To wonder why SAHPs enable their OH to 'do long hours' and 'travel a lot'

[ChristmasPlughole]

OK so it is a thread about a thread but on the SAHPs don't earn the income, their dps do thread, lots of mners are saying 'dp can only earn lots of money if I stay home with the kids so they can travel/ work late'. And the implication is that's OK as they earn lots of money.

But why? Would't you rather have less money but bring your children up together?

What is the extra money for?

It's an honest question, I have friends who are almost 'single parents' during the week and their dps travel a lot too. And they have lots of money. But it seems such a lonely existence.

(I am asking about couples who choose to have one high earning parent - not couples who work all the hours god sends to survive).

I don't get it. I love dp and would hate him to do long hours and have two weeks go past before we spent a nice evening together.

It seems so Victorian.

I agree totally with Seeker - again. But I also had to take into account DH's temperament and he needs to work silly hours both because his field demands it and he loves his field and is/was deeply ambitious. There have been times when he has rarely been home but I knew that was part of the deal. He certainly didn't put those hours in to make money and whatever field he chose he would have been the same. It's just in the field he chose the job is very demanding. Neither of us is especially materialistic and I reviewed my own career and now work public sector and relatively local because it means I can leave the house at 8.30 after the dc have left and be home by 5.30/45 ish. For that I get public sector middle mgt money and am very pleased with it. Also did it after 8 years at home as a SAHM which I loved but which was gruellingly hard work. DH's income is a by-product really of his commitment but had he chosen to be a teacher or a social worker I am convinced he would have been a headteacher of a big school or head of social services at an LEA by now.

wants to join the parralel universe with seeker where earning 80k makes you poor...

I have never said that we are poor, in fact I explicitly said that we live a comfortable life and have absolutely everything we need. I said that by LeQueen's standards we are probably poor as we cannot afford to buy a Georgian town house and decorate it with over priced paint.

I was making the point that it is perfectly possible to work sensible hours and see your family every evening and still live a comfortable lifestyle.

Schmee I am at home with my family, I chose a career that enabled me to be at home with my children in the holidays. I did not work when they were at home. What on earth would be the point in me being at home when they are at school. My husband is at home when they leave for school and when they get home from school, as he also wants time with them - I afterall have the school holidays.

runningwilde I think all that people are saying is that they do not understand why people choose a job that requires them to be away for long stretches of time or to miss their children growing up. I would imagine that the careers that allow you to support a SAHP are a choice. We are not talking about people doing 3 low paid jobs to keep a roof over their head.

People have also said that it is good that there are people willing to sacrifice family time for careers.

Naive and odd op. Some jobs require overseas travel my friends DH works in films he has to go on location for weeks or months at a time be that London, St Petersburg, Madeira wherever they are filming. Then we will have say a month or two off. Not all jobs are 9-5 10 minutes bus ride away from home . He loves the job and isn't really qualified to do anything else.

I still don't think I have managed to read it all, but I will as it is bad manners not to read your own thread.

I am incoherent as someone said. Very eloquent but cannot get words down to mean what I want. Anyway, thank you to ToothbrushThief as they explained what I meant.

So drum roll.............I have decided that IABU

I think from the posts I have read basically you'all fell in love with your driven dps and accepted their work ethic / workaholic nature. So it is not the money but the person you fell in love with. Fair enough. I understand that now, and it does explain the RL relationships I have experience of.

Personally I would have given short shrift to any potential partner that was always working. So I guess these decisions are made way before children come along.

(I also feel obliged to state in dp's defence that he has set up his own company and earns a good wage, as some posters have been rather sniffy).

"I think from the posts I have read basically you'all fell in love with your driven dps and accepted their work ethic / workaholic nature. So it is not the money but the person you fell in love with. Fair enough. I understand that now, and it does explain the RL relationships I have experience of. ". Was this on some other thread? I don't actually think that's what people are saying on here at all!

Im currently a sahm, hubby has been working away since sept. We had him home for a week over christmas and we will finally get him back this week....for 3 weeks then he is off again!
No high salary involved, where we live I cant work due to amazingly short creche hours plus there being no jobs anyway and no qualified childcarers!
We have now made the decision to move back to the uk where we have brought a house. This means the children can stay in one place their whole lives instead of moving every 2 years with dh's work. It will also mean I can get back to work once my dd hits school age. And for the first time in their lives the kids will have their grandparents, uncles, aunties and cousins around them. The downside is that they will only see their dad at the weekends and when he gets holiday!

If a job comes up with the same wage and would keep my husband as happy as the one he has now then he would jump at it but you just got to make the most of what you have, wether it be money to spend or time together...because some of us have neither lol

One of the things that made DH attractive to me as a potential partner/father was how driven he was.

A bit mercenary on my part but having had the upbringing I did I had no intention of marrying someone who didnt intend to work hard at providing.

I make no apologies for this, my childhood was happy on the whole, but we were very very poor. Go to bed hungry poor. There was no fucking way I was choosing someone who did what they loved if what they loved meant not enough for the kids. My dad loved the land but it was a bitch and as much as I feel the connection there wasn't any chance of me marrying a farmer for instance.

I work very part time. This is due to dh working long hours. I do not expect him to work these hours so I can stay at home. It was his choice to pursue a career and take a job 50 miles away from home. As a consequence he leaves house at 6.30 in the morning and is rarely home before 7. Sometimes much later.
Op should he put his career on hold and get a lower paid job so he can spend more time with the family? Would seem a wate to me.

I don't think anyone is saying that parents should plunge themselves into poverty so they have time with their families . But most people who have high paid jobs which take them away from the home for extended periods had a wide choice of career options. I , therefore do not understand why they choose one that keeps them away from their family.

It's not a choice I would make, and indeed like the OP, I chose to work part time to enable my DH leave his city based job and to get a much lower paid job in a local town. To me, it was important that my dh would be home every night, so we could all eat our tea together every night as a family, and dh could put the children to bed.

Neither did I want to work weekends or evenings, as I believe it is important to have family time then and it is something we prioritise.

But I realise that I was lucky to be in the position to enable that to happen. I too earn a decent salary so am able to make up the amount dh has lost (not all people are able to do this), the nature of dh's job was one that he could retrain and find work at a similar level outside of London, not all jobs are able to do this, and I also have fixed hours so there's not two of us needing childcare - in fact, now the girls are at school, we barely need any. We're also lucky that we have family to pick up the slack when we're both needed to work. Without this it would be impossible, and so I can see that the burden of all the work has to fall on one partner.

I was a SAHM when my children were small but not so my DH could work long hours and earn lots of money. We didn't have much money but I wanted to be at home with the children. Also once there was more than one most of any extra money would have gone on childcare. We did stuff as a family at weekends.