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
I'm staying out of the snarkiness of these posts, or trying to, but I had to put my two cents in on the above.
Hollie
Susan
as to the rest, if your post was only about one person you know irl, then you shouldn't have suggested that it had something to do with wohps--eh? because if all you are talking about is a single individual, then how can you rope unrelated people (in this case sahms) into it? i suppose she's also white, but you didn't put off her materialism on her race, eh? i suppose she's also protestant, but you didn't put off her materialsm on her religion, eh? and on and on. either you are talking about one person, or you are talking about a category of people, and you can't--as you have in this thread--switch back and forth as it conveniences you. it was pointed out that your dh fits the same standard of material-grabbing as you accuse your friend of, but rather than use that information to feed insight you lashed out with insult.
but more than that, it seems worth pointing out that your "friend" apparently has a dh. why is she materialistic and he immune from your judgement. again, many people here, unlike you, feel that a father is an important person in a child's life. forgive the psychoanalysis here, but it seems obvious that your "friend" and wohms "like her" isn't the topic you are exploring here at all. it's not that she works, but that her work gives her something that you begrudge her--eh? otherwise, wouldn't you care more that your own children's father spends twice the time away from his own child than that your "friend"--someone who isn't even part of your household--spends away from children totally unrelated to you and yours?
I don't think I lashed out when someone called my DH materialistic, but I do think I pointed out his motivation for working the hrs he works. Nonetheless, I continue to have insults piled upon me for my lifestyle and my OPINION.
I'm not jealous of my friend at all. I LOVE MY LIFE! I'm grateful that I'm able to stay home w/my DS and consider myself very lucky that I can. I said in my OP that I didn't understand why anyone would want to work when they could SAH with their kids (which brought the "you've never had a meaningful job then" arguement, and yes, I have, but it wasn't as meaningful as raising DS--nothing is). So again, I go back to the different strokes theory. However, I do think that my IRL friend is wrong and I won't back down from that. Do I think ALL WOHMs are wrong and EEEVIL? Of course not, and I've never said that I do. C
Post 578. <
And, how do you know what my husband's priorities are? PPPFFFFFFTTTT. Are insults all you can come up with? Try harder next time...and maybe I'll take the bait. >>
Post 586. <>
Shoot, even yoru first post seemed a bit snarky to me, what with all the emphasis on teh word WANT and FT.. Post 45. <>
Post 629. <>
Post 697. <>
Post 642. <>
Post 596. <>
Post 613. <,A zillion? Really, was it a zillion? Because, *sigh*, funny, I don't remember seeing it ONCE in all the post that I have read from you. Seems if you said it a zillion times it would have been in at least one that I read. oh well....sigh.... >>
Need I research more? All of those have an air of snarkiness about them, IMO. Some obviously more than others.
However, I do say that you're being snarky doesn't make anyone else's being snarky right.
Hollie
Pages