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
Where in that post did I say I didn't understand it?
PumpkinAngel
So what are you asking?
PumpkinAngel
Because we are all individuals, not carbon copies.
X may be a better parent if they SAH.
Y may be a better parent if they WOH.
For Z it may not make a difference.
I have seen where people have posted that SAH makes them a better parent, I have not seen anyone post that SAH makes everyone a better parent.
***You consider 3hrs a day and what 10 hours awake on the weekend to be large amounts of time?***
Large amounts of time was your phrase, not mine. But I'd say it's alot more time than any other adult spends with our children, or that we'd be comfortable allowing them to spend with our children given their ages- yes.
***Is this interaction time or just time spent at home?***
Mostly interactive time. He gets home at 5, we have dinner together as a family, he plays with the kids while I clean up and do some things around the house- then we have a bit of family time and start the bedtime routine. If he's had a bad day he might hit the cave a bit early, but for the most part, he spends what time he has with the kids (and me). His family is his life.
***I mean one can be home mowing the lawn (or whatever) and not actually be spending time with the kids, kwim?***
Right- I agree, and fair question.
***If they don't? Or once a child hits elementary school and they are no longer paying a nanny/daycare?***
I'm speaking primarily of pre-school aged children, remember? I've stated numerous times that there is essentially no difference between a WOHP/WOHP, WOHP/SAHP household when it comes to children that are school aged. Whether one is at home doing whatever one does or working while the kids are in school doesn't matter. (Unless one is or wants to behomeschooling).
***No, actually that's not true at all. Except for the homeschooling, there is no difference.***
I believe there is- your children are significantly older than mine, correct? Therein is your difference.
***Horning in? That's an interesting way to look at it, I guess.***
It was meant to be humorous or flippant. As it is now, he enjoys a good deal of one-on-one time with the kids. If we both WOH it would almost *all* be shared time- and that's not good or bad, it just is.
***Great, mine does as well. I was just letting you know your general statement about sick days is not really true for all.***
Sure it isn't- but it's something that many WOHP's have to deal with when both spouses are WOH. Would you disagree?
***Ah, the grammar police have arrived. I really don't think you want to get into a discussion of what are common debate tactics or not, I personally would like to actually stick to the debate at hand and not bring this down to a personal level.***
This isn't personal AT ALL- I am merely stating the simple fact that your posts, when stated like that, come across as rhetorical questions. No policing- just telling you where the miscommunication comes into play. If you intend for it to be rhetorical, then that's fine and expect it to be taken as that. If you *don't* intend for it to be rhetorical, then it would be a good idea to think about that when you post such things. It has nothing to do with making anything personal or debate tactics- it's a simple matter of clarity of speech. If you want to be understood- take the advice. If you don't- don't. If you want to make it personal- that's on you because it's not at all what *I'm* doing here.
***Because honestly, I don't give a fig about what you think my common debate tactics are. If you don't like my style you are more than free to ignore any and all of my posts, but I am not going to change my style to please you.***
It has nothing to do with pleasing or displeasing me. I don't give a fig *how* you post. I am ONLY telling you that what you posted comes off as a rhetorical question.
Wytchy
***Weren't you the poster commenting to another poster that you don't put all posts to memory? FWIW, I don't put all posts to memory....so forgive me for not remembering the dozen other times that you have told me that you could go to work for your father.***
No problem.
***Should of/could of/would of has nothing to do with the here and now.***
Sure it does in that we planned for us to be in this position, doing what we're doing- we didn't just happen into our lifestyle due to lack of planning, unexpected pregnancy, etc. etc.
***None of the above. I simply forgot that you could go to work for you father if you wanted to tomorrow and be able to replace the majority of the income your dh is currently making.***
That's fine and I'm sorry for jumping on you for that. I totally understand that one. I just thought that since we've talked about it at length more than a few times that you'd have remembered it. No problem.
***What does that have to do with anything?***
You asked about my ability to go out and replace DH's salary tomorrow. I merely said that even if I were now WOH that I might not be able to do that. A job search often takes at least *a little* time.
Wytchy
"Interesting. Do you think he would be willing and still consider himself a good parent if he was the sahp and you the wohp?"
Absolutely. We would both feel just as pleased with our situation if our roles were reversed. We want a SAHP for our kids, not a SAHM per se.
<>
So what is the big difference between "helping to raise" and "helping the parents to raise"? In the case of "helping to raise", the word "helping" would seem to imply that someone is being helped. Who would that be but parents? How's that different from "helping the parents to raise"?
Helping to raise puts one on equal footing? Since when? Co-parenting, co-raising, terms like that might suggest an equal footing, but "helping"? No way.
Seems to me you're trying here to support your argument by making distinctions without differences.
This statement you made may not have any inference when read alone.
"I really have never kept a score card, but I would say yes I believe it's better for children to have two very hands on active parents who do a equal (but often different) hands on stuff with the kids.."
However, the fact that this statement..."So you think spending more time with the sahp is better than either equal hands on time? Interesting."...precluded it, denotes that a SAHP/WOHP situation and one of equal hands on time are two different things to be compared to one another (ie: *not the same thing*)
Maybe you didnt *mean* to make that implication, but it is most certainly there. You cant compare A (SAHP) to B (child with two active hands on parents) and then say you arent making a comment about work status affecting parenting.
i tend to agree with your post to a point. what i dont buy is that if one is a crappy wohm parent then by becoming a sahm they are going to magically become a good parent and vice versa.
and while not necessarily in this thread, but definately on this board, i have seen people post that to be a good mom one must sah - and it is that sentiment that for me raises the question then how can their spouse be a good parent when they are not following their own edict. and they all claim what wonderful involved spouses they have - yet moms who woh cant seem to be involved, only dads. while i find that sentiment interesting i also find it very hypocritical.
Jennie
>>I have seen where people have posted that SAH makes them a better parent, I have not seen anyone post that SAH makes everyone a better parent<<
yes yes. ita.
Pages