No need for mommy wars, people!

[Miz Diz]

I agree with OP. I have been both and they both have their negatives and positives. Everyone needs to do what is right for their family.

Almost every SAHM mom in my neighborhood puts their kids in daycare 3-5 days a week for half days. I always think it's funny because usually the SAHM's are the ones who think it is terrible when kids are put in daycare. When they ask me why I don't put my child in daycare, I tell them the point of me quitting my job was to get my dd out of daycare.

 

[tvguy]

Only comment I have is, I don't understand the moms OR dads who choose work over staying home, when the daycare costs more than they earn. I am amazed how many people I encounter these days in that situation. I understand the desire to work, but when it's COSTING you more to work than stay home..what are you thinking?

 

[cm8]

Staying home is right for some people. Daycare is right for some people. You are not in their situation. No one can make those decisions but them. SAHMs have plenty of other ways for their kids to interact socially, and working moms can find plenty of quality time for their kids. No one needs to get defensive about their choices or bash anyone else's.

 

[disfan07]

Only comment I have is, I don't understand the moms OR dads who choose work over staying home, when the daycare costs more than they earn. I am amazed how many people I encounter these days in that situation. I understand the desire to work, but when it's COSTING you more to work than stay home..what are you thinking?

I knew a lot of parents like this at the preschool/daycare where I worked. Most of these parents chose this because both of their jobs were very shaky. meaning that in this economy neither one was guaranteed and they felt more secure knowing that if one parent lost their job, the other parent was still bringing in a steady paycheck and they would stop paying for daycare at that point until the other parent found another job.

An example of this is one of the families from my 3 year old class. Her mom told me that after paying for daycare for both children she probably brings home about $25,000 a year which they didnt really NEED, but obviously nice to have. About 3 months into the shcool year, her dad lost his job and they pulled her from full time daycare (still sent her to preschool) and because her mom still had her job, they were able to continue to pay all the bills without touching their emergency fund because the other parents still had a stable job. He was still without a job when I moved 6 months later. In my class of 15 kids (30 parents), we had 6 parents who lost their jobs within about a 3 month span. But they were still able to pay for everything because they still had one income coming in. That reasoning makes perfect sense to me especially in this economy.

 

[Darsa]

Thank your lucky stars hunny, that you have been *blessed* with a choice. Sadly, not all have the luxury of "choice to sacrifice a career"

Exactly. I have always *wanted* to be able to stay home with my girl, but was never able to. Luckily she seems to be a well-adjusted, normal (actually quite awesome) kid at 14, even though she had grown up having to attend daycare.

 

[Christine]

Only comment I have is, I don't understand the moms OR dads who choose work over staying home, when the daycare costs more than they earn. I am amazed how many people I encounter these days in that situation. I understand the desire to work, but when it's COSTING you more to work than stay home..what are you thinking?

Most of the "stay at home" job falls to the woman. If a woman pulls herself out of the workforce for 10-15 years, it can be devastating to her earning potential. If that wasn't bad enough, some women find that after being out of the workforce that long, they can't even hope to get back into their field (couple that with a bad economy and suddenly you are unemployable). Many women don't find this possibility palatable. Besides being out the workforce for so long, the person who is out is also not contributing to their own retirement system, which hurts them in the long run. Then there's the scenario of the the wife staying home with the child(ren), the husband leaving her, and she has no work experience anymore. Not a position I would ever put myself in. Everyone has a different perspective on why they choose childcare and I think you have to be understanding as to where they are coming from.

I know a few people who worked and didn't make a dime after daycare. Mostly that was just for a short time though, and not for the entire time their child was in daycare. The under-2 ages are the most expensive to pay for so it was usually those times where there was no "profit" into the house. The child then got older, daycare costs came down a bit, while the salary did increase at the same time.

 

[polkadotsuitcase]

Strikes me as hilarious that, as of right now, this thread is immediately followed by a thread titled, "Do you live in fear of your cheese grater?"!

Mommy wars: People who take everything far too seriously.
Cheese grater phobia: People who find the humor in kitchen gadgets.

Then again, I haven't had any caffeine yet this morning, so maybe the humor is all in my head.

*Note:* just re-read the above. I feel compelled to add that in saying, "People who take everything..." that is not in response to PPs in this thread. Just the mommy wars in general. Out there. In the universe. Not on the DIS. This is fiction. Any resemblance to any posters, living or non, is purely coincidental.

...not that I'm worried anyone will take this too seriously, of course...

 

[Art 1]

Most of the "stay at home" job falls to the woman. If a woman pulls herself out of the workforce for 10-15 years, it can be devastating to her earning potential. If that wasn't bad enough, some women find that after being out of the workforce that long, they can't even hope to get back into their field (couple that with a bad economy and suddenly you are unemployable). Many women don't find this possibility palatable. Besides being out the workforce for so long, the person who is out is also not contributing to their own retirement system, which hurts them in the long run. Then there's the scenario of the the wife staying home with the child(ren), the husband leaving her, and she has no work experience anymore. Not a position I would ever put myself in. Everyone has a different perspective on why they choose childcare and I think you have to be understanding as to where they are coming from.

I know a few people who worked and didn't make a dime after daycare. Mostly that was just for a short time though, and not for the entire time their child was in daycare. The under-2 ages are the most expensive to pay for so it was usually those times where there was no "profit" into the house. The child then got older, daycare costs came down a bit, while the salary did increase at the same time.

You mention nothing of what's best for the child, only the mother. Doesn't what's best for the child come first?

 

[disfan07]

Originally Posted by Christine
Most of the "stay at home" job falls to the woman. If a woman pulls herself out of the workforce for 10-15 years, it can be devastating to her earning potential. If that wasn't bad enough, some women find that after being out of the workforce that long, they can't even hope to get back into their field (couple that with a bad economy and suddenly you are unemployable). Many women don't find this possibility palatable. Besides being out the workforce for so long, the person who is out is also not contributing to their own retirement system, which hurts them in the long run. Then there's the scenario of the the wife staying home with the child(ren), the husband leaving her, and she has no work experience anymore. Not a position I would ever put myself in. Everyone has a different perspective on why they choose childcare and I think you have to be understanding as to where they are coming from.

I know a few people who worked and didn't make a dime after daycare. Mostly that was just for a short time though, and not for the entire time their child was in daycare. The under-2 ages are the most expensive to pay for so it was usually those times where there was no "profit" into the house. The child then got older, daycare costs came down a bit, while the salary did increase at the same time.

You mention nothing of what's best for the child, only the mother. Doesn't what's best for the child come first?

No. What's best for the ENTIRE FAMILY is what comes first. And in this economy for many families that means having two paychecks coming in from two jobs...most likely neither of which are secure jobs. If the one parent who was employed loses their job, how is THAT best for their child?

 

[Christine]

You mention nothing of what's best for the child, only the mother. Doesn't what's best for the child come first?

Not always. But I know not everyone thinks like that. I tend to look at the long-term picture. If someone does what's best for the child at one point in the child's life, it might not end up being what's best for that child 15 years later.

I, for one, think that having a stable roof over your head and a steady income to pay for things like food, have good medical care, and financial security are all things that are best for a child. It may not be the "best" that is immediately recognizable in day-to-day living, but overall it can create a "best" situation for that child.

I also don't think that having one parent become financially disabled at any point in a child's life is the best thing for them. Leaving yourself vulnerable and being nervous about such things doesn't make you the best parent. As I said earlier, everyone comes from a different perspective and that should be respected.

 

[hookedondizney]

Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah

Whatever people.....this is the thing....if you don't like something you read then MOVE on.....don't whine and cry over it! This is what society is doing way too much of....putting their 2 cents in where it really doesn't matter!!!!

 

[castleview]

Most of the "stay at home" job falls to the woman. If a woman pulls herself out of the workforce for 10-15 years, it can be devastating to her earning potential. If that wasn't bad enough, some women find that after being out of the workforce that long, they can't even hope to get back into their field (couple that with a bad economy and suddenly you are unemployable). Many women don't find this possibility palatable. B.

As a stay at home mom, I agree with this. However, it didn't bother me that I would be leaving my field since I was starting to burn out and the length of the commute is something I could no longer do (looking back, I can't believe I lived that life ). Since being a SAHM, I have done a lot of volunteer work including work for the Park & Rec department. I found that I enjoy writing grants, organizing programs and just enhancing the town in whatever way I can. I hope I can take that experience and use it somewhere someday. Even while being at home, you can learn a lot about yourself.

 

[daughtersrus]

Only comment I have is, I don't understand the moms OR dads who choose work over staying home, when the daycare costs more than they earn. I am amazed how many people I encounter these days in that situation. I understand the desire to work, but when it's COSTING you more to work than stay home..what are you thinking?

Sometimes it's for the benefits that the job offers~ like health insurance.

 

[powellrj]

Sometimes it's for the benefits that the job offers~ like health insurance.

I work with several women who work for health insurance. Not every place offers it and if their DH is self employed they can't afford it.

I have been both and working mom and a stay at home mom and to be honest, I enjoy working.

My dad became disabled right before he turned 50 and while he will have insurance for the rest of this life, the same wasn't true for my mom so she had to go back to the workforce after being a stay at home mom her whole life. Its been really hard for her because she lacked the skills and the experience to get a "good job" with benefits and found herself working at low paying jobs just to get the insurance. She is now covered my medicare, but she still had to work until she was well into her 70's to pay for her supplemental insurance.