. It is not imaginable to me that cooking a home cooked meal and cleaning would take up so much time that working wasn't possible. To me this is a matter of "choice" and like Lisa said possiby "upbringing" as well. My mom always worked and worked hard. She kept a clean house, cooked meals for us, and worked a FT job (sometimes two). All without breaking a sweat.

I guess it honestly never occurred to me that there are woman who would actually like to spend the rest of their lives staying home. I am a big "what if" person. I can not and would never be able to allow myself to completely depend on my husband to support us (not to mention saving for retirement for two, etc) even if money were absolutely no factor. I mean seriously, staying home..... forever?? The thought never crossed my mind....

In no way did I think you were dismissing SAHMs. Honestly, to cook the type of meals that I would like to, I would need at least 2 hours a day. That includes baking bread from scratch, making sauce from scratch...so not just homemade, but everything from scratch. That is what I would LOVE to do...and it's what I grew up on. And I would not spend ALL day cooking and cleaning I would have time devoted to exercise, Bible reading & prayer, and helping out other moms/elderly in our church. My mom is not nearby, but I would love to be able to help the elderly in my church with things like errands, bringing them to appointments, cleaning their houses, etc. That is what my mom does a lot of now...except she does it with her own mom. Plus, I would LOVE to be a volunteer in my children's school - not their classroom, but their school.

A few random questions/thoughts:

1. The discussion here seems to be mostly about the one category that has a number of posters saying that they'd never go back to traditional, paid employment. I wonder how much the choice to never go back (or to leave 100%) has to do with having a career versus a job. I'm thinking that it's alot easier to give up a job and less interesting to go back to one - although, no doubt, there are career women who make the same sahm choices, as well.

2. Would you be adverse to your husband staying home and having the flexibility to set his own schedule (e.g., "do things I didn't have time for before while working full-time"), work paid jobs on occasion, and have no plans to get back into the job market? I know that we have a few women here who are the sole financial providers for their families, but not many. Assuming that you could earn as much as your husband (glass ceilings aside), couldn't your husband be the one to stay home while you go back to the full-time paid position?

3. On the "earning your own money" concept, I won't speak for the other posters who've said that, but for me, the idea is not having my "own money." It's a work-ethic thing, as well as an issue of responsibility. (Which, again, is not said in any way to diminish the contributions of the sahm choice. Just how i see it for myself.) I bring in what i can to the family while still doing most of what is described by many of the sahms in this thread. I'm not there every day and alot of the week is punctuated by work so I do miss out on that time with my son (as does my husband), but I feel that I bring home much more than a paycheck, too.

No question, though, that there is a reality that says that women are significantly more likely to be improverished and even old and poor due to reliance on their spouse's finances. (meaning that divorce or death comes and the woman, who's been out of the workplace, losing all of those years of earning, earning potential, retirement, savings, and job experience, can never regain the footing that she's lost. It shows in the dismal statistics and most of those women didn't intend to end up in that spot, I'd guess.) I don't work to be defensive and my income is family income (not his or mine)... but I'm mindful of the fact that if something unexpected happens, I have a sustainable path to provide for myself and my son.

1. I have a master's degree, and had a career. I would happily give it up to have the opportunity to serve my family and others.

2. I am a conservative Christian and the Bible is clear on the different roles for males and females, so we would not reverse it.

3. I have education and experience that can never be taken away from me. I have something to fall back on. We have life insurance policies. I have money saved up. I am not worried about financial issues and am not going to live my life worrying about "what-ifs" I can keep my experience current through volunteer opportunities or even very part-time work.

Financially, I will most likely return to work when the kids are in school, but that is just my dream. Maybe DH will have a huge increase in salary by then

[Smplyme89]

In no way did I think you were dismissing SAHMs. Honestly, to cook the type of meals that I would like to, I would need at least 2 hours a day. That includes baking bread from scratch, making sauce from scratch...so not just homemade, but everything from scratch. That is what I would LOVE to do...and it's what I grew up on. And I would not spend ALL day cooking and cleaning I would have time devoted to exercise, Bible reading & prayer, and helping out other moms/elderly in our church. My mom is not nearby, but I would love to be able to help the elderly in my church with things like errands, bringing them to appointments, cleaning their houses, etc. That is what my mom does a lot of now...except she does it with her own mom. Plus, I would LOVE to be a volunteer in my children's school - not their classroom, but their school.

I guess I can see where you are coming from... sort of. I plan to send a lot of my time volunteering, but when I retire not now. I guess my thought process has always been, you work until your well... old Than you get to spend leisure time doing as you wish. Work hard now, retire early, and than have the rest of my years to enjoy myself.

I am pretty sure our different views on this come greatly from the way we were raised. My parents are religious, but not overly so (and I am not at all myself). I have a very "modern" view of the roles of men and women. My mother instilled this in me. I want to stay with my babies when they are little, be home with them, care for them, and cherish them. Being a SAHM calls to me. DH actually pushed it more than me, because he said he'd never seen me happier than when I was at home with Nolan on maternity leave

I also have a drive within myself though, to have a career, and a life outside of the home. Which is why we are having another baby so soon. I can finish school and stay home, all without postponing my career which is very important to me. This conversation has been enlightening for me. I know I sometimes have a hard time processing things out of the scope of my bubble. Especially since I have never actually met someone who stayed home.... indefinitely.

[Flynn08]

A few random questions/thoughts:

1. The discussion here seems to be mostly about the one category that has a number of posters saying that they'd never go back to traditional, paid employment. I wonder how much the choice to never go back (or to leave 100%) has to do with having a career versus a job. I'm thinking that it's alot easier to give up a job and less interesting to go back to one - although, no doubt, there are career women who make the same sahm choices, as well.

2. Would you be adverse to your husband staying home and having the flexibility to set his own schedule (e.g., "do things I didn't have time for before while working full-time"), work paid jobs on occasion, and have no plans to get back into the job market? I know that we have a few women here who are the sole financial providers for their families, but not many. Assuming that you could earn as much as your husband (glass ceilings aside), couldn't your husband be the one to stay home while you go back to the full-time paid position?

3. On the "earning your own money" concept, I won't speak for the other posters who've said that, but for me, the idea is not having my "own money." It's a work-ethic thing, as well as an issue of responsibility. (Which, again, is not said in any way to diminish the contributions of the sahm choice. Just how i see it for myself.) I bring in what i can to the family while still doing most of what is described by many of the sahms in this thread. I'm not there every day and alot of the week is punctuated by work so I do miss out on that time with my son (as does my husband), but I feel that I bring home much more than a paycheck, too.

No question, though, that there is a reality that says that women are significantly more likely to be improverished and even old and poor due to reliance on their spouse's finances. (meaning that divorce or death comes and the woman, who's been out of the workplace, losing all of those years of earning, earning potential, retirement, savings, and job experience, can never regain the footing that she's lost. It shows in the dismal statistics and most of those women didn't intend to end up in that spot, I'd guess.) I don't work to be defensive and my income is family income (not his or mine)... but I'm mindful of the fact that if something unexpected happens, I have a sustainable path to provide for myself and my son.

Overall, I think there are more people who have jobs than careers. I had a high paying career for 15 years before I quit when pregnant. For me that makes the idea of going back to a lower level, lower paying job somewhat undesirable. I was a vp in a large company and I can't do that part time. I can go back to them at anytime but it would certainly be at a lower rank and include less of a lot of things that I worked for. I always wanted kids and I always wanted to stay home with them so before I met my husband (at 36) I had enough to subsidize myself staying home for a few years. I saved a lot of money early in life and it continues to accrue- relieving pressure as to our retirement and how I would survive if we did divorce. My DH also makes more than I did- so our assets have increased together. I think you make some fair points but there are a lot of different situations, as I'm sure you know. There are days that i wish I had my boys earlier but financially it was a huge benefit to have them later in life. I can't be sure what I will want to do when my guys are older, for me that's something that i will have to figure out closer to the reality.

[KC's wifey]

1. I have a master's degree, and had a career. I would happily give it up to have the opportunity to serve my family and others.

2. I am a conservative Christian and the Bible is clear on the different roles for males and females, so we would not reverse it.

3. I have education and experience that can never be taken away from me. I have something to fall back on. We have life insurance policies. I have money saved up. I am not worried about financial issues and am not going to live my life worrying about "what-ifs" I can keep my experience current through volunteer opportunities or even very part-time work.

This is very close to our situation also. I had a career, and it is one I can go back to if needed. Like Lisa, we are conservative Christians who do believe in gender roles. There is no way my DH would ever want to reverse that. He finds great satisfaction and pride in being the income provider. And I get great satisfaction and take pride in providing the kind of home environment for my children and husband that I can only do as a SAHM. I do not feel like I am "getting out of providing" at all. In our marriage, we threw independence out the window. We depend on each other. I depend on him for leadership and income, he depends on me for a peaceful, well run home, and children raised at home with our beliefs. I don't think responsibility and a good work ethic only applies to people who have a paying job, even if they have no children or grown children.

One difference between Lisa and I is that we are not yet financially prepared for anything to happen to DH without my back up career. We are getting there. So if needed, I would and could go back to work if it were necessary for my family, but it would be temporary, especially when the kids are little. Our ideal situation is for DH to work and me to stay home, and we sacrifice a lot to make that happen.

[anonsouthernbell]

If I could take my son with me to work then I would work, which is actually what I do now. I work part-time at a daycare, not my chosen career, but it allows me to get out of the house, have adult conversation, and still spend time/see my son. I am sad that I have to stop working there once this baby is born.

[TripMomma]

I voted other. We are pretty much in this situation now. DH works and it is enough to pay the bills, allow for some fun and big ticket things, but we are not "well off". We have decided that I will stay home until the kids are all in full day school. At that point I will go back to work part time, I will be looking for hours to match their school day, and I will wait until I find it. I love being a SAHM, I am in no hurry to go back to work LOL.

[moosh34]

No question, though, that there is a reality that says that women are significantly more likely to be improverished and even old and poor due to reliance on their spouse's finances. (meaning that divorce or death comes and the woman, who's been out of the workplace, losing all of those years of earning, earning potential, retirement, savings, and job experience, can never regain the footing that she's lost. It shows in the dismal statistics and most of those women didn't intend to end up in that spot, I'd guess.)

There is much I could say in regard to this thread, but I haven't and don't know if I'll ever have time to make a full reply. I do want to make a semi-short comment in reply to the quote above because the anecdotal evidence in my family makes it ironic. I have 8 couples (aunts/uncles and my parents) for examples in my life. All have been married. All but one have had the wife be a SAHM for all the time that their children were preschool age (and for the ones who had a lot of kids, that was a significant time.) The only one who could be considered impoverished is the one who did not stay home and has been working in her career since she graduated college. (Still renting an 800 square foot apartment, only one who borrows money from my grandparents, etc.) She is also the only one that is divorced. She has one child. All the other couples have 4+ children. My mom started working again part-time when my youngest sister started school and did not move to full-time until we had all graduated college. She works in the same position my "career aunt" has now. They are teachers. I have another aunt who also went back to teaching when her kids were all in school and she's now a principal, which would be considered higher up in the career ladder. So the culture that surrounds me, and I know it doesn't apply to everyone, would suggest that I will be better off relying on dh's income while our children are being raised, that I can successfully get back into the workforce if I want, and that I may never have to go back into the workforce (some of my aunts haven't) and still have a completely productive life.

Just for the record, I currently plan on returning to the workforce at some point...but I don't know when and it's not set in stone.

[ibisgirldc]

I think you are forgetting that when you enter into marriage you are entering into a partnership. The terms of that partnership will vary for each family depending on so many circumstances ie: career vs. job of either spouse, salary of both spouses, education, number of children, standard of living, religion, etc.... By someone saying they do not plan go back to work doesn't mean they are being absolved of earning their own way or contributing to the family. Who knows if there are funds set aside for this very purpose within that partnership? If both partners agree and want this for their family? It doesn't automatically mean a woman has fully agreed to be supported by her man for the rest of her life and has no provisions if that doesn't work out.

I'm not forgetting that marriage is a partnership. What you describe is no different than the mutual decision that both the husband and wife will continue to work (paid jobs) after the arrival of the kids. But that second bolded part is just something that I'd neither want nor request... nor understand. I entirely get being a sahm, but when the 'mom' part of it is removed, if my husband is putting in a full work week then (from my perspective and his) so should I.

And on the financial stats, you can look them up. Over 65, twice as many women, compared to men, live in poverty. Close to half of the single mother households are below the poverty line (meaning that their kids live that way, too). We get jobs at slower rates and get less on the dollar when we do. We have less health insurance, private or govt, than men. If everything works out, you beat the stats, but knowing that this is the reality for many women, there's nothing wrong with aligning our choices with long-term best interests for ourselves and our families. Obviously, many of us are doing that, but statistics (again) say that most aren't (whether it's retirement as a couple or what happens after divorce/death). It's not why I work (the paid job) or why someone else should, but it's an elephant in the room that can't be ignored.

[beanpop]

I just agree with Christina on everything As much as I would love to be a SAHM I just...couldn't do it forever. I would have to go back to work at least once the kids were in school.

[kendra76]

Since I am the main bread winner and DH stays home, he knows that he would be screwed if we split up today. But it was a decision that he would stay home with the kids and I would work. My income is 3X what he made, I carry the insurance, etc. I say screw gender rolls, but again it works for us. My DH handles all the house stuff and I take care of the bills etc. he does a great job at home and I have a major respect for those of you that stay home. I just know that I could not be a SAHM.

[macksmom]

I'm not forgetting that marriage is a partnership. What you describe is no different than the mutual decision that both the husband and wife will continue to work (paid jobs) after the arrival of the kids. But that second bolded part is just something that I'd neither want nor request... nor understand. I entirely get being a sahm, but when the 'mom' part of it is removed, if my husband is putting in a full work week then (from my perspective and his) so should I.

And on the financial stats, you can look them up. Over 65, twice as many women, compared to men, live in poverty. Close to half of the single mother households are below the poverty line (meaning that their kids live that way, too). We get jobs at slower rates and get less on the dollar when we do. We have less health insurance, private or govt, than men. If everything works out, you beat the stats, but knowing that this is the reality for many women, there's nothing wrong with aligning our choices with long-term best interests for ourselves and our families. Obviously, many of us are doing that, but statistics (again) say that most aren't (whether it's retirement as a couple or what happens after divorce/death). It's not why I work (the paid job) or why someone else should, but it's an elephant in the room that can't be ignored.

The bolded part has been explained by others - more religious families with traditional roles which both partners find fulfilling. As long as they are financially secure why should anyone else care what they are doing? Trust me I don't get it either (the gender role aspect) and it's not something I would choose, but I think it's a conscious decision made by both parties within their own household. It's really no one's business how or why as long as they are self-sustaining. I don't think they are any more likely to end up a statistic of poor single motherhood than a dual income family.

I wonder what the stats would be on this forum alone of single income households vs dual income households and what their financial provisions look like. There are plenty of 2 income households that do not have a lot in savings, nothing in retirement or college accounts. And it's not because they make low wages....many spend more because they make more. Many are just not educated in finances. Lots of single income families live frugally and save more because they realize living off 1 income can make you vulnerable.

I agree that women need to be smart about money. Especially SAHMs need their own retirement accounts and savings accounts and everyone should have life insurance in case they do find themselves to be a single mom statistic. I wonder about the stats - certainly single MOM households are more common than single father households. I just don't see why you can't align your choices with long-term best interests on one salary. Again, not a choice I would make for myself, but I can understand it if everyone realizes what provisions will be necessary down the line.

[Cosmosmom]

Unless I won a really huge lottery, would keep working. Would love to do it 4 days a week instead of 5 though.

It's a personal decision between a couple but really not working puts you at a huge disadvantage...especially in terms of retirement. Or if a divorce would occur...which of course we don't want to plan for but realistically we should. I'm sure that many of those who have divorced didn't think it would happen to them.

It's also not really fair to ask one person alone to be responsible for everything financially....that is a lot of pressure on someone and I would not ask that of my DH. And after living through one unexpected job loss, I don't know how we would have survived had I not already been working.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/feeonlyp...t-home-parent/

[CoffeeCat]

The bolded part has been explained by others - more religious families with traditional roles which both partners find fulfilling. As long as they are financially secure why should anyone else care what they are doing? Trust me I don't get it either (the gender role aspect) and it's not something I would choose, but I think it's a conscious decision made by both parties within their own household. It's really no one's business how or why as long as they are self-sustaining. I don't think they are any more likely to end up a statistic of poor single motherhood than a dual income family.

I wonder what the stats would be on this forum alone of single income households vs dual income households and what their financial provisions look like. There are plenty of 2 income households that do not have a lot in savings, nothing in retirement or college accounts. And it's not because they make low wages....many spend more because they make more. Many are just not educated in finances. Lots of single income families live frugally and save more because they realize living off 1 income can make you vulnerable.

I agree that women need to be smart about money. Especially SAHMs need their own retirement accounts and savings accounts and everyone should have life insurance in case they do find themselves to be a single mom statistic. I wonder about the stats - certainly single MOM households are more common than single father households. I just don't see why you can't align your choices with long-term best interests on one salary. Again, not a choice I would make for myself, but I can understand it if everyone realizes what provisions will be necessary down the line.

I agree with this completely, especially the bolded part. I find it extremely irritating that it is frequently assumed that just because we have one income that we can't possibly have done the responsible thing and provided for these possibilities in life, especially when I know SO MANY people who make 4x as much and are still living paycheck to paycheck without adequate provisions for the future. If you take DEBT out of the equation, you'd be surprised about what you could live on and save for the future with, especially taking the cost of living differences in different areas into consideration. We also have connections to a lot of different people whose expertise we can use for free or extremely cheap. Plumbers, electricians, car mechanics, etc. We have friends and family nearby who can babysit for free. If that was added to our "income" as money we don't pay that others do, we would make significantly more. Again, can't exactly explain that to people either.

I don't see a single thing wrong with working, as a man or a woman in the relationship, because it works for your family and you need it to be a happy healthy person or to provide enough for yourself, your partner and your kids. I don't look down on moms who use daycare whatsoever. But in discussion of this topic, not just here but irl among my friends and acquaintances, there is always someone in the mix who, in defending their choice to work, makes sweeping statements about everybody who doesn't do what they do, using statistics that don't fit for me and my family. It just isn't fair nor is it helpful in the discussion IMO.

[raspberry]

Before we had our son, we talked about me staying home until the child entered school. I got laid off 6 months before I got pregnant, but I was making more money than dh. If I hadn't gotten laid off, it may have been a different story. However, my dh carries our insurance, so it wouldn't have made sense for him to quit. I love being a sahm to our son. Once ds begins school full time, I will go back to work, either part-time or full-time.

[Smplyme89]

Unless I won a really huge lottery, would keep working. Would love to do it 4 days a week instead of 5 though.

It's a personal decision between a couple but really not working puts you at a huge disadvantage...especially in terms of retirement. Or if a divorce would occur...which of course we don't want to plan for but realistically we should. I'm sure that many of those who have divorced didn't think it would happen to them.

It's also not really fair to ask one person alone to be responsible for everything financially....that is a lot of pressure on someone and I would not ask that of my DH. And after living through one unexpected job loss, I don't know how we would have survived had I not already been working.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/feeonlyp...t-home-parent/

This is how I feel as well.

I keep giggling in my head between this thread and the other one.... Since I keep thinking how many individuals who stay home indefinitey would still collect social security (that they hadn't paid into) and "live off the system".....

[Cosmosmom]

This is how I feel as well.

I keep giggling in my head between this thread and the other one.... Since I keep thinking how many individuals who stay home indefinitey would still collect social security (that they hadn't paid into) and "live off the system".....

This is a good blog post about how staying at home affects social security. http://www.reallifesupportformomsblo...home-moms.html

[KC's wifey]

I don't think its "unfair" to have one person be responsible for bringing in the money. Just as I don't think its unfair for the person staying at home to be responsible for doing everything required to make a home run smoothly. In our house I do all the cleaning, budgeting/bill paying, shopping, child rearing, organizing, appointments, cooking, etc. By splitting the responsibility this way, it means we can both relax for the most part when he comes home.

While I think it is great that women are able to enter the workforce and have an education now, I also think that the volume of two income households has contributed to increasing the standard of living to a point where it is now difficult to live on "only" one income. It can be done, but I don't think it is as easy as it was back when most families lived on one income. The irony is that women who now want to stay at home feel they can't afford to.