Strollerderby : SAHM

Stay At Home Moms Worth $122,000

JeanneSager — Thu, 07 May 2009 15:29:00 GMT

I was recently accused of inciting a mommy war between the "stay at homes" and the "working mothers." I honestly out-right guffawed. Because as a working mom who spends part of her time working from home, I've always felt sort of betwixt and between. And respected the heck out of both sides!

Not to mention the list of stay at home dads and working dads I know (including some of my fellow 'Derby writers).

And now to show all you stay-at-home full-timers how much I think you're worth, a little math from Salary.com. In the "real" world, you'd be raking in six figures.

Based on ten daily functions described by a survey of some twelve thousand stay-at-home moms (why they didn't include dads I don't know - those numbers are growing!), the average stay-at-homer should be earning $122,732 a year. In other words - that's what they'd be paying someone else to do all of those duties.

The reason I love this number? Because everytime one of my stay-at-home mom friends tells me she feels like she should kowtow to her working partner, I can throw it at her. See, you're not just worth something as a human being. You're also worth something in the world of family finance.

My biggest contention has always been that those of us who work out of the home usually PAY someone to watch our children. So a stay-at-home mom or dad is saving the family that money.

Then throw in how many more take away meals are consumed in families where both partners work (because as Keri noted the other day, the finances weigh out - it's cheaper to cook it than to buy it). Ironically, several comments left on Keri's post came from parents who don't believe a baking parent's time is worth anything special. This survey begs to differ.

The Salary.com survey goes on to list eight other occupations filled by a stay-at-home parent, including "housekeeper, computer operator, facilities manager, van driver, psychologist, laundry machine operator, janitor and chief executive officer."

The survey puts a working parent's "at home" salary around $76,184. You have to tack on their actual wages to come up with a fair number - but I'd reckon you then have to subtract daycare, take away meals, etc.

So who's better? Neither one. And I say that as a betwixt and between parent. We're all just doing what works for us. But we're all worth something - just ask our kids.

Image: More4Kids

Also on Babble:

Stay-At-Home Moms are the Best, Aren't They!

Madeline Holler — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 14:02:00 GMT

Oh, for God's sake, Dr. Laura, put a lid on it.

The conservative call-in radio show host (and her kid's mom!), Dr. Laura Schlessinger, has written a book that lays out her life's philosophy -- or at least the philosophy she's pounded listeners over the head with since her show first aired 600 years ago.

"In Praise of Stay-at-Home Moms," the introduction of which is excerpted here in the Wall Street Journal, appears to be one unwittingly fortunate woman's hearty pat on her own back for raising her child as she saw fit and admonishing those who didn't follow the same script.

In a nutshell, Dr. Laura thinks children should not be put in daycare and parents should not get divorced. Period. It's not that moms shouldn't work, she argues. It's just that moms shouldn't be away from their kids. (Which gets a little complicated for the widowed forklift operator with a 9-month-old in her lap!)

From the introduction:

My husband and I came to the practical conclusion that I needed to go back to radio work to be our family's primary financial support, while he would manage my career, the home, and our finances. Nonetheless, I refused to take any job which would require me to be out of the home every day while our son was home or awake! I would take care of him all day and then go to work on radio, leaving the home at 9:00 PM after putting him to bed. Eventually, when he started kindergarten, I landed a daytime shift while he was in school.

In order to do the writing and necessary research, I would get up at 5:00 AM and work a few hours before I woke him up to get ready for school. I always worked my career around my family, never the other way around.

She takes on her critics, who call her a hypocrite for having a career when she tells other women not to. She also responds to women who say they simply don't have the kind of flexibility in their work that she had. What makes her different -- and, let's face it, perfect! -- she explains, is that she never waivered from the following tenets (and you shouldn't as well):

It is so very doable if you are:

-- committed to the priority of raising your children yourself;

-- part of a marriage, which obviously provides two parents;

-- willing to sacrifice some opportunities for the sake of family;

-- willing to "do without" many things -- but not family time and attention; and

-- not willing to compromise your conviction, no matter how pressed you get by circumstances or naysayers.

Actually, it's not bad advice. And I don't see where it requires being a SAHM/a radio DJ/unwilling to put kids in daycare to meet these goals.

I think that's what really gets on my nerves and is actually destructive: Dr. Laura found a way of being a mother -- a working mother with a flexible workplace (how about a book "In Praise of the Office Secretary Who was No Doubt Stuck Watching Dr. Laura's Son While She was Working") -- that fit her life, personality and goals. And her philosophy as a mother. It's easy to write a book praising yourself, especially when you're looking back. We should all hope the choices we made work out and are deemed praise-worthy, if not by Dr. Laura, or a book publisher, then at least ourselves.

What I always think about the SAHM/working mom debate is that (1) the labels are way too simple -- I'm sort of a SAHM yet also a working mother with childcare and (2) every mom/family is different. Our kids will be who they are, and, yes, that will have to do in large part with how we raised them, including being half-way up their asses from daybreak to sundown, absent from day break to sundown nearly 24/7, or some other work/home combination. Like us, our kids will all have their own history -- they're own story -- based on their family life, what their parents did with them and for them. And good thing, too. Otherwise, it's all a little Stepford ... right?

Family circumstances influence how kids are raised; parents' personalities matter; there's more to parenting than face time. As long as our kids are safe, fed and educated, why nitpick at the particulars? Why focus on just one thing?

What do you think? Nothing matters more than weekday lunches with Mom? Or did Dr. Laura change your life?

Image: WSJonline

More Ammunition for the Mommy Wars

KeriF — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 12:37:00 GMT

Working mothers have it so great... They get to spend all day on their own, talking to other adults, eating their lunch without a child hanging off of one leg, being able to use words longer than two syllables. Sure, they might miss the occasional school play, but at least they don't have to smell like baby poop all day.

Stay-at-home mothers have it so great... They get to spend all day with their precious children, witnessing every milestone as it happens rather than as reported by a nanny or day care provider. They can spend the day in the park, enjoying the beautiful day as their children scamper on the playground equipment. They can wear sweats and t-shirts all day... heck, they can wear pajamas all day!

Which side of the war are you on?

Of course it isn't that simple. Most working mothers and many stay-at-home mothers do so because they have to, not because they choose to. But what if you could choose? Which would you do?

Thanks to the economic downturn, many women are now finding out how the other half lives. The Associated Press reported recently on a new trend: laid-off women becoming stay-at-home moms, at least temporarily. According to the article, more than 800,000 women have lost their jobs since the end of 2007.

Sasha Emmons was laid off in January but found a job only a month later. While she admits she enjoyed spending more time with her daughter, she was happy to go back to work. "I just felt kind of lost without a job," she said. "Everyone talks about the mommy wars, and you always have that question as a mother: Is the grass greener on the other side? For me, the question was answered."

Other mothers report loving the role reversal. "It's been one of my greatest joys," said Shelley Ziech, who's been laid off for a year. "Now I get to do the Mom things--making the lunches, taking my daughter to school. It's been fabulous." But would it be so fabulous if she did it every day for five years? Or ten?

Who do you think has it easier, the stay-at-home or working mother? Would you switch roles if you could?

Photo: Erlc.com

I'm Not a Brat, I'm Autistic

Who Buys The Baby Products In Your House?

Brett Singer — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 16:15:00 GMT

We now present: The Diaper Follies.

Scene: An apartment in Manhattan. There is a stench. It is coming from the baby. The baby's father, a stay at home dad, puts the baby on the changing table and removes his diaper. It is indeed filled with a noxious substance not unlike nuclear waste. After cleaning the baby's tushy, Father notices that there are no clean diapers. He picks up a telephone and calls Mother, who is at work.

Father (very cheerful, abnormally so): Hi Honey.

Mother (working, wary of Father's cheerful mood): Hello dear. What's up?

Father (still cheery but as transparent as a brand-new window): We're out of diapers.

(Pause.)

Mother (calm): You should go buy some.

(Pause.)

Father (still cheerful, hiding his nervousness): Great idea! Thanks hon! See you later!

And… scene.

*-*-*

Obviously that's not exactly what happened. I would never leave a baby on the changing table while I made a phone call, for example. But I did email my wife (I didn't call, that would be weird) and inform her that we were out of diapers. We just, I don't know. We didn't have any. And I didn't know where she got them from.

Does that make me a dummy? I was probably tired and it was my first time. The point is, despite the fact that my wife is the primary wage earner and I am the primary childcare person, she's still in charge of stuff like diaper purchases.

While I never called my wife at work to tell her we were out of diapers or other baby products, that still isn't really my department. Another example: I am at the drugstore to buy diapers. Upon arriving, I realize that I have no idea what size diaper my children wear. Rather than buy the wrong size (which has happened before and may happen again – would those kids just start using the freakin' bathroom? Sheesh) I call home and say, "Honey? What size diapers should I buy?" I am mocked for not knowing, but that's better than the beating I receive for buying the wrong size. (Note: my wife has never actually beaten me for buying the wrong diapers. Mocked me, yes. Forced me to wear the diaper on my head…OK, that's not true either. But mocking. Oh, the mocking.)

Anyway, I was wondering – who's in charge of baby product buying at your house?

Image: Amazon

Baby Bikini and Pregnant Man Top 2008 Weird News List

Announce Your New Addition With Panties: Male Perspective

A Quiverfull Of Kids

Working Parents Smackdown Part 2 – Dads With Jobs vs Moms With Jobs

Working Parents Smackdown Part 1 - SAHD vs SAHM

Do You Have an Easy Bake Oven in Your Vagina?

Miriam Axel-Lute — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 23:00:00 GMT

Though the post is fairly long and rambly, I couldn't resist sharing this call-to-arms by Renee at Womanist Musings about lingering gender assumptions, especially by schools:

"The education system seems to think that this is still 1950 and that mothers are at home with tons of time on their hands to participate in bake sales. This request is never gender neutral, even though Daddy has two perfectly good hands himself. Why is this still the norm when most women work a double day? Even if a woman is a stay at home mother how does a vagina translate into the ability to bake? Do I have an easy bake oven stashed somewhere in my vaginal opening that I was not aware of?"

She has a larger point about the very narrow defintions of acceptable motherhood, but the comments are filled mostly with horrific stories about teachers telling single and/or working-outside-the-house and/or non-crafty moms that a purchased stocking/Valentines cards are not good enough, or that a married working mom couldn't interrupt play group for a work call while a single one (or a married dad) could, because for her a job was choice. Would like a little judgment with your assumptions? Or the other way around? Yeesh.

It's all a bit disheartening. And she's writing from Canada, too. Aren't they supposed to be more evolved than we are? (I'm kidding. Don't answer that.)

Photo by Tracy Hunter.

More by this author:

Working Parents Smackdown: SAHM vs SAHD

Working Parents Smackdown Part 2 – Dads With Jobs vs Moms With Jobs

Brett Singer — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 17:00:00 GMT

Part 2 of Working Parents Smackdown (read Part 1 here). This time we focus on the workplace:

When men work late, they're just doing their jobs. Women are neglecting their children.

Women are often made to feel guilty about working late, sometimes by their spouses. Men probably are too but it seems like its easier to avoid.

Women who work risk "emasculating" their husbands. "Femininasculating" isn't even a word.

The "Mommy Wars" are definitely a thing. There are no "daddy wars."

If a woman works "outside the home" and has children, people ask "how does she do it?" If a man works, no one ever says "outside the home", and nobody wonders how they do whatever "it" is.

No matter what, mom is the first point of contact for any school issues. That's not to say I have a problem with that but that's what I see happen. This includes general PTA-type matters, actual issues such as coming to pick the kid up due to illness, and of course Mom's Night Out. (Note: I am NOT angling for an invite to Mom's Night Out. I vastly prefer Dad's Night In, especially when there is a football game on.)

These aren't necessarily sexism or something-ism. It's more of an assumption of gender roles. Which is technically sexism. But it doesn't feel quite as insidious as, say, discrimination in the workplace. Of course, these assumptions can easily translate into more dangerous actions in a job setting, such as when a woman is passed over for a promotion because her boss assumes that she will eventually leave her job to have children. So maybe it is the same. I don't know.

I do know that the last time my friends teased me for being a stay at home dad (who, for the record, works) I was able to silence them by saying, "Have fun at the office on Monday, guys." Haven't heard any teasing since then.

Last word: I find it infuriating when anyone gives a woman a hard time for being a primary caregiver. (Although I use the term frequently, "staying home with the kids" is kind of a silly term once the rugrats are old enough to go to school or even daycare.)

Last word number two: Feelings of emasculation are in the brain of the man. That doesn't mean that the feelings are invalid, nor does it mean that there aren't women who can be cruel and try to make their menfolk feel small. But often the issue is in the guy's head. (It was with me; that's a topic for another time.)

Last word number three: I hereby vow to look up the meaning of the word "last".

Image: edmbookstore.com

Matt Lauer Talks To Sarah Palin In The Kitchen

Teacher Has Affair With Student, Parents Say Keep The Door Open

Grown Kids Try Forcing Dad To Divorce Second Wife In Court

They Say – Most Toys Are Toxic

Working Parents Smackdown Part 1 - SAHD vs SAHM

Brett Singer — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 17:00:00 GMT

Definitions:
SAHD = Stay at home dad
SAHM = Stay at home mom

I've been thinking about some of the differences between these two types of parents. (See also Part 2, Dads With Jobs vs Moms With Jobs.)

Now:

At a party, SAHDs are asked, "What do you do?" SAHMs are not.

If a woman chooses to be a SAHM, she is:
- a lazy throwback
- not fulfilling her potential

If a man chooses to be a SAHD, he is:
- making a sacrifice
- taking a break from work

Men who stay home are doing something great for their wife and children. Women are just, you know, doing what they're supposed to do.

SAHMs are "homemakers." SAHDs are "musicians."

Men who stay home with their kids are special and unique. Women are ordinary and perhaps even bad for their gender.

To sum up: women, whatever you do, you are wrong. If you work, you suck. If you stay home, you suck. Guys: whatever you do, you're OK! Rock on! Write that novel! Play that funky music, SAHD!

I'm exaggerating somewhat, but I'll put it out to the crowd. Am I exaggerating? If so, how much?

Image: theonlymanofthehouse.com

Matt Lauer Talks To Sarah Palin In The Kitchen

Teacher Has Affair With Student, Parents Say Keep The Door Open

Grown Kids Try Forcing Dad To Divorce Second Wife In Court

They Say – Most Toys Are Toxic

Do You Have an Easy Bake Oven in Your Vagina? (by Miriam - one of the greatest blog post titles ever)

For a good marriage, women need to stay home

Brett Singer — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 14:00:00 GMT

That's a slight exaggeration, but not by much. Jezebel has a clip from the Mike and Juliet Show where Dr. Scott Haltzman (author of The Secrets of Happily Married Men) offers up marriage advice. His notion that wives need to "make their husbands feel like superheroes" and "nurture their needs" is enthusiastically backed up by Ro' Black, a stay-at-home wife. Ro' says that, "her marriage works because her husband gets a home cooked meal every night." She also picks up his stinky socks after he works out. Dr. Janet Taylor, another expert, goes so far as to suggest that marriage is a partnership and that perhaps Haltzman is going a little too far (gee, ya think?). Dr. Scott disagrees – he wants a pat on the back for making coffee for his wife every morning, and also wants his woman to get off the damn phone when he gets home from work, because he feels like he just "conquered the world" and would like this feeling to be acknowledged. According to the good doctor, he used to come home and "sulk" (his word) when she didn't immediately drop what she was doing and give him her full attention; now she does what he wants and he's happy.

What century is this?

I have no problem with a married couple that prefers a more traditional marriage, one where the husband works and the wife takes primary responsibility for the kids and the house. In fact, most of the people I know have situations that are exactly like that. Mine isn't, which may be why I'm more sensitive to the sort of idiocy being espoused by Haltzman the Hunter and Ro' Black.

Or maybe I think that some men might actually be mature enough to handle coming home and finding the Missus on the phone. Some men might even be okay if their wife makes more money than he does. Some men might even – wait for it – cook dinner for the family. Or – oh no, don't go there – do a load of laundry. Some men don't even have jobs! Of course, those marriages are doomed to fail, but nobody's perfect, right?

I'm not a feminist; I'm not sure a man can be a feminist, frankly. But I do think that the notion that the only way to have a happy marriage is for the wife to keep the husband happy, and that the only way to keep said husband happy is to cater to his every whim, is borderline psychotic. But hey, you know, live and let live. Go to Jezebel to see the clip. Fair warning: it might make you mad.

source: Jezebel

image: millsaps.edu

Egyptian woman gives birth to septuplets because she wanted a boy

5 reasons it's a good thing I had boys

Volleyball hasn’t come a long way, baby

Matthew McConaughey keeps placenta

5 things that would make parents' lives easier

No dinero for Dina

Is it fair to take pictures of Britney's kids?

Sad footnote to sad story

Woman goes to jail for adopting children to get money

Dads Get Screwed For Staying At Home--Just Like Moms!

Kelly Mills — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 21:01:00 GMT

Here's a problem many women who took a break from working outside the home to be with the kids have faced for a while: How to explain the blank space on the resume? The fact that being a SAH parent isn't given much respect, and the unfair impression some employers have that it means you aren't serious about your career have meant women have had a harder time breaking back into the paid workforce. But hey, problems like this aren't just for the ladies anymore. Ain't equal treatment grand?

With increasing numbers of dads opting out to raise the pups, now some men are trying to explain that baking cupcakes for 22 kids and getting three children to soccer practices means they can prioritize well and multi-task. And interestingly, many of the guys are hoping to find inroads along the path former SAHM's have blazed. I think very few people get less respect than the excellent SAHDs out there. Men who leave the workforce are still considered especially suspect to some employers, so guys have had to do things like maintain a side business and do volunteer jobs to keep a tight resume. Maybe the best bet for the guys is to find a hiring person who understands--like a mom who stayed at home for a few years to raise her kids.

Today Show Uncovers the Obvious

What a WAHD

Women Not Having It All

What is mommy worth?

Brett Singer — Wed, 07 May 2008 13:35:00 GMT

This story pops up every now and then. The question is: how much would mom get paid if her job were in the private sector?

The Daily News reports on a study from MomConnection that has come up with a number for moms in New York. And… drum roll please…

$70,000 a year.

They came up with this amount using data from the web site salaryexpert.com.

As for what the women surveyed think they should get if they were to receive a yearly salary, "34% said $100,000, 31% said $50,000, 27% said $75,000 and 8% said $25,000." Man, I'd like to meet the women who said $25,000. Cheap date.

I say "women" because this survey was specifically about stay at home moms. I'm not crying discrimination or anything like that but it still surprises me how often articles like this read as if they were written in the 1950's.

Here's the best part (a quote from someone at MomConnection):

These are Generation Y moms in their 20s and early 30s who made a considered choice to become mothers…They are less likely to feel annoyed or to be whiny."

Oh! I see. As opposed to the whiny wimmen of Generation X, the Baby Boomers, and everyone who came before. Weren't they annoying? All that, "Wah! I want respect! I want equal pay! I'm whiny!" They didn't make a choice to become mothers. They were forced into it, right? (Grrr…)

So – I ask you, the readers. How would you respond? What do you think the salary for a mother should be? Or is what a mother does, to paraphrase the MasterCard ads, priceless?

image: The Daily News

Women Not Having It All, Having It All, Had Enough

Kelly Mills — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 21:29:00 GMT

Meg Wolitzer has a new novel called "The Ten-Year Nap". It's about moms, mostly moms who left the workforce to stay at home with kids. It sounds good, and she says, "In fiction, stay-at-home moms have often been [subject to] mockery, and I think it's very sexist: the stay-at-home mother whose children are oversubscribed, who has reduced her entire brain to trivial things." We can totally use some better depictions of SAHMs. But I have to speak to the fact that once again, we are gonna get a small wave of "Can women have it all?" headlines and I'm over it.

'Kay, look, I'm going to answer the question of whether women can have it all: It depends. I mean, we aren't having a giant collective female experience here, are we? So some moms have to go back to the workforce whether they want to or not, while others can't wait to get back, and still more choose to be home with the kids full time. I know some SAHMs who partly made their decision based on the fact their jobs were low-paying and tiring (like teaching) and they preferred being at home, not just because they wanna be with the kids. I know moms who found being at home with the kids was so not for them. And I know moms who like their jobs and made choices based on the fact that their careers don't allow for much of a break.

I know moms who went back to their careers after the kids went to school, who work from home, who have part-time jobs, who work two jobs, who care for several kids, who are single, and who are the breadwinner with a partner staying at home. You know, not everyone has a really fulfilling career, mom or not. Not everyone finds parenting fulfilling. And things change over time for people. Whether or not you can "have it all" probably depends on what you want, and where you are, and I bet the answer to that question is different for everyone.

Look, I'm irritated because the "have it all" stick is used to beat women for selfishly wanting things or passively not wanting things. It implies that women want too much; and yet asserting that women can have it all ignores that many women are going to have to make a few trade-offs along the way. Rather than get into that, could we get equal pay and better childcare and a little respect for our individual choices? Thanks ever so much.

Weekly Check-Up: If Work Stress Causes Heart Problems, Does That Mean Your Kids Can Kill You?

Kelly Mills — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:31:00 GMT

There's been this story in the news lately: Work can kill you. Okay, the job itself won't necessarily take you out (unless you are a professional stunt person) but the stress just might, since it can be a big deal for heart disease. The finding came out of a long-running study of civil servants in Britain called the Whitehall II Study (the first Whitehall Study included examination of the link between social status and mortality, and it was a big deal, and don't even ask me how I know about it, but I have a dark past.) Anyhow, the minute I got to reading this, I immediately thought, "What does that mean for stay-at-home parents? If your job is raising your children, are you at risk for a hurting heart?"

It's not far-fetched at all when you hear how the researchers measured stress. They asked participants questions about their job demands such as "how much control they had at work, how often they took breaks, and how pressed for time they were during the day." Well, golly, if I remember one thing about being a SAHM (for a hot few months, I detested it) it was that your day is largely dictated by nap needs and meals and poop explosions, all of which can change at a moment's notice even for the most rigorously scheduled of folks. That feels like a lack of control to me. I also remember there were very, very few breaks (any nap hours were spent scrambling to do other stuff) and that the day was always packed with things I needed to get to, like food shopping, and that I felt one step behind a ton of the time. Hmmm. Sounds like a heart diesase recipe, especially when you add the unfairly low level of job credibility you get as a SAH ("Must be nice, sitting on the couch and eating bon bons while the baby sleeps.")

Now, obviously I was not SAH material, and I can imagine (sort of) that the sheer joy of being home with a sweet kidlet or two might counteract some of the job stresses I listed. Plus you are probably much better at dealing with this stuff than I was. But it does make me wonder if we couldn't get a little more research on the stress levels of those who work at home caring for kids full time.

Taser Party: Like Tupperware Parties, But With More Voltage

Kelly Mills — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:01:00 GMT

Could this be an entrepreneurial opportunity for SAH parents? Only if you don't mind locking up the merchandise before Junior Tasers his sister over a breakfast cereal dispute. Truthfully, I have very conflicting feelings about the idea of Taser stun gun parties, which despite the press attention, so far just encompass one woman, Dana Shafman, selling Tasers Tupperware-party-style to women. Pro: I have this romantic affection for Tupperware parties, because I picture 1950's housewives getting to express secret business ambitions by pushing plastic containers on their neighbors. Con: The Tupperware party model was morphed into the strange sex toy party phenomenon, and much more heinously, the candle party. Eeek! No more pumpkin scented votives, please! Wow, I digress already.

Okay, con: When Amnesty International opposes your party, it's not a good sign. And we've all read at least one story about the overuse of Tasers, plus they've been implicated in deaths. Also, there's a danger in having any weapon that can be taken away from you, and I guess there's been reports of Tasers used in domestic violence. Um, but pro: I read Shafman's quote on why many women want pink Tasers. "'It's a girl power kind of thing,' Shafman says. 'You're kind of making a statement: I know I'm a woman. I know I'm the most sought after victim in regards to sexual assault, sexual abuse. So please stay away from me. If in the event you do come after me, I'm going to use my pink Taser to put you on the ground.'"

I will say this: That woman can sell. And like the sex toy party, I bet some of the popularity here is because it gives women a forum to express something they often feel it necessary to suppress--in this case, anger over being cast as a victim. Would you sell Tasers to your neighbors?