the value of having a SAHP

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-24-2007
the value of having a SAHP
549
Wed, 02-13-2008 - 8:57am

Whatever your circumstances, and whatever your family's complex mixture of reasons for choosing to have a SAHP, or not....


do you see any value at all, for a typical child, in having a SAHP (either short term or long term)?


Even if in your family, the many benefits of having dual-WOHPs outweigh any potential benefits of having a SAHP (or if having a SAHP is literally impossible for whatever reason), do you actually acknowledge that that are benefits to be had by choosing to have a SAHP?


(on the assumption that the hypothetical SAHP is happy to SAH, and puts a lot into it)

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-04-1997
Wed, 02-13-2008 - 10:08am
What benefits are exclusive, or almost exclusive, to having a SAHP?
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-04-1997
Wed, 02-13-2008 - 10:11am
I don't, because I don't believe that having dual WOHPs means that the "main caregiving" is going to be non-parental. Working parents vary in the amounts of hours they use othercare, from zero to, I dunno, sixty or more? I wouldn't have been happy with the upper end of the spectrum in my situation, but I was quite happy with the amount of time my kids spent in other care, and at no time did my kids spend the majority of their time being cared for by non-parents.
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-08-2006
Wed, 02-13-2008 - 10:13am
I'm curious, too because because I can't see any exclusive benefits except in individual situations.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-12-2005
Wed, 02-13-2008 - 10:14am
Ah, I see. That was kind of the problem I was having with the "but". That for every benefit of being home, there was a parallel benefit to working.
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-24-2007
Wed, 02-13-2008 - 10:16am

OK, one specific example, rather than the fuzzy ones: comfort nursing.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-05-2000
Wed, 02-13-2008 - 10:21am

There is value in both. But the value is different for each family. I don't think that there is a value that would apply across the board for every family. I know the value that having a sahp had for our family when the girls were children. And I know the value that having dual wps has for our family now in raising Dylan. But, leaving Erica out of the question, the value of having a sahp would not have outweighed the value of having the stability of 2 incomes in raising Joy and Angela.

Chris

The truth may be out there but lies are in your head. Terry Pratchett

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-04-1997
Wed, 02-13-2008 - 10:21am
The benefit would possibly be "more hours of comfort nursing" rather than comfort nursing vs never being able to nurse for comfort. My children, who nursed for years, got plenty of "comfort nursing" over the courses of their infancies and toddler years. I have a few friends who were available 24/7 to their infants and toddlers, but not many. So even the SAHMs who believed in comfort nursing (which is not something all SAHMs believe in) usually left the kids from time to time, and guess what? The kids learned to accept other means of comfort when Mom wasn't available -- just like the children of WOHPs.
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-24-2007
Wed, 02-13-2008 - 10:24am

The reasons that you didn't feel comfortable with using an amount of othercare that was at the upper end of the spectrum, are probably the same or similar as the reasons that I would give for claiming benefits in having a SAHP.


Many would disgree with me, but in my mind if the child is cared for by

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-24-2007
Wed, 02-13-2008 - 10:32am

I said perfectly clearly that the parallel benefit would be that the child learned other methods of comfort.


And the reason I specified comfort nursing, rather than just nursing, is that the availability of comfort nursing (for example when they're teething or sick) would certainly require that the carrier of the mammaries be available when the comfort is needed.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-29-2002
Wed, 02-13-2008 - 10:38am

"The reasons that you didn't feel comfortable with using an amount of othercare that was at the upper end of the spectrum, are probably the same or similar as the reasons that I would give for claiming benefits in having a SAHP."

Not really. Lois may have preferred x number of hours of othercare for her kids for a variety of reasons that might have nothing to do with what you perceive to be the benefits of having a SAHP.

We staggered schedules, not necessarily to minimize the number of hours dd spent in dc, but to keep the hours to an amount we considered beneficial for her. That amount had a lower limit as well as an upper limit, btw. We actively wanted her to be in dc for at least 20-25 hours per week, but found that she did best (in terms of mood, energy levels etc.) if the max number was under about 35 hours per week. I know of other families who found that 40 hours per week actually worked better for their kids than 20 or 30 hours per week, for a variety of reasons.

Pages