Mumsnet Talk

OK so it is a thread about a thread but on the SAHPs don't earn the income, their dps do thread, lots of mners are saying 'dp can only earn lots of money if I stay home with the kids so they can travel/ work late'. And the implication is that's OK as they earn lots of money.

But why? Would't you rather have less money but bring your children up together?

What is the extra money for?

It's an honest question, I have friends who are almost 'single parents' during the week and their dps travel a lot too. And they have lots of money. But it seems such a lonely existence.

(I am asking about couples who choose to have one high earning parent - not couples who work all the hours god sends to survive).

I don't get it. I love dp and would hate him to do long hours and have two weeks go past before we spent a nice evening together.

It seems so Victorian.

I would hate my dh to travel and do long hours too.

But if I had always known that that was part of his job I'd have just got used to it over time. Its not a big deal for lots of people. And some people have things that are more important to them than being able to watch telly together of an evening.

YABU - if someone has a job that takes them away and requires long hours, it might not be that easy to walk out of it to find another job.

If it's causing a problem for the family, of course the couple should consider together whether walking away from the job and finding a different, less demanding job is an option but it may simply be the field they are in.

What is the extra money for?

So that one poor fucker works twice the hours, earns double the money and allows the mortgage to be paid .... so the other one can whine on MN about 50% of hosuehold chores not being done and their SO needing a night off to sleep and the unfairness of it all.

its not how I would want it either - but some jobs do have long hours and if you through in a commute as well - and some people find unless they do long hours they don't progress in their carreer - and it very important to some people - and some people want to stay at home so it can work for some people

Dh is out of the house for very long hours, always has, even before we married, so even when we were dating, it is just the way it is. I am a sahm but when I return to work he will probably still do the same hours (2 to 3 hours in the morning and night is travel). I love my dh too, just the way things are and if I worked now he would have to work equally long hours but we would, as a family, be worse of as chidcare for 2 and wraparound care for one would be more than I earned.

Troisgarcons

It's one of those circular arguments IMO. The DP needs to earn loads of money so that the SAHM can stay at home. And the SAHM needs to stay at home so that the DP can earn loads of money...

Troisgarcons

Trois

YABU

For some families, money is the priority - that might be for any number of noble or shallow reasons. For other families, time is the priority - again, for any number of reasons. And for other families, both are equally important and they try to find a balance. Nothing right or wrong about any set up, just personaly choice.

Personally, I'm single but, if I had a partner, the more often he worked away the better I'd like it. I can't hold down relationships because I get panicky and upset about spending long periods of time with one other person and need my own space. It doesn't mean I don't love people just that I can't cope with being around them due to issues of my own. A distance relationship would be ideal!

There isnt always a choice.

YABU - what willcrossthatbridge says. Not always that easy to find a job with good hours.

Some advantages to being the sole parent most of the time though.

YANBU - I'd hate DH to be away all of the time and DS really benefits from having him around in the week. I wouldn't sacrifice that for anything.

YABU. I'm one of those parents. DH is at home, I have a job that turns out to involve travel and late nights. I didn't know it would when I took it three months ago - those bits were mysteriously absent from the job description - and the plan is that I will look for another one as soon as I've been in this one long enough for my CV not to look dodgy, but for now I just have to put up with it, and I'm really blessed that DH is able and willing to cover.

In my case it's not the field, just bad luck and a sneaky employer, so I ought to be able to find something that either pays more or is more family-friendly without massive difficulty. But I do, quite seriously, have a dilemma about whether it would be better for us as a family for me to earn more or be at home more. DH would like me to be home more, but equally acknowledges that more money would be damn handy!

Troisgarcons

trois

trois - so very very true!

suebfg - some people don't have the choice. You and the OP are phrasing yourselves as if these SAHPs have decided money is more important than a co-parent. It's not as simple as that.

troisgarcon, that is very judgemental of you. I do all the household chores and all the childcare. As I said, dh has worked these kinds of hours from about 2 months into our relationship and the mortgage was his BEFORE we married so based solely on his wages so he is not taking on paying a mortgage that was originally based on us both working, he lived here alone for more than 2 years before we married.

I have a job that takes me away from home a lot, and even when I am close to home, I work long hours. My DH isn't a SAHD but he does take on a much greater share of the childcare than I do. I would love to work close to home, not to travel so much and work less hours so that I could see my family more, but these days jobs are really hard to come by, and if I could find one close to home, it would probably mean such a big change to our life style (eg having to sell our house) that I just can't contemplate it. Not yet anyway. On the plus side, I do have a really good job that a lot of people would love.

THe working partner doesn't have to be working long hours or travelling a lot though in order to rely on childcare provided by a SAHP that cannot be replicated using professional childcare (bar a live-in nanny). Any job that regularly involves work on weekends, starts before 8am or finishes after 6pm can be unworkable with professional childcare - i.e. most shift work for a start. The working parent may still spend a lot of time at home with the children.

The other point of view is that when we were both working - dh was in one country and I was in another, and we saw each other every six weeks, plus I had ds. By not working, and moving to be with dh, we have a far more settled home life; we have now lived together for 5+ years at a stretch, which we never achieved before (and we have now been married 25 years); ds has had his Dad around and benefited from that, and I am less stressed as I don't have to keep all the balls in the air any more.

Dh still works silly hours, but that goes with his particular territory that means you are paid 24/7, and expected to work until the job is done, be it at sea or ashore.

Christmas - some people have jobs that earn a lot of money that require a lot of travel. Some people are fine with that and some aren't. Each of us prioritises different things.

Surely if bills/mortgage/food etc has to be paid for then you generally have either 1 person with a high salary ( in order to pay for above, therefore enabling 2nd person to be SAHP) or 2 people working for an average wage?

If you want to be a SAHP, it stands to reason the DP has to earn a fair bit, seems logical this would involve fairly long hours and poss travel- or am I missing the point??

It's hardly the SAHP who is enabling DP to work long hours, it's the DP enabling their husband/wife/partner to stay at home isn't it?

Maybe I'm reading it all wrong, it's just seems like a really funny question, sorry