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
***Yes, sahm2lb said something along those lines about her being better suited for domestic duties and her dh being better suited for career aspirations. So I am guessing by your statement that you believe dh to be helping to raise your children is based on his income? I am sure there is more to that than just income and the privilege of allowing to you to be a sahm and not have to work.....that is what I am getting at and I am not talking specifically in anyone's particular case but a more general broad question.***
Absolutely there is more to it. However, it's simply not a hard thing to realize that generally speaking a SAHP spends far more time and does more with the child/ren *because* they are a SAHP. Does DH raise our children? Absolutely. But I spend more time with them. That doesn't make him (or any other WOHP) a bad parent. It just means that SAHP's tend to get more time with their kids. Either parent would tend to get FAR more time with their children than any of the above persons outside of said family.
Wytchy
"So then what do you think the difference is between the sahp who couldn't raise their kids in the manner they wish without being a sahp and the working parent who doesn't have a problem doing so? Interesting that they are both also in the same family."
Actually as I stated in an earlier post, my DH is not 100% ok with his contribution WRT *raising his kids*. He would LOVE to take a turn at being a SAHD, and I would LOVE for him to be ble to do so. However, we literally could not afford to live on my income alone. The are little differences in our parenting preferences, however, we do have to live within the reality of our limitations and that means only I can SAH.
"See, I said something very much like this in another thread. That when I was a sahm, it was for me and for my reasons. I was slammed by a poster."
I'm sorry that happened to you.
***Up to a point, but this is getting ridiculous. And I find it very curious that you found nothing to complain about the op's original statements that "a nursing baby could be switched to a bottle at any time," which is simply not true, yet you claim that me pointing this out is "false" unless I add a disclaimer that there is an exception to every rule.***
Actually I don't recall reading the OP's statement.
***My feeling is that you keep trying to make this discussion into something about you and your situation, when it isn't. It's about whether mom has an advantage when it comes to nurturing a breastfed baby. You didn't nurse your babies, so nothing I've said is about you.***
First of all- no- this has nothing to do with me personally nor am I taking it to mean as much. My sole purpose for responding at all was merely to correct the inaccuracy of the statement.
Wytchy
<>
ITA. I had a "bf counselor" in the hosptial tell me to start intorducing obttles early to get her used to it and it completely wrecked bf'ng for me. It is recommended to wait 6 weeks for the supply to be established. There are exceptions to the rule but it is iresponsible for anyone to tell a mother it is no big deal when to introduce a bottle.
if i didnt have all the help raising my children that i do what would happen to them, well, they wouldnt cease to exist, i certainly wouldnt give them away - BUT - they would not be as happy or as emotionally healthy as they are, they would not be as well rounded as they are, they would be much more limited - they would in effect be totally different people than who they are. and for our family that is not an acceptable way to raise our kdis. my daughter wouldnt be the math whiz she is if it werent for a particular teacher who has worked with her and spent countless hours with her because both of her parents are basically math dunces. she wouldnt be the accomplished baritone player she is without the countless hours of her band director, personally i cant even get a sound out of a baritone. and while these people are helping her with their areas of expertise they are also becoming friends and people she can count on and depend on to help her in other areas if the need arises, the are imparting values and perspectives, different from those she receives at home. they have deep concern for her, not just as a student but as a person and they guide her accordingly. those are some of the reasons i consider them to be helping to raise her.
as to rural areas, i live in a very rural area, we moved her 2 1/2 years ago and i have made it my mission to cultivate the people who are helping to raise my kids. so living in a rural area did not negate the need, for us.
Jennie
Jennie
Sorry, but my younger dd wouldn't, and I have several wohm friends who struggled with babies who never took a bottle. No mom I know would be willing to risk dehydrating her baby to the point where she would take it rather than starve to death, so I don't see that as a viable option.
In any case, none of this changes the fact that breastfeeding is critical to nurturing a breastfed baby. If you could switch him to a bottle, he'd then be a bottlefed baby--then bottlefeeding would be critical to nurturing him.
Pages