Stay at home moms...

[RoadDawg]

Are they worth as much as this story states? I'm not dogging the work that stay at home moms do but if you add in all the stuff that the working man provides for them... is the value the same? Just curious what others think on the situation?

Yahoo link

[gc82000]

This reminded me of a story about how Japanese women were getting a sitpend for staying home and taking care of their children. Since many moms in Japan take up small part time jobs it takes money away from younger workers that would have gotten to help develope skills for later jobs.

[Kai]

MILF'ED!!!!!!!!!!!

[gimp]

I think it's a load of crap. I'd get into it but I'll get all worked up over it. My Mom and I used to get into arguments over this kind of thing.

[MantisMag]

well i think the 100 hour work week is stretching it a bit. if they worked outside the home presumably they would still be acting as mothers when they got home. so i think 50 hours is more realistic. also i'd like to see what the breakdown for the jobs was how much time was allocated at each salary. you really can't just add them all together either since they'd be doing a lot of these jobs at the same time.

[Destructo6]

It's diffcult to compare an hourly office job to being a parent/housewife. A stay at home mom doesn't get hired or fired in the same way, nor is the job description the same across the board.

The comparison is just silly.

I'd want my wife to stay at home with the kid(s), mainly because I think it would be better for the kid(s).

[Southpaw]

The titles -- which reflected the most time-consuming parts of their day -- include day-care center teacher, van driver, housekeeper, cook, chief executive officer, nurse and general maintenance worker, the survey showed

Part of the problem is stay at home mothers are not CFO's or Nurses. I would bet that only a few mothers are actually qualified to do either of these jobs. I wonder how much a father would earn by being a carpenter, lawn care specilist, plumber, ect... the informal study is EXTREMILY INFORMAL to the point of sillyness

[SlartyBartFast]

The comparison is just silly.

QFT.

The "worth" of housework and/or staying at home with the kids is exactly half of all combined family earnings after family expenses. No more, no less.

To try put any other value on it is an exercise in logical gymnastics. For the state to subsidise personal choices (beyond supporting dependents) is stupidity.

What is "fair" in splitting work between partners when both work or when the mother (or father) stays at home and connot handle the workload in an 8-hr flexible shift day is highly subjective and only valid in a case-by-case analysis.

Regardless, a smart man knows to not argue or discuss anything about this topic with their wife or girlfriend or any female acquaintences. You'll never win and no matter what you say you'll be sleeping alone.

[SlartyBartFast]

You do have to give the article credit.

Mothers said you cannot attach a figure to the time spent with their kids.

"I'm giving 150 percent of myself to them many hours a day," said Debra Miley, who stays home with two-year old daughter Olivia and four-month old son Gregory. "You cannot attach a dollar value to the time that you spend nurturing your child if you're lucky enough to be a stay-at-home mom."

It ends realistically. The time you can spend focussed on your children IS priceless.

On a note to prove how rediculous the 100,000$ figure is. Tell any woman who demands that pay to get a job outside the home and pay someone else that amount to do the work. Then laydown the ultimatum that ALL driving, lawn care, plumbing, painting, and other dominantly male jobs will only be accomplihed by hiring proffesionals. Then ask them how exactly the family will make ends meet.

Perhaps the nannies and live-in maids that do this kind of work deserve more pay for what they do. But those that decide to a job for themselves do not.

[Lohman446]

Children, and in a world of "CHOICE" comes responsibility that cannot be denied. Like it or not, if children are a choice, which the law says they are, then you have decided to accept the responsibility. The theory on "what is it worth" is as illogical as saying to me that the time I spend playing paintball, or participating in it, talking about it, promoting it, should be paid based on Dynasty's salary. For one, I do it solely as a choice, for two - I am not a professional. You simply cannot compare what you do as a choice to what someone gets paid to do professionally.

[Hasty8]

well i think the 100 hour work week is stretching it a bit. if they worked outside the home presumably they would still be acting as mothers when they got home. so i think 50 hours is more realistic.

I would say that the 100 sounds about right as a median. There are 168 hours in a week. (24*7). In order to show that the 100 hour week fits you only need to account for apx 14 (14.2857142857143 actually) hours out of the day.

For my mother, her typical weekday broke out like this:
6-9am - get us kids up and to school. (3 hours)
10am-1pm - housework - cleaning, laundry, etc (3 hours)
2pm - 10pm - get us from school, after school programs, homework, baths, dinner, get us into be, clean the kitchen after dinner. (8 hours)

That's 70 hours in just 5 days. The weekends get pretty much worse with her dealing with us, the food shopping, more house cleaning, cooking, weekend activities, etc. We're talking up at 8am to 9pm so that's 13 hours each day so we are at 98 hours for the week so the 100 could definately work.

also i'd like to see what the breakdown for the jobs was how much time was allocated at each salary. you really can't just add them all together either since they'd be doing a lot of these jobs at the same time

Salary.com, which tracks what jobs pay, suggested that the annual base pay for a 40-hour stay-at-home mom's workweek would be $43,461. Mothers would earn an additional $88,009 a year for 60 hours of overtime each week.

$43,461 works out to $20.89 an hour (43,461/2080). 2080 equals 40 hours * 52 weeks.

Based on the fact that most mothers need to be very good at so many different skills (financial accounting, decision making, problem resolving, COOKING!!!) I would actually say this is a bit low.

Part of the problem is stay at home mothers are not CFO's or Nurses. I would bet that only a few mothers are actually qualified to do either of these jobs. I wonder how much a father would earn by being a carpenter, lawn care specilist, plumber, ect... the informal study is EXTREMILY INFORMAL to the point of sillyness

If you think that mom's do not fit these descriptions then I wonder what your mother was like. That's not an insult. It's an honest question. My mother was all those jobs listed and more. She was most certainly the CFO for the family as she was the one who balanced the checkbook and cut out the coupons. She was the nurse whenever my brother or I did something typically stupid. She was the chauffeur, cook, housekeeper. She most definately was the CEO of the family.

Now, taking that wide variety of job titles into consideration I can see where the $20/hr amount comes in. The CEO, CFO aspect of her work would definately up the average of the cook, chauffer, housekeeper, etc. positions.

As for how much the father would earn by being a carpenter, lawn care specialist, plumber, etc. not much with most families I know as my father can't swing a hammer to save his life, has probably smoked more grass than he ever cut and the extent of his plumbing skills is reduced to using the ice maker.

Again, this is my experience and is not to be taken as indicative of the general public.

[SlartyBartFast]

If you think that mom's do not fit these descriptions then I wonder what your mother was like. That's not an insult. It's an honest question. My mother was all those jobs listed and more.

Well, unlike your father, I'm quite good at fixing the plumbing and painting and cutting the lawn, etc.... There are bad mothers as well, so it's pointless putting either role down or stereotyping (either negatively or positively).

Some of the jobs I do I COULD get paid as a proffessional, although the ones for which I could qualify without training or documented experience would pay far lower than my current day job.

Some of the jobs many stay-at-home mothers do they COULD get paid as proffesionals. However, they wouldn't get paid enough to cover their employment expenses AND pay the proffesional they'd have to hire to replace them at home.

And while they do family fianances and fix minor wounds they ARE NOT CFOs or Registered Nurses any more than I'm a full carded Carpenter or Electrician.

Heck even the best of mothers wouldn't cut it as an average laundry worker. A proffessional launderer accomplishes far more in a shift than any amateur does (whether the mother, the father, or the children helping).

Also, these articles are infuriating because they are simplistic stereotypes. Good Fathers do as much as good mothers. And the slanted opinionated surveys that support the idea men don't contribute enough always miss out on most if not all male dominated roles in their calculations.

A good functional family does NOT necessarily divide all labour equally to be 'fair'. Complementary roles and skills can be equally as 'fair'. Men may not know what it is like to be pregnant or give birth. Equally few women know what it is like to support a pregnant woman and maintain your other responsibilities.

If a good family wouldn't hold together without the mother, it wouldn't hold together without the father either. Not without a drastic change in the role of the remaining parent.

[bornl33t]

that article was put together by some feminazi....of course its one sided and compleatly incorrect. Mom's rock. But this isn't helping their cause.

Freaking women... they can fight in combat but can't kill a spider.

[MantisMag]

hasty8 you missed the point of my post. if your mom had a job outside the home what would she do when she got home? she would still be doing the things she does now and not getting paid for it. therefore when calculating salaries we should not count that time. i only even bothered with 50 hours because of time she would've spent commuting is spent working because she lives at her "job".

[RoadDawg]

that article was put together by some feminazi....of course its one sided and compleatly incorrect. Mom's rock. But this isn't helping their cause.

Freaking women... they can fight in combat but can't kill a spider.

umm... it was a dude.

The importance of this calculation or this estimate is just calling attention to the fact that being a stay-at-home mom is not a cop out, it's not the woman's way out of the workforce and it's not a job of no value," said Bill Coleman, senior vice president of compensation at Salary.com

I'll agree that what stay at home moms do is tough work. It is however not worth as much as the article states. They may do small portions of the jobs listed but they in no way, no how, should they get paid the full amount that these jobs provide. It would be like myself saying I could make that much from all the "manly" items I do around my house. In many cases it's the man that is supporting the "stay at home mom." I found this rather amusing and rediculous. (I first heard about this on the Tom Leykis show)