Which is worse?:
A. A single, stay at home mother -- who's never had a job in her life, is leeching off the government, but is obviously home with her kids.
B. A married, working, working-class mother -- who doesn't see her kids but for a couple hours a day because of her crazy work schedule, and who's family depends on her income (along with her husband's).
Please state if you believe that being a SAHM is the "only" and/or "right" way that women should go.
Please give a reason for your choice of A or B!
2007-12-19 05:13:18 · 25 answers · asked by Thinking 5 in Pregnancy & Parenting ➔ Parenting
Hey now, I didn't say all women fall into these categories. All I said is "which is worse?".
2007-12-19 05:53:31 · update #1
I'm not currently a SAHM, though I have been in the past. You are trying to make the exact same point that I have tried many times to make on here. Saying that SAHM's are superior to working moms is stereotyping and don't we all (Or most of us) try to teach our kids not to stereotype others?
If someone were to say that all black men are low lifes, who abandon their kids to go out and sell drugs, or that all middle easterners are terrorists, they would be verbally attacked for stereotyping certain groups of people, yet people on here do it everyday concerning SAHM's and working moms.
You take a SAHM who sleeps in just as late as she can, finally getting up when her kids are making so much noise she can't sleep anymore. Who gets up long enough to fix them a bowl of cereal and then lays down on the couch for a couple more hours of sleep. Then gets up and gets on the computer, ignoring her kids, until the sound of them saying "Mommy, I'm hungry." aggrivates her so much that she gets up and fixes them a sandwich, then gets back on the computer till Dr Phil comes on, then she ignores her kids some more. Is she really the superior mother just because technically she has the title SAHM?? No, I don't think so. No more than you can say that all working moms are just concerned with how much money they can make and not about their children. Some fathers simply don't bring home enough money, after taxes, insurance, and possibly child support on another child, to support his family totally on his own. If a mother is willing to do what she has to in order to provide for her kids, then I think she deserves some credit for that.
I have personally seen many SAHM's who are lazy, trashy, and who seem to be aggrivated with their kids all the time. But that doesn't make me think that all SAHM's are like that.
Titles mean nothing. Technically being a SAHM doesn't in anyway make a mother superior to another mom. It all has to do with what she makes of her situation.
2007-12-19 07:14:27 · answer #1 · answered by Pink Cowgirl 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Luckily there are many women who don't fit either category -but of these two- B.
Being a SAHM is good if you can manage it financially. Many families can't. It isn't great when you can only see your kids a few hours a day and on weekends. But that is reality for a lot of women, myself included, and we make the most of the time we do have. I feel very close to my kids, I know they are well cared for in daycare (and have a lot of fun as well) and I get some satisfaction for doing my job outside the home well and get recognition for it.
2007-12-19 05:41:05 · answer #2 · answered by Sweet Tooth 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well I don't think that situations involving children are as cut and dry as an A or B option unfortunately. There are postives and negatives for both sides. Being a stay at home mom sometimes means that you loose out on education and "real world" experiences and don't have as much insight to offer your children. My mother was a stay at home mom by choice and this was very obvious from raising a family for 20 years...she could not even help me fill out my college application because it has been so long since she had to "work", "fill out forms", etc. She relied on my father for everything and in turn I think made her dependent on him to where she knew no life outside of her children and home life. I saw that growing up and vowed that I would never be like that, I wanted a happy balance between working AND raising my children. If you are fortunate enough to find or afford great child care/day care services (because lets face it...some children are better left in others care than their mothers) then there children are not loosing out on anything, they are learning social skills, etc. My sister in law is a stay at home mom who raised her two children until school age and found that she has nothing but problems with them in school now because they do not know how to behave in social situations. My sister in law took them places and played with them, BUT they never experienced life without their mother's care and that was difficult for them when they started school. For these above examples I have to say that staying at home is not always the right thing for everyone to do and each family is different. But having just had a baby of my own, I know how precious that time you have with them is and how you should take advantage of it. I returned back to work by choice...It took me six years of college to complete my degree in architecture, so I am not ready to give up all of my hard work to stay home with my new baby, but I am lucky because my husband is staying home with her right now. I see her in the morning, at lunchtime, and when I get home from work...so I am only away from her a total of about six hours a day.
2007-12-19 05:28:23 · answer #3 · answered by ataman 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
B. It sets a better example for children to see mom working and doing her best to provide for them as opposed to abusing a system that was set up to help those who REALLY need help. Those who are on welfare should only be using it as a temporary means until they get back on their feet. It should not be a permanent means of support for the terminally lazy. And no one should use the excuse of wanting to be a stay-at-home-mom in order to leech off of society. All mom's would prefer being able to stay home with their kids, but that just isn't always a reality, so they go out and get a JOB. Any intelligent, family oriented, working mom out there will tell you it's not the amount of time you spend with you kids that matters. It's the quality of that time.
2007-12-19 05:58:36 · answer #4 · answered by Shelley L 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I think if you have kids you should be working to take care of them especially if you are a single mother the government really shouldn't have to pay for your kids, don't have kids if you cant work to take care of them. You need to work to take care of kids in general. Also I do not like the idea of a SAHM. It doesnt set a very good example for daughters it just seems like an easy way out of not having to work and getting to stay home all day.
2007-12-19 05:24:11 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
With the options you gave I would choose A as the worst because if she is single she HAS to work. In B as long as it is Quality time then it should be ok. However i would probably go crazy.... I quit a job because I only got to see my kids 3hrs per day.
However my opinion is that if you don't have to work then you should be at home with the kids because it is the parent's job to take care and teach their children. If I could stay home I would.... but I can't trust my hubby to hold a steady job so someone has to make the money!
2007-12-19 05:29:39 · answer #6 · answered by lovemy2boys&girl 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't believe staying home is the only or right way to go. There is no right or wrong way~ it's a personal decision.
I am a proud working mother. I work from 8:30- 3:00 (M-F) as a teacher. My mother keeps my son while I am working. I have plenty of time to spend with my son after work & on the weekend.
I am a happy wife, mother & teacher~ what could possibly be wrong w/ that??:)
2007-12-19 05:19:32 · answer #7 · answered by Proud mother! 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Well I'm neither. My fiance & I decided I would stay home & breastfeed. I went to school online during the day & nights & weekends when his dad was home. It worked for us I have a college degree & my son is now in school. I believe that for the first 2 years atleast a mom should stay home with her baby. It's our system that has to change to allow that. Women in europe get very long (sometimes years) of maternity leave. We need to be more supportive of moms not give them just these 2 options.
2007-12-19 05:21:00 · answer #8 · answered by kiwi 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
There are some SAHM that have no choice. If you have no one to help so you can work. But working is good as well. The difference in working and not with kid is obvious when you are not there you loose touch and you don't even know it. But if you stay home and you are there for them you get to know them . There is much to it. you raise your children you give them morals you don't have strangers teaching them there's.
2007-12-19 05:23:34 · answer #9 · answered by mommas 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It doesnt have to be one extreme or the other. However, I do believe in the children having parent and if that means living off the government then I guess that is the right thing to do! You can have a stay at home mom that that does schooling and such on the net and uses govt assistance while betterering herself and also take the oportunity to be with her babies. I do believe that if kids had their parents a little more theses days we wouldnt have so many screwed up kids running around!
2007-12-19 05:20:00 · answer #10 · answered by proud family 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋