Am now working out maternity leave and have to decide how long to take. I'm the main earner in our family so our household income would take quite a dip when im on maternity. Hve always just assumed i would take the 9 months option where some money comes in. Now im faced with putting dates on paper im not so sure.
We would be relatively comfy if i take 9 months. If i take the full year it will be a bit of a squeeze but would be able to afford the essentials (mortgage etc), but very little money to spare for every day things. (This is baby no 1 so we're used to having money for every day dwindling) Still, depite financially it being more logical to go back after 9 months, i had a mini meltdown today (ahh wonderful pregnancy hormones!) at the idea of handing over an 8 month old baby to the parents and going back to work :( 8 months seems so little.
Would it be unreasonable to aim for skint and home above the more 'sensible' (!?!) option of going back sooner. It would put more pressure on OH to bring home the bacon (self employed so more pressure/less reliability) but he says i should do whatever i think best.
WWYD?