The context here is marriage, divorce, alimony, contract negotiations. It is adversarial. We’re talking real money here and women has a strong advocate in CAr.
Where’s the brotherhood of men speaking out for our interests?
At least 6paxk said that alimony should be limited and temporary. The non-working spouse needs to adapt to a lower standard of living after divorce, if necessary.
CAr, if you say that women have this yearning and joy from being sahp, then they would do the job no matter what the pay. Why should the employer pay more than market rate? Artists for example work for very little pay because they love what they do. Some make good money, but most don’t. Yet they are still happy.[/quote]
Um, I’m going to take the advocate comment as a compliment, thank you. 🙂 But it looks to me like I’m the only one advocating for caretakers and homemakers, at least to the extent that I am (not just women…please stop twisting my message). Most (all?) of the other posters here are primarily advocating in favor of the wage earner, with some more neutral exceptions; at least, that’s how I’m reading it.
And as for this “joy” you speak of and how it should affect compensation, what about actors, athletes, CEOs and other very wealthy people? Are they not doing exactly what they love? Should they work for free, as well?
BTW, those starving artists are usually doing it in the hopes that they will make it big someday. That, or they do it strictly for themselves. Caretaking is a selfless task; it is not self-indulgent. You keep thinking that it’s like having a vacation day when you’re single/childless. It’s not at all the same; it’s not similar in any way.
And the “market rate” for what a woman does is extremely expensive.
[quote=CA renter][quote=6packscaredy]No one really needs to be a multi decade SAHM.[/quote]
Many SAHMs end up caring not only for their own children, but for their grandchildren and parents/in-laws.
Just because people are willing to do it for “free” (with the expectation that they will not be left destitute and abandoned in later years), doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have both social and economic value. Try hiring a full-time nanny (responsible for everything from transportation to school/classes/activities, to doctors’ appts., to caring when children are ill, to homework assistance/teaching, etc.), housekeeper, accountant (many SAHPs manage the finances and investments), personal shopper, and on and on…see how much you’ll spend.
Just for a frame of reference, in our neighborhood, a teenaged kid with no experience and who doesn’t even clean after the kids (or do anything else listed above) will make $15/hr. for three kids. That’s the going rate around here for everyone we’ve talked to.[/quote]
Trust me, most spouses aren’t paying anywhere near “market rate” for the work their SAH spouses are doing. That’s where the deferred compensation argument comes in. Women will do all kinds of things “for free” out of a sense of social responsibility and the desire to do what’s right for her family. (Not talking Mommy Wars here; for some women, working outside the home is what’s right for them and their families, as we’re all different and bring different strengths and gifts to our own families…I’m referring to the SAHPs for the sake of this argument). But they are doing it because of the implicit and explicit understanding (see most marriage vows) that the marriage, and economic and social benefits that result from the marriage, will last for life.
———-
Again, regarding that euphoric joy you seem to think most SAHPs feel:
[quote=CA renter]
In addition to that, for those who enjoyed a career before having children and who’ve spent years getting an education and working their way up the corporate/professional ladder — with all the social status, accolades, and self-identity that go along with it — it can be incredibly difficult to suddenly become a servant (for free, and often working harder than you ever did in your professional life!) without an identity of your own. You become so-and-so’s wife or mother (and don’t even get to keep your own name, in most cases). And then, you get to hear all the ignoramuses out there saying, “Oh, you don’t work.” It can be very frustrating, demoralizing, and depressing. I think this is where a lot of the “complaining” and talk of sacrifices comes from. Many SAHPS make very real sacrifices in order to do what they feel is the right thing for their families, and they are giving up a HUGE piece of themselves in the process.
[/quote]
And this…
[quote=CA renter][quote=Blogstar][quote=6packscaredy][quote=CA renter][quote=6packscaredy]Stay at home dad’s give up their most study handsome years?[/quote]
No, but they do give up major income earning potential when they are SAHDs.[/quote]
Not speculative at all. It’s very well documented.
Not only has the SAHP put the breaks on the career trajectory (usually during the most important years), but staying out of the workforce for even a few years will affect things like vesting for retirement or other benefits, service credit for retirement (for jobs with defined benefits), continuing education/licensing requirements, career experience, outdated knowledge when re-entering the paid workforce, etc. In the vast majority of cases, it will PERMANENTLY affect the SAHP’s income earning potential.[/quote]
Also want to mention that many SAHPs follow their spouses around the country/globe in order for that spouse to pursue career goals. This means that the SAHP often has to give up friendships and familial relationships (which can lighten the caretaking role a great deal) in order to allow the spouse to fulfill his/her career goals. This is a sacrifice that is not accounted for, socially or legally, but it’s a HUGE deal for many SAHPs.
