Heart vs. Head: The work status decision

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Heart vs. Head: The work status decision
2102
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?

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-15-2006
Mon, 01-30-2006 - 10:31pm

>>>always resort to this based on the fragmented comment you have posted, I am sure you are happy to provide detailed posts that support<<<
are you denying that you've ever brought a sah/woh debate to the level of comparing the sahmom to the wohdad pka?

>>>you or your situation. Why are you taking this so personally?<<<
lol. i love to respond to a public message board from the perspective of my own little, personal world..aren't you the one who pulled another poster to the carpet for not having any *personal* experience related to some nanny argument? surely you must understand the connection.

>>>like a pity party...well, if sahm is raising the kids, then wohd is left in the dark and disattached from raising the children. sniff....why pumpkingangel does it always lead to that? >>

I don't know why you are thinking that way. Nothing I have said supports that, nor do I believe that. Perhaps you can enlighten the board and me<<<
the enlightment will never come from me. but do know that i'm not the only one who doesn't find the art of raising difficult to grasp here and the perception to which you seek answers (like "where does the wohd fit in..") does come across as sympathy hence the pity party i used.

>>>actually that very issue has come up with each transfer that dh has been offered and that we have turned down, largely in part because of our large network. <<<
so in all fairness pka, you really don't know what you would do if that *network* disappeared tomorrow. do you? as a mother to children who have witnessed more moves in probably your lifetime and mine both, being raised is much more personal than some network of outsiders who can't guarantee that same interest (tomorrow).

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-13-2006
Tue, 01-31-2006 - 8:55am
i agree completely and i feel 100% certain i never said it had anything to do with woh or sah - i am a sahm.
Jennie
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-10-2006
Tue, 01-31-2006 - 1:17pm

I'm trying to insert my foot in my mouth, but it just isnt working ;>

Avatar for myshkamouse
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 01-31-2006 - 11:52pm

I think it depends on the babe. My DS would switch from boob to bottle with not much of an issue once he was strong enough for both. DD on the other hand refused bottles for the first 7 months or so of her life pretty adamently. She got easier all of a sudden around then and went back and forth no issues till I stopped nursing at 13.5 months.
DS at around 12 months wouldnt nurse anymore at all.

MM

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-04-2004
Wed, 02-01-2006 - 7:44am

Perhaps I should have said that I don't recall reading it or that I may have skimmed through it and not caught the part you were talking about. Still doesn't make a difference as to the point at hand in regard to making an absolute statement.

Wytchy

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-04-2004
Wed, 02-01-2006 - 7:45am

That's a fair answer. Thak you.

Wytchy

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-04-2004
Wed, 02-01-2006 - 7:52am

I don't see *anywhere* where you've offered anything other than what was written. Even when I addressed it, you never said 'that's not what I meant' or anything of the sort. If that's *not* what you meant- just say so and I'll happily accept that and drop it. If it *is* what you meant, then expect to continue being called on the false statement as often as you defend it or bring it up.

As for the rest- no- and far from it. Actually I think that my stopping breastfeeding was the best thing for myself and my children. I feel I'm much more closely bonded to them and was certainly able to enjoy them more during that time. So no- I'm certainly not defensive about something I consider a beneficial and more enjoyable (for me) choice LOL!

Wytchy

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-04-2004
Wed, 02-01-2006 - 7:55am

My point is not that one isn't greatly benefitted by having the aforementioned resources, my disagreement is *solely* with the statement that one *couldn't* raise their children without them. Now if one were to say that they *couldn't raise them in the manner they think is best*? OK- definate agreement there. But saying that one can't raise them without (insert whatever here) is like me saying "I can't raise my children if I don't SAH with them." See the point?

Wytchy

Avatar for mom34101
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Wed, 02-01-2006 - 1:16pm

I see. So you mean when you said you hadn't read the post I was responding to, that was false?

I stand by my original statement that it's not an easy feat to get an exclusively bf baby to switch to the bottle. Of course there may be exceptions to that rule, but that doesn't negate the generalization. And perhaps if you hadn't insisted my statement was "false," while ignoring the post I responded to, in which jennie said that a bf baby can be switched to the bottle "at any time," I might have responded differently. But of course, you didn't bother to read that, even when I pointed it out and quoted the exact language for you.




Edited 2/1/2006 1:17 pm ET by mom34101
Avatar for mom34101
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Wed, 02-01-2006 - 1:19pm
Read the post I responded to, and consider why *that* generalization (which is not true) doesn't bother you, whereas my statement that "it's not an easy feat to switch an exclusively bf baby to a bottle" does.

Pages