Are young mothers really better off than in the past ?

I had twins in 1960 and was in hospital with complications for 3weeks... husband working all hours he could to earn enough to support us... don’t know how I’d / we’d have survived if my mum hadn’t come round every morning for next 3 months to help and enable me to recover. Babies did not sleep a night through till 18 months ...
Not on maternity leave ... I’d had to resign at about 7 months pregnant but thrilled to get two lots of maternity pay as I’d had two babies
That paid for a pram ..
we struggled and mostly managed .. I got an evening job and eventually I returned to teaching as they started school..
it was not easy but young enough to survive... but I do think without a husband who turned out to be a “new man” .. ie totally helpful... and a mum who was able to help... saved us.
Don’t know how youngsters are able to manage without genuine physical support...

Unless you're the virgin Mary or a widow(er) there is no such
thing as a single parent. I know that this usually means
that the parents are not together and one or the other has
the main responsibility of caring for the children but
nevertheless the child does have two parents and both of
them should be there to give love and support in whatever
way they can.

TellNo1Ok - we had no physical help with 5 children, and, to be honest, wouldn't have wanted it from parents as they had very different ideas regarding babies and childrearing. BUT we were most definitely a team, my husband and I, and in that I was very very lucky.

putting tiny children into long hours of daycare, constantly feeling guilty

I don't want to derail this with a childcare debate but had to respond to this. I think in the vast majority of cases (certainly in the mothers I know of) this isn't true at all.

There are still a lot of moms who don't work until children are in school. There are even more (most of the women I know, myself included) who work part-time, or term-time only (or both) so that the amount of time spent in chicldcare is minimal. I know some families where the dad stays at home, or the Mom and dad both work part-time so the child isn't in childcare. Then there's the amount of children cared for by family members instead of nurseries.

Of the 15 children in DDs age bracket at nursery (birth-2.5 years), 1 is full-time. The rest are combination of part-time or term-time only. And even then, most don't go until they're around 1 year old. And they are all thriving there, they do so many activities each day that they wouldn't have time to when being looked after at home or with family members who still have daily life to get on with. It can be a really enriching part of a child's life.

I just think there's an awful lot of focus on how moms are putting little children into full-time childcare to go to work and it's not the full picture. Plus, from the stories on this thread, there have always been working mothers. Yes there are more of them now, but it's also more talked about and debated in the media these days, which I think has lead to it seeming like lots of children are in full-time childcare from just a few months old, which isn't the case with any child or mother I know. I don't think it's as frequent as the media suggests.

Posted on this topic before. The best days of my life were when I was at home with my children in 70s. Great social life with other young mums- we looked after each others offspring so we all got to go to squash, tennis or just shopping without buggies. We had days out together & we socialised at weekends with the husband's involved too.
Great times. I went back to work part time when youngest started secondary school. All downhill from then on!

Stella1949 As a young married mother in the early 1960's it was for me and many more a case of ' you made your bed etc etc.'. I went back to work when first child was six months old. DH was the evening shift parent when he walked in the door I walked out to my job as this was the only way we could keep up our mortgage payments. With the birth of our second child it was the same routine. You were fortunate if you hade relatives to give you support Hence the 'made your bed' etc etc.

I agree that it's unwise to generalise. It often depends on how mum and baby are after the birth, what shape their finances are in and what access to childcare the parents have if mum needs to return to work.
Bills soon mount up if they took on lots of financial responsibilities without a back-up plan for when children arrive.
I was lucky in that I stopped work when I married (and moved) and completed a degree whilst a stay-at- home mum.
When our children were born in a cottage hospital between 1967 and 1987, I stayed for between 10 days for the first (which was normal) 8 for the next two and a few hours for the last two.
Mum lived about 180 miles away and inlaws in Australia so I got on with it myself and thoroughly enjoyed it.
There was no expectation that I would work and I had a very generous amount paid into a separate account for me to spend as I pleased, with all household bills being taken care of.
Bar two, my friends and I never, ever discuss money. My two BFs choose to discuss the state of their marriages, finances and family relationships as they're confident that I don't gossip, however, I don't reciprocate.
At least two of my aquaintances have to account to their husbands for every penny spent indeed, I bought some necessities for one who had to wait until her DH was in a good mood to ask for nappy money.
Some waters are like a millpond and some are choppy with many sandbanks and tides. We have to be careful navigators.

I think this is a transition generation - we’re heading towards equality but not there yet. Many scandinavian countries have it sorted. We’ve gone from women having no choice, not able to own property or have bank accounts, not driving, having to give up your job, name and home on marriage, having to do all the childcare, housework and shopping, to having independence. Women can now choose to work, have children, drive, live alone, all is acceptable. At the moment yes, most women still do the majority of the “womens” work as well as holding down a job and paying half the bills. But it is slowly changing. The government asking all companies to publish equal pay info has caused some discussion. Eventually men will realise they have to do half the tasks, share the work, to be equal partners, with equal choice. Women will be able to do less and have more choice once men step up. At present many men don’t want to adult so they run from responsibility, and society (run by men) has encouraged that. I think it will change with each generation. But we also need to see a more female oriented work environment to equal things out. Men and women are both parents so why are women paid less? Because companies and the country are, in the main, run by men for men.

I would think the majority of young mothers are better off now than those of us who went back to work in the 1960s after having our babies.Some of us had no car,central heating,telephone,washing machine ,dish washer ,parents living close by etc. I had a long walk to the railway station or bus stop to take my baby to a day nursery before getting another bus to work.
I certainly didn't have a personal midwife and none visited me at all after I left the Maternity Hospital.
Young mothers today wouldn't have swapped places I am sure.

There is a really good website that takes headlines and articles and turns them around, so they are written about men instead. I think it is brilliant and really challenges your thinking. #manwhohasitall
For example we say “working mothers” it is a term used alot. How many times do you hear the term “working fathers”? Women are forever being told how to look, think, speak, live. They are criticised constantly. They have a child, one the couple wanted, but is the man ever asked “so are you going back to work after the birth?”. Mothers are criticised, by people saying why have a child if you are going to put it in nursery. But dads aren’t. It is only a failing of the woman. Perhaps they don’t have relatives who can do the childcare. Perhaps they need the money. Perhaps the mother wants to continue her career, just like the father. Why doesn’t he stay home? He is the childs parent too. I really hope life will be different for future women because it is a hard life. But mothers need to not pamper their boys. Make the boys wash up, teach them to cook, wash and sew.

I personally get tired of all the moaning on Mumsnet from women who have such an easy life compared to when I was bringing up my children.
Disposable nappies were the exception, where we were living all food had to be made from scratch, there was no childcare to allow you to work, I had my first twin tub after DC1 was born.
When I was a child we didn't even have an inside toilet. Now everyone expects 2 bathrooms and an ensuite. Semi detached is looked down upon as everyone expects to have a detached house.
As for women who choose to have a child with a "partner".....if he won't commit to marrying you why on earth have you chosen to bring a child into this world?
It is a 20 year commitment. Every child deserves to have two loving parents.

Things have certain changed since I had my children in the late 1940s. In those days few married women went to work. I lived in south London and we young Mums met every afternoon in the local park exchanging ideas of how to make the rations go round etc. whilst all the children played together. Few labour saving appliances or technology onwhich to spend money. We were poor but happy.
I never went back to work. Later I joined the W.I. And kept busy organising classes in dressmaking, cooking etc. And volunteered at the hospital and helping elderly people.

Not every woman stayed home after having children - I went back to work when my daughter was 18 months old. Yes, my DH earned more than me as he was several years into a career in the Civil Service but I did the bulk of the housework/shopping/cooking and gardening etc as well as working. What was different was that it was much harder to find/pay for childcare - I was lucky in that I was a Nursery Nurse and could take my daughter to work with me as part of my salary until she went to school. There was also the expectation that a father would be there, at least until the children were older, and that both parents would work together to provide for their children. From my perspective it seems that a lot of younger people no longer see the need to stay together to raise a family and blended families are quite the norm today, sometimes with children from more than one relationship as parents move on and continue to have children with new partners. Younger people are besieged by media advertising the 'perfect' homes/holidays/toys/cars etc etc - we didn't have that pressure and many of us started off with second hand furniture and no holidays until our children were older unless you could go camping! Would I want to be a young parent today - no, definitely not, unless I could still have the same standards I had in the 1970's when I had my own children, a lot of the Mum's I speak to seem so unhappy with their lives and the pressure to provide this perfect but totally unrealistic world for their children

Impossible to generalise here, but the only thing I personally feel is how grateful I am to have been able to spend every single minute of my 3 children’s pre school days in the 70’s, at home with them. I was fortunate and wouldn’t have missed it for the world. We are all different tho, some mums go back to work thro choice, some thro necessity.

Espee ^As for women who choose to have a child with a "partner".....if he won't commit to marrying you why on earth have you chosen to bring a child into this world?
It is a 20 year commitment. Every child deserves to have two loving parents.^

If only it were that simple. Many women choose not to marry and many don't want the father of the children in their lives. Please don't blame everything on the men, they are not all feckless. The suicide rate for men is higher than women and I know of cases where not being allowed to see the children is the reason some men couldn't face living.

Food for thought on here. It seems there is too much choice nowadays. The tyrrany of choice.
To become a parent or not. To marry or not. To stay at home or not. To have more than one child. Soon you'll be able to choose the child's gender. You probably can already. Will anyone choose the 3rd gender?
Then day nursery, childminder or au pair?
If you have several children you must earn a lot before you can afford childcare and TBH not every parent wants to farm out their darlings to an underpaid, undervalued, undertrained nursery nurse.
I'm very glad I've done my parenting. Grandparenting is a different mine field.

I think that the difficulties young mothers have these days are just different - impossible to say if it’s easier or harder. Read recently that women are expected to raise their children as if not working, and do their jobs as if not bringing up children. That sounds like a tough call.

I agree Merlotgran. Morrisons has about 20 mother and baby parking places. I didn't even have a car. Getting on the bus with a toddler, pushchair which had to be folded, and shopping was quite a problem.

*As for women who choose to have a child with a "partner".....if he won't commit to marrying you why on earth have you chosen to bring a child into this world?
It is a 20 year commitment. Every child deserves to have two loving parents.*

I'm not married to my DP. We are getting married this year, at his suggestion. I was quite happy to not be married. I'm in a stronger position than him financially (I'm the only one with substantial savings) and didn't really see what I would gain from marriage. We already lived together and jointly pay for everything (a fair contribution, based on a percentage of salary). Not every woman wants to get married. I'm marrying him now because he wants to be married, and as I don't have a strong opinion either way it makes sense. Doesn't mean I'd be any less committed to him if we weren't getting married. I just didn't see how it would add to our lives as we already lived together, are saving for a house together etc. It's not like in previous generations where couples couldn't live together until after marriage.

As for having a child before marriage, yes it's a 20 year commitment but a commitment to the child, not your partner. Plenty of people get divorced and still parent their child, so why is it any different for unmarried couples when they split? Plenty of men walk away from children after divorce as well, not just fathers who didn't marry the mothers.

Divorce is much more common these days, a marriage doesn't mean commitment.

I haven't read all the replies, but I am pleased that I was a new mum at the end of the 70s

Now there is so much pressure on mums. Most have to go back to work just to keep the family financially stable. i don't mean to enable them to go on holidays, have expensive cars, socialise a lot , just to keep a roof over their head, food on the table and give their children a decent life.
There is also the pressure to keep their children as children, to combat the pressures of the media, their peers, and the internet, to say nothing of drug culture.
Parents today have it tough.
It wasn't easy for me, my OH had to work 200 miles away from us for 3 years and could only come back every other weekend as that was all that we could afford, but we eventually were able to move nearer and he was home every weekend. This lasted 20 years, but I still think it was easier than now

Nonnie. If you read what I wrote again you will see that
it was not criticising men. The comment was directed at women.
(though men who father children without the commitment to parent for the next 20 years are equally irresponsible)

Legally in the U.K. there is a vast difference between living together and bring married, Newmom101. Property, pensions, wills - things you don't necessarily think about when you're young.

*being

Razzy That #manwhohasitall site is absolutely brilliant. Thanks for mentioning it.

Grammaretto not every parent wants to farm out their darlings to an underpaid, undervalued, undertrained nursery nurse
My GCs have all attended nursery. The opportunities they have been given, the attention they have received and the learning that has resulted from these has been valuable and impressive. The nursery nurses may be underpaid, but the are not undertrained, they are professionals and the educational opportunities they offer can rarely be equalled by even the most caring mother. For example My GS is currently enjoying using joinery tools, he has just finished a period at Forest School, where he learned about and watched a Kelly Kettle, besides building dens, climbing and exploring, and he did all these things with friends his own age. Nurseries are great places and children thrive in them.