Scenario

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-26-2003
Scenario
934
Sat, 12-06-2003 - 11:17am
I see a lot of stories on this board about sahms refusing to work when their family is in need of a second income.

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

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
In reply to: the_boss_plus
Sat, 12-13-2003 - 4:56pm
"Ideally, that would mean each providing half the care on all fronts because then each would be an equal parent on all fronts." I don't think that's remotely necessary or even particularly desirable. We must define "equal parent" differently. It's much more important that our child gets exactly what he needs from us both than that he get exactly the same amount of exactly the same things from us both. That just sounds like a lot of redundant effort.
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-06-2003
In reply to: the_boss_plus
Sat, 12-13-2003 - 4:59pm
ROFL - this is so amusing from the woman who participates in garagantuan threads about how her child is ahead of her peers, said peers dragged said child down and the insistence that she works in order to make her children better people by having a higher SES.

The irony is jaw dropping.

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-02-2003
In reply to: the_boss_plus
Sat, 12-13-2003 - 5:36pm
Yes, higher SES is better. Your point is??? Are you suggesting that my dd is ahead of her peers because I WOH?
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-02-2003
In reply to: the_boss_plus
Sat, 12-13-2003 - 5:39pm
Nope, just offering a possible alternative explanation based on what I see. If you see it differently, go ahead and make your case. What I see fits with what I hear on this board. There ARE MSAHM's out there who treat motherhood like a competive sport. If I were one, I'm sure my dd would be an A student. She's not because I'm not. All I'm saying is mothers pushing their kids to fill their own agenda is a very plausible explanation of a difference in grades seen based on moms working status. And it is. My point is that correlation does not imply causation. It is highly likely that something else is causing the difference. From where I sit, that very well could be moms who push their kids harder to build their own self esteem. If you disagree, state your case.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-29-2003
In reply to: the_boss_plus
Sat, 12-13-2003 - 5:40pm
and you have certainly MISSED the point. HOW can you say that one must ft sah to raise kids -- and YET, your kids are not (or will not be) home ft once they start school???? are you not seeing the irony here?

OR is it that kids are FT raised by the age of 5? which is about as stupid a notion as that which says that you have to sah ft to raise kids.

eileen

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-02-2003
In reply to: the_boss_plus
Sat, 12-13-2003 - 5:42pm
Why not? I don't want my kids to be followers. I want them to be leaders or at least able to be their own person without having to follow someone elses lead. I consider self sufficiency a very postitive trait. I want my kids to think for themselves and if that means they get into mischief now and again, so beit. No, compliance isn't a good thing. Not in my book.
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-06-2003
In reply to: the_boss_plus
Sat, 12-13-2003 - 5:45pm
No, I am suggesting that we may, based on my experience, have a case of pots and kettles.

I am suggesting that based on things you have said her your ego is tied to your child's academic perfomance and that you do what you can to enhance their performance by WOH. Your ego being tied to your child's performance/accomplishments and your working go hand in hand.

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-06-2003
In reply to: the_boss_plus
Sat, 12-13-2003 - 5:49pm
And higher SES is better than what exactly? And how is it better? Define better. Define the better person in terms of SES.

Obviously the opportunity discrepencies between the poor and wealthy are apparent - but what about the 10k discrepancies?

This is something that came up in conversation today at the school, as I sat with my less better peers.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
In reply to: the_boss_plus
Sat, 12-13-2003 - 5:50pm
<<>>> This is an excellent point, HOWEVER, when those little hormones hit......they can turn on ya (and with ds1, i took *no* responsibility for his obnoxious behavior!!! LOL). then when those little hormones level out, if they have turned, they will "come back home". ds1=perfect example.
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-18-2003
In reply to: the_boss_plus
Sat, 12-13-2003 - 5:51pm
Hmmm, where would your kids be while attending those conventions and seminars?

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