Are mega hours ok if you have a SAHP?
Find a Conversation
Are mega hours ok if you have a SAHP?
| Wed, 06-18-2003 - 11:00am |
This is kind a a spin off from the equalty and careers thread. I have been reading many posts from the thread about SAHPs who have spouses who work lots of hours. Is it OK for one spouse to work 80 hours a week (assuming it's his choice), as long as there is a SAHP with the kids? Is it OK to to be a workaholic or career driven and come home at 10pm and leave the house at dawn because you have career goals that require those kinds of hours? Is that fair to the kids and ultimately fair to the relationship between dad and the child to assume the position that as long as mom is home, dad can be gone all the time?
Personally, it would make me crazy to have my dh at work 100 hours a week, regardless of my employment status. Crazy because I wouldn't want to have to handle everything that pertains to home and kids and crazy worrying that the kids were not developing a close relationship with dad. There is something to be said, IMHO, for dad beng the one to show up at some of the parent meetings, events, etc.
My bro commutes to NYC daily. He leaves at 4:30am and doesn't get home til 8-9pm every night. He misses just about everything having to with his kids and does not even get to eat one meal with them during the week. That would make me nuts.
Is it ok to have an absent parent if the other parent is a SAHP?
Susan

Pages
Hollie
That is almost EXACTLY what I said to my son this morning!
The inability of other posters here to understand that there's a way to strive to meet my children's needs without becoming a doormat. It's called balance.
If it's between lunch and dinner, and dd1 is getting a snack, then she can offer ds and dd2 one. . .if they're hungry they'll accept. . .if not, oh well.
Look, I think it's great that you liked having a working mother and that you're close. I don't think I ever stated in my OP that you can't work and be close to your kids. What I vehemently disagree with are people to whom possesions (things like the big, huge house and bazillion dollar car) are more important than time with their children. The people whose need for materialist things comes before their kids. And that is what I was commenting on in my OP.
Christi
Virgo and cyndi and I have made this argument a hundred times ... but here goes again.
Say a family, with only dad WOH, would be about $10K short of what they need to pay their bills and live in a modest house. Mom obviously NEEDS to WOH. She cannot get a pt job that would bring in $10K after child care costs. So, she has to work ft. However, she's qualifed, skilled, intelligent and educated enough to make $40K. So, she now has $25K left over (after child care costs). She takes that $25K and buys a nice SUV, invests in a college fund, and they have a home with an extra bedroom and a pool.
On the surface, it might appear as though she didn't NEED to work. It might appear as though she were only working for "things." But, there's a very good possibility that she isn't. I mean, what is she supposed to do? Take only $10K for a $40K job because that's all she NEEDS? Is she supposed to NOT spend that extra $25K because she'd only be spending it on THINGS?
I, personally, don't know of A SINGLE WOHM who only works for things. I'm sure they exist. However, they are RARE. And you can't take the poor judgement of that rare woman and project it onto all WOHMs, or, even, onto one whose financial picture you haven't seen fully.
Hollie, who although I used to be a Choose To WOHM, is not a Have To WOHM
Because, apparently, time on the job is more important to *your* husband than time with his family. If he is working 80+ hours a week away from the family, then I would say HIS priorities are pretty screwed up.
Is he digging ditches for a living @ $5.00 an hour, and working 80+ hours a week is the only way to put food on the table and keep a roof over your head?
Pages