going out to work vs motherhood dilema

Hi,

I am a bit confused of late and wondered if anyone can advise? I am
just about to have my first child, I am incredibly excited and looking
forward to raising her, seeing this as a more important `job' to me,
than `going out to earn a living'. Having worked in a variety of
jobs/careers for the last 11 years, I now want to enjoy being a
housewife and child carer and put as much effort into this as I would
anything else. I will maintain other interests during this time and
may try a few working-from-home ideas for `pocket money', but for at
least the next 2 to 5 years I want to make being a mother a priority,
choosing to be the main carer of my child for what is, after all, only
a few short years. I suppose this should all be a natural normal way
of thinking, but my problem is down to my partner.
My partner thinks that staying at home being a housewife/carer is
`taking the easy way out', and plus he is worried about taken on a
greater responsibility for ensuring we have enough money. He also
thinks it isn't going to be stimulating enough for me.

I would not like to be financially dependent on him, but am prepared
to downsize my life for a few years if this is what it takes. I am
also fully prepared to find looking after a child a very stimulating
and rewarding job. I certainly know that my partner's job isn't
stimulating. I have even suggested that he can take an equal share in
staying at home and have never encouraged or pressured him to bring in
loads of money from work. I also happen to know that some mothers
find it an easier job to sit in an office for 8 hours a day rather
than spend it with a toddler - hence the desire to make use of child
minders/nurseries etc, so I would regard child-caring/rearing a
difficult and tiring task at times - more so than in traditional wage
paying jobs.

I also want to know how women in the past - even as recently as 20
years ago - never seemed to get the pressure to go out to work and
bring in half the finances? Were men happier to have this arrangement
or are they actually happier to have more financial stability? If the
latter - why didn't more women go out to work at this time?

thanks!

Hi all/ Abi

This is my first time posting, after lurking for a while...

I am a Mum of 2 - Christopher, 11yo and Fran, 5 yo. I am a social worker and
love my job. As a first time Mum, I continued to work full time, spent much
time feeling guilty and feeling guilty for feeling guilty (why should I feel
bad!!!! I am a modern woman having it all!) I worked too hard and had a
healthy income.

After Fran, I wanted to stay home, but did not think it would be financially
viable. I therefore went back to work. Feeling worse and worse, I took on
bigger work challenges to compensate. After 2 years, I realised that I was
not coping - I was not being true to myself, my children, partner, nor
employer. I walked out of the high paying job and went freelance working
less than 1/2 time.

Since, I have come to the realisation that I did not need the money all that
much. We manage very well, and I have made savings (childcare, guilt
presents, new outfits, lunches) and I have a good relationship with both
children, who love Mum being at home after school everyday.

However, it was a learning curve - my husband now is the main breadwinner,
he still helps out but I had to make new networks - my stimulation was work
and I had fewer mother friends. I now make efforts to get to know more Mums
in the class, to join groups. Let me tell you, school politics are as
interesting as office politics!! Playgroup and nursery politics similarly.

The lifestyle might not be as plush, but there are fewer tired arguments,
fewer packet meals and fewer 'leave me alone, I need to finish this report'
times.

However, for me, it was always about being true to myself. I am more
fulfilled now, and my children are happier. When I was less fulfilled, I was
not as happy and therefore my relationshp with my kids suffered.

Some of my friends are fully fulfilled at work and have nannies etc. You
need to do what feels right for you.... and therefore for your family.

Phew - what a sermon! And for a newbie!!!

Pat

I stayed home with my first child for the first six months. I found a
part-time job that gave me a couple of days a week out of the house. I
worked at that job until my second child was born. Since that time I
have been a homemaker/busy person. I have done a very short stint of
childcare for a friend, some graphic design consulting now and then. I
have also become involved in a project to publish a book. The short
version is that I have found plenty to do while keeping my house
relatively clean, taking my kids to dance class and preschool, and
cooking (which I really enjoy).

Anyway, the moral of my story is that without the support of my husband,
I would not be able to make this work. Being the primary caregiver
requires a great deal of support. I support his work and he supports
what I do at home. If that system is not ready, IMO staying home will
not be a very good experience for anybody in the family.

Karen G

On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 04:53:59 EST, (Abi)
wrotE:

I also want to know how women in the past - even as recently as 20
years ago - never seemed to get the pressure to go out to work and
bring in half the finances? Were men happier to have this arrangement
or are they actually happier to have more financial stability? If the
latter - why didn't more women go out to work at this time?

I am writing from the US & not the UK but I can tell you that 20 yrs.
ago, which was the 1980s, there certainly was pressure for women to go
out to work. I grew up in the 1960s and many women worked outside the
home even then, my mother did. I don't think the pressure was a great
but by the '70s it had become so. In addition, society adjusted and
housing, education, and other things became more expensive often
requiring two incomes depending on where one lived.

Were men happier with this arrangement? Not necessarily but many of
them didn't know thay had a choice. Now they do. The arrangement you
speak of is fine if that is what both partners want but you sound like
you are trying to force your partner into a role he doesn't want.
Would you be as amenable to having him stay home full time to care for
the baby while you went out to work to support the family? If not,
maybe you can see where he's coming from.

Is it possible for you to work part-time after a while or to work from
home? Maybe that would help to alleviate his concern. You could
propose being home with the baby for the first 9 months or so, then
seeking some kind of income. Many women here do in-home day care or
some kind of sales from home to allow them to be at home.

"Abi" wrote in message
om...
I also want to know how women in the past - even as recently as 20
years ago - never seemed to get the pressure to go out to work and
bring in half the finances?

In the past, even as recently as 20 years ago, women often did
not have the earning power of men. My mother was fired by
North American Rockwell in the late 50s for getting married.
She wasn't the happiest staying home with the children, and
always was looking for more outside activities to show she
had something to contribute to the world. I wonder how
she would have turned out if she had been born 30 years
later.

In the early 80s the number of women in management anywhere
was pitifully low, in the company I worked for there was not
a single women above first line management. No, there was
no pressure to bring in half the finances, because it was
pretty much impossible unless the wife had much more
education and experience than her spouse.

Were men happier to have this arrangement
or are they actually happier to have more financial stability? If the
latter - why didn't more women go out to work at this time?

Back then whole families had less fininacial strain because the
cost of living was reachable on one modest salary. That is
not the case any more. Unfortunately, we hoped equality
meant families would have the choice of having the wife
or husband work. Economically, it often means having
both work.

I would not use examples of families in the 50s and 60s
to convince your husband you should stay home, its
apples and oranges. And 20 years ago women did go
back to work.

That said, you mentioned you want to go back to work in
5 years or so. Have you looked into afterschool care in
your area. I know when I had my children it was hard to
find good infant and preschool day care, but impossible to
find good afterschool daycare for kids above 2nd grade.
That's when I went part time, and eventually retired, to ensure
my kids had time to play and I had time to help with after
school activities.

wrote:

Back then whole families had less financial strain because the
cost of living was reachable on one modest salary. That is
not the case any more. Unfortunately, we hoped equality
meant families would have the choice of having the wife
or husband work. Economically, it often means having
both work.

In the US (I don't know how it works in the UK) this is, in large part, due to
the fact that wealth is much less equitably distributed than it was even 20
years ago. The rich are far, far richer, and the not-so-rich are feeling the
pinch.

--Helen

"workerbee" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 04:53:59 EST, (Abi)
wrotE:

Would you be as amenable to having him stay home full time to care for
the baby while you went out to work to support the family? If not,
maybe you can see where he's coming from.

Is it possible for you to work part-time after a while or to work from
home? Maybe that would help to alleviate his concern. You could
propose being home with the baby for the first 9 months or so, then
seeking some kind of income. Many women here do in-home day care or
some kind of sales from home to allow them to be at home.

I have always worked (except when I couldn't find work) and think I know
myself well enough that being home during the baby time is wonderful, but I
get really bored when the kids hit about pre-K.

That said, even when my youngest was very little, I worked part-time and had
a child minder when I was working. When he was a toddler, we jumped through
all kinds of hoops to minimize day care, and everybody in the family had a
"shift" tending to him, including the HS age boy (who volunteered for the
job!)

My daughter is currently working full-time at a crummy cashier job while her
DH works full-time at a job that is going to be very, very good for him over
the long haul, career-wise, but that doesn't pay very well. They work
differing shifts, and his step-mom watches their little one during the
overlap. It's quite a burden on their family, but nobody is really earning
much money and it's the best way they've found. It's also given my SIL and
grandson the opportunity to develop a strong bond, and for SIL to learn that
he can be a competent care-giver for his children. Things will be changing
for them when he starts law school and the next baby comes (Late June/early
July), but for now, this works.

I like to think I am supportive of mum being home with the children, but
unless you are a citizen of a country where you are paid to do so until the
child is older (like Germany, or Norway), then you really must consider your
partner's wishes in the matter. Partners make decisions for the partnership
together, and if s/he is not on board with your preference, that will be a
problem.

Best,
Ann

In article ,
(Abi) wrote:

Hi,

I am a bit confused of late and wondered if anyone can advise? I am
just about to have my first child, I am incredibly excited and looking
forward to raising her, seeing this as a more important `job' to me,
than `going out to earn a living'. Having worked in a variety of
jobs/careers for the last 11 years, I now want to enjoy being a
housewife and child carer and put as much effort into this as I would
anything else. I will maintain other interests during this time and
may try a few working-from-home ideas for `pocket money', but for at
least the next 2 to 5 years I want to make being a mother a priority,
choosing to be the main carer of my child for what is, after all, only
a few short years. I suppose this should all be a natural normal way
of thinking, but my problem is down to my partner.
My partner thinks that staying at home being a housewife/carer is
`taking the easy way out', and plus he is worried about taken on a
greater responsibility for ensuring we have enough money. He also
thinks it isn't going to be stimulating enough for me.

I would not like to be financially dependent on him, but am prepared
to downsize my life for a few years if this is what it takes. I am
also fully prepared to find looking after a child a very stimulating
and rewarding job. I certainly know that my partner's job isn't
stimulating. I have even suggested that he can take an equal share in
staying at home and have never encouraged or pressured him to bring in
loads of money from work. I also happen to know that some mothers
find it an easier job to sit in an office for 8 hours a day rather
than spend it with a toddler - hence the desire to make use of child
minders/nurseries etc, so I would regard child-caring/rearing a
difficult and tiring task at times - more so than in traditional wage
paying jobs.

I also want to know how women in the past - even as recently as 20
years ago - never seemed to get the pressure to go out to work and
bring in half the finances? Were men happier to have this arrangement
or are they actually happier to have more financial stability? If the
latter - why didn't more women go out to work at this time?

thanks!


Don't know how it was in the UK, but in the U.S. between the end of WWII
and the mid-1970s, it was possible to live a comfortable middle-class
life on one middle-class salary. The returning soldiers needed jobs,
and women who had been encouraged to work to support the economy during
the war (and who had had to work during the Depression, when pretty much
everyone was poor) were expected to stay home and take care of the kids
of the Baby Boom, and get out of the way of the menfolk. And good job
opportunities for women were scarce (except in the standard female
professions of nurse/secretary/teacher) until the women's movement
started to have some impact.

In the late 1970s and early 1980s we had a spell of inflation where the
increase in the cost of living significantly outstripped the increase in
salaries. It was quite a scary time--I graduated from college about
then, and financially things were pretty bleak. At the same time, women
were beginning to be able to get decent paying jobs. The status quo
shifted in the course of a few years, to the point where two
middle-class salaries had only a little more buying power than one
salary had had a decade before. The second salary became
institutionalized, probably by the end of the 1980s.

Mom staying home with the kids has historically been a middle and
upperclass phenomenon anyway--during my grandma's first marriage and
after her divorce in the 1920s, she ran a stenography service in L.A. to
support herself and my mom. She didn't start staying home until she
married a man who worked as a high school teacher, and even then, she
did freelance writing and ran a restaurant at various times in their
marriage. And her mom worked alongside her dad running a general store.
Her first husband's mom ran a rooming house. My other grandma lived a
life of leisure and taking care of my dad, but she was married to a
banker.

So much for the somewhat oversimplified history lesson to answer your
last question. To answer your first question, the most important issue
is not whether you stay home with the baby, go back to work, or take up
an income-producing activity that you can do at home. People have
raised happy, healthy children doing any of those things or a
combination of all of them in succession.

But in my opinion, it is absolutely essential that whatever you do, you
and your partner both agree that it is the best option. It's better
for your relationship and even better for your baby. Being the sole
financial support of a family is a stressful position, especially if you
weren't raised to consider it your natural role, and if your partner
resents it, things could get pretty grim.

By the way, don't underestimate how exhausting child care can be. It
can be extremely rewarding, but like most jobs, it involves a lot of
rote work and heavy lifting, and the hours can be grueling. And your
experience will be different from anyone else's, because it depends on
your child's personality (and on how much he or she is willing to sleep
;-)). Before I had my baby, I had absolutely no clue what it would be
like to take care of her fulltime, even though I knew other moms. It
was a lot harder than I had expected.

Elizabeth Gardner wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Abi) wrote:

Hi,

I am a bit confused of late and wondered if anyone can advise? I am
just about to have my first child, I am incredibly excited and looking
forward to raising her, seeing this as a more important `job' to me,
than `going out to earn a living'. Having worked in a variety of
jobs/careers for the last 11 years, I now want to enjoy being a
housewife and child carer and put as much effort into this as I would
anything else. I will maintain other interests during this time and
may try a few working-from-home ideas for `pocket money', but for at
least the next 2 to 5 years I want to make being a mother a priority,
choosing to be the main carer of my child for what is, after all, only
a few short years. I suppose this should all be a natural normal way
of thinking, but my problem is down to my partner.
My partner thinks that staying at home being a housewife/carer is
`taking the easy way out', and plus he is worried about taken on a
greater responsibility for ensuring we have enough money. He also
thinks it isn't going to be stimulating enough for me.

I would not like to be financially dependent on him, but am prepared
to downsize my life for a few years if this is what it takes. I am
also fully prepared to find looking after a child a very stimulating
and rewarding job. I certainly know that my partner's job isn't
stimulating. I have even suggested that he can take an equal share in
staying at home and have never encouraged or pressured him to bring in
loads of money from work. I also happen to know that some mothers
find it an easier job to sit in an office for 8 hours a day rather
than spend it with a toddler - hence the desire to make use of child
minders/nurseries etc, so I would regard child-caring/rearing a
difficult and tiring task at times - more so than in traditional wage
paying jobs.

I also want to know how women in the past - even as recently as 20
years ago - never seemed to get the pressure to go out to work and
bring in half the finances? Were men happier to have this arrangement
or are they actually happier to have more financial stability? If the
latter - why didn't more women go out to work at this time?

thanks!


Don't know how it was in the UK, but in the U.S. between the end of WWII
and the mid-1970s, it was possible to live a comfortable middle-class
life on one middle-class salary. The returning soldiers needed jobs,
and women who had been encouraged to work to support the economy during
the war (and who had had to work during the Depression, when pretty much
everyone was poor) were expected to stay home and take care of the kids
of the Baby Boom, and get out of the way of the menfolk. And good job
opportunities for women were scarce (except in the standard female
professions of nurse/secretary/teacher) until the women's movement
started to have some impact.

In the late 1970s and early 1980s we had a spell of inflation where the
increase in the cost of living significantly outstripped the increase in
salaries. It was quite a scary time--I graduated from college about
then, and financially things were pretty bleak. At the same time, women
were beginning to be able to get decent paying jobs. The status quo
shifted in the course of a few years, to the point where two
middle-class salaries had only a little more buying power than one
salary had had a decade before. The second salary became
institutionalized, probably by the end of the 1980s.

Mom staying home with the kids has historically been a middle and
upperclass phenomenon anyway--during my grandma's first marriage and
after her divorce in the 1920s, she ran a stenography service in L.A. to
support herself and my mom. She didn't start staying home until she
married a man who worked as a high school teacher, and even then, she
did freelance writing and ran a restaurant at various times in their
marriage. And her mom worked alongside her dad running a general store.
Her first husband's mom ran a rooming house. My other grandma lived a
life of leisure and taking care of my dad, but she was married to a
banker.

So much for the somewhat oversimplified history lesson to answer your
last question. To answer your first question, the most important issue
is not whether you stay home with the baby, go back to work, or take up
an income-producing activity that you can do at home. People have
raised happy, healthy children doing any of those things or a
combination of all of them in succession.

But in my opinion, it is absolutely essential that whatever you do, you
and your partner both agree that it is the best option. It's better
for your relationship and even better for your baby. Being the sole
financial support of a family is a stressful position, especially if you
weren't raised to consider it your natural role, and if your partner
resents it, things could get pretty grim.

By the way, don't underestimate how exhausting child care can be. It
can be extremely rewarding, but like most jobs, it involves a lot of
rote work and heavy lifting, and the hours can be grueling. And your
experience will be different from anyone else's, because it depends on
your child's personality (and on how much he or she is willing to sleep
;-)). Before I had my baby, I had absolutely no clue what it would be
like to take care of her fulltime, even though I knew other moms. It
was a lot harder than I had expected.

Many thanks everyone for your advice - I can see how salaries dont go
as far today as they used to in the past. I didn't realise it was more
common than I first thought for women to go out to work, in the past
few decades. I have been just looking at the example of my housewife
mother and her friends who raised children in the 1960s and early
1970s and suppose thought everyone did this (full time carer/not
producing any income). In part I feel they have made me feel guilty
for considering working at the same time as caring for children simply
because they didn't do it (because they didn't have to) - but
nowadays, as you all say - it is much harder to get a decent standard
of living on one salary.
I suppose if the worst comes to the worst I can use my savings to
afford the ability not to have to work to buy me a few more months
longer of being able to stay at home and treat the exercise like a
career break....
I can understand my partner's fear of being the sole breadwinner
aswell - but I have stated all along that if he wanted to trade places
with me then this would be acceptable to me as I would rather he be
happy and also that our child is being looked after by him as opposed
to a stranger.
I just cant believe the low status full time parenting is given in
general though. It is a really important job - one that impacts on
society as a whole, and yet it's completely `unpaid'!

In ,
workerbee wrote:

*I am writing from the US & not the UK but I can tell you that 20 yrs.
*ago, which was the 1980s, there certainly was pressure for women to go
*out to work. I grew up in the 1960s and many women worked outside the

I don't know if there was pressure, but certainly my mom worked... I was
born in 1970. Mom worked part-time (selling homemade bread and other
things for a local co-op!) when I was little; by the time I started school
she was training to become a Realtor and I know for sure she was
definitely working in that capacity by the time I was in 3rd grade.

Of course, my mom's mom worked too, as a medical secretary or something
like that, so maybe it's just a family tradition.

--
hillary israeli vmd http://www.hillary.net
"uber vaccae in quattuor partes divisum est."
not-so-newly minted veterinarian-at-large