Help! Husband pushing me to find job!

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-04-2006
Help! Husband pushing me to find job!
1529
Tue, 11-07-2006 - 10:35am
My husband has just taken a leave of absense from his high paying 80 hour a week job to focus on being home more and finding out what he really wants to do. He is now working 3 days a week at a job he really likes. He always said if he took this job he would find another part time job to supplement the income. I am working weekends and babysitting during the week, but my income is a joke. Our kids are 5 and 3 and cry every weekend when I leave. My problem is this: my husband has put no effort in finding that 2nd job he said he would find and is pushing me to work full time. I want to be a stay at home mom, but it may mean him going back to a job he hates. He says the kids will adjust, get over it. Am I being selfish or lazy for wanting to stay home? Is he being selfish for leaving a good paying job?

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Thu, 02-08-2007 - 6:54pm

I never said it wasnt healthier though. If I thought either way was fine, I wouldnt have been freaking out at the idea of an epidural and gone 22 hrs with a sunnyside up baby in me, no pain meds at all.

My point was that lambasting women for not being *strong enough* does nothing but make people who were unable (for whatever reason-medical community is certainly a big part of it, I dont disagree with you there) to go unmedicated feel bad.

I can run for over 2 hours on a rutted trail without stopping. I challenge anyone to tell me that I just wasnt aware enough or secure enough in the power of my body to go without meds. I think its patently unfair to make that kind of generalization, which was what I was trying to say.

dj

Dj

"Now when I need help, I look in the mirror" ~Kanye West~

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2004
Thu, 02-08-2007 - 11:28pm

Exactly. If we simply added "where possible" or "when good sense renders it feasible" to many of the statements, it's perfectly fine.

I just think sometimes people get caught up in ideology and forget common sense. That pretty much applies to most debates LOL.

If we simply said "my preference is to XXX where good sense renders it feasible" there really wouldn't be much to argue though.

Mondo

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-13-2006
Thu, 02-08-2007 - 11:38pm
i agree that everyone should have the option to choose what works best for them. but different choices dont relate to making or not making ones children a priority. ihave been both a wohm and a sahm, my childrens priority in my life is not based on work status. they didnt become a higher priority when i sahm or a lower priority when i woh. to say that a sahm is making her children her priority is fine as long as you accpet that her children are no more a priority to her than the children of a wohm are to her.
Jennie
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2004
Fri, 02-09-2007 - 12:10am

i do hear a lot of "i'm happier sah.." or "this is something i'd rather be doing because i don't have to woh.."
-------------------------------
I actually don't find anything offensive with that. I suspect some of your SAH friends' husbands would love to SAH, too, if they only had a choice in the matter.

Mondo

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-09-2006
Fri, 02-09-2007 - 3:06am
Misdemeanors, mostly. Probably no felonies. ;)
iVillage Member
Registered: 02-07-2007
Fri, 02-09-2007 - 7:32am
I hope there was nothing in my post that implied that working or not working outside the home somehow relates to how much of a priority one's children are. I certainly did not mean to imply that. I agree with you.

~Ghostwriter, M.A.


iVillage Member
Registered: 01-15-2006
Fri, 02-09-2007 - 7:58am

eh,no...many of us are very happy in our elements - sahm/wohd.

and i'll tell you what,i never realized how alone i wasn't wrt job losses,career gains that have forced many moves until i started meeting other sahms just like me who've been transplanted becuse of their husband's jobs,too...i suppose we could have just stopped moving,i could have started woh which would have required reliable dcp arrangements but i don't consider that the best arrangement for our family.




Edited 2/9/2007 10:05 am ET by egd3blessed

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 02-09-2007 - 7:59am

I think the healthiest of all is for both mother and baby to survive without serious injuries or lasting psychological trauma.

I had a midwife, hot showers, food and drink, bla-bla-bla, and yet dd and I would both have died had we been laboring with the coven back in the potato field. Had I been given pain relief sooner I might also have been able to think about having another child without getting cold sweats and nightmares.

Women's bodies can do a lot. Women also used to die like flies from childbirth, and their babies used to die and/or be born with injuries.

We owe one of the finest monuments in the world to the dangers of childbirth:

"In 1631 his second wife died during the birth of their daughter Gauhara Begum, their fourteenth child. Shah Jahan was reportedly inconsolable. Contemporary court chronicles contain many stories concerning Shah Jahan's grief at Mumtaz's death; these are the basis of the "love-story" traditionally held as the inspiration for the Taj Mahal."

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 02-09-2007 - 9:23am

"...(midwife, jacuzzi for pain relief, different pushing position, eating and drinking during labor, no rules about anything) they very well may have been able to."


No thanks.

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

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 02-09-2007 - 9:26am

Either way IS fine.

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

Pages