Would you stay at home with your kids? (1 Viewer)

[Goodbye]

I guess parents find a way...

Still, I would'nt know...

But It's still a case of an opinion based on speculation Vs an opinion based on actual fact.




Yeah, who was screaming anyway? I did'nt hear anything?

 

[Diddles]

i am still boggling at this, tbh (that you know people who can do it). it just strikes me as a recipe for either doing a shit job at your work or (cruel though it is to say it) not paying much attention to your child.

i know a couple of people who work from home, and they have childcare some or all of the time. they have to. you can't do conference calls, work on tasks that require sustained concentration, do a big push for a deadline, etc. if you're regularly being interrupted by a small person's needs. unsurprisingly, the concept that "mammy can't be disturbed" doesn't really sink in when you're two.

I know people who did it and did it well. And I know other people who stayed at home during the day and worked at night when the other partner came home. My sister in law did this for several years. She currently has six kids, two of whom are four, works part-time AND is studying for a degree. And all her kids are deadly. If I had a child half as well adjusted as any of her kids I'd feel honoured.

The fact is some people are well able for a certain way of life and some aren't. And I also think that the younger you are the more inclined you are to feel that there's no way you could stay at home with a child all day etc. etc., working or not. I'd have to do it myself as I work from home anyway, and I couldn't afford not to work, but I wouldn't feel half as apprehensive about doing it now as I would've a few years ago. At this stage in my life, I don't really give a shite about my career or talking to areseholes in an office all day. I love what I'm doing and would find a way to continue doing it even if I did have a child.

And it's not on thinking that anyone who doesn't have children shouldn't be entitled to an opinion on rearing children. Everyone has different experiences and levels of involvement with their immediate family and friends.

 

[minka]

And I know other people who stayed at home during the day and worked at night when the other partner came home.

that's more working in shifts, though, isn't it? you're still full-time "on duty" for childcare and then only doing your other work when your partner is "on duty". it's a different situation to minding a child *while* working. (and sounds pretty damn stressful/exhausting as well, imo - not to mention, is it healthier for the family if you see more of your children but less of your partner?)

The fact is some people are well able for a certain way of life and some aren't. And I also think that the younger you are the more inclined you are to feel that there's no way you could stay at home with a child all day etc. etc., working or not. I'd have to do it myself as I work from home anyway, and I couldn't afford not to work, but I wouldn't feel half as apprehensive about doing it now as I would've a few years ago. At this stage in my life, I don't really give a shite about my career or talking to areseholes in an office all day. I love what I'm doing and would find a way to continue doing it even if I did have a child.

fair enough. it possibly depends on the work as well - i really couldn't do my job if i was trying to child-wrangle at the same time. not properly, anyway.

oh, and i'm still pretty sure i couldn't stay at home with a child all day (i also hated working from home, which i did for a year), and unless thumped is lying, i'm older than you....

 

[Squiggle]

i am still boggling at this, tbh (that you know people who can do it). it just strikes me as a recipe for either doing a shit job at your work or (cruel though it is to say it) not paying much attention to your child.

It depends on how imaginative you are about what you work at, and also on how flexible your working hours are. As I said earlier, doing a job where you have to be available 9-5 it can be tough... but if you work at something that involves just getting a job done within a time period it can be done. One of my friends, a single mother, quit her full-time job as an architect when she realised that childcare was costing her too much financially and also emotionally. She worked while her little boy was napping, watching cartoons in the same room and for a few hours after he went to bed. She told me that he was less of a distraction than her colleagues had been in the office and that she was amazed at how much work she could get done in a relatively short period of time. When he went to playschool she could get all her work done while he was there and then focus on him exclusively when he was at home. Now that he is at school she can take on more projects. But even in the early days she was much better off because she was working for herself rather than on salary.

My cousin has two children, she arranges catering. Yes, she has to take phone calls during the day and make arrangements but she does 2 or 3 jobs a week and makes very good money. She gets a babysitter to mind the children for the 2 or 3 hours that she has to be at the event for.

Those are just two examples... but there are others.

The fact is some people are well able for a certain way of life and some aren't. And I also think that the younger you are the more inclined you are to feel that there's no way you could stay at home with a child all day etc. etc., working or not.

It is true that working from home is not for everyone... it does involve sacrifices, or at least making changes... and as Diddles says it may not be for everyone... but then having children may not be for everyone either. Those are decisions people need to make for themselves.

And it's not on thinking that anyone who doesn't have children shouldn't be entitled to an opinion on rearing children. Everyone has different experiences and levels of involvement with their immediate family and friends.

I apologise for inferring that people were 'screaming' perhaps not the right choice of word... but Hayworth and I were responding to open questions and the response we were getting most commonly was 'you don't have kids, what would you know'. My sister has two children, one of my brother's has one (but plans to have 4) and I have more friends with children than I care to think about (it makes me feel old). My family are very close and I have spent extended periods of time with my nieces and nephew and their parents. Children are very important in my family and there has always been an open discussion.

 

[Diddles]

that's more working in shifts, though, isn't it? you're still full-time "on duty" for childcare and then only doing your other work when your partner is "on duty". it's a different situation to minding a child *while* working. (and sounds pretty damn stressful/exhausting as well, imo - not to mention, is it healthier for the family if you see more of your children but less of your partner?)

Lots of people don't see their partners much even without children, evening courses, karate lessons, band practice etc. Unless people are absolutely minted, sacrifices have to be made no matter what and parents are always going to have to go all out for periods of time to keep a family together.

and unless thumped is lying, i'm older than you....

I wasn't referring to you personally, it was an observation.

I apologise for inferring that people were 'screaming' perhaps not the right choice of word... but Hayworth and I were responding to open questions and the response we were getting most commonly was 'you don't have kids, what would you know'. My sister has two children, one of my brother's has one (but plans to have 4) and I have more friends with children than I care to think about (it makes me feel old). My family are very close and I have spent extended periods of time with my nieces and nephew and their parents. Children are very important in my family and there has always been an open discussion.

That's what I was getting at .

I'm very close to some children in my family and I looked after my niece and nephew full-time for months at a time when I was younger. I'm still very much involved in their lives and their upbringing. So even though I don't have kids I'm of the opinion that I, like lots of other people who don't have kids, can to some extent, comment on parenting.

Also, in answer to the original question, yes I would stay at home, even if it was purely a matter of choice.

 

[RSJ]

I spent all day today looking after a 1.5 year old and a 4.5 year old while their parents went to a wedding. I am never having kids.

PS Big ho ho ho at people with no kids telling people with kids "how it is". Yeah, i know exceptional people too, it's their ability to do stuff that most people can't/won't that makes them exceptional.

 

[Squiggle]

I spent all day today looking after a 1.5 year old and a 4.5 year old while their parents went to a wedding. I am never having kids.

PS Big ho ho ho at people with no kids telling people with kids "how it is". Yeah, i know exceptional people too, it's their ability to do stuff that most people can't/won't that makes them exceptional.

I'm not telling people "how it is". I'm merely pointing out that it can be done, if you are willing to make the sacrifices. Snakybus asked a question. Both my parents were at home when I was growing up, as, probably were both of yours. That meant that my Mother had to do the housekeeping (and there was a lot of it in a crumbling old farmhouse) and a certain amount of farmwork with us in tow... it also meant my Dad involving us in the farm as we were older.

Everyone is different RSJ. That doesn't take away from the opinion that Diddles and I hold that we would do our best to find a way to be able to stay home with any children we might have, or with Hayworths right to the opinion that she could not afford a child under the present circumstances. That is how it is for us... not for anyone else... but for us.

 

[nlgbbbblth]

Number 2 on the way already? Brave man

due Monday.

 

[nlgbbbblth]

Bullshit. Cribs, prams, nappies, clothes (do people give you presents until they leave the house?) health care, childcare, books for school, etc.... you are paying for another entire person for 18+ years. I can barely afford to feed myself, let alone another. Kids are expensive. Even for the basics.

I was commenting on Anthony's post which read

kids are as expensive as you want them to be.

This is what I said.

exactly,
yes, there are expenses but it's definitely nowhere near what the ill-informed vinyl-hating doom merchants foretold.

Of course they cost money and you have to make sacrifices but it's not impossible.

Certainly in the early years it's not as bad as it will be once school comes on the horizon.

 

[billygannon]

Couple of things...
Firstly kids are an added expense. Of course they are.
But they're really not showstoppingly expensive. I've spent more on my teeth than I have on my kid (so far).
It's a gradual thing as well. It's not like you spend all the money in one go. And your family and friends really do help out. Not to mention the government.
Seriously... the cost of raising a child shouldn't be a deterrant to having children. Most people can afford it. Believe me when I say this. I'm the sole income in my relationship. I worried about money. But it's working out fine. If anything, it's a catalyst to earn more dosh.

Secondly.. about women working with kids.
Right... my boss works from home three days a week. She minds her kids while she's working. And she's easily the most professional person I've ever worked for. She manages to juggle it all.
I also know a lady who teaches yoga and has started up a online clothes shop - and she has two kids under the age of three.
So it is possible to do it. It's not easy... but it is possible. Some people can. Some people can't.

Something my girlfriend told me is very true. We're the first generation who are genuinely expected to raise children on our own. Previous generations have had far more involvement from their extended families.
It's fucked.
I should move to Germany and take advantage of the one year paternity leave thing.

 

[RSJ]

I'm not telling people "how it is". I'm merely pointing out that it can be done, if you are willing to make the sacrifices. Snakybus asked a question. Both my parents were at home when I was growing up, as, probably were both of yours. That meant that my Mother had to do the housekeeping (and there was a lot of it in a crumbling old farmhouse) and a certain amount of farmwork with us in tow... it also meant my Dad involving us in the farm as we were older.

Everyone is different RSJ. That doesn't take away from the opinion that Diddles and I hold that we would do our best to find a way to be able to stay home with any children we might have, or with Hayworths right to the opinion that she could not afford a child under the present circumstances. That is how it is for us... not for anyone else... but for us.

Ah crap, had a big reply written out but a mate called with beers and in the to-ing and fro-ing it got deleted. Basically: It's not impossible to work and look after kids, but it's not entirely possible for most people. Citing examples of people doing it in extraordinary circumstances is neither here nor there as these people sound like they could do pretty much anything if they put they minds to it. Maybe their kids are the quietest ever, i know people with three kids under five who tidy up after themselves and the 4.5 year old even changes nappies, in those curcumstances it's entirely possible, but for most it's pretty implausible. i think in the spirit in which it was said, i'd agree, especially having spent the day with a 1.5 year old who needs constant attention (picks up and throws most things, everything else he climbs and jumps off) and a 4.5 year old who'd make veruca salt look like mother theresa. I didn't even get to fully check my emails all day, can't imagine doing eight hours work and looking after them and getting some usable amount of sleep.

PS don't forget when people were saying it was impossible you were saying - " Most of us could do our full-time office job in a few hours a day. Pre-school children generally take naps during the day." Full on madness!!!!!

 

[nlgbbbblth]

Couple of things...
Firstly kids are an added expense. Of course they are.
But they're really not showstoppingly expensive. I've spent more on my teeth than I have on my kid (so far).
It's a gradual thing as well. It's not like you spend all the money in one go. And your family and friends really do help out. Not to mention the government.
Seriously... the cost of raising a child shouldn't be a deterrant to having children. Most people can afford it. Believe me when I say this. I'm the sole income in my relationship. I worried about money. But it's working out fine. If anything, it's a catalyst to earn more dosh.
......................
I should move to Germany and take advantage of the one year paternity leave thing.

well said Billy.

that German thing - is it one year altogether, in one go?

I get ten days paid paternity leave.

 

[billygannon]

well said Billy.

that German thing - is it one year altogether, in one go?

I get ten days paid paternity leave.

You can take a year off after the baby is born apparently.

I got two weeks paternity. It's pretty recent... added two weeks holidays so I got a full month at home.

 

[minka]

Secondly.. about women working with kids.
Right... my boss works from home three days a week. She minds her kids while she's working. And she's easily the most professional person I've ever worked for. She manages to juggle it all.
I also know a lady who teaches yoga and has started up a online clothes shop - and she has two kids under the age of three.
So it is possible to do it. It's not easy... but it is possible. Some people can. Some people can't.

i'm interested in the assumption that a person working from home while minding children/otherwise engaging in superhuman feats of life-juggling is a "woman working with kids" - "it's amazing how she manages to have a job and children!" "it's really difficult, but some women can do it!". nobody ever says that about men with children, do they? is childcare always assumed to be the mother's responsibility, no matter what else she happens to be doing?

(not having a go at you, billy, just musing...)

 

[billygannon]

i'm interested in the assumption that a person working from home while minding children/otherwise engaging in superhuman feats of life-juggling is a "woman working with kids" - "it's amazing how she manages to have a job and children!" "it's really difficult, but some women can do it!". nobody ever says that about men with children, do they? is childcare always assumed to be the mother's responsibility, no matter what else she happens to be doing?

(not having a go at you, billy, just musing...)

For the first year it's much more practical having the mother staying at home - simply because of breastfeeding and what not. That said, the father should be there too - but we're living in countries that think the dad should fuck off to work before the umbilical chord is even cut.


I think any parent, be it the father or mother, who brings up a child on their own and manages to work is extraordinary.

 

[minka]

For the first year it's much more practical having the mother staying at home - simply because of breastfeeding and what not. That said, the father should be there too - but we're living in countries that think the dad should fuck off to work before the umbilical chord is even cut.

true, though a goodly chunk of that is covered by maternity leave - most working mothers i know have taken all their paid time + some extra unpaid to maximise the amount of time they're off in the first year. you can still have the mother at home for a lot of babyhood without her giving up work or going part-time or whatever, i suppose is what i'm trying to say. it's the bit after that....

one of the many things i like about my current employers is that they give decent paternity leave - one of my us colleagues is off for six weeks at the mo.

I think any parent, be it the father or mother, who brings up a child on their own and manages to work is extraordinary.

hell yes.

 

[Jill Hives]

I guess parents find a way...

Still, I would'nt know...

But It's still a case of an opinion based on speculation Vs an opinion based on actual fact.




Yeah, who was screaming anyway? I did'nt hear anything?

Beating a dead horse here but I just to make the point, .... so your opinions on... lets say America, are not valid and ridiculous because you weren't born or live there? Good to know.

 

[Anthony]

Hayworth, what I'm seeing is you saying "I can't afford kids" which is fair enough and obviously true. But that's different to "kids are expensive".

And it was me that said it was impossible to mind kids and work at home (at the same time) and by that I didn't mean it was impossible to have kids and work from home, or that it was impossible to mind your kids and work from home.

I work from home and I drop kids to and from school/creche and then pick up when relief arrives an hour or so later. So yea, I work from home and "mind" kids but in that hour or so when all three of us are in the house it is neigh on impossible to work.

 

[Jill Hives]

Hayworth, what I'm seeing is you saying "I can't afford kids" which is fair enough and obviously true. But that's different to "kids are expensive".

I don't really see how. If you were to write down every expense a kid adds to ones life, over time...I would think any one would admit (in purely sums, mind you, not emotional enrichment), "wow that was expensive." It really is a moot point in my case because I won't be having children.

This tangent started because I said, if more people thought about why they were having them before they actually did, the world might be a better place. I am not judging people on here because you all seem like caring parents but when I see tons of kids running around my neighborhood (here and in the States) unsupervised, cursing, and generally causing a menace it makes me wonder. Parents could be working several jobs just to make ends meet and/or just don't care but the results tend to be the same.

I am not saying people shouldn't have children but their should be some type of responsibility in doing so. If anyone in my position now were to actively try to have a child, it would just be irresponsible. They would not have the money and/or time to foster the well being of another life. It would selfish. Just because you want something, biological or not, doesn't always mean you should have it. After watching my siblings and a few friends struggle (who are generally average financially) I'll maintain my opinion that kids are indeed expensive.

This statistic has been thrown around in many articles (not counting college in the US) whether or not it's accurate I'm not sure but:

The cost for modest-income families to raise a child from infant to age 17 is about $173,000, reports the U.S. Department of Agriculture. For families making more than $66,000, the cost rises to about $254,000.

So for me a child would be around a 1/3 of my income every year. That's expensive. Maybe that wouldn't be for you but it just proves my point that it's debatable and no one should scoff and say, "oh they're not expensive" or "that should not be a reason NOT to have one" just because they've done it and it's been fine. It's different for everyone.

Apologies, but it's a subject that just get under my skin. Since my mid to late 20's I have been harassed time and time again about when I am going to settle down and have a baby. The pressure is unreal as a unwed, childless woman. I digress. Dead horse, I know.

 

[billygannon]

I
So for me a child would be around a 1/3 of my income every year. That's expensive. Maybe that wouldn't be for you but it just proves my point that it's debatable and no one should scoff and say, "oh they're not expensive" or "that should not be a reason NOT to have one" just because they've done it and it's been fine. It's different for everyone.

It should be pointed out that the vast chunk of that 173K really kicks in when the child is in the latter stages of their teenage years.
The cost of a child increases as the child gets older. But then so does your income - in most cases.
Put simply, you wouldn't be spending a third of your income on children at any stage of a child's life.

You also said it's different for everyone, yet applied an average cost of a child to your own circumstances.
Therefore because your income would be less than average, then the cost of your child would also be less than average.

I am not saying people shouldn't have children but their should be some type of responsibility in doing so. If anyone in my position now were to actively try to have a child, it would just be irresponsible. They would not have the money and/or time to foster the well being of another life. It would selfish. Just because you want something, biological or not, doesn't always mean you should have it. After watching my siblings and a few friends struggle (who are generally average financially) I'll maintain my opinion that kids are indeed expensive.

It's pretty clear you don't want a child. That's fair enough.
When you refer to someone in your position, I would assume it's someone who doesn't want to have a child.
However if you're referring to someone in your financial circumstances, then I'd have to take issue with this.
Essentially you're saying you should only be wealthy to have kids.