To stay at home with the kids or not. Living hand to mouth

[Sierrah]

For years I’ve been going back and forth on the question of wether or not it’s better to stay at home with the kids or work and provide them with a chance of a good education.

I’m not married or have any kids at this point but I would like to marry one day on have at least couple (maybe by adoption depending on when and if I marry). If I did marry and was able to stay home but only get by so to say is it better in the long run to stay home with the kids or to work and put by savings for their future education.

I grew up rather poor. Both my parents worked but we just got by pretty much. No vacations, no big Christmas presents or much dinning out at all. Later when my dad was doing a little better my mom quit working but it was still a just get by experience. I mean really minimal. I was pretty much grown by then too and in highschool. So I hit 18 years old…no money for college, or education. I’m not blaming my parents they did what they thought was right and they were so traditional they thought I would marry and have a bunch of kids and not need to worry about working…wrong.

So I guess what’s better working to save for your kids future or staying home. I’m not talking about working to provide vacations or material stuff. Mainly working to get by.

 

[Feanaro_s_Wife]

So I guess what’s better working to save for your kids future or staying home. I’m not talking about working to provide vacations or material stuff. Maiinly working to get by.

**In my opinion? Staying home. I personally don’t believe that our kids are owed an all expense paid education. There are many ways to get through school…it’s great if mom and dad can pay (or at least help) but many many people don’t have that luxury and do just fine.

I would rather focus on what I believe to be important to my kid(s) now… a parent who is home with them. If both parents have to work to pay the bills then they do what they have to. But I would never choose to not be home with my child(ren) just to pay for some future expense that they may or may not need.

For the record we have one child and I stay home. We live paycheck to paycheck and there will be no “education savings account”. We provide the necessities as well as some extras. But most of all my little girl has me home with her, and to me, that’s the most important thing.**

 

[kage_ar]

There are many ways to go to higher ed without mom and dad footing the bill. Work, scholarships, military service… from my experience those who earn their own college tuition are more serious about studies. Maybe your parents thought the same way!

 

[capsaicin]

We are in dire financial straits, basically living hand to mouth right now. I have an at-home job, and have worked part time out of the home ONLY when my husband was home in the past.

My being there for my kids is much much much more important than any paycheck I could bring in. I will never waver on that. Even if we were in danger of losing our house, I would not go to work full time to prevent it. We would make the best deal we could, get out of the house, find a place to rent, and even with all that turmoil, at least my kids would still have the stability they have come to expect of Mom always being avaiable to them. That is more important.

College… hey, my DH went ROTC. Many people enlist in the military and earn money for college that way. Work hard and get good grades to earn scholarships. There are loans and grants. Go to school part time and work to pay for it. There are so many ways for people to fund their own college educations that no parent should be putting their kids in full time daycare to justify paying for it. I did a combo of scholarships, loans, grants, work study and part time jobs to pay for mine.

 

[sanctareparata]

I agree. Who says (or even expects?) that Mom and Dad pay for a higher education? I certainly didn’t expect it, didn’t get it, and didn’t resent them at all for not having provided that for me. Now, as an adult, if my Mom were to ask me “Would you rather I had worked through your childhood so you wouldn’t have all those loans now rather than staying home with you then?” my answer would be NO.

 

[Sierrah]

I agree. Who says (or even expects?) that Mom and Dad pay for a higher education? I certainly didn’t expect it, didn’t get it, and didn’t resent them at all for not having provided that for me. Now, as an adult, if my Mom were to ask me “Would you rather I had worked through your childhood so you wouldn’t have all those loans now rather than staying home with you then?” my answer would be NO.

Just to make clear I don’t resent my parents decisions. I’m just trying to look at both sides of the argument. In my case with my ADHD (which was not fully understood when I was young) school was always a challenge so when I didn’t have the funds to go directly after high school I kind of think this was a big set back for me but it was my own fault. I didn’t save any money…well there really wasn’t any to save to be honest but I could have worked more myself to secure the funds to go to school back then I just didn’t care. My parents did cosign loans for my brother. I’m sure they would have done the same for me had I asked.

 

[koit1967]

Our son is 5 months old. When it came time to decide whether or not she would go back to work, we decided that she would. Her sister is able to be our day care provider and both of our schedules allow that we could stay home with him if he were sick or her sister unable to watch him that day.
If my wife had not gone back to work, we would not have been able to buy our house or to address some debt that we needed to take care of so that our family could have a good life. We don’t believe that her returning to work takes anything away from our son.
My wife is registrar at a private Catholic college. She was taken aback by some there who were surprised that she returned to work.
The decision to return to work or to stay at home is one’s personal decision.

 

[Feanaro_s_Wife]

**From your family situation it seems like you feel like you missed out on something… both of your parents had to work AND they were unable to pay for your education.

(In the scenario I was speaking about, it was an “either or” kind of thing… either one parent stays home OR both work in order to pay for a future education.)

IF you could go back in time and change one thing…would you make it possible for one of your parents to stay home with you OR make just a little extra money with both of them working so they could afford to pay for your college?**

 

[capsaicin]

We don’t believe that her returning to work takes anything away from our son.

Really? You really believe that a child’s mother is so irrelevant as to be completely replaceable? You really, really believe that? You and I can disagree about mothers working outside the home or not. But to say that whether a child’s mother is with him for the vast majority of his waking time or is not with him makes absolutely no difference… that sounds like people convincing themselves, because it just cannot be true.

If that is true, then why bother to be discerning about with whom you had a child? If the mother is completely irrelevant, then why would it matter? Why didn’t you just have the child with your wife’s sister, as she is totally interchangeable with your wife? See where I am going with this? I am taking your concept to its logical conclusion.

Also, I think putting a baby in daycare to pay off debt shows irresponsibility. If one cannot afford to have a child because of debt, then one should put off having the child until the debt is paid off. This is not to say anyone in debt should not have a child. But people should evaluate their finances and figure out whether they can provide for a childs needs and pay their debts, and if they cannot, they should not have the child and then use the excuse of debt to shortchange him out of having his own parents care for him full time, at least for his infancy.

 

[AmberDale]

If you have a decent job now, why not start building a nest egg? That way if and when you get married, you will have it so you can stay home.

I to don’t believe that parents should foot the bill for everything, including school. Some sure, but not everything. That’s what work study, loans, scholarships, etc are for.

 

[koit1967]

I never said that my wife is replacable. It looks we’re going to have to agree to disagree.

 

[Jennifer_J]

Really? You really believe that a child’s mother is so irrelevant as to be completely replaceable? You really, really believe that? You and I can disagree about mothers working outside the home or not. But to say that whether a child’s mother is with him for the vast majority of his waking time or is not with him makes absolutely no difference… that sounds like people convincing themselves, because it just cannot be true.

If that is true, then why bother to be discerning about with whom you had a child? If the mother is completely irrelevant, then why would it matter? Why didn’t you just have the child with your wife’s sister, as she is totally interchangeable with your wife? See where I am going with this? I am taking your concept to its logical conclusion.

Also, I think putting a baby in daycare to pay off debt shows irresponsibility. If one cannot afford to have a child because of debt, then one should put off having the child until the debt is paid off. This is not to say anyone in debt should not have a child. But people should evaluate their finances and figure out whether they can provide for a childs needs and pay their debts, and if they cannot, they should not have the child and then use the excuse of debt to shortchange him out of having his own parents care for him full time, at least for his infancy.

Please dial back the rhetoric a bit. In an ideal world, a parent would always be the primary caregiver, but in real life, that’s not always possible. Even through history, mothers have had to work and share childcare to get the job done. This baby is being cared for by his AUNT. I think that’s wonderful. The child isn’t in “daycare”, he’s being cared for by the family–as it should be.

I also firmly disagree with your assesment of when to have children. People didn’t stop having families during the depression. Certainly economics would be part of the equation, however, you can’t be in that famlies shoes and know that God is telling them not to have more children. It’s not your place.

 

[Sierrah]

Really? You really believe that a child’s mother is so irrelevant as to be completely replaceable? You really, really believe that? You and I can disagree about mothers working outside the home or not. But to say that whether a child’s mother is with him for the vast majority of his waking time or is not with him makes absolutely no difference… that sounds like people convincing themselves, because it just cannot be true.

If that is true, then why bother to be discerning about with whom you had a child? If the mother is completely irrelevant, then why would it matter? Why didn’t you just have the child with your wife’s sister, as she is totally interchangeable with your wife? See where I am going with this? I am taking your concept to its logical conclusion.

Also, I think putting a baby in daycare to pay off debt shows irresponsibility. If one cannot afford to have a child because of debt, then one should put off having the child until the debt is paid off. This is not to say anyone in debt should not have a child. But people should evaluate their finances and figure out whether they can provide for a childs needs and pay their debts, and if they cannot, they should not have the child and then use the excuse of debt to shortchange him out of having his own parents care for him full time, at least for his infancy.

Capsaicin please be respectful of others when responding in the forums. I realize you have strong beliefs on this issue. We all do but insulting others for their beliefs gets us all nowhere. Everybody has a right to their own opinion.

 

[Sierrah]

I never said that my wife is replacable. It looks we’re going to have to agree to disagree.

Koit1967 thank you for you insightful reply.

 

[BamaRider]

I dunno if you’re not ahead of yourself.

Look at going to school or a job with a future, to provide yourself with a means, outside of a partner. This method puts YOU in charge of your future and offers you options.

 

[koit1967]

We are all children of God. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the catechism says nothing about the mother staying home. We don’t believe that our decision makes us any less Catholic. We attend mass, we take communion, we go to confession. We practice NFP. We embrace and believe in the Holy Catholic Church. I was once a hard core atheist and a firm believer in contraception. Christ intervened in my life and made me whole. My own individual studies and and the lessons I learned going through RCIA helped me to realize the sin that is contraception. Our child’s life is precious to us and we don’t take it lightly, as I am sure no one else does theirs.

 

[whatevergirl]

Really? You really believe that a child’s mother is so irrelevant as to be completely replaceable? You really, really believe that? You and I can disagree about mothers working outside the home or not. But to say that whether a child’s mother is with him for the vast majority of his waking time or is not with him makes absolutely no difference… that sounds like people convincing themselves, because it just cannot be true.

If that is true, then why bother to be discerning about with whom you had a child? If the mother is completely irrelevant, then why would it matter? Why didn’t you just have the child with your wife’s sister, as she is totally interchangeable with your wife? See where I am going with this? I am taking your concept to its logical conclusion.

Also, I think putting a baby in daycare to pay off debt shows irresponsibility. If one cannot afford to have a child because of debt, then one should put off having the child until the debt is paid off. This is not to say anyone in debt should not have a child. But people should evaluate their finances and figure out whether they can provide for a childs needs and pay their debts, and if they cannot, they should not have the child and then use the excuse of debt to shortchange him out of having his own parents care for him full time, at least for his infancy.

These threads always turn into working moms vs non working moms. :yawn: KOIT never said that he thought his wife not being at home was ‘irrelevant.’ Please don’t misconstrue what people are saying here. He never said that.

It’s a personal decision, and one that a couple shouldn’t take lightly when deciding.

 

[whatevergirl]

We are all children of God. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the catechism says nothing about the mother staying home. We don’t believe that our decision makes us any less Catholic. We attend mass, we take communion, we go to confession. We practice NFP. We embrace and believe in the Holy Catholic Church. I was once a hard core atheist and a firm believer in contraception. Christ intervened in my life and made me whole. My own individual studies and and the lessons I learned going through RCIA helped me to realize the sin that is contraception. Our child’s life is precious to us and we don’t take it lightly, as I am sure no one else does theirs.

You are not any less Catholic because your wife works. Neither is she. I stayed at home, and then started working when my kids were school age. I am not less of a Catholic, because I work now…my kids are older, 12 and soon to be 16, but to the point–I am saddened when I read some people judging others like this, and making it look like people are less Christian or something, because they have decided that both parents need to work, and put their children in daycare.

I would love to meet who started this notion that women working outside of the home somehow renders them a)less of a mother and b) less than Christian. I think that myth really needs to stop. This is not a Catholic doctrine. Raising children in a loving, attentive home, and putting one’s family first…(God first of course) is a Catholic ideal.

Please know that these threads invariably take these turns–don’t take it personal. ((hugs))

 

[Galnextdoor]

I think staying at home or working outside the home all depends on the mother and the situation. There are many things to consider.
The women who post here are probably the cream of the crop when it comes to being nurturing mothers, but there are other women who are not very nurturing. I know career women who work 50 hours a week. When they go to a family gathering, they hand their babies off to a friend or relative and have no idea where the baby is the rest of the afternoon. They don’t feed the baby or change the baby or ask where the baby is. If a baby cries, they don’t go to investigate whether it’s their baby crying. I don’t know why there is that disconnect. I’ve seen women beg their doctor to go back to work 4 weeks after they have had a baby. For women like this, I think the baby is better off with a warm, nurturing daycare provider.

If you want to work simply to be able to buy things for your children. I don’t think that is a good idea. I’ve seen kids whose parents work to provide them with every conceivable comfort or want. These kids never experience the desire of owning something and then working to get it. They say I want and the parents get it for them. When they graduate from high school, parents expect them all of the sudden to want to work to get something. The kids, on the other hand, only understand one way to get what they want, asking. Parents are shocked that the kids don’t want to leave the house and kids are shocked that the parents, after all these years, expect them to actually do something to get what they need and want.

I think that if you can be a good mother without having to work that is the best option. You can guide your children, instill your own values in your children and teach them to be responsible citizens. If they don’t have everything their friends have, so what. Teach them that it is fun to be resourceful in getting what they need. The difference between being poor and living at the poverty line is attitude. Poverty level has to do with the pocket book and poor has to do with the spirit. I’ve known many old folks who said that they didn’t have much of anything growing up, but they never knew that they were poor.

As for saving for college, let them save for their own college if they want to go. Let them work for a scholarship in something they enjoy doing. For example there are vocal scholarships, band scholarships, science scholarships, math scholarships, dance scholarships, education scholarships, business scholarships etc.
They will appreciate it more if they have to work for it, and it will be a great thing to put on their resume after they graduate.

I don’t see the point of handing them everything they need until they are 18. It’s better for them to realize how the real world works.

 

[gardenswithkids]

For years I’ve been going back and forth on the question of wether or not it’s better to stay at home with the kids or work and provide them with a chance of a good education.

I’m not married or have any kids at this point but …

First, you are getting ahead of yourself. This question is only theoretical to you currently. If the question weren’t theoretical, you could examine the specifics details to help make the decision.

You write of living “hand to mouth” and no extras. Practically speaking, day care is very expensive. Often when both parents work and especially if they are in the lower income bracket, the majority of the second income goes towards daycare. (That cost might be off-set if they worked different shifts.) Beyond day care, working also has other costs, such as travel expense, etc. The second income often puts the couple into a higher tax bracket, so part of their income is taxed at a higher rate.

If money is that really tight that a couple has to live “hand to mouth”, they probably aren’t saving much for their children’s education. Even if they did, many responsible parents who want to provide for their children’s education invested that college money in stocks. Today, many have about 30-40% *less *saved from compared to a year ago.

I think it is most probable that given the “hand to mouth” description, it is likely most practical that one parent stay home. If they assessed their financial situation, they might discover that the second income doesn’t provide nearly as much income as they think.