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.
No, not at all. Why would I feel guilty about giving my children a better life? I know that what I do improves their outcome and research backs that up. I feel proud of what I've given my children.
I really hate when debates reduce to this. Accusations that I must feel guilty because I feel strongly that WM's improve their children's lives. If you can't debate, you attack your opponent personally and put them on the defense??? Is that the point of this accusation? Strong feelings to not mean guilt. Sometimes, just the opposite.
FTR, my decision to work was made sans research. I didn't get into the research until people started telling me I was hurting my kids by working. At that point, I decided I needed to take off the rose colored glasses we all wear WRT our decisions and look at what the data says. Fortunately, it says the people who said I was hurting my kids are the ones who need to take off their rose colored glasses so it turned out to be a non issue but, ever since then, I defend WM's. What we do is good for our children and that is something to be proud of.
WM's find creative ways to find more time with their children so time is not an issue. Time studies show that what WM's give up is time for themselves not time with their children. We sacrifice our own leisure time for our kids. (This thread is about time not about me, thank you). So what if I have less time for friends or hobbies or get less sleep than a SAHM. That's not what matters at the end of the day. I'll have plenty of time for my social life, hobbies and sleeping when the kids are grown.
No reason for working part time when I did. I just wanted to and could so I did. I wish I hadn't now. Asking my family to do without income so I could have more time at home was wrong. I woudn't do it again. I can never make up for that decision. It was a lot of money spent on vacation time for me and that is not something I'm proud of. I enjoyed all the time off but I'm not proud that I took it.
As to working summers, it comes with the territory. Putting my kids through college takes top priority. It is my job to set them up in life. If I have to teach summer school to make X dollars to do that, that is what I will do. I owe my kids that. Indulging myself by teaching should not cost my family financially.
I'm glad to know that. It shows you are human.
No it doesn't. Neither of my teacher parents ever worked summers (until my dad's school went year-around.) We used that time to take family road trips, and swim at my grandparent's. These are my best childhood memories, not being "independent" after school.
What does that even mean? You said teaching isn't important and you only do it so your daughter can go to a good school. How is that indulging yourself?
ETA you could have made your point and had many of us agreeing with you if you had attempted to do it without degrading SAHMs. I absolutely see the value in working. I also see the value in staying home. There are tradeoffs with both. If you could just admit that your way isn't necessarily best for EVERYONE, we'd all shut up about it.
If that were the only thing that mattered, all wealthy families would have well functioning, successful children and all poor families would have maladjusted, unsuccessful children. That is simply not true. How the family functions (regardless of WM/SAH status or even necessarily time) has much more to do with successful children than family income. Family function is key (and no I don't have any studies to back that up, it's common sense). Some families function better with a SAP and some families function better with both parents working. A study cannot tell you how best a particular, individual family functions best. Not one person is arguing that your family isn't better off with you working. Everyone else just would like the same modicum of respect that perhaps, just perhaps, they know what works best for their own family more than you, or some study that was not ever intended to tell everyone how best to live their life.
this is an excellent point! I can't believe it took this long for someone to make it.
It has more to do with the family situation than the mother in question. We have every reason to believe that parenting isn't influenced by working status. What is impacted is the family's standard of living.
After a certain point, more is just...more. I confess to a certain quasi-Buddhist perplexedness as to why more than one needs-- excess, if you will-- is remotely desirable.
There's been a lot of time accounting so far in this thread, but what I haven't heard from anyone is a discussion of what they consider a "good" outcome. I'm sure everyone will have their own list of things that equate to a desirable outcome for their kids.
My daughters are educated, respectable adults who have healthy family lives, passions that they pursue, and the ability to create some semblance of the reality they wish to live. Moreover, they are people with whom I would happily spend time even if I weren't related to them-- and they give every indication of feeling the same way. And neither lives in my basement. So..y'know...it's pretty good. I'll call their upbringing a success, overall.
After a certain point, more is just...more. I confess to a certain quasi-Buddhist perplexedness as to why more than one needs-- excess, if you will-- is remotely desirable.
Exactly! I'll confess to raising a family (and living) with "Less is More" and "Small is Beautiful" as firm beliefs.
To hear you tell it, Ivory, one would think that with only one parent working, we'd all be living in the ghetto, and with 2, we'd all be members of the country club. It just isn't like that.
My neighborhood has home values ranging from about $250K to $600K. That is my immediate neighborhood. If I go back to work full time and we decide to buy a bigger house, we would choose to live in the exact same neighborhood, with the same people, and the same schools. Nothing would change except the size of our house. I don't think my kids would turn out any better because we lived in more square footage.
No it doesn't. Neither of my teacher parents ever worked summers (until my dad's school went year-around.) We used that time to take family road trips, and swim at my grandparent's. These are my best childhood memories, not being "independent" after school.
What does that even mean? You said teaching isn't important and you only do it so your daughter can go to a good school. How is that indulging yourself?
ETA you could have made your point and had many of us agreeing with you if you had attempted to do it without degrading SAHMs. I absolutely see the value in working. I also see the value in staying home. There are tradeoffs with both. If you could just admit that your way isn't necessarily best for EVERYONE, we'd all shut up about it.
I have not degraded SAHM's. All I've said is they do the same job that WM's do. WM or SAH makes no difference WRT how our kids turn out. This is, and always has been, a financial decision. For some reason, saying that SAH is the equivalent of WM (finances aside) is offensive to many here. Apparently, SAH must be better to be a valid choice in their minds.
I'm refering to the financial loss involved in teaching. I had no right to ask my family to take it. Working summers doesn't quite correct that so I'm going back into engineering.
If that were the only thing that mattered, all wealthy families would have well functioning, successful children and all poor families would have maladjusted, unsuccessful children. That is simply not true. How the family functions (regardless of WM/SAH status or even necessarily time) has much more to do with successful children than family income. Family function is key (and no I don't have any studies to back that up, it's common sense) and not all families function equally without regard to working status. Some families function better with a SAP and some families function better with both parents working. A study cannot tell you how best a particular, individual family functions best. Not one person is arguing that your family isn't better off with you working. Everyone else just would like the same modicum of respect that perhaps, just perhaps, they know what works best for their own family more than you, or some study that was not ever intended to tell everyone how best to live their life.
Ah, the old go to extremes tactic....didn't see that one coming...
I never said SES was EVERYTHING. It is, however, something. In most cases it matters. Even among the wealthy it matters. Things would be worse without it.
I have not degraded SAHM's. All I've said is they do the same job that WM's do. WM or SAH makes no difference WRT how our kids turn out. This is, and always has been, a financial decision. For some reason, saying that SAH is the equivalent of WM (finances aside) is offensive to many here. Apparently, SAH must be better to be a valid choice in their minds.
I'm refering to the financial loss involved in teaching. I had no right to ask my family to take it. Working summers doesn't quite correct that so I'm going back into engineering.
And you don't think degrading? You compare what I do day in and day out to what you do on a vacation or on thhe weekend? And that's not degrading?
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.
I can't believe it took this long for someone to make it.
