"Nearly 100 percent of both groups describe their children as happy. (If true, this makes me wonder how therapists are going to make a living 20 years from now.) "

Simple, they are NOT happy - fodder for the therapist.

I don't feel anyone judges my decision to work except on this blog. I have never heard anyone outside of the internet care what choices I make for my family. I quit in a skinny minute, if I could afford to SAHM and DH agreed. If nothing else, it is difficult to handle the logisitics of working and raising children. It has gotten a lot better in the last generation. But it is still difficult to manage 2 hour delays, snow days, early dissimal on Mondays, summer vacations, and teacher work days. It is never easy to deal with sick leave and doctors appointments. My DD was sick last month while DH was on a business trip. I had to take 2 1/2 days off and the office nearly had a cow. Some days I really wonder if it is worth it. But DH is paranoid about retirement and college savings. It seems surreal but I literally work outside the home for long term savings goals.

I'm curious as to what the breakdown is of the 15,000 respondents. I know they represent both SAHMs and working moms, but I didn't see any breakdown of how many SAHMs v. working moms replied.

I was also surprised by some of the results - especially that 66% would choose to stay at home if they could.

SAHM I can figure out, but what the heck are DH and DD? Little help...

I just can't even go there with this discussion again! Why don't we talk about something a little less divisive, like religion! foamgnome gave some suggestions for great topics last week and here we are again with the SAHM, WOHM discussion. Anyone want to talk about Harvard's new president and terrific that is?

I think that 66% reflects more of a curiosity about what it would be like to be a stay at home mom AND a discontent with whatever job the mom is currently working at. I stayed at home for almost two years and I know that it is better for my family and myself that I am back at work, but there is still that feeling occasionally that I'd just like a break from working for a couple months. Get caught up on household projects going back to the gym, etc. I think if those 66% reallly had the opportunity to get out, they would in time find that the stay at home lifestyle isn't a perfect fit for them either. PArt time is the Holy Grail, but so few careers are open to it.

I'm not at all surprized that current stay at home moms do not generally want to go to work outside the home. they are doing what works for them and it is generally much easier to change your mind and get a job than it is to stop working and stay at home-- that is certainly true financially, but also true from a time management perspective, too.

It's interesting that 45% of the SAHM feel they get the help they need from their spouse, vs. only 39% of the working moms. Also, that 28% of working moms say they get little or no help from their spouse.

Without getting into the SAHD discussion . . . I've chosen to stay home, in part, because we can do more as a family. My husband has a crazy work schedule. I can make sure that the kids are around and we can sit for a meal or reading time, or whatever, when he is home (and awake, he works 3rd shift). I can also make sure that I'm available when he's around.

He spends far more time with our kids and helping around the house than any of my working friends spouses. Maybe I just got lucky.

I think the pressure of busy families' schedules, especially dual income, prevents a lot of spouses from supporting each other. Both end up exhausted and neglected.

It appears that a large percentage of the working moms don't make a very large income. (The income breakdown for two-income families with a working mom and one-income families with a stay at home mom is very similar, which leads me to think many of the working moms may either be single moms or the working poor.) Presumably if you have to work to put food on the table, you either (a.) do not care what other people think or (b.) do not have time to worry about it. Thus, 'feeling judged' is presumably less of an issue when no one could reasonably call you 'selfish' for working.

"Fifty-six percent of stay-at-home moms feel judged by family, friends or other moms. Only 43 percent of working women do. (Surprise here. Have the media attacks on working moms resulted in thicker skins? Are stay-at-home moms more defensive about their choices?)"

Leslie, it looks like you've got your bias blinders on. Perhaps the results turned out like they did because there isn't really all that much judgment of working moms.

For the record, I should state that I've never felt judged for my decisions. In fact, the circles in which I travel seem to be relatively judgment-free zones. I continue to think that a lot of these issues just aren't as big a deal in real life as they are portrayed here.

And Anon, DH and DD mean Dear Husband and Dear Daughter, respectively.

DH=darling husband
DD=darling daughter
DS=darling son
DW=darling wife.

I thought the income break downs were interesting too. If you look at the SAHMs income breakdown, their husbands clearly make more $$ on average to the WOHMs spouses. So women are working because they need the $$$. Given their spouses made more $$, a think a large % would choose not to work.

----I stayed at home for almost two years and I know that it is better for my family and myself that I am back at work, but there is still that feeling occasionally that I'd just like a break from working for a couple months. Get caught up on household projects going back to the gym, etc.----

What you've described sounds like a vacation, not like the life of any of the SAHMs that I know. Is that what your lifestyle was like - mostly leisure - when you were a SAHM? Where were the kids?

"Fifty-six percent of stay-at-home moms feel judged by family, friends or other moms. Only 43 percent of working women do. (Surprise here..." How could that be a surprise? SAHMs have slowly become ridiculed and devalued by society: either they are controlled by their husbands, too stupid for employment, or so totally lacking self-esteem that they can not do anything else. That's the impression I've been given over the past few years, years I've spent as a WAHM. Many times I've been treated with absolute disdain by a woman until she finds out I work from home, then suddenly, I'm worth speaking to.

The honest truth is that we, women, are devaluing ourselves by perpetuating the SAHM - WOHM war. Men of any value, treat all mothers with the same respect, not so with women. It's hit or miss there. We need to be allies, let go of the "better mothering" rivalry and help one another out.

I think you missed the real points of interest in this poll. For the most part, the answers from SAHMs and WOHMs were very similar. The questions that had the largest variations may explain some of the animosity Moms feel:

"Are you angry or disappointed about having to choose between work and your children?"
Only 25% of SAHMs said Yes to this poll, while 55% of WOHMs said Yes.

"Do you secretly feel like you are cheating or failing your children?" Again there was a nearly 20 point difference between the groups' answers, with more working Moms feeling that they are cheating/failing their children.

What a terrible time in our society when woman HAS to put her job before her family despite her wishes and concerns. What a terrible time in our society when, in the name of feminism, we have painted ourselves into a financial corner and taken away our real freedom of choice: to choose whether to stay home or to work.

Let's let it go, sisters. Let's give each other respect, regardless of our choices. After all, isn't that what our foremothers fought for?

Go Dani!

Dani wrote * What a terrible time in our society when, in the name of feminism, we have painted ourselves into a financial corner and taken away our real freedom of choice: to choose whether to stay home or to work. * While I understand what you are trying to say here, please remember that this issue is not just about choices. Almost every working mom I know has no choice, not because they *painted themselves into a financial corner*, but because there is no partner involved. In my case, I lost my husband several years ago, and it is really hard to read when others constantly talk about how they chose to stay at home so they could be a better mom. I wish I could too, but, I have no *choice*.

Not surprised by the results - these are self-selecting women who have time to watch Oprah or read Oprah's magazine. I would expect results to invert if you polled the female readers of Time/Newsweek/etc. or another group of women who would probably be identified as more than half-time workers.

S.A.H.M. have much happier and well behaved children. Their children are generally more respectful and more mature for their ages then those whose parents settle for a government school education. I find it very telling when wild life will stay with their young longer than people will stay with theirs. The desire to acquire wealth over loving your child will only result in poverty of the soul.

It's hard to have a choice between working and not working when the mother is the only breadwinner in the house. All too often that is the case, for whatever reason.

Oh, brother, Free. What a load. Even thoug I stay at home, I don't think my kid is any better or worse than the children she hangs out with, many of whose moms work (granted that they're all only 14 months old, but still). Moreover, where is it written that all kids with SAHMs are homeschooled or in private school?

Posted by: Free per me | February 12, 2007 08:29 AM

Are you this judgemental about everything? Sad life you must have.

"S.A.H.M. have much happier and well behaved children. Their children are generally more respectful and more mature for their ages then those whose parents settle for a government school education."

Interesting. Most of the teen parents in my neighborhood have SAHMs.

The home schooled kids are socially ackward, incredibly naive, and easily manipulated (might explain the out of wedlock births).

Why are we even talking about this poll? The respondents were all self-selected (they went to the website and answered the questions.) They are not representative of the population so there is no reason to think that this poll provides us with any useful info about "how moms think."

Leslie, how about finding a _real_ poll to discuss? I too am getting frustrated with the topics on this blog. Please, use this space to get some more substantive discussions going.

jj, it appears that I misworded my last paragraph, I did not mean to imply that women have painted themselves into a financial corner individually, rather that as a society we've come to the point where the middle class is disappearing and along with it goes our opportunity to choose whether we work or not. I was once a working single mother, now, I'm a married working mother. I am blessed to be able to work from home, were I to lose the job I currently have, I would be forced to find employment outside the home, not because we have made any attempt to live above our means, but because one income would be insufficient to provide for the needs (not wants) of my family.

The real tragedy, as I was trying to say in my first post, is that modern feminism talks constantly about "choice" but it has mostly become an argument about abortion which truly doesn't affect every life AND which is probably a moot argument as I doubt that there is much chance that our current laws will change. The choice we SHOULD be screaming about is the choice to work. Women should have the opportunity for education and employment equal to men, but our soiety should also value children and families enough to ensure that parents can provide the very best care; whether that's by a parent staying home or by using a quality daycare. Women shouldn't have to work in order to live a middle class existence: but many do because wages for average jobs are so pathetic. Women shouldn't have to put their children in low quality daycare because they need/want to work: but many do because a good daycare program can cost so much as to make the mother's paycheck worthless.

We should be fighting for choices that matter to so many of us everyday rather than arguing about the value of work vs the value of staying home, or the established laws about abortion that really have no bearing on whether women will abort or not.

Is it just me or does anybody else find the HTML link for this discussion a little "disconcerting". The link ends with "draft_my_baby_or_my_job.html"

Gosh, I'm hoping my job gets drafted and not my baby. :)

Does anyone on here really care about what your neighbor, co-worker, sister in law, etc, really thinks about you working or staying at home? I do not care. I do not care. I really do not care. I hear crap all the time when I go back to visit family and friends, and here I sit at my computer making money to help take care of my family without even a little guilt.

Oh and well behaved kids come from well behaved parents, who make them listen, talk to them about right and wrong, and care enough to put them first whether they work or stay home.

I'm childless by choice and that's how I will stay. I guess I never reallly relate to this "child or job" discussion; if you need to eat and live, you will work, kid or no kid. And there's always a way to make it happen; my mother ALWAYS worked, as did my father. I went to daycare/aftercare and school; when I was old enough, I stayed home during the summers, had a babysitter or after a while, got a job. Perhaps I'm being naive, but I see other black women making this happen every day, so I'm not clear on why it's such a "balancing act." I'm glad I'll never know.

On "better behaved" children: I believe that SAHM beget children who can't wash their own clothes and are completely ill-adjusted to life in the real world. As a teen, I RELISHED the times when my parents weren't home after school. I would've cringed to have my mother home mopping floors or doing whatever mythical things SAHM do all day (which somehow still manage to get done in non SAHM homes...). I also would've had less respect for her since I believe all adults should be able to pay their own way with their own money.

How can someone tell me, their child, what to do when they get an allowance from my dad just like me? Why do we still encourage women to "stay at home" and not men? And whathappens to someones brain when they just sit at home? It's obvious I'm opposed and I didn't mean to open upthat can. But that's just my schpiel.

PS- I believe among black women at least, you're far more likely to be judged for staying at home than for not staying at home. Minority women haven't had the luxury of choosing to work and thus there's a cultural expectation toward working. Ref. bell hooks for more discourse on that!

"Women shouldn't have to work in order to live a middle class existence" WHAT???? Sounds like you're on the Anna Nicole Smith model here....

Nicoa

Just so you know, you are probably going to get it on here today. :)

A couple of thoughts:

- A poll that includes self-selection and provides no background numbers [what was the breakdown of SAHMs vs WOHMs] has limited accuracy.

- The income level difference may very well be the most striking number. With two incomes, the WOHMs have an income breakdown that mirrors the SAHMs. Absent the WOHM income, the drop is considerable and does not look anything like the SAHM distribution. [This gives some backing to the 91% of WOHMs who claim that financial reasons are a significant concern in their decision.]

Absent any hard numbers or correlation questions, it's hard to give much weight to any of the other differences.

Why are we even talking about this poll? The respondents were all self-selected (they went to the website and answered the questions.) They are not representative of the population so there is no reason to think that this poll provides us with any useful info about "how moms think."

Leslie, how about finding a _real_ poll to discuss? I too am getting frustrated with the topics on this blog. Please, use this space to get some more substantive discussions going.

Posted by: randdommom | February 12, 2007 08:39 AM

I agree - I don't think this survey is representative, you had to go to the Oprah website to take it - what does that say? Knowing some people that "Live their lives by Oprah" I would say - nothing. Such a select audience.

Would Leslie publish a poll taken by The Heritage Foundation or Tammy Bruce's website? I doubt it. She picked this survey because it suits her needs, not because of any real statistical significance.

I have a 20 month old son and I work. I found it interesting that WOHMs did not feel judged. I have definitely been treated badly and made to feel bad about my decision to work. I am a 30 year old govt attorney. I have had a 60 something year old govt attorney at my office (who never had kids) ask me how many "firsts" I've missed since I came back to work. "Did you miss his first steps, yet? How many firsts have you missed?" All this was said with a smile and a pretense of actually caring how my child was doing. I've also had two 30 something women tell me that they would never consider working once they had children, and that if you do WOH, your child will start calling the daycare provider/nanny "Mommy." It's interesting, they said that to me when I was pregnant, and now each has a child. One continues to work while the other has quit working to stay home fulltime.

I work because as foamgnome said, "It seems surreal but I literally work outside the home for long term savings goals." There's that, and if we are ever going to afford a mortgage here in DC, I have to work for the next couple of years at least. I know if we won the lottery I would quit my job in a heartbeat, but then, I don't really like my job... I might feel differently if I really enjoyed what I was doing, but this job pays really well and is strictly 40 hours a week with a lot of flexibility.

"S.A.H.M. have much happier and well behaved children. Their children are generally more respectful and more mature for their ages then those whose parents settle for a government school education." I think the vast majority of research does not support this, I point you to work over the last year in the literature, including Developmental Psychology. Besides, your anology to animals is not apt, as many species use 'village' care for their young, where older members of the pack are entrusted with care of the young as the younger mothers have other tasks.

I think the media does perpetuate this conflict between SAHM and working mothers. I'm lucky enough to have friends who stay at home, who work, who work from home, and find everyone to be incredibly supportive. My husband and I are lucky enough to work very close to our home, so we spend a lot of time with our kids and not commuting.

The fact is that, with house prices and college tuition increasing much quicker than inflation, most families cannot afford to have a parent at home. We all make sacrifices for this - my husband and I make less money at jobs close to home, many of my friends work inconvenient hours to spend time with their kids, my SAHM/D friends are for the most part delaying their careers or fulfilment to raise the kids (generally a financial decision as they can't make more than daycare costs). None of us drive SUVs or have many extras. And we all love being parents. Isn't that what it's all about?

"The desire to acquire wealth over loving your child will only result in poverty of the soul."

Free per me, what about single parents? If I were to stay at home, I'd quickly be confused with a welfare mom, because, yes, that's exactly where I'd be. So, I work to keep my child out of poverty and acquire wealth so that I may feed, house, and clothe my child. I think, with the Lord's help, our souls will be fine.

Nicoa:
I understand where you are coming from as far as Black mothers are concerned. There have been and currently are no working mothers in my extended family and its been like this for generations.

Before I had my son, I felt like you re: pulling your weight and being self sufficient. Often, the women in our community want the girls to be able to carry their own weight because of the historical uncertainty of the husbands employment (or often his presence).

I know that there is a trend towards SAHMs in the more affluent Black community and I think that's great that we Black women are taking advantage of the option. My only issue with your comment is that SAHMs usually biuld a network with other parents, working or otherwise, to have adult conversation. So I doubt their minds are turning to mush.

Nicoa:

There are many effective models of marriage. In our family, my wife and I are interdependent -- we both have specializations that enable us to function as more than the sum of our individual talents. For us, her decision to be a SAHM has meant that we can live a lifestyle and provide our children an environment that we desire.

Her 'mythical duties' at the moment include organizing the elementary school science fair [she is up at the school now] -- last year there were over 300 children in a school of 500 that participated.

With respect to teaching children independence and fostering good behavior, I would submit that SAHMs have historically been able to do that and they continue to do that today. Again, there is no one 'right' approach that is limited to SAHMs or WOHMs.

In general, there was a time when I thought I had all of the answers on parenting much like you -- and then I had kids and began to understand the depth of my ignorance.

"I believe that SAHM beget children who can't wash their own clothes and are completely ill-adjusted to life in the real world."

Oh please, that's as silly as

"Their children are generally more respectful and more mature for their ages then those whose parents settle for a government school education."

and both you posters should go ask a few of the people you respect and admire in your lives how many hours their parents each worked and see what kind of a correlation there is. I'm guessing not much.

But comments like these show why polls like the Oprah poll continue to get interest and attention - to produce these artificial wars.

When really I agree with Dani on many of her points. I personally like to view income as HOUSEHOLD income and I do think that the price of housing, specifically (and the way housing is tied to good public schools, or not) creates hard economic choices and issues for FAMILIES.

I personally think the ideal model is that PARENTS, not women, vary their participation in the workforce over the lives of their children to meet the needs of their particular family.

In my family right now my husband is career-building and works crazy, crazy hours, so I work part time so that our total family hours are not all shot to hell. Later we hope to reverse it. But that is possible for us in part because we got into the real estate market early and had our son late.

It's interesting, but, as many others have pointed out, it means esentially nothing. Self-selected = not valid, even if the number of women who completed the poll is huge. In any case, the actual percentages are meaningless and should not be extrapolated to a larger population.

Here is how you *could* use the results, assumuing you had the data to do statistical tests: You could determine if stay-at-home or working moms who visited Oprah's Web site and took this poll were more likely to agree with X or Y. That might still be something worth talking about, but we need to be clear that is all we could say based on this.

As someone who does survey research, I'm disappointed that neither Oprah nor Leslie included this kind of disclaimer.

So, my argument that one wage should be sufficient to maintain a family as middle class somehow makes me similar to a dead former Playboy bunny? How interesting.

Do you take offense that I said, "women shouldn't have to work", let's make it more PC for you and say, "Salaries should be sufficient in average jobs so that a two parent household could provide for all of its needs from a single source of income." Is that better?

"How can someone tell me, their child, what to do when they get an allowance from my dad just like me? Why do we still encourage women to "stay at home" and not men? And whathappens to someones brain when they just sit at home?"

A child's respect for their parent should never hinge on whether or not that parent is employed. What an outrageous idea, truly. Should a parent who loses a job then be disrespected by his/her children until he/she bring home proof of income? Ridiculous.

In general, I think that most of the time the woman in a male and female led household is better equipped to stay home with the children. It is not anti-feminist to say that most women are better at caring for children than most men. It is not a hard and fast rule, and it doesn't mean that men are incapable of caring for their children. It does; however, recognize that there are differences between men and women that can be generalized. Just as men are biologically created to be better at seeing a moving target and women are biologically created to be better at differentiating between several non-moving items (thus, many husbands routinely ask their wives, "where's the butter?" as they stand in front of the open refrigerator) so too women are generally better caretakers for the young than men.

Well, just sitting at home doing nothing absolutely would damage someone's brain... and probably lead to too much viewing of Jerry Springer and thus more damage, what a vicious cycle. However, being a stay at home parent is not something that involves a lot of sitting around with one's thumb up one's nose. Being a stay at home parent is equivalent to being a teacher or daycare provider, you know, the people who get paid to care for other people's children so those people can work. I suppose that those who choose to teach toddlers or provide daycare are also likely to have problems with their brains at some point?

Alas, every stereotype about women who choose to stay home with their children will be perpetuated: they're stupid, they're lazy, they have nothing to offer society. Every stereotype about women who choose to work will be perpetuated: they're selfish, they're greedy, their children misbehave. How incredibly stupid to argue about this, how incredibly wasteful. We don't need misogynists to keep us down, we'll just continue tearing at one another.

ps I completely agree with those who question why fathers do not get this pressure. In fact, my husband questions it at well. He feels he gets zero support for paternity leave, picking up sick kids, or any parental responsibilities, and he is responsible for 50% - he does drop off, and we alternate picking up sick kids. Perhaps the media should focus on paternal rights for a while. He would like that.

OK, re: 'Salaries should be sufficient in average jobs so that a two parent household could provide for all of its needs from a single source of income.' Why is that? Why should a household with all its children in school NOT require 2 incomes? I don't get it....

to HappyMom: "I think the pressure of busy families' schedules, especially dual income, prevents a lot of spouses from supporting each other. Both end up exhausted and neglected."

While I think this is probably true of some families, I've actually encountered the exact opposite in my life. My friends who are SAHMs tend to have sole responsibility for the kids, house, family, vacations, etc. That is their "job" - and a hard one at that. Their husbands are the "breadwinners" and tend to feel less inclined to do chores, housework, read to the kids, etc.

w/r/t my friends where both parents work, both parents tend to take equal responsbility for the kids, house, family, etc. No one parent bears the full brunt of anything - financially or otherwise. I've found in these families the dad is actually a lot more involved in the kids' lives.

Just my 2 cents...

"Salaries should be sufficient in average jobs so that a two parent household could provide for all of its needs from a single source of income."

AKA the family wage. So, will people be paid this wage once they have children? Does it mean that childless people will be required to do the same job for less money? Will single people earn less than married people? Will a man who supports his wife earn more in the same job as a woman whose husband also works?

I'm hoping that the poster "Nicoa" is really what's referred to as a "troll"; that is, someone posting outrageous comments deliberately designed to draw responses. However, there's one comment I have to address:
_______________
How can someone tell me, their child, what to do when they get an allowance from my dad just like me?
________________

I really, really hope that you didn't feel that way about your parents - that your mother's worth was only connected to her pay.

In our own marriage, my wife has worked outside of the home full-time; she's worked part-time; and she's been a SAHM. It depended on the situation. I have never judged her based on the income she brought to the family, I can guarantee you that we would never, ever, ever tolerate our children having that attitude - in fact we spent signficant time teaching them the opposite.

While this budget model doesn't work for all couples, from the beginning of our marriage there has been no "his money" and "her money". It's all "our money". Some goes to retirement, some to college funds, some to other savings, some to bills, etc. And yes we each get an amount each month to spend however we want.

In no way was the money my wife got when she was an SAHM an "allowance" - it was just part of the overall budget. If you really want to categorize it, you could call it her pay for the work she did with the kids, the house, errands etc. It was no more an allowance than what I get from the company that employs me.

I guess that's related to the way I was brought up. Dad was a career Army NCO; Mom was a teacher. The only times she didn't work outside the house at all were when Dad was away; e.g., the 14 months in Vietnam in 66-67. She chose not to work because she felt it was more important to be home at that time. However, I will absolutely guarantee you that my respect for her and opinion of her did not diminish at all because she wasn't contributing money to family income. Not then, and certainly not in hindsight.

Leslie, Are you honestly suprised about the results??

Are you suprised that most women want to be home and raise their kids?

And you are shocked that more SAHMs are criticized than working moms? There's nothing new there, either!

I was a SAHM for 3 yrs and just recently went back to work. I got much more flack for being home than I do for working. The same "You're wasting your life" kind of thought. Like I was less of a person because I chose to stay home with my child.

This horse has been beat to death, but being a SAHM doesn't mean you lose every brain cell you were born with.

Also, why couldn't you just let it go when you mentioned that SAHMs don't get the respect they deserve?? Why did you make a little side comment on how all moms don't get the respect they deserve. We know that- but just give the SAHMs a bone every once in awhile!

I work now (and I do enjoy it) but I would rather be home w/ my daughter. That is more important to me and means more to me than any job I could ever have (yes, that would include President of the US or Nobel Prize Winner) It just means more to me. But financially we just can't do it right now.

There is nothing wrong with women staying home. We don't put the women's movement back- we're raising our kids! SAHMs DO deserve more respect. I actually refuse to consider having a 2nd child because I'm not able to stay home again.

I'm not shocked by these poll results at all.

To Dani,
That stuff about men and women being biologically different, and therefore women being generally better at parenting young children, is directly from the Mars/Venus pop psychology of John Gray. I recently stumbled upon something that I wish I'd seen much earlier - a wonderful piece-by-piece rebuttal of Gray's work called Rebuttal from Uranus (I bet you'd pull it up if you Googled this). And then the excellent followup essays at http://web2.airmail.net/ktrig246/out_of_cave/index.html. These really strengthed my opinion that his stuff is utter bunk written by a man (with fake college degrees) who wants to keep our patriarchal society in high gear. I think I'm becoming a true feminist!

To Ann Arbor: I also agree that men's rights to be equal parents are not discussed enough. A SAHM means that her partner can't be (unless they are both so rich no one has to work) - but two reduced hours parents can both be equally involved. I wish you could send me a Zingerman's #13 for lunch - I was born and raised in A2 and I miss it!

I have to argue one point. In the past, families tended to live on one income but the living on one income was really different. People were not responsible for the majority of their retirement. People got pensions or worked till they died. 401Ks and TSPs did not exist. Also college was not as common. Parents were not, on average, saving for their children's education. The rich sent their kids to college but the bulk of the middle class did not. You could also make a middle class salary without a college degree. So I think the need for one income to support the entire family is a lot different then it was 30 years ago. In DC and other parts of the country, real estate has gone bonkers. I think it will level itself out in 10 years. But right now, to even own a 3 bedroom townhouse you need to slap down 400K+. That is out of reach to a lot of families. Or do an hour and half commute. I think the whole economy is changing and it is hard to get a grasp on it. I think a lot of condemnation occurs because it does not take 2 professional incomes to maintain middle class life. It probably takes 1 1/2 to adequately save for college and retirement. So the other half is spent on padding savings and luxuries. So it leaves this impression that people are working for the extras. Dual income hhlds, on average, is not working for the extras. But since we got a little more disposable income, we spend it.

"AKA the family wage. So, will people be paid this wage once they have children? Does it mean that childless people will be required to do the same job for less money? Will single people earn less than married people? Will a man who supports his wife earn more in the same job as a woman whose husband also works?"

Absolutely not, pay should not fluctuate depending on the number of dependents one has. Pay should depend on the job, not the family, my point is that most jobs don't pay enough as most wages have not increased at the same rate as the cost-of-living.

It wasn't that long ago that the vast majority of families lived on one income, now it's becoming nigh unto impossible to do so.

I wish we had some info on sources and methods for this. Is this a random sample or did Oprah watchers voluntarily fill out the poll? What's the SAHM:Work out of home mom ratio? Geographic distribution? Urban, rural, suburban disribution?

Oprah is on at 4pm eastern time. Earlier as you go west. How many working parents (mothers) actually watch the show?

I actually caught this show because DD was home sick that day. She was taking a nap and I was able to catch the show. It was actually a decent show. It was hard because they could not go into depth in any of the women's lives because it was only an hour show. I actually liked the show that proceeded the next day. DD was sick for 2 1/2 days. It was interviews with 30 year old women. It was really interesting to hear about how different women live their life.

DC lurker:

From my (limited) experience in broadcasting, I think they try to put Oprah on at 4 p.m. in all markets and since its not a live show that's possible. But you would be surprised how many people tape/DVR/TIVO Oprah or stay up to watch the rebroadcast at 2 a.m. (in the D.C. market). I'm not sure why but to each his/her own.

"Perhaps the results turned out like they did because there isn't really all that much judgment of working moms."

vs.

"S.A.H.M. have much happier and well behaved children. Their children are generally more respectful and more mature for their ages then those whose parents settle for a government school education. I find it very telling when wild life will stay with their young longer than people will stay with theirs. The desire to acquire wealth over loving your child will only result in poverty of the soul."

Puh-leeze. Working moms are judged as often and as much as stay-at-home-moms. For some reason, women can't seem to respect each other's choices and seek validation for their own by shooting down others'.

And I do think this topic is a dead horse. Foamgnome had some great topics for discussion last week; Leslie, are you paying attention? Or do we have to hijack?

I occasionally watch Oprah as I am home from work by 4 (early in early out) but none of my friends or neighbors are ever home until after 6. I shouldn't be watching tv - I should be at the gym! Why is it so hard to go the gym in the winter? The summer was easy but now I just can't muster the energy to go back out once I am home.

I'm on the West Coast and Oprah is on at 4:00 here too. (Not that it matters, just pointing out that it's not always "earlier as you go west.")

The poll is sort of interesting, but I don't put much basis in any of the answers because I'm pretty sure it was an online poll - which means it's skewed towards the beliefs of regular Internet users *and* it was completed by women who watch Oprah - which means it's not representative of all working and SAH moms.

jj - "In my case, I lost my husband several years ago, and it is really hard to read when others constantly talk about how they chose to stay at home so they could be a better mom. I wish I could too, but, I have no *choice*."

I'm so sorry for the loss of your husband. But I urge you to not take it personally when some women say they have made a choice to stay at home. Even though many women don't have a choice, many do - and why shouldn't they be able to give that as their reason when they're asked "what do you do? Why don't you work?" Sure, some women brag about having a choice - but I would say that the vast majority aren't.

I didn't have a choice in and after my first marriage, and while I wished I did have one, I didn't resent those who did. Or at least I tried not to, because really, their choices had nothing to do with me.

This again? I used to enjoy reading this blog, conflict and all, but I am starting to think the entire concept has run its course.

Can I really narrow down entire range of balance issues to: breastfeeding vs. bottlfeeding, working vs. stay-at-home moms, and a few random tangents that spark minor debate until about noon?

I'll check back periodically, but I think "On Balance" is missing some great issues proposed by readers in favor of the same-old, same-old.

And Oprah is so far removed from the lives of normal people that I don't put much stock in her advice or studies.

MBA Mom-- sorry I wasn't clearer.

While I was a SAHM, the only time I ever left my child with someone else was when I went to the gym, which I tried to do every weekday. The gym had a wonderful and inexpensive babysitting room that my child enjoyed visiting. it wasn't a vacation at all because whatever I did had to involve my child when he was awake (i.e., hours spent everyday at the local park or at the afore mentioned gym)-- or had to be done at home while he was asleep. I think of a vacation as an opportunity to break out of your routine and being a SAHM was DEFINATELY a routine. Needing to stay close to home for the two or three naps per day doesn't permit a lot of freedom. During naptime I could read whatever I wanted though, which I LOVED-- plus I watched TV shows like Sopranos and West Wing that I never had time for before. And still don't, now that I'm back at work. And I did household projects like refinishing the basement and planting a garden. All that stuff, plus spending that much more time with my child is what I occasionally miss. But, considering that I earn six figures, I feel like I can a lot more good overall for myself and my family and the community at large though by staying at work now, but I just wish there were a few more hours in the day. that just wasn't a big isse as a SAHM. Teh big issue as a SAHM was the feeling that I could give more to the community by going back to work since my child seemed more content with professional caregivers and around lots o fother kids than he did with me. So why not go back to work? he's happier and I'm givign back more to society than I could as a SAHM. Other SAHMs are better at childraising and volunteering and/or their children have different needs so just because I'm back at work shouldn't be taken as any indication that I think SAH is a less valid option.

Hope this is more clear.

"I personally like to view income as HOUSEHOLD income and I do think that the price of housing, specifically (and the way housing is tied to good public schools, or not) creates hard economic choices and issues for FAMILIES.

I personally think the ideal model is that PARENTS, not women, vary their participation in the workforce over the lives of their children to meet the needs of their particular family."

Posted by: Shandra | February 12, 2007 09:25 AM

Excellent perspective Shandra - three cheers!

"S.A.H.M. have much happier and well behaved children. Their children are generally more respectful and more mature for their ages then those whose parents settle for a government school education. I find it very telling when wild life will stay with their young longer than people will stay with theirs. The desire to acquire wealth over loving your child will only result in poverty of the soul."

Posted by: Free per me | February 12, 2007 08:29 AM

Free per me, your comments on the well-behaved children of SAHM may apply to your own children but certainly not to many others. When my own twins went from public school to a small private school in the seventh grade, I received only positive feedback from both teachers and parents as to what nice kids they are and how quickly and well they fit in with everyone else. One parent commented early on that my son and daughter fit in so well it looked as though they'd been there for years rather than just a few short weeks.

As to your acquiring wealth and settling for a government school education statements -- one of the reasons that my kids are now back in public school is that to continue to afford the tuition at the private school I would have to work more!!! And I can't ask my husband to work more as he passed away several years ago. So working part time, as I do, is a very good situation. Second reason for public school is that I was often bothered by the lack of ethnic, racial and, also, economic diversity at the private school which had a large cadre of very wealthy families. I think that these demographics might certainly cause children to further buy into the idea that having money -- acquiring wealth!! -- is paramount to a happy existence. God knows, it's enough work battling media images on that front already.

So, my sympathies to you, Free per me, that your own children are not able to be nice and adapt nicely to a variety of situations. But do keep in mind, please, that what may be true for you and yours is not necessarily true for other families, parents and children.

Wow. Now I understand why so many mothers, in general, are up in arms about my choice to remain child-free. Re: Nicoa's shpiel... thanks girl. Ya made the rest of us look bad.

Ladies, while I can't understand making the decision to be a SAHM, to each his own. I hear people ridicule these women as if this staying home business is all walks in the park and what not. I'm not saying I don't thinking working women probably have to put in more hours... I'm sure they do judging by that whole spouse help section... but why the lack of support for each other by each other.

Jealousy, perhaps? Judging from the vehement distaste each group appears to have for the other, I can only assume everyone occasionally wishes their decision could have gone the other way.

Anyway... I'm proud of all of the women in the world managing to do a decent job raising children. It's something I KNOW I can't do... so more power to you, whether you're hanging out with them at home or entrusting the times you can't be there to someone else.

I've found all of these comments so interesting, because everyone has failed to consider the moms [alot of whom are black] who are the breadwinners in their families.

For these moms, like myself, we have no choice to be a SAHM so the conversation is moot from the start.

I make over $20K more than my husband as do alot of my friends [some make double what their husbands make] and this is a problem in the black community because more black women are receiving higher education [masters/law degrees] where our males are barely getting college degrees.

So keep in mind that there's a large segment of society where the man isn't the primary provider and in these cases, it's paramount that not only the mom work but the dad as well!

While I was a SAHM, the only time I ever left my child with someone else was when I went to the gym, which I tried to do every weekday.

The "only" time you ever left him was "every weekday?" Wow, what a poor overworked SAHM you were.

"I've found all of these comments so interesting, because everyone has failed to consider the moms [alot of whom are black] who are the breadwinners in their families."

Sing it. I'm white, but I earn almost double what my husband does.

I asked him once if he'd be interested in quitting work after we have kids and he looked at me like I had lobsters crawling out of my ears.

"Would Leslie publish a poll taken by The Heritage Foundation or Tammy Bruce's website? I doubt it. She picked this survey because it suits her needs, not because of any real statistical significance."

Why is it necessary to impute motives to Leslie's choice of topic? To say that "she picked this topic because it suits her needs" is speculative at best; you can't know why someone else does something unless they tell you.

Perhaps Leslie shared her reasons with this poster?

And, to those of you who keep griping about the topics on this blog, why not bite the bullet and write a guest blog? That way, you can introduce any topic you want, discuss how you deal with the issue, and get real-life responses.

Beats the heck out of complaining day in and day out.

I used to make almost double to DH. Now we both make about 50% of the income. That is why it would be hard for either of us to quit our jobs.

Pittypat: I just sent Leslie a submission for a guest blog. I am putting for warning to the grammar and the spelling police. It may not be well written.

I, too, am about to be the primary breadwinner in my marriage by a margin of 50% (assuming I pass the bar exam, knock on wood). We don't have children yet, but if we do, there just isn't any way I could be a SAHM.

I also don't see my husband as wanting to be a SAHD -- he gets restless at home for an hour or two (as do I).

Point is, a lot of women just don't have a choice about working.

I'd love to write a guest blog, but I have the distinct impression a submission from a childless person would not make it past the in-box.

I read the blog to learn from others, but it has pretty much stopped being educational, and is now more for amusement purposes.

If you could pick an optimal number of days to work per week, how many would it be - 0, 2 or 3, 4, or full time?

Catmommy: I think we have had a guest blogger who was childless. I think you should write one. It would be interesting to hear your side of the story.

MoxieMom -- Patience please! Foamgnome's topic suggestions were terrific. but it takes some time to come up with entries that address the issues in a meaningful way. I am working on them! And I DID want to write about Drew Gilpin Faust but feared get bashed about being elitist (AGAIN). Any advice?

Free -- My vote is that WMs have more polite, respectful, independent kids. The brattiest, most spoiled kids I know (except for my own) have SAHMs who baby them. Of course this is a terrible generality but I just had to counter your terrible generality with one of my own.

And for those Oprah bashers who claim only SAHMs watch...how naive! I know lots of working moms (and dads) who use tivo or comcast on demand to watch Oprah every night. Also some folks use a late lunch hour to watch in the cafeteria at work.

How about 1?

An optimal work schedule for me would be half time, but 3 days a week 6.5 hours a day to correspond with when my kids are in school, but still have days off to volunteer (both in the schools and out.)

Why do you think the 36% of SAHMs who say they want to go back to work don't do so? I understand why the working moms who want to quit don't--they need the money. Is it that the SAHM's can't get jobs that pay enough to cover child care? Their husbands won't "let" them? This seems odd to me--these are women that seem to have choices.

Patience please! Foamgnome's topic suggestions were terrific. but it takes some time to come up with entries that address the issues in a meaningful way.

Isn't that the truth. Leslie may read my submission and laugh. Scrap it and try to find a real writer to write the blog. I guess that is why I majored in math.

My ideal would be no commute, 6.5 hours a day 4 days a week.

maybe the men with the SAHMs make so much more because they can focus on their career because everything at home is taken care of?

foamgnome --

Great! Can't wait to read your guest blog.

catmommy --

Go ahead and submit a guest blog. I'm betting that it would get published, as there are many childfree people on this blog who read it for a variety of reasons -- some actually having to do with balancing work life and home life.

maybe the men with the SAHMs make so much more because they can focus on their career because everything at home is taken care of?

That is part of it. But part of it is that some fields only pay a certain amount. No matter how much time and attention you give a job a high school teacher is not going to make 300K.

Why is it oprah "bashing" to suggest that her audience is mostly SAHMs? I think people were pointing out that the data for this "poll" is self-selecting and probably made up of a majority of people who have time to watch it. Jeez.

"Is it that the SAHM's can't get jobs that pay enough to cover child care? Their husbands won't "let" them?"

My experience with this issue is when I was younger, my mom quit work to be a SAHM. She intended to do it until I started school but didn't end up going back until I was 12 or 13. This was because our financial professional said it would actually cost more for her to work, taking into account extra travel expenses, wear-and-tear on the cars, before- and after-school care, work wardrobe, and being in a different tax bracket, etc. And she is in a professional career!

She decided not to go back until 1) I was old enough to fend for myself after school, and 2) the marriage was on the rocks and she needed to make sure she could provide for herself and me after the divorce (albeit in a different lifestyle than that to which we were accustomed).

Anyway, sometimes working actually costs money taking into account all of the relevant factors.

Cow Girl, It tickles me that you explain putting 6 figures into your pocket is "giving back to the community".

Off topic to Father of 4: My condolences -- I was offline with my own family issues last week. Leukemia is a cause near and dear to my heart -- I run in the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society's marathon training program (Team in Training).

We as women really need to stop judging one another. I will be having my first child in June. Unfortunately, I won't have the choice to stay at home much longer than the 3 months to which I am entitled under the FMLA. Why won't I have the choice?
Because not having a college fund for my child is not an option. Because living paycheck to paycheck on DH's salary is not an option. Because moving out of my house (which is already rather small) into a condo or apartment is not an option. Because trading in my car (which is already very, very modest at best) is also not an option. My DH and I are a team and we need both salaries. It's not that I love my job (in fact, I'd quit today if I could afford it; maybe things would be different if I loved my job). If you decide to or can afford to stay at home, good for you; I won't judge you and please don't judge me.

Father of 4 - just so you know, Cow Girl is actually Cal (is in short for California) Girl. Your translation software does some funny things sometimes!

I too am the breadwinner for our family and have finally come to see how ridiculous it is to feel any guilt about that.

lawgirl - good luck on the bar!!

And finally, I cannot believe that we're reduced to arguing that how well behaved a child is depends on whether the mother works or not. That type of attack on each other strikes me as an insidious way of undermining each other as well as perpetuating the idea that childrearing is all about the mom and the dad has nothing to do with it. It's like that ridiculous study that looked at the correlation in dual income families between a mother's working hours and childhood obesity, but not the father's hours or even the combined hours. Why are we so comfortable pinning everything on the mother's decisions or actions? I don't understand how so many women who talk about equal responsibility can just let that sort of thing go, and if I were a father, I would be even more irritated to have my role written out of the picture.

How a child turns out depends on the parents' choices, their style, and a lot on the children themselves, and I sincerely doubt there any consistent or significant correlation between whether the mother works and how well-behaved the child is.

maybe the men with the SAHMs make so much more because they can focus on their career because everything at home is taken care of?

If you could pick an optimal number of days to work per week, how many would it be - 0, 2 or 3, 4, or full time?

Posted by: s | February 12, 2007 10:45 AM

If I could pick an optimatl number of days to work per week? My husband and I would ideally be the idle rich, work 0 days per week, and do nothing but travel with our kids, take a private tutor along on our travels, do community service projects, each write the great American novel, and maintain our excellent health for the next 40 years.

Alas, back to the real world, in which eating and sleeping with a roof over our heads is highly favored . . .

"Free -- My vote is that WMs have more polite, respectful, independent kids. The brattiest, most spoiled kids I know (except for my own) have SAHMs who baby them. Of course this is a terrible generality but I just had to counter your terrible generality with one of my own."

One might hope that you would exercise a little more restraint before tossing 'terrible generalities' of your own.

The most polite, respectful, independent children I know have parents who have strived to foster those traits - regardless of whether both parents were employed or not.

Sorry if this is a duplicate post - the connection got hung up and I can't tell if it posted:

I too am the breadwinner for our family and have finally come to see how ridiculous it is to feel any guilt about that.

lawgirl - good luck on the bar!!

And finally, I cannot believe that we're reduced to arguing that how well behaved a child is depends on whether the mother works or not. That type of attack on each other strikes me as an insidious way of undermining each other as well as perpetuating the idea that childrearing is all about the mom and the dad has nothing to do with it. It's like that ridiculous study that looked at the correlation in dual income families between a mother's working hours and childhood obesity, but not the father's hours or even the combined hours. Why are we so comfortable pinning everything on the mother's decisions or actions? I don't understand how so many women who talk about equal responsibility can just let that sort of thing go, and if I were a father, I would be even more irritated to have my role written out of the picture.

How a child turns out depends on the parents' choices, their style, and a lot on the children themselves, and I sincerely doubt there any consistent or significant correlation between whether the mother works and how well-behaved the child is.

I just wanted to pipe in to say that my DH is a WOHM dad - I'm currently a SAHM - and he is amazingly helpful around the house and with the baby! I guess londonmom's friends must just have really bad taste in men if they're that unwilling to help their wives ;)

And I DID want to write about Drew Gilpin Faust but feared get bashed about being elitist (AGAIN). Any advice?

Leslie - I don't understand how writing about Drew Gilpin Faust would get you bashed for being elitist. But then I haven't been reading this blog for very long - two to three weeks - long enough though for this SAHM vs WOHM thing to already have gotten very old! Drew Gilpin Faust would have been my choice for today's topic, though any day in the near future would work especially since she has not yet publicly commented on her appointment.

Another idea for you, one that I touched on in an earlier posting -- exploding the myth that mommies for all eternity have spent the bulk of their time during their children's formative years tending to their children's needs. I would maintain that average mothers (the wealthy have always had special privileges) thoughout history, although they may not have been working "outside of the home", did not spend the bulk of their time and engergy tending to their children. This concept did not emerge until our society became industrialized and women were freed from the great burdens of "woman's work", that is, lots and lots of manual labor necessary for both survival and living decently. And during that time children, even very young children, were very often cared for persons other than mom - older siblings, grandparents, and hired help. In fact, I would further maintain that by today's standards many children were in fact quite neglected as little individuals in order that the family as a unit could survive. So why all the angst and/or condemnation about leaving baby in the care of responsible and competent (and very often loving) others in order to work?

Father of four,

I feel very lucky to have the job that I do. The money does not go into my pocket. It goes to charitable causes and to pay for physical therapy and other adaptive needs for my disability. I feel I owe society a great debt and this is a way for me to give back. I think it is more effective than staying at home and not earning any income.

I wonder what type of insights a lesbian brings into such surveys, interesting. But, girls with cloning and effective male contraception just around the corner, you all better go out and get a job if you want to eat and put a roof over your head like real men do.

Father of four, one other thing. As a breastfeeding SAHM, I VERY often felt like all my child was interested in with me was . . . well . . . making me feel like a cow. constantly nursing! I feel like I get way more done in my life without the constantly wailing and tugging on my shirt! So-- no offense taken! You are more right than you perhaps intended!

"I'd love to write a guest blog, but I have the distinct impression a submission from a childless person would not make it past the in-box.

I read the blog to learn from others, but it has pretty much stopped being educational, and is now more for amusement purposes."

I've thought exactly the same thing many times.

Good luck on the bar, lawgirl! Let me know how it goes. When I start practicing, I won't be the "primary" breadwinner (it will be a roughly equal contribution), but my earning capacity allows him to eschew the corporate ladder so we can have more balance at home. He'll be the one picking the kids up from school and coaching baseball, and I'll be the one working 12-hour days. Will it work for us? We'll see...

One more thought Leslie, once the myth is exploded and the mommy wars are deflated, then and only then does balance become the issue. Because regardless of the history, raising children and doing what needs to be done in order for the family to be well, yes, it is a balancing act.

>>I would maintain that average mothers (the wealthy have always had special privileges) thoughout history, although they may not have been working "outside of the home", did not spend the bulk of their time and engergy tending to their children.>>

Yes! Thank you. Running a house was a LOT more work two or three generations ago--just the cooking and washing would take a lot longer, not to mention other house/farm chores. Entertaining or educating little ones was not how our foremothers spent their days. My grandfather spent his infancy tied to a cradleboard and worn by his mother while she worked in the fields. I hardly think he would have been worse off being in a modern day care while she worked in an office.

I saw the same thing "a dad" and other posters did, which is the stunning difference in what the families would earn if the working moms's did not work and that the two groups were roughly equal in income distribution when the working moms work. It seems a stay at home spouse is a luxury, driven by ability to afford it. As you dig into this more, you find the "Leave it to Beaver" post World War II era, for example, was a period of extraordinary prosperity in America. I suspect how most families form, work, and raise children is more a function of economic circumstance than anything else. Taking a guess, I suspect even the social attitudes toward women working are really driven by economics. During the 1930's Depression, for example, there weren't enough jobs for the men. Seems logical that social conventions would form to limit the pool of the unemployed competing for jobs. Of course I am oversimplifying to keep my post brief - just wanted to share some food for thought.

Has it occured to anyone that maybe Leslie is intentionally stoking the flames to gather material for her next book. Leslie may be a WOHM, but she sure doesn't seem to work very hard.

Megan:

"Why are we so comfortable pinning everything on the mother's decisions or actions? I don't understand how so many women who talk about equal responsibility can just let that sort of thing go, and if I were a father, I would be even more irritated to have my role written out of the picture."

As a father, I agree completely. The amazing thing to me sometimes is how different I see the discussion on this board in comparison to the parents in my neighborhood. In addition to SAHMs and SAHDs, we have WAHMs and WAHDs [as well as various interesting part-time options]. In each case, families have developed a teaming relationship between husband and wife that plays to their respective strengths.

Why don't they ask if working mothers get the respect they deserve?

How the children turn out is a Red Herring. I am with "Megan" and her comment - "How a child turns out depends on the parents' choices, their style, and a lot on the children themselves, and I sincerely doubt there any consistent or significant correlation between whether the mother works and how well-behaved the child is" I would add that how the children turn out is the responsbility of all of us together. Despite our differences, we adults need to present a united front to the kids, work together, and support not undermine each other and their teachers.

"I suspect how most families form, work, and raise children is more a function of economic circumstance than anything else."

True, but I also believe that many working women derive a great deal of satisfaction and reward (besides monetary) from their jobs. It's just that darn 40 hour work week that's so hard to take.

Product of WM, off topic, my most gracious office mate spent her weekend training for a 100 mile bicycle ride at lake Tahoe on June 3 for the Leukemia and Lythoma Society. You bet I'm putting in a donation for this worthy cause.

Cal Girl, Apologies for botching your posting name. I chuckled when I first heard breastmilk called "moo juice". Disabled too, huh? You have my attention.

Why don't they ask if working mothers get the respect they deserve?

_____________________

Do fathers get the respect they deserve?

What respect do they deserve?
From who should they get this respect?

Seriously. Anytime someone talks about not getting deserved respect, I have to ask these questions to set the context.

It's very easy to ask "do X get the respect they deserve?" for any value of "X" and say that the answer is "no, of course not".

But what's the aim of asking the question?

If I had my choice, I'd pick a 4 work week. Nothing I do requires me to be in the office daily, but there is plenty around the house that doesn't get done because I'm in the office. BTW, my office is really not flexible re: personal time, errands, etc., and I have to make certain that all 8 of my hours a day are billable. Another option I'd be open to is a 7hr day or 35 hr work week. Leaving an hour early make all the difference some days.

If I could pick an optimatl number of days to work per week? My husband and I would ideally be the idle rich, work 0 days per week, and do nothing but travel with our kids, take a private tutor along on our travels, do community service projects, each write the great American novel, and maintain our excellent health for the next 40 years.

Alas, back to the real world, in which eating and sleeping with a roof over our heads is highly favored . . .

Posted by: | February 12, 2007 11:06 AM

Best posting today!

"Do fathers get the respect they deserve?"

Unlike most WOHMs, most working men don't work all day and then come home and do all the things a SAHM has to do. WOHMs generally have to do this and, hence, deserve respect.

m_ti-bear says, "It seems a stay at home spouse is a luxury, driven by ability to afford it."

I'd add that being able to afford to have one spouse stay at home involves more factors than grabbing a calculator and looking at each spouse's salary. It's about aggregate debt and savings, as well. In addition to each couple's combined and separate earnings, the factors that determine whether parents can afford to have one spouse stay at home, in the area in which I live, are:

1. whether parents paid for college educations for one or both spouses, e.g., no education debt,

2. whether parents assisted or provided a house downpayment, e.g., lower mortgage payment and equity in the home which permits parents to weather emergencies because they have an asset which may support a home equity loan, and

3. whether, for several years prior to childbirth, one or both spouses were out in the workforce in professional or high-paying jobs that allowed one or both spouses to accumulate assets including a house or substantial 401(k).

If each member of a couple owns a townhome/condo/whatever and they enter the marriage with limited if any consumer debt, their options will be very different at the same salaries than the options my husband and I have. We both have education debt, a fair amount of consumer debt related to childcare while incurring education debt, and few assets. (We even paid for our wedding.) In contrast, every other family in our immediate neighborhood (9 family sample) had college provided for them plus initial house downpayments and, essentially, started off fresh with kids and assets in the form of home equity and retirement plans. This isn't a pity party. We are very aware that our financial struggles are nothing compared to the majority of working parents. But it is frustrating when a few SAH parents estimate what they think we earn, and deduce that we must be working for frivilous cars and vacations and not because we'd like to be able to repair the hole in our living room ceiling before we retire, and keep the education loan monsters away from the door.

Drug addicts will readily site the pathetic reasons for not getting off drugs. Although they know it's destroying their minds and bodies, they continue to rationalize their continued abuse of the drugs in order to pacify their conscience.

Those who choose to subject their kids to a government education employ this same type of rational. They dare not face the reality of the effects on their own children because of the choices they've made. They just refuse to deal with the far reaching consequences their choices will have on their children. It's easier to say "I have to work" or "we can't afford it". This has been proven to be false in all but the most drastic of cases.

The real reason most won't do what is necessary to get their children into a quality private school, is that it would mean giving up the SUV, cable TV and eating out 3 times a week.

Face it folks, it's time to face reality. Your children deserve better! Stop trusting the gov't to do what you should be doing; providing your child with the best education money can buy. And that excludes a gov't education!!

Face it folks, is there anything government does well? Admit it, deep down inside, you KNOW what you're doing by giving your child over to the gov't. to educate is paramount to child abuse.

Slightly off topic, but are there any single, working, moms out there that have encountered problems dating someone that makes less? My friend and I have this problem, and I doubt we are alone. I'd be foolish to assume these issues don't arise in marriage, but my guess is that at some point the couple discusses this and comes to some happy medium. If not, please enlighten me.

"It's just that darn 40 hour work week that's so hard to take."

Amen to that, lindab! In answer to the earlier question about how many days would be ideal, I'd work a five hour day, four days a week, and I'd be doing something only slightly different than what I'm doing now. I enjoy the intellectual stimulation I get from my work (though I'd rather apply it to topics that are more important to me than what I work on now), so I think even when (not if!) I do win powerball I would still want to work that schedule. Also, I think my son has really thrived in part-time daycare - he gets great social interaction, he learns a lot, so I feel good about having something like that in his life. But I'd also take lots of vacations, though!

To add to NC lawyer's comments - single people without children are not automatically free to spend spend spend. I too have a mortgage (and no second income to fall back on) and home repairs, car repairs, etc to take care of plus a mother who depends on me for a small amount of money every month to make ends meet. People have actually asked me what I spend my money on since I don't have children.

At least my "gov't education" taught me the difference between "paramount" and "tantamount"

At least my crappy government education taught me the difference between "paramount" and "tantamount."

At least my crappy government education taught me the difference between "paramount" and "tantamount."

Free per me is really trying to get us riled up today - let's not give him/her the satisfaction as he/she seems to be a very unhappy and bitter person.

"Do fathers get the respect they deserve?"

Unlike most WOHMs, most working men don't work all day and then come home and do all the things a SAHM has to do. WOHMs generally have to do this and, hence, deserve respect.

_________________________________

Wow, doesn't sound like any house I know of.

This morning, I got up, fixed breakfast, took care of two loads of laundry, started getting the kids up (high school bus comes by at 6:35), fixed school lunches, emptied the dishwasher, walked and fed the dog, made sure homework was done and backpacks were ready, checked work and personal e-mail, prepped dinner (got the meat marinating, checked to see what I need to pick up at the store, etc.) and then came into work. (And yes my wife, although she gets up a half-hour after me, was equally busy.)

After work, it'll be fixing dinner (roast pork loin, pasta, veggies and salad), taking the middle daughter to her softball clinic, doing some organizational work for the softball program I help run, making sure all the homework is done and helping where needed, probably a couple more loads of laundry (with 4 kids we do a lot!), taking care of the dog and then figuring out if school will be cancelled tomorrow because of the weather.

(And again, my wife will be equally busy, running one child to a tutor, volunteer meeting at church and then one at school, helping the 5-th grader with some things, etc.)

(It's a lot easier now than it used to be. With 3 teenagers and a 5-th grader they can do a lot of the basic cleaning; picking up after themselves, vacuuming, dishes, etc. Just threaten their driving privileges; it gets done very, very quickly. :-)

Bragging? No, we're pretty typical of the folks we know. I guess somewhere there might be fathers who come home from work and think that since they've won the bread they can goof off and watch TV all night, but I don't know any of them.

(I could summarize the routine of my brother, who's the single father of two teen-age daughters, but that would be overkill.)

"At least my crappy government education taught me the difference between paramount and tantamount."

Yeah, and between "rationale" and "rational"!

"are there any single, working, moms out there that have encountered problems dating someone that makes less?"

I've dated men who made more money than I, but because of debt and child support payments, their disposable incomes were far less than mine.

Since I'm not looking for a long term relationship, it hasn't really been a problem.

"Unlike most WOHMs, most working men don't work all day and then come home and do all the things a SAHM has to do. WOHMs generally have to do this and, hence, deserve respect."

This pure horseradish, but that aside . . .

No one "deserves" respect for cleaning up his or her own cave. Contrary to everything you've heard from Paid Service Ads on the networks the last 20 years, you actually have to do something, accomplish something, provide service to someone, overcome something, which is worthy of respect in order to merit the respect of even one more person on the planet. Simply existing, picking up your own clothes off the floor, cleaning out your own gutters, and feeding your children does not merit respect. It's just what you do. Sheesh, some people want respect for breathing.

and KLB, I've heard many people ask childless folks what they do with all that extra time they have - you know, since they have no kids for whom to care. It's a testament to your restraint that you all don't just haul off and smack the ignorant, although these are probably the same people that question foamgnome's friends about why they have 5 children. (I though you were going to be on vacation this week - am I confused again?)

How about this for a quick survey? What does a man/father really want when he gets home from work? Someone who meets him at the door with slippers, smoking jacket and a martini? Remember when the mother would feed the kids early and get them out of the way before dad got home? Fathers didn't really spend much time with the kids then - seen and not heard you know.
I bet most men would prefer an equal partner even if she told him to make his own drink.

I meant to say earlier that I agreed with foamgnome about working more for the future than for today. A defined benefit pension is virtually a thing of the past because they are huge financial drains on companies. (See General Motors, Ford, etc). Dual income couples work so they can retire, help their kids with college etc.

NC lawyer,
I don't leave for the Bahamas until Thursday - thanks.

I think I would take a Fairfax County Public education over just about any private education in the country. Of course, Free per me could be in a state with very poor public education & in that case I would probably look at private schools.

The statistic I thought was interesting was the SAHMs 'Is it possible to give 100% to motherhood and career?" 71% said yes.
I wonder how the women who said yes formed their opinions as they are SAHMs & presumably not in the workforce.

I am in the 36% of SAHM's who would like to work but for our family right now it is not practical. My husband works crazy hours, travels on a moments notice and makes 3 times as much money as I could working full time.

I have a college degree and I worked in a profession that is in high demand (nursing). However it would require three twelve hour shifts per week, every other weekend and every other holiday (in the hospital). I know I could work in some other setting, one of the reasons I chose nursing was for the flexibility, but two weeks ago I had sick kids and my husband was out of town. I spent two full weeks at home with kids and taking them to doctors, pharmacy runs, going and getting homework from school, and trying to keep life going--if I had a job on top of this I would now be completely crazy. Not to mention it wouldn't have been fair to the job me calling in to work for my sick kids for two solid weeks. So for right now I don't work.

Bahamas KLB SS MD!You can give us all the Anna Nicole scoop when you return!

I am going to re-name this blog..... Working and Stay at home moms, and those who love to discuss them!

Moxiemom,
I will keep my eyes and ears open.

moxiemom,

I would agreed with you that it just couldn't get any worse than another rehash of SAHM/WOHM until we had the ANS column Friday.

perhaps someone will introduce a tangent that will result in a turn for the more interesting. a girl can hope.

""are there any single, working, moms out there that have encountered problems dating someone that makes less?"

I've dated men who made more money than I, but because of debt and child support payments, their disposable incomes were far less than mine.

Since I'm not looking for a long term relationship, it hasn't really been a problem."

First of all, would you explain what you mean when you are asking about encountering problems. What kind of problems? The woman can't handle the man making less or the man can't handle the woman making more?

For DZ who doesn't see it as a problem since she isn't looking for a long term relationship - would it be a problem in a longterm relationship?

For all the talk on this blog about equal opportunity in careers and equal partnerships for couples when both work, that doesn't extend to the paycheck apparently. It's OK for a woman to make less, but not a man.

In my marriage, everything is ours, there is no yours and mine. Therefore, it doesn't matter who makes more or less.

It is going to snow and sleet, etc here in DC starting today. What can't you be without in a storm?
I vote for margaritas and quesadillas (along with coffee of course).

"I think I would take a Fairfax County Public education over just about any private education in the country. "

Ditto on Howard County just up north. I have relatives in other states with kids in private schools and their educational opportunities are much less than those our kids receive in Howard County.

Army Brat

Why don't your kids make their own lunches, do their own laundry, etc.?

I didn't check backpacks or homework after my kids could learn to read.

I take exception to the anti-public-education person - "the government" doesn't educate kids, individual teachers educate kids. Sure, the government provides the buildings and pays the salaries (less than they deserve!) and sets a framework, but it's individual teachers who do the (hard and dedicated)work and turn out,