Is it wrong for a Catholic woman to work and have a family?

[thewanderer]

That statement still sounds like you think the SAHMs who do live in trailers aren’t “doing enough” for their families.

Not really upset or the like, but that’s totally how it sounds, just so you know. I don’t think it would take much for most people to be offended at least a bit at that kind of statement.

People get offended way too easily.

I personally would rather work than be a SAHM and live in a trailer. That’s just the truth. I don’t have anything against people who do,** I just personally would want** to provide a better house for my family. If that offends you, I am sorry.

I’m not sure how else she can say it than to say that she, personally, would prefer that. She specifically phrased it as a personal preference rather than a universal statement. I’m sorry, but I can’t think of another way to phrase it that makes it sound less as though she is making a universal claim. Different people have different standards they want for them and their families, and thats ok. It is possible to personally want certain things and also recognize that the fact that you personally would go out to work to allow your family to have them that doesn’t mean that other families are wrong to forego them while having the mother stay at home.

 

[Debora123]

That statement still sounds like you think the SAHMs who do live in trailers aren’t “doing enough” for their families.

Not really upset or the like, but that’s totally how it sounds, just so you know. I don’t think it would take much for most people to be offended at least a bit at that kind of statement.

Well, rest assured that is not how I feel. If a family decides they want the woman to stay home, that is completely up to them and none of my business.

But likewise, it goes both ways. Statements some women make around here saying that they would not work unless they were on the brink of starvation or something, can also sound like they think it’s selfish for women to work unless that were the case. It’s best not to read to much into what people say when they are talking about personal preferences.

 

[Julianna]

Well, rest assured that is not how I feel. If a family decides they want the woman to stay home, that is completely up to them and none of my business.

But likewise, it goes both ways. Statements some women make around here saying that they would not work unless they were on the brink of starvation or something, can also sound like they think it’s selfish for women to work unless that were the case. It’s best not to read to much into what people say when they are talking about personal preferences.

 

[Litcrit]

Statements some women make around here saying that they would not work unless they were on the brink of starvation or something, can also sound like they think it’s selfish for women to work unless that were the case. It’s best not to read to much into what people say when they are talking about personal preferences.

Apparently, it’s a selfless sacrifice for men to provide financial sustenance for their families and it’s a selfless sacrifice for women to be SAHMs - regardless of the actual financial situation a family finds itself in.

But men who stay at home are lazy slackers and women who work to provide for their family are selfish.

It seems to be an irrational, cultural compulsion to think in these stereotypical terms.

I work, my husband doesn’t. We’re not rich because I work, and we’re not starving because he doesn’t. I’m not selfish, he’s not lazy.

 

[SamH]

Forgive me for once again derailing the thread

There are things in US economy that greatly puzzle me, and this is one of them: how can one paycheck (the mother’s) cover only a car, gas, and daycare (expenses connected with actually having the job), while the other paycheck in the family (the father’s) covers a car, gas, and all the other expenses the family has (bills, food, clothes, and anything else people spend money on)?

This is so often cited as the reason why it makes more sense for US mothers to stay at home.

Is daycare that expensive? Or are women’s salaries in the US so low? Would the father’s salary also only cover daycare and the car and gas he uses to get to work?

Thank you in advance for clarifying this to me.

Cheap (legal?) daycare for a single child is $125 a week. Good daycare can run $250 a week in Kansas. A woman working a nonprofessional job (clerk at a store counter) would easily have her “net” paycheck eaten up by such an expense.

 

[SamH]

Women make less than men in the same positions.

Actually that is not true and if you find that happening turn the employer into the Department of Labor - they are breaking the law.

 

[Kelfa28]

Forgive me for once again derailing the thread

There are things in US economy that greatly puzzle me, and this is one of them: how can one paycheck (the mother’s) cover only a car, gas, and daycare (expenses connected with actually having the job), while the other paycheck in the family (the father’s) covers a car, gas, and all the other expenses the family has (bills, food, clothes, and anything else people spend money on)?

This is so often cited as the reason why it makes more sense for US mothers to stay at home.

Is daycare that expensive? Or are women’s salaries in the US so low? Would the father’s salary also only cover daycare and the car and gas he uses to get to work?

Thank you in advance for clarifying this to me.

This is what confused me for the longest time.

What I’ve been finding is a shuffling of children between all the grandparents and aunts/uncles and even family friends to offset the high costs of daycare.
Just so mom and dad can put in 40 hours a week.

My sister is planning on doing this. She is also planning on breast feeding exclusively as well.


Anyway, I’m a bit miffed because it blows my husband and I’s chances of having an occasional baby sitter (for once a month drill days and a once in a blue moon date night).

But that isn’t a consideration for my sister, of course.

My husband and I are living off his unemployment checks for now…to put our finances into perspective.
And we have two cars and a house.

But the ONLY debt we have is our mortgage and I’m not kidding on this one. That took some real dedication and hard work for that achievement.

You also have to check under the rug to see how we’ve handled things. We have netflix instead of cable.
We have two used cars and no payments.
We have cheap track phones we only use when we need then.
We cloth diaper.
We rarely ever eat out. I make almost all of our meals.
We are fortunate to have Tricare health insurance. Cheap and good.
We have LOTS of savings.

This is why we can do what we do.

I can understand why a woman would want to work. That is her right. But it disturbs me to see couples make massive financial mistakes because of carelessness and try to make up for it by them both working and letting grandma and grandpa raise a kid from 8 weeks on up.

Personally, I don’t see it as a positive thing to separate a baby from his mother at 8 weeks of age. I don’t see it as a positive to separate a child from it’s mother at one year of age.

 

[Baelor]

Actually that is not true and if you find that happening turn the employer into the Department of Labor - they are breaking the law.

Illegal immigration is tautologically illegal and yet it still occurs. Basic analyses of the wage gap between men and women show that there is an unexplained component.

 

[Debora123]

Apparently, it’s a selfless sacrifice for men to provide financial sustenance for their families and it’s a selfless sacrifice for women to be SAHMs - regardless of the actual financial situation a family finds itself in.

But men who stay at home are lazy slackers and women who work to provide for their family are selfish.

It seems to be an irrational, cultural compulsion to think in these stereotypical terms.

I work, my husband doesn’t. We’re not rich because I work, and we’re not starving because he doesn’t. I’m not selfish, he’s not lazy.

 

[Kensho]

People get offended way too easily.

I personally would rather work than be a SAHM and live in a trailer. That’s just the truth. I don’t have anything against people who do, I just personally would want to provide a better house for my family. If that offends you, I am sorry.

But here you are doing it again!

“Decent life”. “Better house”. If those aren’t words carrying a judgment with them, I don’t know what is. This has nothing to do with me being easily offended – I am trying to point out the assumptions underlying what you are saying. That doesn’t mean that there is necessarily anything wrong with your preferences.

 

[Debora123]

But here you are doing it again!

“Decent life”. “Better house”. If those aren’t words carrying a judgment with them, I don’t know what is. This has nothing to do with me being easily offended – I am trying to point out the assumptions underlying what you are saying. That doesn’t mean that there is necessarily anything wrong with your preferences.

Um, yeah, I think a 3 bedroom house with a backyard is a “better home” than a trailer… that’s my opinion, you are free to disagree if you want. What do you want me to say?

Shoot me I guess, holy smokes.

 

[Kensho]

Apparently, it’s a selfless sacrifice for men to provide financial sustenance for their families and it’s a selfless sacrifice for women to be SAHMs - regardless of the actual financial situation a family finds itself in.

But men who stay at home are lazy slackers and women who work to provide for their family are selfish.

A certain segment of the population thinks that. Another would probably applaud you as doing great things for your life and setting a fabulous example for your children, and think that you were wasting your time and talent if you stayed home. That’s just as irrational. The husband’s and wife’s roles should serve the family; husband and wife should not serve the roles. If that makes sense.

I tend to be fearful of young adults, not yet married or not yet parents, who express strong opinions about what role they will take or what they expect and need. Life has a tendency to throw you for a loop.

 

[severus68]

I forgot to add that I wish people would consider how it sounds or who they are belittling when they make unflattering reference to living in a trailer. There are surely people on this forum who currently live in or have lived in a trailer; there are more of us who have had friends and family who lived in trailers. Heck, my grandparents’ first family home together with their first child was a camper, and they were one of the happiest and most functional families I ever knew. It’s okay to want certain things for yourself but be careful not to suggest that those who don’t have those things aren’t giving their children a “decent” life.

I don’t think anyone is belittling or looking down on other . While we try to do the best we can and can be happy in living in less than ideal circumstances, there is nothing wrong with wanting more and a better life for our children.

 

[severus68]

Well, rest assured that is not how I feel. If a family decides they want the woman to stay home, that is completely up to them and none of my business.

But likewise, it goes both ways. Statements some women make around here saying that they would not work unless they were on the brink of starvation or something, can also sound like they think it’s selfish for women to work unless that were the case. It’s best not to read to much into what people say when they are talking about personal preferences.

Agreed.

 

[severus68]

Apparently, it’s a selfless sacrifice for men to provide financial sustenance for their families and it’s a selfless sacrifice for women to be SAHMs - regardless of the actual financial situation a family finds itself in.

But men who stay at home are lazy slackers and women who work to provide for their family are selfish.

It seems to be an irrational, cultural compulsion to think in these stereotypical terms.

I work, my husband doesn’t. We’re not rich because I work, and we’re not starving because he doesn’t. I’m not selfish, he’s not lazy.

 

[Litcrit]

A certain segment of the population thinks that. Another would probably applaud you as doing great things for your life and setting a fabulous example for your children, and think that you were wasting your time and talent if you stayed home. That’s just as irrational. The husband’s and wife’s roles should serve the family; husband and wife should not serve the roles. If that makes sense.

I wholeheartedly agree. I hate those stereotypes as well and try to deconstruct them when I see them, too.

Look, we do what we do in our family based on our temperaments, God-given talents and abilities, education, practical considerations. Not our sexual organs.

Some things are biological and I was lucky enough to be at home with both our kids until they were 18 months old and I nursed both of them until they were 2.5 years old. I see this part of mothering as important for my family.

On the other hand, my husband’s cousin is married to a woman who didn’t want to breastfeed and refused to ever pick her baby up for fear of “spoiling” him. When she was at home, no one was allowed to hold and cuddle the baby. The husband could only hold him in secret when she was away. In this particular case, I firmly believe that this particular baby would fare better in terms of affective attachment with him as a SAHD and her as a WOHM even at 8 or 12 weeks old or however long maternity leave lasts in the US.

 

[Kensho]

I wholeheartedly agree. I hate those stereotypes as well and try to deconstruct them when I see them, too.

Look, we do what we do in our family based on our temperaments, God-given talents and abilities, education, practical considerations. Not our sexual organs.

Some things are biological and I was lucky enough to be at home with both our kids until they were 18 months old and I nursed both of them until they were 2.5 years old. I see this part of mothering as important for my family.

On the other hand, my husband’s cousin is married to a woman who didn’t want to breastfeed and refused to ever pick her baby up for fear of “spoiling” him. When she was at home, no one was allowed to hold and cuddle the baby. The husband could only hold him in secret when she was away. In this particular case, I firmly believe that this particular baby would fare better in terms of affective attachment with him as a SAHD and her as a WOHM even at 8 or 12 weeks old or however long maternity leave lasts in the US.

The crux of what you are saying, I think, is that both husband and wife need to do the best they can in their particular situation in order to put family first, and I strongly agree with that. And I agree about the importance of the mother being with her babies (except in sad cases like that of the mother you describe above).

I think most men are probably not suited to staying at home; my husband certainly isn’t, and I had to tell him as kindly as I could that he just wasn’t a very good homemaker and that trying to be one seemed to be bad for him. But the most important thing to me is that young children are cared for by a parent, and if it’s in everyone’s best interests that that be the father, then so be it.

 

[FatherOfTwelve]

I wholeheartedly agree. I hate those stereotypes as well and try to deconstruct them when I see them, too.

Look, we do what we do in our family based on our temperaments, God-given talents and abilities, education, practical considerations. Not our sexual organs.

Some things are biological and I was lucky enough to be at home with both our kids until they were 18 months old and I nursed both of them until they were 2.5 years old. I see this part of mothering as important for my family.

On the other hand, my husband’s cousin is married to a woman who didn’t want to breastfeed and refused to ever pick her baby up for fear of “spoiling” him. When she was at home, no one was allowed to hold and cuddle the baby. The husband could only hold him in secret when she was away. In this particular case, I firmly believe that this particular baby would fare better in terms of affective attachment with him as a SAHD and her as a WOHM even at 8 or 12 weeks old or however long maternity leave lasts in the US.

Gen 3:16 To the woman he said, “I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.” 17* And to Adam he said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, ‘You shall not eat of it,’ cursed is the ground because of you; in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life; 18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth to you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. 19 In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; you are dust, and to dust you shall return.”

From the very begining when Adam listen to his wife, God cursed the ground because of Adam’s sin and proclamied that the husband shall rule over the wife. God then charged Adam with the “Role” that he would toil (provide for) the rest of his life.

These are God given roles, not worldly stereotypes.

“I wholeheartedly agree. I hate those stereotypes as well and try to deconstruct them when I see them, too.”

Eve is still alive and well…

 

[SlackerCatholic]

WOW

 

[PetiteFoi]

The crux of what you are saying, I think, is that both husband and wife need to do the best they can in their particular situation in order to put family first, and I strongly agree with that. And I agree about the importance of the mother being with her babies (except in sad cases like that of the mother you describe above).

I think most men are probably not suited to staying at home; my husband certainly isn’t, and I had to tell him as kindly as I could that he just wasn’t a very good homemaker and that trying to be one seemed to be bad for him. But the most important thing to me is that young children are cared for by a parent, and if it’s in everyone’s best interests that that be the father, then so be it.

We actually had that situation - hubby was unemployed (during the recession, was laid off) and I was working.
He was full-time housewife, and I’m sorry, but he kinda stunk at it.
I mean, he’d make food every so often and clean a bathroom; but being at home depressed him.
He felt he wasn’t contributing, and it felt emasculating to be “provided for.”
All his time was spent on the computer and he gained weight; poor guy, it was NOT a good time for him.

I don’t want to generalize here, but my husband really needs to be the breadwinner.
We joke about how he’d like to be a “kept man”, but I know he’d hate it in the long run.

:twocents:
Peace,
~ PetiteFoi