Will my child remember that I was a SAHM
Find a Conversation
| Wed, 06-06-2007 - 7:47pm |
It struck me today that she might not.
I was sure I was doing the best thing for my children by staying home with them (two daughters-3 years old, and 4 months old). As I was talking to a dear aunt of mine (whose daughter is a working mother, since her infant was 12 weeks old), I felt my defensive bristles go up.
She went on and on about how "If she could do it all over again....she wouldn't have stayed home....." Then she told me a story in which her ds said to her, "mom, did you stay at home with us, or did you drop us off at daycare?" She almost died when he asked her that, because she stayed at home with her ds and dd until he entered kindergarten. Granted, many kindergartners haven't formed lasting memories by that age yet...but still. It got me thinking; is this ALL WORTH IT?
She was using it in her argument against staying at home. I have a Masters Degree in Counseling that I am not using. My career lies dormant at this time. We don't have cable, newspaper service, vacations, frills of any kind, new cars, etc. because of our money situation. We are middle-class and have sacrificed SO MUCH...only for me to hear from my aunt that..."her daughter needs to work to maintain their lifestyle." Yeah, driving a Volvo, she probably does....
I just need to hear from some of you who frequent this board and have solid opinions one way or the other on this topic.
Andrea







Pages
It is wrong and it is probably copyright infringement - I don't know because it sure seems designers do it all the time. Didn't someone design the A-line skirt...and now a million and one designers do it? I remember when Mary McFadden copyrighted her infamous and beautiful pleat. I'm sure lots of designers actually get the copyright, many probably don't.
When I was a child, camouflage (sp?) was actually in style. I wore t-shirts with camouflage. Now it's back in, just in lots of new colors. Isn't that illegal? Shouldn't the Army get all upset? LOL!
And, finally, if anything, the handbag designers should probably give the knock-off party hostesses a commission - it's free advertising. I used to out and out hate the then "new" trend of bag designers splashing their logos across their bags. It kind of grew on me (I think because of seeing it everywhere and probably on the knock-offs, maybe not) and I've gotten some similar, fun designer summer bags for me and my DDs.
<>
Yes, which I also corrected 100+ posts ago.
PumpkinAngel
What is ILLEGAL is putting another designers name on it.
If I copied Dian Von Furstenberg's hideous wrap dresses and sold them as 'Katie wraps' at a lower price it'd be one thing. If I copied them and put her name in them then I'm passing subpar copies off as hers adn that's wrong.
Yes. We. Did.
Sure, it is an opinion and it is based on logic. When there is a victim pushing along the police to enforce the laws, the police are more likely to do so. But if a victim of a crime is not willing to appear in court or is not willing to press charges, the police are less likely to pursue the crime. Not always, but generally.
Do you think the handbag manufacturers are victims? If so, what are their real damages? TIA.
I have a pair of snowboots from LLBean that I have had for 20+ years.
PumpkinAngel
<<Who said anything about knowing the intimate financial details of friends? LOL. >>
Both myself and Libbyfaith, that is who.
PumpkinAngel
<>
Do you have any support for this?
Most people speed. Most people at some point have driven drunk. Some of them have done both at the same time.
And we've all heard on this board (from somebody?) the idea that all wohps are stealing money from an employer when at work and playing on internet message boards. <>
So, no, I don't exactly picture you of all people at Sunnybrook Farms!
<<PKA said she was involved at school so I was very surprised she didn't know even 11 families. >>
Can you link me to where I stated this?
PumpkinAngel
Pages