Why is it usually the woman who gives up work?

[Firedoll]

I'm on mat leave and have been asked 30+ times if I'll be going back to work and, when I say yes, if I'll be part time.

My DH has never once been asked about his working hours since our DS was born.

And if I say yes I am going back to work I get "oh, will your DS go to nursery/will you get a nanny?" The idea that my DH could look after DS for some of the time while I'm at work just doesn't even enters people's heads.

I don't blame people for asking because they're just making conversation. And it seems they are making a reasonable assumption as if one of the couple is going to give up work/reduce their hours, most of the time it will be the woman. In my experience at least.

But why is this? I see so often on here people saying that their OH couldn't go part time or is the higher earner. But all the latest reports suggest women in their twenties are now out earning men so that can't be true for the majority.

Is it just a cultural thing?

It would be interesting to see what level of flexible working requests are made by men, how many are refused, and what grounds. Obviously there will be some jobs where, whether the employee is a man or a woman, it is difficult to accommodate a flexible working request, but I imagine there are many where it could be done it just isn't.

Because my DH (as is not unusual) would not have been offered part time. Which means he ends up earnings more. Which means that when push comes to shove, the lesser earner gives up/cuts back more.

Until the demand is there with men being expected to do it as well, nothing will change.

I wonder if there would be scope in a discrimination claim? I bet some of the men who were not allowed/knew it wasn't worth asking for flexible working would have been granted it if they were women?

I don't think they should have to - as I said above, people should do what they can afford/what they want/what suits them best - but as a society why discriminate like this?

My DH will be a SAHP when I go back to work. We can only do this because he has his own business so he will scale this down to PT when the baby's in nursery.

I think if DH was an employee we'd be in the same position as a lot of families. He'd be the breadwinner.

Oh and we've had a mixture of supportive and bordering on offensive comments about our decision

I didn't go back to work. Husband earns 7 x my old salary. I wanted to be a SAHM. It came very naturally.

I gave up as became all maternal and didn't want to work.
Both of us decided it was better for dc to have a sahp and I wanted it to be me and dh has a career he didn't want to give up.
Have just started work the last few weeks after 25 years as a sahm.

Some people feel the same but also factor in finance, especially if the man earns more, it makes sense. Just the same as it does for the sahd's whose dw earn the higher salary.

My reasons (in order of priority):

DH earns approx. 4 x my full-time wage

I don't enjoy working FT (teacher) - I enjoy working (most of the time) when PT. If I am honest having DC was a wonderful excuse to go PT... and I doubt I will ever return FT. In my ideal dream world I would have liked to be a SAHM and then housewife - although we could afford this I just couldn't justify it for many reasons, so PT was the compromise. I really don't think DH has ever wished to be a SAHD/househusband.

I returned to work (part-time) before DC were weaned - so was still BFing exclusively - the whole pumping thing would have been a nightmare for me FT.

Raising children isn't valued in our society. It's 'women's' work and despite bringing up the next generation it's seen as value-less. Paid childcare jobs are poorly paid and mostly done by women. Children have no voice so they just don't matter.

If we valued childcare for the huge importance it has then it would be much more likely men would do it more and and work places would be more accommodating to men going part time or taking shared leave. It would become the cultural norm. And women would ofcourse then take the lead in terms of being the working out the home more, in families where that works.

While culture dictates this alot, I think it's important not to discount the biological experience of a mum who stays at home after bf and being the primary care taker during mat leave. Leaving my twins who bf numerous times a day and night for nourishment and comfort even after a year wouldn't have made sense to me. But not discounting the experience of those mums who feel this way doesn't mean applying it to all women.

Oh and to add I knew two saHD, mostly part time working mums, a few sahm. My husband works alot but helps hugely with children and house work, he does more housework than me really, our two have disabilities as do I do even with a cleaner I can't manage. Most friends partners pull their weights also, atleast when physically around.

Because women get a much longer maternity leave than men get paternity leave.
Because most men refuse to stay at home.
Because the majority of women earn less than their male partner so they are doing what makes financial sense
Because we as a society see only women as responsible for children.

Oh and yes personal experience effected my descion also. I hated childcare as a child, was abused at one childminders, ignored at others. Felt like holding my breath and counting down until I was picked up. I hated it, was very lonely and depressed and thoroughly exhausted being out if my comfort zone for so long.

Plenty of children thrive in childcare, but plenty won't be suited to it. Even my first childminder who I loved and she remained my 'aunty' my whole childhood acknowledged I was miserable in her care. I just felt abandoned and lost and rejected, so ofcourse I didn't want that for my children.

Posts such as Peach are the most telling imo
Even in this day and age there are comments about men being the main carer, this is what needs to change.
However, it's not the attitude of society in general that needs to change first, it's parents who need to talk about it and work together to suit what works for them.
Also, employers need to change policies and now we have shared leave there is no reason why men shouldn't take up the opportunity.
My dh had no time off when ours were born as he was a peri teacher at the time, he had the day off in both cases. With dd 13 years later he was self employed and had much more time to bond and provide and more importantly get into a shared routine much quicker.

Money is the main factor for our situation - I earn around 26k full time and dh 46k. I've taken maternity (going back when dd is 7 months) and I'm going back 3 days. Dd will be in nursery all theses days. I'll earn about 15.5k so will only pay tax on a small amount - I'm also buying childcare vouchers (as is my dh).
I have friends with varying childcare situations but most come down to money and earning potential.

Before DD Dh out earned me by quite a bit. After maternity leave I went back full time and he quit to be a SAHD. We took quite a financial hit to do this but DH was depressed and saw an opportunity to get out of a bad work situation.

14 years down the line, I can see why men tend to keep their jobs. I out earn him considerably.

We're splitting parental leave roughly equally. I would happily do all of it but I don't think that's fair on my DH, as I would be refusing him the chance to equip himself for parenthood. And I would probably complain then when he was a less involved parent than me!

I'll be going back to work pretty quickly, whilst my husband stays at home with the child, and then later we'll both just reduce our hours a bit. We earn about the same, but for financial reasons its better for him to be off than me (complicated), and I'm quite happy with that. He's much better with kids and babies than I am anyway, and has been the broody one out of the two of us.

In our case it was because I had a desperate, desperate need to be with my children and dh didn't. I wasn't planning to give up work, in fact I went back full time for 8 months after maternity leave but I was miserable. Luckily we could live on dh's salary and he was happy for me to stay at home.

I realise MN is a small sample by how come so many women have DPs who are higher earner? If women are out earning men in their twenties? And the average age of having a first child is around 30?

No idea but in our case DH is 7 years older than me and I'm not yet 30.

I will go back to work for 3 months so I can keep my enhanced maternity pay but I have to admit the idea of staying at home with my baby feels like the more natural thing to do. However I feel it's important to keep a foot in the door of the world of work so to speak.

And shared parental leave isn't an option for us financially but if I'm being completely honest I'd feel really weird about DH at home with the baby while I went to work

That's very uncomfortable for me to admit as a fairly strident feminist, but that's how I feel

Posselhoof - why would you feel uncomfortable? Not being antagonistic just curious.

peach I would feel jealous I suppose, of not getting that precious time with my baby

DH freely admits he wouldn't want to do it either

There are a number of reasons why my DH continued working full time and I took a year's mat leave and then went back part time.

Breastfeeding, for one. And the fact my DH earns more than me. Also, I wanted to go part time and was happy to do it.