Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's all about priorities. Hindsight can help of course too.
So - what is more important to you? Your baby? Or a trip to Hawaii? Seeing your firstborn's first steps? Or hearing about them from someone else? It boggles MY mind, but it seems some women don't value the same things I do. They feel hearing about it from another is the same thing. Or that spending 2 awake hours per day with your child is really equal to spending 12 awake hours... I suppose with a mom who isn't interested in her kids, that's possible, and if that's you, you should go back to work.
As to being 'bored' - that's really a "you" thing. I know some sahms who are bored and can't find anything more to do with their time and their children than sit around and bemoan the only thing they can find to do is hang out at the mall or clean their house. There are some of us who expand our hobbies/interest to include our children and focus on the short time they are little. For instance, a lawyer can practice law for her entire life, but you can't be a mommy to an infant or toddler forever (unless you're Michelle Duggar)
If you ever plan to go back to teaching, you'll want to find something part time after the first year or so though... it's tough to re-enter a workforce (by design or catastrophe) after being 'gone' for a long time.
And if you choose to stay home, keep in mind that those future employers who will value your dedication to your family and respect your choice to stay home, will want to know what you did/do with your time... did you get into crafts? Join a MOPS group? Find a playgroup? Start a book club? Volunteer at church? Teach your infants sign language? (Just a few ideas)
And keep in mind churches when you're thinking about a part time job. Church daycares generally hold classes for a couple hours a day, so they can call themselves preschools... they need teachers and if you work there (and especially if you're a church member), you'll be making money without paying for separate daycare.
Well you know what i meant lol . I just don't have the maternal nature to be around kids younger than 6-7.
areer
born--It is like nothing else in the world. Never say never--I was an older mom--had a professional life was planning on being "child free' ,and got what used to be called "baby hunger" in my 30's. Was hard getting pregnant and keeping a pregnancy, but it was the best thing I have ever done with the exception of marrying my husband--which was the best thing.
I really don't think that Stay at home vs. Working mom is the most important thing in a child's life. It is the love and encouragement they receive from those who surround them. Be it a caregiver, or a mom or dad.
I feel that I was privileged to be able to be there 24/7 for my son, that is only because of the support and love of my husband.
It's all about priorities. Hindsight can help of course too.
So - what is more important to you? Your baby? Or a trip to Hawaii? Seeing your firstborn's first steps? Or hearing about them from someone else? It boggles MY mind, but it seems some women don't value the same things I do. They feel hearing about it from another is the same thing. Or that spending 2 awake hours per day with your child is really equal to spending 12 awake hours... I suppose with a mom who isn't interested in her kids, that's possible, and if that's you, you should go back to work.
As to being 'bored' - that's really a "you" thing. I know some sahms who are bored and can't find anything more to do with their time and their children than sit around and bemoan the only thing they can find to do is hang out at the mall or clean their house. There are some of us who expand our hobbies/interest to include our children and focus on the short time they are little. For instance, a lawyer can practice law for her entire life, but you can't be a mommy to an infant or toddler forever (unless you're Michelle Duggar)
If you ever plan to go back to teaching, you'll want to find something part time after the first year or so though... it's tough to re-enter a workforce (by design or catastrophe) after being 'gone' for a long time.
And if you choose to stay home, keep in mind that those future employers who will value your dedication to your family and respect your choice to stay home, will want to know what you did/do with your time... did you get into crafts? Join a MOPS group? Find a playgroup? Start a book club? Volunteer at church? Teach your infants sign language? (Just a few ideas)
And keep in mind churches when you're thinking about a part time job. Church daycares generally hold classes for a couple hours a day, so they can call themselves preschools... they need teachers and if you work there (and especially if you're a church member), you'll be making money without paying for separate daycare.
Many women do care but rather their family not have to struggle paycheck to paycheck just to see their child walk for the first time. And yes also many parents just don't find the fact little johnny walked for the first time all that amazing of an accomplishment. And i'm sorry but somehow i doubt a future employer is going to give 2 figs whether you are a family person,were a SAHP, or care what you did with your time. If anything you more a liability then someone who puts less time into their family because your family will come before your job always.
areer
born--It is like nothing else in the world. Never say never--I was an older mom--had a professional life was planning on being "child free' ,and got what used to be called "baby hunger" in my 30's. Was hard getting pregnant and keeping a pregnancy, but it was the best thing I have ever done with the exception of marrying my husband--which was the best thing.
I really don't think that Stay at home vs. Working mom is the most important thing in a child's life. It is the love and encouragement they receive from those who surround them. Be it a caregiver, or a mom or dad.
I feel that I was privileged to be able to be there 24/7 for my son, that is only because of the support and love of my husband.
Oh i can say never because little kids bore the life out of me. I might adopt an older child....but infants and toddlers are just not something i find fun to spend my time with.
Many women do care but rather their family not have to struggle paycheck to paycheck just to see their child walk for the first time. And yes also many parents just don't find the fact little johnny walked for the first time all that amazing of an accomplishment. And i'm sorry but somehow i doubt a future employer is going to give 2 figs whether you are a family person,were a SAHP, or care what you did with your time. If anything you more a liability then someone who puts less time into their family because your family will come before your job always.
Maybe, but when the opportunity comes up for someone to work from home, the employer will give precedent to the one who put her family first (my current job).
And maybe if someday you have children, you will realize that your child will only take their first steps ONCE - and personally, I'm glad my kids were reaching to ME instead of someone who won't value those firsts. But again, it's all about priorities. Some work to pay the bills, but many work for extra funds like trips to Hawaii (as in this thread) or because they'd be "bored" (which is a personal issue and indicative of the type of person they are)... and some work because they don't realize what they'll miss out on... and by the time they realize it, it'll be too late. You can always go back to work ... you can never get your child's early years back.
Something else my dh and I discussed when we decided I'd stay home with the kids - when both parents work, you will live to your income, whether or not you plan to. In a worst case scenario, when something happens and an additional income is needed, the sahp can always start working again and bringing in additional income... rather than having one parent have to get a second job.
There is no right answer to the question the OP posed. What it really boils down to is what she and her family want to do and can make workable for them, financially, quality of life wise, and schedule-wise. Wanting to return to one's career because it is fulfilling, because one worked hard to get to the current position, because taking time off would be detrimental to the career path is a perfectly valid reason for choosing to return to work. Not every career can be parsed down into part time hours, and working from home, although those are wonderful options when they exist, IMO. I am thankful we live in a time where it is both possible and a frequent occurrence for mothers of babies and small children to return to their jobs if they so choose (and I say this as someone who took a break from her career to stay home with two little ones). There are going to be drawbacks and benefits to any decision that gets made; the only ones who need to live with this particular set of decisions are these three family members.
Maybe, but when the opportunity comes up for someone to work from home, the employer will give precedent to the one who put her family first (my current job).
And maybe if someday you have children, you will realize that your child will only take their first steps ONCE - and personally, I'm glad my kids were reaching to ME instead of someone who won't value those firsts. But again, it's all about priorities. Some work to pay the bills, but many work for extra funds like trips to Hawaii (as in this thread) or because they'd be "bored" (which is a personal issue and indicative of the type of person they are)... and some work because they don't realize what they'll miss out on... and by the time they realize it, it'll be too late. You can always go back to work ... you can never get your child's early years back.
Something else my dh and I discussed when we decided I'd stay home with the kids - when both parents work, you will live to your income, whether or not you plan to. In a worst case scenario, when something happens and an additional income is needed, the sahp can always start working again and bringing in additional income... rather than having one parent have to get a second job.
Actually, no. Taking time off does not make employers think you're better suited for WAH. Just the opposite. If you can't juggle work and home life with work at work, what should make them think you can juggle it with you at home? I would think the mom who puts family first by staying home would put family first over the WAH job as well. She woudln't be my pick. I'd pick someone I alrelady know can juggle both work and family.
And no, you don't use all of your income just because you have it. That is a choice. The dual working family is often better off if one loses their job because the other one isn't taking a pay cut to restart a career and hasn't missed years of vesting, pay raises and promotions and, if they're smart, they've been saving and have that to fall back on. And even if they are living off of both incomes because they can, all they have to do is cut back if one loses their job. Why do you think the dual income couple can't scale back? And do you really think the SAH spouse is just going to walk into a job that lets them pay the bills?
The true cost of SAH is much much higher than most people figure. You lose experience, raises, promotions, savings, interest on those savings and vesting towards retirement in addition to income. You never make up for these. Just ask my SIL and my sister (both militiant SAHM's at the time) and they'll tell you if they realized the true cost, they would not have SAH. Both are now facing never retiring because of the years they took off to be home. My brother also may never retire because of that decision. When my SIL reentered the work force, she found her skills antiquated. The only job she could find was as a receptionist (she had worked as an opthmalogist assistant before SAH). Interestingly, the only job my sister could find is also a receptionist. Now that she's divorced, she is really regretting those years at home. When her alimony runs out, she has no idea how she will pay the bills. Sadly, this has left her husband/provider shopping. Neither of them will ever recover from that decision.
I'm facing the same thing I would have faced if I had SAH beause I made a bad decision to go into teaching from engineering. Restarting an engineering career on 5 year old experience will not be easy and I will have to settle for about 75% of what I was making 5 years ago just to get back into engineering. So the cost of going into teaching will reverberate for many years to come just as the cost of SAH would reverberate for years to come. You don't just lose the income for the years you're out of the work force. You lose future earnings as well because you've lost experience. The only advantage I have is that, at least, I had a job. Employers prefer not to hire people with gapping holes in their employment because they're unreliable. They already know that when the going gets tough this is a person who quits. Employers do not look kindly on taking time off for any reason other than to gain experience you can't get while working. They will favor the person who didn't take the time off not the one who did.
Last edited by Ivorytickler; 07-08-2012 at 08:17 AM..
You are assuming that the man is the breadwinner and not the female. Not every family is able for one parent to stay home. Also, to the people who don't understand why the moms go back to work even though the dad makes +300k, you then state how you can feel that you need things to do and not enough interaction. Maybe these women understood that of themselves before they had kids and planned accordingly.
Actually I wasn't assuming anything mcatp...the OP is a woman, I was responding to her as she described herself "a stay at home MOM"...I'm very much aware that not all families can afford to have one parent "stay at home".... I still think the children are better off raised in their home than at a daycare....and if one of the parents is making an adequate income to support the family...the others contribution is more valuable in the home....just my take, is all
Hello everyone! I've never posted in this forum (longtime lurker) but I hope you don't mind me asking questions/advice!
I have a son that is four months old. I have to decide (soon!) whether or not to go back to my teaching job in the fall.
I'm worried that if I go back to work I'll feel like I have NO time with him - I couldn't get him home until 5 and he goes to bed for the night around 7 or 7:30. But at home with one kid, I feel bored and understimulated, and really the 24/7 with him is a bit draining at times (but I do LOVE being with him). I know when we have 2 we both agree that it would be best for me to stay home but right now I'm just not sure. Also I'm not sure if it's because of his age that I'm feeling the way I do but I have a lot of "down time" during the day -- I assume that will change when he is older ? ?
We can afford it but we would have to change our ways of spending, though really having a baby has cut down on our spending anyway. We have good savings and we don't live super extravagantly. I feel like we could use some things, like a bigger vehicle, etc, and it would be more difficult to do that on one salary. And of course I wouldn't be contributing to our savings, 529 plans, etc, if I wasn't working. Then again a good part of my salary would go to daycare, gas, clothing, other work related costs.
A part time job would be perfect but I'm not sure if I can find one or if it would work with finding someone to care for him because part time care just isn't available around here for infants.
Any experiences anyone would like to share would be helpful.
At four months, it's still too early to really have a full sense as to how things are going. I think the best of both worlds is part-time work, if you can swing it; that can be easier said than done to find, though. I bet you could find part-time infant care if you looked around, especially if you look beyond the obvious places. In our old city most of the larger daycare centers did not offer P-T care, but I eventually found a small in-home daycare (which I preferred in any case) where the owner was more flexible, especially if you could adjust your schedule so that you essentially were able to split a FT "spot" with another PT parent.
If you do decide to stay home, don't think about it as you not "contributing" to your salaries, etc.; you'll be contributing in plenty of ways. By not working for pay you'll be saving a lot of money in expenses. Your contributions will no longer come in the form of a paycheck, but they will be just as important.
Pretty soon here you should be able to get out of the house more. Little kids are actually very portable; go out to get coffee, go to the museums, go on walks, whatever. And find a parent group, too, if you haven't already; sometimes it's nice to just hang out with other parents with young kids during the daytime. Gives you some sanity and adult connection.
My take on it is that you'll have many, many years in which to work, but your kid will only be young once. If you can do it, I'd give staying home a shot and see how it goes.
Maybe, but when the opportunity comes up for someone to work from home, the employer will give precedent to the one who put her family first (my current job).
And maybe if someday you have children, you will realize that your child will only take their first steps ONCE - and personally, I'm glad my kids were reaching to ME instead of someone who won't value those firsts. But again, it's all about priorities. Some work to pay the bills, but many work for extra funds like trips to Hawaii (as in this thread) or because they'd be "bored" (which is a personal issue and indicative of the type of person they are)... and some work because they don't realize what they'll miss out on... and by the time they realize it, it'll be too late. You can always go back to work ... you can never get your child's early years back.
Something else my dh and I discussed when we decided I'd stay home with the kids - when both parents work, you will live to your income, whether or not you plan to. In a worst case scenario, when something happens and an additional income is needed, the sahp can always start working again and bringing in additional income... rather than having one parent have to get a second job.
Why would a sah job give you precedent because you are a family person? Sah jobs are typically done because it is a money save for the job. But they also have to balance that with who they feel would put in the most productivity. As for your second point i highly doubt i ever will as i am about as maternal as my fat cat who hates everyone but me. The fact is my mother was never like that either and never found first words or first steps to be that amazing. Me scoring a 32 on the act, or getting a 4.0 through all of high school was more the things that got her misty eyed. As for your last point you are correct but in the end is not the point to do a little better for your kids then you had done for you? If you want to be a sahp that's fine but it's not meaning you have better priorities it means that's what you as a PARENT want to do. You value those moments and do it for yourself. But other people value having extra abilities to do other things with their kids, and give them other advantages in life.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just wait till you have your first
. I just don't have the maternal nature to be around kids younger than 6-7.
