Why is it wrong for the wife to stay home.

[LadyPaniolo]

Did I miss something??????

Much of my post was in reference to BillzBacker's comments.

 

[Princess4real]

you are using someone like Lionel Richie who is crazy rich compared to the average person. Half of his assets gives a woman millions of dollars and thousands of dollars a month for alimony. His kids go to schools that cost 50G a year, his wife is used to squandering thousands of dollars a month on nothing... maintaining that lifestyle would require him to pay a lot of money, so even tho the woman has less money overall she still has enough to maintain a cushiony-enough lifestyle.

Put into average American lifestyle context, where people live paycheck to paycheck, kids go to public school and and the reality that most husbands of SAHMs are middle to working class (annual salary of 30-100G) a year...those women arent going to recieve nearly enough in alimony and child support to live at acceptable standards and afford to maintain the livelihood of their children becase the man only makes but so much in the first place. This leaves these women by the wayside to find means of employment to sustain living and providing for their children because the husband still isnt pay enough money for you, your children, your mortgage, bills, health insurance, food and all those other things.

And like I said before, employers dont want to hire soeone that has little work expereince or hasnt worked in years. At best these ex-SAHMs are going to be forced to take entry-level positions, positions usually people that just gradated from college or underpaid positions with crazy labor for little salary. They arent qualified to be the "boss" in many instances. How do you provide a life as a single mother then when you have 2-4 kids, bills, insurance but u only make 30G a year and only receive a few hundred a month from ur ex-husband. Thats some serious struggling that woman is gonna be doing.

Real talk!!! Y'all better listen!

 

[dlewis]

I think the concept of "Whatever makes mom happy is best" is ludicrous.

I remember a thread about child molestation. Poster after poster said "I was molested in daycare". It happens ALL the TIME. So if Mommy is spending the day at work, while her child is being raped or beaten, and Mom comes home "fulfilled" and smiling from ear to ear, the child is benefitting. I don't think so.

I understand what you are saying but is it better for a mother to be forced to stay home with the kids and she abuse the kids?

Abuse is never right, in any situation. Thankfully my children were surrounded by family at the daycare center they went to and I was the type of mother who checked on them often.

 

[Spidergul]

I think the concept of "Whatever makes mom happy is best" is ludicrous.

I remember a thread about child molestation. Poster after poster said "I was molested in daycare". It happens ALL the TIME. So if Mommy is spending the day at work, while her child is being raped or beaten, and Mom comes home "fulfilled" and smiling from ear to ear, the child is benefitting. I don't think so.

Is that fair?-Nevermind, I saw you were referencing something.

 

[LadyPaniolo]

Is that fair?

It happens all the time. Even in the less violent situations... you have neglect happening. Nobody but family LOVES your child. I guess that's where I disagree with some of you. Some of you feel like buying xyz for kids is more important, I feel like children can thrive in poverty if they KNOW that they are LOVED.

People really want to believe that whoever they are paying (less than minimum wage, most times!) to raise thier kids loves them. Let that paycheck bounce and see how much "love" is left for your kids.

You know what, with that, I'm out. You either get it or you don't. Your kids are either worth the sacrifice, or they are not. It's just that simple.

Peace.

 

[BillsBackerz67]

1. Andrea Yates killed her children because she had a severe psychological disorder, not because she was a SAHM. Wow. I've heard people say this mess before and it blows my mind. How can you say you love your children if being in the presence of your kids more than 3 hours a day could bring you to infanticide?

2. If we want to talk about children who are wild and out of control, then we will have to examine the FACT that children raised in daycares are more likely to be aggressive and violent than those raised by thier parents.

3. Everyone has bad days when thier kids are wild. Why do working moms complain so much about how hard it is to take care of thier kids, that they would kill themselves or kill someone else if they had to be in the company of thier kids? Because they are little angels.

4. Please dont' pity SAHMs. I pity any woman who has been so damaged, so broken inside, that she cannot even love her own children. My god. What did you have kids for if you hate them so much? I dont' think I'd even kill George Bush if I had to live with him. Let alone my own kids...

I'm sorry, I just can't even be in this convo.

you sound completely angry and annoyed for no reason. If im miserable and depressed being home all the time how is that BEST for my children? I can say millions of times over nd over again that my kids are benefitting but you cant help the way you feel. Thats all Im saying. If you enjoy being at home 24/7 then do YOU.

 

[barbiesocialite]

is it better to live on food stamps and government support and having the emotional and mental strain of wondering how ur gonna have enough money to pay a partiuclary bill or not being able to give your children certain things because you cant afford it.

Good parenting is not all about just spending time and loving children. Living cost money. When you are broke and struggling that sorta thing takes a heavy toll on one's individual and familial stability. NOTE: Id like to add that the number one reason for divorce is financial reasons.

Sometimes good parenting requires some people to work. Other times being a SAHM and devoting time to your children is a better parenting method. It depends.

again, most SAHM are not married to well-off spouses so sometimes working and not-working are never better than the other. Its a preference.

 

[BillsBackerz67]

I think the concept of "Whatever makes mom happy is best" is ludicrous.

I remember a thread about child molestation. Poster after poster said "I was molested in daycare". It happens ALL the TIME. So if Mommy is spending the day at work, while her child is being raped or beaten, and Mom comes home "fulfilled" and smiling from ear to ear, the child is benefitting. I don't think so.

The same can be said about fathers and uncles molesting children even when the mom is in the household unfortunatelyerplexed I was watching courttv and the girl who killed her father said that her dad used to moelst her in the den while the mother was cooking dinner. when I hear of molestation cases most of the time its a trusted family member rather than an outside source.

 

[barbiesocialite]

The same can be said about fathers and uncles molesting children even when the mom is in the household unfortunatelyerplexed I was watching courttv and the girl who killed her father said that her dad used to moelst her in the den while the mother was cooking dinner. when I hear of molestation cases most of the time its a trusted family member rather than an outside source.

so true... most cases of molestation and rape happen by family members or someone close to the family

 

[BillsBackerz67]

It happens all the time. Even in the less violent situations... you have neglect happening. Nobody but family LOVES your child. I guess that's where I disagree with some of you. Some of you feel like buying xyz for kids is more important, I feel like children can thrive in poverty if they KNOW that they are LOVED.

People really want to believe that whoever they are paying (less than minimum wage, most times!) to raise thier kids loves them. Let that paycheck bounce and see how much "love" is left for your kids.

You know what, with that, I'm out. You either get it or you don't. Your kids are either worth the sacrifice, or they are not. It's just that simple.

Peace.

and sometimes the sacrifice means going back to work because you cant make ends meet. love dont fill the belly unfortunatelyerplexed

 

[~~HoneyComb~~]

It happens all the time. Even in the less violent situations... you have neglect happening. Nobody but family LOVES your child. I guess that's where I disagree with some of you. Some of you feel like buying xyz for kids is more important, I feel like children can thrive in poverty if they KNOW that they are LOVED.

People really want to believe that whoever they are paying (less than minimum wage, most times!) to raise thier kids loves them. Let that paycheck bounce and see how much "love" is left for your kids.

You know what, with that, I'm out. You either get it or you don't. Your kids are either worth the sacrifice, or they are not. It's just that simple.

Peace.

Not true, there are millions of children being molested by family members unbeknownst sometimes by the mom, there's a sick world out there and we can't think that just because a child is surrounded by family that they are safe.

 

[Spidergul]

It happens all the time. Even in the less violent situations... you have neglect happening. Nobody but family LOVES your child. I guess that's where I disagree with some of you. Some of you feel like buying xyz for kids is more important, I feel like children can thrive in poverty if they KNOW that they are LOVED.

People really want to believe that whoever they are paying (less than minimum wage, most times!) to raise thier kids loves them. Let that paycheck bounce and see how much "love" is left for your kids.

You know what, with that, I'm out. You either get it or you don't. Your kids are either worth the sacrifice, or they are not. It's just that simple.

Peace.

It sounds more like you are mad at WM's than WMs are at SAHMs.
Like you are trying to make the rest of us who either choose or have to work feel guilty for not staying at home. erplexed

 

[Cinda2503]

Everything in life isn't black or white. 90% of people do not want to see a child be neglected or abused. I, for one, was not talking about a situation where abuse was involved. Iwasn't thinking about a child being abused.

Being a parent is the very definition of sacrifice. Some people don't get this concept.

Personally, I would want to stay home with my children until they were school-aged. I am a teacher so we would be on the same scheldule and I wouldn't have the need for daycare.

Abuse (verbal, physical, emotional) can happen with to anyone from anyone - including family members. So I don't neccessarily think leaving children with family will prevent abuse from happening.

Obviously, there are some deep-rooted personal issues which can cause people to feel strongly about the issue of sahm's.

I am still in support of doing what is best for you and your family. Extra backgound checks and due diligence must be practiced as well as hope/prayer when picking a child care provider (i.e. the man you choose to have children with as well as the people taking care of your children when they are away from you).

 

[JustKiya]

And sometimes the sacrifice means going back to work because you cant make ends meet. love don't fill the belly unfortunatelyerplexed

That's very, very true - and I don't think anyone is knocking a woman who has to work in order to provide her children the necessities of life. It's a sad indication of how little parenthood is valued in this country, that while it's 'okay' to take advantage of gov't subsidized childcare/daycare, it's a horror and an indication of 'laziness' for a woman to get food-stamps and take care of her own kids. *shrug*

Of course, I've always held that the gov't would rather that we not take care of our own kids, because then it's easier to shape them into little drones and clones of each other, used to marching to some 'authority' figures drum, without the time or freedom to do their own thing and learn to think for themselves...... but that is a different thread, I suspect.

But for the women who don't have to work...... well, that's a different story.

 

[Princess4real]

It sounds more like you are mad at WM's than WMs are at SAHMs.
Like you are trying to make the rest of us who either choose or have to work feel guilty for not staying at home. erplexed

See how I could have turned out if I would have been a stay at home mom? j/k

 

[SparklingFlame]

you are using someone like Lionel Richie who is crazy rich compared to the average person. Half of his assets gives a woman millions of dollars and thousands of dollars a month for alimony. His kids go to schools that cost 50G a year, his wife is used to squandering thousands of dollars a month on nothing... maintaining that lifestyle would require him to pay a lot of money, so even tho the woman has less money overall she still has enough to maintain a cushiony-enough lifestyle.

Put into average American lifestyle context, where people live paycheck to paycheck, kids go to public school and and the reality that most husbands of SAHMs are middle to working class (annual salary of 30-100G) a year...those women arent going to recieve nearly enough in alimony and child support to live at acceptable standards and afford to maintain the livelihood of their children becase the man only makes but so much in the first place. This leaves these women by the wayside to find means of employment to sustain living and providing for their children because the husband still isnt pay enough money for you, your children, your mortgage, bills, health insurance, food and all those other things.

And like I said before, employers dont want to hire soeone that has little work expereince or hasnt worked in years. At best these ex-SAHMs are going to be forced to take entry-level positions, positions usually people that just gradated from college or underpaid positions with crazy labor for little salary. They arent qualified to be the "boss" in many instances. How do you provide a life as a single mother then when you have 2-4 kids, bills, insurance but u only make 30G a year and only receive a few hundred a month from ur ex-husband. Thats some serious struggling that woman is gonna be doing.

I used Lionel as an example. I know hes not the every day situation.

Most people who have one person who is the primary bread earner is not living a pay check to pay check situation. As least I hope not anyways.

Of course if that is the situation, then no, a woman is not going to be eating grapes and getting massages all day if she gets divorced b/c 10 to 1 she wasnt doing that anyway.

If the couple breaks up, then the courts are going to give the bulk of the money and the belongings to the wife and the man usually gets the short end of the stick which is where the phrase "Its cheaper to keep her" comes from.

Not all SAHM are unemployable, have no job experience, no education, and no degree having women. There are plenty of women, like myself, who can go out right now and get a good paying job with excellent benefits. Mnay SAHM have degrees, sometimes more than one. If my husband left me right now, I wouldnt be hurting at all, but he would. He knows that. We have talked about this very thing lots of times.

The family court system favors women and children in most situations is my only point.

 

[Princess4real]

That's very, very true - and I don't think anyone is knocking a woman who has to work in order to provide her children the necessities of life. It's a sad indication of how little parenthood is valued in this country, that while it's 'okay' to take advantage of gov't subsidized childcare/daycare, it's a horror and an indication of 'laziness' for a woman to get food-stamps and take care of her own kids. *shrug*

But for the women who don't have to work...... well, that's a different story.

Joyousnerd did!

ETA: She even ran out of the darn thread because she started getting upset! I'm like WTH?

 

[Crackers Phinn]

4. Please dont' pity SAHMs. I pity any woman who has been so damaged, so broken inside, that she cannot even love her own children. My god. What did you have kids for if you hate them so much? I dont' think I'd even kill George Bush if I had to live with him. Let alone my own kids...

George wouldn't make it if it was me and him under the same roof.

 

[SleekandBouncy]

It seems to be the topic of debate no matter what circle of women I'm in. It often comes down to one woman's choice offending another woman because she doesn't make the same one.

The bottom line is this. Research and my anecdotal observations show that children benefit greatly from at home parent during their formative years. It has various benefits including a parent with a direct opportunity to monitor the child's development and behavior whereas many families live in separate universes or exist after 7pm when mom and dad have returned from work, giving them 30min to prepare dinner, and 20minutes to discuss all the going ons of their children (often interrupted by the TV).
Not all women can or wants to be SAHM, but by admitting truths ppl are better able to compensate even if they decide not to be a SAHM. Everyone is different.The question is are you willing to make that sacrifice for your child and if not do you have a good plan to juggle kids and work? Are you putting fanciful self interest above your kids or would you genuinely be miserable, can you compromise and do part time? These are all questions that aid a woman in deciding what's best for her kids and herself.

As to not wanting to be dependent. Everyone should put aside something for a rainy day and a SAHM is definitely served by initiating a family savings pot. Should he go bat crap crazy you should have savings, alimony, perhaps even a pre-nup, and a portion of that joint account to fall back on. Truthfully speaking, if I were a mother and my sole reason for not being a SAHM mom were concern my DH might/could/wanna leave me high n dry then why even be married to him? That's like sitting down to urinate and half pissing. I'd rather not sit.

 

[JustKiya]

Joyousnerd did!

I suspect her, and mine, definition of 'needful things' that would force someone to work outside of the house is VERY different than most peoples.

*shrug* But I don't want to speak for her.

 

[SparklingFlame]

It seems to be the topic of debate no matter what circle of women I'm in. It often comes down to one woman's choice offending another woman because she doesn't make the same one.

And there you have it.

This is the basis for any and all debates.

If you dont see things my way then you are the devil and vise versa.

 

[ccd]

ok with all that you guys are saying. Than for example the whole real housewives serious on bravo. I see the threads and replys everywhere saying not so nice things about those wives that stay home. Than i can't judge them because i don't know there situation.

I think the women on that series have strange personalities.....their egos are HUGE....and I think they get crtiticized cause what 's that all about; they act like the did something spectacular to get what they got ....The husband is doing the work that enables the lifestyle....they need to relax and be thankful that they are so blessed...instead of acting like their "Hole is the Pot of Gold" and the reason why they are where they are.....I'm sure other women were in their positions and
a- didn't do enough
b- Lost the dude
c- couldn't deal with alllll that goes with being with an athlete


The arrogance is atrocious....

 

[JustKiya]

It seems to be the topic of debate no matter what circle of women I'm in. It often comes down to one woman's choice offending another woman because she doesn't make the same one.

The bottom line is this. Research and my anecdotal observations show that children benefit greatly from at home parent during their formative years. It has various benefits including a parent with a direct opportunity to monitor the child's development and behavior whereas many families live in separate universes or exist after 7pm when mom and dad have returned from work, giving them 30min to prepare dinner, and 20minutes to discuss all the going ons of their children (often interrupted by the TV).

And - to me, that's the thing. Period, bottom line.

Ain't nothing wrong with someone not being able to give their child the utter best in all things - hell, that's part and parcel of life - you can't get all you want, and sometimes, that means you can't get more than 45 minutes of face time with mom a day.

But lets keep it real, with ourselves and each other, that while we might be giving them OUR best, it ain't THE best - often due to external circumstances (like a light bill that needs to be paid) that we cannot control or avoid.

Subtle, yet crucial difference.

 

[MD_Lady]

Te'TahHead really is right to a certain extent.

Being a SAHM is giving up a serious portion of your power and personal autonomy; mainly because if these women wanted to get divorced or leave they cant. I mean, they physically can if they have will power to leave if their marriage is making them miserable, however, that wouldnt be financially sound at all. Since they were a SAHM, leaving these relationship situations would mean they would now need to find gainful employment and pay disporportionate amount of family/child costs. One thing I learned in a few business communication classes, as well as working on current women's issues is that women that stay home for long periods of time, degree'd or not degreed, have more difficulty finding a job than women who have been working. Employers dont want to hire someone that has little to no work experience, esp if they havent worked for ten years. That is a burden for companies because these women are under qualified for the positions these former SAHM think they are entitled to. A lot of women dont really see some of the dangers that being a SAHM could potentially cause if they were to become widowed or divorced.

My career path was actually chosen for SAHM motivations. Thats def why I would work at least pt from home (but attached to a normal company-- for me that would be teaching online courses for a university which is EXCELLENT employment) to save and stash away money because with divorce rates and life being unpredictable, you never know. I can't give up that much of my personal autonomy and put my livelihood completely in the hands of someone else. That wouldnt be smart at all.

My mother is a SAHM and not only has she always talked about this, your point is one of the main reasons why she feels women need to think hard about their choice before leaving the workforce. The truth is, not every man is going to provide a woman with the best environment for becoming a SAHM (and no, money is not the only factor here). Many (not all) women jump at the opportunity to become a SAHM because they see it as an early retirement, a break from the "rat race", and/or a chance to "do them". What they don't realize (something else that my mother has always talked about) is that it's a job with it's own set of pros and cons just like one outside of the home.

 

[dlewis]

I think I'll start a thread tom on how to balance children, working and wifing. I want to see how others do it.

I spend 4.5 hours with my kids during the week. More on the weekend.

But I wonder how that compares to the SAHM. I mean even though she's at home is she spending the same amount of time with her kids or more.

 

[SparklingFlame]

I think I'll start a thread tom on how to balance children, working and wifing. I want to see how others do it.

I spend 4.5 hours with my kids during the week. More on the weekend.

But I wonder how that compares to the SAHM. I mean even though she's at home is she spending the same amount of time with her kids or more.

In my situation I spend 4 hrs with each one Mon-Friday. Less on the weekends.

 

[JustKiya]

My mother is a SAHM and not only has she always talked about this, your point is one of the main reasons why she feels women need to think hard about their choice before leaving the workforce. The truth is, not every man is going to provide a woman with the best environment for becoming a SAHM (and no, money is not the only factor here). Many (not all) women jump at the opportunity to become a SAHM because they see it as an early retirement, a break from the "rat race", and/or a chance to "do them". What they don't realize (something else that my mother has always talked about) is that it's a job with it's own set of pros and cons just like one outside of the home.

So very true.

As I was just saying in DLewis's thread about Status, I think that SAHM presents the wrong picture - it should be considering a WAHM, because anyone who has taken care of a child for any period of time knows that it's WORK.

And as most SAHM's aren't in the financial arena that would allow them to farm out the housework/home management - that's ANOTHER job, right there.

It's usually not even vaguely all about sitting on your butt, watching soaps, eating bonbons - some do, but most are working like you wouldn't believe.

 

[JustKiya]

I think I'll start a thread tom on how to balance children, working and wifing. I want to see how others do it.

I spend 4.5 hours with my kids during the week. More on the weekend.

But I wonder how that compares to the SAHM. I mean even though she's at home is she spending the same amount of time with her kids or more.

A day, or across the week?

 

[SparklingFlame]

So very true.

As I was just saying in DLewis's thread about Status, I think that SAHM presents the wrong picture - it should be considering a WAHM, because anyone who has taken care of a child for any period of time knows that it's WORK.

And as most SAHM's aren't in the financial arena that would allow them to farm out the housework/home management - that's ANOTHER job, right there.

It's usually not even vaguely all about sitting on your butt, watching soaps, eating bonbons - some do, but most are working like you wouldn't believe.

Kiya SAHM work day is 20 hrs a day.

Sometimes I long for a 9-5.


Your post is on point.

 

[JustKiya]

Kiya SAHM work day is 20 hrs a day.

Sometimes I long for a 9-5.


Your post is on point.

And you don't get sick days, or vacation time - unless you have a fabulous and doting extended family around that you actually trust to leave your children with who are actually within driving distance of you, which most families also don't have, as they've moved all over the country chasing the paper that gives them the option to stay at home. *sigh*