Being a stay-at-home mother (method, SAHM, teenage, baby)

[funisart]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

Over scheduling is part of this. My point is that maybe it's time to kick it down a notch. To go back to letting our kids play outside until the street lights come on.

Unfortunately, I do see not playing this game as having negative consequences for kids. Dd#2 has been unable to find a sport to play in high school. Because all of the other kids have been cheering, playing soccer, doing gymnastics, playing football, playing baseball, playing volley ball, etc, etc, etc...since they were 2, she can't make the teams. Still, I don't regret not spending her childhood going from one activity to another. I just wish high schools had more entry level sports for the kids who didn't pick one at 3. Dd#1 has been able to play high school sports because she attends the school I teach at which is small and has plenty of opportunities for kids who didn't start playing at 3. Dd#2 will have to pick a sport and take lessons for a year. Fortunately, she's highly gifted so, if nothing else, she'll have early graduation and her GPA to fall back on. It would be nice if she also had organized sports on her college applications but I'm not seeing that happening this year. Unfortunately, the only sport open to her is the one she doesn't want because it's "not cool" (which is why it's open to her. It's swimming.)

My son didn't play football, wrestling, or do weightlifting, or do Debate Club until high school. But he made all the teams without previous experience. He continued with Jazz Band in High School, but not Marching because you can't play football and be in Marching. When he was 16 we bought him a 10 year old volvo with 300 thousand miles on it and he drove himself.

He was in Marching Band and Jazz Band and Chess Club in Middle School.I did drive him to private trombone lessons. I did chaperon almost every event as I was a stay at home mom and available. But did not hover, hard to do when you have 10 kids in your charge.

He was in chess club, and kazoo band and cub scouts in elementary. I did have to be there for cub scouts because there is no den if there is no parental involvement. Before elementary he was in Karate, gymnastics, and swimming class. Not all at the same time. From the age of 8 he played paint ball--and still does at 29. We did not allow him to start team sports until high school, on the advice of his grandfather, a pediatrician, who had seen too many young kids with permanently injured joints.

I see that your daughter plays piano. Is there a jazz band in high school?? She could play keyboard. What about activities that don't require physical competence. Yearbook, Newspaper, Debate, Science Club??? I'm sorry that she didn't find an interest earlier that translated into some kind of activity in middle and high school. Most of the schools I have been around are replete with activities--but they may need a bit of your time to get her started.

[wsop]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

Making it about time has resulted in us spending too much time with our kids.

Well then, going by that theory, being a SAHM CLEARLY is the winner, since SAHMs, according to you, spend less time with their kids than working moms. What was that number you quoted again? 47 minutes I think it was.

[jojo61397]

Originally Posted by wsop

Well then, going by that theory, being a SAHM CLEARLY is the winner, since SAHMs, according to you, spend less time with their kids than working moms. What was that number you quoted again? 47 minutes I think it was.

She said stay at home moms of the 1970s spent less time than working parents of 2011s...

[Kibbiekat]

Originally Posted by wsop

Well then, going by that theory, being a SAHM CLEARLY is the winner, since SAHMs, according to you, spend less time with their kids than working moms. What was that number you quoted again? 47 minutes I think it was.

[Ivorytickler]

Originally Posted by wsop

Well then, going by that theory, being a SAHM CLEARLY is the winner, since SAHMs, according to you, spend less time with their kids than working moms. What was that number you quoted again? 47 minutes I think it was.

Nope. You have that backwards. SAHM's spend 47 minutes MORE per day with their kids than WM's. Let's keep the facts straight.

I'm not sure how much is enough but I think blindly chasing more is a mistake.

[Ivorytickler]

Originally Posted by jojo61397

She said stay at home moms of the 1970s spent less time than working parents of 2011s...

Actually, we don't have data on the 2011's...the year is not done...The comparison I've seen is through the 1990's. We seem to be making more and more time for our kids with each passing decade. If the trend were to hold, I'd think that the 2000's will show that we're spending even more than we did in the 1990's. The $50,000 question is do any of our kids need this time?

[Ivorytickler]

Originally Posted by funisart

Again, I don't think that most of the posters on this forum are here for a debate==we do not feel the overriding need to win. We are here to discuss and in discussing our own experiences are relevant, as well as our honest "Not Mes".

Isn't there a board somewhere for debating?? Were you on the debate team in highschool?? My son was and we all enjoyed it very much--but we did not bring debating into family discussions.

If you don't want to debate, then refrain from posting. You are not required to even read threads you're not interested in. I find attitudes about this topic to be interesting and often wrong. (When it comes to thinks human, common sense often flies in the face of what is real.) I happen to like debating this topic. It can go so many different directions. If you don't like debating, then don't. It's that simple.

[Kibbiekat]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

Actually, we don't have data on the 2011's...the year is not done...The comparison I've seen is through the 1990's. We seem to be making more and more time for our kids with each passing decade. If the trend were to hold, I'd think that the 2000's will show that we're spending even more than we did in the 1990's. The $50,000 question is do any of our kids need this time?

Something doesn't have to be a "need" to be beneficial.

[jojo61397]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

Actually, we don't have data on the 2011's...the year is not done...The comparison I've seen is through the 1990's. We seem to be making more and more time for our kids with each passing decade. If the trend were to hold, I'd think that the 2000's will show that we're spending even more than we did in the 1990's. The $50,000 question is do any of our kids need this time?

According to this "study" aka NPR report, working parents spent the SAME amount of time with their kids as SAHM did in 1970. It also states that the working moms are doing less housework, less cooking, less going out with their husbands, and getting less sleep.

[DewDropInn]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

It's the American born moms I see hovering.

Know any Asian-born Tiger Mothers? They have hovering down to a science. And they all make A's.

Gosh. I made myself laugh.