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 This may seem like an outdated concept, but research suggests that women all over the world still look for these qualities in a mate and are more likely than men to favour traits related to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?

For the idea of SAHF to pick up, we would need to start by having a situation where men and women see their career as equally valid, interresting and worth doing .

As it happens, women seem to think that their career is never 'as good as' the one of their partner. In terms of money currently made or in term of viability etc.. At least that's certainly the excuse given when women are asked why they are the one to be the SAHP. It's also the one I used when I was made redundant. Why work if childcare cost are higher than my wage? The fact that my career was just as promissing and important than his just didn't get into the equation (Similar jobs in similar industry!). It took me a long time to actually REALLY value my work as much as his.

Something that has always made me wonder as women get similar level of qualifications to men and the earning difference isn't that pronounced before women have children. So why is it that it's always the women's career that is sacrified usually by the woman herself?

If there is so much support from the women ITT, why doesn't it happen more in the real world? You have a ratio of 10 to 1 for UK SAHM/SAHD numbers. There are millions of men out there who would love to enjoy the ''life of Riley'' (as it has been described on here) that comes after the kids are old enough for school. Millions who'd like to go to the gym, have brunch with friends, enjoy their hobbies, have daddy wine at 11AM...

I am in exactly the position quoted- i work full time - DP is SAHD - earns a bit of pin money.
I would say - i don't give a sh&t about the provider stuff. I am very envious of the amount of time he gets to spend with DC. He also gets a lot more free time than I do and fails to appreciate it. i also worry about not being primary childcarer and impact if we split up - so over compensate
He finds it really hard to meet people and feels judged on lack of career; people also treat SAHDs entirely different from SAHM - he has to justify himself a lot more but also gets treated as some sort of hero for doing normal stuff.

I would love it if society was completely equal, and in public policy / media debate we talked about PARENTS - not mums or dads.

Gender is irrelevant to your role as a parent in relation to how you structure your family arrangements WRT work and childcare roles (with the obvious exceptions of pregnancy, birth and breastfeeding).

I think this issue is key if we want achieve gender equality, and am very excited about the option to share maternity leave as hopefully this will open doors for people. I wouldn't want to work full-time and support DP to SAH, largely because in my ideal world we would both work part-time.

But I do think it's important to think about why the majority of people hold these views. DP hates the idea of working any less than full-time (at the moment, no kids yet) and it's interesting talking about why. I always assumed at some point there would be some breaks in my career due to maternity leave, etc, whereas he has never seen himself stopping work until retirement, and didn't react well during a short period of unemployment. Most men I know who have retrained have struggled more than women who've done similar and I realise society often does identify men with their careers much more strongly than is the case with women.

I think also because it's more socially acceptable for women to date/marry men who are a bit older rather than vice versa, it is more common men are slightly more 'advanced' in their careers at the time of having children (esp if having children in twenties rather than thirties, where a few years can make the difference in establishing yourself) which leads to women going part-time 'because it makes more sense for the family' and then the financial gap widens.

IME, with friends where the woman is the higher earner/they earn the same, the men tend to be much more involved and hands-on parents: obviously that's just anecdotal but I do think there's something in that. I would love the idea of people just 'deciding what's best for their families' like people say on this thread but I think everyone is underplaying all the obstacles and decisions that happen long before that decision occurs.

I don't think that I would be happy with a SAHD. I am not suited to being a SAHM, I work 80%. I would be happy for DH to work 80%. But in the same way that I couldn't SAH, I don't think I could be in a relationship with a man who didn't derived satisfaction from his work and have a strong desire to spend time working with other adults.

Because men tend to earn more than women. So unsurprisingly, no matter how much women may like the idea of their husband being a SAHD, it doesn't make financial sense for their household.

The proportion of mothers in couples who are breadwinners is now 31%, so at least for one third of the couples, would make more financial sense for the dad to stay at home.

Something that has always made me wonder as women get similar level of qualifications to men and the earning difference isn't that pronounced before women have children. So why is it that it's always the women's career that is sacrified usually by the woman herself?

Uk women are more educated than men these days and the number is higher every year (2014 was a new record, 60% of new uni students were women). They also earn more than men up to the age of 39.

www.cityam.com/1416448301/pay-gap-falls-young-women-out-earn-men

The overall difference is made by the old guard (male bbomers in senior positions) and women choosing to take time off because of children. These women could continue their careers like it happens in other countries. In Romania (my home country) my family friends include surgeons, uni professors, corporate mid/high managers, notary publics etc.. All of them are mothers children but only took little time off after giving birth. My own mum also had very little time off as a teacher and her career was unaffected, her pension is quite decent by local standards and she owns the house she lives in. And I'm talking about a country that is far more patriarchal and traditional than the UK. Things like Page 3 issue wouldn't even register on the map among the local clusterfuck of gender stereotyping and sexism that goes on in everyday life.

I would bloody love to have a DH who would be a SAHD.

I think you'll get a bit of a self selecting bias on this thread, though.

Because men tend to earn more than women. So unsurprisingly, no matter how much women may like the idea of their husband being a SAHD, it doesn't make financial sense for their household.

They don't, check the link above. Women make more money than men for almost their entire fertile life. If anything, there should be more SAHD's if that theory was correct. Of course, this is assuming women indiscriminately marry men of all incomes.

I wouldn't have wanted to have been the sole breadwinner with DH as the SAHD when the DC were young. This is for purely selfish reasons as I'd want us to share the time with the DC. If for some reason DH couldn't get a job, then of course I would do it as needs must.

DH had no inclination to be a SAHD so the situation never arose. Though I had no inclination to be a SAHM. TBH my feeling is that the "ideal" is probably to have both parents work equally and childcare equally.

My DH is a SAHD and has been for nearly 7 years. It wasn't planned that way but after we unexpectedly had twins my wages covered the bills and his didn't so he gave up work.
However I see it lots where SAHM do far more at home than my DH. I am envious of the time he has with them and resentful that all the financial security is with me. My DC's would all love me to be around more. It's annoying to hear other mums tell me how lucky I am that my DH cooks, I feel like saying to them they are lucky their DH works! If I had my time again I would not do it this way.

There is also the issue that 'my DH never shown the inclination to be a SAHD'.

And the question is WHY? Why is a dad not really keen on spending time with his dcs? Why is it not even true when the couple has had issues conceiving, go through IVF etc? It's always the women who stay at home then. Not the men. Does it mean that the fathers didn't want this child just as much the mother? I don't think so.

I would guess that it's because men have been conditioned to think that looking after babies is a woman's job and that they aren't as good as women to that (plus it's not as gratifying, they associate themselves with thei work etc etc).

I'm the higher earner but not by much and when DH and I have kids we won't be able to afford it. He'd like to stay at home and I'd like him too but we can't afford it. The plan is me: full-time, him: part-time.

If I earned enough for it then yes, I'd be all for it.

Eccle, I don't agree. The wages of men are women are the same before having dcs.

Then women take some time off, assume that they will never get the same wage/don't have the same ability to progress so aren't in a rush to go back to work.
I also think that women don't have the same 'drive' because, basically, they've been told againa nd again that it's men who will have a great career (because their is important) whereas theirs is just 'for fun' or 'out of necessity'.

So again they stop work for longer and then say, 2 or 3 years after, you get 'Oh my wage isn't as good so it doesn't make sense' or 'I've stop too long, I can't work in my field anymore'.

A real equal system would see both parents taking some time off. Maybe let's say 1 year with mum and then one year with dad.
Then all these pseudo issues about the difference is wages, abilities and experience would fade into the background.

And the question is WHY? Why is a dad not really keen on spending time with his dcs? Why is it not even true when the couple has had issues conceiving, go through IVF etc? It's always the women who stay at home then. Not the men. Does it mean that the fathers didn't want this child just as much the mother? I don't think so.

Probably for the same reason pretty much most females in nature (and especially mammals) are far more attached to their babies and far more involved with them than the males. And why they even sometimes ''adopt'' little ones that aren't even their own species. Or why female monkeys choose toys that resemble their infants.

*I'm the higher earner but not by much and when DH and I have kids we won't be able to afford it. He'd like to stay at home and I'd like him too but we can't afford it. The plan is me: full-time, him: part-time.

If I earned enough for it then yes, I'd be all for it.*

Your situation is typical for a young couple, women earn slightly more than men on average until 40 (as shown in the link I posted a bit earlier). So the split should be 50/50 or even in the men's favour for who gets to stay at home. Yet SAHM's still represent 90% of all SAHP's. Why do you think that is?

I wouldn't actively seek out a family set-up in which one partner worked outside the home and the other stayed at home. It wouldn't matter to me which partner SAH. I can understand that sometimes it might be the best option for some families but it's not the sort of family life DH or I want. I could imagine some scenarios in which one of us chose to give up working outside the home (serious illness, need to care for a disabled family member, etc.), but absent those issues it wouldn't be an option we would choose. Sharing everything, both financial and home responsibilities, is what we prefer.

But having said that, I certainly see nothing wrong with a man or a woman SAH if that is what works best for them.

Your situation is typical for a young couple, women earn slightly more than men on average until 40 (as shown in the link I posted a bit earlier). So the split should be 50/50 or even in the men's favour for who gets to stay at home. Yet SAHM's still represent 90% of all SAHP's. Why do you think that is?

With the exception of myself and two other friends, it seems to be that the male partner is the higher wage earner in the case of my friends so almost all the SAHMs I know have very high wage earning husbands or partners while the other couples have both parents in part/fulltime work.

Out of the three of us higher earners, one does full time and her husband part-time (like DH and I would) and the other two both work full time.

I think that the idea of career vs jobs comes into play, or at least it has in DH and my debates (I have career, him a job he dislikes). Most of my SAHM friends had jobs rather then careers and so were happy to stay at home while they had the chance, whereas the one that does have a career (teacher) has taken a career break and has always found it very easy to get work compared to her trademan husband- she does tutor occasionally when she feels the desire to teach. I personally wouldn't want all my years of training and experience to be given up in favour of my DHs job, or even if he had a career- why should mine be the one which suffers? Which it would given my industry.

My other SAHM friend had no choice, her Dickhusband left her and helped her not one bit.

I hold my hands up to anyone who stays at home or does childminding or teaching because I really wouldn't want too- the fact that my DH wants to would be fantastic...if we could afford it.

I do think there's a bit of machismo as well. One of DHs friends is a SAHD and gets ribbed by some of their mutual friends. One of said mutual friends was shocked when both DH and his their other friend said they'd be happy to do the same. He saw it as very much 'woman's job' but then he's a bit of a one for sexism and the like so it wasn't unexpected.

And flipped round in a different direction.

SIL (very well educated) quite often says that she was never career minded, she just wanted to have children and become a SAHM. I’ve heard similar expressed by other women.
TBH it doesn’t sit well with me that the aspiration for anyone (male or female) is to have children and let someone else support you.

But, that aside, I don’t think I’ve ever heard a man say this or anything similar. I do know men that are SAHP, but they have taken on this role because it made sense for their families at the time, rather than necessarily being a role they sought out.

Neither DH nor I wanted to be a full time stay at home parent.

I would not want to be the only earner while my husband stayed home with the children. I suppose I could see circumstances that might make that necessary but it wouldn't be what I would choose.

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?

My ideal situation would be both of us working part-time. I don't think either of us would be happy as a full-time sahp.

Although, if we could afford it, he really wanted to and we could not both work part-time for whatever reason, then I'd have no problem with him being at home all the time. I'd prefer that over me being a sahp full-time.

I work full time, DH works part time (12 hrs a week) and he looks after DS the rest of the time.

That's been the situation for the past year and is likely to remain so for at least the next 3 - 4. We're both quite happy with it.

I was always the 'breadwinner' though even before we had DS. The only exception being the year I was on maternity leave.

I would have no problem with my dh staying at home if it made sense.
But we both need to work,anyhow,like,surely,most people.
If I could be transformed into a high earner rather than a manual worker,I'd love my dc's to have dad at home and he'd love to do it.
Same,the other way round.

I'm sure the idea of man as hunter gatherer went out in the 1980's when women started expecting potential partners to be 'new men' by and large.