Anne Romney Hasn't Worked A Day in Her Life

[Warren Dew]

His response to that scenario was:

I'd like to know what we're supposed to conclude from it. That an employed wife should write checks to her stay at home husband like he's hired help, because he has it so bad at home?

No, that wasn't his response to your scenario. Rather, that was part of his response to my comment on his scenario. The question was addressed to me; it can be read as a general question, since he also referenced your scenario without quoting from it, but it can't really be read as a specific response to you.

I explained that that was not what I was getting at at all. What I was getting at is precisely what I described above.

If it wasn't what you were getting at - unsurprising since it wasn't directly addressed to you - can I suggest it would be better not to quote it at all? That would avoid the implication, especially when you use short quotes as with Coito's style, that the subject of the quote is what you're talking about. I think it's things like that that result in colubridae and others finding your posts in this thread confused or confusing.

In fact, I'd already stated that I wasn't in favor of an hourly wage-- went to some effort to describe my thoughts on the subject, ideas I'd encountered from Suze Orman and so forth. I said I didn't know what should be done, but I could see a lot of problems that need addressing.

Apparently, "I don't know; let's talk about it" isn't an acceptable answer in a discussion with Coito, because he came back with this:

So, if I may get an answer to a question of mine, since I've answered all yours -- what is your position on wages for stay at home spouses? Yes? No? And, if yes, who pays? Would you mandate it by law? Or, would you leave it up to the spouses involved? Why? Why not?

I guess I'll re-iterate: I don't know.

Coito is asking a pretty straightforward question here: he's asking for a yes or no answer to the question of whether there should be formal wages paid to a nonworking spouse, and for an accompanying explanation.

I was under the impression that you'd already answered "no" to that question, as you seem to reiterate at the beginning of the quote here. However, now you say "I don't know" - basically, a "maybe" - in what you describe as a reiteration, at the end. So now your position seems very confusing as to whether it's a "no" or a "maybe", and I'm left thinking Coito may have been correct in thinking you hadn't really answered it yet.

I'm not saying you should answer it, mind. I'm just pointing out how people might think that you had answered it in several different ways, and interpreted that as obfuscatory.

I wonder what he does, talking to people in real life, when he can't roll the text back to get the bit he wants.

People rarely say more than a sentence or two at a time in face to face conversation. In conversation, Coito would likely get a turn to speak after one Coito quote's worth of the other person talking, so his style of response would be very natural.

[hadespussercats]

Warren, I tend to think you're the one who should get a trophy for dispassionate, rational argument.

I always enjoy your contributions to the threads you join.

As for Coito's style of response being natural (or not)--
sometimes the breakdown is effective. A rhetorical "Take that! and that! and that!"

But sometimes he doesn't look at the full picture before he begins a breakdown, and his ends forget his beginnings.

I'm sounding more irate here than I feel (I think.)
There are aspects of the stay-at-home parent situation that warrant earnest discussion.
I was hoping for something more open, less guarded, less "Of course I would piss excellence at staying at home with my kids, what do you think?" and more "Wow, what would I really feel like, dealing with x, y, and z, and does that inform my thinking about social policy?"

I think the vibe in this thread might have just been too hostile/guarded to talk that way, especially since coito tends to be very reserved when it comes to talking about actual family life (which is part of the reason I created the hypothetical scenario in the first place-- so he wouldn't need to discuss his real life. The other was that I really did want to create a scenario where being a SAHF would be a more than full time job.)

The other aspect that I've realized might have added to the confusion is that not everyone is as comfortable in a "Let's play pretend, what if" sort of situation. I've worked creatively my whole life and can put myself in foreign situations with ease-- so much so that I forget that kind of imagination doesn't come easily for everyone.

To Coito-- I hope you know I don't harbor actual hard feelings from any of this discussion.

[Ronja]

Colubridae: are you saying that because I am a mod, I should not be allowed to express negative feelings/reactions about a non-moderator's posting style - even if those feelings/reactions are perfectly true? Are you saying that the rules should be different for staff than for non-staff members?

Also: how do you feel about this exchange between Coito and hades? In your opinion, did hades call Coito names (as he claimed in a later post)? Was Coito's response to hades approriate?

I wrote my little imaginary scenario because I think your image of your typical day at home with two small children is funny. Laughably naive, and sort of sweet.

Well, I find that insulting, and if we're going that route, then I find your story miserable, a tale of woe from someone who hates being a parent, because they see the day-to-day life with their children as a horror-story. The person you describe is nearing a breaking point, unable to organize the simplest things, like a bag to go out to the store with wipes and diapers and other necessaries. The person you describe can't seem to manage taking care of the twins and cleaning the house and buying groceries, so, it sounds like social services might be in order. Your "typical day" at home sounds like an unending misery, a hell on Earth. If my view of a typical day of parenting is different than yours, then I'm glad of it.

[Warren Dew]

As for Coito's style of response being natural (or not)--
sometimes the breakdown is effective. A rhetorical "Take that! and that! and that!"

I don't see it as a tactic for winning arguments; I think Coito is just trying to make sure he addresses all the points the other poster brings up. Coito seems to like tying up every single loose end.

I agree that he sometimes seems to get lost in the trees, and forgets about the forest.

I'm sounding more irate here than I feel (I think.)
There are aspects of the stay-at-home parent situation that warrant earnest discussion.
I was hoping for something more open, less guarded, less "Of course I would piss excellence at staying at home with my kids, what do you think?" and more "Wow, what would I really feel like, dealing with x, y, and z, and does that inform my thinking about social policy?"

You don't sound irate to me at all, perhaps because I think I get where you are coming from: you seem to be interested in exploring the topic, not in winning arguments.

For my part, I haven't picked up on that discussion partly because I'm not sure where to begin, but mostly because I'm not thrilled with prolonging a thread whose title insults someone I see as a pretty admirable person.

[Warren Dew]

For my part, I haven't picked up on that discussion partly because I'm not sure where to begin, but mostly because I'm not thrilled with prolonging a thread whose title insults someone I see as a pretty admirable person.

Speaking of which, here's a video made by the Romney boys for Anne:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfL4vnqV ... ure=colike[/youtube]

[kiki5711]

For my part, I haven't picked up on that discussion partly because I'm not sure where to begin, but mostly because I'm not thrilled with prolonging a thread whose title insults someone I see as a pretty admirable person.

Speaking of which, here's a video made by the Romney boys for Anne:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfL4vnqV ... ure=colike[/youtube]

Oh God please gag me before I throw up.

[Coito ergo sum]

Warren, I tend to think you're the one who should get a trophy for dispassionate, rational argument.

I always enjoy your contributions to the threads you join.

As for Coito's style of response being natural (or not)--
sometimes the breakdown is effective. A rhetorical "Take that! and that! and that!"

But sometimes he doesn't look at the full picture before he begins a breakdown, and his ends forget his beginnings.

Well, the thing is, my intent is to address discreet points. If I don't carve out the discreet point and address it, but instead wait until the end of the entire post, then I have to keep saying stuff like "As to you point that....[reiterate the part I'm responding to]...I agree or disagree and here's why...." If I just take the bit above and answer it below it, then the two positions can be easily compared. I don't know why people object to that, since I normally address all points without deleting portions of the other person's quote. So, no text is generally lost, and therefore if I've taken anything out of context, that would be immediately apparent.

I don't do what you did to my post, which is to take one sentence and say "this was what you argued..." when actually the point was a bit more fleshed out.

I try to look at the full picture. But, sometimes people use this "full picture" line to infuse a lack of clarity, so that they can have it both ways in their argument. In the end, my posting style (which isn't just my posting style - many others do this too) is designed to increase clarity and focus, so that both sides of a discussion can be seen together. It seems to me to allow for longer and more in depth discussions on a topic, whereas if everyone just posts long multi-paragraph posts not focused to the points to which they were responding, points get lost and the conversation veers off or peters out more easily.

I'm sounding more irate here than I feel (I think.)
There are aspects of the stay-at-home parent situation that warrant earnest discussion.

Which is what we are doing.

I was hoping for something more open, less guarded, less "Of course I would piss excellence at staying at home with my kids, what do you think?" and more "Wow, what would I really feel like, dealing with x, y, and z, and does that inform my thinking about social policy?"

That isn't, of course, what you asked me when you earnestly wanted my opinion of what I would do in my life if your hypothetical applied to me and my family. I answered your question precisely, and in detail, and at no time did I claim to piss excellence (that's a funny quote from the movie Talladega Nights, by the way, and not a claim to superiority) in relation to staying at home. It was my answer as to what I would do and/or strive to do in that role. I never claimed there wouldn't be bad days. And, I wasn't being guarded at all.

Also, you didn't offer your view of what YOU really feel like, dealing with x, y and z, and you didn't expound on whether that informed your thinking about social policy.

But, since you ask, what would I feel like dealing with twins. I'd feel great most of the time, working hard, raising kids that I love, as I do now. Many days my hair would be on fire. Many days I would feel down and overworked, and stressed, as I do now. I would worry if I was doing a good job raising them, as I do now. I would, like any parent, feel nervous and concerned if they were sick. I would worry about being able to provide for them adequately, ultimately send them to college, etc. Raising children well is a difficult task, and one that takes a lot of hard work. I would have to say that my entire being and all my experiences inform my thinking about social policy. That's a very broad statement and all my feelings and thoughts about life, family, work, economics, politics, war, peace, charity, and love inform my thinking about social policy. That's correct. But, that doesn't really help address any actual issues, since the Devil will be in the details -- which social policy are you referring to? What should the social policy be? (regarding the issue of payment of wages by a wage earner spouse to a stay at home spouse, my life experiences, and my thoughts on how I would deal with the hypothetical you suggested lead me inexorably to the conclusion that no public policy requiring such payments is either feasible, or desirable, for the reasons I've already given).

Warren's summation above about my confusion relative to your position is more or less accurate. At first I didn't see your position stated, then you stated it, but it seemed you included hedge words like "not NECESSARILY in favor of it..." and then you said you weren't in favor of it, and then you said you didn't know. So, I wasn't getting a clear yes or no or maybe/not sure. I was just trying to get your view on it.

I think the vibe in this thread might have just been too hostile/guarded to talk that way, especially since coito tends to be very reserved when it comes to talking about actual family life (which is part of the reason I created the hypothetical scenario in the first place-- so he wouldn't need to discuss his real life. The other was that I really did want to create a scenario where being a SAHF would be a more than full time job.)

Well, I think you're mistaking my tendency to focus on a precise answer to a specific question for "guardedness." If you read your question posed to me with the hypothetical, I fail to see how I did not answer it completely and fully. I think the problem is, you didn't like my answer. Which is fine, and you can disagree with whether my answer is feasible or typical, etc. But, it can't be "wrong" in this instance, because you asked me for what I would do and you wanted my position on my life under those circumstances, irrespective of what usual, or normal or typical for everyone else. In fact, you chastised me a few posts earlier for referring to spouses in general, rather than my own personal experience.

The other aspect that I've realized might have added to the confusion is that not everyone is as comfortable in a "Let's play pretend, what if" sort of situation. I've worked creatively my whole life and can put myself in foreign situations with ease-- so much so that I forget that kind of imagination doesn't come easily for everyone.

To Coito-- I hope you know I don't harbor actual hard feelings from any of this discussion.

That is pretty darn insulting, hades, if you're referring to me there, although you may not have meant it that way given your last sentence. I don't harbor any hard feelings either. Quite the opposite.

I am, however, plenty comfortable with hypotheticals and let's pretend scenarios. You posed one, and asked what I would do in that scenario. I told you. Apparently, you don't believe me, and you prefer to think that some other imagined scenario is more likely the case. Fair enough, but because your answer to the hypothetical you posed would be different than mine doesn't mean you're better at imagining scenarios than me.

[Coito ergo sum]

Colubridae: are you saying that because I am a mod, I should not be allowed to express negative feelings/reactions about a non-moderator's posting style - even if those feelings/reactions are perfectly true? Are you saying that the rules should be different for staff than for non-staff members?

Also: how do you feel about this exchange between Coito and hades? In your opinion, did hades call Coito names (as he claimed in a later post)? Was Coito's response to hades approriate?

I wrote my little imaginary scenario because I think your image of your typical day at home with two small children is funny. Laughably naive, and sort of sweet.

Well, I find that insulting, and if we're going that route, then I find your story miserable, a tale of woe from someone who hates being a parent, because they see the day-to-day life with their children as a horror-story. The person you describe is nearing a breaking point, unable to organize the simplest things, like a bag to go out to the store with wipes and diapers and other necessaries. The person you describe can't seem to manage taking care of the twins and cleaning the house and buying groceries, so, it sounds like social services might be in order. Your "typical day" at home sounds like an unending misery, a hell on Earth. If my view of a typical day of parenting is different than yours, then I'm glad of it.

How is my response any less appropriate than Hades' description of my answer to her hypothetical. It's appropriate for her to call me "laughably naive" and my description "funny" and (obviously with a bit of snark) "sort of sweet." I do find that insulting. Since those are my feelings about her post, don't I have the right to tell her that? After all you claimed that right yourself. And, I gave my assessment of her answer to her hypothetical, just as she assessed mine. Is hers appropriate, and mine not?

[Coito ergo sum]

For my part, I haven't picked up on that discussion partly because I'm not sure where to begin, but mostly because I'm not thrilled with prolonging a thread whose title insults someone I see as a pretty admirable person.

Speaking of which, here's a video made by the Romney boys for Anne:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfL4vnqV ... ure=colike[/youtube]

Oh God please gag me before I throw up.

I only watched it because of your comment on it. I'm puzzled by your reaction. What was so nauseating about the video?

[Hermit]

What was so nauseating about the video?

Apart from the music overlay and the concluding splashscreen that seems to indicate that the entire production is part of the election campaign I saw nothing wrong either.

[hadespussercats]

Okay, Coito. You've seen snark where I meant it (the "laughably naive" remark) and snark where I didn't (Not everyone is comfortable in situations that stray too far into the imaginary, and some people prefer to work from concrete experience. Wondering if you might be someone who prefers to build his castles on the ground, as it were, wasn't meant to be an insult.)

As for this:

Also, you didn't offer your view of what YOU really feel like, dealing with x, y and z, and you didn't expound on whether that informed your thinking about social policy.

You might mean the hypothetical situation I posed, with the premature twins. But maybe you mean, how do I really feel, being a SAHM?

I'll go ahead and answer the latter, because the former doesn't seem to be getting this conversation anywhere helpful.

I've wanted to have a child (possibly children, but the jury's still out) since I was a child myself. I've always pictured staying home with my children, when that day came. Towards that end, I babysat, taught vacation Bible school (!), worked as a counselor at various theatre and art daycamps, performed and worked in children's theatre... etc., etc. I did a lot to prepare. I read a lot, too-- about 6 or 7 years ago I started reading what most people call mommyblogs (though that term's generally a pejorative), which was my entree into making friends online (which eventually lead to forums like this one. And, as I mentioned, is where I got most of the material for my hypothetical scenario.)

So, I really wanted to do this. Which makes my experience of it different from someone who ends up doing it, out of circumstances, and maybe resents the lifestyle.

Even so, I was well aware that even people who always dreamed of being parents, maybe went through extensive fertility heartache, even (not an issue for us, thankfully), can be shocked, knocked off their feet, by how tiring and lonely parenthood can be, how the marriage can change, how their bodies are different, how they miss their work, their old sense of self, how all these things can make them resent their new situation in life, maybe even resent their kids... I worried about that. A lot.

I worried about it particularly because this post-partum scenario carried particularly nasty risks for me and my family, because of my health issues (I wrote about this in a thread called "An informal poll", if you want to read about it. I won't re-iterate here.)

Because of that, my husband and I did a lot of work between us to lessen those risks. He took several weeks off work when Sprog was born, and after that worked from home until a few months ago. And he's always taken care of night feedings, because it's dangerous for me to get sleep-deprived.

I take care of Sprog the rest of the time. And I love it. I mean, if you can't tell, I love being with my little boy. I think he's funny (already!) and adorable, and I love spending time with him, and I feel so fortunate that I'm able to do this, because I know full well many parents would give their eye teeth to be able to do it and simply can't afford to.

Honestly, we can't really afford to, exactly. But we manage.

Still, there are a lot of times when I feel like a drain on society because I'm not doing work beyond keeping my boy clothed, clean, educated, and fed. I feel like I'm boring to talk with, because I don't have other work (although, to be fair, I have been doing other work, in the "downtime" But most of that was when J was home to help a bit, and Sprog was not nearly so mobile and demanding.) And were it not for the fact that I live in an urban area, where we can walk to where other people (and babies) are, and I already like to communicate online, I might feel really isolated. Which could make me depressed.

On that subject-- I feel guilty about how much J has to do, and the fact that my health problems require that-- especially because when there's no problem there'e no problem, if that makes sense. I feel like I ought to be able to do that myself, and feel like a loser that I can't.

I don't feel like I'm keeping up with the housecleaning and the cooking and such the way my mother did, which also makes me feel guilty. But I try. I strap Sprog to my back and haul the laundry upstairs to the laundry room. I vacuum occasionally, even though it makes him cry. I do my best, and suspect that my best sucks.

Part of it is that I choose to make some art or write stuff occasionally, instead of taking care of the dishes. Because no one (or at least, not me) wants their epitaph to read, "She kept a clean house."

As for money, well, I wish I were making some. I'd feel better about myself if I were. (Again, I have made a bit, here and there, but you get the idea.) I have a supportive husband, and we work it out between us. But I could see SAHM situations where a different kind of woman gets pushed around by a different kind of man, who controls her through access to the couple's funds. It happens. I'm not sure what to do to protect people from that, though I think Suze Orman's idea of educating women (and men) to learn how to be assertive about managing finances, is a good step.

Okay. This is a long response. I think I'll stop now. Hope I answered what you were asking.

[Coito ergo sum]

Okay, Coito. You've seen snark where I meant it (the "laughably naive" remark) and snark where I didn't (Not everyone is comfortable in situations that stray too far into the imaginary, and some people prefer to work from concrete experience. Wondering if you might be someone who prefers to build his castles on the ground, as it were, wasn't meant to be an insult.)

I acknowledged that you may not have meant it to be insulting.

As for this:

Also, you didn't offer your view of what YOU really feel like, dealing with x, y and z, and you didn't expound on whether that informed your thinking about social policy.

You might mean the hypothetical situation I posed, with the premature twins. But maybe you mean, how do I really feel, being a SAHM?

I'll go ahead and answer the latter, because the former doesn't seem to be getting this conversation anywhere helpful.

That depends what you mean by "helpful." It certainly isn't me who took the conversation in the wrong direction. You posed the hypothetical and I took it seriously, and gave you a serious answer. Let's be clear on this: I participated seriously and respectfully in the hypothetical you proposed. I was thereafter met with snide remarks about my response. That's what didn't get us anywhere.

However, we're not talking about how you really feel being a SAHM. That, of course, is a different question that the hypothetical you proposed, which is just fine. We'll talk about that, and I'll again take it seriously and give you my honest view on things.

I've wanted to have a child (possibly children, but the jury's still out) since I was a child myself. I've always pictured staying home with my children, when that day came. Towards that end, I babysat, taught vacation Bible school (!), worked as a counselor at various theatre and art daycamps, performed and worked in children's theatre... etc., etc. I did a lot to prepare. I read a lot, too-- about 6 or 7 years ago I started reading what most people call mommyblogs (though that term's generally a pejorative), which was my entree into making friends online (which eventually lead to forums like this one. And, as I mentioned, is where I got most of the material for my hypothetical scenario.)

So, I really wanted to do this. Which makes my experience of it different from someone who ends up doing it, out of circumstances, and maybe resents the lifestyle.

Even so, I was well aware that even people who always dreamed of being parents, maybe went through extensive fertility heartache, even (not an issue for us, thankfully), can be shocked, knocked off their feet, by how tiring and lonely parenthood can be, how the marriage can change, how their bodies are different, how they miss their work, their old sense of self, how all these things can make them resent their new situation in life, maybe even resent their kids... I worried about that. A lot.

I worried about it particularly because this post-partum scenario carried particularly nasty risks for me and my family, because of my health issues (I wrote about this in a thread called "An informal poll", if you want to read about it. I won't re-iterate here.)

Because of that, my husband and I did a lot of work between us to lessen those risks. He took several weeks off work when Sprog was born, and after that worked from home until a few months ago. And he's always taken care of night feedings, because it's dangerous for me to get sleep-deprived.

I take care of Sprog the rest of the time. And I love it. I mean, if you can't tell, I love being with my little boy. I think he's funny (already!) and adorable, and I love spending time with him, and I feel so fortunate that I'm able to do this, because I know full well many parents would give their eye teeth to be able to do it and simply can't afford to.

Honestly, we can't really afford to, exactly. But we manage.

Still, there are a lot of times when I feel like a drain on society because I'm not doing work beyond keeping my boy clothed, clean, educated, and fed. I feel like I'm boring to talk with, because I don't have other work (although, to be fair, I have been doing other work, in the "downtime" But most of that was when J was home to help a bit, and Sprog was not nearly so mobile and demanding.) And were it not for the fact that I live in an urban area, where we can walk to where other people (and babies) are, and I already like to communicate online, I might feel really isolated. Which could make me depressed.

I don't feel like I'm keeping up with the housecleaning and the cooking and such the way my mother did, which also makes me feel guilty. But I try. I strap Sprog to my back and haul the laundry upstairs to the laundry room. I vacuum occasionally, even though it makes him cry. I do my best, and suspect that my best sucks.

Part of it is that I choose to make some art or write stuff occasionally, instead of taking care of the dishes. Because no one (or at least, not me) wants their epitaph to read, "She kept a clean house."

As for money, well, I wish I were making some. I'd feel better about myself if I were. (Again, I have made a bit, here and there, but you get the idea.) I have a supportive husband, and we work it out between us. But I could see SAHM situations where a different kind of woman gets pushed around by a different kind of man, who controls her through access to the couple's funds. It happens. I'm not sure what to do to protect people from that, though I think Suze Orman's idea of educating women (and men) to learn how to be assertive about managing finances, is a good step.

Okay. This is a long response. I think I'll stop now. Hope I answered what you were asking.

It wasn't what I asked, but it certainly was a summary of your feelings about being a SAHM. I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with Suze Orman's idea of educating people to learn to be assertive about managing finances. Absolutely, people should learn to be responsible for their own stuff, and to not get walked on by other people. That's all great. And, I have in no way suggested that whatever a couple decides to do with accounts and that sort of thing is wrong. If you want separate accounts, keep them. If SWMBO'd wants a separate account, it wouldn't even be a discussion for me. I'd just be like, "sure, why not?"

It sounds like you do your best, and you probably underestimate yourself. In my experience, we all experience doubts about our quality of parenting, and concern over the sacrifice of opportunities because of children. To me, though, that's what life is about, though.

[hadespussercats]

That depends what you mean by "helpful." It certainly isn't me who took the conversation in the wrong direction. You posed the hypothetical and I took it seriously, and gave you a serious answer. Let's be clear on this: I participated seriously and respectfully in the hypothetical you proposed. I was thereafter met with snide remarks about my response. That's what didn't get us anywhere.

I responded that I didn't think your answer was realistic. My sense at the time was that it was so unrealistic you must not have given it much careful consideration.

You've let me know I was wrong about that. That's fine.

You also said that the person who wrote that scenario [me] obviously hates being a parent, is utterly incompetent and should have social services called on her.

There were two people in that tango, sir. Want to call it even?

It wasn't what I asked, but it certainly was a summary of your feelings about being a SAHM.

What would you like to hear about?

It sounds like you do your best, and you probably underestimate yourself. In my experience, we all experience doubts about our quality of parenting, and concern over the sacrifice of opportunities because of children. To me, though, that's what life is about, though.

Indeed.

[Coito ergo sum]

That depends what you mean by "helpful." It certainly isn't me who took the conversation in the wrong direction. You posed the hypothetical and I took it seriously, and gave you a serious answer. Let's be clear on this: I participated seriously and respectfully in the hypothetical you proposed. I was thereafter met with snide remarks about my response. That's what didn't get us anywhere.

I responded that I didn't think your answer was realistic. My sense at the time was that it was so unrealistic you must not have given it much careful consideration.

You've let me know I was wrong about that. That's fine.

You also said that the person who wrote that scenario [me] obviously hates being a parent, is utterly incompetent and should have social services called on her.

Yes, I wrote that is what it sounds like, if that is what a "typical day" is supposed to be. That "typical day" sounds absolutely, mind-bogglingly HORRIBLE. If that was every day, I'd want to shoot myself in the head, and I'm sure I'd need a doctor. I was also responding to you clobbering me a bit for the "laughably naive" summation you said I posted.

There were two people in that tango, sir. Want to call it even?

Sure, it's even. That was the main point I was making by making that comment, after you blasted my summation.

It wasn't what I asked, but it certainly was a summary of your feelings about being a SAHM.

What would you like to hear about?

What i asked was that you answer what you said you asked me about: "Wow, what would I really feel like, dealing with x, y, and z, and does that inform my thinking about social policy?" -- that was in reference to the hypothetical you posed.

I'd also like to know your thoughts on what to do about it, social policy-wise.

It sounds like you do your best, and you probably underestimate yourself. In my experience, we all experience doubts about our quality of parenting, and concern over the sacrifice of opportunities because of children. To me, though, that's what life is about, though.

Indeed.

Word.

[hadespussercats]

Well, in response to the hypothetical I posed--

I'd likely be in a mental hospital. So the rest of that wouldn't really be an issue!

We'd have to find a way to hire help. Or I'd have to be the one working and J would stay home (though I have no idea how that'd pan out!) Maybe we'd have to move in with family.

Which would send me to the mental hospital...

I hope you see what I'm getting at here. I couldn't be the sole caretaker of two premature twins that were that young.

As for social policy, I keep telling you-- I don't know. I don't know what should happen. But if one parent is earning wages to share with the other, it at least seems like the other parent should automatically be included in pension plans, social security, etc. Although some families might not want that, if it ups witholdings...

What legal protections are there for a parent who never works outside the home, financially, beyond alimony/palimony and child support if they divorce?