to think a sahp is a luxury

[3nonblondeboys80]

for the sahm and the wohp parent. Lots gets said about being a sahm is a luxury lifestyle choice etc etc. However, I think it is also a luxury for the wohp.
eg not having to do half the housework,
half the sickness days,
nighttime waking.
knowing you can go away on business conference etc without having to worry about arranging childcare.
no dealing with school admin, homework help.
having someone to sort out family prescriptions, medical appointments, car servicing etc etc.
not having to share school, nursey picks ups.
Ok I accept wohp has some additional burden being the only wage earner but I feel this is more than balanced by the above.
aibu

When I went back to work after being a SAHM I got asked quite a lot of questions. Did I find it hard? Did I enjoy having some pin money / have things to think about outside the house? (don't get me started on those). Did I find juggling kids and work difficult? How did I cope with holidays and sick kids?

My response was no, I've found it easy but it's had much more impact on my dp. He can no longer travel, stay late for work without planning. He has to spend his evenings cooking, doing house admin, planing food etc. his annual leave is now partly taken up doing childcare.

No one ever asked my husband how he found it with both of us working. Apart from a couple of silly comments about money.

I think the benefit to the wohp of having a sahp is often overlooked.

I agree also with HicDraconis.
Some people may actively choose to be a sahp, or wohp, others may feel that they haven't a choice. I suspect there are many who don't have a strong feeling and fall into what fits best for them.

What matters is both parties appreciating the contributions of the other.

As a single parent I'd think any partner who pulled their weight was a luxury - either going out to earn money or doing half the childcare/housework. It sounds lovely either way.

It's only a luxury if you can afford it and it's a choice. FT nursery fees are about £10k per year here, so someone on an average wage and 2 children in nursery would probably be worse off working.

That's said, I would love "a wife" by which I probably mean a housekeeper.

Yep total luxury. I am a SAHM because daycare would have cost £400 more than anything I could earn in my field. We couldn't afford for me to work. DH's salary vs DH's salary - £400.

Agree with some pp-it's the choice that is the luxury. I think DP would certainly agree that me being at home makes his life much easier. No worries about childcare, I do the majority of the house work, night wakings and generally take care of everything to do with the home.

Pico2- several of my friends who have now returned to work have tried to woo me as a wife! Sadly for some of them the weight of the house work etc has fallen to them despite them returning to work

I am a STAHP and it is cheaper for us, than for me to work. I am a community worker and dh is a higher earner, but not all that much 45k so it makes sense for me to stay at home. Because dh is a high earner we woukd not qualify for any tax credits.

Writer - I was a SAHM. We could afford it.

I didn't plan on my then husbands dick falling into a spare vagina that just happened to be passing.

As a general rule, I'd agree that having one SAHP makes life easier for the WOHP, even if the SAHP is forced into that position (say because their earnings wouldn't cover childcare).

But I wouldn't describe it as a luxury because of the fact that some families are forced into this position instead of having made a free choice to have a SAHP. If I wanted to work but couldn't for whatever reason, I'd be really annoyed to have this described as a luxury for me / DH.

I was an SAHM for many years and although I can see why it can be thought of as a luxury, it wasn't really for us.

I went back to work full time when I had my eldest, and put her in nursery when she was three months old for childcare. That was nearly 20 years ago now, and even then it was costing us nearly £700 per month. Three years later I had my second baby and became an SAHM because the cost of putting them both through nursery would have cost more than I earned and we had been unable to find other childcare options with which we would have felt comfortable. We didn't live near family either, so there was no local support network.

In our situation, we would definitely have been a lot worse off if I had gone back to work. I am not saying it was easy living on my husband's salary alone. It certainly wasn't. Both of us were also constantly on edge about the possibility of him losing his job, and he very keenly felt the responsibility of being the sole breadwinner. I'd be lying if I said it never caused us any tensions.

I am working again now every weekday morning, and enjoying it. The children are all old enough not to need childcare, and it has made so much difference to us financially.

Choices are not always clear cut.

I see it as a someone making a sacrifice rather than it being a luxury.

We all see things differently. This is merely my way of looking at things.

I think if you can afford it and if both parties respect each other, thenyes, it can be a luxury. As the wohp my life is definitely easier with dh at home. Mainly, as other pp have said, because I don't need to worry about late meetings or early starts or sick days etc.

But then, I more than pull my weight when home. I move heaven and earth to make sure that if dh has plans and I have said I'll be home, I am home. And I still try to make bed time at least twice a week.

Similarly, dh does things to make my life additionally easy.

For us, being able to live this life is a wonderful luxury and we a re thankful every day.

Yanbu.

I think it's a luxury for the other partner who is working. But not necessarily for the SAHM. I'm a SAHM and I'm not working because it just doesn't make sense financially (childcare is too expensive and travel costs). I miss the day to day interaction with colleagues and friends. It's isolating being a SAHM.

I often read on MN that some SAHPs expect their WOH partners to do 50% of the housework as well as lots of childcare in the evenings and weekends etc. In those situations, no, I don't think having a sahp is a luxury for the WOHP at all, really. Just more pressure on them as the sole breadwinner.

In families where the SAHP takes care of most of the housework and doesn't expect a huge contribution from the WOHP at home, then yes, I think it is a luxury. A bit like having a housekeeper!!

Personally, although I'd love a housekeeper if I could afford one, I would prefer to have a partner who shares the burdens of earning and housework with me. And to split the childcare between us too.

.

Yes as the wohp I do have less to do at home. But I do my fair share and I do as much of the before school bits as I can depending on what shift I'm doing meaning he can sleep a bit later

He does all the school runs and on the days I work late he does dinner and bedtime but on the days I'm home earlier we do them together.

When I was a sahm (and still with xh) he did absolutely nothing to contribute to the household except bring money in, but he only worked a few hours each night so could have easily helped me, even a tiny bit.

So having been on that situation I make a point of doing as much as I can so that dp never feels like I'm taking the piss. And he doesn't mind picking up the slack if I can't help out because I'm too busy/tired from work because I make the effort 90% of the time

I can't work onsite unless there's enough hours to cover childcare for the week. It's not the best situation having to watch a child and work at the same time. So no, it's not a luxury, but it's better than no money.

If I can get a job that pays better than DH we'll switch places and he'll work from home while I go to the office.

Yanbu

DH and I have done both roles. Now he is big earner I'm sahp. I support his role tons as I do everything ( as agreed) and he maximises income. This works for us only as I study PT and he is fully here weekends for his share. He has it easy in some ways I in others. Main drawback is he misses stuff with kids and I get held back career. I like to think we balance out but ultimately I get to experience sahp and working 2nd career soon so feel I've done both. Depends whee you values lie.

The sahms mums I know have high earning partners, very high earning, so for them while yes they'd be slightly worse off if they worked, it very much is a choice. And certainly a luxury. For them.

I do get a bit when they say, in my company (I work) that they couldn't possibly work in an office as it is so boring. Well you could if you had to

Want to add i feel it is a luxury to be able to pick Ds up from school and hear his news/problems and spend time getting school work and reading done not stressed/tired. I value being able to take them to park swimming and be home for 530.

Doesn't surprise me at all that it's the female wohp here that still do significant amounts of house stuff and child care even though they work full time with a sah partner.

Just to add my own experience, my DH was a sahd for around a year or so. We wanted to give dd some stability at home after a move across the country, away from her beloved nanny, and it seemed pointless to start looking for suitable childcare again when she was about to start school. It worked quite well for dd, but I honestly don't think it made a whole lot of difference to me as the main breadwinner!

I've toms DH I'd only be full time again if it was 50/50 school runs and cleaner hired with an agreement on batch cooking! I do worry we are a bit locked in. But kids will soon be off I guess needing less in some ways more in others