Jury Duty is not family-friendly!

[DVCLiz]

Actually there is well publicized information regarding that as it is simple budgeting 101. In some cases, it is economically viable for the dad to stay home. Many people state they "have" to work and have a tough time doing so. Often they are surprised when their choice isn't really the must do they thought it was.

When I was working, after actual expenses and daycare, I made only $1 an hour for that particular job. Trimming the budget by $160 ended up not being a big deal.

I'm not unemployable at this point--but our game plan has always been for me to go back to school for a different career choice should something happen to my husband. And if he decides to leave me for some pop-tart, he will pay dearly for choice and I am okay with that.

However--I will not live in fear that I'll end up poor for choosing to be a SAHM or that I have no self work or job skills simply b/c I stayed home while some burly man brought home the bacon.

And we read about many single income families on the dis who are doing just fine, it isn't exactly the best source to prove a point.

The point, Lisa, is that there are a million different scenarios - not all families are going to be able to put a second parent to work and have it pay off, but neither is it always a better idea for the family to have only one earner. The previous poster implied that almost all couples who ran the numbers would find it was not worth it for the second parent to work. That's obviously not true.

I'm sure there are plenty of single income couples on the DIS who are doing just fine, but most of the ones I read about are looking for ways to earn money at home or trim the budget. And we certainly have had more than our share of women who suddenly found themselves without a husband - I seem to recall several "I never thought it would happen to me" threads this year alone.

If you (not you personally, the general you) are willing to take the chance that you can go your whole life without having to have job skills that could earn a family's income, then go for it. It doesn't have anything to do with self-worth. I just think a woman should be prepared to earn a living for herself and her children if she should need to. Being coy about what you'd do to your husband if he cheated on you isn't the same as being prepared to do a grownup's job.

 

[Bella the Ball 360]

Ugh, what a week we had last week, and it's starting off just the same this week. DH has federal jury duty. But DH works nights so he can do drop off/pick up of the kids each day. We've had to finagle our schedule in the mornings to get all of us where we need to be on time, getting up extra extra early and leaving the kids at school early too. Afternoons, well, it's been a mish mash to say the least. I can't just take time off to deal with everything because he's on jury duty. Nor would they excuse him. Nor do we have any friends/family who are free at 2:15 every day - everyone works! I hope they are not in deliberations too long this week. At least he's not on one of those high profile ones that take months. After this week they better not call him for 10 years - not just 3!

Is federal jury duty six months long? Do you need to go to downtown Boston near South Station? I had jury duty last week but it was in the district court on the North Shore and I was out by 10:30. A friend had Federal Court and she had to go in each Wednesday for six months. If you ask me that is a HUGE imposition and very difficult to manuver on the job.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

If you (not you personally, the general you) are willing to take the chance that you can go your whole life without having to have job skills that could earn a family's income, then go for it. It doesn't have anything to do with self-worth. I just think a woman should be prepared to earn a living for herself and her children if she should need to. Being coy about what you'd do to your husband if he cheated on you isn't the same as being prepared to do a grownup's job.

Oh--I'm not being coy. I'm dead serious.

As for the rest of your statement--I had so much to say but am opting to not say it. It simply isn't worth it.

 

[HelenePA]

I have no plans on going back to school or work even after they are all in school.. I'll be eating bonbons and watching my stories

 

[Liberty Belle]

It never ceases to amaze me how many people on the DIS do not have ANYONE they could leave their kids with in case they were called for jury duty - especially since you generally have quite a bit of advance notice to make arrangements.

Would it be perfect? No. Would it be convenient? No. But it can be done.

What would you do if there was an emergency?

I don't. All my friends work and my family is an hour and a half away. I'm not sure what we would do in an emergency. Do you mean like if my husband and I were both in the hospital? I suppose I could beg my mother to stop all her duties (she doesn't work, but she is president of an organization) and come up, but she'd have to resign, if it were going to be longer than a week.

We just moved to this neighborhood and there is one stay at home mom that I know of, but I don't know her well enough to trust her with my child every day after school for who knows how long. My son's school has an afterschool program, but it's full.

I suppose with enough notice I might be able to get him into a daycare that does afterschool pick up.

 

[merryweather20]

I'm not trying to be critical of a stay at home parent - I am one now and have been for many years. I was a working parent, too, when my children were small.

I'm just saying that a university educated young professional should be able to earn enough to more than compensate for the tax advantage, daycare costs and convenience shopping that comes with the territory of being a working parent. Either your friends aren't married to husbands who earn a professional salary or they are using some calculations that really aren't realistic.

And I can't think of a single SAHP I know - either in real life or here on the DIS - who benefits the family financially by staying home. IN fact, it's the other way around - usually the family is making pretty substantial sacrifices in order for mom to be home with the children. I think it's fine if someone wants to make that choice, but - to bring this back to my original point - it's not a choice I would make. As I said before, if I can't come up with a few hundred dollars to pay for good childcare for something unexpected like jury duty, I wouldn't be comfortable not earning a decent paycheck that could make my family more secure.

Its not a few hundred dollars. I know nowhere that would take a child for four months for $200 and if that was the case the $6 a day jury pay, would indeed put a nice dent in that expense.

In your posts you've colourized SAHP as uneducated and financially irresponsible, in this post you say its "not a choice I would make" then up at the top you say you are a SAHM Not even when the kids were small and you would have yielded the most savings in childcare, now that they are older and could presumeably attend public school for little cost during the day... and yet you are judging other parents.

SAHP's are simply fine. It is their family it is their choice, and you most certainly cannot paint them all with one brush, especially the one you have been using.

 

[LuvCuteBoys]

You're time isn't any more important than mine just because you have kids and I don't. This isn't directed at anyone specifically, but I'm so tired of people with kids thinking that their time is so much more valuable.

 

[sunnydoozer]

You're time isn't any more important than mine just because you have kids and I don't. This isn't directed at anyone specifically, but I'm so tired of people with kids thinking that their time is so much more valuable.

I think you are missing the point. Its not how much "value" that person's time is compared to yours, but simply that they need their "value" to cover daycare.

 

[jrmasm]

I think you are missing the point. Its not how much "value" that person's time is compared to yours, but simply that they need their "value" to cover daycare.

But people with kids are not the only ones that can be hurt financially by jury duty.

 

[DVCLiz]

Its not a few hundred dollars. I know nowhere that would take a child for four months for $200 and if that was the case the $6 a day jury pay, would indeed put a nice dent in that expense.

In your posts you've colourized SAHP as uneducated and financially irresponsible, in this post you say its "not a choice I would make" then up at the top you say you are a SAHM Not even when the kids were small and you would have yielded the most savings in childcare, now that they are older and could presumeably attend public school for little cost during the day... and yet you are judging other parents.

SAHP's are simply fine. It is their family it is their choice, and you most certainly cannot paint them all with one brush, especially the one you have been using.

OK, you've made several incorrect assumptions in this post. First, I've never responded in this thread to any situation in which someone was called for a four month term of jury duty. All of my references have been made based on the original post and the discussion of jury duty service as a few days long - not four months. My comment was that if it stretched my budget so tightly to cover child care costs for a few days - which I estimated to be a few hundred dollars - I would make some changes in my lifestyle and get a job that earned money to put my family in a more comfortable postition.

Nowhere did I ever say that I thought SAHPs were uneducated. I said I was glad to have the education and experience to be able to earn a living for my family if I needed to, and that I thought every woman should be in that position. For that matter, I don't know why anyone wouldn't set it as a life goal to educate him or herself and find a career that was meaningful and fulfilling and earned money before they married and had children. To marry young and have no education is not a lifestyle I would choose to recommend, regardless of whether or not someone has children later on.

I didn't say being a SAHM was a choice I wouldn't make - I said I wouldn't make it if it meant the margin of financial safety for my family was so narrow.

When I worked and when I chose to stay at home were my personal decisions based on when I thought I needed to produce an income for my family and when I didn't.

 

[MrsKreamer]

I got called for Jury Duty in July of 2005. I was able to serve and did so very willingly. I was picked for a trial and had to miss work for a week. Then I only had one child, who was in daycare, and my job (at that time)paid for Jury Duty because it is a law firm. I got called again one year ago. Now I have two kids, and as of last year neither was school age and both were at home with me. I have a part time job on nights and weekends which I only get paid for if I show up(not really a problem since I could have still made work in the evenings). Here is where my problem was...we had no vacation time left because of Hurricane Gustav. Everyone in my family works. My parents, my in-laws, etc. There is no short term daycare around here. My friends don't have kids and they work. So I sent an email explaining my situation to the clerk of courts and I was excused. I have no problem with serving as I had already done so. Now if they call me to serve next year when both of the boys are in school, I will gladly serve again.