In Taiwan, grandparents often become the people taking care of the kids, even if the parents could afford daycare. They have three years of kindergarten here, so kids start at the age of three. There are afterschool programs which are pretty reasonable, but a lot of grandparents watch the kids after school if the kids aren’t enrolled in one of the programs.
In Japan, far more women quit working. There is day care, we had our children in daycare. I’m not really sure what the backup plan is for those who can’t afford it.
For the question of working or staying home with the kids. My mother completely shocked that my wife wasn’t going to give up her career and stay home. She didn’t say much, but she’s said over the years how important she thought it was. Of course, this was the mother who failed to protect us from the abusive father, which had far, far more negative consequences than had she had worked. I tend to not take much child raising hints from her.
I’ve read too many horror stories on reddit about abusive, narcissist parents to ever believe that stay-at-home parenting is ALWAYS the best option for kids. Lots of parents may not want to “roll the dice” on some untrained caretaker, but it’s not like the dice isn’t rolled a trillion times with an untrained parent. Which would be most parents.
Sure, nobody’s disputing that. It’s just that for some, staying home is a better option, either strictly for financial reasons, or because they believe they can provide better care for their children.
And generally speaking, when people buck societal expectations for either gender, people talk shit about it. Which is why working women get a lot of shit for not staying home, AND a man who quits his job and stays home is viewed as something of a loser.
Neither is fair or accurate, but that’s how society works.
And as far as the stay-at-home or pay for day care and continue your career, I think the thinking is that most people who would castigate someone for putting the kids in daycare are those who believe that stay-at-home parenting is de-facto better than day care for the children. And as a result, they think that prioritizing career over providing the best care possible for one’s children is extremely selfish, IF you could afford to do it.
It’s not that simple- a lot of it depends on the parenting ability of the parents as well as the quality of the day-care- shitty stay at home parents are worse than a good day care.
Sure, but I always thought that only millionaires and the like would be sending their kids to a $40k a year daycare. Not someone only making $100K or less.
For us–and my husband quit his job to stay home with our son–it’s been less about what was best for our son and more about what was best for our family. I am sure that what my husband was making could have more than covered the cost of daycare we would have considered good, and that he may well have thrived in such an environment. But we didn’t want our lives to be as hectic as two-parent-working families always seem to be: it’s so much more complicated to deal with running a household, and things like a sick kid mean you have to juggle insane logistics. Part of it is just that I, personally, LOVE my job and I knew that if we both kept working, it would stall out my career a lot more: it’s important that I can work early or late as need be without a lot of planning. We also had some ideas about his education that wouldn’t have worked if he were in childcare: we needed one of us to be working with him daily in a way that you can’t pay for.
But here’s the deal: I don’t think my son would have been worse off if we’d both stayed in the workforce. I think my marriage would have suffered, and my own happiness. The problem is that in America, you can’t ever admit to that being your motive. If you could’ve worked harder and been more miserable and made a little more money, you should have and your a shitty person if you didn’t. So saying “We stayed home because this is the lifestyle we wanted” just doesn’t fly. You have to say “We stayed home because it’s what’s best for any kid, and we want what’s best for our kid, and people that make a different choice don’t love their kid like we do”.
On the other hand, if my husband had had a job he loved (which he didn’t at the time) and had wanted to stay there, there’s no way I would have quit my job. I am SO unsuited to being a stay-at-home. Until my boy turned 5, summers about drove me insane. I adore him, but Jesus, I do not like amusing/supervising anyone under 5. That lifestyle–me staying home–would NOT have been best for my family, no matter what. The logistics and hassle of two working parents would have been better than that option. But, in the same way, you can’t admit to being a Bad Mom and not liking staying home, so mothers who work can’t say “I’m not a good full-time caretaker, so I would rather pay someone who is good at it and enjoy my mornings and nights and weekends with my kid while still having an outside life.” That makes you selfish. So you have to say 'I would love to stay home with my kid, but I am making a sound financial choice and here are all the reasons it’s objectively the best thing for anyone’s family and anyone who does differently is just foolish".
Oh yeah, there’s no real concept in society that you might not actually want to make as much money as you possibly can, or that you may not want to run the show, or whatever. The overriding attitude seems that everyone should want to garner as much money and power as we possibly can.
You wouldn’t believe how many people are just astounded that my wife chose to stay home to raise our kids rather than continue being a lawyer. People just don’t get it- they seem to think that it’s insane that someone would trade having to bill 2000+ hours a year (not just work, but bill) and working 60+ hours a week and all the stress that comes with it for staying home for a few years to raise children. It was partially a break from the stress, partially a desire to avoid things she’d experienced in her own childhood, and partially a reassessment of what she actually wants do long-term.
I think ultimately the real obligation is to figure out what’s actually best for the children, whether that’s a parent staying home, or both working and finding a good system of care. I actually get the whole idea that maybe having a parent stay home isn’t best; I have some relatives where I’m 100% sure that their children are better off with their mother working, and not staying home with them, as her personality is one that is better NOT rubbed off onto her otherwise great kids.
A lot of people don’t see it like that- they have some really absurd mystical beliefs that the mother being home is the absolute best option, which isn’t true at all. Fathers, grandparents, family members, or even just loving and competent child care staff can provide terrific care and education.
The people who have it worst though, are the ones who can neither afford to have a partner stay home, nor can they afford to obtain high quality child care either. They’re just sort of stuck with what they get, whether it’s the local city rec center, an unlicensed day care, or random nanny or something.
I’d believe it easily - we got the same thing when the Lovely and Talented Mrs. Shodan quit her job to stay home with our (two) children. And not just astonished - some of them seemed to be genuinely offended. Male and female.
Yes. Maybe high-quality child care compares favorably with having a parent stay home to raise them full-time. But that costs an awful lot. And not all child care is high-quality.
We decided, overall, that everyone would be better off with more Mommy and less Money. We talked about me doing it, but we agreed that, long-term, I had more income growth potential, and she wanted to do it more. So we compromised, and did it her way.
It’s seems to me that you’re saying the same thing you’ve said earlier, just in a slightly different way. We understand that this is your position. Or rather, that you think that this is others’ position.
In case it’s not clear, my position is that people who judge working parents (AKA mothers) usually do so not out a genuine concern for children, but because judging others helps them feel superior and justified in their own choices. So you dropped out a college to become a SAHM and before you know it, 15 years have gone by and you have zero work experience? Well, if you feel extra self-conscious about this (maybe everyone in your family are doctors and lawyers), then you’re going to find a way to deal with that psychologically. That may mean convincing yourself that all those doctors and lawyers, with all their money and degrees, are selfish, uncaring, and are endangering their kids. But not you. You are winning because you are a good parent, even if you don’t have a job or a degree.
The whole SAHM vs working mother debate is fraught with insecurities, doubts, and guilt; it’s a rare person who is adamant on either side whose motivation is not tainted with this stuff. So unless you truly know the underlying thinking of everyone who wags their finger at working parents, I would not assume that their stated reasons for their judgement are their true reasons.
BTW, the same pettiness occurs in the breastfeeding debate. 99% of the time, hardcore breastfeeding advocates just want to feel superior and special . They don’t actually believe babies are harmed by formula; they just need to feel as though enduring all the pain and inconvenience that they experienced with their kids was justified. (I say this as a woman who is still breastfeeding her own: fed is best. Don’t kill yourself trying to breastfeed if formula is accessible to you. Motherhood is hard enough.)
In my understanding, there can be advantages to day care that go beyond convenience and allowance for working – for example, in day care, kids might be socializing with other children (often new children) all day, rather than just with mommy or daddy and maybe a sibling or two. There are advantages to having a parent stay at home as well, for certain, but day care does have some good things that are harder or even impossible from parenting at home.
But it goes the other way, too: working parents who are burned out and stressed and hate their lives and secretly worried that whatever problems their kids have (and all kids have problems) were caused by the decision to stay in the workforce also lash out and decide that SAHMs “wasted their potential” or were “too lazy” or “couldn’t handle it” or “sat on the couch”. They say things like 'I can’t imagine what you even DO with your day" or “I have to do everything a stay-at-home does, but I do it between 6-10” or “Must be nice, if you can afford it”, as if it’s a vacation to Hawaii.
Both sides can be nasty when motivated by a desire to sound superior or to deflect their own insecurities.
I think that’s a false dichotomy. Almost all SAHP families I know put their kids into some sort of pre-school once they are potty-trained–mom’s day out type programs are pretty inexpensive and very common. There’s also gymnastics lessons, T-ball, church groups, extended family . . . I mean, yes, a kid with a stay-at-home parent MIGHT end up struggling in unfamiliar social situations when they hit school age, but it’s not an impossible barrier.
Not working has a huge cost in a career job. You lose the 401k contributions at the point in time where putting money aside will do the most good. You loose benefits. You loose the years of experience that is going to lead to higher paid positions over the long term. Since women who are college educated are often having children during the early part of their careers, you might as well throw that degree away - by the time you come back into the work force with a old degree and a few entry level years of experience you are worse off than having no degree at all.
And staying home isn’t free. You are still investing in groceries (as for lunch out, lunches pack). Your home kid expenses go way up (we never had to buy play doh for our kids, it was available at daycare). You still go through clothes - and perhaps faster since jeans wear out if you are on the floor with kids faster than a pair of Target dress pants that you sit in a desk in. You still have transportation costs to get the kids to the library or the zoo
Statistically children do better when their mothers engage in meaningful work they like. If that’s staying home with the kids, then kids do well. If that is working outside the home, then kids do well. Kids do less well, statistically, when their mothers are forced into something they don’t want to do - i.e. staying home if they wanted a career, or being forced to work a job they hate.
Some women who can’t afford daycare get public assistance. A lot have their parents or even grandparents watch kids. Some open up home daycare businesses - licensed or unlicensed - to bring in money and stay home with kids. Some find a way to take their kid to work. Some do shift work - trading child care hours with a spouse or friend who has alternate shifts. Some end up leaving children far too young to be home alone watching even younger kids.
It’s not a dichotomy – socializing with other kids is obviously possible for stay-at-home parents. But it might be easier under some circumstances with daycare. I’m saying that stay-at-home parenting is not necessarily superior to daycare in every way.
I don’t agree with that. Many SAHPs (men as well as women) do it because they feel the child(ren) are the biggest “project” of their lives, and make this sacrifice in order to do it.
As for career-oriented women not having kids, there is some truth in that, if the career really is going to mean that they can’t be the kind of parent a child needs. Plenty of men have made this same decision, believe it or not - both famous and not famous. One reason is because they realize that their job would be an unfair share of the child care on the (usually) wife’s shoulders.
SAH parents and “housewives” still exist, just more likely to be a man doing it these days. My kids were never in daycare. Another option is working opposite shifts, which is what happened most of my childhood. Mom was a chef (nights) and dad was a breakfast cook at the same restaurant. Once kids are in school it’s a little easier, especially these days with much more before and after school care (some provided by schools) available. That wasn’t much of a thing when I was kid. When I was 12 my mom got a 9-5ish office job and Dad died. I was a latchkey kid and watched my siblings for the 2 hours after school.
Now what frustrated us was she was constantly taking days off to stay at home with her kids. Days in which we all had to do her share. That can get very frustrating after awhile.
