Should we leave London after burnout, or stay for my husband's career?

[ChickenChitty]

Help me with my life dilemma.

DH and I have been together for 15 years, we are late 30s with 2 kids at primary school. I work in a stressful job in the City, requiring extremely long hours (60-70hr weeks, weekend work most weekends and most holidays too). DH is in a creative career - his passion. I earn c.6x what he does. He is self-employed so does more with the kids and more around the house (I’d say he does 60% of the childcare and maybe 70% of household tasks).

I nearly died earlier this year with a ruptured appendix that was missed and negligent medical care. It came off the back of a period of very intense work - about 9 months of hell. I’m mentally traumatised from that experience and burnt out generally, and the whole thing has made me reassess my life.

Ive suddenly got clarity that I don’t want to continue doing my job anymore and I don’t even know what I’m doing it for as London is so expensive our quality of life is not great. We have enough equity in our small London terraced house that we could move back to my home town (up north) and buy somewhere large and detached and lovely mortgage free, near much better schools for the kids and near my family. DH really doesn’t want to leave London as he loves it, and his work is here (his family is up north too but nowhere near mine). He would want to continue commuting to London if we moved, which would probably involve overnight stays and impact family life.

Im starting to feel a bit of resentment as I increasingly feel like I’m killing myself and sacrificing my quality of life so that DH can live his dreams. But I love him, am proud of what he does, and would feel awful to effectively force him to move (which we would need to do if I quit my job, as he could never pay the mortgage alone). I knew when we got married that this would be his career. I’ve thought of middle grounds like downsizing in London or moving to a commuter area if I took a pay cut, but that would feel like a much worse outcome for the kids, to leave everything they know for something materially worse, and/or both parents travelling more than we do now . I don’t know whether I’m being unfair in wanting to do this or not, or what the right balance is, so thoughts from other people would be welcome!

If you describe living in a house rather than a bedsit and having children as a “lifestyle”, then absolutely yes I wanted those things, hardly a lot to ask?!

He could probably fit his London work into 2 days per week during term time, and could cancel the Saturday which is freestanding (but in London) (and to those who asked, he has refused to cancel it in the past, but has cut his hours so it’s a shorter day as a compromise).

And yes @CocoButterNut I do think he’s nice!

There is a very odd slant on MN at the moment towards fawning obsequiousness towards "high earners" and contempt boardering on loathing for people not driven first and foremost by money.

It particularly shows up in threads about couples where one does an undisclosed lucrative job and the other a (generally, though not in this case) undisclosed less lucrative job, but also in threads about free childcare (it's astonishing how many posters proport to be earning over £100k yet can't put together a better argument than Veruca Salt).

The absolute scorn poured (by posters who are highly likely to be mostly average earners themselves) on the lower earner, and the falling over each other to demand the lower earner be punished, is quite a thing to behold.

There's such contempt for people who have chosen vocational careers, and adulation for people who are very likely to be in careers which have dubious societal value compared to the lower earner.

It's as though these threads are weird dog whistle, calling out to deep seated meritocratic fundamentalism in a certain MN user demographic...

I’m not sure he earns enough for her to be a sahm even without mortgage costs. That’s the whole problem - if he earnt enough to give them better optionality this wouldn’t even be a thread

theres nothing wrong with the financial split they had but if she is struggling they need to both compromise.

It’s not really about him being the lower earner though - he is dependent on his wife’s income though but in this case he doesn’t actually care for the family/house angle whereas on other threads the lower earner does

Ultimately OP you need to sit down with him and discuss the various options with the status quo not being one of them. I’m sure you can find a solution that would work for you both

Do you think it's an intentional campaign? Genuine Q.

No I don't actually, though it's a fun conspiracy theory.

I think it calls out to a wish to believe in the British version of the American Dream - a slightly different version of the desperate need to believe that the wealthy are wealthy because they're better (and therefore we should defend them from being taken advantage of by the less wealthy - who must surely be worse quality humans), because if they're not better it's not fair.

Whereas actually life just isn't fair. Most grown adults still generally, the (western?) world over, can't actually accept that at a fundamental level.

@ActuallyComfortable maybe from some on this thread but if you read my posts you’ll see that I’ve said (and truly am) very very proud of DH and have been absolutely supportive of his career the whole time we’ve been together. I would never ever ask him to give it up.

The difficulty really with our set up is that his job pays similarly to the kind of thing a - say, most often mother - might do on the side while focusing primarily on kids and house, but he’s committed to it as if it’s the “big job”. Far from stepping back to focus on kids and home, he is constantly doing high pressure, demanding work. So even though his schedule is in some ways more flexible, he’s not really any more available than I am. As I said he does actually do more housework and childcare but it’s quite marginal. We’re both working incredibly hard, but my job is just rewarded more. I don’t think it’s fair or right but it is the case.

Surely the costs of commuting several times a week to London and staying there overnight would be considerable - in my mind that's a poor use of money and unnecessary carbon footprint. Add in the disruption to family life while he is away....

I would commit to a place to live and work in and stick to it. None of this super-commuting.

I would genuinely look at north Kingston. There are 3 bedroom houses in budget and it gives access to schools like The Kingston Academy and Grey Court in Ham. Although Kingston has grammar schools, most local kids don't attend them - so the comps are good.

@ActuallyComfortable

I think it calls out to a wish to believe in the British version of the American Dream - a slightly different version of the desperate need to believe that the wealthy are wealthy because they're better (and therefore we should defend them from being taken advantage of by the less wealthy - who must surely be worse quality humans), because if they're not better it's not fair

Is that your main takeaway from this discussion?

We're fawning over her status as a high earner?

Her life is far removed from mine in the tangible details. To be honest I'm much closer to her DH in the type of work I do and definietly in my earnings. But on a human level I can relate.

I see another woman doing her best to do what so many of us have to: juggle work, kids, finances, spouse, family commitments, carry the emotional load (her dh doesn't seem to be so involved in the hunt for good schools/solutions) and in her case the financial load too.

I see someone who, again, like many of us, has got so used to putting everyone first that she has got into the habit of probably unconsciously minimising her own needs.

And I think one of the best things about this place is when those of us with time to spare can support and challenge posters' thinking to help them find a way through whatever it is they're struggling with.

But maybe I'm wrong and there is some international capitalist agenda being rolled out here.

🙄

To be fair, I asked this poster for more info about her theory. I don't think it's necessarily the takeaway from this thread, though it is as she says a feature of it (not you OP).

@EightSteps

i agree. I too am the lower earner and I would be moving heaven and earth to adjust our lives to help DH if he needed to step away from the rat race

I'm probably a little biased though because I would rather stay living in a city than moving to the suburbs!

there’s a load of unknown factors here but OP clearly needs to have a proper conversation with her DH about how they can get through this to end in a healthier place

OH give me a break. Carbon footprint using a train really?

I know a couple two kids live in a shoebox on the outskirts of London. One a senior nurse the other in a council department. They'd earn the same money up north. But grandparents are loaded so they're hanging on for the inheritance. So do all the visits enabling parents to hang onto the farm in one case, the mini mansion in the other.

Friends are mid forties now, parents early seventies. It's madness.

I used that word (light-heartedly) because OP had said he'd be happy with that, using that word.

We have to get out of the mindset that living in one part of the country and travelling huge distances several times a week is justifiable as a lifestyle choice imo. It's not just the train emissions versus eg a car - there's a lot more to it than that. Staying local is better for everyone in lots of ways.

It's not just the train emissions versus eg a car - there's a lot more to it than that.

What more is there to it?

But to continue to be "nice" he now needs to step up now his wife is facing burn out. Radical solutions will be needed and he needs to face up to that

The problem is the bolt hole will still be over £1200 a month plus bills - even not central - be cheaper to travel lodge it 8 nights a month with no bills -

The best is for OP's dh to bunk in with a mate in London. Perhaps a fellow creative who would not mind the occasional company and pocket money from time to time.

Or just 4 nights

There used to be a website called something like Monday to Friday which is for people who only need a room in the week - don’t know if it still exists but many Londoners are happy to rent out a room for 1-3 nights a week if they get it back at the weekends. Obv much cheaper than a full time let.

Well quite, I was just defending your DH from the accusation that he’s accessing at lifestyle at your expensive.

If he could compress his hours that would make a but difference. But he still has to agree to move north. If he’s a northerner that seems possible, if he’s a Londoner he might prefer to downsize here.

Op said he’s a northerner

theres definitely a way forward for both of them here

I know someone who does just that - comes down Monday morning, goes back Thurs evening - I think he prefers it to- he pays £685 a month- no bills

Definitely cheaper to Travelodge it. DH has a friend who comes over from NI for 2 nights a week and he just looks for whatever the cheapest premier inn or Travelodge is within a reasonable commute to zone 1. And the bonus is you're not paying out of termtime or whatever.