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
Hollie
http://attach.prospero.com/n/docs/docDownload.aspx?guid=7E117344-D332-46AD-A2B2-30B19FAEACCF&webtag=iv-pssahwoh
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.
and what about moms like me who sah with her children, but the clinical depression worked me. going to woh, was the best thing for *all* of us.
how can you make a blanket statement about what is good for our children across the board, when every single situation is different.
i did not raise my children by studies but by instinct, and at 21, 20 and 16 i will venture to say, dh and i did a damn good job! and it had nothing to do with my work status(of course we all know dads are exempt from criticism, as they have penises!)
Edited 12/13/2003 6:57:31 PM ET by almostfreeof3
it was march of 2000, which means my ds1 was ready to turn 18. i came home and said, "hey, kids, mommy's going to be home with you all summer!!!(big smile on my face)", to which lee said, "well, if you're going to be home everyday, im working 60 hours a week!!" ROFLMAO!!!
i dont know about how they react when they are gone, but i sure know how teenagers react when mom is there!!! LOL. that was so funny. i told him, "you're supposed to work 60 hours a week when your 18 if you can!!!!". God, he was something.
My kids accomplishments are their accomplishments. My contribution is genetic. The fact that I have one dd who excels is a reflection on her not me but if I wanted to, I could coach both of my girls well beyond where they are. I see no advantage to them in doing that so I leave well enough alone. If my self esteem were tied to my dd's school performance I wouldn't be spending $37/hr a Sylvan to have my dd taught math the way it should be taught which is actually dragging down her grades at school (Sylvan isn't doing anything wrong. We have a new-new math fuzzy math program that started this year which is too weak in the basics. I'm making sure my dd gets her basics in spite of the fact it runs counter to what they're doing at school because I know how much they mean.)
And if I really wanted to tie my self esteem to my kids performance, I'd force dd#2 to practice the piano every day. You should hear her play when she practices like she's supposed to. I don't however as I think her developing her own love of music at her own pace is more important. No, don't think so. I'm glad my kids have talents but they are theirs not mine and have nothing to do with me.
Pages