or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Stay at Home Parents › SAHM: a right or a privilege?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

SAHM: a right or a privilege? - Page 2

post #21 of 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeannie81 View Post
well for me i can't afford to NOT be a SAHM. daycare is so high, i'd probably have to buy a car, plus gas money, and i don't have a college degree. i would be working for nothing or possibly even paying to work.
same for us. i get treated by peers like it is a privilege, but it makes sense for us. i do think it is a right for children to be raised by a parent if possible.
post #22 of 356
I feel its a privilige.
post #23 of 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by aywilkes View Post
All that said, I think that women desiring to be SAHMs that don't have that much money can make it happen if they elevate their consciousness from one of lack and limitation to one of abundance and creativity. YOu can make anything happen that you want to happen for you and your family.
These words are truly inspirational to me. Thanks.
post #24 of 356
I believe SAHM is a right. Our kids have the right to be taken care of by their moms and dads.

It's turning into a privilage now too because some families worry about their finances so they have to work.

For me, the day I send my kids to day care is the day I get paid by George Bush for being a SAHM. It just doesn't make sense for me to pay someone ELSE to take care of my baby when I don't even get paid to take care of him 24/7! Even if I had a million dollars!
post #25 of 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peepsqueak View Post
I agree with all of you...it is a priveledge that should be a right.
I totally agree!!!!!! In South Dakota we just had voted on an abortion bill that was the tuffest in the nataion. Basicly is was out lawing abortions. Even thought for my self I am pro-life. I could not in good faith even vote that bill because the 300 or 800 babies what ever it is would be saved would not have the right to be with their mother. I stuggle very day trying to be a stay to home mom. I have done homedaycare for years just so I could make a little momey and be with my children. I am currtly going back to work part time becasue we are going into debt with me staying home. Also in going back to work my husbnad will be home with the kids. With 2 kids in daycare there are very few jobs that would pay.
I know that one of my daycare families I take half of hourly pay every hour that the kids are in my care. I hate doing that.
I feel that if you can get by with some assistance form the govent. that is ok. There is nothing in this work that can a mother careign for her child espiecaly for that first year. I wish I new a way to make it better for all mom, beside moving to europe.
post #26 of 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by aywilkes View Post
Do you (collective) think it is a right for single moms too? .
I feel that as a single mom it is more important for you to say home. Unfortunally I don't think that the rest of US sees it that way. I get so angry when I think about that I could get daycare assists if I was make less then 30,000 but could not use that same momey to care for my own children.
post #27 of 356
I think being a SAHM is a privilege, not a right. I really don't think the government ought, for example, to provide subsidies that would allow women (or men, for that matter) to stay home with their kids instead of working outside the home -- although I do think the government should provide more and better daycare subsidies for low-income families.

It seems to me that when we decide to become parents, we take on the responsibility of providing for our children's material needs, in addition to their other less tangible needs. Of course I realize that there are times when families may need some government help to get by, and I fully believe that help should be available, but I think the long-term intention of that help should be to assist the family in becoming financially self-sufficient. I don't see how providing subsidies to support stay-at-home-moms encourages financial self-sufficiency.
post #28 of 356
For those of us in capitalist countries it's always going to be a privilege, just like having enough food, a place to live, and health care are privileges. :
post #29 of 356
It is really hard to be a single SAHM.. and I still think it's a priviledge.

I mean I think all women should have th right to stay home if they want to but most families need that 2nd income.

I am not wealthy by any means (In fact we went to less than 1/2 of what DH made in his salary on SSA death benefits-which is a considerable amount compared to most people I know on SSA benefits, so I am thankful he paid so much into it) but it's been a lifestyle change for sure. the bills are covered, but not much else leftover after that. we are just scraping by. eventually I WILL have to go back to work though. and likely will have to work well into my retirement aged years. but I am grateful for being able to be with my children NOW during these early years. oh and I do get crap from certain people for being single and able to SAH w/ my kids. I have actually been a bit scorned for it. I struggle every single day though to do it. every penny is stretched and we do go without. and beleive me I'd rather have my DH here than his death benefits anyday! It won't always be this way, so I am definitly grateful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aywilkes View Post
I am not a SAHM and I definitely think it is a privilege. It is one thing to live meagerly and budget but another story to not be able to make ends meet. Do you (collective) think it is a right for single moms too? I've been a single mom since baby was born and I did live off student loans and a small pay from internships for 2.5 years but since then I've worked. I do not think that families need to be well-off to have SAHMs just like families don't need to be well-off to have more than 2 kids, BUT I think being a SAHM at the expense of basic needs being covered is a really courageous decision that I would not be able to make.

All that said, I think that women desiring to be SAHMs that don't have that much money can make it happen if they elevate their consciousness from one of lack and limitation to one of abundance and creativity. YOu can make anything happen that you want to happen for you and your family.
post #30 of 356
do socialist systems have stay at home mothers ? or does it require all citizens to work in order to support the system?
post #31 of 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by skueppers View Post
I think being a SAHM is a privilege, not a right. I really don't think the government ought, for example, to provide subsidies that would allow women (or men, for that matter) to stay home with their kids instead of working outside the home -- although I do think the government should provide more and better daycare subsidies for low-income families.

It seems to me that when we decide to become parents, we take on the responsibility of providing for our children's material needs, in addition to their other less tangible needs. Of course I realize that there are times when families may need some government help to get by, and I fully believe that help should be available, but I think the long-term intention of that help should be to assist the family in becoming financially self-sufficient. I don't see how providing subsidies to support stay-at-home-moms encourages financial self-sufficiency.

I agree with this. Plus basically where does the government get the money from? The people. I am lucky to be a SAHM. We don't have much to spare. If they would increase taxes on DH's income so that they could give out more money to people that would like to stay home but can't afford it ('make it a right'), it would wipe us out.
post #32 of 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by skueppers View Post
I think being a SAHM is a privilege, not a right. I really don't think the government ought, for example, to provide subsidies that would allow women (or men, for that matter) to stay home with their kids instead of working outside the home -- although I do think the government should provide more and better daycare subsidies for low-income families.

It seems to me that when we decide to become parents, we take on the responsibility of providing for our children's material needs, in addition to their other less tangible needs. Of course I realize that there are times when families may need some government help to get by, and I fully believe that help should be available, but I think the long-term intention of that help should be to assist the family in becoming financially self-sufficient. I don't see how providing subsidies to support stay-at-home-moms encourages financial self-sufficiency.
I agree with this. Long-term care for children should come from their parents, not the government.
post #33 of 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by meowee View Post
In our society it is a privilege, but I believe it is fundamentally a right. I also think it's a myth that if the mom just went out and worked, she would give her family a higher financial echelon. I would have to make a very big salary for our family not to have to pay for me to work (our child care expenses would be huge, even for non-perfect care).
A privilege that I wish was a right. I was wondering if it is a myth the other way. . . I'm a teacher so not too highly paid and crappy insurance but even so, after I pay for daycare I bring home and additional 2,000 dollars. I am half of our income. It would be hard to budget that away.

For those who belive it is a right-- do you mean it should be a right or it is a right? How can it be a right if I can't do it???
post #34 of 356
I am from Ireland living, working and married in the States. In Ireland as of March 2006, a woman is entitled to 8 months PAID maternity leave with the option of taking a further 2 months unpaid leave. I was always made believe that America was a land that valued the family as one of it's most important things - however, how is it possible for 'family' to be most important when we are left struggling to cover our 12 weeks FMLA using saved up vacation/sick leave - nearly all my colleagues have been unable to afford taking those precious 12 weeks off after having their babies - that, to me, is absolutely heart breaking! Personally, I have taken 12 weeks (thanks to careful saving and working up to the day I delivered my dd) - and will be returning to work full time in two weeks (sob) - I need to go back to work not just for the financial part but for the mental part - but my husband and I are lucky enough to have worked it that I do first shift, he does second - this way we will probably not to have a baby minder...

My point is, the govt. should be making it easier for women to have children and take that valuable time off at the beginning - heck Sweden allows 18 months paid leave off (okay that might be a stretch for us here in the US but it's food for thought....).

P.S: I am not dissing the States - I just think that we need to re-evaluate our values where 'family' is concerned!!! (hope I haven't upset anyone!)
post #35 of 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lolly2006 View Post
I am from Ireland living, working and married in the States. In Ireland as of March 2006, a woman is entitled to 8 months PAID maternity leave with the option of taking a further 2 months unpaid leave. I was always made believe that America was a land that valued the family as one of it's most important things - however, how is it possible for 'family' to be most important when we are left struggling to cover our 12 weeks FMLA using saved up vacation/sick leave - nearly all my colleagues have been unable to afford taking those precious 12 weeks off after having their babies - that, to me, is absolutely heart breaking! Personally, I have taken 12 weeks (thanks to careful saving and working up to the day I delivered my dd) - and will be returning to work full time in two weeks (sob) - I need to go back to work not just for the financial part but for the mental part - but my husband and I are lucky enough to have worked it that I do first shift, he does second - this way we will probably not to have a baby minder...

My point is, the govt. should be making it easier for women to have children and take that valuable time off at the beginning - heck Sweden allows 18 months paid leave off (okay that might be a stretch for us here in the US but it's food for thought....).

P.S: I am not dissing the States - I just think that we need to re-evaluate our values where 'family' is concerned!!! (hope I haven't upset anyone!)
ITA!!!
post #36 of 356
I believe that it is a right, and one that we as mothers should be fighting for.

The website for Mother Ought To Have Equal Rights states that "motherhood has become the single greatest risk factor for poverty in America." Women around the world do the bulk of the labor and only make a tiny percentage of the income, because the labor that women do is largely domestic labor. While a price cannot be put on motherhood, mothers contribute to society in many positive ways, and it is about time that they are acknowledged and compensated. Women have not obtained equal rights, and the next wave of feminism needs to address these issues.
post #37 of 356
Thread Starter 
Sometimes I picture the daycare in the US like something from "A Wrinkle in Time". Where all the houses look the same, and all the people look the same, and every morning, women wake up and walk out of their house and into the house on their right. There they mind the child all day, and then go home at 5 pm to their child. What is the point if we're all just rotating the children around?
But on the other hand, personally, I would not have gotten pregnant if there was some doubt about our being able to provide for dd. And if, god forbid, something happened to H, as sick as it would make me, and as much as it would break my heart, I would go back to work because first and foremost it is my responsibility to PROVIDE for my daughter. Not only love (which WOHM can also give, ya know?), but clothing, food, shelter. I do not think that I get excused from providing those things because I became a mother, more that I am even more responsible for providing them. I wish we were like Ireland or Norway, but we're not. And all I know is that I have ONE responsibility in my life and that is taking care of dd, and if that means I have to go back to work in order to provide for her monetarily, that's what I'd do. The pain it would cause me is my own problem. My daughter would still be just as loved and just as mothered if she was in day care.
(I was raised by a very strong AP mother who put us in daycare at a very early age, and I become a little defensive when people infer (or I perceive) some judgement about day care being inferior.)
post #38 of 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilliansmom View Post
I wish it was a right. But I have to go with privilege. I know mamas and dadas that wish they could afford to stay home but can't. So I have to say that makes me feel privileged to be able to do so.
I totally agree. I feel lucky everyday that I get to spend my days with my son, and he doesn't have to be in a day-care situation, while I work to pay for it someplace far away from him.
post #39 of 356
It is a privilege, although I think it's one that should be more widely supported. There should be guaranteed paid maternity leave, and, more importantly IMO, there should be a wage structure such that the ability to support a family on one income is the norm rather than the exception. I also think there should be affordable non-institutional child care options for those who need or want it. I do think that non-institutional care should be a right for the child. But unfortunately I don't think it's a right that will be realized in our lifetimes...
post #40 of 356
I think it is a mother's right to both nurture, and provide for her children.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Stay at Home Parents
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Stay at Home Parents › SAHM: a right or a privilege?