Unique contributions to society

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-06-2006
Unique contributions to society
1504
Thu, 10-19-2006 - 4:12pm

In another thread, the "unique" contributions of SAHM's were alluded to but it wasn't stated what they are. Let's play a game and find out what they are. First, pretend that as of tomorrow, all moms SAH and detail what will be missing from society then pretend that all moms go to work and detail what will be missing from society. I'm really curious as to what people think a world without SAHM's orWOHM's would look like.

If all the moms who SAH went to work then the library would move story hour to the evening and summer vacation bible school would be held in the evenings so that all kids can attend and not just the kids of SAHM's. Banks would likely shift their hours to later in the day and you'd see more 24 hour stores. I think there would be more home cooking style restaurants too. I think day care centers would improve because of increased demand.

If all moms who WOH suddenly SAH, you'd see fewer service industries around because moms could do things themselves instead of paying for them. The nursing shortage would be more of a shortage. We'd probably have a shortage of teachers too. There'd be fewer government services because there'd be less tax dollars to pay for them. I can't think of anything else right now.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 10-23-2006 - 12:21pm

No, that's not what I said. It's still early there, I'll wait while you get another cup of coffee.


Anyone would think that my particular life, if I were to SAH today, would be much more leisurely than it is with me WOH.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-01-2003
Mon, 10-23-2006 - 12:21pm

I AM planning to be self sufficient in retirement, even if social security's not around. That's why I'm "contribut a lot of money into your own personal retirement fund." Are you planning to rely on society or your family to support you in retirement? If so, why?<<

not at all, i was just pointing out some scenerios to question kbmammm's issue with dependancy. it goes beyond just working, because we don't work our entire lives...

however, i do not want to live ina convelescent home - they terrify me - and i'm hoping that my DD will take me in as i will my parents, as they did with theirs. not because of the money though, but because family takes care of family.

Avatar for mom34101
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Mon, 10-23-2006 - 12:21pm
I don't get this attitude. You work for your family and yourself, as do I. Why is that worthy of somebody's respect?
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-12-2003
Mon, 10-23-2006 - 12:22pm
"More realistic?" Neither.. I think they both happen quite often. I wouldn't call either one naive.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 10-23-2006 - 12:22pm
Ok I'm sorry, I wasn't clear.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-14-2006
Mon, 10-23-2006 - 12:25pm

You're right, in some cases a relationship like that would probably be healthy if both partners are ok with it. In the case of your girlfriend there, it sounds like it is ideal for her, and I'm glad she's happy.

For most people, having 2 spouses compete for power in a relationship just spells disaster, in my opinion.

I just see marriage more than just who brings in more bacon into the house. There is more to life than just making money... although it's an important part to be happy and healthy. On it's own, its not enough... :)

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 10-23-2006 - 12:25pm
Sadly, in my family we don't necessarily take care of one another, so that's not a viable option for me (to rely on my sons or other family members to take care of me in my old age).

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-15-2006
Mon, 10-23-2006 - 12:26pm

<>

Only if you still had the nanny and housekeeper.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-01-2003
Mon, 10-23-2006 - 12:27pm

well, then that is avery braod definition, that applies to any person, employed or otherwise who has obligations they can't ditch when the kids are sick.

we have different opinions on what is high powered...and in your definition work status doesn't really apply. plenty of WP's have jobs they can ditch for whatever reason they want (and call it a "sick day") and plenty of SAHP's have obligations outside of the home or to other children in the home that they can't ditch when one other child is sick. (or when they're sick for that matter).

it evens out.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-14-2006
Mon, 10-23-2006 - 12:27pm

Unless you found some things you liked to volunteer for I suppose. but yes, I agree. My children are not in school yet, but if I was still a stay at home when they started, I would be bored out of my skull. I wouldn't personally see the point to being home. There wouldn't be as much of a mess for me to clean, no lunches to make.

The stay at home dilemma for me only applied to the early years, because I really wanted to be home, and I was actually worried i might regret it later. Now Im happy working and happy I took the time too. :)

Pages