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
Some parents really aren't on the same page about what's important for their kids, whether it's parents' school involvement, sports, what have you. Some parents actually are on the same page, but what they have in mind involves role definitions, as in, yes, it's important to be involved at the kids' schools, but it's the mom's responsibility.
But what's puzzling to some of us is the idea that SAH is important because of the huge time commitment that good parenting entails (for parents who believe so) while the WOHP somehow manages to parent well enough in far less time.
When this is challenged, the response is usually more or less that it's too bad the WOHP isn't around more often, but it's worth it because of the benefits of SAH. Which leads to the obvious question of why it wouldn't be better (if *best practices* is the aim) to somehow allow that absent WOHP more of that all-important time with the kids, perhaps through dual WOHP's.
Good thing we have the board to help us figure it all out ;-)
***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"?***
IMO "Helping to raise" puts the person on the same level as the parent- with the same responsibilities etc. "Helping the *parents* to raise" puts a person on the level of being an assistant to the parents- who are the ones doing the raising. Does that make sense?
***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.***
'Helping to raise' doesn't seem any different than 'co-raising' where I'm sitting.
Wytchy
Am I part of that 4, because if I'm not, make it 5.
Wytchy
***Could we still raise them? Absolutely. But not the same way in which we would like to. Kind of the same thing you were trying so say about what would happen if your "village" dissappeared. Right?***
That's what I thought but she's repeatedly disagreed with that one.
Wytchy
i will respond here - in gerneral, and overall, yes i am more intimately involved in their lives. but there are times and on certain things that others are more intimately involved. i spend an incredible amount of time at my daughters school, but monday thru friday 8-3:30 i would say that her teacher is more intimately involved in her education than i am - after all, she is there for those hours i am not. and yes, i do consider educating my child as part of raising her, and the teacher is definately helping raise her as she is providing something for her that i can not (i say can not because i do not beleive in homeschooling for my children) and no, i dont buy that once she leaves this grade that teacher will fall by the wayside, her teacher from last year is still involved in her life on a daily basis. i think this may have something to do with whether or not the parent cultivates a true friendship with the teacher, which is something i normally do (though not always), where the relationship then goes beyond that of student/teacher.
my older daughter has a band director she has worked with for 3 years now, he is certainly more intimately involved with her on her music career and because of the time they have spent together over those years has become not only a music director, but is comfortable going to with other issues and someone who has taken a huge interest in her and how her life turns out. and yes, i feel he is definately helping to raise my daughter, he is helping to mold and shape the person she is becoming, things i feel are part of raising my kids.
if someone is taking over a part of your childs life do you really not feel that person is helping to raise the child.
Jennie
I don't see the difference, and I'm not the only one. Helping means just that, helping. Not taking primary responsibility but assisting. No equality of footing implied.
When you read the print on a product, say a tube of toothpaste, it says "Helps fight cavities". It doesn't claim to prevent all cavities, only that it "helps". In the same way, if I'm having trouble as a parent, I might consult with a counselor or child development specialist for help in parenting. I might even continue to consult with that person on an ongoing basis. If the advice I get is helpful, I don't think anyone could deny that person is helping me to parent. But that in no way suggests that professional is co-parenting with me.
I would suggest that rather than rely on this dubious distinction you're making, you might as well just say you think parents in their role of carrying primary responsibility are way, way more important than any kind of help they could possibly get. Probably, you've already said that in one way or another. And probably, you also get it that lots of parents don't see parenting that way at all.
"Which is pretty similar to my comments to what would happen if my village changed as well. KWIM?"
Yes, I do know exactly what you mean and agree completely.
Jennie
Pages