Julia Hartley-Brewer v Stella Creasy

Sorry growstuff I misread, and thought I was replying to volver

growstuff

DiscoDancer1975

volver

Ouf!

I know many people, male and female, who would be angry beyond words to hear you say that just because they work, they don't put their children first. It implies that you think any working person doesn't care as much about their children as they do about the next sale they make or piece of code they write.

Its just insulting, and very much out of date.

That’s not what I’m saying at all.....as well you know.

It seems very much that's what you're implying.

I didn’t say anything about not caring. I’m sure all mothers, whether working or not, love and care for their children in the same way as anyone else. It’s the time that’s missing. They simply don’t have it for both, and you don’t need to be a mathematician to work that out. Hence why so many children are in after school clubs and all day nurseries.

You didn’t have children....so put all your energy into your work. It sounds like you had a great career, and did well. I’m at the other end of that. I had four children, put all my energy into them, had a great time, and hope I did well.

I just can’t see the two mixing, without something somewhere missing out. It is just my opinion, you won’t find it on any google search.

Know how what? You can’t put your children first if you’re working. It’s just basic common sense.

Yes, how dare women work to pay for their families.

Definitely not putting children first.

What a load of garbage.

Thanks so much summerlove. I can always rely on you for a really nasty comment. And thanks so much for finishing this thread for me. Frankly I’ve had enough.

Summerlove

Germanshepherdsmum

My choice trisher. Of course he had to go to school at 5. Many professionals would happily pack their offspring off to boarding school at 7 for convenience . Why, if the intention from the outset is to pay a stranger to look after your child the moment you can get back to the office (or whatever) do you actually bother to have a child? When you finish work said child may be in bed and the only time you spend with them is at the weekend (assuming you’re not working, which with many jobs you will be) and holidays. Unless you’re doing it to keep up the birth rate, what’s the point? Mother first, child a poor second.

Why bother having a child just to give to their grand parent?

Neither a paid professional, or a grandparent is you, their mother

I didn't give my children to their grandparents, who didn't live near and couldn't have helped at all - not that I would have let my parents or in-laws look after my children because they had such different values.

Know how what? You can’t put your children first if you’re working. It’s just basic common sense.
Maybe not in the workplace, which is why it would make sense for employers to think twice before expecting people (not just parents) to be available round the clock. If everyone were expected to be available to be called into in work at 1.00 am (outside of a scheduled nightshift) nobody would be able to make any plans or arrangements, or to have any sort of life outside of work.

You can certainly go to work in a job with reliable hours (which most probably could be with a bit of imagination and give and take) and put your children first. Most parents do exactly that, and work so that their children can have best the start in life that they can give them.

The fact that SAHMs also do other things doesn't really stand up in this context, though, Callistemon, as many working mothers do those things too. It takes more organisation, but it is perfectly possible to work, have outside interests and see that your children get to enjoy theirs too. When children are at school, their clubs and classes happen in the evenings, for one thing, and for another, many volunteer organisations are staffed by people who work during the day, so they, too, have meetings out of working hours.

Until the 1950s (or thereabouts), most working class women did work. They took in laundry or mending, did cleaning or caring, etc. It was only when the country became richer after WW2 that more people became "middle class" and could afford for one parent to stay at home.

Germanshepherdsmum

My choice trisher. Of course he had to go to school at 5. Many professionals would happily pack their offspring off to boarding school at 7 for convenience . Why, if the intention from the outset is to pay a stranger to look after your child the moment you can get back to the office (or whatever) do you actually bother to have a child? When you finish work said child may be in bed and the only time you spend with them is at the weekend (assuming you’re not working, which with many jobs you will be) and holidays. Unless you’re doing it to keep up the birth rate, what’s the point? Mother first, child a poor second.

Why bother having a child just to give to their grand parent?

Neither a paid professional, or a grandparent is you, their mother

DiscoDancer1975

volver

Ouf!

I know many people, male and female, who would be angry beyond words to hear you say that just because they work, they don't put their children first. It implies that you think any working person doesn't care as much about their children as they do about the next sale they make or piece of code they write.

Its just insulting, and very much out of date.

That’s not what I’m saying at all.....as well you know.

It seems very much that's what you're implying.

I don't "well know" at all. You wrote You can’t put your children first if you’re working. It’s just basic common sense.

If that's not what you mean, what do you mean?

Callistemon21

growstuff

Callistemon21

I honestly think some women become SAHMs more for themselves than the benefits for the children
Unpleasant and uncalled for growstuff

It's what I honestly think, based on my experience of some SAHMs, so not unpleasant and uncalled for at all.

PS. I find some of the comments about working mothers extremely unpleasant, judgmental and uncalled for.

I've been both
Many women do have a career break therefore become SAHM - an acronym so wrongly ascribed to them.

I've never met a mother who "stayed at home" whilst their children were young- they volunteered, met others, made sure their children enjoyed a lot of activities. If they were lucky enough to have husbands who came home each evening (I wasn't) they could go out, go to evening classes etc to improve their skills ready for their return to the workplace.

I wouldn't be judgmental about working mothers either

But so many SAHMs are judgmental about working mothers. I've met some of them and I know they gossiped about me when my children were young. Some of them even seem to be posting on GN - just read what some of the posts are saying!

As for the voluntary work, etc. - it's like a hobby.

volver

Ouf!

I know many people, male and female, who would be angry beyond words to hear you say that just because they work, they don't put their children first. It implies that you think any working person doesn't care as much about their children as they do about the next sale they make or piece of code they write.

Its just insulting, and very much out of date.

That’s not what I’m saying at all.....as well you know.

That to DD1975

Ouf!

I know many people, male and female, who would be angry beyond words to hear you say that just because they work, they don't put their children first. It implies that you think any working person doesn't care as much about their children as they do about the next sale they make or piece of code they write.

Its just insulting, and very much out of date.

therefore become

Before becoming

I need to take a course in autocorrect or a refresher in proofreading skills.

growstuff

Callistemon21

I honestly think some women become SAHMs more for themselves than the benefits for the children
Unpleasant and uncalled for growstuff

It's what I honestly think, based on my experience of some SAHMs, so not unpleasant and uncalled for at all.

PS. I find some of the comments about working mothers extremely unpleasant, judgmental and uncalled for.

I've been both
Many women do have a career break therefore become SAHM - an acronym so wrongly ascribed to them.

I've never met a mother who "stayed at home" whilst their children were young- they volunteered, met others, made sure their children enjoyed a lot of activities. If they were lucky enough to have husbands who came home each evening (I wasn't) they could go out, go to evening classes etc to improve their skills ready for their return to the workplace.

I wouldn't be judgmental about working mothers either

Germanshepherdsmum

How have I advocated that lifestyle?

By saying that you don't want to pay taxes to subsidise others' choices, and simultaneously that people shouldn't have children if they can't afford to pay for their upbringing.

In most cases couples on one salary can't afford for one of them to stay at home, and even more wouldn't be able to do so if they were not subsidised by the taxes and NI contributions of those who who are unable to have children because of the affordability consideration.

If only those who could afford to have one parent at home should have children, inevitably this would lead to those who couldn't afford to procreate subsidising those who could afford it. My question was how this sits with you, as someone who does not see why you should subsidise the life choices of others.

DiscoDancer1975

DaisyAnne

DiscoDancer1975

I’ve come to the conversation late, so apologies if I’ve missed something. I was a SAHM, and the thought of working whilst bringing up my children wouldn’t have occurred to me, even if my husband had wanted me to. If that makes me a 1950’s mum...then so be it.

In my opinion, and that’s all it is, children come absolutely first, and unless you need to put food on the table, a mother’s job is her children. If you want a career, it should go on hold, or you don’t have them. Children are so precious, and the best gift of all. Work...you can do anytime.

My doctor once said to me, she often sees women who have regretted working, but none who have stayed at home. She was a working mum herself....and said she sometimes feels she doesn’t do either job properly.

I think the government needs to be paying mums to stay at home, instead of paying other people to look after their children while they work.

Children first....always

So are you suggesting that only you and those who stay at home actually know how, and make sure, they put their children first?

Know how what? You can’t put your children first if you’re working. It’s just basic common sense.

Oh yes you can! And it's bloody hard work!

Another good post Doodledog.

Germanshepherdsmum: I don't seek to suggest for a moment that children both of whose parents work are any less happy etc than those who have a stay at home parent.

So if you're not suggesting that the children of parents both of whom work are any less happy, why is it so important for parents (the mother) to give up a job? Who exactly benefits from the mother not working?

Great post @ 16.39 Coastpath.

Callistemon21

^I honestly think some women become SAHMs more for themselves than the benefits for the children^
Unpleasant and uncalled for growstuff

It's what I honestly think, based on my experience of some SAHMs, so not unpleasant and uncalled for at all.

PS. I find some of the comments about working mothers extremely unpleasant, judgmental and uncalled for.

DaisyAnne

DiscoDancer1975

I’ve come to the conversation late, so apologies if I’ve missed something. I was a SAHM, and the thought of working whilst bringing up my children wouldn’t have occurred to me, even if my husband had wanted me to. If that makes me a 1950’s mum...then so be it.

In my opinion, and that’s all it is, children come absolutely first, and unless you need to put food on the table, a mother’s job is her children. If you want a career, it should go on hold, or you don’t have them. Children are so precious, and the best gift of all. Work...you can do anytime.

My doctor once said to me, she often sees women who have regretted working, but none who have stayed at home. She was a working mum herself....and said she sometimes feels she doesn’t do either job properly.

I think the government needs to be paying mums to stay at home, instead of paying other people to look after their children while they work.

Children first....always

So are you suggesting that only you and those who stay at home actually know how, and make sure, they put their children first?

Know how what? You can’t put your children first if you’re working. It’s just basic common sense.

DiscoDancer1975

I’ve come to the conversation late, so apologies if I’ve missed something. I was a SAHM, and the thought of working whilst bringing up my children wouldn’t have occurred to me, even if my husband had wanted me to. If that makes me a 1950’s mum...then so be it.

In my opinion, and that’s all it is, children come absolutely first, and unless you need to put food on the table, a mother’s job is her children. If you want a career, it should go on hold, or you don’t have them. Children are so precious, and the best gift of all. Work...you can do anytime.

My doctor once said to me, she often sees women who have regretted working, but none who have stayed at home. She was a working mum herself....and said she sometimes feels she doesn’t do either job properly.

I think the government needs to be paying mums to stay at home, instead of paying other people to look after their children while they work.

Children first....always

So are you suggesting that only you and those who stay at home actually know how, and make sure, they put their children first?

How have I advocated that lifestyle?