First!

I just don't even see why we need to care. If I don't respect some other woman's decision, where is it written that I have to TRY? This is what I don't get from all this mommy war crap. And no time was it dictated to myself or others that we all had to be best buddies and totally respect and appreciate their choices. No. And we could save ourselves a lot of time and effort if we just live our lives and to hell with what others think (including worrying about hurting others' feelings because you don't respect their decision).

I think the entire "mommy war" concept is totally overblown. I work part time and have feet in both worlds. I so rarely in my day to day world hear critism of either side. I do not find the stay at home parents I interact with while volunteering at school and girl scouts feeling smug or supieor. And I do not find my colleagues at work spending any time at all complaining about stay at home moms. In fact many love their stay at home friends ability to help them out.

In my personal life I have friends that do both and lots trying to carve out the part time niche. I do not hear any animosity between the side or even view them differently. We are all people making the choices that are best for us and our families.

Just bring the Medical Examiner. Forget about the crash cart, this topic can't be revived.

It seems to me that she was quoting someone else as opposed to calling stay at homes "mommies". Are you just trying to make a mountain out of a molehill thereby proving yesterday's article correct? Seems strange coming from you, someone who has promoted the concept of "mommy wars" Give it a rest.

I don't find it overblown at all. I am beyond thrilled it is finally being discussed instead of forcing us to live with our own desperate guilt and jealousy.

As a mother of 3 who has at various points been a partner in my firm, off on maternity leave, home full-time with the kids, and working part-time and who has thus been a part of the working mother world as well as the at home mother world (as well as that very strange world of being part-time and being both and neither at the same time)... I can say that this war is very real, especially within each of us.

By default aren't all articles written about the mommmy wars written, edited, published etc. by working people. I just wonder if we ever really see the views of the stay-at-home moms.

Another Point: I agree 100% that b/c working moms hold the pens and microphones in this debate, we hear more from their viewpoints. Not fair, and not good.

Also agree with Turtle Park Mom -- for most women, there is some truth to the Mommy Wars, and it is very healthy to get the debate out in the open (and out of our heads).

But there's also truth that some moms don't experience the negative tension and guilt and jealousy. This doesn't mean there's no Mommy War. It just means these particular moms don't experience it. Those of us who do have a mommy war raging in our heads have something to learn from moms who never experienced it, or have figured out how to put it to rest.

Lastly, i agree we've debated this topic A LOT on On Balance. However, the subject has been in the news so much lately that I think we need to stay current and dig into it again in light of all the recent tv and media coverage on the "mistake" stay-at-home moms supposedly make by stepping out of work for a few years.

The Mommy Wars is only "very real" because we allow it to be that way. I could not care less if someone chooses to stay at home, work, or a combo of both. People do what is right for them. Each choice has its own advantages and disadvantages.

Where the problems come in to play is when someone attacks another person's choices in a desperate attempt to validate their own choices. Or, when someone PERCEIVES that their choices are being attacked.

I for the life of me cannot understand why anyone cares what your neighbor or friend is doing. Or why they care if they disagree with your choice to stay home, go to work, etc.

I think Bennett is much more indignant and self-righteous than the moms I meet in everyday life. I get the impression that us "younger" moms (late 20's, early 30's) aren't as concerned about this topic these days. Most of us realize that the choices we make are personal and it's stupid to make judgments about someone's family situation. I think Bennett needs to start thinking outside her box and learn that what a woman needs and desires can vary, not just among women but also during a woman's life. So yes, I think authors and the media make this topic a bigger deal than it needs to be...or maybe it's just a big deal to a select audience of mothers.

I do think that this is a topic that's inflated somewhat in the media. IRL, I don't think I've ever heard these things discussed at all, and have not noticed tension between the working moms and SAH moms I know.

I'll admit that I let Leslie Bennett's nastiness piss me off (and yes, she really is that condescending in her articles and interviews and, presumably, her book). But generally, I tend not to care what other people think of my choices. I suspect I'm not in any way unique in this.

yawn...

I have an aunt who's on the front lines on of the mommy wars and seems to find joy in stirring up trouble on both sides. In the period of 1.5 hours at a recent family gathering, my aunt criticized my sister for being a working mom and my cousin for being a stay at home mom. I am not a mom so watching this from the sidelines I think, whoa, you can't win so no point in fighting--just be the best mom you can be. And how come she didn't make any comments to the dads? And why didn't the dads, who were present, stick up for the wives more? Maybe the dad's just didn't smell the snark in her comments. Maybe it's not SAHM vs. WOHM but rather just criticism of moms in general.

My sister, the WOHM, didn't react to my aunts comments. She just let it go. My cousin, the SAHM, became upset and left the room. Was there more guilt on my cousin's side or did my aunt hit a nerve? I hope not, they are both good moms. Whenever this mommy war stuff comes up, images of them both come up in my head and I think look at them, they show that either type of mom will do. I wish I had spoken up at the time and said that.....

I agree with NewSAHM. The nastiness and condescension on Bennetts' part are fueling the war. Who really believes that any woman making the choice to stay at home or work is doing so without doing their own cost/benefit analysis? Does Bennetts think that SAHM's (who she believes should be in the work force) are that frivolous and casual in their choices?

If you assume that the SAHM is incapable of evaluating their situaion and making a rational choice, why would you want them to work in your organization anyway? What a drag they would be on everyone else's efforts.

It's insulting for her to state that women whose choices are different from hers are living in denial. It's telling that she needs to characterize the choices of others in such a public way. She doesn't deserve the press she's receiving for this book.

Don't kid yourselves. The mommy war is very much alive both within us and our communities. I too have been in the weird inbetween world of part-time work and stay at home mom, but am currently working full time. Still trying to strike a balance...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/29/AR2007042901555.html?hpid=topnews

Staying at home or going to work or a combination of both are decisions predicated on many factors. To narrow these discussions to a stay-at- home moms vs working moms serves no one, least of all the children...

And, I for one, abhor the use of the word "wars" because it implies that someone is/will win.

Sure, the "mommy wars" are real- but I think we make too big a deal out of them. After all, what is comes down to is just two groups of people (those sahms and wohms who participate) saying nasty things about each other. Why do we have to act like that's a big news story?

I think that many journalists are just lazy and prefer to cover bickering rather than doing serious investigative work and analysis. I mean, you might actually have to crunch numbers, or read dry reports, or something. The horrors! Much easier to just find a few women who have strong opinions and quote them, or pick out a few inflammatory quotes from a serious author's work, or decide that three of your friends doing something is a "trend"...

Actually, we do hear a lot from the stay-at-home moms - go to the discussion boards on Baby Center, iVillage Parenting, or any of the other popular baby/parenting sites, and there are hundreds of pages of SAHMs as well as working moms, not necessarily going at it, but saying in a million different ways their views about how and why being a SAHM is best. Just because these women aren't full-time freelance writers doesn't mean their views don't get heard.

I read Leslie Bennetts book, and I don't get the impression she is trying to bash SAHMs in any way. She is trying to rescue and save them from danger of financial disaster. It seems to me her exasperated tone comes from how people keep trying to change the question: No one wants to debate the real issue of whether leaving work is financially dangerous. Instead the debate keeps getting twisted to one of "are people's choices getting respected?"

It seems that people hear her say: "By being a SAHM you are taking a financial risk" and they interpret it as "you've made a bad choice and are dumb." But she's only saying the one thing, not the other.

I'd love to hear some real debate though about the financial risk issue. I told a friend about Bennett's arguments and said the arguments had me pretty convinced that I shouldn't leave my job to stay at home when my first baby is born in a few months, even though I'd been waffling. The friend (a working gal with no kids) played devil's advocate and said Bennetts was probably exaggerating the financial risks of divorce, and long-term disability insurance as well as life insurance could cover me in the case that my husband died or was injured and couldn't work.

I wish more people would talk about those real and scary issues and stop griping about respect and choices who was more snippy at whom!

I have done both the SAHM and WOHM roles; I have always felt that everyone's situation is different. Some occupational fields can tolerate a few years "off ramp" and some cannot. I have known creative SAHMs and one who derided daycare but was constantly calling sitters so she could go out without her kids. This person also had a substantial trust fund. I have known WOHMs who were great moms and others who thought they had to take every job on the rung involving lots of business travel,then wondered why their kids were messed up. Most of us are doing our best and somewhere in-between all of the extremes. We should all just try to get along, and stop buying these books or paying attention to these writers with nothing better to write about.

The war in Iraq pales in comparison to the epic mommy war being fought everyday in the streets and homes of suburbia...

"Could Bennetts be experiencing just a tad of 'highly combative indignation' herself?"

I think most anyone who is combative on the issue is conflicted (though that doesn't mean those who are conflicted are necessarily combative). Many of us do what we do, and don't really much care what anyone thinks. I'd rather feel that peace than sell all the books in the world.

Why are you wasting space on this subject? Those of us who are Moms, stay-at-home or not, would rather spend our precious-few minutes of free time reading something interesting.

There are a couple of things which have thrown fuel on the mommy war fire in the past few years.

First, the stay home mommy message dovetails nicely with that of right wing christian conservatives, and ends up being promoted by them to advance the rightists' autocratic male dominated world view. I support the choices of women, but I recoil at their lifestyle being advanced by people whose ultimate aim is to take away choices.

Second, stay at home moms are expressing themselves and defending their choices on line a lot more than the average working mom. I think computers and internet networking have made life a lot better for moms at home longing to feel connected and intellectually stimulated, but it has also brought parenting issues and conflicts a lot more air time.

I am not a mom, but I've endured a lot of scrutiny over my decisions in life, and find that as long as I am confident I did the right thing for myself (any my husband when he entered the picture), I could not care less what others say. If others don't respect my choices, fine, but I don't expect them to walk on tiptoes for my benefit.

I have to believe that any "indignation" is the result of insecurity. After all, if a woman knows she's doing the right thing for herself, why waste valuable time and energy trying to convince everyone else she's right, too?

These news articles about women hurting their careers by leaving the workforce are not an attack on SAHMs. They simply state the obvious: that women often set their careers back by taking off for long periods, and place themselves at risk financially in the event of divorce or death. This isn't always the case, but more often than not, it probably is. Nowhere in these stories did I see an attack on SAHMs. If they weigh the benefits risks and make an informed decision, then they've done the right thing.

Groggy said:
"I read Leslie Bennetts book, and I don't get the impression she is trying to bash SAHMs in any way. She is trying to rescue and save them from danger of financial disaster."

What incredible condescension. Infantilizing adults (who need "rescue"!!) because they've made a quite common and personal decision based on their own needs, financial situation and relationship (things unknown to you or Bennetts) is the height of arrogance. Shame on her and shame on you.

I vote "fiction".

That we keep revisiting a variant of this topic on a weekly/bi-monthly basis indicates to me that: a) there is no shortage of opinions pro, con, and on the fence about the stay at home / work outside of the home debate; and, b) this issue will NEVER be resolved to the satisfaction of participants referenced above. Perhaps the greatest disservice we do to ourselves in perpetually rehashing this argument is that we ignore the bigger problem of the precarious financial position of MANY families and individuals in this, the wealthiest nation in the world.

Like so many "wars," this one seems to be fed almost exclusively by people who see life through ideological lenses. There's an intellectual strain that developed in the 20th century that is well summed up by the phrase "everything is political." In that view, what I choose to buy is a political statement, the clothes I wear are a political statement, where I live is a political statement - and all the choices I make in my personal life become statement about gender politics.

Don't misunderstand me - it is important to make prudent, responsible choices, and to care about the effect your choices have on the people in your life. But there's a difference between thinking about practical consequences for your family, and intentionally making a "statement."

If you read the posts on this blog carefully, the ones that are most heated tend to come from people who are focused on what their choices "say," the "statement" they make, the "cause" of this or that group of people, a "movement" or one or more words ending in "ism" - rather than on specific needs of a child, spouse, or themselves.

I'm increasingly convinced that there's nothing sadder than seeing people purely through political or ideological eyes - I can't imagine being married to someone who couldn't step outside that and view me as a friend and lover. Politics is important, and ideology can be important - but they can blind us if that's all we ever look at.

Fortunately, most men and women are more concerned about building good lives for themselves and their families than they are about fighting ideological battles. That's why, while you can find plenty of writers to maintain a war of words, most women have no interest in signing up for either side.

Groggie,

I have not read Bennetts' book, so I bow to your superior knowledge of its tone. There's no debating, though, that she misses few chances in interviews to lob bombs at SAHMs. I blogged about a few of them here, if you're interested: http://paranoidmama.blogspot.com/2007/04/update.html

As far as the financial risks of being a SAHP, I agree that they exist, I just think that Bennetts' one-size-fits-all solution is far too narrow. From what I've read, her only advice is that women never quit working in the first place, or that they return to the workforce immediately, or else they face doooooom!

There are ways to protect oneself from financial ruin while also taking some time to be home for a while. Would-be parents can wait a few years and build up a substantial savings account before having kids, to guard against unexpected unemployment and to build a nest egg for retirement. Good life insurance can cover the financial hit of one spouse dying. Disability insurance can help with unexpected medical leave.

The point is, there are options out there. Bennetts, at least in her interviews and articles, seems not to be interested in these things. Her demeanor suggests that she has an agenda to push (women should never stay at home), and that the "but I'm only trying to help!" is an excuse to let her fling insults with impunity.

The closest I can come to on this topic is my sis-in-law who stays home with the 2 nephews because it is more important to her and my brother that she not work outside the home, even though they need the money.

I have to agree that it's actually a much-broader topic. I have seen moms whose work situations are identical and instead they war over who raises their children better or whose child is more developed. Some of this has to do with the individual's own maturity and confidence and often parents want their children's successes to be a direct reflection of their parenting skills or their value as a person. Certain issues bring out competition and divisiveness more than others and I think parenting is one of them. Comparing yourself to others is often how we measure ourselves; unfortunately, it's a bit too easy to make yourself feel better or less guilty by judging others or looking for their faults. I don't think this is limited to parenting (think full-timers vs. part-timers at work; long-time career builders vs. newly drafted star worker, handyman dad vs. not-so-handyman dad, etc., etc.).

I think "war" is definitely a trumped up term used to sell books and draw readers. People die in wars. I might call this The Cycle of Human Pettiness Magnified by Motherhood.

It's not just moms either--while I'm good at keeping my mouth shut, I certainly find myself questioning the way others parent their children or beginning to make some sort of value judgment when someone's child seems to have expensive clothes but lacks basic necessities, etc., etc.

Choosing (for those who have the luxury) to stay home with your children or going back to work is a deeply personal decision that leaves a lot of folks feeling uncertain. You look for things to validate your decision and ya don't take kindly to things that question or judge it.

I spent the weekend moving...
Fred, just saw your post- will do when I can get into my email account (cable company will transfer service sometime this week). :)

I will never look at spinach (or grapes) the same way...

Anyway, I think the mommy war is as real as everyone makes it. If someone is resenting your choices, or judging them for you, that is their problem and life goes on. Generally, so long as a person's choice is not infringing on your own rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that is their business. We can throw out opinions on the merits of staying home or going to work for all eternity- but they are always subjective and can never be anything but. I do think it is overly critical to label a choice to stay home as a mistake.

I moved out to the Midwest 2 1/2 years ago, and the Mommy Wars don't really seem to exist here.

We live on what is considered a decidedly upper-middle class neighborhood (makes us giggle - we bought the house for less than we sold our NoVa condo). We have quite a few SAHM's, but most of them are former professionals, some of whom got laid off, some who chose to stay at home.

But we also have quite a few working Moms as well. Some accountants, one lawyer, a dentist, a few nurses. And you know what? We all play nicely together...well, as much as neighbors will ;). Not a lick of Mommy War in sight, though a few folks do grumble about other people's lawns...though now that I think about it, it's the men who do that sort of grumbling!

Though I will say it took a while for many women (not just my neighbors) to get used to me out here. They all thought since I moved here from DC and have a trace of a NYC accent (and talk as quickly as any NYC resident), they thought I'd "look down" on them in general because I was a "Big City Girl" (they've realized they were mistaken and I didn't take it personally).

That makes me think that some of this is based on "Big City" issues. Because out here....people eat dinner with their families, even when they're busy. My neighbors on either side are lawyers in the same practice - they both come home and have dinner, spend some time with family, and head back in or finish up work at home.

People also leave work early to go play golf or go fishing when the weather is nice. Your commute is as long as you want it to be - there's little difference in the price of the same house inside the city limits or outside of it. And there seems to be adequate child care; I've never heard a Mom complain about not being able to get into a facility out here.

Maybe when life isn't so hectic because things aren't so spread out (going to "the other side of town" takes 10 minutes around here - 15 if you hit the lights wrong), then these hyped-up arguments mean less. Then again, the Golden Rule does seem to actually work out here in the Midwest, and that might also have something to do with it as well. Live and let live, and do unto others. It's nice :D

"These news articles about women hurting their careers by leaving the workforce are not an attack on SAHMs."

Sorry - there's more to it than that. Bennetts comes right out and says that SAHMs are making a foolish mistake, they are unjustifiably wasting their time and talents, and they shouldn't do it.

How do you spin that as anything other than an attack? She's basically called all SAHMs "slackers!"

For me, the only place the "Mommy Wars" exists is inside myself. I occasionally question the decisions I've made, but I'm pretty good about realizing that (a) my children are pretty sturdy and resilient little creatures who will survive any decision I make regarding at home/at work opportunities, (b) my career and professional expectations are pretty sturdy and resilient, and (c) I don't really care what other people think of me or my choices. I like this blog because it's fascinating and enriching to learn about other points of view, but when it comes down to it, the only perspectives I care about are mine and my husband's, my childrens', and to a lesser extent, my parents'.

I don't like dealing with extremists of almost any kind. That's one thing this blog has driven home for me! The Linda Hirschmanns (or Leslie Bennetts) of the world turn me right off, because I don't have the time or energy (and I refuse to spend my money) on someone who is so absolutely certain that her way is the only right way for everyone, regardless of their situation.

I do think women have a lot of inner angst about the choices they made. But I don't think in person, people say a lot to one another about the mommy wars. I really don't think outside of cyber space people are not that rude. Most people are fairly busy and their interactions with other people is sort of fleeting. I do find people on line talk rather nasty to one another. But I don't think friends cut each other up to shreds. This constant fueling of the mommy wars is mostly on line and in the media. But we have also learned on line and on blogs, people say all sorts of things they would not dare to say in person.

"What incredible condescension. Infantilizing adults (who need "rescue"!!) because they've made a quite common and personal decision based on their own needs, financial situation and relationship (things unknown to you or Bennetts) is the height of arrogance. Shame on her and shame on you."

Fran, you can leave me out of it, I'm not trying to rescue anyone, I'm just saying I think that's how Leslie Bennetts sees herself. And I think she's frustrated by the fact that she perceives some women as blindly endangering themselves and then reacting furiously when she (again as she sees it) tries to pull the wool off their eyes.

Poor Leslie Bennetts, she didn't realize before writing her book that the world is divided into two main types of people: Ostriches with their heads in the sand and the thinking types. The thinking types will always be happy to read books like hers, but will always need books like that less than the ostriches. And the ostriches will always peck at anyone who so much as mentions sand ...

This is like everything else, in that there are small groups of loud people on both sides who have very definite ideas about women and what their priorities ought to be, and these views are not up for debate or any compromise. That's why it's so personal. That's why people like Bennetts resemble the very thing they despise, and there are stay-at-homers who do likewise. They can't see just how much they are walking contradictions, and neither can their enablers in the press who do their part to make matters worse.

I live in a Maryland suburb and I can tell you that the mommy wars are alive and well--and this is in REAL life! Not some media fueled frenzy.

In our neighborhood, we have the stay at home moms. They're the ones who are up at the elementary school ALL THE TIME. They're the ones who aren't participating in community sports...they have their children in special coached sports right after school--something working moms couldn't possibly do. They also have Pampered Chef and Southern Living Parties in the middle of the day when their kids are in school. And they're up at the pool all day every day during the summer...until us working moms show up at the end of the day. Then, they go home and make dinner for their families. These women are for the most part SKINNY...they all work out at 5:00am at Fitness First...and they're very cliquey.

There's also a little "war" among the stay at home moms themselves. The ones who are volunteering at school wonder what the stay at home moms who aren't volunteering could possibly be doing with their time.

The working moms (of which I am one) often feel a need to compete with these moms--not sure if the stay at home moms are competing with us, though. I know someone who jumped through HUGE hoops to put her children in swim team even though she works...just so her kids could have the same benefits as the stay at home moms do. And someone else who's involved in our Girl Scout troop always tries to outdo the sata at home moms in how well she does everything--saying, "see...those stay at home moms don't have us beat."

But I do often wonder...are the stay at home moms less STRESSED than the working moms like me who are ragging ourselves out to DO IT ALL!!!!!! I envy the fact that they can read a book in the middle of the afternoon when their kids are in school, rather than working all day...then trying to do it all in the evening. When you work and you're a mom, you have very little time for yourself!

I briefly was a member of a local Mom's club when my daughter was very little. Since I worked full-time (my dh was a SAHD), I could not attend the playgroups or other functions held in the daytime, although my dh sometimes did. They did have their meetings at night.

There was definitely an elitism with many of the SAHMs and I definitely felt looked down on by some of them. This was not true of all of them by any means, but that in addition to the under-the-surface anti-Semitism at the time made me not feel very welcome. What is ironic now is that a member of my temple is now that club's President so I guess things have changed a bit there.

Dogma:
I have been a SAHM and a WOHM, and I received more c**p the years that I didn't work; basically, WOHMs were generally rude and condescending. That was almost 20 years ago (I was home between 1988 and 1999), and I thought attitudes would have evolved by now, and mothers would respect each other's choices. I think it's possible your cousin reacted strongly because SAHMs are probably still treated like uneducated lazy idiots by a small segment of WOHMs (it seems like there too many Leslie Bennets in the world) and she probably is in the unfortunate situation of being in contact with a vocal segment of that population.

On the other hand, my sister, who did not spend any time as a SAHM, feels like the non-working moms she meets in her children's school community are snarky and rude, so it certainly seems to go both ways.

I see working or not working as a personal (as in none of my business) choice. Some moms need to work; some love their careers and figure out how to make it all happen; some only plan to not work for a few years; some have the money and desire to not work at all.

I might have opinions, but I don't feel the need to share them with people who have made different choices, and I absolutely respect whatever choices another mom has made. When a parent comes in for a conference, I can't imagine criticizing that parent for working, or not working, or going back to work!

Instead of criticizing each other for our choices, we should be working to narrow the gender wage gap, create family-friendly and more flexible workplaces, alleviate societal ills like limited access to health care...whatever YOU believe will improve society as a whole.

Free period is over, back to class...

Tripe like this convinces me Woody Allen was a woman in drag.

I agree with you that when you work there is very little time left to yourself. So, war, or no war...there are times I think it would be so nice to have the "luxury" of being a stay at home mom. Not that they don't work at home...but they're doing one job, not two!

"It seems to me her exasperated tone comes from how people keep trying to change the question: No one wants to debate the real issue of whether leaving work is financially dangerous."

This is one thing that exasperates many stay-at-home moms (and the families that love them) - why is financial security the only (or even most important) question? We have to be able to support our families and ourselves. But aren't there some other equally important questions?
- What's best for my marriage?
- What's best for my kids?
- What do I really, really enjoy doing?

We've spent years, as a society, trying to teach men that an inordinate focus on financial success and security leads to an unbalanced life. You know what - that's right! That's why we have men who aren't as focused on the corporate treadmill; men who're willing to be stay at home dads; men who'll turn down the promotion if it requires traveling five nights a week, or moving the family across the country.

Who wins if we turn women into 1950's era men?

As a Working Daddy I want to say that I am extremely sick of this discussion and think it's long long past its expiration date. There have been no additions to the debate. I talk to men about this at work all the time , those whose wives got minor league bachelors degrees stay at home for 2-3 years and then complain bitterly that they aren't offered jobs at decent salaries. Get over yourself, you let your skills get rusty and you're now entry level again- we know a woman who did that and bragged that she knew how to use email like everyone else, but when I mentioned using mind-mapping software or building a company-wide wiki she blanked. My supervisor's wife is a surgeon, my wife is a PhD biologist, my friend's wife is a CFO w/ an MBA, another friend's wife is an Army Major, another friend's wife is a published author, several women I know runs their own non-profits, and I know at least 4 women who are serious surgical, cardiac, intensive care, etc nurses at Bethesda Naval Hospital and other high-profile locations and let's not even talk about all the DC Lawyers. If anyone expects these women to stop working they are throwing away all the effort they put into bettering this country. If they don't use their education to better society to the fullest extent then the part of the education they don't use is wasted and should have gone to someone else- remember getting into college is competitive. Why take up a place in med school or law school or B School that someone else wanted and was rejected for if you aren't going to use it?

I've always been a working mom, and we had a stay at home mom who used to live across the street from us. Our kids were close in age, and she always felt superior to me because she was home. She would give me "pop quizzes" about how many teeth my son had...etc. She was more on top of these details than I was...probably because she didn't have anything else to do. She also told me she advanced into solid foods quicker because she was feeding her little precious son ALL his meals and snacks...while daycare was taking care of my son. She always was always doing things MORE...BETTER...ETC than I was. I was soooooo glad when she moved away!

Find the comment about pools and SAHM kind of funny. Our pool run by the HOA doesn't open till 3PM during the week. When I asked why, they said it wasn't worth opening earlier because so many parents worked. Also at my daughter's preschool Holiday party, I was the only parent there. I wondered where all the SAHPs were. I assumed maybe they all worked. I worked too but happen to have the day off. I don't see any real volunteerism at my daughter's preschool but that maybe because it is public preschool for delayed children. Even the stay at home parents do not get very involved. I am one of the only parents that is involved in the preschool. It isn't much because I work four days a week but I try to help out when I can. I see more volunteerism in the elementary school then the preschool. I read a lot about what the PTA is doing in their Tuesday flyers.

Sorry for posting a third time, but also wanted to point out something else that seems neglected in the discussion so far ... everyone keeps saying, It's a personal choice, it concerns only me. But one of the really interesting counterpoints in Leslie Bennetts book is that it's not just a personal choice. The idea is that if a person is financially dependent and becomes unemployable (or minimally unemployable) due to years out of the job force, they can end up becoming a burden on others ... e.g. kids having to support their parents, or even society as a whole if the person ends up on public assistance. And it does happen, even to stay-at-home parents who formerly felt wealthy and secure.

Again, that's LB's argument as I understand it, not necessarily what I'd argue if I were the one writing books ...

This is one thing that exasperates many stay-at-home moms (and the families that love them) - why is financial security the only (or even most important) question?
----------
Says someone who has no friends who went bankrupt, became homeless, and moved their entire family into Mom's basement. Pooh-poohing is a sin.

ALive and Well --

I can say that, for me at least, I have a ton less stress as a SAHM than I did when I was working. While I can't quite sit and read a book (DD is 17 months old, so not in school yet, but no longer napping), I do have the option of spending sunny days in the park with her and fully intend to spend lots of time at the pool. I don't have to cram all of the necessities of life (grocery shopping, errands, cleaning, cooking) into the margins of my day. I'd be lying if I said it wasn't nice.

That was my post about the pools...that's very interesting that yours has hours based on the working moms, not the stay at home moms. At our pool, the stay at home moms have their kids in swim team in the morning...they pack a HUGE lunch, and hang out at the pool for the rest of the day. The ones that I talk to feel good that they're giving their kids the "carefree summers' of our own childhood.

That's also interesting that you're one of the only volunteers...and you work :)

ALive and Well --

I can say that, for me at least, I have a ton less stress as a SAHM than I did when I was working. While I can't quite sit and read a book (DD is 17 months old, so not in school yet, but no longer napping), I do have the option of spending sunny days in the park with her and fully intend to spend lots of time at the pool. I don't have to cram all of the necessities of life (grocery shopping, errands, cleaning, cooking) into the margins of my day. I'd be lying if I said it wasn't nice.

Posted by: NewSAHM | April 30, 2007 09:33 AM

That was my post...and I do think it would be nice to have the time you have. This weekend I was juggling attending the T-ball game, helping my son finish his science fair project, etc. And then squeezing in the grocery shopping, laundry, etc. It's EXHAUSTING!!!!!!!! What I wouldn't give to be able to spread out the chores during the week!

I have a new idea topic -- how about the fact that insurance companies charge more to insure women than men. There was an interesting editorial by Eleanor Smeal and the anniversary of the ERA in last week's Post, which argued that the ERA is still necessary and relevant(including to stop gender discrimination by insurance companies).

I'm a working mother and work in large part for health insurance coverage (much more expensive at my husband's work).

The "mommy wars" is nothing more than the same cattiness and classism applied to a different little detail of the "best lifestyle." It's the continuing crap that we as women do to ourselves to keep ourselves running in circles. There is no reality to the "war" at all.

I work. A ton. I have three kids, one autistic and one with ADD. I tell you, people are going to find a reason to judge me and feel superior regardless of whether I work or stay at home. I've decided not to take the bait when I can possibly avoid it. I think that more women would be well-advised to do the same.

If it makes you feel any better, there are many, many weeks when I still end up cramming all of the laundry and housecleaning into the weekend because DD's being a barnacle and won't let me out of her sight during the week. :-)

I have a lot of respect for working moms (and anticipate being one myself once I'm done having babies). That stress to get everything done is the one thing I dread about going back to work.

That was my post about the pools...that's very interesting that yours has hours based on the working moms, not the stay at home moms. At our pool, the stay at home moms have their kids in swim team in the morning...they pack a HUGE lunch, and hang out at the pool for the rest of the day. The ones that I talk to feel good that they're giving their kids the "carefree summers' of our own childhood.

That's also interesting that you're one of the only volunteers...and you work :)

Posted by: TO: Foamgnome | April 30, 2007 09:37 AM

I thought the pool thing was strange too. But it might be just an excuse to cut hours. But my guess is they saw that it wasn't being used before 3PM and decided if cuts needed to be made, it will be there.

I am still shocked that there is not more preschool volunteerism. But it is also a preschool for delayed children. I think that probably factors in. These parents are dealing with a huge emotional obstacle and might feel they have nothing to offer the professionals. She is going to an award ceremony with the whole school. So I will check out how many parents attend. I also wonder if public school makes a difference. It is in an area that is middle class but I would imagine if you can afford private preschool, you probably also can afford help, which would make it easier to volunteer.

I think the mommy-wars are real, and I have tried to avoid them by "copping out." I have one child and both my husband & I work, but at work I avoid conversations about staying at home/working/etc and since having a child, didn't seek out new "mommy" friends - I basically stuck with the women I have been friends with since college & beyond. I don't limit my child's interaction with other people, obviously, I just don't want to dip my toe in any pool (no pun intended) that's going to cause unnecessary angst. So, I guess, in the short term, at least, "copping out" of the mommy wars is how I deal with it.

I have a new idea topic -- how about the fact that insurance companies charge more to insure women than men. There was an interesting editorial by Eleanor Smeal and the anniversary of the ERA in last week's Post, which argued that the ERA is still necessary and relevant(including to stop gender discrimination by insurance companies).

I'm a working mother and work in large part for health insurance coverage (much more expensive at my husband's work).

Posted by: Just Saying | April 30, 2007 09:40 AM

Could that be because it is more expensive to treat women due to pregnancy. My friend is an insurance agent and she says if you drop pregancy coverage, the price drops way down.

Thanks for letting me know it's not all bliss ;)

In my ideal world, I would work part-time...honestly, I think I'd go nuts if I was home all the time. But alas, the world isn't "ideal." If you want my opinion...I wouldn't go back unless you really need the money.

"I have a new idea topic -- how about the fact that insurance companies charge more to insure women than men."

Obviously, you are not talking about auto insurance, especially for ages 16-25.

20 year old daughter with multiple speeding tickets still pays less insurance than 18 year old son with clean driving record. They have comparable vehicles.

"This is one thing that exasperates many stay-at-home moms (and the families that love them) - why is financial security the only (or even most important) question?"

Gee, I've always been really worried about what exasperates SAHMs!!!!!!

Because you can't buy insurance for everything!

Spouses get can sick or injured (mentallly or otherwise), not enough to collect benefits/insurance, but just enough to keep them unemployed or underemployed for the rest of their lives.

Spouses hide assets under the radar and take off.

Then the SAHM can explain to her children why they are living in poverty.

Cause, yeah, poverty is a really BIG question!! And it sucks the most for the weak & helpless - kids and old people.

What an airhead!!!!

I think the Mommy wars idea is absurdly amplified (if not wholly created) by the media. And the sad thing is that these books that come out are not constructive. They only heighten tension and anger between SAHMs and working moms, where none might otherwise exist. Truth be told, I think most people don't give a crap if someone chooses to stay at home or not. And everybody justifies in their own mind whatever decision they made. These books make women think there is a debate/war going on about working versus staying home. I was watching this show "What about Bryan" with my wife. And the stereotypicaly depiction as stay at home moms as rude condescending women judging our working mom hero seemed absurd. "Desperate House Wives" had the same depiction a couple of seasons ago. Maybe I wasn't paying attention, but in recent years this seems to have become a very common plot device. And it just seems so contrived to me.

I'm a single mom. My ex-husband left me for another woman. Being a working mom is not a personal choice, its a necessity. I'm sure its like that for the majority of woman.

I can't wait for the day we talk about the "Daddy Wars"!

"This is one thing that exasperates many stay-at-home moms (and the families that love them) - why is financial security the only (or even most important) question?"

It is certainly not the most important question - me personally, I'd say love and family are more important than finances in a heartbeat. But finances are still way up there - e.g. you're not doing your kids any favors if you end up having to support them all by yourself and not being able to.

I feel like I would really, really, really like being a SAHM indefinitely, 50s style, the whole nine yards. But "doing what you really love" isn't always the right thing to do, it seems to me. I can imagine there are plenty of working people out there - parents or not, sole breadwinners or not - who would really love to just play the guitar all day instead of going to work. Does this mean they should sacrifice a secure livlihood and even impoverish a family to do it?

I like the whole concept of Leslie Morgan Steiner's column "on balance", because it seems like in life most people have to balalnce doing what they really love and their spirital and family values with doing what they need to and working and achieving in a worldly way. I don't think women need to turn into 1950s style men, but I would also say that we need to pull our weight in the world and recognize that our decisions affect more than just ourselves, and make our decisions with the fullest information at our disposal and in all thoughtfulness - not just out of our hearts but our heads too!

Spinach is green, killer weed too
I'm scarred for life now, how about you?
And I think to myself what a godawful blog

I see posts leaning left and posts to the right
Some post all day, some post at night
And I think to myself, what a godawful blog

Some people having children, some people asking why
Someone said feces, now watch the insults fly
I see trolls trading barbs, sayin' what I should do
Now I'm always saying, "STFU"

I see statistics flyin', I watch them grow
How Blog Stats does it, we'll never know
And I think to myself, what a godawful blog
Yes, I think to myself, what a godawful blog...

Oh blah

NewSAHM, you are so right about less stress when you are at home full time. I was a SAHM for 4 years and returned to work about a year ago, and life is quite hectic now. Happy, but hectic. I do wonder from time to time if the fact that our (my family's) quality of life is better when I don't work is worth quitting, but I pull a Scarlet O'Hara -- I'll think about that tomorrow.

I think becoming a parent brings out a lot of self doubt in a lot of people. I've seen very confident and competent people question every decision that they make when it comes to the things they are doing (or not doing) for their kids. I think this phenomenon drives the so-called "mommy wars" because once you convince yourself the choice you have made is right, you have also convinced yourself that the other choices are wrong.

But, not all mommies are in this war. I have friends who SAH and who WOH, we have get togethers and conversations about all sorts of things, not just our children. We all love our children and we benefit greatly from the various perspectives each mom brings to the group.

Is it overblown by the media? Definitely! Heck, imo, Oprah has made millions off this so-called "war", championing those oh-so-important topics to those mothers who are free at 3pm to watch and believe such trash.

"Says someone who has no friends who went bankrupt, became homeless, and moved their entire family into Mom's basement. Pooh-poohing is a sin."

DCer,

cute snark - but totally divorced from reality. My wife and I will celebrate our 25th wedding anniversary this fall. We have two kids, own our own home on a 1/3rd acre lot, and have sent our older child to college this year.

My wife worked before our first child was born - she quit, in part because she was doing social work in rather dangerous low-income neighborhoods. (I was relatively comfortable with the job until one evening when we saw a story on the evening news about a woman who had talked her lover into killing her husband with an axe, and then stuffed the body into a closet - it turns out my wife had tried to sign the woman up to work with her in her home a couple of weeks before.)

Her staying home required some changes in our life. I bought a house almost as old as I am, and took a 90 minute commute, to make it affordable. We keep our cars on average for 13-15 years.

Yes, I'm insured. If I die, she'll eventually have to go back to work. But, she'll be able to pay off the mortgage and spend some time retraining. (She's insured also - if she'd died a few years ago, I'd have needed to pay for child care.)

DCer, gratuitiously insulting people you know nothing about is a sin also.

"I can't wait for the day we talk about the "Daddy Wars"!"

Feminist Mom, it's not going to happen. Men don't judge each other over this kind of stuff.

I do know that when I was a sahm my wohm sister kept trying to tell me to go back to work- that she *knew* I couldn't *possibly* be happy, that I wanted to go back to work, etc. When I went back to work, she was all smug as in, see, I knew I was right. My other sahm sister felt we were bonding when I was sahm and I'm not really sure what she thinks about my working (I think she partially thinks how much more wonderful her(abusive) dh is since she doesn't *have* to work). But the decision was only partially based on money.

I do understand bennetts point about what happens in case the sahp has to get a job (divorce death). But I also think that certain things can be planned for-i know plenty of marraiges where it seems likely people will get divorced-when I've spoken to some who have been, they say they knew something wasn't right all along but they ignored it. But- the person you marry who has certain values will have certain values always( like my bil who loves money above all else). There is some truth to her thoughts, but even if one is scared, there are ways tocounter that-insurance, savings in one name, etc, rather than changing what you do (ie go back to work when you do not want to) and doing it because you are scared.

I was a SAHM for the first three years of DD life. I enjoyed it except for the SAHMs in the neighborhood. I grew tired of listening to neighborhood gossip, interior home design, and other girlie topics. When I had enough and thought that DD was ready for more pre-school time, I called my former employer and was re-hired as a part-time employee. I haven't regretted my decision one bit. My DD is now 11. I am financially secure knowing that I will have a pension, SS, and a healthy 401k when I retire in about 6 years. My husband is on the track to retire at the same time. Both of us will be in our mid-50's, with DD in college. I still work part-time and sure, it wasn't all fun and games, but I DO NOT miss talking about drapery fabrics!

"I DO NOT miss talking about drapery fabrics!"

I'm a fulltime working mom and I would love to be home talking about drapery fabrics!!!! At least, give me a year or two...and I'll let you know if I tire of it then.

The friend (a working gal with no kids) played devil's advocate and said Bennetts was probably exaggerating the financial risks of divorce, and long-term disability insurance as well as life insurance could cover me in the case that my husband died or was injured and couldn't work.

No, Bennetts is not exaggerating. It IS a risk, but if you are aware of it you can plan accordingly!

That's what brains are for, of course.

If taking a few months off isn't the end of your career, do it. If it will guarantee your family living in grandmom's basement, then don't.

If you can, at least take the 8 weeks. 12 if you can swing it.

Personally, I simply never wanted to be viewed as a dependent, so I never left the paid work force longer than my leave would cover post-partum. But that may not be best for you and your family.

Good luck!

Groggie,

I never said that women shouldn't work - many have to, and for others it's the smartest, most prudent choice. Just like all men don't have to work - for some, being a stay-at-home dad is the best choice.

But I do think we need to recognize that there are more considerations involved than the financial - and that in some circumstances this means one parent may rationally choose to stay home with the kids, just as in other circumstances a parent may choose not to accept the best-paying or most prestigious job.

I would have a lot more respect for Ms. Bennetts' point of view if she wrote about building the best, most fullfilling life for yourself and your family, rather than maximizing your financial security. I don't disagree with her because it doesn't fit some view I have of the role of women - I don't think her approach makes sense for men, either.

Boo--I am now considered an OLDER mom because I am on my late 30's! Dang. The kids are 10 and 13, so I guess it works out. I have worked out of my house for several years, albeit part time. I LOOK like a SAHM. In the summer, however, I get up early to work. I was one of the swim team moms and HATED it. Chasmasaur, that was a funny post. Things ARE different in the midwest. People talk to each other for one, and the word 'commute' is relatively unknown. Whenever we go back to visit relatives, we look at real estate and get excited--we could live in a fab house with no mortgage! But we love it here on the East Coast. We actually do take advantage of many of the opportunities. It is also much more diverse. The percentage of minorities in my school as a child was less than one percent. Even ten years ago when I was there the student body was largely white. I like that my kids can grow up in a fairly diverse area.

As far as I am concerned, the one mommy war is the one we have with ourselves. I am the one whose opinion counts. If my neighbor thinks I am lazy/uncaring if I don't work/work, that is her or his burden, not mine. I take ownership of my decisions. What is validating to me, besides the fact that these are MY choices, is the fact that my family--husband and two kids--is emotionally, physically and socially healthy. Bad mommy--it sounds like you understand completely.

To bad mommy @ 9:44 am

>>>>I work. A ton. I have three kids, one autistic and one with ADD. I tell you, people are going to find a reason to judge me and feel superior regardless of whether I work or stay at home. I've decided not to take the bait when I can possibly avoid it. I think that more women would be well-advised to do the same.<<<<

Good for you! And I hope you get the support you need from friends, family and work.

I agree with you. This is not in your league, but an example, I hope, to those who stress over the smaller issues.

We're having a Kentucky Derby party this weekend (out here in Wisconsin, a rarity). I decided to make it a block party, and was surprised at the outcome - about half my neighbors can actually come.

Since yard work is just starting here, our yard is a little rough (we had a retaining wall put late last summer so the baby grass didn't take well in a few places before the snow started to fly). My husband is angsting, but I told him that the neighbors will understand we waited to patch holes until AFTER everyone was tromping all over our yard. They will appreciate not having to dodge baby-grass patches.

And for those neighbors with perfect yards who don't appreciate it? Well, we're being good neighbors for giving them something to feel superior about and to have some party conversation all built in ;)

The way I see it, if our hospitality, free food and free booze doesn't earn their goodwill, then scr*w 'em. Real friends understand. Same for the whole Mommy Wars thing. The people who actually matter will understand (or can be made to understand). Scr*w the rest of 'em.

I do not see that it is "infantalizing" adults to say "hey, have you thought about this risk in staying home or working (or whatever)." I think everyone should have full information before making a decision like this, wherever possible. That's just my opinion.

You can argue her tone was offensive, and I don't know as I haven't read the book. But, the fact is, many women do NOT think about the LONG TERM financial impacts in deciding to stay home. Why is it infantalizing to provide some food for thought? I'm constantly learning things that I don't know and that's ok with me.

So, I don't think the premise of her book is offensive. Her tone? Like, I say, I dont' know.

"exaggerating the financial risks of divorce, and long-term disability insurance as well as life insurance could cover me in the case that my husband died or was injured and couldn't work."

No, because your husband could commit suicide and you might not be able to collect the life insurance.

Or, your husband could be be injured, but not enough to collect benefits, but enough to keep him from finding a decent job.

The people who understand risk are the ones who have had their lives collapse because of depending on one person for financial survival.

I think financial security isn't the most important thing to most people, until or unless they don't have it. That is why I must give Bennett her due. Every woman needs to be able to paddle for herself.

I never felt their were "wars", just that there were time issues that separated working from non-working Moms. I think the war aspect of it is what the media harps on because it makes good copy.

In my little circle the son of the stay-at-home Mom dropped out of school after several stints in a juvie place and is finding himself traveling around in a merry-bus. The son of the working Mom is going for his MBA. Don't know who is happier or better off. Kids have a way of being themselves despite their parents. The things we do as parents don't always make so much difference. Lucky for both kids they have roofs to return to.

Well, here is the mommy war again. My sister in law is a SAHM. She has kids aged 12-5. The youngest is almost 6 and was kept out of kindergarten because she didn't want to get a job (her words). My brother in law is about to get laid off and she still isn't looking for a job. Mind you he works two other jobs and is about ready to die from the stress, but she really doesn't care. I see her like 4 times a year and she always has something snarky to say to me, I could say stuff back, but why bother. My kid is healthy and happy and I don't worry about money, so living well is really the best revenge.

The only other war I have is with the SAHM who park in front of my house and block my drive way while waiting for the bus. Once a week, I get in my car and make them move, just because they shouldn't be blocking the road. That is the extent of my mommy war.

All things being equal and operating under the assumption that there is a choice...

Its hard for us to respect each others choices because, in order to survive our own individual choice (staying at home vs. working), we have to be invested in it. To be invested in our own choices, we have to believe that we are making the RIGHT choice, convincing ourselves of the reasons that make that choice RIGHT. The choice we didn't make is, therefore, by definition is the WRONG choice.

To anon @ 10:16 AM

Yeah, we do miss the cultural diversity thing. Our little town is 97% Caucasian. Blows my NYC/DC raised mind.

We figure if/once we have a child, there will be many trips into the nearby bigger cities or back East to visit family. Because if one more person responds to my excitement over a new Tapas restaurant opening up to "topless? why would you want to eat at a topless joint?" I may have to just go home and weep for a few hours...

"I do not see that it is "infantalizing" adults to say "hey, have you thought about this risk in staying home or working (or whatever)." I think everyone should have full information before making a decision like this, wherever possible. That's just my opinion."

But that's not what she said. She said, categorically, that it's a mistake and women should not do it. Not "have you thought about it," or "everyone should be aware of," or "it's important to consider," or "it is often difficult to," or "in most circumstances," but that it's a mistake, a waste of women's lives, and that they shouldn't do it.

Is the tone of that offensive? Yes. The substance is arrogant, condescending and obnoxious also. And, in my opinion, just plain wrong. No one solution (work full time, work part-time, stay home) fits for all moms.

"The people who understand risk are the ones who have had their lives collapse because of depending on one person for financial survival."

It's tragic whenever someone is ruined. But "financial survival" doesn't mean that both parents have to both work non-stop through their entire adult lives. Is it the best way to die with the most money in the bank? Sure - but who cares? Just because I'm home doesn't mean I will never be able to work again. It may reduce my future earnings potential - but that's fine. If we're talking about paying the bills if my spouse gets sick or dies, I can do it. It may require scaling back a bit - but that's not the same thing as having our lives "collapse" (unless we're messed up enough to think that an upper-middle class suburban lifestyle that keeps up with the Jones' is necessary for a meaningful life).

Is it just me, or are people too defensive? Has PC caught on so much that people think that nothing should offend them--that being offended infringes on their rights or something? I have lots of opinions. Some of them can be offensive. I keep my mouth shut on the really bad ones, but am I really not allowed to say that staying at home is not the smartest financial move? An educated writer can't have that opinion and back it up with fact out of the fear that she'll offend SAHMs?

People offend me; I offend people. The key (which it seems that most people on this board have figured out) is to grow a thick skin and be comfortable with your choices.

Some people don't think they are risking their family's finances by staying at home. Some people do. Some people like sky diving and driving without seat belts. Some people would much rather avoid the inherent risks of those actions.

My opinion is that women should always be ready to support themselves if the worst should happen. I don't think kids need a parent with them 24/7. I think that the only way to get rid of the gender gap is for women to be have an equal showing in the workforce.

But who cares what I think?

I'm amazed that with all this talk about financial security only coming with working- no one has mentioned that in the DC area, and other urban/suburban areas like it, the costs of a second spouse working can actually easily eclipse any income generated. Adding together the cost of child care for one child, commuting costs, work clothes, lunches out and other incidentals, a spouse making less than a median income for the area can easily just be breaking even and actually just working so that someone else can raise your child. Sure, you're contributing to the company and some people just really like to work, so its still a personal choice- but to say that a second income automatically equals a secure financial future for yourself and your family is just silly! Sure, some people in this area can make enough to clear the costs but the gain is small and only incrementally increases. Add two or more children to the child care costs.... In the end it has to be a decision based on considering a wide variety of issues. I currently make enough to clear child care costs and come out slightly ahead, but to me, I don't want to. It's far more important to me to stay at home with my children. I have a friend though who loves her job. She has reliable child care and good for her! She'd be miserable without her job- so I applaud her for finding a way to keep it. As for this "you're at financial risk by taking the time away"- sure I could get divorced but I think I know my situation better than you- and I see no indication of it. Its wrong to patronize these women and assume they don't know enough about their family, marriage and situation in life to realize what type of a risk this is. I see just as much risk in handing my child to someone else to bring up 80% of their waking hours. Its choosing which risks you're comfortable with and what you can afford and all of these "do it my way" types should just mind their own families and businesses!

To newsahm. I am definitely less stressed since I went back to work. Dh helps out more and there's more money and so it makes things *so* mich less stressful. It took almost four years for me to get that stressed out, but it did happen and I'm *so* happy to be back to work.

Why is there such a focus on financial saving versus marriage saving? It's like a pre-nup - always assuming for the worst - I must get a job in case my husband turns out to be a cheater, liar, sloth, etc etc. Shouldn't those concerns have come to mind before having kids? If you want to work because you want to work, then work. If you want to work bc you want to live large, than work. If you have to work because that is how things are, then work. If you want to stay home, and can, then stay home. I choose to stay home because it is what is best for me and my husband and our kids. And because we are fortunate enough that I can. I work pt from home to make a little extra to help things out, but my first priority is my marriage, my second my kids. Planning in case the person with whom I've had the kids and whom I love turns out to be someone else... well that seems like you are preparing for the inevitable and pre-supposing it will happen. I'm not dumb, or blind, I know that the worse can happen, but I am going to put every bit of my energy into helping it NOT to happen, rather than helping it TO happen.

Are Dad's who are in the car 3 hours a day and in the office at least 8 hours a day happy? I loved staying at home with my daughter, but I'd rather put her in at least part time daycare to take some of that strain off my husband. It turns out he works PT, I work FT, and the baby is in daycare PT, so we're happy. I'm not in the car 3 hours a day, a nice bonus, though I'd rather work PT. I just think we forget about the dad's happiness.

We think about moving from here all the time so we can both work less than FT. We're committing to 2 more years before we head south.

Rather than be angry with or ugly to SAHMs, I'm just envious. We should all be so lucky to be able to make that choice. I'm sure there are plenty of reasons to like or dislike SAHMs beyond their work status.

I agree that the decision to have a parent stay at home is a personal family decision. I also agree that the decision to stay at home should involve more then just money. But I do wonder (and not passive aggressive) if professional women factor in all the financial benefits of working. People often site the cost of day care, commuting, work incidentals versus their salary. But what you often don't hear or hear (depending on who is making the argument)the financial benefit or loss of retirement. Granted at a minimum wage or low wage job this may be irrelevant. But in a lot of professional jobs, you are also looking at loss or gain in SS income, retirment 401K matching, and pension (if appropriate). My guess in order for it to be cost effective to work, you need to make at least twice as much as child care plus retirement benefits. For professional people, that difference is often 3 or 4 times the cost of child care plus retirement benefits. When you think about losing a million dollars or more in retirement benefits, is it still profitable to quit? Of course for so people, the money is of no importance based on values or spouses income. It is just something to think about when you are making those calculations.

The thing that always strikes me about these discussions is that while the "criticism" of the SAHMs focuses on the impact on THEM (reduced salary later, difficulty entering the job market, other financial implications), the criticisms of the working-outside-home moms focuses on how terrible it is for the children. I think the latter type of criticism is much more judgmental and accusatory than the former. If the SAHMs were truly so concerned about the children of the working moms, they would be more than willing to do whatever they could to help. (Posted by a parent with a grown child)

Fridays Off (10:19 a.m.) is on the money in that the real issue most moms struggle with is convincing themselves that the decision they have made, at whatever point in time, is the 'right' one, given the endless messages from all sectors that no no matter what or how much moms do, it is never going to be 'right' or 'enough'. However, no matter what my personal opinion is, I have always tried diligently to keep it a personal opinion and to take people as they come, and treat them fairly and honestly. My problem, however, both as a SAHM and a WOHM, has been folks who seem to think that the 'rightness' of their choices means that they have can demand assisitance from someone who has made the other, 'not right" choice. When I was a SAHM, I resented WOHM moms who felt I had no right to say no when they tried to dump their kids on me during snow days; as a WOHM, I resent co-workers who leave me holding the bag while they are constantly absent for one child related crisis after another.

"If we're talking about paying the bills if my spouse gets sick or dies, I can do it"

Really? Who would take care of your spouse and kids if your spouse couldn't while you were at work? How would you pay for that care? How would you would pay for your medical coverage if your spouse lost theirs?

Must be nice to be so confident about the future.

The Mommy Wars are internal. Even in the suburbs ;o) - nobody can make you feel bad about your decision if you're at peace with it yourself.

NewSAHM - I agree completely with your posts about stress levels. It's not so much that the chores are spread out (I had an extremely busy weekend with kid stuff and did laundry and grocery shopping yesterday), but that the down time is spread out. I don't feel like I have to wait all week for the weekend so I can de-stress and relax like I did when I was working

1. Savings in wife's name? What would the husband think about such planning for divorce, especially if the wife doesn't bring income?
2. Missing 5 years of work: compound interest makes it irrevocable. Skills deteriorate. Employers take advantage of your weak bargaining position. Might end up being a burden on your adult kids or on society.
3. Part time work is the worst: have to prove youself every day, and end up working more than full-time employees.
4. Kids on the bus to your kid: "your mom is fat". Your own kid when she comes home: "what did you do all day?"
5. Forget all of the above if you have at least $2 mln wisely invested in your name at 10% annual return. If your money works, you don't have to.

There are some seriously scared people out there! We CAN'T be prepared for every possilbe horrible scenario! If you lived like that, you couldn't get in a car, because that's likely the biggest danger in your life. All you can do is be as smart as possible. And sometimes you'll come up short and have to get creative. Life's scary, but oh what a ride.

I'm in the midst of reading The Feminine Mistake and I do find the tone shrill and
I'm so far (about 1/3 in) really really disappointed in it.

So far it presents some macro-stats - women's participation in the workforce declining slightly; okay but I believe MEN'S participation has too because of higher unemployment rates PLUS, hello, the baby boomers starting to get towards retirement ages.

And then it has interviews with people where she describes the SAHMs in really nasty ways. I've been trying to figure out why she doesn't comment on the working women she interviewed's wardrobes, when she talks about the SAHMs clothes, etc. Can I say again that I am brutally disappointed?

I'm still waiting for the analysis in between. I'm not finding much of any, except that SAHMs are self-deluded and part-time working moms (like me) only just slightly less so. And I am a thinking person and very interested in this and fairly open to looking at why the pressure to stay home was on me, as the woman/lesser earner and what I should do about it going forward.

I do think there is a huge internal war, for me. I mommy-tracked myself at work and I am sometimes quite glad I did because our family has gained. But I do sometimes feel that all the time to sniff the roses now, as wonderful as it is - and it is - may haunt me later. I'm prepared to deal with that, and have planned financially, but I still am HUNGRY to look at it from different perspectives. ESPECIALLY as I think about whether I want to have another child or what.

But the Mommy Wars in the media hasn't helped really because it totally doesn't reflect the people I know or me. It lacks in complexity: SAHM-good, or SAHM-bad and not something like "here's the good, here's the bad, here are the risks, and here are the benefits."

Anyways this was very timely!

The word "media" appeared in 861 posts by 446 different contributors of this blog.

Our top 10 concerned with outside sources listed below:

9 Emily
9 WorkingMomX
10 pATRICK
11 Father of 4
11 Leslie
12 cmac
13 foamgnome
13 Laura
13 Megan
14 KB
15 Megan's Neighbor

I've become hideously boring.

"If the SAHMs were truly so concerned about the children of the working moms, they would be more than willing to do whatever they could to help."

Since I'm one of the people who thinks that children should be at the top of the list of considerations for whether to SAH or not - not being snarky but simply a curious/honest question - what are we supposed to do to help? Do you mean doing things like offering to pick up their kids from school/activities? Or provide childcare? Or go scrub their toilets because we have more time to do it?

I am reading Bennett's book now and I think she is 100% on the mark and don't find her tone to be condescending in the least. Then again, I am the embodiment of the exact point she's trying to make; raised by a stay-home mom to find a husband to support me, I did just that and gave up my career to stay home with my kids for eight years, only to now end up divorced and having to scramble to re-establish myself in the workplace and earn enough to support myself and my kids. Even though I was married for almost 14 years, worked while my husband took his sweet time earning his PhD for 10 years without earning more than $13,000 a year during that whole time, and shouldered almost all child-rearing and domestic responsibilities, my ex walked away with the house, the paid-off car, and his six-figure salary. Meanwhile, I make about 30% of what he makes, got the car with five years of payments left, and am renting a townhouse I can barely afford--while starting back at the bottom rung of the career ladder.

Bennett's tone may be harsh, but I believe it has to be to get women who are firmly entrenched in their belief that they can always count on their husbands to support them and their kids to at least be aware of the realities that they may well encounter-- such as divorce--that could drastically affect their lives. I know if I had read this book a few years ago when I was doing what I thought was best for my kids and my family by staying home full-time I would have scoffed and been enraged at her seeming to slam the notion of raising one's kids instead of sticking them in daycare, but ultimately, in the end she was right. I don't know that I would have done anything differently, but I think this is an issue that every woman should give careful consideration to when weighing the pros and cons of walking away from a career to be home with her kids.

Do you say "shame on you" to all the other self-help or advice book writers? "Shame" on someone for writing a healthy eating, or personal finance, or find your inner happiness book? Do you say "shame" to writers who try to debunk conventional wisdom and offer different perspectives?

Given the discusson on this blog about post-nuptual agreements and on the costs of childcare vs working, it was pretty obvious that most of us aren't financially savvy and didn't know about all the different ways to look at the issue.

Someone raising those points shouldn't be shamed. And if you're that senstive to someone's "tone" I don't know how you manage to read the web, watch TV, or walk down the streets!

********
Groggy said:
"I read Leslie Bennetts book, and I don't get the impression she is trying to bash SAHMs in any way. She is trying to rescue and save them from danger of financial disaster."

What incredible condescension. Infantilizing adults (who need "rescue"!!) because they've made a quite common and personal decision based on their own needs, financial situation and relationship (things unknown to you or Bennetts) is the height of arrogance. Shame on her and shame on you.

Posted by: Fran | April 30, 2007 09:09 AM

What a luxury it is to debate this issue while millions of people worldwide figure out how they will survive another day. I'd like to raise two issues equally as confounding as the mommy wars: People who work out in jeans and people who refuse to use their blinkers on their cars.

" I keep my mouth shut on the really bad ones, but am I really not allowed to say that staying at home is not the smartest financial move? An educated writer can't have that opinion and back it up with fact out of the fear that she'll offend SAHMs? "

Meesh,
Of course you have that right (and I suspect you could do it as well or better than Ms. Bennetts). The difference is that you (I believe) would be very unlikely to say that staying home with the kids is always a mistake, and that women simply shouldn't do it. You'd also be more effective - my wife picked up Ms. Bennetts book at a Borders a couple of days ago, and by the time she'd read the the inside of the dust cover, she was completely furious with her. That book is unlikely to reach many women who don't already agree with Ms. Bennetts.

On the other hand, my wife handles most of our finances, and is very concerned about things like college savings, retirement savings, life insurance, and what would happen were I to get sick or die. A book about smart financial choices for women would definitely interest her. Talking about when it make sense to go back to work, and how, would interest her.

The problem with red meat is that red meat for some is almost always a red flag for others.

Oh I also wanted to say that I did find some of the financial analysis okay (not great) in the book - but I did find the idea that:

job = security

was way overblown. Unless that was matched with a) savings and b) continuous education.

Maybe it's just having gone through the dot com bust and then the 9/11 travel industry collapse, but people who have worked hard and kept their skills current still end up at financial risk in some sectors. The auto industry (and some related advertising, since auto advertising is huge) is going through this now.

I worked for a social service agency that did employment counselling and I can say anecdotally that sometimes people who are at middle management levels - the jobs Bennetts would have women aspire to - in almost any field are often much more at risk than lesser-paid part timers who aggressively continue to develop their skills.

Because the part timers often know how to get work, and keep on top of that, where the managers sometimes are too busy managing to do that and end up in total shock when they are downsized and find the actual networking and searching extremely hard to do.

For our family living on one income (first saving the other, and now not entirely needing it) has been way smarter than getting into a two-income-requiring mortgage, etc., even when it meant a fixer-upper and moving up the property ladder gradually. Soooooo I guess I have to say that although I agree that a gap is a financial risk, the idea that a job definitively negates that risk is really anathema to me.

All of these complexities are things that I would like to see discussed in terms of work and life balance, rather than diatribes on denial.

I worked all the years before I had kids and for the entire time my son was in elementary school. When my son was young I mostly worked part-time. I paid for daycare, parking, clothes, etc. Because I was part-time the benefits weren't that huge. My time was being invested in short-term profits that went to pay for family expenses.

While I worked in the public sector, my husband worked in the private sector. The truth is that he could pull in a bonus that was worth more than my entire year's salary. The decision for me to stay home went hand-in-hand with him taking on more responsibility at work and bringing home more money. We also made that decision after we'd put enough money aside to create a cushion during difficult times.

Financially, our family is better of with me investing my time directly to my family. That's not the case with lots of people but it is our reality.

Can I ask a question? WRT the "mommy wars," particularly as viewed through this blog, working vs. staying at home debate often devolves to the "it's my choice - isn't that what the feminist movement was all about, choice?" tangent. If it is truly a "choice," then why would stat at home women feel entitled to ask their husbands to fully fund their 401K/IRAs, etc.? Because it seems like women who use this argument of choosing to stay home say it makes their lives better, it's what they want to do, etc. - so why should the husband feel the need to set up a bank account for her?

I'm sure I'm not the only person who was smart about marriage and kids. I would be utterly and completely blindsided if I found out my husband was anything but committed to me and our child. We've got insurance to handle the other eventualities. People who get divorced always come out with I-should-have-known-better stories that generally tell of