Are working moms stretched too thin?
Find a Conversation
| Tue, 06-13-2006 - 2:45pm |
Do you think a mom who works full-time and has kids is stretched too thin?
I was working full-time up till November of 2005. Then I decided that it was all too much. I was exhausted and found that when I did get to spend time with my little guy (he is now 2 1/2) I was very impatient with him because I was soo tired. Also the stress of work often overflowed into my personal life (both with ds and dh).
Now that I have been home for over 6 months, I am finally starting to be more patient and am enjoying my son instead of rushing him along. If he want to take 20 minutes to get into the car - ok, no problem.
So - do you think that trying to juggle work, kids, marriage and all the stresses that come with those things is too much? (I did)
Maybe when my son is older - then I will go back to work and it might be easier because he will be more self-sufficient? Who knows? All I know is that for now, I am enjoying being a SAHM and am glad for the time I get to devote to my son and the lower stress levels (that I believe were very unhealthy for me).
josee

Pages
<>
I disagree.
PumpkinAngel
Sure. You have your experience and I have mine. I spoke from my experience and yes, I've been doing research for a year. Through a combination of my research and mostly my experience, I take my stand pro staying home.
Don't get me wrong...I'm happy to know that for some people as yourself it's been working out just fine. I do agree that an active and involved parent may just make up for the absence. And then, if you're home with your kids when they return from school or you support them in their activities (such as attending games, recitals, ect.) then I don't believe they would feel the impact. The key is listening to the kids and getting feedback. If money gets tight for us and I have to work...I won't feel too bad because I plan to be an involved parent. But I'm hoping my work at home plan is successful.
This forum does take getting used to. I'm often amazed at how heated debates can get--and yet the same posters come back again and again, moving from one discussion to the next. The beauty of this board, though, is that you are challenged to really think about your opinions. I've learned a lot here about views I disagree with--and I've learned a lot about what shapes my own views.
While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, and most certainly should do what you feel is best for your family, I think the point that others have been trying to make to you is, your opinions are based solely on your own experiences. You have the opportunity here to learn from experiences different from your own. That doesn't mean that you'll change your mind and go back to work after your baby is born. But perhaps you'll see that there are living examples of families with DWOHP whose children are perfectly fine with their experiences? It's the difference between believing that YOUR child will benefit from your being at home and believing that ALL children benefit from having a parent at home.
Best of luck, btw, with your pregnancy. And condolences on the loss of your son.
I don't see how that article supports your statement that children with a sahp are better off than those with dual wohp's.
PumpkinAngel
You posted that there were no disadvantages to children who had dual wohps?
PumpkinAngel
Mine are 8 & 10 and it's almost the same thing....mine want to do their own thing and I think that's a really good thing.
PumpkinAngel
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
<>
Yes, I have
PumpkinAngel
Ok, but your tone and the tone of some others on this board is a bit demeaning - but that is my opinion. Yesterday I left, because I was taken off guard. But now, I realize this thread is a bit different than what I'm used to. People seem to be more on attack mode - either that or some people got offended by my opinion.
'How is it old fashioned? Women did have time until the mid 50's due to that technology to spend the amount of time with our kids that we do now.'
Below is a section taken out of a 1950's history article. You can go to the line in case you think I made it up.
"Men were mostly the bread winners, the ones who worked, had careers, and made the money to support the family. Women were mostly expected to stay home and be in charge of the home and taking care of the family."
http://home.att.net/~boomers.fifties.teenmag/1950_history.html
I think it's amazing that I have to support my statement that women staying at home is old-fashioned...I thought most people knew that.
'This is really getting old. I will say this one more time, disagreeing with you is not bashing nor is it hostile, it's debate on a debate board. You don't want your opinion questioned, picked and probed, then go to a support board where they don't debate what is posted.
My facts? History books.'
This is a cop out answer. You can no longer say that I don't support my facts. I just did and will continue to do so because I don't like people trying to insult my intelligence.
Pages