Change Up

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2007
Change Up
518
Mon, 03-22-2010 - 5:33pm

On a debate team, one has to be prepared to debate *either* side of a specified subject area.

So, what points from the "other side" do think have merit. Are there any points that you haven't seen that you think would be hard to counter?

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-09-2009
In reply to: tryingtoquit
Mon, 03-22-2010 - 8:09pm

This is a great idea.


The problem is, from my perspective, is that most of the mom's here are not on one *side*, but have a philosophy that what works best for the family is what the mother (and father) should do.


That said:

********
Ducky

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-22-2009
In reply to: tryingtoquit
Mon, 03-22-2010 - 8:59pm

I have a ? You have five kids right?

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2007
In reply to: tryingtoquit
Tue, 03-23-2010 - 9:58am

Since I am more of a "whatever works". I'll give both sides.

I think the Msah side has a point when they say young children need to have quantity time with a parent. For one, I think it goes for both parents. How much that time is really depends on the individual child. I think the amount of time needed diminishes as the child ages, with an uptick during the "puberty" years. In fact, it was one of the reasons I quit to sah- so both DH and I could have more time with each of our children. Initially, DH took a less demanding and more secure job and I negotiated a part time arrangement. We saw a problem when DH was out of the house more than 60 hours per week and I was out of the house 45-50 hours per week. This was doable, but not great, with one child. Having a second child increased the number of hours we needed with our children. It was balanced when DH was out of the house 50 hours per week and I was out of the house 30 hours per week. If other more unusual issues hadn't developed, we would probably still be in this scenario - and loving it. YMMV.

The main "issue" I agree with on the Mwoh side is that my ability to earn a decent salary has diminished significantly during the time I have quit. I am at risk of DH (or me) having a personality change that results in the big D. To mitigate this, I have kept up with contacts in my old industry. I have also developed some new skills. No guarantee I would be able to find a job, but our area has historically low unemployment and I think I would be able to find something within a year. With half the equity in our house, I would be able to afford a two bedroom condo in the boys' current school district and I would be able to live on half of our retirement savings. It wouldn't be as fun, but it would be doable.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-22-2005
In reply to: tryingtoquit
Tue, 03-23-2010 - 10:25am
I love this! I don't know what side I'm on, though. I'll have to think about this some more.














iVillage Member
Registered: 01-09-2009
In reply to: tryingtoquit
Tue, 03-23-2010 - 10:36am

Well...


With my first, I probably could have worked.

********
Ducky

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-22-2009
In reply to: tryingtoquit
Tue, 03-23-2010 - 10:52am

One thing that the MWOH ignores in the "work to protect myself in case of divorce" is that WOH alone is not any protection.

A wife in a dual WOHF situation that lives paycheck to paycheck with lots of debt would not fair very well after divorce (especially if they were in what I think is a very common situation, the DH the main bread winner, the DW a much lower income).

A wife in a SAH/WOH situation that lives way below their means and has a lot of money put away would do fairly well after divorce. (Unless the DH is a real scumbag and does illegal things to hid/keep the money away from her).

Having two incomes is not protection. Handling the income you have smartly no matter how many sources it comes from is protection.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-22-2009
In reply to: tryingtoquit
Tue, 03-23-2010 - 10:52am

~In fact, it was one of the reasons I quit to sah- so both DH and I could have more time with each of our children.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2007
In reply to: tryingtoquit
Tue, 03-23-2010 - 11:06am

Very true. Which is why I feel comfortable taking the risk.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-22-2009
In reply to: tryingtoquit
Tue, 03-23-2010 - 11:20am

I never looked at it that way befor until recently. I also totally agree with you.


If I was to get a divo dh would

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-08-2009
In reply to: tryingtoquit
Tue, 03-23-2010 - 11:32am
The best argument I have ever heard for SAHM is the time issue -- there really is a value in spending a lot of time with young children. But I don't think it's a binary issue, that SAHMs have a lot of time to spend with their kids and WOHMs don't. Spending a lot of time with my kids was a priority with me and I had a career that allowed that to happen. If I were dissatisfied with the amount of time I'd had with my kids when they were small, I'd have switched careers or become a SAHM.

Pages