To think life is a lot easier & more relaxed if there’s one Sahp?

More relaxed, if both parties are happy with their respective roles, sure.
Better, not necessarily. I feel that the security of 2 incomes works better for us.

We are a family that needs a lot of chill time so life became much easier for us when I stopped working when DS was 4. I am now working again, very part time but even that has had an impact.

IMO the ideal would probably be both parents working 3 days a week. I don't think both parents working 5 days a week is good for anyone but unfortunately it is needed in many families. I would love it if society changed so that it was possible for all people to be part time.

But at what cost to the SAHP?

That one parent makes themselves economically unviable and dependant on the other.
Essentially pays hundreds of thousands in earnings opportunity losses for the privilege to be "supported".
Complertey at the mercy of the other parent.
What a way to live. Like a child.

I was only talking about this today. And yes, if one parent is home it fundamentally makes things easier logistically. Like a previous poster said it’s subjective whether it’s better, but I think for many it really must be.

I’m not sure I need a SAHP but a housekeeper would be marvellous!

I get what you mean though- Ive been invited to a Leadership event during DH’s board week so I need to find out if he can do the school run or if I need to ask our babysitter if she’s free before I say yes. If DH was a SAHD I’d just say yes without checking as I’d assume they were covering the school run unless specifically flagged.

It really depends on the people involved.

It wouldn't be more relaxed for us because neither of us want to be a SAHP so whoever did it would be bitter and resentful.

I also TBH don't feel like we are "rushing around" but I think that's more of a personality thing. I don't like having lots of down time or "chill" time the way that a lot of posters seem to.

When someone insists this is the case, I assume it’s a woman with a lazy partner who doesn’t do his share of household gruntwork or childcare, meaning she’s run ragged and thinks her only option is to stop work, thereby deskilling and disempowering herself economically because Nigel thinks grocery shopping and cooking are specialist skills from which his penis debars him.

Perfectly possible for two FT working parents to raise children and run a household without undue stress, assuming average organisation, communication and, obviously, the shared understanding of everything being shared.

I think it works well, provided the SAHP wants to be a SAHP, the WOHP is equally happy for there to be a SAHP, they can afford it, and there is mutual respect for what each of them brings to the table, and the effort involved. Also, that there is clarity as to what the role is comprised of, and an understanding that being the SAHP doesn't make you Dobby, and doesn't absolve the other partner of parenting, or contributing to the household in a meaningful manner.

It also helps if SAHP isn't translated into 'lady wot lunches, squeezing the brats in and around your lifestyle', or 'dude wot spends their life gaming, throwing a bag of wotsits at the crotchgoblins when they get a bit noisy'.

Another option is for one or both parents to work part time.

I had an admin role during school hours, including school holidays off and I always felt I had the best of both worlds.

Well, yes. If there's less to do in a day then life is less hectic. That's just a fact.

whether it's better is subjective though.

I can only imagine the bunfight this thread will end up as. Yikes.