Scenario
Find a Conversation
| Sat, 12-06-2003 - 11:17am |
Well picture this scenario and tell me if you think it's appropriate for this mother to stay home-
As a single and childless woman, she always lived frugally, and worked hard. He is the same way- both the husband and wife manage to get out of debt and save up a few thousand dollars by the time they meet. They date for a couple years (or whatever amount of time YOU think is reasonable for a couple to date before marrying). By the time they get married, their combined savings is at 8,000 dollars. As a childless couple, they continue to live frugally and work hard. His income goes to pay the rent, utilities and necessities while all of her income goes into her savings. They have a few setbacks here and there like car repairs or illness or emergency out of town trips. But altogether, they manage to save up say, 20 grand by the time their first child is born X amount of time later. The husband gets great insurance at his job. They are already used to living off of his income anyway since her income was mostly going into savings. There is still no credit card debt and no auto loan debt. This being said, is it TOOOOO much to ask for this woman to stay at home for at least a couple of years, maybe between 3-5 years to take care of the baby at home? What if she planned on going to work once the child or children got to elementary school, and just wanted to stay home for the baby years? Is that reasonable?

Pages
Oh brother ... where to start?
<<and it always amazes me that you post the SAME thing every time. >>
That's because she believe so strongly in what she posts. Her story is consistent. That's a positive thing.
<<They were being watched, guided, disciplined, fed, loved on, etc... by SOMEONE else.>>
Does this thought threaten you? I'm glad my children are watched and guided by others. I'm glad they are loved by people other than me. Its wonderful to be loved on by multiple people. Its one of the great pleasures in life.
<>
If there's not a difference to notice, then why would she? I observed dd's Kg and 1st grade classmates closely; there wasn't a correlation between the behavior of those with WOHMs and those with SAHMs. The most aggressive, misbehaved child in the class had a SAHM. The 2nd most misbehaved child (a pretty decent mental bully)
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.
Huh? What posts did you read?
<> Ummm, where do you get that from? She didn't say a word about having had a hard life or being dealt anything difficult.
<>
Yeah. Tell that to the thousand of experienced, educated men and women out there who have no Christmas presents for their kid because they can't get a job.
<>
You actually tell your kids they can be perfect? Talk about setting them up for a fall. No one IS or CAN be perfect. They can be their best.
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.
"I don't know very many of us who feel qualified to teach our children properly up thru 12th grade, but I would hope we all feel qualified to raise our children at home ft. Do you see my point"
How are earth are you going to be raising your kids ft when your kids are in school if your assertion is that parents who use dc are not raising their kids ft? Out of curiosity, if you always knew and planned for having a ft SAHP for the kids, how is it that you failed to plan for being able to homeschool them should the need arise? I always considered the possibility for homeschooling to be one of the benefits of having a SAHP. Things happen, school problems come up, children sometimes do better with homeschooling. Having a parent who would be capable of handling homeschooling would seem to me a critical part of planning for a long-term SAHP in the family.
Laura
<>
Not only have they NOT suffered any "ill effects" from dc, but they THRIVED and it was a true POSITIVE -- 'AND it was IN ADDITION to our care.
as for being in the minority about that -- NO, i think you are sadly mistaken and very, very far off. I think kids that "suffer ill effects from dc" are few and far between and i would venture a guess that their home lives suck too.
I've known many, many kids who have attended dc -- my own, neighbors, nieces, friends' kids -- and NONE, not a single one has ever suffered these mysterious "ill effects" of dc. And no matter how many times you say it, it won't make it come true.
<>
and so what's the DIFFERENCE -- other than sah vs. woh -- and how does that translate into a difference between our children? and why do you automatically assume that "different" equals "worse", NOT just "different"?
and i mention that i raise them FULL TIME because that is what i do. Around here, we call it being a MOM. Imagine that!
<>
OMG! NO, please tell me it can't be true! ROFLOL! SO WHAT? they were watched, guided, disciplined, fed, loved all by their providers for 8 hours per day -- THEN they came home and they were watched, guided, disciplined, fed and loved by their parents for 16 HOURS per day. Sounds like pretty lucky kids to me.
<>
well if you take the position that raising them is ONLY about time then i can see what you mean. but most good parents KNOW that "raising" kids involves so much more than just time. I'm surprised you haven't figured that out yet. AND part of raising them involved finding wonderfully warm, loving, responsible caregivers for them while we were working.
and of course raising them includes meeting all of their educational, social, emotional, health and religious needs.
<>
i can, i have and i do. WHY is that different? I have slept by hospital beds for weeks on end -- and cried when my daughter was in PICU because they wouldn't let me sleep next to her (i slept in their visitor room/bed down the hall). I have traveled around the world for my middle dd (who had a gene therapy procedure in New Zealand). It's ALL part of parenting. I'm amazed that you seem to dismiss it out of hand, but maybe you haven't had to deal with the extent of illnesses, hospitalizations and doctor visits that we have.
<>
No differences, but it doesn't surprise me that you see a difference. Personally i think you see what you want to see. the differences i see have EVERYTHING to do with the kind of parenting the kid gets vs. mom's work status.
<>
if they can make these judgements about the children in their care, i would question their abilities as teachers. I'm surprised that they don't relate these behaviors back to PARENTING -- where it belongs.
<>
and it's NEVER occured to your friends that kids that are aggressive or shy -- JUST might be that type of personality? it's NEVER occurred to them that it might be due to the way their PARENTS interact with them or they type of parenting style they have? I'd say that your friends fall far short in their observation and conclusion skills.
<>
i don't need to LOOK for a difference that isn't there. and no, i can't imagine having ANY better children whether i stayed home or not. they've had the benefit of my PARENTING which goes far above and beyond the fact that i'm a teacher.
<< I know you say they don't, but have you ever REALLY taken a critical eye to it? J>>
what's to look critically at? the way they are turning out has NOTHING to do with my work status. interestingly, i've always been able to look at my kids critically and have been much often complimented on how well i KNOW my kids -- the good AND the bad -- and yet, not one of those people have ever seemed to think that the "bad" (you know, typical kid stuff like sibling rivalry) comes from the fact that i hold a job.
<< I hope you are a lucky minority who raised good, well adjusted kids in spite of...>>
what a sad, sad view of wohms and dc kids. the minority? HARDLY. wohps can and do raise good, well adjusted kids every day -- NOT "in spite of" dc -- partly because of dc and the greater part (the vast majority) of GOOD PARENTING.
i truly hope that if you have a dd she never decides to be a wohm and use dc. it would break her heart to have a mom with such a nasty, judgmental attitude. would you think that your grandchildren would be in the "minority"?
eileen
"However, I don't see vast benefits of homeschooling over private, catholic shools, and I certainly don't see homeschooling as a benefit of sahparenting, as you put it."
I don't necessarily see homeschooling as offering vast benefits over a decent education (public or private) at a school either. In some cases, with some children, homeschooling is the best option. In many (if not most) cases, children benefit from a good school setting. But it seems pretty darned hypocritical to me to go on and on about the vast risks putting a child in dc poses when one is perfectly happily prepared to send their children to school, where the risks are just as great....you claimed that you HAD to send your child to school and therefore it is worth those risks, unlike parents who choose dc because they don't HAVE to send their child to dc. And that is patent nonsense, you don't have to send your children to school anymore than I have to send my children to school/dc. You choose to do it because you see your children gaining something from it, just as I choose to send my dd to dc because I see her, along with the whole family, gaining something from it. So what is the difference?
Laura
Laura
No, SAH is not an automatic indicator that one puts their children first. That is not the primary motivation of every SAHP nor is it the outcome of the action. Even the ones who can "afford" it.
Pages