stay at home mother.

suicide_circus

Shivers26 wrote: »

That used to seriously boil my p1ss.

Haha great expression!

bluecode

Well I'm effectively a stay at home Dad. I do have a job as such but the nature of it means I'm around during the week a lot. When they were babies we had them full time in the creche because we both worked. It is a very good creche too. But it was expensive.

My wife earns a lot more than me and it has become obvious that it made no sense to have them in creche. So we cut back the hours. Now one is in school and other Montessori under the government pre school scheme. We don't have the expense of the creche anymore but school hours are not conducive to work. The creche operates 8 to 6. But school finishes at 1:30 at the moment. It would be extremely awkward to find a job that fitted in with those hours.

So it's not a lifestyle choice it's sheer neccessity.

But I'm lucky my wife is reasonably well paid and we could live on her money alone, unlike that Garda Sergeant in the other thread. :rolleyes:

So it makes financial sense for me to stay at home as much as possible. But it's not easy and it does wreck your head at times. I love my boys but could cheerfully kill them sometimes.

I genuinely do not know how others cope.

If the right full time job came up. I would cheerfully take it and get the kids minded. But it would have to be very well paid and that's unlikely.

mariaalice

In the eighties Gay Byrne had a radio program it was a bit like liveline and when the topic of working mother came up you alway got the response they are taking a mans job, and other such rubbish:p..... so for someone of my generation to see some women today staying at home and living a sort of repackage 1960th lifestyle is a bit odd.

Someone is after telling me women have more children in a rescission.

iguana

mariaalice wrote: »

In the eighties Gay Byrne had a radio program it was a bit like liveline and when the topic of working mother came up you alway got the response they are taking a mans job, and other such rubbish:p..... so for someone of my generation to see some women today staying at home and living a sort of repackage 1960th lifestyle is a bit odd.

Your posts are coming across as weirdly bitter, tbh. Why do you have such a problem with how other people choose to live their lives?

The fact of the matter is that when a couple has children someone has to look after those children. There are obvious variations but most couples have the choice of; The couple earning two salaries while paying the salary of a childminder or one partner can earn a salary and the other can take on the work of the childminder. For many people on average incomes there is very little financial difference so they choose the scenario that best suits their personal preference. Not everyone has a job they love or feel at all passionate about. Not everyone prefers the company of their co-worker to the company of their children. A lot of people work for the money and if they are only working to pay someone else to care for their child they decide to stay home instead.

They aren't harming you, they aren't scamming your taxes, etc, so maybe mind your own business and stop being so judgemental.

mariaalice

iguana wrote: »

Your posts are coming across as weirdly bitter, tbh. Why do you have such a problem with how other people choose to live their lives?

The fact of the matter is that when a couple has children someone has to look after those children. There are obvious variations but most couples have the choice of; The couple earning two salaries while paying the salary of a child minder or one partner can earn a salary and the other can take on the work of the child minder. For many people on average incomes there is very little financial difference so they choose the scenario that best suits their personal preference. Not everyone has a job they love or feel at all passionate about. Not everyone prefers the company of their co-worker to the company of their children. A lot of people work for the money and if they are only working to pay someone else to care for their child they decide to stay home instead.

Thats very unfair I am not judging anyone, I then to comment on thing that I find are changing or are different, this is an INTERNET discussion site thats all its a place where anything and ever thing is discussed and its very democratic I have no problem how anyone lives their life, however I do think there is a lot of saying one thing in private as regards childcare and schooingl and saying another thing in public.

Dravokivich

mariaalice wrote: »

Thats very unfair I am not judging anyone, I then to comment on thing that I find are changing or are different, this is an INTERNET discussion site thats all its a place where anything and ever thing is discussed and its very democratic I have no problem how anyone lives their life, however I do think there is a lot of saying one thing in private as regards childcare and schooingl and saying another thing in public.

Wait... what have I been reading here?

mariaalice wrote: »

Another thing I have noticed is the amount of 4 children family's seem to be increasing when my first child was born 4 children families were rare unless the family were farmers.

mariaalice wrote: »

My point is I know someone who takes all the children to mass even though they are agnostic ...The same person would not cosider a fee paying school but they are sending the children to a galesscoil not because of any interest in the Irish language...

women were only delighted to get the chance to go back to work,nobody had ever heard of the word lifestyle applied to something like family.

mariaalice wrote: »

If you can afford to stay at home with your children and still maintaining the same lifestyle you alway had then you husband/wife/partner must be very very well paid and you are well off as well as Lucky in the society we inhabit.

Those are all judgements...

mariaalice

Dravokivich wrote: »

Wait... what have I been reading here?







Those are all judgements...

No they are not judgements they are opinions.

kowloon

It's better for children to have a parent at home. It doesn't have to be their mother either.

Does anyone remember the 'Childless' thread? There were a few people on there with some really nasty attitudes towards those who left work to raise children.

mariaalice

I feel sorry for any mother who would like to stay at home with her children but cant because of their mortgage or whatever and I was pointing that the option of mothers staying out of paid employment is becoming the preserve of the lower paid or the well off, For most middle income earners it is not an option.

Some of the other things I have an opinion on ( not a judgement about ) would be because for example I think its deeply cynical to affect an interest in Irish just to get your child in to a galescoil.

kylith

smash wrote: »

You want people who have worked hard for their positions to try and raise their families better to just give it up because someone who's single without those responsibilities in their life can't get work?

I don't want anyone to do anything. I'm just saying that if two people are working, and one of them is only earning enough that they are effectively working just to be able to afford to go to work (i.e. salary is just enough to cover childcare and a second car for that parent to get to work), one of them may consider staying home to look after the kids. This would benefit the children, by having a parent at home, and would also make more jobs available to the unemployed; whether they be single and trying to save enough to start a family, or a parent in a family where both parents are out of work.

smash

kylith wrote: »

I don't want anyone to do anything. I'm just saying that if two people are working, and one of them is only earning enough that they are effectively working just to be able to afford to go to work (i.e. salary is just enough to cover childcare and car), one of them may consider staying home to look after the kids. This would benefit the children, by having a parent at home, and would also make more jobs available to the unemployed; whether they be single and trying to save enough to start a family, or a parent in a family where both parents are out of work.

Covering child care plus a car... So they give up work and can now no longer afford a car etc.

There's plenty of people that could decide to not have both parents working but will the unemployed full the gap? Probably not as the skill set might not be there!

SBWife

kylith wrote: »

I don't want anyone to do anything. I'm just saying that if two people are working, and one of them is only earning enough that they are effectively working just to be able to afford to go to work (i.e. salary is just enough to cover childcare and car), one of them may consider staying home to look after the kids. This would benefit the children, by having a parent at home, and would also make more jobs available to the unemployed; whether they be single and trying to save enough to start a family, or a parent in a family where both parents are out of work.

And those who are employed providing the childcare, selling the petrol for the car, maintaining the car, selling the cars, providing insurance for the car loose their jobs? Contrary to the viewpoints of many of the armchair economists on boards, the economy is not a zero sum game, women entering the workforce have helped fuel some of the largest and longest periods in economic growth experienced in the west. I swear some of you guys could have a future writing economic policy for the more right wing portions of the US Republican Party.

kylith

smash wrote: »

Covering child care plus a car... So they give up work and can now no longer afford a car etc.

A car for that parent to get to work, I'm assuming that two people working may well have two cars, most of the 'two working parent' families I know do. I'll reword that post to make it less ambiguous.

There's plenty of people that could decide to not have both parents working but will the unemployed full the gap? Probably not as the skill set might not be there!

That's a pretty big 'might' there. There are very few truly irreplaceable people in any industry, and the few there are certainly wouldn't have to worry about childcare costs. The idea that there 'probably' isn't anyone who could replace the current occupant of any job in the country is just silly. And is someone who is thinking of giving up their job to stay with their kids really going to worry about their boss' ability to hire a replacement?

kylith

SBWife wrote: »

And those who are employed providing the childcare, selling the petrol for the car, maintaining the car, selling the cars, providing insurance for the car loose their jobs?

Unfortunately I don't have all the answers. Perhaps the increase in job availability would absorb that portion of the population. Perhaps a proportion of those people fall into the 'currently working to pay to work'. Previously it was normal for one parent to work and one to stay at home, and the economy didn't collapse.

Contrary to the viewpoints of many of the armchair economists on boards, the economy is not a zero sum game, women entering the workforce have helped fuel some of the largest and longest periods in economic growth experienced in the west. I swear some of you guys could have a future writing economic policy for the more right wing portions of the US Republican Party.

I don't know were you're getting the 'right wing' nonsense, I don't recall anyone saying women should stop working, rather we've been talking about 'one parent', whether they be male or female.

smash

kylith wrote: »

A car for that parent to get to work, I'm assuming that two people working may well have two cars, most of the 'two working parent' families I know do. I'll reword that post to make it less ambiguous.

Disregarding the car, there's a cost involved with staying at home. There's an adult and child to feed and extra utility bills. How is that to be covered?

smash

kylith wrote: »

Previously it was normal for one parent to work and one to stay at home, and the economy didn't collapse.

Like the 80's? ... When the economy collapsed? Or before that? When the cost of living was nowhere near what it is these day?

SBWife

kylith wrote: »

Unfortunately I don't have all the answers. Perhaps the increase in job availability would absorb that portion of the population. Perhaps a proportion of those people fall into the 'currently working to pay to work'. Previously it was normal for one parent to work and one to stay at home, and the economy didn't collapse.


I don't know were you're getting the 'right wing' nonsense, I don't recall anyone saying women should stop working, rather we've been talking about 'one parent', whether they be male or female.

Reducing the size of the workforce be it through a return to one earner families or through a reduction in immigration in order to reduce unemployment is a common policy platform of the more radical elements of the US Republican Party. I never stated or suggested that it would be the female who stayed home only pointed out that the last large scale increase in the workforce ( which happened to result from increased female participation) helped fuel an unprecedented period of economic growth in western democracies.

cazzak79

I don't have kids yet I'm hoping to have 1 or 2 kids with my partner the one thing that stressed me
Most is childcare as we both will have to stay working as long as we can
The costs of childcare whether crèche or childminder are both so expensive.

bbm1

Having friends whos mothers stayed at home, I think they are more needy. My friends wouldnt be able to do as much stuff on there own, always looking company to go to the shop and wouldl be unsure of doing things by themselves. I think its because they are so used to their mothers doing stuff for them. They all set they would quit work as soon as they get preganant and I said the opposite but maybe its just because of what your used to.

My mammy has always worked but it was by choice daddys wages could have been enough to support the family. She loved her job and i think she would have went crazy stuck in the house all day. We had a great babysitter for 15 years!

lukesmom

I can't afford to work! With 3 children, 2 of which are under 2 it's just too expensive for a creche or childminder. Would love to be out earning but at the same time I do enjoy the fact I am not missing out rearing them myself. Some days though I am nearly pulling my hair out with a toddler and newborn it is hard bloody work. I'm on my own too as husband had to move to London to work to support us all. There is only so long you can spend on social welfare before you crack up. My mother stayed at home while my dad worked. I hope to work again when kids are all in school but for now I don't have €1600 a month for childcare.

stoneill

I was a stay at home dad for about 6 months - by jasus I ran back to work!
Anyone who is a stay at home mum has my admiration, paid or unpaid, it has got to be the hardest job in the world!

Smidge

ash23 wrote: »

I think when the kids are small, staying at home often works because it doesn't pay both parents to work.

However, I think once all kids are in school, it is then that staying at home becomes more a sign of wealth. Because once in school childcare costs decrease and so, one parent choosing to remain at home becomes a cost as opposed to making financial sense.

I think the problem there though is unless you have had a "profession" before having your children it has become very difficult now for an "Average" mother to return to work once the children are of age for you to return.

You could have been several years out of the workforce at that stage.

okiss

Most parents have to make decisions based on there own qualifications, work experience and what stage they both are at when they have children.
When most people do the sums for the cost of them both to work outside the home they both need to be earning a good wage.
I know some woman who are happy to stay at home with the children and other woman who are happier working outside the home.
One couple I know are very comfortably off and she could afford to stay at home but she goes out to work as they could never have enough money.
They are so mean that if they won €50 million in the euro millions they would still be driving the 07 car which has 150,000 plus on the clock.
Meanwhile I know other woman who would love to work again even part time but due to the childcare cost and transport cost it would not pay them to do so.

Grayson

I'm in my 30's. When i was a kid I went to a country school. There was just me and my sister in my family and we were the smallest family there. Everyone came from a family of 4 or more. Most of the women didn't work and were full time housewifes. But that was goold old catholic ireland where everyone pumped out as many kids as they could.