[quote=CA renter][quote=UCGal][quote=CA renter][quote=Blogstar]It appears that the consensus it that it is worth 30k or less. More for prima donna stay at home parents.[/quote]
Try to find someone who will take care of your kids seven days a week, and take care of your house, pay bills, manage all of your family’s business, etc. for $30K/year. You can’t even get a teenaged babysitter to work just 40 hours/week for that money…and that’s just for keeping an eye on the kids. Good luck with that, whiner.[/quote]
CAR – again you suggest that working parents don’t do any parenting on weekends and evenings. I am largely sympathetic to your POV until you pull that crap.
If you are promoting the value added to the family of the choice to be a stay at home parent you need to compare it for the hours you would be at work. NOT 24×7.
As someone who worked – I was a full time parent from when I walked in the door in the evening, till I left in the morning, and 3 days of the weekend 24×3. (For non part timers it would be 24×2.) I managed to juggle sleepless nights because I was breast feeding – and even toted the breast pump to work for two kids… one didn’t wean till 18 months… Which meant I had a baby literally glued onto me from when I walked in the door… That time COUNTS as parenting. Yet you claim that only SAHPs get credit for after work hours parenting.
And I managed to take care of the house, pay the bills, and take care of all of the family business – including dealing with renters, etc.
Lets stick to a 45 hour week comparison. (To allow commute time and a quick lunch.) Even parents that work outside the home manage to parent their kids and pay bills during their non-work hours. Some even clean, do laundry, grocery shop, and invest during their non-work hours.[/quote]
I’ve NEVER claimed that wage-earning parents don’t have any parenting responsibilities. I have no idea why you keep suggesting this. There is a value for what they do, just as a SAHP’s work has value. If the SAHP’s contribution is $15/hour for domestic work, the contribution of the wage-earner’s domestic work is also worth $15/hour.
And, as noted in the quote you’ve used, above, and in my post to scaredy, I’m not telling people to price this labor at 24 hours, 365 days/year.
Even hiring a teenaged babysitter (not nearly as qualified as many SAHPs, nor someone who will accomplish much outside of simply keeping an eye on the kids), it would cost over $30K/year if they make $15/hour (the going rate for a teenager to watch three kids in our neighborhood…one who does NOTHING else). That person would not be available on call (as a SAHP is if there is an emergency, or when the other spouse has to travel or be away for work), would not be taking kids to all of their activities and appointments, helping with all of their schoolwork, doing the laundry and cleaning, shopping, etc. If you were to find someone who would do all of these things for $15/hour, it’s highly unlikely they would stick around for more than a few months, if that.
Like I’ve said, a SAHP will do it for “free” with the understanding that they will have financial security in exchange for these services. If you were to inform them that they would be abandoned whenever the wage-earning spouse got tired of them, or when s/he didn’t need their services anymore, it’s highly unlikely that any of them would continue working under these conditions.
And if the wage earning parent(s) are gone from the house and children, somebody else is taking care of those things — these services are being outsourced. Even if a grandparent is willing to do it for free, there is an opportunity cost involved on their part. This work is never “free,” as somebody is always going to have to pay or sacrifice something in order to get it done.[/quote]
UCGal, there are some issues that I think you’re not taking into consideration, too.
Let’s take your personal situation. Both you and your husband had higher-paying jobs, relatively speaking. This enabled you both to cut back your hours so you could do more of the domestic work, but it wasn’t “free.” There is an opportunity cost that you don’t seem to be taking into consideration — the difference between what you made as PT employees, and what you could have made if you had continued working FT. There’s also the possibility that you both could have gotten further ahead in the long run if you were to have continued FT instead of taking that time off — in some industries/companies that would have been the case as they might have seen you as less driven, or less motivated, than your peers. That opportunity cost is real money.
There are parents who make far less than your family who also try to spend as much time as possible taking care of their families. I’ve known parents who fully staggered their shifts in order to do this. They would not have been able to drop back to PT, and outsourcing this work (especially childcare) was totally unfeasible, as noted in my “negative earnings” posts, which is why they staggered their shifts (one night shift, one day shift…or opposing days). But there was still a cost; there was essentially NO couples time and very, little/no time when they could do things as a family. I’m sure that if they could have afforded it, they would have gladly outsourced their work and/or had someone be a full-time SAHP…but there was no way to do this, because the numbers simply wouldn’t work. But “not being able to afford it” is not the same as something having little/no value. If a person can’t afford a new car, that doesn’t mean that the car has no value. Just because some families are not able/willing to outsource certain services, that does not make these services any less valuable.
Hope that makes sense.
——-
Also want to make clear on my post above about the cost of a babysitter who simply keeps an eye on the kids and will *maybe* clean up after their own mess, that is for ONLY 40 hours/week. For only that, you will pay over $30K/year.
