Heart vs. Head: The work status decision
Find a Conversation
Heart vs. Head: The work status decision
| Tue, 01-17-2006 - 1:03pm |
Did you make your decision to SAH/WAH/WOH ft/pt based primarily on objective/tangible factors, or with your heart?

Pages
While that's partially true, in that I would never consider raising a child without such influences in his life, I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about his outcome. His outcome was not possible if I were the only influence as he grew up.
You haven't been saying that.
Karen
" says, "Navy makes a very strong statement." I guess so. It says, "I'm boring." Or, "I'd like this job here at the bank.""
Jeff @ TelevisionWithoutPity, Project Runway
Karen
"Veronica: "I hate fake deer too. Every time I see their stupid fake-deer faces I want to grab a shotgun and go all Cheney on 'em." Sure, but since fake deer don't talk, they won't
Can I ask a question here?
PumpkinAngel
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Perhaps I am not clearly stating my question?
PumpkinAngel
I think all Lois is saying is that 6 weeks is recommended to be sure that supply is not compromised. If it is more important for someone that the baby takes a bottle before x weeks and that person is prepared to accept that problems may ensue (breast refusal, drop in supply etc.), then of course one can start bottles earlier.
The thing is, a lot of women who use bottles earlier than 6 weeks are quite suprised to find serious trouble (often the baby prefers the bottle and refuses the breast, and supply is compromised). It won't happen to everyone, but it does tend to happen. It's a matter of weighing the pros and cons. If one is determined to bf long-term, the chances of success will be very much increased by waiting until at least 6 weeks before introducing a bottle. If long-term success at bf is less critical than making sure the baby comfortably takes a bottle, then it may well be worth the risk to start bottles ealier. Does that make sense?
"Does that mean the sahp is the one raising the children while the wohp is not?"
Absolutely not. My DH is a very devoted father, who plays a big part in raising our kids. However, I personally do not believe it would be possibe to be the mother I want to be and still WOH. In addition, while DH loves his career and knows that it is a vital part of raising our children, he would trade it in to be a SAHD if my income would have supported it. We both thought to would be nice to trade off as primary caregiver to the kids, alas, our finances do not cooperate with our *dreams*.
I guess in my case SAH is more about *me* and being the mom I want to be. Maybe I'm simply lacking the ability to coordinate WOH and parenting to my standards. I dunno.
Edited 1/28/2006 7:30 pm ET by snoopyme
Pages