Full-time Nanny with SAHP - Why?

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-28-2004
Full-time Nanny with SAHP - Why?
1258
Tue, 02-10-2004 - 6:41pm
Something I've often wondered about, but never had the opportunity to ask. Why do SAHM or SAHD need a full time nanny, especially when they aren't working from home. I can easily see the need if the SAHP is a WAHP, but what is the logic for a full time nanny otherwise?

Any comments?

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-19-2003
Sun, 02-15-2004 - 3:09pm
I'm not assuming that. In fact, in a previous post to you, I said that there probably *aren't* that many SAHMs who do this. However, I do know one personally and she tends to skew my view on these matters. And I agree with your "typical SAHM w/nanny" description.

My points have been that:

1) I don't understand why a SAHM needs a FT nanny to pursue self-fullfilling activities. This doesn't mean I don't understand why a "typical SAHM w/nanny" needs/wants her nanny.

2) You can't compare the FT childcare of a child of a "choose to work WOHM" to that of a SAHM w/a FT nanny who uses that nanny so she can pursue self-fullfilling activities 40 hours/week. This doesn't mean that the former is not comparable to a SAHM who does these activities PT or to a SAHM who volunteers her time.

But IMO, a child can tell the difference between mommy going to work, spending her time volunteering and helping others or taking some "me time" for herself AND mommy leaving to spend all day doing frivolous activities. IMO, a child will (rightly so) feel like a lot less of a priority in the latter situation.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-19-2003
Sun, 02-15-2004 - 3:17pm
>>Are they more noble then a SAHM because they are using childcare while they work?<<

Nope.

Like my post said, all the choose to work WOHMs I know are not like this. They may get some self-fullfillment out of their jobs, but they also use the money earned from their jobs to better their FAMILY, not just themselves.

The women you are describing are not typical "choose to work WOHMs." I don't see these women as any different than a SAHP who leaves their child with a FT nanny so they can pursue strictly self-fullfilling activities.



Avatar for mygriffin
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-28-2003
Sun, 02-15-2004 - 4:17pm
You don't need to justify anything to me. YOU'RE the one who said taking two 6mos to the store is hard, hence, a reason for needing a nanny.

I don't care about nor judge you for having a nanny for any amount of time.

<>

Does that mean that SAHMs with twins and help are NOT doing hard work?? Because that's what's implied by that statement.

Avatar for mygriffin
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-28-2003
Sun, 02-15-2004 - 4:24pm
I'm not critical, I guess I just don't understand the point of BEING a SAHM if you're not doing it to spend more time with your kids.

I'm sure this is because of what I think being a SAHM is all about. To me, there'd be no reason NOT to work if I wasn't spending all the extra time I could with my kids.

Avatar for mygriffin
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-28-2003
Sun, 02-15-2004 - 4:27pm
So that person gets no better SOL, no insurance, no retirement, no savings??? Basically, her salary is going straight to pay the daycare?

I guess that's working for purely self-fulfillment. She must really LOVE her job....

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-19-2003
Sun, 02-15-2004 - 4:36pm
It's "A-typical" for a choose to work WOHM to make an income that doesn't increase the family's SOL? All of her money is going towards childcare? None is left over for retirement, health insurance, to help pay the bills?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sun, 02-15-2004 - 4:36pm
I don't see why being a SAHM has to be all about the kids, it wasn't for me. As a matter of fact when I first became a SAHM it was not even called that. Then I refered to as a housewife or homemaker. When did the change happen that the children are at the center of all decisions?
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-19-2003
Sun, 02-15-2004 - 4:36pm
Should've read your post first!
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-02-2003
Sun, 02-15-2004 - 5:47pm
Yes, I know people whose salary goes primarily to daycare. One example would be a social worker friend of mine. She likes working and didn't want to take time off thereby losing seniority. She is climbing the so called *corporate* ladder. Her husband makes more than enough to satisfy their lifestyle. She is working purely for self fulfillment. She employs a full time live in nanny and most, if not all, of her salary goes to the nanny. In my current situation, my employment will more than likely COST me money. I am not doing it for personal fulfillment however.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-02-2003
Sun, 02-15-2004 - 5:48pm
Yup, yup, and... yup.

Pages