Breadwinners

jaja321 · 06-02-2017 11:23AM

BelovedAunt wrote: »

I can see your point but if I found out that a male friend was becoming a stay at home dad I would say to myself "that's quite rare" whereas if it was a female friend choosing to stay at home, while it's becoming rarer, it still is far more common than men doing it.

It's definitely rarer..but it does happen and happened a lot more during the crash. All I'm saying is that it's the expectation that annoys me. If we were to discuss it as a couple and make a decision together it would be based on what made more sense for us a family. And that wouldn't be clear cut in terms of it being me to leave my job. So its more the expectation that frustrates me in this day and age.

Your Face · 06-02-2017 11:30AM

I'm the sole breadwinner with a demanding workload.
Its a tough job but I knead the dough.

jaja321 · 06-02-2017 11:31AM

Merrick Defeated Technology wrote: »

Your husband can't have kids either, people usually have more than one child so it makes no sense for the father to give up work as if the mother goes back to work and then a year later is off for 9 months again on maternity leave so either neither are working which can't happen or the father has to try get back into the workforce after taking time off which might be difficult and also makes career progression more difficult. Men also can only get limited paternity leave compared to maternity payments for a woman so it makes more sense for her to be the one staying at home while she is receiving this money.

I'm not saying either should give up work but if one does it makes far far more sense for it to be the woman.

It's totally dependent on individual family circumstances which is why the expectation frustrates me. Also I don't know where you're getting 9 months from. In this country it's 6 months. I also hope to see at some point a shared parental leave system open to both parents to share as they wish as they do in other countries. Hopefully we'll eventually move towards this system.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1 · 06-02-2017 11:31AM

Graces7 wrote: »

I have a friend whose daughter in law became pregnant unexpectedly in her 40s and was planning to put the baby up for adoption as she felt too old to raise a child.

Granny took over and raised the little one; had her with her every day all day. Revelled in it.

Doesn't make it right though. She felt too old to raise a child but the grandmother wasn't!?! Poor child.

coffeyt · 06-02-2017 11:33AM

I've been on both sides over the last two years, when my son was born my husband wasn't working so he stayed at home minding him while I returned to work. When I was on maternity leave after my daughter was born my husband returned to work. We made the decision for me to stay at home and mind both our children. There is only 16 months between them so between childcare costs and traveling to work we would only have been better off by about €50 by me returning to work full-time which just didn't make sense. I can honestly say going to work is much easier than staying at home minding 2 little ones but even though it's tougher I much prefer being at home with them. I loved going out to work and miss the independence of having my own income but I am 100% that we made the right decision for us. We are lucky in that living outside of Dublin our mortgage isn't massive so we can manage on one income, and even have the odd treat!
Edited to add I do plan to return to work once both are in school which will give us more income to cover the extras so don't see this time as wasted when it comes to earnings!

andekwarhola · 06-02-2017 12:11PM

Your Face wrote: »

I'm the sole breadwinner with a demanding workload. Its a tough job but I knead the dough.

Reminds me of the constipated baker that smelled really bad because he kneaded a crap.

andekwarhola · 06-02-2017 12:23PM

Merrick Defeated Technology wrote: »

It's not a chore for many grandparents to do the childminding either. They don't want to see their children waste 1000's of euro needlessly on childcare and leave their kids with strangers rather than with family. You could easily pay the mortgage on an investment property with change left over for the cost I see some people pay for childcare in posts on here.

Think it varies. More power to people that want to do it.

My parents live close by and love their grandchildren. Thankfully we don't need full time childcare or after school (we pay for one day of the latter) but we do rely on them for helping out when we need it, generally never more than a few hours a week but it's priceless and very much appreciated.

If I put myself in a hypothetical future situation where I had grandchildren, I'm being honest that I'm not sure I'd be delighted to be signed up for 40+ hours a week of childcare in my retirement even though I love the idea of having grandchildren.

Something like 1 to 2 days would be great.

Obviously, if it was a case of financial emergency (of which wanting to put saved childcare money into other investment doesn't really count) I'd gladly do it for my kid(s) though.

neonsofa · 06-02-2017 12:37PM

andekwarhola wrote: »

Think it varies. More power to people that want to do it.

My parents live close by and love their grandchildren. Thankfully we don't need full time childcare or after school (we pay for one day of the latter) but we do rely on them for helping out when we need it, generally never more than a few hours a week but it's priceless and very much appreciated.

If I put myself in a hypothetical future situation where I had grandchildren, I'm being honest that I'm not sure I'd be delighted to be signed up for 40+ hours a week of childcare in my retirement even though I love the idea of having grandchildren.

Something like 1 to 2 days would be great.

Obviously, if it was a case of financial emergency (of which wanting to put saved childcare money into other investment doesn't really count) I'd gladly do it for my kid(s) though.

Best part of being a grandparent is spoiling them for a couple hours and then handing them back. Can't really do that if you're their full time childminder.

06-02-2017 12:49PM

jaja321 wrote: »

It's totally dependent on individual family circumstances which is why the expectation frustrates me. Also I don't know where you're getting 9 months from. In this country it's 6 months. I also hope to see at some point a shared parental leave system open to both parents to share as they wish as they do in other countries. Hopefully we'll eventually move towards this system.

6 months paid but most women I know who have had kids in the last while have taken closer to 9 months by having holidays built up and taking them after the 6 months and also taking some unpaid leave also.

Robineen · 06-02-2017 01:43PM

andekwarhola wrote: »

Obviously, if it was a case of financial emergency (of which wanting to put saved childcare money into other investment doesn't really count) I'd gladly do it for my kid(s) though.

I think this is it. If not putting your kids in childcare would pay for an investment property then you have enough to give the grandparents a weekly amount of money to mind the kids. It'd still be a lot less money than childcare but you wouldn't be completely taking advantage. It's acknowledgement of their hard work at a time when they should be kicking back.

My parents would happily take hypothetical grandkids once or twice a week, but would refuse to do 40+ hours. I don't know if even extra money would entice them. And they are looking forward to be grandparents.

whoopsadoodles · 06-02-2017 03:16PM

Robineen wrote: »

I think this is it. If not putting your kids in childcare would pay for an investment property then you have enough to give the grandparents a weekly amount of money to mind the kids. It'd still be a lot less money than childcare but you wouldn't be completely taking advantage. It's acknowledgement of their hard work at a time when they should be kicking back.

My parents would happily take hypothetical grandkids once or twice a week, but would refuse to do 40+ hours. I don't know if even extra money would entice them. And they are looking forward to be grandparents.

My parents were the opposite, they didn't want my kids going to creche and point blank refused to take payment.

And they now look after my dog and they love it.

I'm fairly sure I'd be the same.

I of course pay them in other ways by buying them gifts and booking them on weekends away but they would never ever take money from me. I bought my mam a car and taxed/insured it/got her driving lessons so she didn't have to walk in the rain to collect my wee one from school.

Families are all different, what is one's idea of heaven is another's idea of hell. There is no right or wrong way.

Robineen · 06-02-2017 03:23PM

whoopsadoodles wrote: »

My parents were the opposite, they didn't want my kids going to creche and point blank refused to take payment.

And they now look after my dog and they love it.

I'm fairly sure I'd be the same.

I of course pay them in other ways by buying them gifts and booking them on weekends away but they would never ever take money from me. I bought my mam a car and taxed/insured it/got her driving lessons so she didn't have to walk in the rain to collect my wee one from school.

Families are all different, what is one's idea of heaven is another's idea of hell. There is no right or wrong way.

Well, you do a lot for them in return and that is payment, just in a different way!

As nox describes it above, it sounds like they'd be on call at the weekends too. That means they could be childminding six or seven days a week some weeks! That is an awful lot for aging grandparents.

A_Sober_Paddy · 06-02-2017 03:27PM

I genuinely find it strange to have kids and them dump them off at a creche. If myself anf the oh have a kid, one of use will be staying at home with the kid. It just seems pointless to have a kid and let someone else raise it.

whoopsadoodles · 06-02-2017 03:27PM

Robineen wrote: »

Well, you do a lot for them in return and that is payment, just in a different way!

True enough, I wouldn't assume they should do it, and I don't take them entirely for granted (I probably do take them for granted to some extent but certainly don't mean to). If I could give them the world I would, because they do so so much for me.

Robineen · 06-02-2017 03:29PM

whoopsadoodles wrote: »

True enough, I wouldn't assume they should do it, and I don't take them entirely for granted (I probably do take them for granted to some extent but certainly don't mean to). If I could give them the world I would, because they do so so much for me.

Buying your mother a car is a lovely and might I add very generous thing to do! I'm sure she feels very appreciated.

whoopsadoodles · 06-02-2017 03:34PM

Robineen wrote: »

Buying your mother a car is a lovely and might I add very generous thing to do! I'm sure she feels very appreciated.

Ah it wasn't really. Was an aul banger and it was for ferrying my kid around. Thought it was only fair tbh.

But god yeh, I hope she does feel appreciated!

Although they just got a puppy so it's payback time of me having to doggysit when they go away. It's a hard life.

Alf Veedersane · 06-02-2017 03:35PM

A_Sober_Paddy wrote: »

It just seems pointless to have a kid and let someone else raise it.

You'd be home-schooling as well, I take it?

meeeeh · 06-02-2017 03:36PM

A_Sober_Paddy wrote: »

I genuinely find it strange to have kids and them dump them off at a creche. If myself anf the oh have a kid, one of use will be staying at home with the kid. It just seems pointless to have a kid and let someone else raise it.

And it's seems strange to me not to work and kids not be in creche. Where I grew up all parents worked and more or less full time. Stay at home parenting wasn't encouraged. Kids didn't/don't turn out any worse than here, neither is having kids considered pointless.

I work part time now, which suits us fine and more importantly I hace my own income. That is independence I would be reluctant to sacrifice.

06-02-2017 03:38PM

Robineen wrote: »

Well, you do a lot for them in return and that is payment, just in a different way!

As nox describes it above, it sounds like they'd be on call at the weekends too. That means they could be childminding six or seven days a week some weeks! That is an awful lot for aging grandparents.

I mentioned not paying extortionate rates of childcare not giving nothing back in return for help from parents with childminding. For example we have a family farm so I would be working on that evenings and weekends on top of a day job if I had a child and was living close to home. Also the weekend thing was not a suggestion of every weekend just a weekend where you and your oh could go out together. Normally weekends can just be taking turns to go out thing etc.

A_Sober_Paddy · 06-02-2017 03:40PM

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

You'd be home-schooling as well, I take it?

Of course not, but let's say both parents work full time jobs.

Kids go the school, then after school to creche or child minders. Collect them after work at 5.30-6(most likely 6.30 tho) feed kids then bed around 7-8 depending on age. So at best 3 hours a day with your child.

Robineen · 06-02-2017 03:46PM

Merrick Defeated Technology wrote: »

I mentioned not paying extortionate rates of childcare not giving nothing back in return for help from parents with childminding. For example we have a family farm so I would be working on that evenings and weekends on top of a day job if I had a child and was living close to home. Also the weekend thing was not a suggestion of every weekend just a weekend where you and your oh could go out together. Normally weekends can just be taking turns to go out thing etc.

Even a scattering of seven day weeks in a year is a lot in addition to five days a week all year. On those weeks, they'd have hardly any time to themselves. Babysitters don't even work out that expensive when it's only the odd time. Would you not just shell out for one, considering the childcare savings you'd be making and the fact that your folk would have had the kids all week?

neonsofa · 06-02-2017 03:48PM

A_Sober_Paddy wrote: »

I genuinely find it strange to have kids and them dump them off at a creche. If myself anf the oh have a kid, one of use will be staying at home with the kid. It just seems pointless to have a kid and let someone else raise it.

You're very fortunate to be in a position to make that choice. Plenty of people cant afford to do that.

A_Sober_Paddy · 06-02-2017 03:52PM

neonsofa wrote: »

You're very fortunate to be in a position to make that choice. Plenty of people cant afford to do that.

Then don't have kids, is the answer to that

jester77 · 06-02-2017 03:52PM

A_Sober_Paddy wrote: »

I genuinely find it strange to have kids and them dump them off at a creche. If myself anf the oh have a kid, one of use will be staying at home with the kid. It just seems pointless to have a kid and let someone else raise it.

But they are not raising the kid. The kids learn so much there, my son is only 3 and has gets to learn cooking, baking, pottery, woodwork, how to grow plants and vegetables and other things that I can't even remember. You don't even get exposed to most of those things in school. I would love to have had that as a kid.

neonsofa · 06-02-2017 03:56PM

A_Sober_Paddy wrote: »

Then don't have kids, is the answer to that

Oh right, how about you go back in time and tell me that when I was in a stable relationship and well able to afford the child, yknow prior to the father leaving. Should have thought of your "answer" then. Silly me.

Or tell the people who had great jobs and made redundant a few years later.

Or whatever else that happens that you just cannot plan for.

Galway_Old_Man · 06-02-2017 04:00PM

I find the concept of having your very young children being effectively raised by strangers baffling to be honest. I can think of nothing more important than my kids welfare and upbringing. Thankfully I have a decent enough job that allows us to get by while the wife looks after the kids (until they're of school age) and I genuinely feel sad for those who aren't in such a situation.

Before I get shouted down as a sexist or whatever, I'll point out that for our middle kid I took a 6 month break and stayed at home. Some of the best times of my life then, would love that I could do it again. If situation and job stuff was different, I'd be happy for my wife to be the breadwinner.

Robineen · 06-02-2017 04:00PM

A_Sober_Paddy wrote: »

Then don't have kids, is the answer to that

Well, this is daft. Hello, depopulation.

Robineen · 06-02-2017 04:02PM

Galway_Old_Man wrote: »

Before I get shouted down as a sexist or whatever, I'll point out that for our middle kid I took a 6 month break and stayed at home. Some of the best times of my life then, would love that I could do it again. If situation and job stuff was different, I'd be happy for my wife to be the breadwinner.

This has been a pretty rational thread, what makes you think you'd be shouted down?

Electric Sheep · 06-02-2017 04:05PM

neonsofa wrote: »

Oh right, how about you go back in time and tell me that when I was in a stable relationship and well able to afford the child, yknow prior to the father leaving. Should have thought of your "answer" then. Silly me.

Or tell the people who had great jobs and made redundant a few years later.

Or whatever else that happens that you just cannot plan for.

Or that simply don't think Sober Paddy's opinion is relevant to their life.

Galway_Old_Man · 06-02-2017 04:05PM

Robineen wrote: »

This has been a pretty rational thread, what makes you think you'd be shouted down?

3rd post in is exactly what I was expecting. The poster in question automatically assumed that the OP meant keeping women in the home. It's popped up again.

Breadwinners

Comments