SAHM

[Sheherezade]

Well...I'd posted the link to Amazon for the book. I'll still read it myself, but the reviews were not good. Most readers said the essays were monotonous. It seems that the writers are all from very similar lives and similar circumstance. They are upper middle class and educated (like most of us) with choices. I think that's still applicable to our group, but they are also all writers. I was thinking it might end up being one dimensional. Something for us to discuss, though, huh? Alison's link is for the book - in case you didn't look fast enough for my two second post!

[PrincessFiona]

I think what needs to be tackled is the fact that the divorce rate is so high to begin with. THAT is the root of the problem. 30-50% divorce rate for medical professionals!?! Is that true? I know that the rest of the population has an astronomical divorce rate and that is a major concern. Why are so many families literally falling apart? Is marriage so undervalued in our culture that we are truly OK with serial monogomy? Are children like pets - where we just assign them out to a guardian when the relationship doesn't work out? Cavalier attitudes towards marriage and parenthood disturb me greatly. Why do we value marriage and parenthood in our society so little that so many women feel they must turn to the government (of all places!) looking for financial support?

Interesting. My mil would argue that now that we women have all of these *choices* we're ruining the family. She once told me that now that women are worried about 'fulfilling themselves' (how dare we?) they are also less willing to accept unhappy things about their marriages. Hmmm...she was literally talking about things like alcoholism and infidelity.

Of all of the people here whom I know are divorced, not a single one of them has a cavalier...hmmm, now which one of us can be the guardian while I go out and fulfill myself..attitude. Most have been angry, hurt, and shaken to the core by the end of their marriages.

I will say though that I DO think that we now tend to take the 'easy' way out a lot more quickly than other generations did. Divorce is so easy and so socially acceptable that it is seen as a completely normal option when things get tough or don't work out easily. How many friends did I have during residency who said "I would never, ever tolerate that kind of a work schedule...I'd leave my husband if we had to live like that."

In Alex's first grade class this year, his teacher told me 70% of the parents were divorced! One day at lunch, one of the boys had asked me "are you still married to Alex's dad". I said "of course I am"...and then I realized that maybe his parents were divorced. I asked the teacher and that's how I got that little tidbit of information.

Why marriages are falling apart is a whole other can of worms. I do think expectations for the relationship are part of it. We go into it expecting to feel 'complete', fulfilled, forever on that cloud 9...and when the 'honeymoon is over'...well...a lot of people call it quits I think. I don't think people are being cavalier...just unrealistic.

kris

[Rapunzel]

My family is full of divorce. Full of it.

And, it is entirely a selfish attitude towards marriage and parenthood that led to those divorces - all of them. Maybe not on the part of both parties - but at least one spouse exhibited that behavior in ALL of these divorces (including the latest one - my sister's).

Taking the easy way out (ie laziness) is another huge contributor to the divorce rate. But, the behavior of, "Well, if this doesn't work out, I can always divorce and do it all over again!" is, well, cavalier (showing arrogant or off-hand disregard, dismissive). And, I think you find that attitude popping up more and more.

However, I also believe there are other factors at play on a larger, societal scale. Why are our children growing up without the social skills they need to hold a marriage together (particularly one that produces children)? The government is supposed to "socialize" children from the age of 4 or 5 to 18. Obviously the government has failed to socialize them enough to have the emotional tools necessary to function in the most basic unit of society - the family. I think the government has already had far too much of a hand in our current culture and I don't think the government is the hero that can rush in and save the day when it comes to divorce.

Yes, I'll agree it's a whole nuther can of worms. But, I think arguing that we need the government to support all of these women and children who have been decimated by divorce begs the question: WHY is there this problem to begin with? Women ARE more likely to end up below the poverty line if they are divorced with children. Women ARE very likely to end up in that situation. Our culture is producing this problem. And, in order to solve it we need to get to the root of the problem. Asking the government to solve this problem will not, in the end, truly solve the problem - unless the government can change our culture to the point where divorce is a rarity (and possibly truly socialize children so that they can function in society?).

June Cleaver's pearls, I just realized that come May I will have been staying at home for 6 years :thud:

June Cleaver's pearls, I just realized that come May I will have been staying at home for 6 years :thud:

OMG, Tracy! You crack me up!

[PrincessFiona]

The government is supposed to "socialize" children from the age of 4 or 5 to 18. Obviously the government has failed to socialize them enough to have the emotional tools necessary to function in the most basic unit of society - the family. I think the government has already had far too much of a hand in our current culture and I don't think the government is the hero that can rush in and save the day when it comes to divorce.

Are you referring to school? Because seriously...I have never seen it as the govts job to socialize any of my children...nor the schools, tbh.

kris

[Rapunzel]

Actually, one of the biggest reasons I hear from people not to homeschool children (their own and others') is "socialization" - as in, "I send my child to school so he/she will be "socialized". That's a very, very common statement that homeschool parents hear - so common, in fact, that there are entire webpages devoted to the sheer nonsense of such a statement.

Seriously, a large chunk of Americans DO think it is the government's place to teach their children how to function in society (ie what is referred to as "socialization" by government-funded and controlled schools).

Looking at the number of criminals and astronomical divorce rate in our society I guess the government does a pretty good job in that roll.

[PrincessFiona]

I don't think it is the govt's job...children ARE socialized to a degree in school...of course they are...they are pretty much socialized anywhere that they go that involves interacting with other children. That includes homeschool groups, interacting with church groups, siblings, etc.

June Cleaver's pearls, I just realized that come May I will have been staying at home for 6 years :thud:

:flowers Tracy - if you ever decide to take the easy way out - let me know. I'll be waiting for you!

[Rapunzel]

children ARE socialized to a degree in school...of course they are...they are pretty much socialized anywhere that they go that involves interacting with other children. That includes homeschool groups, interacting with church groups, siblings, etc.

Of course, you learn 'social skills' in any social environment - including prison. Anytime you interact with others you are learning about, well, interacting with others. The question is: Are you learning beneficial skills or dysfunctional ones? A great many of the social skills children learn in various social environments are obviously dysfunctional ones if they are growing up to have a hard time functioning in such basic social units as a family.

I just had a conversation a couple of weeks ago with a mom whose child takes swimming lessons with my own children. She proceeded to tell me that she would homeschool her children - except that she wants them to be socialized. It's a common thought pattern that children learn how to function in society from public schools. And, the bottom line is that children DO learn how to function in society by their interactions in the social environments they occupy. For children who attend public school the social environment that takes up a good chunk (half or more) of their day is their public school. I won't argue that children do not learn certain behaviors of interacting with others in a public school (through their interactions and observations with and of both children and adults in that environment). I would question whether those behaviors learned are condusive to the continuation of a well-functioning society.

[mommax3]

However, I also believe there are other factors at play on a larger, societal scale. Why are our children growing up without the social skills they need to hold a marriage together?

That is the million dollar question, isn't it? However, I think faulting the school systems in this country is a little simplistic. Children learn what they live, and whether or not they go outside their home for their education, they spend most of their "living" time at home. So if we are looking for someone to blame, we have to blame.......ourselves. The best way to grow a healthy marriage in your children is to have a healthy marriage yourself, and if you yourself don't have a model (and I didn't) find a couple who does and watch them and ask questions if you can. I agree that it is harder and harder to find functional families, but my opinion is that the "family" failed first, and the schools have followed suit as a result, not the other way around.

The socialization argument against homeschooling is a bad one, in my opinion, both because homeschooled children are able to have plenty of social experiences outside of their home if their parents are motivated, AND because the word "socialization" is both a broad term and a vague one. Some people who use it don't know what they are talking about and are just parroting what they have heard. Others realize that if they were teaching at home, it would take a monumental effort on their part to give their kids varied experiences with people unlike themselves and know that they aren't up to the task. Sending your kids to school will, without a doubt, expose your kids to households with values unlike your own, with NO effort on your part.....whether that is a good or a bad thing is for each parent to decide.

Sally

[Phoebe]

I'm a little late chiming in. I struggle with this issue since I have been a SAHM going on 4 years now. I never thought I would want to be at home with my kids until I faced making a daycare decision and going back to a job I hated. I worry about the big gaps in my resume, getting back into the workforce eventually and having a graduate degree that isn't worth much. I also worry a lot about being dependent on my spouse for financial stability. Although my mom had a career, my parents divorced when I was in college and I have seen how my mom struggles even to this day and worries about her retirement. I have another friend my age going through a divorce and she is now forced to work full-time and can't be there as much as she wants for her teenage daughter.

All these issues scare me. It isn't stopping me from staying at home with my kids. Right now, I feel like my place is with them since my husband works crazy, inconsistent hours. I provide their stability and consistency since their dad's schedule is always different. However, I also feel like I would like to be more than someone's mom. I want more of an outlet for myself. I think that would make me a better mom too.

My post seems like it is all over the place. It is confusing!

Jennifer

[mommax3]

I have struggled with this topic, too. I was raised by a mom that didn't finish college and then was left with four little girls and no way to make a living. She got grants and went back to school and became a teacher. She didn't start teaching, though, until she was forty. She is 61 now and needs to keep teaching until she is 69 or 70 to fully fund her pension. Growing up watching all of this made me SURE that I would finish college before I did anything else......and I did.....my sisters, too.

Staying home, though, doesn't feel like as much of a gamble somehow, at least compared with the alternatives. I have not worked in my specific career field for almost 11 years, although I have worked. I know, though, that I could get a job teaching music somewhere next fall if I needed to. I would have *great* classroom management skills and wouldn't have the years of experience that would make me too expensive to hire. Granted, I wouldn't be rich, but I would have a salary and benefits. If I had worked all these years, I guess I wouldn't worry about my financial security, (not that I actually worry a lot about it now) but I would definitely worry about plenty of other stuff, like if I was doing the best for my kids on a variety of fronts.

I don't know what the future will bring any more than anyone else here, but I will say *for myself only* that I feel better about my marriage having been home to provide consistency for the boys AND for DH than I would if I had more stuff jockeying for position on my priority list. I know DH would be further down the list if I were working, which wouldn't do our marriage any favors. I am committed to staying married, and all I have to go on is that he *says* he shares the same committment. I realize that he could make a fool out of me at any time, but I am choosing to trust him and take each day as it comes.

Sally

[SueC]

I don't really worry about my marketability due to leaving my career if something should happen to my marriage (I couldn't return to work as an OT because my license has lapsed but I feel pretty confident that I could land a job), but I sometimes think I should be doing more investing and saving for retirement. My dh has an excellent plan, but nobody is socking away any money with my name on it.

[DCJenn]

After losing everything with my first marriage, (We mutually made the decision to split after we separated and we both met other people and realized that we'd made a HUGE mistake. He married the girl he met and I ended up moving on from mine) I decided that I will always be able to provide for myself, period.

So, I have credit in my name, retirement plans in my name, have purchased my own home, and several of my own cars. But- I was 33 when I entered this marriage so I've had years of being on my own and establishing my own life. My current SAHM job is convenient, it's usually rewarding but I am SO VERY glad that I have had all of the life experiences that I have before doing this. and I didn't stay home because I for the greater good of society, I stayed at home because 1) I have a child who spent 13 months of his life institutionalized and 2) my job ended and 3) we were moving anyway. There's no commitment to society, here, it was just convenient the way that it all worked out.

and yes, as I have said, I do plan on going back to work, but I will not accept certain kinds of positions in the field of MR/DD as most require more on-call days than my husband's job. I've had enough holidays and vacations ruined by my own job, plus his? I don't need the trauma. So, I'll be happy to work again, but I'm not planning on being the #1 Go-To person again. I'm too old, too lazy, and too cynical for that.

Jenn