A Guy’s Take on Stay at Home Moms and Dads (Part 1: The Cons)

re: A Guy’s Take on Stay at Home Moms and Dads (Part 1: The Cons)

Mike Adamick (Cry It Out!) — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 16:47:37 GMT

Great post! I can totally see the million dollars easy, what with salary, bennies and deflated 401k contributions and gains. And the boring, yikes. Have you ever played chutes and ladders 57 times in a row? I like your take on identity -- it's so much more than just what we do for work.

re: A Guy’s Take on Stay at Home Moms and Dads (Part 1: The Cons)

gpgirl — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 23:46:31 GMT

Great post. We went through all of these questions before I decided to stay home with our son. For me, it is a great decision, but I do understand the costs.

One thing is that I really did not enjoy the job I had at the time I had my baby, so it was easy to leave. I was in a fairly high position, so in that sense it was difficult because of the loss of a high income. However, I was expected to work long hours and be available at all times. With the hours I was working, I would literally never see my son during the week. (He would wake up after I would have to leave and would go to bed before I came home.) That was just too much for me.

If I wanted to take a lower position with fewer hours, that was not allowed either. In the end, this is probably good for me, because when I go back into the workforce I'll be able to take a position that requires fewer hours, even if it pays less, and that will be OK with me. (I am totally one of those people who were ready to leave the rat race!)

I should mention that I was in my late 30's when I had my son, so I felt like I already accomplished a lot when I quit. If I was younger, I might have felt that I was missing out on something. This is just the case for me, I know everyone is different.

Also, I totally believe the loss of $1 million. It is not just the money you are not making while staying at home, but the potential earnings lost by being out of the workforce, and then coming back to a lower paying job.

re: A Guy’s Take on Stay at Home Moms and Dads (Part 1: The Cons)

Cole Gamble — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:58:19 GMT

maybe you could sell the bread.

re: A Guy’s Take on Stay at Home Moms and Dads (Part 1: The Cons)

Sukey — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:26:44 GMT

A good read on this topic is The Price of Motherhood by Ann Crittenden, a former New York Times reporter and a Pulitzer Prize nominee. The economic sacrifice, or what she calls the "Mommy Tax", is stunning. However grossly unfair, baking bread just doesn't bring home the bacon.

re: A Guy’s Take on Stay at Home Moms and Dads (Part 1: The Cons)

another_mom — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:02:35 GMT

If you're not talking about spending, it's very easy to lose a million dollars in salary (before taxes, at least). Some simple math: a woman stops working at age 30 when she is making $45,000 a year. Multiply that by 30 years (assuming she retires at age 60), and you have $1.35 million. That doesn't even include pension, benefits, or any pay raises.

re: A Guy’s Take on Stay at Home Moms and Dads (Part 1: The Cons)

Cole Gamble — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:10:13 GMT

I know, a million dollars sounds astronomical but that is the figure the study came up with.

re: A Guy’s Take on Stay at Home Moms and Dads (Part 1: The Cons)

Knitty — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 17:23:08 GMT

I sincerely doubt that most mothers who stay home with their kids are forfeiting 1M dollars. I mean, get real! Unless your job is something very lucrative, you're probably not making all that much during the years before your child goes to school if you take into account daycare (especially for multiple children), meals purchased out, gas to get to the job, professional clothing needed, etc. A parent who stays home to care for the children but also cooks from scratch, bakes bread, gardens, etc. can actually save his/her family a tremendous amount of money. Additionally, most parents who stay home while the kids are little return once they're older... so once again, no way are they forfeiting a million bucks.