Disagreement about third child

In article J99be.18979$NU4.16691@attbi_s22, P. Tierney says...


"Circe" wrote in message
news:cY7be.18229$%c1.5661@fed1read05...

Anyway, what I'm getting at here is that I think the family *is* the basic
economic unit. The idea that what a SAH spouse contributes to the family
is
in any essential way different from what the wage-earning spouse
contributes
troubles me. I think both partners are making an equal contribution to the
functioning of the economic unit.

I think that both partners are making a contribution. In most homes,
however, I wouldn't get hung up on the word "equal". It's obvious that
some aren't, but that's okay. It doesn't have to be 50/50.


P. Tierney




True it doesn't have to be 50/50. But in many cases the situation is not OK.

Banty

In article UE9be.18685$r53.16605@attbi_s21, P. Tierney says...

"Ericka Kammerer" wrote in message
...
P. Tierney wrote:


I think that both partners are making a contribution. In most homes,
however, I wouldn't get hung up on the word "equal". It's obvious that
some aren't, but that's okay. It doesn't have to be 50/50.

I'd agree that on any particular dimension the contribution
may not be 50/50 (probably won't be, in fact). I submit, however,
that there's a problem if *on the whole* (that is, taking all
dimensions into account, not just economic issues) one partner is
putting consistently and significantly less than 50 percent into the
Grand Unified Family Utility Function ;-) Not that I would recommend
bean counting to ensure that, but I think people pretty much know when
someone isn't putting out fair effort, and I don't think it's
particularly conducive to a strong marriage or a respectful
relationship.

I agree. The word "equal" raised a flag, as if both parents
worked and one make 60k while the other made 30k, and both
did the same amount of parenting, then one could get into
trouble of the contributions need to be equal. Though one
could say that each is equal since each is earning his/her
full potential, but I wouldn't. I'd just assume stay away
from the whole concept.


P. Tierney




Yeah. Or the case of some households where the contributions are NOT equal, but
the expectations of both partners are in line with that. If the needs and wants
are actually fulfilled that way, who am I to argue. The question often being of
course whether or not in the long run things really are OK..

There are also temporary sitautions which go strongly on one partner. Which
should even out over the course of hte marriage. But may be OK or even
necessary. (one partner in med school, military deployment, etc.)

Banty

In article , Ericka Kammerer says...

P. Tierney wrote:


I agree. The word "equal" raised a flag, as if both parents
worked and one make 60k while the other made 30k, and both
did the same amount of parenting, then one could get into
trouble of the contributions need to be equal.

Agreed. And even though I think it's important to
understand that there are economic contributions other than
the easily visible ones that result in cash being deposited
in the bank account, the reason that's important is not so
that someone can tally things up and decide who's more
important based on the totals.

You might have things well in hand with how you weigh "non-economic" and social
factors, but, with money in the mix, a LOT of people do tally things up.

Banty

"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article bs8be.18235$%c1.13844@fed1read05, Circe says...
"Donna" wrote in message
news:804be.4199$WX.1818@trndny01...
but beyond that, I know that there is no way that I will be
relieved of the (primary) responsibilities of cooking, daily tidying,
child care, scheduling, etc, etc, etc.

For me, the primary difference between going on vacation and being the
SAH
parent is that when we are on vacation, there are *two* adults to do all
of
those taks you just listed instead of just one (me). My husband is more
than
willing to take on a lot of those responsibilities while we're
vacationing,
so while I might not get *complete* break from the primary tasks of
parenting, I get enough help doing them that it seems like a break!

There's your answer already to my response to Donna.

My point there was - why does this "primary caregiver" role stay that way
during
vacation.

Well, I take it from Donna's statements that she doesn't feel there's a
realistic chance that her husband *will* take on a significant part of the
caregiver role while they're on vacation. I happen to have a husband who
does things like cooking, daily tidying, childcare, and so on willingly and
happily while we're on vacation. I can't and don't assume that other
employed-outside-the-home spouses are equally willing or happy to do so.
--
Be well, Barbara
Mom to Mr. Congeniality (7), the Diva (5) and the Race Car Fanatic (3)

I have PMS and ESP...I'm the bitch who knows everything! (T-shirt slogan)

On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 10:55:00 GMT, "Donna"
wrote:


Here is what I haven't seen discussed (but I've been in and out of this
thread, so I may have missed it): Regardless of whether the primary
caretaker of the family is working outside the home or inside the home, how
does that person *ever* get a vacation from those responsibilities? DH and
I are planning to rent a house for a week on the ocean with the kids at the
end of the summer. I've asked (well, decided, actually) that we will hire a
cleaning service to clean the house at the end of the rental so that I don't
have to, but beyond that, I know that there is no way that I will be
relieved of the (primary) responsibilities of cooking, daily tidying, child
care, scheduling, etc, etc, etc.

Donna

why??


Okay, Im of the old fogie set on alot of these issues, BUT...even
though I am the SAH and he is the work outside the home, when we go on
vacation, we are equally involved with the kids. There is no "he goes
and golfs" while I sit by the pool.

Barb

"Barbara Bomberger" wrote in message
...
There is no "he goes
and golfs" while I sit by the pool.

Or if there is, there should be a corresponding "I go and get a massage and
a facial while *he* sits by the pool" g.
--
Be well, Barbara
Mom to Mr. Congeniality (7), the Diva (5) and the Race Car Fanatic (3)

I have PMS and ESP...I'm the bitch who knows everything! (T-shirt slogan)

"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article jp8be.18234$%c1.5571@fed1read05, Circe says...


Well, who's going to be doing those things during the vacation if Donna
doesn't?


Ther'sss this - - other adult in the household?


That simply changes my responsibility to nagging, rather than doing. And
I'm not prepared to spend a week reminding DH to put the kids down for a nap
so they don't whine later, feed everyone at regular intervals, wash some
towels, hey, we're running low on milk and fruit... etc, etc. If I don't
do it, it won't get done at worst, or it will be a dreadful week while DH
figures things out (e.g. if we run out of milk, the children will fuss for
the half hour it takes to go to the store and buy some, so get it before it
runs out).

Fair? Of course not. But in reality, if I don't do it, it won't get done
in a manner that will allow for a relaxing vacation. shrugs

Donna

On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 00:19:15 -0400, "bizby40"
wrote:


"Barbara Bomberger" wrote in message
.. .
I tend to think (and I should probably run and duck here_ that the
people who fee the need to quantify the most are either 1.having the
kind of issue bizby describes or 2. Had a career path prior to having
kids.

Why does my name keep getting dragged in when you're talking about money?
Someone (was it you Barbara?) said something to the effect that they didn't
think the SAH parent needed a vacation as much as the WOH parent. I
disagree with that. I do think what I do is a job in its own right with its
own routine and its own stressors, and is fully deserving of a vacation now
and again. I really couldn't care less what my job is worth monetarily.

No, but if your posts on here are accurate, there are some issues with
regard to the respect on one person towards the functions performed by
the other person. That was my point.

b

In article 83bbe.18254$%c1.15322@fed1read05, Circe says...

"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article bs8be.18235$%c1.13844@fed1read05, Circe says...
"Donna" wrote in message
news:804be.4199$WX.1818@trndny01...
but beyond that, I know that there is no way that I will be
relieved of the (primary) responsibilities of cooking, daily tidying,
child care, scheduling, etc, etc, etc.

For me, the primary difference between going on vacation and being the
SAH
parent is that when we are on vacation, there are *two* adults to do all
of
those taks you just listed instead of just one (me). My husband is more
than
willing to take on a lot of those responsibilities while we're
vacationing,
so while I might not get *complete* break from the primary tasks of
parenting, I get enough help doing them that it seems like a break!

There's your answer already to my response to Donna.

My point there was - why does this "primary caregiver" role stay that way
during
vacation.

Well, I take it from Donna's statements that she doesn't feel there's a
realistic chance that her husband *will* take on a significant part of the
caregiver role while they're on vacation. I happen to have a husband who
does things like cooking, daily tidying, childcare, and so on willingly and
happily while we're on vacation. I can't and don't assume that other
employed-outside-the-home spouses are equally willing or happy to do so.


Are they?

Banty

"Circe" wrote in message
news:k89be.18238$%c1.8806@fed1read05...

What seems to be in dispute is how to place *value* on the contributions
of
the non-wage-earning spouse. The problem is that for most people in modern
culture, value=money. Since money comes (generally) from work, that
equation
leads to work=money which in turn leads to SAHparentingwork.


For me, I place the value of the things that I do that aren't remunerated,
at the same hourly rate as my contracting. I bill by the hour, and that
hourly rate is paid regardless of what I am doing for the client: auditing
records or anlyzing data or simply driving to and from the worksite. So
that is what my time is worth at this particular instance. If I'm making
beds, or potty training, or shopping for groceries, that's what *my* time is
worth, today, at this particular instance.


The point I'm trying to make here is that no one would say that my
wage-earning job isn't work because I like it, have a lot of autonomy, and
don't find it particularly stressful, but plenty of people seem perfectly
happy to qualify SAHparenting as not work. When asked to explain why they
think so, they come up with lots of explanations for why it's not work
that
could just as easily apply to something that *would* qualify as work. So
what it all seems to come down to in the end, as far as I can tell, is
that
people feel that SAHparenting isn't work because it doesn't earn money,
even
though on every other characteristic we have so far come up with for
determining what constitutes "work", being a SAHP can be just as insert
characteristic here as a paying job and a paying job can be less insert
characteristic here than being a SAHP. Everything "depends".

Again, I haven't followed every post in this thread, but I don't think that
anyone is arguing that being an at home parent isn't work.


And given that every other measure we have so far come up for determining
what's workd depends on the circumstances, I don't see why we can't all
agree that SAHparenting *is* a job, it *is* work, and it *does* have
economic value.

Donna