Working mothers

With my three DDs there is quite a variance in their ways of parenting and work. DD1 and her DH are both freelance. They share the parenting, with the one who has work going and doing it while the one who hasn't looks after the children.

DD2 worked a 2 hour drive from home which meant a very long working day and hardly any time to see her little DD. Her husband is an actor and when 'resting' was able to look after the little one (very well, might I add). But when he was away working, it was difficult for her to get childcare to cover those long hours. I live a considerable distance from her and was unable to help. She has now decided to be a SAHM and loves it. Does some work at home and gets involved with the school.

Many of you regulars probably know something of DD3's situation as an unsupported single mum. She now runs her own business as well as keeping the very complicated activity life of her boys going. Respect to her! She has no choice in the matter but is permanently exhausted doing it all. At least she has us here to support with childcare: long school holidays, sickness and worst of all those increasingly frequent 'non-student' days, the nightmare of working single parents.

As long as children are loved, cared for and given plenty of stimulus, I can't see how they will suffer whatever the working choices of their parents.

BTW whatever is this latest fad, 'attachment disorder' all about?

What I wouldn't have given to be a stay at home mum. just a shame my sons father walked out when he was only weeks old not that the lazy sod would have worked to keep us anyway

@DaphneBroom

It brings a lump to my throat when my kids say they were proud of me.

When my son was at primary school, he had to produce a Mother's Day card and was supposed to write a message inside along the lines of 'Thank you, Mummy, for baking cakes and being there with hugs when I graze my knee' etc. My son wrote something like 'Thank you, Mummy, for working hard to put food on our table and pay the bills'. I still have the card somewhere, because it made my cry.

Daphnedill what a lovely message! It was straight from the heart rather than the not very well thought through one from the school! Definitely one for the memory box!

I think I had the best of both worlds,I've been self employed since I was 22 ,worked until I had to go to the labour ward and was back at work the day after my daughter and I were discharged from hospital ,she was 8 days old.I took her with me .She lay in her pram and had wee walks twice a day .She was there with me until she started nursery at 4 ,helped out by putting stamps on letters etc .I dont think it dd her any harm,she's a very sociable person ,a brilliant mum of 3 and has her own business .She's also has a heart of gold and is constantly helping others ,despite her own chronic health issues .Like many my mum wouldn't have looked after my children ,she always said she brought up 4 of her own .My husbands parents took them for the odd weekend .I had my daughters eldest two from they were weeks old until they started school and my sons 7 year old for half of every week ,as he has shared custody and he works very long hours .As long as kids feel loved and cared for thats the main objective.

I have absolutely no problem with parents wishing to go back to work if they wish like daphnedill but I do object to the Government supporting this one type of parenting over another. I believe there are many parents (note I am not just saying mothers) who would prefer to stay at home especially during a child's early years but government policies have only encouraged out of home working by subsidising childcare settings.Lack of affordable housing, low paid work etc have also exacerbated the problem.
Daphnedill - I absolutely loved being at home with my children and often say they were the happiest days of my life but I wholeheartedly believed it was the best for them. It wasn't just for self gratification and I can also assure you I was certainly no domestic goddess!!

I've only just seen this thread. I'm hopeless at links but I've just read an article in today's Daily Mail on line that concludes children where both parents work, so the children spend time in nursery and/or with grandparents are developmentally more advances than the children of what the paper refers to as SAHMs. The research is from an English university and is consistent with every piece of research on this subject I've read about in the past 30 plus years.

Some of the comments, including those in the OP are judgemental and criticise any woman who chooses to have a career as well as children. My grandchildren have a couple of days in nursery and a couple with grandparents. The angry comment earlier on this thread, suggesting that those of us who "couldn't be bothered" with our own children (i.e. we went to work) will take the same approach to our grandchildren couldn't be further from the mark. My family and friends include numerous retired GP's, nurses, teachers (lots of public servants) as well as an equal number of folks who ran their own businesses etc. We're all now involved in child care for grandchildren on a regular basis.

In the 70's I hoped this country would follow the excellent example set in so many other norther european countries, where excellent child care is provided at minimal cost for all parents. It's better for children and better for families. When I was a social worker, we were able to provide nursery places for depressed SAHM's - large numbers of them.

@chattykathy

So why were those days so happy if it wasn't self-gratification? Excuse me if I think you're contradicting yourself.

Contrary to those who see SAHMs as being denigrated, I see the other side of the coin. I do not believe that bringing up children is the best job in the world, but it seems people like me are to be criticised for being so selfish. Why is this criticism always addressed at women? What about the men who love their children, but aren't criticised for going to work every day?

I can't see why there is a conflict. There is nothing to prevent SAHMs taking advantage of any support for nursery education and sending their child to nursery part time if they wish. Presumably they are allowed some time away from their children. This setting working mums against stay at homes isn't necessary.

I agree. I don't even know how the government is encouraging women in couples financially to stay in work.

I think there are two issues here. Firstly, it's about supporting low paid families with children. Secondly, it's about supporting women to stay in work/go back to work.

Girls outperform boys in schools; there are more female undergraduates than males; women and men in their twenties have approximately equal incomes. It's not until women start having children that inequality kicks in.

Once women take a career break, they become de-skilled and find it difficult to get back into a job at the same seniority and at the same pay.

There are, of course, women who deliberately choose jobs which fit around childcare, but there's a problem if they find themselves separated or bereaved.

The biggest group of people living in poverty are single parents, mainly in their thirties or forties and mainly women. Research has shown that men generally recover from separation/divorce financially more easily than women, probably because they usually don't have to work around childcare, but also because they have worked continuously.

The above has implications for the tax credits paid to single parents and also for the pensions they are able to build up. Therefore, saving money by not supporting women to remain in work could have a financial price further down the line.

However, it's not just about the money. I believe that women should have the same opportunities as men. I also believe they have the same responsibilities, which means ensuring that they are capable of supporting themselves and their children on their own, should the need arise.

I am now going to come across as something from the dark old ages but it is my belief and if others don't agree that's fine.
Why have children if you don't want to play a pivotal role in their early years? I personally would ban all mothers of under 5's from working at all and then only part time work until they attend high school. If women are widowed when their children are under these ages, the government should pay a big enough pension to be able to live comfortably at home looking after their children during those formative years. If women are left as single mothers because of divorce they should get X amount from the government and then the hubby should get X amount decucted at source from their wages. The same would apply if a guy does a runner after he has discovered he is going to be a father. This may help make men take responsibility for their children or for taking adequate protection to prevent them becoming a father.
This would also help the younger generation get a foothold in the world of work.
I have had many a younger workmate tell me they HAVE to work yet if they did without the branded clothes, holidays abroad, weekends away on hen do's they could manage quite well for those few years.
I would rather have the joy of watching my child meet all their milestones, get the cuddles and be their when they were feeling poorly than have all the material things that seem to be 'can't live without' items. And no, my hubby wasn't in a great paying job and there has been many a time we had to sell something ( a piece of furniture ) to pay a bill and our kids Xmas & birthday presents were sometimes good quality second hand goods, but they never felt hard done by and knew their parents put them before material goods.
I know I will have offended a lot of people, but we are all entitled to our own beliefs. Oh, and I have no problem with parents changing/sharing parental duties. I did work occasionally, but it was after hubby came home from work. We would literally pass children over on the doorstep when he was coming in and I was going out. But children grow up so quickly, a few years of 'doing without' and making a few sacrifices must be worth more than only seeing your child for an hour in the morning and another hour or two at night surely? And we did not have such generous child benefits, housing benefits, tax credits and all the other things lower paid workers can get today.

Children can still attend nursery if their mums stay at home, it just would not be all day every day. When my children were small we regularly went to mother &a baby/toddler groups, then as they got older they would go to a playschool without me for a couple of hours twice a week, then their are the picnics at the park with other mums and children. Being a stay at home mum doesn't mean you keep yourself and your children locked away from society.

MagicWriter2016 its different times,people dont want to sacrifice or do without and many young people I know wouldn't thank you for second hand things...Thats not THEIR fault,its the generation who brought them up ....US .They dont all have designer clothes and holidays abroad ,some work long hours and some are on zero hours contracts and have no idea what hours they'll work or when.The working poor are probably not new ,just better publicised .It doesn't mean they aren't worth some help

Magicwriter, the UK government will be paying out a quarter of a million pounds to train my daughter as a doctor, none of which will be repaid because we live in Scotland where university is free.

Do you think it's a good use of that money for my daughter, should she have children, to stay at home for five years and then work only part time for another seven years? Time in which her male/childless colleagues will be gaining experience and the world of medicine moving rapidly forward. How will she then restart her career, nearing her 40's with time against her and her peers far ahead in terms of career promotion?

How will the NHS cope, given that more than half of today's medics are female? As a society, we need women to work, to share their skills and talent. If you read my earlier post, you will see that women staying at home is a 20th century phenomenon and that the norm prior to that was for women to work.

All of my grandchildren have working parents and none of them seem any the worse for it, they're just regular normal, happy children who are deeply loved by their parents.

MagicWriter, Would you use the same argument for men? Have you ever asked them why they want children if they don't want to play a pivotal role in their upbringing?

It's joy for you to watch the milestones. I don't suppose the children care less who watches them achieve those milestones.

magic I agree with you in part . Having children is a choice and generally means a bit of sacrifice , in my opinion people are not willing to give anything up and still want the lifestyle which they had pre children . Hence the " I have no choice but to work" card which many of them play because they have huge mortgages etc.
Whether we like it or not childcare falls mainly to the Mother , the Mans job is to support the family . It may be viewed by some as an old fashioned idea but it is entirely practical as yet men cannot have babies . It seems to be the children who miss out the most , being farmed out to whoever begrudgingly looks after them , you only have to look at a lot of the posts on GN to know the level of childcare some are being expected to do .

Firstly f77ms what do you consider a huge mortgage? My sons wage alone would not even support a £75,000 mortgage for an ex-council house!

Secondly I take great offense at your statement it seems to be the children who miss out the most, being farmed out to whoever begrudgingly looks after them I look after my DGC very regularly and never once have I done so "begrudgingly" or I would not do it! Yes it can be difficult at times, especially with DDiL working shifts . It is very difficult during the long school holidays when the children can get passed around a bit (I do work too) but begrudge doing it? No way. I consider spending time with my fantastic GC a pleasure and some of the happiest times of my life. I feel that when they are with me they are having a different experience than they might have elsewhere. I live right across the road to a fantastic beach and we spend so much time there in all weathers. We cook together, we do art and craft, we read, do gardening, watch films, and go on several outings, not to mention caravanning holidays when we can.

What gives people the right to make such sweeping judgements about others? Some comments here are beyond cold, critical, judgemental and offensive.
it's the same old nonsense, " the Man's job to provide for the family, children of working mothers (and it's always the mothers who are blamed) are 'farmed out to whoever begrudgingly looks after them "

My children are still close to their child minder, despite it being almost 20 years since they no longer spent after school and holidays with her. My grandchildren go to excellent nurseries a couple of days a week and spend one day with each set of grandparents. They are meeting all their developmental milestones early, have strong and healthy attachments with both parents. I must say, I'm relieved I don't live in a family with grandparents who have such judgemental views on younger families.

The OP writer (me) got slammed by some for talking about working mothers but whether we believe it to be right or not society in general looks upon the mother as the primary carer.

The OP talked about women who don't need to work but choose to do so asking for government and employer support towards the costs of childcare and the difficulties of juggling children and work. If any subsidies or help were to become available it should be targeted at those who have no choice but to work.

Daphnedill, if you read my post you will see that I did say that I had no problem with the parents swapping roles and that fathers who abandon their children should be made to pay for their upkeep. I just find it difficult to understand why a woman would go through nine months of pregnancy to then hand her child over to someone else to bring up for her other than the father. But as I also said, that is MY belief and if others think differently then I have to accept it, the same way I would expect folk to respect my beliefs.

I hope that someday you'll know the indescribable joy of having children and of paying someone else to raise them.
Gomez Addams (Addams Family Values)

VQ

Little Pubert, bless him.

Really, why are people being so judgmental about the reasons why women work? If a woman wants to work and have a family, why shouldn't she? Maybe once she has a child she finds childcare isn't the rosy landscape she was led to believe and finds it boring and a drudge (personally, I enjoyed it but not everyone is the same as me).

Isn't it better that a child has a happy working mother than a resentful, bored SAHM?

This thread reminds me of the deserving and the undeserving poor of Victorian times.

Wonderful post aruna , A little glimpse of how it is for children of working mothers so eloquently put .

Oddly when I started this thread it was to complain that those who could afford to be stay at home mothers were asking for financial and employer support.

It amazes me how threads sometimes take on a life of their own.