To be a traditional sahm ??

So does being a "keeoer" mean you can't fall ill or be made redundant, Mosman?

After 30 years I certainly thought of dh as a keeper, but the council has just decided to close the department he has been working in for those 30 years.

If you have one or two children you have options of walking out, supporting yourself yadda yadda. I honestly don't think anyone has number 4 or 5 unless they are damned sure their DH is a keeper because the thought of doing that alone would turn me grey over night. I worked full time whilst DH was working away and DC4 was between 12-18 months old and I am not exaggerating when I say it nearly killed me.

Feelinggood I'm much happier now than I was I am doing qualifications and hope to have a better job by the end of the year, financially I'm not stoney broke but I am nowhere near as well off as I was when I was married, the kids are great, the exH and me communicate and work together for the kids (and I even babysat for him and his partner only once though in an emergency) and life is getting better for me. But it wasn't easy it's been a hard road and a hard series of lessons to learn. I would just hate anyone else to make the same mistakes I did.

That's true recharge a good does of reality there. This is. What happened to me for the short time was painful beyond belief, stressful and yes shocking at who my DH became. We recovered and are happy now, but by god I had my eyes opened and learnt some lessons.

I'm a SAHM, quite comfortably so.

I have always been in paid employment since the age 14. I stopped working at 34 after 11 working in a profession to middle management level.

I found it hard to relax actually not working the first year. I've since had my second dc, which was and is completely different to the very stressful time I had with dc1 when working. TBH I don't think I would have conceived even.

I'm happy traditional roles at the moment, it works for us I feel I emable my DH to go out every day and work long hours in demanding job. He had the opportunities and greater earning potential, he could not do his job if I did not do his share of parenting.

I'm happy with this as DH used to be primary parent as he worked less hours than me previously and did more domestically on a daily basis. For us it has been a case of interchanging when needed to do so in response to circumstances.

Sadly I also had the benefit of a temporary separation, things got pretty bad, so I know how vulnerable the lower/non earner can be financially speaking. I don't think I could hop back in to a middle management role but I could do some consultancy and earn decent money to support myself and kids, though probably not to the level we live at now.

Throughout this I have been studying a part time degree which I feel is an investment in my future and will offer broader port unities when I return to work. I have also found it very nourishing to do this aside from the baby groups etc.

So in all I've been on both sides of the fence ft/pt and I found each to have its benefits and drawbacks for your chilld, family, yourself. It just think its important to do what's best for all three based on what choices you have available,a d I know some have few or none.

I do intend to return to work and will earn less than what I would be had I not had the career break and I know my pension is reduced and currently dormant. So there still lies the inequalities as I see it, but I'm pleased I have something behind. Having said! that, like many in my generation have had babies later, I will need to work longer and know I might not be in as good health when my grandchildren are born.

I don't think a best way exists.

The other thing I wanted to say was that once your "D"H starts to have an affair or meets someone else or decides to leave because you're too grumpy or too fat or too old - they aren't your DH anymore. That person you are in a marriage with, they don't exist anymore. They are a different person and they won't behave in the way you have come to expect. Because they aren't that person any more. So all the guarantees and stuff they've said in the past - it's out the window it's gone it doesn't mean anything anymore- because the person who said it isn't that person in front of you not anymore.

So the how you think it'll be or the how you and him discussed it would be if you ever split - it won't happen like that because the "D"H you're dealing with isn't the DH that was in your bed for 20 years.

My dp works 8-4.30 in construction and this supports 6 of us.

What does your dh do to support 7 people on such short hours? (genuinely curious, I would like such a job)

Am constantly baffled by these threads,what is the issue here?

The OP seems happy doing it her way,Its definitely not my way,but the OP would most likely hate my life being a single parent,working as a Teacher and studying for my masters.

I don't want her life she doesn't want mine,sorted we can both stay where we are.

Janey68 I agree. In my case my exH is self-employed in his family business which has a very very good accountant. This gave us a good standard of living when we were together. However, the assets of the business are well protected and on paper he owned very little and drew a very small salary. I receive very little maintenance, although he does pay it, which I realise is better than many. And yes I could take it to court and fight it out but the only winners then would be the solicitors and I might lose and it would damage the relationship we have now where we can work together fairly well for the children.

I agree with that point recharge. A fulfilling life comes about in all sorts of ways- often its a mix of things, being a parent, friendships, interesting career, hobbies. There's a hell of a lot more to life than thinking 'I'll be minted if my husband leaves me!!' And anyway, it's also absolutely correct that many women seriously over estimate how well off they would be financially anyway. Even when it comes to their own pension provision the stats show that a scary number of women have made inadequate provision and just assume erroneously that they'll get their husbands if he dies first. And that's without even starting on women who are left high and dry when their husband leaves them

My MIL is like the OP (has to feel needed) and now with grown up children, she is always trying to 'help' in order to feel 'needed'. It's a pain in the arse. She also did everything for them and as a result my DH left home completely clueless about cooking, cleaning etc etc. It's not good. I will teach DS how to clean things properly and how to cook basic meals and so on and hopefully my future DIL will thank me for it ;) I also encourage DH to do stuff around the house as I don't want DS growing up watching me do all the chores while DH sits on his backside!

Seeing that I'm going in for an op in January, it is a relief to reflect that I am loved by my family, that I am wanted by them, but that I am not indispensable; if anything were to go wrong, or if my problem was more serious (which it is not), it is reassuring to reflect that they would cope well on their own. In the same way, when dh was handed his redundancy letter before Christmas it was a relief to him to know that I am qualified and would be able to help support the family.

It doesn't imply any lack of faith in marriage as an institution to realise that one of you may fall ill or otherwise unable to perform their usual role. Dh is a thoroughly reliable person, but not so reliable he can't get cancer or be run over by a bus. I'm reliable too, but not to the point of being able to guarantee I will always be in good health.

And there is much much more to having a life than being minted. Seriously. All the money in the world wouldn't have replaced my friends or got me a fulfilling job. Or made me happy.

Amber I would advise you to check your figures very very carefully. I seriously doubt if your DP ditched you for a younger shinier model you'd be minted.

sorry that should of been dh earns

i really hate this whole working mum vs sahm.My mil is always goingon about it,my dhs sil has 6 kids and is a headteacher,number 6 is a few days old and shes going back to workin march,not really what i would want to do but from what i can see they are all happy,the kids are lovely,well behaved,responsible and kind.

I am sahm of 4 and i do so because i like it,my dearns plenty for us both and if he ever ditched me for a "younger shinier model" i would be minted anywayso that side of it doesnt worry me.

I think there is no right or wrong way,years ago women HAD to sahm and i imagine a lot of them really hated it,and their kids probably didnt benefit from that,at least now the ones who dont want a career too can do so and surely a happy mother is better than an unhappy resentful one?(and vice cersa,dont go to work if you really want to be at home!)

Whatever makes you happy. I worked for the first 15 years of ds1s life and until ds2 was 7. I became a sahm when ds3 was born.

They do help around the house because I think it's important but they probably do more now I'm at home than when I was working as I have more time to teach them to cook and they're in the house more than they were when I worked.

My mum was a sahm, it didn't do us any harm. Both me and my dsis trained as nurses, worked and are able to cook/clean etc even though our mum did everything for us. Being a sahm to daughters doesn't mean they won't work and have careers.

My mum went back to work when we were 14 and 10

Permanently
I agree about that comment
I wasn't so happy about my mum not being there all the time during my teenage years because she inconveniently got cancer and died.

OP - glad you're happy. I hope you have protected yourself financially, see the thread linked to earlier on being a SAHM for some ideas, if you haven't already made provisions. DH is a SAHD (now starting a business) and I protected our family income so if something happens to me, he and the children will be OK.

My view on children doing jobs around the house etc is that it is good for the child to take responsibility and also I wouldn't want my sons growing up thinking that it is a woman's role to tidy up after a bloke. (Hopefully, when my sons grow up, they will have partners who will secretly appreciate that!).

I totally agree permanentlyexhausted.

It's a really cheap jibe to start throwing around comments like 'mothers not being there all the time'.

The situation where a parent (either mother or father) genuinely isn't there, either through death or genuine estrangement is extremely sad. Having parents who work is not remotely comparable. Working is a normal fact of life for most adults. The op is the exception in having left school and never ever had a paid job in her entire life (and it's an exception many of us wouldn't choose)

Parents who work are still the primary carers for their children. They are still the most central people in their children's lives. They remain the biggest influence. And hey- their children grow up perfectly well adjusted and happy and successful.

So stay at home if it makes you happy and fulfilled and your partner is happy to work to enable you that lifestyle. But dont try to make any claim that it will make your children happier OP. Do it because it suits you and you don't want to work and because youve found a partner who is willing to do the stuff you don't want to and vice versa

And so slow again!

Kim147 - I agree totally. That's what I'm trying to say, that being a SAHM doesn't make for an equal relationship. It doesn't make for an equal partnership.

Oh I type so slowly . OneLittleToddlingTerror yes I agree. All too typical of the traditional SAHM set up.