What would you give up to stay home?
Find a Conversation
| Sat, 08-05-2006 - 8:36am |
Hi everyone.
I have always said that staying home is so important to me that I would give up many things to be able to do that. We live in a very small home, I have no jewelry and we buy all our clothes at Walmart. I know that if I went back to work, we could afford more. But I would never trade being at home for a larger house or more luxuries.
However, after reading this board I have started to suspect that there are things I would not want to give up. If I couldn't send my kids to preschool a couple of hours a day, if I couldn't afford any after school activities like ballet lessons or if I could'nt afford any kind of summer program for them, I think I would have to find a way to go back to work. So basically, I'm perfectly happy to deny myself "things." But I would not want to take much away from the kids.
Of course I would probably have to find a new career becuase I could never work the 80 hours a week my old career entailed.

Pages
So qutting your job to take care of your own children is just a matter of convenience to you????
That's pathetic.
The average income in my town is $75,000/yr.
YOUR kids don't need a SAHM.
Newsflash: You are not the standard to go by on parenthood....by any means.
ah! i found it again LOL. i also found some of the studies i have looked upin the past, which i will post at the end of the post, i'd like to address the rest of it!
>>One thing I agree with the author going in is that my peers had far more to do with how I turned out than my parents did. I can also see where genetics played a big part. My morals, while drilled into me as a child, went through readjusment in my teens and again in my 30's. They certainly were not set.<<
my morals were also not set in stone, but my core values (taught to me as a child) did manage to outlast my rebelious teen years, peers included (thank goodness i did not end up like them!) and have remained with me throughout my adult life. while they are not an exact copy of my parents values...they are similar enough. my parents did not expect me to be a carbon copy, but rather taught me some very basic rules and standards, and then taught me how to figure out teh rest. there are many parents out tehre who do no not provide these types of lessons for their children.
and in any case, as my DH always says "whether its nature or nurture, its all the parent's fault". ;)
>>I used to think that I helped shape my kids but after being a mom for 11 years, I've come to the conclusion that they are who they are and I'm just along for the ride.<<
that to me, sounds very sad. if you really think that, then how do you really feel about your part as a parent? i mean, do you wonder why you ever bothered in the first place? if you had no part in shaping their lives at all, then all that love, caring, and nurturing you gave to yuor child was really a waste of your time, save for a few fond memories.
i'd hate to think like that.
>>Now the teen years? Those I can see needing to really watch the environment and outside influences.<<
i think as a parent you can never really stop watching the environments and developments of your child...no matter their age. not if you care about them, that is. but the teen years, yes they certainly require a great deal of extra "watching" because teens will test you, in every conceivable way. but it is the first five years when children learn the core values from which their personalities spring forward, and their ability to handle changes, tests, and consequences also come from this.
http://www.aap.org/pubed/ZZZDTILI1AC.htm?&sub_cat=106
There is a whole history to your parent-child relationship that began at the moment your youngster was born. To help you better understand the present, try to gain some insights into where you have been as a family. Think back on your experiences with your child when he was a baby, a toddler, and a preschooler. Ask yourself:
* How active a parent were you in those early years? Did you play a major child-raising role in the family, or were there other demands (such as long hours at work) that kept you from being as involved as you would have liked?
* What were your most enjoyable parenting and family experiences during those years?
http://www.aap.org/pubed/ZZZEU02DEEC.htm?&sub_cat=106
One of the ways your child shows his love for you is by imitating you. This also is one of the ways he learns how to behave, develop new skills and take care of himself. From his earliest moments he watches you closely and patterns his own behavior and beliefs after yours. Your examples become permanent images, which will shape his attitudes and actions for the rest of his life.
You cannot give your child all that he needs if you only spend a few minutes a day with him. In order to know you and feel confident of your love, he has to spend a great deal of time with you, both physically and emotionally.
http://www.childdevelopmentinfo.com/development/temperament_and_your_child.htm
Temperament is a set of in-born traits that organize the child's approach to the world. They are instrumental in the development of the child's distinct personality. These traits also determine how the child goes about learning about the world around him.
These traits appear to be relatively stable from birth. They are enduring characteristics that are actually never "good" or "bad."
http://www.childdevelopmentinfo.com/development/devsequence.shtml (just a cool site)
http://www.childdevelopmentinfo.com/development/erickson.shtml (another cool site)
http://www.childdevelopmentinfo.com/development/piaget.shtml (info about the logic and abstract thinking development and corresponding ages)
http://www.talaris.org/parentingcounts.htm (an awsome research site it has loads of good stuff for parents)
Scientists are amazed at the capabilities of newborns, babies and toddlers to learn, feel and think. What’s more, researchers know relationships are vital to unlocking those capabilities. From birth through five, children develop healthy social and emotional skills through nurturing and responsive interactions. Those skills build the foundation for learning, behavior and health in school and in life. Parenting counts.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/04/990420064552.htm
Contrary to recent reports, parents "powerfully influence" their children's lives--at least from birth to age 3--by encouraging childhood chatter, researchers with the University of Delaware and Temple University contend.
http://www.medem.com/search/article_display.cfm?path=n:&mstr=/ZZZTSB560AC.html&soc=AMA&srch_typ=NAV_SERCH
and some of the other studies that i've looked up about childcare in the early years and how it affects children:
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/115/1/187
All of a child’s early experiences, whether at home, in child care, or in other preschool settings, are educational. At present, 60% to 70% of children younger than 6 years regularly attend some type of out-of-home child care or early childhood program.1 The arrangements families make for their children can vary dramatically, including care by relatives; center-based care, including preschool early education programs; family child care provided in the caregiver’s home; and care provided in the child’s home by nannies or babysitters.2 How a family chooses this care is influenced by family values, affordability, and availability. For many families, high-quality child care is not affordable, which results in compromises.3–5
Children exposed to a poor-quality environment, whether at home or outside the home, are less likely to be prepared for school demands and more likely to have their socioemotional development derailed.8–21 The inadequate outcomes of children in poor-quality care often cannot be fully remedied in the formal structure of the K-12 educational system because of the need for noneducational services such as mental and behavioral health care. To focus only on the education of children beginning with kindergarten is to ignore the science of early development and deny the importance of early experiences.
A child’s day-to-day experiences affect the structural and functional development of his or her brain, including intelligence and personality.21 Experiences influence every child’s development and learning, and these experiences can be positive or negative, with long-term consequences for the child, family, and society.21 Research of high-quality, intensive early childhood education programs for low-income children confirm lasting positive effects such as greater school success, higher graduation rates, lower juvenile crime, decreased need for special education services later, and lower adolescent pregnancy rates.8–20 Children who attend high-quality early childhood programs demonstrate better math and language skills, better cognition and social skills, better interpersonal relationships, and better behavioral self-regulation than do children in lower-quality care.8–20 Inferior-quality care, at home or outside the home, can have harmful effects on language, social development, and school performance that are more difficult to ameliorate, especially for children in schools with fewer resources.8–20 The positive effects from high-quality programs and the negative effects from poor-quality programs are magnified for children from disadvantaged situations or with special needs, and yet these children are least likely to have access to quality early education and child care.
Families that rely on child care need access to affordable, high-quality programs. However, most child care centers in the United States are rated poor to mediocre in quality, with almost half meeting less than minimal standards.12–15,22 Efforts to improve the quality of early education and child care through federal, state, and local public policies address licensing and regulation, teacher or caregiver education and compensation, and adequate funding.
State licensing standards are important for health, safety, and teacher qualifications, but they set a minimum standard, typically considerably below the recommendations of health and safety experts.6 National organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), American Public Health Association, National Association for the Education of Young Children, Child Welfare League of America, and Zero to Three
Yet, developmental brain science studies show that young children, especially infants and toddlers, need stable, positive relationships with their caregivers.21
http://www.childcarecanada.org/ccin/2003/ccin7_13_03.html
The first study found that child care is linked to assertive and aggressive behaviour in some children. The more time they spend away from their mothers being cared for by others during the first 4¼ years of their lives, the more disobedient they are and the less likely to get along with others in kindergarten. The second study found that in children under 3, levels of salivary cortisol (a stress-sensitive hormone) rose in the afternoon during full days spent in daycare, but fell as the hours passed on days they spent at home. It is unclear whether these higher levels are related to the strain of being away from home or to the social challenge of interacting with other children. The researchers concluded that daycare is especially challenging for shy children, who are slower to develop social skills.
http://www.childcarecanada.org/ccin/2003/ccin7_25_03A.html
Two studies published last week added fuel to the long-standing controversy over the effects of child care on children's health and well-being.
A study by the National Institute of Child and Human Development found that the more time children spent in child care, the more likely they were to be aggressive and have other behaviour problems.
Finally, what's the staff-to-child ratio? If there are four babies per caregiver, which is typical, it's hard to give them the individual attention they need. It's better to have two babies or toddlers per caregiver and three to four preschoolers per caregiver.
http://www.mothering.com/articles/growing_child/family_time/childcare.html
The latest results of the NICHD study are at least reasonable cause for concern about daycare. Researchers have found a strong relationship between the total number of hours in daycare and problem behaviors; moreover, the negative effects continue into kindergarten. The problem behaviors could be classified as aggressive: bullying, fighting, and defiance. The negative effect was present regardless of quality or type of care. It applied to boys and girls, rich and poor. In addition, children who had been in care 30 hours or more per week were nearly twice as likely to have high problem-behavior scores in kindergarten as children in ten hours or less of care (17 percent compared to 9 percent).13
How reliable are these results? The NICHD study is the largest longitudinal study ever done on the effects of child care, and one of the few to include nannies, relatives, and home daycare as well as formal childcare centers.
welcome to new england LOL!
my friend and past co worker just took her son out of day care (he's old enough for school now) just as the cost rose to $500 per week.
there are a few places where day care is only $300 per week. considering tehre was a recent drive by by one of them, i wouldn't consider it the safest place for a day care to be located. i know i wouldn't use it. unfortunatly the ones that are low priced are also the ones in the worst neighbourhoods.
it sucks, our little city used to be affordable, but we're sandwhiched between several "high end" cities/towns, plus some development in the area, and costs have sky rocketed. daycare was no exception. (we were lucky to find an apartment for less than $2k per month).
**Yes, I believe that WOHM's view career/employment differently that SAHM's. I don't see it as something to take up and leave as I see fit. I see it as important enough to protect.**
Did it ever occur to you than some people view their chldren as more important than a career? After all, a career can always be resumed, but you can't stop your child from growing up and moving on. Just as you believe WOHs view employment differently than SAHs, maybe SAHM's view child-rearing differently than WOHMs. Maybe they don't see children as something to hand over to someone else to care for so they can come and go as they see fit (those who could SAH, but choose to WOH).
You keep talking about how much WOH affects your children by example. Are you saying SAH is a bad example to kids?
What will your children remember about your job other than you got in car in the morning and spent the day somewhere else while someone else took care of them? On the other hand, my kids see me all day and witness first hand the responsibilities of SAH, which is every bit as important as WOH. You are very proud of the fact that you are an engineer, but it is no more important than a SAHM, in my opinion.
"No, kids don't make economic sense but kids don't need a SAHM either"
what??? so if kids dont make economic sense, why did you have them?. Could it be a decision you made from the heart? even knowing that they would cost you a lot of money?
I was saying that some decisions are made with the heart (or at least partly with the heart) like having a child (an example). Kids cost a lot and if it was strictly an economic decision, you probably would not have had them. So sometimes in life decisions are not strictly 100% about making "economic sense". And to me, that is also how being a SAHM is - a decision based partly from the heart.
"That would be a decision about life but a foolish one none the less."
I think its foolish to make decisions based solely on "economics". If I had done that - my life would now be an empty shell. I would not have travelled, I would not have had my son, I would not be a SAHM ect....
Very foolish indeed, u can't always find your personal happiness in a pile of money.
Josee
"If you can't afford to feed your kids if you SAH then get a job already."
Wow, we agree on something! LOL
But, I would guess that *most* (not all, but most) families with a SAHP (like the ones on this board) can afford to feed their kids (and more). I havent heard of that many kids at home and starving because one of their parents decides they have to stay at home "at all costs"....to the point of starvation. At least not in any of the parts of Canada that I have lived in (which is most of it). I would assume its the same in the US. If a person sees that their kids are starving - they usually would try to rectify that situation by working if they are physically able to. If not, then we are talking about neglect. And, in my opinion, a mentally unstable parent.
In most cases a family who has a SAHP - that family has enough money to feed, clothe and shelter their kids. (there might be some exceptions, but there are always exceptions to everything i guess)
Josee
Pages