Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Should my DH high salary exclude him from doing jobs at home

671 replies

Shout · 11/03/2007 12:43

I am at stay at home home Mum with 2 DS my husband has quite an important job and his salary reflects it. Everytime he has to work weekends or evenings he says that is what I am being paid for.

My biggest grip is that he is getting lazier around the house, meal plates left at the table coke cans around the house, cuff links ties left out and gets more out,gets changed from work, suit and dirty washing left on bed for me to clear wet towels ,floor. The kids get 10 mins of play fighting then he watches his programs/or is on the computer.If he doesn't want to do anything he just ignores it or says its not a problem eg tyres are not flat, toilet isn't blocked!

When ever I get cross that he doesn't do his fair share he says in a jokey mannner but I get paid so much.
I asked him several times to make an appointment to discuss situation he kept avoiding it, I wrote him a letter explaining how I felt, it took him 3 days to get round to reading it and never responded.

I am back to comfort eating putting on weight and feeling crap about myself, hence all physical contact is virtually non exsistent.

Any advise out there?

OP posts:
Caligula · 13/03/2007 22:26

Hmm I guess it's where you're coming from.

I didn't find it offensive because I'm coming from the viewpoint that I'm hte permanent person in my children's life and so I'm very confident that I know them better than anyone else and that I will continue to know them all their life. I'm aware of a long term, continuous dynamic. So I feel very confident about dealing with the other carers in their lives, be they CM's, teachers, etc., because at the back of my mind is the knowledge that they only know one aspect of my child and one slice of their life, whereas I know the history and hopefully will be involved in the future of this child, which the professional I'm talking to, won't. So that while they can be very helpful at a particular time for a particular thing (education, sport, etc.), I don't defer to them on overall knowledge of my child.

I know that might sound all a bit irrelevant and rambling, but I'm trying to explain why I personally don't find yellowrose's terminology offensive. Because the people my kids see every day, who look after them and nurture them, are in the main, paid strangers, in the sense that I very much doubt that the kids will keep contact with them in the future and they're involved in my children's lives because someone is paying them to be. I can understand that if you're coming from the angle of feeling that you're being criticised for working though, you would find it offensive. However, I'm highly doubtful that YR is coming from that angle, just because of her posts on other threads. And her home ed comment is a bit of an interesting pointer.

Caligula · 13/03/2007 22:29

I'm left wing and I'd have no problem with it at all. If I had loadsamoney, I'd never do a stroke of housework. Except as a form of relaxation. (Anyone remember that patronising comment of Mrs Thatcher, that the way she relaxed was by doing housework? Old bat.)

Actually, not even as a relaxation.

Thank you for the sanity comment YR, it's not often I'm held up as an example of sanity.

3andnomore · 13/03/2007 22:31

you see Xenia, you always bewoe us poor women, being slaves and SAHM or whatever...but tbh...I understand your stance as little as you understand mine...yes, I find it perfectly acceptable for dh to be only there for 2 hours quality time, but that is because I am there the rest of the time...if that makes sense...and yes all my KIds started going partime nursery at around 2- 2 1/2...however, in the future our dynamic will change but I, as the mother will always arrange it so that my Kids have me around about the tme the get out of school, 3pmish...unless dh finds a job that will do that, then I will be happy to go to work fulltime...but I do eel that there should be one person that is a proper contact person at all times...and a paid carer just isn't quite that....and I know many people who are lucky enough to have a great childcare arrangement that offers that...but in general it doesn't!

yellowrose · 13/03/2007 22:32

Caligula, you always bloody make sense to me !

drosophila · 13/03/2007 22:36

I can't fathom women who work and do everything. How can people tolerate that even for one day? If you say the children won't eat if you went out and your husband had the children and they were asking for food surely he could open a can of beans?

Well he would but it would be hours too late. DS has serious allergies and as a consequence issues with food. It s a full time job keeping on top of it. Fact is DP is not on top of his eating. He is not on top of his own eating. He is curently eating his dinner.

Xenia how much a part in your marriage breakup did your job/high salary play?

Eleusis · 13/03/2007 22:36

I can take the point that people find many of Xenia's SAHM comments offensive. But, there are some SAHM posters (like Yellowrose) whose comments are equally offensive. And that was my point.

My live-in nanny is no stranger to my children. My children are not deprived of my love. And it is down right rude for you suggest that their care of which you know very little is anything less than fantastic.

Perhaps your SAHM superiority comments are little more than self serving. Perhaps you are in denial that someone else (paid or not) could do just as good of a job. Perhaps... you should acknowledge that you are staying home because it is best for YOU.

3andnomore · 13/03/2007 22:44

eleusus, that could be said vise versa really coudn't it?
Like I said, I don't think it has to be family that provides the focal parenting, but it has to be permanent...not ever changing...

Caligula · 13/03/2007 22:45

Are your comments addressed to me Eleusis?

Because if so I'll answer them, but in the morning because it's late and I'm off to bed.

3andnomore · 13/03/2007 22:47

although, I must admit, I am kind of oldfashioned there then, in thinking why bring Kids into this works if I don't have the time to look after them..but this is my own standard not a standard I expect of others...as I know everyones needs and situation is different!
However, I will never understand if women don't look after their Kids by choice...i.e. are SAHM with Nannies, busy doing crap like having their PT around or their nails done or theur tan done or whatever...that is, in my opinion vain and lazy and well...not fair on the Kids

Judy1234 · 13/03/2007 22:56

It's a matter of degree for all parents. I think 2 hours a day is fine. I like it. I would hate never to see them and I wouldn't send them to board. The stay at home mother with help (there are mumsnetters in that position) is doing her children no worse a service than the single or married mother who works. We're saying chidlren don't need a parent 24/7 and 2 hours a day or whatever you think is right works fine for all concerned.

Some people might say working because you have to but morally thinking you should be there but have no choice but to work is a better stance than working through choice as I do but I don't agree. In fact most stay at home mothers might do a better job if they had some paid servants actually whether to free them to do more child care and less cleaning or to let them have 4 hours off a day to relax so when they're with their children they're more rested and in a better mood. Less is more....

jules99 · 14/03/2007 00:21

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

twentypence · 14/03/2007 00:55

If he does nothing and treats you like a slave then your ds's will treat you the same way. My plan would be:

Cleaner

Make ds's tidy up after themselves, no sense having 3 untidy men to pick up for

Get some exercise so you don't want to eat crap.

Eleusis · 14/03/2007 06:38

Caligula, my post was directed at yellow rose, not you.

yellowrose · 14/03/2007 07:37

"Perhaps your [Full Time Working Mother]superiority comments are little more than self serving. Perhaps you are in denial that [the Parents] could do just as good of a job [as the Nanny]. Perhaps... you should acknowledge that you are [Working] because it is best for YOU"

Please read the above extract from Eleusis as altered by me in brackets. That is how YOUR posts sound like to me.

Some of us find Xenia extremely offensive, yet we continue to enjoy debating with her. If you don't enjoy the discussion because you are offended, that is fine.

yellowrose · 14/03/2007 07:39

jules - Xenia's comments are not radical. They are ThatcherRight.

Judy1234 · 14/03/2007 07:44

jules, good decision. Ditch the guilt. I can write you a list of 20 reasons why you're better off working and your child is if you want me to but I would probably annoy some stay at home mothers by doing so. My ex husband is a teacher - we were married 19 years and both worked full time but our deal was if the daily nanny didn't work out (cheapest option with 3 under 5s) then he would give up work and in fact it always did work out so he carried on.

DonnyLass · 14/03/2007 07:50

uh oh

Xenia ... I admire your temerity. I think the vehemence of some of your opinions is often OTT although I share your sentiments on several of your favourite issues.

You are bound to be asked to share your list! I would certainly like you to reveal your hand ...

This is a genuine interest not a Xenia-bash!

yellowrose · 14/03/2007 07:56

Xenia, out of interest, how old do you think the baby should be before you recommend that jules should got to work full time ? I am interested in the answer because you said that you breastfed all your children until the age of one, including twins (Something that I DO admire you for).

Jules, dh is and was paid much less than me when I gave up work for our son. We decided that it would be best if I gave up my job as ds (now 2.8 yo) is and always was breastfed.

How you feed a child is a very important factor in what you decide to do after the birth. I know people are going to say, "well, so why don't you express milk in the office", this was not an option in the environment I used to work in and not an option if you wish your child to self-wean as I do.

I don't wish to turn this into a feeding thread, but is an importnat factor in the lives of many millions of women round the world who choose to stay at home and bf.

CristinaTheAstonishing · 14/03/2007 08:05

YellowRose - I found I could continue breastfeeding DD when I went back to work. I wasn't ready at 6 months because of BF but by 10-11 months the time was right for us. We managed w/o the need to express at work, even now she's 2.

yellowrose · 14/03/2007 08:10

I know Christina - It depends on the child though, doesn't it ? Some are ok with 1 - 2 feeds a day, other are pretty much demand fed like mine. The environmnet I worked in before involved 12 - 15 hour day plus a one hour commute each way, where it would not have been possible to express at set times of the day due to the nature of the work.

Eleusis · 14/03/2007 08:38

Yellowrose, I have not made WOHM superiority comments. It is true I do think there are advantages (And Xenia, go on, post the list! You know we want you to.), however I don't go round insulting SAHMs unprovoked. My views on this subject are that if you choose you want to stay home because you believe it is best for you an/or your child, then go for it. Fine by me.

But when you get high on your horse and imply that WOHMs are some how nelegting their children by leaving them with "paid strangers" then I tend to get a bit hot under the collar and lash back. "Paid stranger" is rude and all you can say is back it up that's it's a fine thing to say. Well, you are wrong. I am not the only one who took offense.

CristinaTheAstonishing · 14/03/2007 09:07

YellowRose - DD is demand fed too, just not always with breastmilk on tap! We make up for it at night. You would factor in breastfeeding when deciding whether to return to work or not. Some people will want to have firm plans in place (even if they change them), others will play it by ear - depends on the job too.

winniepoo · 14/03/2007 09:22

Well I often discuss this with my victorian dh and apparently the fact that your dh is male excludes him by default from doing household chores and childcare but it does enable him to watch or take part in any sporting activity he chooses and drink beer whenever he wants

yellowrose · 14/03/2007 09:24

Yes Christina, it depends on the nature of job, how child friendy the employer is (the City isn't in most cases) hours of work, commuting in London, etc AND on the child. For some it is feasible, for others it is not.

Elusis - I did not: "imply that WOHMs are some how nelegting their children by leaving them with "paid strangers"

That was the conclusion YOU drew from my post. As Caligula pointed out she did not draw the same conclusion. So clearly you read it in a very subjective manner.

Eleusis · 14/03/2007 09:26

Whenever my DH gets all Victorian, I ask him if he'd like me to give up work and stop bringing home that paycheque. Then, I suggest some nice manly chores for him to do. He'll do almost anything to get out of changing a nappy. One time I swapped vacuuming the whole house in exchange for changing a stinky nappy. I grinned from ear to ear when he agreed and he suddenly realised he'd been had. The nappy too about one minumte to change, and the vacuuming chore was at least an hour or so. Silly man.