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.
i don't want this to turn into a right/wrong discussion. I think this is interesting considering our economic times but it just may be because of our economic times. Does poor employment prospect factor in your decision to stay home with young children if you do?
I decided to stay home (initially working from home and now just at home) because of the exact opposite. My husband is able to comfortably carry our family on his income.
On the flip side.. I completely understand how poor employment prospects can nearly force a parent to stay at home. Take my part of California and family make up: I have 2 young children, with mediocre childcare costing $1200 per child. Not including additional gas and travel time, you're looking at $2400/mo in day care cost. Good childcare will cost you $1600 per child giving you a bill of $3200/mo. For a 2 bedroom apt in a nice city in the sf bay area you are looking at around $1700/mo. That's a total of $4900/mo and that's not including gas, electric, car note etc. A lot of people make $3200/mo so why not just stay home and raise your children in a way that only you can?
Those are interesting statistics. 23% to 29% in just over a decade is a huge jump. I'm really surprised the affluent SAHMs account for only 5%. 34% living in poverty and 5% affluent means 61% are middle class with household incomes under 75k. Not mentioned in the article is the rising childcare costs. There is a point where it's just not worth working when cutting back on the budget will make up for whatever the net income will be after childcare expenses. Not many mothers would work to clear a few hundred dollars a month unless they needed to for sanity, enrichment, etc.
On the flip side.. I completely understand how poor employment prospects can nearly force a parent to stay at home. Take my part of California and family make up: I have 2 young children, with mediocre childcare costing $1200 per child. Not including additional gas and travel time, you're looking at $2400/mo in day care cost. Good childcare will cost you $1600 per child giving you a bill of $3200/mo. For a 2 bedroom apt in a nice city in the sf bay area you are looking at around $1700/mo. That's a total of $4900/mo and that's not including gas, electric, car note etc. A lot of people make $3200/mo so why not just stay home and raise your children in a way that only you can?
You can only count childcare and the additional commuting and work realated expenses. You can't count rent and utilities because those things need to be paid even if you don't work. Your childcare must be through the roof in San Fran to be $2,400 for two children at the cheapest.
Even $1,200 for 2 children doesn't make financial sense for a mother earning 35k per year since her take home pay would be 2k per month. When you take into consideration commuting expenses which are $360/month via bus in my area or $400 plus gas for parking in my region, that is only clearing $450 at most and $200 at worst without taking into consideration clothing and lunch costs. Since that's a low enough figure that can be easily cut from a household budget, it really doesn't make financial sense to work for many parents during the childcare years.
My husband and I would classify ourselves as middle class. For us, it doesn't make economic sense for me to work. We are expecting our 2nd child in May, meaning we'll have two kids under one. The younger the children, the more expensive the day care!
As others have said, once you factor in the gas to get me to a job downtown (50 mile roundtrip every day), plus parking downtown, plus work related expenses, plus the extra that I would have to spend on grooming as required by the professional world (nails, hair, makeup every day), it makes no economic sense. We would be profiting a bit, but not much. Not enough to make it worth it by any means.
I do miss work sometimes, but I know that the reward long term of being a SAHM will be worth it. ♡
Interesting study. I think that more women just realize that it doesn't make sense (for some) to pay nearly half of one's salary for childcare when it isn't necessary. Families categorized as "wealthy" might be misleading too. If one of the household incomes dropped, they may very well just be middle class and might have expenses that require two incomes but have "free" childcare in the form of a family member.
My husband and I decided that if I didn't find work in a reasonable amount of time then It would be best to just stay home. We were just starting the whole adoption process, and a lot needed to be done. It helped that we only had to work around his schedule. I've since discovered other things I can do at home, and now can't imagine working with young children who need daycare. I wouldn't want to spend the money on it, even if I had it. I'd be working for two groups: my employer and my child's daycare. For us it's not worth it and we can afford to live off of one salary for a good while.
Eventually I plan on working full-time outside of the home, probably after he retires which is within 5 years. I read somewhere that the unemployment rate is under 7% now. That's not too bad from where it was a few years ago. I don't think it's all about the economy, because I know of women who had high-earning careers who left them once they had children. They just found other things to do at home. Maybe it's becoming a trend simply because more women want to be at home when their children are babies and young, hiring Nannies and babysitters as needed.
Don't get me wrong though. There is a trade-off...I believe it will be much harder for me to re-enter the workforce when I do return, which I am not looking forward to experiencing!
I'm not surprised. I know many people who are walking the line. Child care is expensive, and the other costs of working add up.
I'm single and working part time so that I can actually parent my children. The financial toll is challenging, butin 5 moure years my youngest will graduate and I can make up for the financial loss then.
I've known plenty of women who decided to keep working at their careers (not jobs) knowing they would be in the hole for a few years. it was worth it to them to keep their career path active because they feared taking a few years off would greatly derail their career goals. Also we all know people who are working purely for the benefits. I can understand that.
I wonder if this has been studied and if this can be verified. I surely do know being away from a career can mean being left behind for many people--whether it is for health reasons, to be a caregiver or to have or adopt a baby. it is just a very personal reason every family has to make themselves.
I've known plenty of women who decided to keep working at their careers (not jobs) knowing they would be in the hole for a few years. it was worth it to them to keep their career path active because they feared taking a few years off would greatly derail their career goals. Also we all know people who are working purely for the benefits. I can understand that.
I wonder if this has been studied and if this can be verified. I surely do know being away from a career can mean being left behind for many people--whether it is for health reasons, to be a caregiver or to have or adopt a baby. it is just a very personal reason every family has to make themselves.
Maybe if their career goals are more important than their children they should have just focused on their careers???
Sorry, just don't get dumping your kids in day care for 12+ hours/day...just will never make sense for me when people have a choice---and most people do have a choice....the only ones that really don't are single parents....
Maybe if their career goals are more important than their children they should have just focused on their careers???
Sorry, just don't get dumping your kids in day care for 12+ hours/day...just will never make sense for me when people have a choice---and most people do have a choice....the only ones that really don't are single parents....
That statement is so far from the reality of the majority of Americans. In KS, the average household income is $48,000 and that is generally two people working. Take away 1/2 to 1/3 of that income when mom or dad stays home, put 2 kids in the mix, a house payment, car payment, insurance, groceries, utilities.............. I know that people with "careers" don't understand having a "job" but gee.
We worked different shifts for a few years to bridge the gap. And, putting your children in day care is not "dumping" them. Think the old "quality over quantity" when it comes to the hours spent with your children.
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.
