Working for Lifestyle/Extras
Find a Conversation
| Mon, 11-20-2006 - 11:13am |
Hi Ladies :)
This is my first time on this debate board and I have been dying to jump into some of the topics, but I feel as though they are sooooo long (one in particular is over 1000 replies, yikes!) that starting my own specific one might work out better.
Anyhow, a recurring theme here seems to be what Moms should and shouldn't be going to work for. It seems some are of the opinion that is OK for Mom to work if she must to pay her bills but NOT if its to afford a nice car, house, good neighborhood. This is considered keeping up with the Johnses (who are they???) and thats bad.
Well, I want to know what in the heck is wrong with a women working to have nice things? I don't mean working and leaving baby in child care 16 hours a day, everyday...thats pretty extreme.
I enjoyed a certain lifestyle before having a child, should I have downsized that lifestyle once baby came so I didn't have to work? What about me *wanting* to maintain a certain lifestyle for myself, my husband, and my child makes me a (a) workaholic or (b) striving to keep up with the Joneses?
Don't some people (like myself) simply enjoy living in a nice place with nice things and want their children to have the same experience?
So please, anyone who thinks a women is wrong for WOH if she is not doing so to financially survive but does it to maintain a certain lifestyle...whats wrong with this?
Thanks all :)

Pages
Point taken. It's not like singing EIEIO will get him a free ride to college. . . that's true. ;) And I'm sure if I WOH I would still read to him every night, just not for as much time as I do now.
you missed the point. the point is that your son could have done all that with a combination of dc + your care (as is the case with wohms) just as well as with a sahm. You don't have any way to know that he wouldn't have done that well.
additionally, kids that age are sponges. they soak up everything around them.
Carole
Right, and when dd was that age, I only worked PT, so I really was with her more time than not. I remember limiting how many books I read to her, because it was all she wanted to do. I think balance is important, and one mother with 1-3 kids all day long does not necessarily promote balance. Especially not if mom is well educated and not inclined to do housekeeping when the kid is awake.
I do not mean this as a comment on your specific situation, your comment only made me think about it.
I'm not harrassing or bullying.... maybe you should report me if you think that is what is going on.
>>The crock is overflowing with all the rhetoric on this thread attempting to explain why a mom should woh to provide that which while may be nice could never replace her precious time with her children.
No room for what I have to say, thanks.<<
You have an unpopular opinion. Acting as if there is "no room for what you have to say" is apparently your response to very few people agreeing with you. I was asking what you would expect to happen on a debate board in the ideal scenario.
In my state, which will here remain nameless because it's generally near the bottom on student test scores across the nation, about 40 hours of coursework to regain the gifted/AP certification. Our teaching certification is for life, no renewal necessary. Seniority? Not really an issue at the school where I taught--we tried to share things equitably so new teachers would remain with us. As far as the yearly pay increases, I'd pick up where I left off and retire later (age 60 instead of 53, as previously planned), the yearly increases just delayed until I RTW; considering after 12 years with my district I was making only $5,000 more a year than brand new teachers with only a bachelors, I doubt a few years off would make all that much of a difference, and if I retired later it wouldn't make any difference at all. My DH won't be able to retire until 60 anyway, so I just consider these few years SAH sort of a head start on my retirement.
Pages