how do i convince my husband

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2004
how do i convince my husband
1841
Mon, 07-18-2005 - 4:09pm
how do i convince my husband to let me at least job-share so i can take care of our 3 month old dd? he grew up with his mom working & all his friend's moms working. we can afford it if we cut back on some things, but he doesn't want to cut back & just doesn't understand someone wanting to be a stay at home mom...it doesn't help mycause that the grandmothers will babysit. i'm so unhappy about having to go back to work...he wants me to work full time 1 more year & just doesn't get it! i feel like my heart is being ripped from my chest every time i hink about it.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Mon, 08-01-2005 - 12:19pm

"I really don't think you can compare the work you do now with the work that mothers did 100+ years ago before the technology figured in heavily in the majority of the households."

Again, that is your opinion.

BTW, "housework/work" is not the only factor to be considered here. You seem to be forgetting (or else ignoring) the very real work of "mothering" in and of itself. Why is that?

Do you honestly see a SAHM as nothing more than someone who takes care of the house and the chores? Do you truely view a SAHM as being someone who merely takes care of the grunt work? Please elaborate.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Mon, 08-01-2005 - 12:26pm

"You know, I don't think I know a single mom who actually put their child in daycare for that purpose. Actually, I don't even know a single mom who proactively considers that a benefit."

Exactly!!!

"However it is a very good, factual rebuttal"

I agree, that it is a rebuttal. However, I don't agree that it's a "very good" one. In fact, if you really want to know the truth, IMHO, I think it's really nothing more than an elaborate excuse that ft dual WOHP's use to make themselves feel better.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-11-2005
Mon, 08-01-2005 - 12:36pm

i think you argue a good case wytchy. it's scary to fathom even a little some idea that sahms have no say so in money decisions. if i had to worry about every dollar i spent of dhs or that all i am is some free ride for him to avoid dc costs, i would think trouble in the marriage.

>>don't see him posting here, do you?
yes! too many times all liberated wohms think of is playing on some equal playing field in the form of money only. well put!

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Mon, 08-01-2005 - 12:37pm

<<(continual mother/child contact, exclusive bfing (no bottles), extended bfing, child-led weaning, co-sleeping (no cages/cribs), baby wearing, little to no use of substitute care)>>

"I didn't do any of those things. Please tell me how not doing those things have harmed my children?"

More importantly, could you please explain how the following *benefited* your children?

part-time or significantly decreased mother/child contact

exclusive and/or semi-exclusive artificial feeding (aka formula feeding)

feeding via artificial means (aka bottle feeding)

sleeping in a cage (aka sleeping in a crib)

extensive use of strollers, playards/playpens, swings, bouncy seats, carriers, etc.

extensive use of substitute care (especially care provided by non family members)

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Mon, 08-01-2005 - 12:56pm

<>

"Why is that the point?"

Because it was the second part of a two-part question regarding why people, although quite informed about the research and theories concerning parenting practices, still freely and knowingly *choose* to disregard it.

"Yes they are quite informed on the research and theories....maybe the choose to follow another set of research and theories that are 180 of the first set."

Hmm, perhaps you could provide us with "another set of research and theories that are 180 of the first set," especially research which claims that these types of parenting practices are not only more "natural" but more "beneficial" when it comes to parents AS WELL AS FOR CHILDREN?

"Because of course there is not one true universal set of research and theories that exist for all parents and children."

I agree. "There is not one true universal set of research and theories that exist for all parents and children." Clearly, "many" sets of research and theories exist. However, it is my long standing contention, that "some" sets of research/theories are not only undoubedly more "natural" but more "beneficial" when it comes parents AS WELL AS FOR CHILDREN.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Mon, 08-01-2005 - 1:18pm

<>

"I would think so, at least culturally so, as many many many of us send our young children to preschool, kindergarten and elementary school,"

Ok, let me be quite specific then? Is it *natural* for young children, specifically infants and toddlers under the age of 3, to be in group care, CARED FOR BY SUBSTITUTES WHO ARE UNRELATED TO THEM, FOR LONG PERIODS OF TIME?"

"to not only be cared for by taught by others who are in fact substitutes and are unrelated to them for long periods of time."

1. There is a considerable difference between infants and toddlers vs. school-aged children.

2. THere is a considerable difference between daycare workers/substitute caregivers vs. licensed teachers with college degrees.

3. There is a considerable difference between substitute care provided by daycare workers vs. teaching provided by teachers.

4. There is a considerable difference between full-time day care/substitute care vs. part-time and full-day school.

"We thought it was quite natural to send our young children off to school....did you think it was unnatural and then if you did, why did you do it anyway?"

Yes, I thought it was quite natural to send my child off to school . However, clearly daycare/substitute care is NOT school. What is your point?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Mon, 08-01-2005 - 1:22pm

"Many animals leave their very young offspring in the care of others or alone in a nest while they hunt for food and often for very long periods of time."

Human animals?

"Are you suggesting we should adopt more of how mammals act in the wild or just pieces that seem to fit your debate?

No, not just any mammal. Human mammals.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-21-2005
Mon, 08-01-2005 - 1:24pm

Excuse me for delurking, but is there any evidence at all that children who had mothers who (had continual mother/child contact, exclusive bfing (no bottles), extended bfing, child-led weaning, co-sleeping (no cages/cribs), baby wearing, little to no use of substitute care) have any advantages over children who did not? Are there any adults out there who had mothers who did this? And if so, what is so special about you now?

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-21-2005
Mon, 08-01-2005 - 1:30pm

I WOH full-time and always have. My two dd's were in daycare. I did not breastfeed. They did not sleep with us. They slept in cribs.

They are both in the gifted program in school. They rarely ever get sick. Maybe an occasional cold. They are extremely well-rounded, mature young ladies (ages 8 and 9).

I just don't see how they are disadvanted in any way because of how we have raised them.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-18-2003
Mon, 08-01-2005 - 1:33pm

<>


WRONG. 2 out of 3 of ds' caregivers have had college degrees, one was a licensed teacher and had previously worked for the public school system. She has a master's in OSU's equivalent of ECE. The other one wasn't licensed, but was eligible for licensing. The third one, that wasn't degreed, was in her 4th year of school to get that degree. (not to metion that I don't necessarily want someone licensed to teach as a daycare worker/preschool teacher ... after all,teacher's licenses focus on the educational needs of elementary, middle or high school students.

Choose your friends by their character and your socks by their color.  Choosing your socks by their character makes no sense and choosing your friends by their color is unthinkable.

Pages