Stay-at-home Moms on the rise in U.S. (child care, meal plan, infant)
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 think it's a myth that some kids spend 12+ hours in daycare. I used to work at a Kindercare for a few years and about a fifth of the kids were there longer than my shift. Some were waiting at the door in the morning and picked up at closing time.
That's how it was for me eventually. I dropped mine off at the sitter at 7am and wasn't back until 6pm. We didn't arrive home until 6:30pm. Dinner and a bath in that 1-1/2 hours before bedtime at 8pm. I literally only fed my children dinner, bathed them, and read bedtime stories 5 nights a week. That wasn't a family life and my sitter truly was raising my children. She did a great job. My children are in their 20s and they still talk about her. I fear they would have been like institutionalized children if they were in a regular daycare instead of being a part of another family. Then I got a job that was a longer commute, but my husband's job changed to one where he got off at 4pm. So the kids were home by 5pm instead of 6pm, but I didn't get home until 7pm so I saw them a half hour less, but my husband saw them 1-1/2 hours more.
In the early years, I had it good. My job was 5 minutes away from where I lived. Daycare was provided by the employer in a different building. I got off work at 3pm and we always went to the park for two hours before coming home to have dinner. It was great. Unfortunately jobs with those hours are few in my field.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meyerland
The startling thing was that sometimes they did have a SAH parent.
Are you sure they weren't working at home? I don't know why I'm questioning that. I do know SAHMs who have full time nannies.
I don't think it's a myth that some kids spend 12+ hours in daycare. I used to work at a Kindercare for a few years and about a fifth of the kids were there longer than my shift. Some were waiting at the door in the morning and picked up at closing time.
When I was nursing some of the shifts were 6.30am till 7.30pm, so the child would have to be in care from 6am till 8pm! Many days we worked past 7.30. I always felt very sorry for parents and children in childcare under those circumstances.
Yes. It started out with interest from a few friends and just people who were interested. Of course I can only have so many students but I enjoy doing it and it keeps me busy.
Mostly I work with children and several college students.
When I was nursing some of the shifts were 6.30am till 7.30pm, so the child would have to be in care from 6am till 8pm! Many days we worked past 7.30. I always felt very sorry for parents and children in childcare under those circumstances.
I am almost one of those moms who have had to leave my DD for a long period of time at the daycare.
My DH works in shifts, so when he is off, she just stays at home. But for 10 days in a month, she goes to daycare at 6:15 AM and I pick her up at 5:30 PM.
Its a horrible situation to be in. It worked fine when I didnt have kids. Since I returned from my maternity leave, I had been looking to find jobs closer to home with little or no success.
It seems other parents are more offended by long daycare schedules than their children are. I'm a SAHM right now but my momma dumped me in daycare 12 hours a day and I don't remember anything about it. My FIL told me that when his mother died, he was 11, they were sent to live with relatives because 'single men just didn't raise the kids back then'. If the worst thing a kid endures is 8 hours of Montessori dancing and crafts along with a nap, count them as being well-cared for.
I don't think it's a myth that some kids spend 12+ hours in daycare. I used to work at a Kindercare for a few years and about a fifth of the kids were there longer than my shift. Some were waiting at the door in the morning and picked up at closing time.
The startling thing was that sometimes they did have a SAH parent.
Ok 1/5 does to remotely a majority make.
A 20% subset of any group does not define the larger set. A larger proportion of children of employed mothers are cared for by their own father as a SAHP.
When I was nursing some of the shifts were 6.30am till 7.30pm, so the child would have to be in care from 6am till 8pm! Many days we worked past 7.30. I always felt very sorry for parents and children in childcare under those circumstances.
Those are long days. Hopefully having 4 days/week off helped balance it out.
My cousin is a SAHM. She misses working, but she and her husband had twins. She didn't make much to begin with, and the daycares they could afford had pretty bad reputations. When you end up with a 2-for-1 deal, you have to adjust your plans!
I think part of it is how the real estate crash has forced so many to reassess priorities, turning a negative into a positive for some. For many of the expenses of the bigger home, the nicer car, the bling, the vacations, and the latest and greatest can be the rocks that weigh you down in life.
First off, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a two-parent, two-income family. No one should ever feel a stigma from going to work every day. If you love your kids and keep the wolf from the door, then more power to you. If you interpret that what I'm about to write is an indictment of working moms, you couldn't be more wrong.
That being said, having one parent at home certainly has advantages in terms of raising children. There's always someone at the house, someone to talk to teachers, supervise homework, and cart the kids to ballet, soccer, lacrosse, Cub Scouts, etc., cook dinner, stay home with a sick child, you name it.
The other thing to consider is that there is a financial cost to working every day. With the cost of childcare and the extra expense involved in working (Extra gas, parking, transit, lunches, wardrobe, etc.), it is entirely possible that the second income essentially covers for the costs of earning the second income with little left over. When my three kids were really young, we toted it up and found out that my CPA wife with the corporate gig was essentially working to net roughly an extra $1,000 towards the household expenses. It was really shocking once we added it all up. Plus we were strung out and tired all the time. The house was a mess, the laundry was a piling up, and we were subsisting on a diet that mainly consisted of Mrs. Paul's Fish Sticks. We were working like dogs but we were never getting ahead.
When we paid off a car and cut back on some expenses, we came out even. Yet she was happy every day and the household ran like a Swiss watch. When I sold my business, she returned to the workforce while I worked out of the house. I managed to earn a substantial income working on my sofa while the kids were in school -- and after hours if the day ran long -- and we actually did much better. Plus if a kid was sick or whatever, I could take care of it. The rare exceptions were those times when I had to go out of town on biz.
I think part of it is how the real estate crash has forced so many to reassess priorities, turning a negative into a positive for some. For many of the expenses of the bigger home, the nicer car, the bling, the vacations, and the latest and greatest can be the rocks that weigh you down in life.
First off, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a two-parent, two-income family. No one should ever feel a stigma from going to work every day. If you love your kids and keep the wolf from the door, then more power to you. If you interpret that what I'm about to write is an indictment of working moms, you couldn't be more wrong.
That being said, having one parent at home certainly has advantages in terms of raising children. There's always someone at the house, someone to talk to teachers, supervise homework, and cart the kids to ballet, soccer, lacrosse, Cub Scouts, etc., cook dinner, stay home with a sick child, you name it.
The other thing to consider is that there is a financial cost to working every day. With the cost of childcare and the extra expense involved in working (Extra gas, parking, transit, lunches, wardrobe, etc.), it is entirely possible that the second income essentially covers for the costs of earning the second income with little left over. When my three kids were really young, we toted it up and found out that my CPA wife with the corporate gig was essentially working to net roughly an extra $1,000 towards the household expenses. It was really shocking once we added it all up. Plus we were strung out and tired all the time. The house was a mess, the laundry was a piling up, and we were subsisting on a diet that mainly consisted of Mrs. Paul's Fish Sticks. We were working like dogs but we were never getting ahead.
When we paid off a car and cut back on some expenses, we came out even. Yet she was happy every day and the household ran like a Swiss watch. When I sold my business, she returned to the workforce while I worked out of the house. I managed to earn a substantial income working on my sofa while the kids were in school -- and after hours if the day ran long -- and we actually did much better. Plus if a kid was sick or whatever, I could take care of it. The rare exceptions were those times when I had to go out of town on biz.
$1000/month?? That is a substantial amount of money to a lot of people. I wouldn't be quick to dismiss it.
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.
