See, this is what gets me. You've placed "sustaining the same lifestyle" over what you admit you would otherwise do. If you admit that you'd stay at home given no financial changes then you admit:

1. You think it's better to stay home with them.
2. You don't because it would cost you money.

That's just sad IMO.

Over the last almost 6 years my wife and I have easily "lost" $400k in income due to her not working and my not being willing to travel. You know what, though? I'm not sitting here missing a single penny of that. My wife was there with every first that my kids ever did and if I wasn't there at the time I was there that night. There's no amount of money you could give me to take those memories away.

:shrug:

It's not an "argument", it's what certain people choose to do. What is good for us may not be good for you. Your personal anecdotes are also not indicative of any sort of "norm", either. You can't tout them as the absolute truth.

Every response has been "typical" so far, especially yours. This is obviously an issue that creates strong feelings on one side or the other, and those feelings are illustrated in the comments.

To your second point, for all intents and purposes, a woman's career is certainly hurt by taking a few years off. While she is taking care of her kids, her competitors continue to work, gain experience, and rise up the corporate ladder. If you want to stay in fantasyland and pretend that doesn't matter, go for it, but i'm not going to play along.

One of the keys we look for, aside from the place being affilliated with a church is the ratio of kids to teachers. The place we have our kids is 4:1 for all classes.

My son (5) is in a class with 7 kids and there are 2 teachers. My daughter (3) is in a class with 8 kids and 2 teachers. My youngest (9 months) just started going 2 days a week for 5 hours a day and there are 5 kids with 2 teachers and a floating assistant that works 3 rooms.

My wife and I both work from home and the only reason our youngest goes for 2 days is because it gives my wife 2 days with no kids for 5 hours in order to get a bulk of what she does in order.

It's all about what works best for you.

We also have funds set aside for the kids when they reach college age and much like the trust we have set up in case something happens to one or both of us, they're not getting the keys to the accounts at 18.

I don't think kids at that age have the mental ability to manage funds like that if left to their own discretion.

The funds are for college and should they decide not to go that route, then we'll use it to help them in whatever they do, but they're not getting the chance to blow that money by the age of 20. I recall how I was at 18.

Do you have children? If so are they in day care?

I agree the term "normal" is relative and all, but there are scientific answers to the "infants need touch/love" aurgument and that's what I hear from Simplex more than anything else.

the choice of maintaining a lifestyle over spending some quality time with the kids needs to be balanced and can not be one sided to either directions, IMO. You'll loose that battle, because either you did not love the kid enough or you didn't make enough money for him/her to do what all the other kids are doing. Try the word "balance" in making these big decisions it will work.

All things being equal - YES, I would rather stay at home with them. I will not say it is better because I, and you, simply do not know. Many studies have been done and it's all inconclusive. There is the "socialization" argument for daycare, and there is the "attention" argument for keeping them at home. I realize there are ways to get both in, and that is probably the best solution, but again, that is opinion, and I don't think anyone can say factually that one is better than the other.

I'm 25 and my wife is 23. We are doing pretty well financially but if we had children that would end pretty quickly. Personally, I would like to put my child through college and have enough left over for retirement. Given our current incomes, that would not be possible if my wife stayed home w/ our child(ren)..which we don't have ;)

So, what is it? Stay home with my child and possibly rob them of the opportunity of a higher education, and extend my career another 10+ years, or send them to daycare 30-40 hours a week and get all those things? Getting both, at this point, is not an option. Hopefully by the time I am ready to have children (which may be never..who knows?), I can do both.

You're completely missing the point. What you state is fact. Her "rivals" are still working and moving up that almighty corporate ladder.

The problem with your position is we don't care. That's not nearly as important to us as our kids. So, when I tell you that doesn't matter to my wife and I it's not some fantasyland, it's fact.

I sure as hell didn't have a financial grasp w/ that kind of money at the age of 18. I wish my parents would NOT have left me take that money. I blew it all on a car that I "had to have".

BALANCE!!!!!


:p

Alot of stay at home moms go on and have successful careers after child-rearing, it is not uncommon. The need for workers is large enough at this juncture that it is not really an issue IMO.

Besides, homemakers do more than "change diapers" all day.

That's great that you don't care, but this entire discussion is not centered around you, nor was my prior comment even directed at you.

So you haven't seen the little buggers lying there without their eyes open, holding onto your finger yet. As my dad told me: "The axis of the Earth is about to shift."

:)

My wife was absolutely sure that she was going back to work. No doubt about it. Career: full steam ahead. I was winding down a contract after my first was born and wouldn't be done for a week or two after my wife went back from maternity leave, so my mom was staying home with my daughter until I could get freed up. Mid-way through the first day of being back at work my wife calls me in tears "do you think I could just stay home instead of working?".

It's much easier to do than it sounds. Just don't spend more than one of you makes. Get a reasonable house and two reasonable cars. Take everything the other spouse makes and invest it. Then have kids. You won't miss the income from the second spouse. Also, you'd be appalled at how much you save having one of you at home, not buying work clothes, not eating lunch out, not having dinner out all the time, etc.

You still haven't answered if you even have a dog in this fight or if you're just blowing smoke out of your ass.

Those on the stay home wagon, seem to think it's the end of work, ever. I'm sure it could be different from case to case, but I'm of the opinion to stay home with my new kid (because the wife makes more than me and isn't as genetically / spiritually inclined to stay at home) for about three to five years. Then it's back to work and still able to give all kinds of love to my kid.

The other ones already have the burden of being from a divorced family so there is so many other challenges to try and overcome for them....