Daycare vs SAHM and pt of diminishing return

[rodi]

I agree that there is no one size fits all. I was an older mom (39 when I had my first.)

Like your wife, I was not of the temperament to be a full time SAHM.... My compromise was to go part time (at first 3 days a week, then after a job change, 4 days a week.) I know myself and know that I don't have the patience to be a full time SAHM with preschool age children. DH also went part time to 4 days a week - so we only had a few days of daycare.

When I had my second child the financial aspect had to be considered... We looked at nannies, babysitters, and formal daycare... vs a full time stay at home parent. After a lot of analysis, considering the extras that come with nannies (vacation pay, payroll tax, sick days) we opted out of that pretty quickly as unaffordable. Daycare offered multiple caregivers so having to take off work if the provider was sick didn't happen. We found a great daycare center and befriended the teachers/caregivers... Using them for after hour babysitting for the monthly "date night" etc.

As an engineer it would have been much harder to take off work for a few years - I'd be obsolete after a few months. I saw that with folks we were interviewing... gaps of more than a few months was unacceptable. I was also the higher earner, so we did consider DH as a SAHD... but part time worked for both of us.

Now I'm retired... some would say I'm a sahm now. And that's ok - because a lot of my day is filled with kid stuff (driving them, nagging them, feeding the never ending bottomless pit that is teenage boys.) It's nice having the time with them now because the teen years are full of opportunities for bad choices. I know their friends and have the mental bandwidth to deal with hosting study parties at our house, etc.

 

[kgtest]

Got a call today from daycare one kids out with flu. SO it begins, I forgot about needing to take time off when kid is sick, in between taking time off for all of the holidays and Time Off the daycare provider has. Provider gets 35 days a year overall and very tight hours.

Thankfully DW works from home but does travel regionally in the sedan so it is ALMOST like being part time sometimes but then being in social svc she gets occasional after hours call or work, whereas me as an engineer I hang it up after work and switch to dad. I can work from home but its not always a no strings attached, officemates like to make up their own rules on how that one should work. I for one have a hard time at home when kids are there, or DW is there, or if the pantry is there lmao.

One of DW career question marks has always been, "what next?" whereas I totally drive and own my engineering destiny and have always taken huge risks in hindsight . Honestly partly due to the forum I understand opportunity doesn't come to your door you need to go to it.

DW works with those with needs, disabled, mentally or physically different and has been involved at all levels from PCA, to group home director to regional program manager etc but there is a glass ceiling and lack of funding in her area. I know the local school district has the 15% levy renewal coming up on the ballot and perhaps that's the ticket If ya can't beat em, join em??

 

[Katsmeow]

I was never a SAHM and wasn't really suited for it. However, I did for a few years work reduced hours. I was able to do that with my existing employer and I saw others do that as well.

Doing it for awhile might work for your DW. But, if might indeed drive her nuts. I've also known some moms who worked part-time and had the kids in day care part-time or started part-time work once all kids were at least in pre-school.

One reason though that I am not a big fan of one parent being the stay at home parent exclusively is that that parent can end up in a bad situation if the working parent drops dead (or becomes disabled or if a divorce occurs).

My mom worked full-time my entire childhood, not unusual now but it was unusual at the time as I was born in the 1950s. I asked her once why she did something that was so non-typical for women of her generation. Basically, it was safety. She did not want to put 100% of her financial security on a man. She had a good marriage but just philosophically didn't want to be that dependent in case anything every did happen.

 

[Sue J]

For us, me being a SAHM was wonderful. Absolutely the best choice and I'm glad we did it that way.

But many of you are correct in how it impacts your retirement. I was out of the working world for 22 years. I didn't have enough Social Security credits to get any benefit. At age 51 I took a part time job to complete my credits. I happen to really enjoy it so I still continue to do it, so that worked out well.

DH's pension was reduced so that I would have 100% as a survivor. It will be plenty for me because we have a low cost of living. At his retirement I was included in his retiree health insurance at a very reasonable cost. I even had a small subsidy. That all changed in 2013, the spouse subsidy was reduced and now it's gone. Spouses can enroll and pay full cost, this year that's $1160/mo. Yeah, that's not happening.

So while I'm glad I was a SAHM we did not consider the long term impact. DH always had life insurance and I would have had survivor benefits from his pension plan. I would have been able to support the family but being out of my career field (accounting) for so long would have put me far behind younger workers.

My SS benefits are small, my IRAs are miniature compared to what they would have been if I had worked all those years.