Would you marry a stay at home dad?

[businesshoursareover]

www.telegraph.co.uk/men/relationships/fatherhood/11122773/Society-still-doesnt-like-the-idea-of-stay-at-home-dads.html

''According to researchers at the Lancaster University Management School, 82% of men who work full time, would like to spend more time with their children.''

''Public support for dads staying at home is close to zero; only 5% of us think dads should work part-time and the vast majority of us (73%) say dads should work full time.

So when a father decides to work part time, he is not just transgressing the social norms, he’s also jeapordising his ability to fulfill the masculine role of protector and provider. This may seem like an outdated concept, but research suggests that women all over the world still look for these qualities in a mate and are more likely than men to favour traits related to resources, like ambition, industriousness and earning capacity.''

Very interesting since there are 10 times more stay at home mums than dads in the UK, not to mention that many of the men's situations are circumstantial and the wife is not exactly happy. Just googling ''mumsnet breadwinner'' will bring up pretty much nothing but threads started by women who resent being the breadwinner. So how many women would love working FT while the husband stays at home or maybe does a little freelance on the side for a few quid a week?

Yes, DH stayed at home with our first for 20 months. Made more sense for me to work, but I also didn't want to put DS in full time childcare before that.

I would not have been very happy if he wanted to stay home after kids were in school though. That of course depends on the family, but in our case, there would not be enough for him to do that I would consider this set-up fair.

Dp stayed at home and looked after the kids during the day and then worked at night for a few years. It worked well for us, but he did work.

We wouldn't do it as DH earning capacity is higher. He works in a specialist industry and has lots of experience. He is self employed now, so works around the family. I also own quite a large company, but again work around the family.

If dhs work dried up I would have no problem working and have worked in some capacity since dd was 18 months old. So 10 years now.

Simple fact is that some people still see being a sahp as a woman's job, therefore men who do it are less masculine. It will change with time. Male nurses weren't the norm when I was younger, I wouldn't bat an eyelid now.

The problem is also that many women want to stay at home, its biological. And yes some do resent having to go out and work. But I am sure some men resent it too, but it doesn't seem as socially acceptable for men to moan about it.

And no I wouldn't marry a man that's already a stay at home dad. I grew up in 'blended' family and (I know its not popular) but I wouldn't date someone who had kids, tbh. I don't think i would make a good step parent and never wanted more than 2 kids. I don't think i would cope with having 3 or 4 kids every weekend/ half the week.

Dh took 3 months paternity leave under shared parental leave arrangements while I went back p/t after dc2. I didn't resent that & think that the ideal for our family would be for us both to work p/t - say 4 days each. Unfortunately dh's industry isn't too accommodating, particularly of men working p/t. They tried to refuse him parental leave saying it wasn't appropriate as they're a small-ish company.
I don't think I would want to work f/t while dh stayed home - I may start to resent the time he had with dc.

I wouldn't marry anybody that I had to ask somebody else about first, stay at home dad or not.

TLM

I've always been struck by the difference between how many educated, middle class women claim they'd be fine with a man staying at home compared to how few actually do it IRL. Not just that, but the men are in most cases not even ''equal'' to them but they are older, higher in terms or job position, seniority, salary, the property ladder etc.

So when a father decides to work part time, he is not just transgressing the social norms, he’s also jeapordising his ability to fulfill the masculine role of protector and provider. This may seem like an outdated concept, but research suggests that women all over the world still look for these qualities in a mate and are more likely than men to favour traits related to resources, like ambition, industriousness and earning capacity.''

I'd like to see the research that suggests that........

*Please read the thread, this isn't about men who already have kids, but the ones who plan on staying at home later.

It's in the OP :

How many women would love working FT while the husband stays at home or maybe does a little freelance on the side for a few quid a week? *

If the survey asked 'do you then a father should stay at home to look after his child' then I would be one of those who answered No.
But i would also answer no to the same question about a mother because as I say I prefer both working p/t or very reasonable f/t hours from home or with no commute and sharing childcare with paid and family childcare too.

We can't afford for both of us not to work, especially thinking long term about retirement and pensions.

That being said we both work compressed weeks and have a day at home with the toddler. I took 6 months full pay maternity then MrVan took 3 months statutory parental leave. Ideally we'd both like to work part-time.

We both work in the public sector and MrVan's organisation was totally freaked out by his parental leave request as they'd not had one before but it was fine.

I would be fine with him working part-time or being a SAHD if he was happy and we could afford it (it would be good for his health to not work outside the home as well).

I wouldn't marry someone who was already a stay at dad. It's a family decision that I'd want to be part of making

And there were quite a lot of SAHDs or Dads working part-time/flexibly when I was on maternity leave. They were regulars at the week day activities.

I think in an ideal world pre school children should be looked after in their own homes by a parent, so yes I would.

Stay at home dads are lovely

Sorry, what does that even mean?

I would not, but only because, if I was a man, I would refuse to marry or have children with somebody that wants to Stay-at-home.
No SAHP for me.

No, I wouldn't marry a man who expected to be able to SAH while I was the breadwinner. But then I wouldn't expect to be able to SAH while someone else financially supported me and my children either. I would always expect to contribute financially to children I create, as well as by looking after them.

Without seeing the whole survey and the context of that question, it's a poor question. I looked at the Social Attitudes Survey but couldn't see it there although some of the other questions there aren't well worded e.g. they have options requiring you to choose man or woman when I think many people's true answer would be "whichever works best for the family" or similar.

"Would you marry a man who wanted to stay at home?" - if that was the question as a stand alone then my answer would probably have been no, because I would have been thinking of someone like my MIL who stopped working the moment she was married. It sounds like someone who wants to be at home regardless of children rather than a SAHD to me.

We've had a few variations:
-I had a year's maternity leave from work after DD was born, but was back at uni FT when she was about 4 months. DH went slightly PT at that point and we used a mix of DH and MIL to cover the times I was studying.
-When I went back to work (FT), as I was the higher earner (by about 50% on FT equivalents) DH went even more PT and DD went to nursery/MIL.
-I then got a new job - more money but huge amounts of travelling which meant I was often away for the whole week for several weeks running so we had to set up our life in such a way that it was never assumed I would be there for childcare.
-DH stopped working entirely for about a year so was a SAHD
-DH now works from home, as a childminder, so not only cares for our DD full time but several other people's too!

So we don't remotely stick to gendered roles really and answering no to that question wouldn't mean I wouldn't be happy for DH to be a SAHD.

If there was a connection and we were attracted to each other and he wasn't a cunt, yes.
Same as if there was a connection and we were attracted to each other and the bloke wasn't a cunt but was working full time, or part time, or whatever.
(And obviously if I wasn't already otherwise relationshipped).

I did read the OP I was just giving my opinion on points raised by others. Its actually part of it. If people wouldn't date a sahd, just because he is a sahd but feel differently about sahm, then its a valid to talk about. As we are discussing perceptions.

My other half has volunteered to take the 2nd half of the mat leave and go part time after our PFB arrives. I earn about £15k more than him so it doesn't make sense for me to take the pay cut. I'm a scientist and he's a solicitor so both reasonably high achievers. Just we both value having someone in the home to raise the children.

I would adore to work fulltime while DH looked after our son at home, but he's as career-minded as me, and neither of us has ever considered stopping work for more than about ten seconds, so it's highly unlikely to happen, except pending a sudden period of joblessness for either of us.

I would have no problem at all earning all or the majority of the household income, or having DH financially dependent on me. And without the juggling and compromising on hours and presenteeism that are fairly normal when you have a small child with two working parents, my prospects for promotion would improve dramatically. Seeing less of my son would not be an insuperable problem for me.

I echo Hak's desire to see the research that suggests that 'women all over the world' are still seeking a 'protector and provider'. That may very likely be the case in societies where female education, independence and earning capacity is minimal, and where women are less able to limit their families, but fortunately that's not the world I live in. I've supported DH financially before, when I was a junior academic and he was doing an internship that turned into his first job in a new field in which he has been very successful - and would have zero problem in doing it again. He's not a 'protector and provider', he's a clever, funny, thoughtful guy I liked enough to marry, and the father of my son. Neither am I 'protected and provided for' - and I never have been at any point throughout our long relationship.

I wouldn't be happy for my DH to be a SAHD.

I would resent him having a great relationship with our DC at my expense. Also, I wouldn't like the pressure of being the sole breadwinner.

For the same reasons, I would never be a SAHM either. It wouldn't be fair on him.

We agreed from very early on (at least 5 years before we started TTC) that we would both work part time. I can't imagine any other arrangement working for us. It does feel like the best of both worlds.

The reason many families opt for the "breadwinner"/SAHP model is because of the exorbitant cost of childcare. When a large part of your earnings are being eaten up by childcare costs, the financially sound decision is to have one parent (usually the woman, because they earn less) stay at home. Which is why we still have an outdated model that (if reading the threads here is anything to go by) incurs a lot of resentment on both sides. But why discuss possible solutions for that when you can just trot out the tired old "woman claim they want independence, but secretly they all want the status quo" argument?

The word "breadwinner" is quite old fashioned - maybe your chosen search terms are influencing your findings business

I'm a sahm who does those few hours work a week. I sometimes wish I had the full time outside the home job as it is a more "solid" place to be, but when the DC were very small (under 3) I desperately wanted to be home with them - in fact we relocated to enable us to afford to live on one salary and when they were small DH had no wish to be the one at home (sometimes now we both think it'd be nice to swap - he might be a better SAHP to school kids and could earn more from home in school hours too) but it's the old chestnut of my "career" such as it was being defunct and it not being financially viable.

So the answer is I felt almost a physical need to be with my children when they were small and was glad to have a DH who was also keen for me to be a sahm. But past the toddler years I'd be happy to role swap and have DH as a sahd - it would be massively liberating I think if He took over my whole role (house and shopping and cooking not just kids) and I worked - but it's impossible now.

I would want to be with someone who would want to have equal, or at least some, time with the children.

I always ExH to reduce his hours and for me to increase mine, so that we both had more time with our 3 dc. But he wouldn't consider it as
a) he said we couldn't afford it (we could).
b) He reckoned his work wouldn't let him, despite them allowing women to reduce hours. He didn't actually ask, just wrongly assumed.
c) He didn't actually want to spend much time with us, preferring the company of his single workmates.

His lack of regard for family split us up but had he been more inclined to be at home, ie at least a partly SAHD, we might well have still been together.

Dh is currently PT, whilst I am FT and he will probably become a SAHD when our second dc arrives but this is because I am the main breadwinner, he is much, much better SAHP than I would be and childcare bills will cripple us when DC2 arrives.

Plus many other practical reasons, I have a rather demanding job and couldn't take sick leave all the time etc.