In today's economy, how can U stay home?

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-29-2004
In today's economy, how can U stay home?
1500
Mon, 08-07-2006 - 2:46pm


I am 33 and am basically now sadly coming to the conclusion that we just can't have kids. I just don't know how people do it. In order to afford our mortgage, my husband and I both have to work full-time. And we bought a home in the least expensive market we could find in proximity to our jobs, so we commute up to four hours a day to make this work.

However, we both agreed, long long ago that we would only have kids if we could raise them ourselves. We just can't in good conscience reconcile the idea of having children and then handing them off to some stranger who is making close to minimum wages to rear them, and who can't possibly care about them as much as we do. And what would be the point? We would miss all their development and "firsts" and wouldn't be a close family, and they would grow up with attachment issues due to rapidly changing daycare staffing. No, if we can't do it the right way, we don't want to do it at all. We feel it's selfish to have them because WE WANT them; we decided long ago only to have them if we felt we could give them a wonderful life filled with love, hope, and opportunity.

So I am getting up there in age now, and I don't see things changing. The only people I see around me having children are people who 1) have family who live close by and can take care of their kids, 2) rich people, or women who marry rich men to be more specific, and 3) people whose families help them out financially.

Is there a chance for two people like us to have a family, when we don't have any of the above advantages? It doesn't seem like it should be THIS impossible! We're both hard workers who make decent money TOGETHER. Separately, it's not enough, but together, it's a good amount.

HOW could we make it happen? I have heard that having children after 34 the risks just go up and up and up, that they may not be healthy...

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-16-2004
Tue, 08-22-2006 - 11:46pm

"One doesn't need 24/7 to figure out how to effectively care for children, one just needs to have a consistent amount of time on one's own with a baby/child to figure it out."

Agreed. I think it takes longer for men to mature, and I think that's one reason why Corey and his close friends are not as effective. Another reason is definitely that I do most of the childcare, even when he is home. I should encourage him to do more. And still another reason we haven't really "got our groove on" and settled into a good pattern with our new jobs is that our hours haven't been consistent. Last month, he was needed a lot because they'd lost several employees. Then for two weeks he didn't work much at all because we took a family vacation. Things have been erratic lately. Now that he's been sent away, I'm sure it'll take some time to adjust to him coming home as well. After that I'm sure we'll create a much better balance, because we have already agreed we need more stability.

"If they haven't gotten that time then either that was their choice or it was the choice of a mother who prefers to not leave the children alone with their father."

Or the choice of both parents together who prefer to spend time together as a family rather than send mom away for the sole purpose of father and son being alone--as if parent and child can only bond when no one else is in the room. I think far more likely is the fact that I just happen to do most of the childcare, which I agree is a problem. I should encourage hiim to do more rather than just do it myself. And a lot of times even when I try something ends up coming up that he needs to do rather than me, like the baby needs to be fed but something else has to be done that only he knows how to do. I think we both end up doing what we're each most efficient at, at the same time, so things get done faster and more family time is made. Most of our actions are geared at creating time for us as a family rather than creating more time for Corey and Corbin. We should probably work on that, too, like letting whatever job it is that only Corey knows how to do go undone for a while and sacrificing some whole family together time so that they get some alone time. I'm still not sure that I think that is best though. Corey and I have always just liked creating family time more than creating individual time.




Edited 8/22/2006 11:48 pm ET by punkalicorn
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-1998
Tue, 08-22-2006 - 11:49pm

<<Because unless she co-sleeps and wakes up with her child to nurse several times throughout the night, the time they are sleeping isn't exactly family time. >>


You seem to have a very loose definition when it comes to you but a more rigid one when it comes to others.


<<If they do co-sleep and interact throughout the night, then sure, claim it. But if you're sleeping down the hall from each other, like most American families, that's not exactly family time. I'm not saying that everyone should co-sleep, nurse, etc. I'm just saying that because I do I spend my night hours with my child as well, interacting even in our sleep considering we cuddle, nuzzle into one another, even curl our fingers in each other's hair as we snooze. >>


I spend my night hours down the hall from my children, but I don't feel that my children need to be attached to me in some form to consider it family time...why do you?

PumpkinAngel

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-16-2004
Tue, 08-22-2006 - 11:58pm

"I spend my night hours down the hall from my children, but I don't feel that my children need to be attached to me in some form to consider it family time...why do you?"

I don't consider being apart as being together, and I consider family time as being together. It's a difference of perspective, I think.

"Sleeping with my elementary school age children so that they can nurse several times a night, cuddle, nuzzle and curl our fingers in each others hair while we sleep together...is really not my idea of family time."
LOL. Understandable. But I don't see how being asleep would qualify as family time if that isn't the case. I think in the early years, when nightime wakefulness is common and co-sleeping is an option, nighttime is more like family time. Not later on. Again, that's just my view. I don't see "being on duty" the exact same as being physically together.

(But hey, there are moms out there crunchier than me who would advocate sleeping with and nursing school age kids! What do I know? lol!)

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-1998
Wed, 08-23-2006 - 12:07am

<>


No, I don't think we have a different idea of what development is because I agree with all of that.

PumpkinAngel

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-16-2004
Wed, 08-23-2006 - 12:18am

"However, schooling and being cared for by a parent isn't required for development. Please provide some kind of evidence that schooling and parental care is needed for development."

No, thanks. I think parental care is necessary for emotional development and that schooling is required for adequate development of skills such as math. There is a lot of research that suggests a child's behavior and performance later in life can be greatly affected by parental involvement as well as the quality of education. I really thought that was common knowledge but... apparently, to develope into a functional adult, you don't need knowledge or closeness with parental figures. I guess kids that drop-out and/or lose their parents at a young age never grow up to have problems that stem from such issues then?

"Where on earth did I say My child is old enough for daycare, time to return to work."

You don't have to say it for it to be obvious that at some point, your children were certain ages, and at that time you went back to work--unless your children were in daycare from day one, whiuch you've already said they were not. Obviously, at some point, you went back to work, and your kids, at that time, were a certain age.

"all of that will change when a child goes to public school and you go back to work."

And I think school is necessary, as I've said before, but that a career for me is not. You can say all you want that children don't need educations and don't need parental care, but that doesn't mean that because you believe that my views are suddenly invalid.

"no one appointed you the board monitor."

No, but I do have the right to discuss and not discuss certain things based on the subject of the board. And I chose to exercise it. I'm saying it's controlling what factors I'm listing and subjects I'm discussing, not that I expect everyone else to only talk about whatever I think is fitting.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-1998
Wed, 08-23-2006 - 12:29am

<>


I agree, but then again...I never stated that age was the only factor.

PumpkinAngel

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-1998
Wed, 08-23-2006 - 12:36am

<>


Then how is schooling necessary for development?

PumpkinAngel

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-1998
Wed, 08-23-2006 - 12:53am

<>


No, I don't.

PumpkinAngel

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-16-2004
Wed, 08-23-2006 - 1:49am

"No, I wouldn't consider once a week rare."

Well, if once a week isn't "rare," then I suppose it's not a "rare" occurance that he's alone with his father then, is it?

"But going with our scenario, how does several hours a month equal once a week?"

How many hours do you consider several? I consider the term a couple to mean 2-3, a few to mean 3-5, and several to mean maybe aobut the same amount. Here we are being exact again. Apparently the words 'rare' and 'several' have exact quantities that must be met in order for them to apply. But sure, I'd say once a week for 2 hours equaling 8 hours a month would be several. I'm sure I'm wrong though, because your definition is probably different than mine--as all our definitions so far have been.

"I'm not asking for an exact number...just some kind of rough idea of where you are basing your experience on."

And after I gave it, describing that I have a variety of friends, you then stated that I had not answered the question. How exactly would you like me to answer the question? You'll have to be more clear.

"I never stated any such things about you, your family or your dh that you have claimed and you just assumed instead of asking."

No, but it certainly felt as if you implied it.

"You aren't to blame for your own actions, you are blaming me?"

No, I'm not. As I said, I'm apparently a liar, a hypocrit, and a person who is too vague and unclear--like everyone else who uses any such figures of speech. I can see with you I have to be very clear, technical, and completely exact and that you are not as skilled at reading between the lines, understanding figures of speech, and figuring out other such things that others would pick up on quite easily. You see, I thought just from common sense that someone would know that 24/7 is jsut a basic figure of speeching meaning all/or most of the time usually. I was wrong. I apologize. I will try never to be vague and assume someone can undersatnd from context/common sense ever again--at least not while 'debating' with you. I take the blame.

"Especially after all of your implications about my posts that were downright outright incorrect."

Yes, I'm sure you were just trying to understand how it's possible for a child who 'keeps me on my toes' to be entertained in my lap while I do something--after I'd already explained that in great detail--when you stated that you can't picture it. Okay. Whatever.

"Why it is that being seperated from my child once a week is NOT rare but my husband spending time with my child once a week does count as rare?"

If my tone and clarity needs improvement, so does yours.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-16-2004
Wed, 08-23-2006 - 1:54am

"Then how is schooling necessary for development? How is parental care necessary for development?"

As I've said before, a child's relationship with their parents has quite a lot to do with their relationships in the future with their spooses, children, and others that they meet; it's necessary to emotional development. Schooling is necessary for mental development; it encourages them to learn and teaches them new skills, and it prepares them for adult life. To me, that means it's necessary for development. You disagree. I understand. Let's leave it at that and agree to disagree. You think schooling and parental care is unnecessary for a child to develope; I disagree. Let's move on.

"I'll take it one step further, I also want them to have a passion or love of teaching. I value education very highly but would never homeschool my children, because simply I don't have the passion for teaching the core knowledge system. That's doesn't say anything about homeschooling, just that I don't have the passion to teach, therefore I wouldn't do it."

I understand. I do have a passion for learning and teaching. If I had decided to pursue a career, it probably would have been one as a teacher. I'd love to do something that has to do with teaching. Something I've given a lot of thought to is being a doula or child birth educator. :) If I don't feel homeschooling is working well, I'll of course send them to school. I definitely understand your point here and agree.

"I'm not sure it's any better than you weren't just assuming that I would have that reaction, but someone on this board would have that reaction. "

Well, it's because it's the reaction I usually get. It's just waht I'm used to and thus what I prepare myself mentally to hear.

Your tone feels condescending to me and very confrontational. I was probably just misinterpreting it, and it was wearing on me more and more until I was just like GRR AAHHH RAWR. It's probably because we're not face to face. I apologize.

Pages