nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Breadwinners

Ush1

Any body else here the sole breadwinner of their family?

I am myself and find it increasingly rare to find other people in the same boat, most families these days seem to have dual incomes.

My wife stays at home and looks after my son. We made that decision based on preferring not to have him in a creche. Has our society gone wrong somewhere that dual incomes and children in creches is the norm?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

neonsofa

Galway_Old_Man wrote: »

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.

Well people are going to discuss the topic (including gender roles etc) but generally speaking I think most people are being rational, as was your post.

Robineen

Galway_Old_Man wrote: »

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.

That post is hardly shouting down opposing views.

Alf Veedersane

A_Sober_Paddy wrote: »

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.

The same applies when they go to school for the most part.

But even if one parent stays at home, the other parent works and possibly doesn't have the opportunity to leave at knock-off time every day and sees the child for an hour, maybe two during the week. Does that mean the working parent plays little part in raising their child?

osarusan

Robineen wrote: »

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

Imagined persecution.

Theboinkmaster

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.

Maybe you should keep your opinions to yourself if you're not even a dad yourself as you haven't a clue what you're talking about obviously.

eviltwin

Being the sole breadwinner has its own issues. I've been both dependent on my partners wages and the sole earner and it wasn't for us. Now we both work, younger child goes to after school childcare and enjoys it, we enjoy the money and our jobs and the opportunity they provide. I don't see two parents working as a bad thing if that's what they both want.

Theboinkmaster

Galway_Old_Man wrote: »

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.

I feel sad for your kids TBH, having a narrow-minded, ignorant and sanctimonious father who thinks his way of living his life is the only correct way and thinks he knows best. I'm guessing you have a "child on board" sticker on whatever sh!theap your wife drives.

I know very wealthy people who use crèches as they believe it's best for their children - you need to learn to respect the differing ways others live their lives.

SAMTALK

Some parents want to stay working, Some parents want to stay at home with kids.
Some parents have to stay working.

There is no correct answer to this because every case is different. I also believe since the economic crash that fewer people would be willing to stay at home because the fear of losing the one income would be terrifying

I stayed at home myself for years and whilst I wouldnt change it, i would acknowledge that it is probably one of the hardest jobs you could do. I have now gone back to work and whilst its hard to keep everything going I do find that I wouldnt like to go back to being at home all day again.

Electric Sheep

coffeyt wrote: »

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!

A lot of women think they will do that. Reality hits them a hard slap when they try to reenter the workforce.

coffeyt

Electric Sheep wrote: »

A lot of women think they will do that. Reality hits them a hard slap when they try to reenter the workforce.

Well the simple truth is I've already been approached twice since I left the workforce about jobs which I have turned down and even last week my old employer phoned to see if I was interested in returning to work. So don't assume that everyone will be hit a 'hard slap'
Also to add that I'm not worried if it takes time to get back to work, that's the choice I made.

[Deleted User]

Robineen wrote: »

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?

My parents never got babysitters it was grandparents doing the minding at weekends and during the week (sometimes weekends could be at aunts/uncles etc and vice versa with cousins staying with us when aunts/uncles went away).

Why do you think parents nowadays would not expect to do the same stuff their parents did for them? The expectation is also that you would look after your parents when they care rather than put them in a nursing home so its all a cycle.

Electric Sheep

Merrick Defeated Technology wrote: »

My parents never got babysitters it was grandparents doing the minding at weekends and during the week (sometimes weekends could be at aunts/uncles etc and vice versa with cousins staying with us when aunts/uncles went away).

Why do you think parents nowadays would not expect to do the same stuff their parents did for them? The expectation is also that you would look after your parents when they care rather than put them in a nursing home so its all a cycle.

This is all theoretical of course, as Nox has no children as of yet. He may well find that his mother (I am sure Nox does not expect his father to do the babysitting) has different plans about how to spend her golden years.

meeeeh

Merrick Defeated Technology wrote: »

Why do you think parents nowadays would not expect to do the same stuff their parents did for them? The expectation is also that you would look after your parents when they care rather than put them in a nursing home so its all a cycle.

My brother and I were minded by grandparents until we started preschool. While my mum minds my brother's kids a bit but they are still full time in creche. My grandparents retired earlier, they were younger, mum's job was for set hours and so on. Things change, more women work, longer hours, people retire later, they have kids older. Situation is different for us and our parents than it was for our grandparents. My partner's parents are very generous and collect kids from school and creche twice per week and keep them for couple of hours. I think that is very generous and it would not feel right to me for couple in their seventies minding two rascals full time. I don't think you should expect that tour parents wil mind your kids just because your grand parents did it.

Robineen

Electric Sheep wrote: »

This is all theoretical of course, as Nox has no children as of yet. He may well find that his mother (I am sure Nox does not expect his father to do the babysitting) has different plans about how to spend her golden years.

Well, I guess he might have a fair idea, it's his own mother. But I just think it's an awful lot to expect and there seems to be no contingency plan there for if it doesn't work out. What if, heaven forbid, she became ill? At the very least, his mother should be treated to nice things for helping out so much. Meals out etc. like Whoopsadoodles does.

[Deleted User]

Robineen wrote: »

? At the very least, his mother should be treated to nice things for helping out so much. Meals out etc. like Whoopsadoodles does.

Where did I say I wouldn't? Did you not see where I said I would (well already do) devote quite a lot of my free time and holidays from my job working at home.

Robineen

Merrick Defeated Technology wrote: »

Where did I say I wouldn't? Did you not see where I said I would (well already do) devote quite a lot of my free time and holidays from my job working at home.

IMO, there should be other stuff, treats. Something in lieu of payment, as you'd be saving huge amounts of money.

Also, would you do 40 hours a week on the farm? If not, it's not really comparable, and one would need to take into account that your parents are a good deal older so childminding would take a lot more out of them.

lapua20grain

I am the sole breadwinner in the house, my wife made the decision to leave work and look after our son. We are luck though as our mortgage is quite low and we have no loans bar the mortgage.

[Deleted User]

Its the lack of choice that bothers people, this is just a personal opinion, but you need a very strong relationship/marriage if there is only one bread winner by choice and the couple have to budget very carefully.

Electric Sheep

mariaalice wrote: »

Its the lack of choice that bothers people, this is just a personal opinion, but you need a very strong relationship/marriage if there is only one bread winner by choice and the couple have to budget very carefully.

I agree, it takes a huge amount of trust to enter into that lifestyle. Becoming a one income family can seriously change the dynamics of a marriage, and not always for the better.

ancapailldorcha

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Yup neoliberalism and free market economics is a bust!

Stop shoehorning your agenda into unrelated threads please.

Glenster

Ush1 wrote: »

Has our society gone wrong somewhere that dual incomes and children in creches is the norm?

I'm not sure society has gone wrong.

Based on my limited experience kids who go to crèche seem more social and confident than kids who hug mummy all day.

Glenster

Electric Sheep wrote: »

But then the SAHMs would complain that they are being discriminated against as they would not get the tax deduction. There is no way to satisfy everyone.

No more free money just because you want kids.

I want a 9-11, make that tax free.

John_Rambo

Merrick Defeated Technology wrote: »

Retired in most instance and from my experience many insist on doing the childminding.

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.

Of course I'm not saying everyone can do it because of proximity to family but then again as I said earlier living close to one or other family would be a requirement of having kids. Even if not for minding everyday but to have baby sitters that can be easily called upon. I see with people with family close by are still able to come out much more often for a session on a Saturday night or go away for a weekend or a two day wedding etc.

Sugar coat it whatever way you want. A chore is a routine task that has to be carried out and grandparents that mind kids can't just wake up and say I don't think I'll mind the kids today!

Any grandparents I know that mind kids are shattered by Friday, it's tough work. I also find parents that have their parents mind their kids day to day abuse the situation and tend to drop the kids off on weekends and nights, babysitters that can be easily called on as you say yourself.

The creche kids tend to be way ahead of the grandparent minded kids when it comes to school too, they're also used to the routine of going to school, they also tend to be much healthier eaters with a more varied diet.

Autonomous Cowherd

Glenster wrote: »

I'm not sure society has gone wrong.

Based on my limited experience kids who go to crèche seem more social and confident than kids who hug mummy all day.

Not meaning to wax all scientific on ye, or bash those who do opt for creche, but there is significant evidence of raised cortisol levels in children under 2 or even 3 years old who are in creche as opposed to ''hugging mummy'' all day long, (as you rather snidely describe it). It's there in the science. This science gives rise to contentious sentiments because of course people want to feel like they are doing their best for their child. And I do honestly think it is economics that drive most people out to do such long hours in the work place, and I feel this system is fundamentally flawed. Most people would rather far more time with their loved ones and far less time in work. It affects all of us, not just our infants and toddlers. On the other hand I would offer that the isolated, nuclear family as it exists nowadays is much more difficult for the parent who remains at home, hence the stress many people feel being confined with their child all day...it would be much more natural to have a village/extended family/ communal setting to surround and support the parent in the home. And this just is not the way society functions now in general. We are victims of a particular form of evolving sociology which is not necessarily wise, but rather driven by economics. On the whole I think it is my unfashionable opinion that young children should be cared for as close to the family unit as possible in their earliest years. This is how bonding has evolved in our species. It seems that every child needs some years of feeling they are the centre of the world. The funny thing is I feel quite strongly about all these issues and the systems that feed into them, but I am very nervous to voice my opinions on them as they are so emotive to people. I am not judging peo9ple for responding as best they can to the demands of the system as it exists nowadays, and I know that every parent loves their child with all their heart.. I just feel that raising the next generation to inhabit the earth is a huge and central task as human beings and we should be very thoughtful about it.

neonsofa

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

Not meaning to wax all scientific on ye, or bash those who do opt for creche, but there is significant evidence of raised cortisol levels in children under 2 or even 3 years old who are in creche as opposed to ''hugging mummy'' all day long, (as you rather snidely describe it). It's there in the science. This science gives rise to contentious sentiments because of course people want to feel like they are doing their best for their child.

I wonder what the cortisol levels are like a couple years down the road when they begin school/playschool. I would imagine they would be higher for some time in the children who had previously been at home compared to those that have always gone to creche and had that routine etc. I know my daughter took to playschool and school like an absolute dream (I was actually slightly offended at the lack of tears on the first day! I just got a wave goodbye :pac: ) whereas other children sobbed and screamed when mam or dad tried to leave. Swings and roundabouts.

Electric Sheep

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

It seems that every child needs some years of feeling they are the centre of the world.

Should there be a limit of one child per nuclear family then? Any child that is not the first born will not be the center of the world and will have to share the attention of their parents.

Electric Sheep

neonsofa wrote: »

I wonder what the cortisol levels are like a couple years down the road when they begin school/playschool. I would imagine they would be higher for some time in the children who had previously been at home compared to those that have always gone to creche and had that routine etc. I know my daughter took to playschool and school like an absolute dream (I was actually slightly offended at the lack of tears on the first day! I just got a wave goodbye :pac: ) whereas other children sobbed and screamed when mam or dad tried to leave. Swings and roundabouts.

Heh, a close friend of mine was a bit offended when she gave up work to stay at home. Her 3 yr old really missed the crèche and her little friends for the first while. Mom felt a bit under appreciated;) but the kid soon adjusted.

neonsofa

Electric Sheep wrote: »

Heh, a close friend of mine was a bit offended when she gave up work to stay at home. Her 3 yr old really missed the crèche and her little friends for the first while. Mom felt a bit under appreciated;) but the kid soon adjusted.

A few times I've said to my one "I'm off on whatever day, what would you like to do?" and she'll say well actually we were gonna do x y or z in creche today so I might just go to creche after school. Suits me grand in that I've the full day to myself but you don't half feel unwanted

Autonomous Cowherd

neonsofa wrote: »

I wonder what the cortisol levels are like a couple years down the road when they begin school/playschool. I would imagine they would be higher for some time in the children who had previously been at home compared to those that have always gone to creche and had that routine etc. I know my daughter took to playschool and school like an absolute dream (I was actually slightly offended at the lack of tears on the first day! I just got a wave goodbye :pac: ) whereas other children sobbed and screamed when mam or dad tried to leave. Swings and roundabouts.

The main studies are for cortisol levels in pre school aged children. The studies show acclimation to stress as children grow older. That would seem to make sense in terms of development.

neonsofa

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

The main studies are for cortisol levels in pre school aged children. The studies show acclimation to stress as children grow older. That would seem to make sense in terms of development.

You're supporting my point. They measure the cortisol levels of pre school children. Those in creche have higher cortisol levels due to the stresses involved in interactions etc and just the general day to day of creche going. The babies at home don't have high levels as they have all their home comforts etc. When the babies from a crèche start school, they are no longer experiencing stress because they are accustomed to the routine and the environment so their cortisol levels would be low/regulated. The babies who were previously stress free at home with mam now have a shock to the system. And I'd imagine their cortisol levels would be higher for a period of time than the crèche going children at that stage. And they too acclimatise eventually. So either way, the babies go through the stress, it just starts at a different stage for each child and they all acclimatise to their routine. Kids are adaptable.