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

With only one child in childcare it's still worth both me and DH going to work (we earn about the same) so we are "trapped" in our jobs. So SAHP does seem like a luxury we can't justify.

The additional income isn't loads and we still have to be careful with money but it allows us to do things to the house that need doing, buy birthday presents, not to have to worry about putting food on the table etc which makes life a lot less stressful tbh. It means we can live in a house rather than a small flat too. So I suppose we have chosen this over SAHP.

The flipside is racing back to do pick ups, negotiating sick days and desperately trying to cook, clean and have some quality of life with hardly any time on our hands.

My DH is the SAHP (although I'm currently on mat leave after having had DS), and I still do all of the admin, all of the cleaning and some of the laundry. He cooks during the week and I cook at weekends.

It wouldn't be financially viable for both of us to work, and I'm the higher earner with the better career prospects, so there was never any doubt who'd stay at home.

I don't think it's a luxury for me to have him there; it just is, we had no choice.

When we lived in London, being a SAHM was not a luxury, childcare was just too expensive with more than one dc. I knew several mums who, effectively, paid to go to work. The cost of childcare, commuting and work wardrobe came to more than their salaries. But they felt they had to do it in order to retain their employability or seniority in their field.

Having left London for an area where childcare costs are lower, I could have WOH. But we felt that the benefits of having a SAHP were worthwhile.

Dh may earn the cash, but I am an equal partner. You could say that my salary is the money we do not spend on childcare.

Now that the dc are at school, yes, being a SAHM is a luxury - but a worthwhile one. OTOH I am bored and would like to have some more tangible luxuries, like a hotel holiday abroad, so we need to balance the luxury of attending all school events/after school activities/child illnesses etc, against the luxury of having a new kitchen/holiday abroad etc.

YANBU - I became a SAHM after having DC2 and realising childcare was going to wipe out my income.

After I had DC1, I went back to work and DH moved his hours to start early and finish at 4pm so he could do nursery pick up. We spilt 'sick days', he had to do a lot more around the house.

When I was on MatLeave with DC2, he had to work late a couple of times and he mentioned that it was a lot less stressful to know he could just stay an extra hour and finish stuff in an emergancy, rather than leave anyway, pick up DC1, then have to to entertain DC1 with cbeebies while DH logged back in to finish what he'd been doing before.

He recently was contacted by a head hunter for a role that would be an extra £25-30k if he goes for it and is just debating it, but if I had gone back to work, that wouldn't be possible for him as he wouldn't be able to have the flexible hours at the new job, and pretty much any promotion at his current place would have to factor in moving to using a nanny for child care rather than nurseries/before and after school clubs, because he'd have to work longer hours and I could only do one end of drop off or pick up.

The fact that his career has more potential when I'm a SAHM wasn't in our thinking at the point I gave up working, but it might have to be considered if I wanted to go back to work once DC2 is school age (and care costs fall).

DH walks in each day to a cooked meal - either home to eat with the DCs or something to be reheated that I made for the DCs. (He's not home early enough to do it). While he does do quite a lot round hte house, it's still no where near half. He doesn't have to do any of hte planning or thinking.

The downside though is he said he doesn't feel as close to DC2 as he's not got that sole charge time every evening. We need to start building in some 1-1 time for them, but I guess if I'd always been a SAHM he wouldn't realise what he was missing.

I guess it is a luxury but one for us both - and it is the WOHP not often acknowledged to benefit (unless the WOHP is the mother - then it tends to be 'what a great guy, staying home so she can pursue her career')

For my DH, who is the WOHP, the benefit is in part because of all the logistics I, the SAHP, do with the DC - school, nursery, clubs, school trips, sickness, doctors, dentists, play dates, parties etc etc, and all the 'stuff' that goes with each of these things - but also all the emotional side of things with the DCs. My DH pretty much leaves it to me to deal with (or make any observations of) possible upsets the DCs might be having - settling into school, issues with friends/ teachers, school work, handling new situations and feelings, coping generally with life.

Sure he will contribute, and I know he cares - but safe in the knowledge that I will sort it all out and ultimately the responsibility is with me to manage everything and everyone in terms of general health, happiness and wellbeing.

To be honest this sometimes feels like a tremendous pressure, whereas going off to work, even when in a pressured job, could feel like light relief by comparison! Even more so if you know they are with the other person who loves them the most in the world.

It's not just the physically being there, it's the parenting and 'upbringing' you get left with.

That's not to say I don't appreciate and acknowledge that he is a good provider and we are privileged to have the choice, it is just there are so many subtle, less visible elements of the 'load'.

Both have benefits. Both have disadvantages.

I actually think DH realises far more than most WOHP with a SAHP partner that he's got a better deal because I worked for so long after DC1, he has seen his life get easier, as he used to have to do a lot more of the child related 'stuff'. I do have friends who stopped work after DC1 who's DHs just don't get how good a deal they have. They can see the money side, but not that what they are buying is time and reduced stress for them.

I am a f/t WOHP having a sahp (who isn't me :( ) doesn't seem that much of a luxury from my side of the fence. YABU.

I used to think how lovely it would be to be a SAHP and used to joke with DH about what a perfect housewife I would be but now, 6 months into maternity leave I realise how naive I was. Another poster used the term 'domestic lacky' or something along those lines and that's exactly how it feels. I think my DH thinks I've got it easy as the current SAHP but I am constantly telling him how jealous I am of his life and his he gets to leave the house every morning knowing he has no other burdens on him.

I used to think how lovely it would be to be a SAHP and used to joke with DH about what a perfect housewife I would be but now, 6 months into maternity leave I realise how naive I was. Another poster used the term 'domestic lacky' or something along those lines and that's exactly how it feels. I think my DH thinks I've got it easy as the current SAHP but I am constantly telling him how jealous I am of his life and his he gets to leave the house every morning knowing he has no other burdens on him.

I can't see how it's a luxury for the WOHP, it's very hard bearing the pressure of being the only earner whilst the other person is at home all day every day with no pressures and free to do whatever they want.

If MN is to be believed, SAHPs are there to purely look after the children and as soon as the WOHP returns the house jobs should be split.

Yet some MN'ers firmly believe that the SAHP should do the household chores and cooking as they are the ones at home everyday.

I'm lucky that my DH is the cook in our house so as soon as he gets home from work he starts making the dinner

Yet some MN'ers firmly believe that the SAHP should do the household chores and cooking as they are the ones at home everyday.

I'm lucky that my DH is the cook in our house so as soon as he gets home from work he starts making the dinner

I am a sahm and yes, it is a luxury for my dh as well as for me. He appreciates it though. I do the majority of the house work and cooking etc but he still does stuff when he comes home, he doesn't just sit there and expect me to attend to his every whim. It's an arrangement that works well for us.

I choose to do the majority of household stuff because I consider that to be part of my 'job' as the one who is at home all day. I'd be pretty pissed off if I was at work all day and then came home and had to start mopping the floor when there was another adult who had far more hours available in the day to do stuff like that. It's give and take. When I go back to full time work, then things will be split evenly again, the way they were when we both worked full time in the past.

daisy - as the person at home with the baby I'm certainly not free to do what I want. If that were the case I would have a lovely lie-in, I'd be meeting friends for lunch, going shopping and treating myself to pedicures. Instead I'm attached to a baby, have limited interaction with adults, my brain power is slowly slipping away, my days are repetitive and mundane and my days are dictated by a baby or structured around the baby. I'm definitely not free to do as I please, nor are a lot of SAHP's I imagine.

I can't wait to go back to work and feel like I have a purpose again outside of my DS.

Treacle - if your children are at school then it makes sense for you to take care of the housework, as you have time to do it. But if there are children at home and the WOHP still expects all the housework to be done and dinner to be cooked then I think that is totally unreasonable. It's possible to keep up on the basics with small children around, as in, tidying as you go throughout the day, but bigger jobs are just not possible. Having small children is a hard slog and expecting one partner to do it all while the other just carries on with life as though they have no children is not fair or reasonable. It's situation that leads to exhaustion and resentment on the part of the SAHP.

And, as writer says, life with small children at home is not a cakewalk. It's hard and frustrating a lot of the time (though also lovely in parts) and the WOHP needs to recognise that.

Cailin I agree. I would feel very resentful indeed if he expected to come home to a show home and a gourmet dinner on the table. But I voluntarily do the majority of the housework because even with a toddler at home I still have more time for these things than he does. But at the weekends, it's all hands on deck round here, we share all the responsibility then.

That's as it should be treacle. What I object to is WOHPs who wash their hands entirely of the day to day household tasks and expect to just go to work and come home, with everything else - food, clothes, children, admin - taken care of by their skivvy.

YANBU I would LOVE to have had a stay at home wife and have been able to pursue my career without ever having to even know where the dishwasher or cooker was, or ever having to pick up my own dirty underwear or nurse a sick child into the night, or worry about getting home on time. (Oops, perhaps I am bitter at having become an unvalued personal valet and housekeeper to someone with a fulfilling career, with no option to go back to my own professional career now I have been out of the workplace for 20 years - the WOHP def gets the better end of the deal).

It's a massive luxury.

When you live in the South East and your DP earns just 15K you HAVE to work.

Those people who say it's not financially viable to work due to childcare fees - I went back to work when DD was 6 weeks old working evenings and weekends.

but jack that vastly depends on the help and support you have around you surely?

dp works nights so for 4-5 days a week depending on his shift pattern he isn't able to look after dd at all as he is either asleep or at work. his shift pattern rotates over a 6 week cycle and having investigated it no cm or nursery can work around his days off. I have no family who can help out as they are all still working. we had no choice but for me to stay home. he earns more than I did and with his older 2 to consider for school pick ups etc it was financial suicide for me to go back.

for those saying surely people know their circumstances prior to ttc yes if people are actively ttc they do however for those of us told for nearly 20 years they were infertile and couldn't have kids it was a massive u prepared shock to discover I was pregnant do no we didn't have the foresight to save or prepare.

Life with small children at home isn't a cakewalk but neither is going out to work.

Both are hugely dependent on circumstances. A SAHM with school age children, or a SAHM with an "easy baby" and extended family around her is obviously going to find it easier than one isolated at home with a small screamy baby.

Likewise, I know there are jobs where you get to have intelligent chats with colleagues, drink hot drinks and debate topical issues in between endless toilet trips. I just don't work in one and don't know anybody else who does either

Just as working people romanticise the life of a SAHM - I think SAHPs do the same to working parents at times.