How much of a say do you allow your dh/dp to have over your work life? DH doesn't want me to work

[yoursayhissay]

just interested in how much of a say you allow your dh/dp to have over your work life?

dh earns a good wage, he is also on a board as well as a ft job, so works more than an average ft job.
doesn't want to cut down on work or go part time.
he often worls late etc

and he thinks I should take his feelings into consideration when I decide what I want to do in the future, not that I should do exactley what he wants but i
I should take his feeling into consideration
and that he should have some say in things

what do you do?

"I think that's the crux- if you give up your career to back your partner's, make sure they're a horse worth backing."

And that the horse never gets ill, involved in an accident, decides he likes a younger/alernate model, gets made redundant, needs to cut back his hours/lifestyle for health reasons, stays happy to (often) be a weekend father uninvolved in much of their care, is happy to pay additional NI contributions for his wife/her own pension/etc.

"Security" is not to be found in 1 paycheck for 40 years.

Someone in that setup has to play "wife" (nothing to do with gender), but in 90% of cases it's the women who ends up screwed over.

indeed frgr.

Well no decision is ever without risk, and you'd obviously have to take into account all those things, but for some people, it still makes practical sense to throw their weight behind the other person's career. This is usually more true when there is a big differential between the earning potential of the two partners.

It also depends on individual attitude to risk.

Frgr- spot on.

I'd also add - its not just about weighing up the risks of what MIGHT go wrong. Even in a situation where the earning partner doesn't get sick/ made redundant/ want a divorce, for many couples, the fact that the earning partner will play a far less hands on parenting role, because they are travelling, having to do networking etc in the evenings, is a step too far.
This thread has very much focused on wives who sacrifice their career in order to support their husband, but the flip side is that the husband is sacrificing time with his children. I wonder how the children in many of these situations feel about that?

I think having an income of your own -even if it's not much- will make life seem brighter for you. It doesn't really matter how much it is- a fiver an hour or five hundred pounds an hour, it will make life seem brighter because you've earned it yourself.
But, berrieberrie, although I generally agree with it being a good idea for each member of a couple to have earning ability and I do think that although you are right to point out pitfalls of stay-at-home parenthood, you are forgetting here that it is NOT up to the richer spouse (and yes I do mean spouse not partner because the difference is relevant here) who gets what in event of divorce. The decision is out of the richer spouse's hands, they don't get to dictate and if a judge decides that the woman gets the house even if she has not contributed a single penny to it, she'll get it.

Not forgetting that there are such things as life insurance.

So, yes, the ideal is that both members of the couple have earning ability-of course it is- but it need not be all doom and gloom for a sahp.

violethill, absolutely right - I'd rather DP had the opportunity to spend time being a father and being part of his children's lives when they're little, rather than working all hours to make as much money as possible. I know not everyone has a choice and can't manage on less, but generally there is more to life and happiness than maximising your income. I wouldn't sacrifice equality for more money.

If the 'traditional' setup (or its reverse) works for some couples, then fine, but I would never consider it. It's just too unequal, too much of a burden and too much of a one-sided life for both partners, in different ways.

I'm just amazed at the posts saying 'my husband would prefer me not to work'. Why, why, would any person prefer another person not to have a career unless it was going to make them ill or something. I genuinely feel like these remarks belong to a different era. No woman would ever post saying 'I'd like my husband not to work' just as a life preference.

I am obviously lucky. My husband thinks I am ace at my job and encourages me constantly to do the best I can, earn as much as I can, and go as far as I can. I cannot imagine how difficult it is to have a career with your husband secretly (or not so secretly) wishing you were at home, indeed, believing you are better suited to domestic tasks than what you have trained for or been educated for. Of course, if I wanted to stay at home (I have done), he's happy with that. But that wouldn't be his preference, his preference is for me to fulfil my ambitions whatever they may be, as mine is for him.

What onetoomany said....

My DP wasn't keen on me returning PT after DC2. The childcare costs wiped out most of what I earned so it seemed pointless to him that I should work for nothing. I persisted for the sake of my sanity but also because I have an employer who was very flexible and I wanted to hang on to this.

A year later the recession hit and DP was out of work for 9 months. He was then very glad I was working and able to increase my hours so we survived! Its not always easy and sometimes it can seem like more trouble than it's worth- but none of us knows what's around the corner and if it keeps you in touch with the grown up world that's also a bonus.

wamster Sadly it often is in the hands of the person with the income as if you are self employed, it is very easy to hide money rather than pay maintenance.
Also, there are many homes with little or no equity in them. Spousal maintenance doesn't really exist any more. So, unless you are very wealthy or have paid your mortage of on a large house, and have your own pension (a lot of divorces now don't include the pension) and savings... youre not going to come off very well.

There is absolutely no way on this earth I would give up my career and independence for a man

the relaionships board is full of women who have found themselves in very precarious financial situations (often when they have been traded in ofr a younger model, after years of child-rearing and home-making)

I worked PT when mine were small, often with not much left over after childcare costs

but those costs were shared and our salaries were shared

I still work PT even though my kids are 15 and 11, because we have a busy family life but I know if it went tits-up with DH I could support myself by going FT and not be reliant on a man's good will

Totally agree. It's not just the financial independence- its all the other aspects of having a working life as well. As ephiny says, the traditional set up of woman at home, man at work, is a very one-sided lifestyle - each person is getting one particular experience at the expense of another. These days more women and men want a more equal set up. Women are now educated to the same standard as men, and men now grow up expecting to be able to look after children and be involved in every aspect of parenting as much as women- thank god.

I think my DH would prefer me to work even though DC are pre-school age, he likes the dea of the money I would bring in and what it would pay for. (I used to earn more than him pre-children). However, he does very few domestic chores and I don't think he would do any more if I did go back to work. He also doesn't realise the childcare costs as we have never had them except cheap pre-school. I would love to go to work but worry my kids are used to me being around, have no family to help if childcare goes belly up, will have to work on top of all domestic stuff, and it will be me having to juggle pick ups and drop offs and DH often travels for work, often at short notice. Just been offered a PT post but logistically I'm not sure how I can make it work.

Just be glad he' not forcing you to work. One lady I know was in tears as she had to go back to full time work when her baby was only 6 months old, even though they could have managed on his wages.
He told her, he did not like the idea of her having more time with their child, so in the end the child ended spending more time in the nursery than with the parents.
No logic, just personal jealousy getting in the way

We decided together whether I returned to work or not. My opinion on the matter was more important for obvious reasons. However, my working does impact DH, so his opinion counts. I need him to be supportive.

Fiddledee- the key thing is to ensure that if you do return to work, your husband accepts that taking on more of the domestic chores is part of the deal. There is no logical reason why a woman is any less good at earning, or a man is any less good on the domestic front

Ripeberry - the situation you describe is ludicrous and sums up why for many couples nowadays, a balance of working and home life works best for all, not least the children. If the father is upset at having less time with his children than his wife,and there is no need to earn more than one full time
Income as you describe, the logical answer is for both to work part time

Yes, but there is not a part time option in most/many jobs.

That might be the ideal in co-parenting happy land, but it's not the reality of the UK economy at the moment, nor is it likely to be in the near future as it's an employer's market, so people can only work within what's available now.

"the key thing is to ensure that if you do return to work, your husband accepts that taking on more of the domestic chores is part of the deal."

There is an underlying assumption here: that the husband is available to take on more domestic chores. That assumption of availability is quite shaky.

I find it a bit odd that some couples haven't discussed this before having children, as a couple, ie how childcare will be done. We are ttc and have discussed at length how we would like/need our setup to be. It wouldn't be a case of one of us telling the other what we want them to do but a case of what would work as a family and what suits us.

I would go down to four days per week if I could get agreement (I earn more) he would be a sahd and continue with one day a week employment and scale down his business so that it was out of hours work for some additional income.

"Just be glad he' not forcing you to work. One lady I know was in tears as she had to go back to full time work when her baby was only 6 months old, even though they could have managed on his wages."

Massive assumptions there that a woman's place is in the home. Why should she not work, just because he earns adequately?

Insert - agree its not always possible, but the Situation has improved dramatically over the last couple of decades, and at least there is employment legislation in place now regarding part time and flexible working. Also maternity leave is longer than ever before, paternity leave exists (it didn't 20 years ago in the UK) and plans are in hand to make ML interchangeable, so that each parent can take some leave, which would allow greater choice for mums and dads.
Of course there may well be further to go, but anyone who has been in the employment market over the last few decades can see that things are moving in the right direction.

And of course the other key thing is to think about all these things and discuss them with the person you decide to have children with! Sounds obvious, but you only have to read mumsnet to see that there are women who accept great inequality in their relationship, eg allowing the man to get away with little or no domestic duties even while both partners are working and before children come along. Most people don't radically change when they have children, so what you have before is likely to be what you get after, so it pays to pick wisely!

X posts there hairylights

I agree with Morloth and am in a similar position.
I choose not to work ( I do have my hands full with children/animals/horses however) and he would prefer the set up we have but would be equally supportive if I wanted to work.
I have no worries about money either now or in the future so the need to work doesn't exist.
People must do what suits them without pontificating about other people's situations of which they know nothing. IMHO.

Has anyone suggested that anyones ambitions can ONLY be achieved through their career? Must have missed those posts.