Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

DH told me infront of ILs to use my brain

250 replies

barbie007 · 29/05/2011 20:56

DH told me in front of ILs that I should do something with my brain.....why not a year of postgraduate law conversion? Or get into finance and earn lots of money? I used to be a schoolteacher so why does he think I want to be a lawyer or a banker now?

I've been a SAHM for 10 years and I love it. I use my brain all the time and it p**s me off that he thinks I don't. We don't need an extra wage btw. I've not spoken to him for the last few hours and when he asked if I could help with dinner tonight (we were only having cheese toasties!) I told him to use his brain and work it out.

OP posts:
fedupofnamechanging · 30/05/2011 11:43

I think you do have a point that she is dependent upon her husband and if things go wrong then that could be a problem. It is a risk that SAHM take when they choose to be at home.A WOHP should appreciate the level of trust their partner has put in them, so should not treat the decision to stay at home as something a person does lightly. It's not without considerable sacrifice. I think that people can only choose to do what they think is for the best for their families at any given time.

For myself, if I'd not been a SAHM, then we would not have been able to move abroad for my husbands work and he would not have had the career advancement that he has enjoyed. Therefore, I consider that I have, albeit indirectly, contributed to the DC university fees

geraldinetheluckygoat · 30/05/2011 11:44

You just desperately want her to feel bad for not being in paid employment. Why? I don't understand why you are SO vehement about it?

scottishmummy · 30/05/2011 11:46

thats my point,future provision for kids solely made by dad.she doesnt work,isnt adding to the just in case funds.its all down to him. she a parent too and imo needs to contribute too

scottishmummy · 30/05/2011 11:48

actually future and current provision for kids solely dad

geraldinetheluckygoat · 30/05/2011 11:48

But she IS contributing, though, isn't she? She is providing childcare. She is doing everything in the home. She is making her dh's life easy. As Karmabeliever says, she has made it very easy for her dh to follow his career path (which she says he loves), he works hard, she works hard.

DiscretionGuaranteed · 30/05/2011 11:50

I agree with scottishmummy that the OP and her family have currently got all their eggs in the single basket of her DH and his career - from my POV it's the worst downside of being a longterm SAHM, because even the best of husbands get sick, get made redundant, get hit by buses, or run off with other people.

ChippingIn · 30/05/2011 11:50

Karma/Belgo/Geraline - well said.

She is supporting them scottishmummy, just not in the way you think she should.

and more importantly for herself - who are you to decide what is right for her?

The only thing I agree with is that by giving up paid work you do make yourself vulnerable should the relationship break down, which is something we should all consider these days given the divorce rate.

TheBride · 30/05/2011 11:50

she a parent too and imo needs to contribute too

She is. There is more than one way to contribute to your children's lives than writing cheques.

if I'd not been a SAHM, then we would not have been able to move abroad for my husbands work and he would not have had the career advancement that he has enjoyed. Therefore, I consider that I have, albeit indirectly, contributed to the DC university fees Yes, and based on recent cases, a judge would likely agree with you on that point (going back to the point about financial vulnerability)

KittySpencer · 30/05/2011 11:51

I'm with scottishmummy on this one. I can't understand why someone wouldn't work with 3 children in school, 10+ years out of the workplace seems very odd to me. I'm not surprised her DH is unhappy.

I was brought up to be independent and always be able to support myself, I agree her position is precarious.

And all this nonsense about the value of voluntary work, as though she's doing a full week as a volunteer Hmm I hardly think a couple of hours a week deserves high praise and in any event if it's that big a deal, she can carry on doing it when she goes back to work, plenty of people do.

geraldinetheluckygoat · 30/05/2011 11:53

Yes agreed about not having personal provision should the relationship break down. But we don't know her position re. savings. Plus, presumbably she would be entitled to half the house, etc. should she need it. PLUS she hasn't come on here with anything that sounds like a potential break up situation, but should it happen, she would get half the house, or to stay in the house. Then she would adjust her lifestyle to the new situation....

fedupofnamechanging · 30/05/2011 11:54

She is contributing. What she does enables her husband to do what he does. Honestly, there are many jobs which pay good wages but expect you to travel, stay late for meetings, take work home etc. If the WOHP said to his employer that he couldn't do any of that because he had to collect the kids and put the dinner on, I doubt he'd keep his highly paid job for long.

A SAHP means that the WOHP hasn't got to worry about any of that. It actually reduces stress on them and allows them to act as a free agent so far as work is concerned.

There are a lot of families where both parents work and they manage to sort out childcare between them and all kudos to them for managing it. I would struggle and the nature of my DHs work means that I would end up working and doing most of the house/child stuff.

Different families have different things that work for them. It doesn't mean that one is right and one is wrong.

KittySpencer · 30/05/2011 11:54

Oh, and the doing everything in the home which she can only do being a SAHM - whilst it would be nice to live in a utopian idyll where household chores were shared, most of us don't. When I was with Ex, I worked FT. And did all the housework, cooking, laundry etc. I know lots of women in that position.

geraldinetheluckygoat · 30/05/2011 11:55

It seems odd to YOU Kitty. But not to the OP, or apparently to this point, her dh. She's not asking you to do it....

geraldinetheluckygoat · 30/05/2011 11:57

Yes, Kitty, I have worked FT and done all the housework too. It was hard, and Ireally resented it.

TheBride · 30/05/2011 11:58

When I was with Ex, I worked FT. And did all the housework, cooking, laundry etc. I know lots of women in that position.

More fool you then

SoupDragon · 30/05/2011 11:58

FFS. Contributions don't need to be financial.
Some people are obsessed with money and see it as the only important thing.

geraldinetheluckygoat · 30/05/2011 11:59

Grin TheBride. Quite.

fedupofnamechanging · 30/05/2011 12:01

So what are you supposed to do then if you get home from work before your partner, or if they are away with work? Refuse to cook dinner or put a wash on because he hasn't done his 50% this week?

KittySpencer · 30/05/2011 12:03

TheBride, given that it was a choice between it being done by me or not at all, it wasn't a choice in reality. However, having had several years of that it does mean now as a lone parent I'm quite used to doing everything myself, and in fact I have less to do now as I don't have Ex to clear up after :)

Also re travel, staying late for meetings, taking work home etc. I'm expected to, and do all of that, as a lone parent. It shouldn't therefore be too difficult for 2 parents to manage between them, even if both work FT.

fedupofnamechanging · 30/05/2011 12:07

Think it depends on the job kitty. If one of you is working away, then it's physically impossible to share the tasks fairly. Which means the other one gets to do both. It also depends on salaries involved and cost of child care or support from family. all families are different and what works for one won't work for them all.

geraldinetheluckygoat · 30/05/2011 12:10

Well done, Kitty. Good for you. But the OP's family doesn't work like that. I don't see why the fact that you do it means that they should? Just because it is possible does that mean it is The Law? That all families should do the same? I don't get your point.

MistressFrankly · 30/05/2011 12:13

Its all well and good arguing whether or not OP should go back to work but the issue is if DH isnt happy with the situation then they need to talk it through. They are working under an agreement made ten years ago. Things change. Saying he wants to have his cake and eat it is a tad unfair. Maybe after a decade he is tired with the way things are and the prospect of another 5 years is a bit much? If he is making comments in front of ILs then he really should have discussed it with OP a bit sooner. Maybe he was looking for back up?
Things may need to change but doesnt mean it will be all bad. Different is good. Maybe he would like to do a few hours less to spend more time with the kids? I know OP didnt think he would but my dad got to a point when he realised how much he missed of us growing up and chose to do less so he could see us more. People change.

scottishmummy · 30/05/2011 12:19

dont understand why any mum wouldn't want to support her dp and kids
i understand sahm when kids are not at school,as nursery is v pricey. i am fortunate in being able to afford ft nursery,and acknowledge that is not everyone situation.

BUT when kids at school. there is no compelling reason not to work and contribute to family.take the sole responsibility off her dh. now i am not kidding myself on that 10yr out job market she will enter at point she left.but given she already volunteer in elderly home no reason she could get job doing this.or work as teaching assistant (given she is a qualified teacher).or look at re-entry to teaching.she doesnt need to work hours that requires after school if that isnt what she wants.

KittySpencer · 30/05/2011 12:22

geraldine, I'm simply saying that a) lots of women are responsible for housework etc and work FT and b) it's perfectly possible to manage a job where travel, late meetings and bringing work home are involved when both parents work.

Clearly not everyone does it, but these are reasons why it was suggested the OP would find it difficult to go back to work, which from my own experience I don't agree would be the case.

YesterdaysPants · 30/05/2011 13:09

Yikes! I haven't read such a SAHM-bashing thread in ages.

It's obvious that OP and her DH need to have a good talk about their situation. But the judginess of posters on here at their decision fir her to be a SAHM makes me Shock

I plan to SAHM when I have my first - nothing to do with affording nursery fees, we could easily cover them. I'm in fact the higher warner but we both agree that we want me at home for the first few years, and hopefully until school age if I'm not going bonkers/we have financial problems.

It's a choice that only the partnership involved can make. The majority of posts on here seem to be judging her for wanting to remain at home - why is it a problem?

There is a big benefit for a SAHM to be around during primary years, and only the OP and her DH can decide if it's outweighed by financial gain. Incredibly condescending to say she won't be interesting to her DH without a challenging WOHM job, and I suspect that's what she found hurtful.

Good luck establishing the right balance for your family OP.