to think my career shouldn't come second just because I'm the lower earner

[manglethedangle]

I was having a conversation with a friend. We are in similar positions, both work in the public sector, both have a young child, both have husbands who work in the private sector in IT with large earning potential.

I was saying that DH is currently job hunting, he got head hunted for a position but it involved a lot of travel so we decided he shouldn't go for it. I also said that we (DH and I) had discussed new jobs and made sort of 'requirements' list. She was absolutely aghast that I'd have any say in his career at all.

I explained that as far as I was concerned he could do any job he wanted, as long as most weekends were free and he's there to do bed time (some nights) and can pick up/ drop DS as required (e.g. I'm working early or late, have training etc) and it pays his portion of the bills.

She told me that as our DHs were higher earners (than us) I should be more willing to do more of the child care, more of the house work etc. So his career could progress and he could chase that 6 figure salary.

I trained hard for my job, it's a professional role requiring public body registration and regular training and accreditation. My salary is lower than his as it's a job which is pretty much only done in the public sector, so we have a clear progression scale and capped pay rises. But it doesn't mean my job is less important, less rewarding or my career is less significant than his.

If DH couldn't do a fair share of the household and childcare duties it would make my job very difficult and career progression limited. it's considered a high stress job, though I don't find it stressful. We agreed pre marriage and kids, that his commitment was to the family role before his professional one, and he left teaching partially to allow this.

FWIW we could meet all our financial commitments if we both earned my salary, I'm not exactly low paid.

AIBU to think that just because he earns more doesn't mean I have to sacrifice my career for the sake of his?

I don't think there is real choice in the world of work/having a family... That's my point. If there wasn't such a career hit to having children I'd think there was real choice. But whether your a man or a woman taking time off for sick kids, requesting flexi hours, cutting back from 60hrs a week etc will all be career limiting in many professions. So either men and women pretend they don't have family commitments or one of them does the family thing and the other does the work thing, or both of them do both and both limit their earning/promotins. That's not choice is it, that's responding to our environment .I don't think everyone should do everything equally (because that's nuts) or that we should have quotas. But we do not have real equivalency and choice.

And I can't even go there with the "paternal instincts are different to maternal instincts because of evolutionary biology" thats your belief you hold onto it

No, YANBU. This is something each family has to work out for themselves, but it annoys me that your friend should be 'aghast'! She has no right to tell you that your career isn't important.

Every couple is different, but I'm with your friend on this one.

My DH is the main earner, so I prioritise his job over mine. He is bringing in most of the family money, allowing us to save, is the reason we have private healthcare and a nice lifestyle etc. Since having DC I've reduced my hours from full time to 3 days a week then to 1 day a week). I'm fine with this, I like being mainly a SAHM. I'll go full time again when youngest DC starts school. I enjoy my job (and studied for 3 years to get into this field) but it will never earn as well as DH's. I do most of the housework, all cooking, nearly all sick days, all night wakings etc. We've relocated for DH's career and may do so again in the future. I knew when we decided to have DC that my career would need to take a back seat, if we wanted to have the same lifestyle and save for the future.

YANBU. DP and I are both in a career where we could earn a lot more than we do but we chose to work in the public sector because we cared more about the type of work we do than the amount of money we get paid. We are still well paid in my view but nowhere near the 6 figures we could earn in the private sector that would come with high levels of stress and long hours and a razor sharp focus on money.

We've managed to find a balance that works for us and as everyone else has said it's a personal decision for individual. That said I have sacrificed my career progression as I work part-time but that wasn't so DP could "soar" but because it gives us a better balance all round. He's a rung ahead of me but that's because he's been qualified a lot longer than me. My job is probably more stressful than his.

The only people who will agree with your friend are those who didn't have much of a career in the first place or who had one that they didn't like. Nobody with any sense would give up a good professional job they enjoyed and paid reasonably well (i.e. enough for the family to live on) just for a few extra holidays or a bigger house. What about the loss of independence or the bad example you set your daughters (i.e. many will wonder what the point of working hard at school if there is a good chance you are going to give it up as soon as you have children).

I agree with others that this is about what works for each couple and each family. Your friend is wrong to criticise your choices but she's also not wrong to make different choices herself.

When my husband and I decided to have a family, I was the higher earner but in a career I didn't particularly enjoy. My husband earned less but I'm a career he loved. His industry gave him higher earning potential, I'd just progressed further with my career. We both agreed that it could be either of us or neither of us that sacrificed our career for a while and that if one of us did, it would make sense for it to be him.

Then circumstances changed. He got a new job on twice the money he was before and I loved being at home during maternity leave and dreaded the thought of returning to work that I was very good at but never really enjoyed. So we agreed that we'd both benefit if he could spend time capitalising on this new role and I spent more time at home with the children while the were young. We agreed, together, that I could use this as time to maybe find another, less well paid, career. I was never cut out to be a SAHM long term, so became a WAHM to keep my employability in tact and re-trained once the children were old enough for me to feel it was possible. At that point my husband lost his freedom to 'do whatever it took' to progress his career and had to do more of the household and childcare duties. That seemed fair. He'd had his chamce to progress in a fulfilling career. It was then my time to do the same.

Income was important in that we had to ensure we could cover our bills and have the minimum lifestyle we wanted...and that meant time with children, rather than luxuries (for us). We were fortunate that we weren't ever truly scraping by, so we could make those choices. But also important was us both having an equal shot at ending up with work we liked. Neither of us wanted to be a full-time SAHP with school age children. Neither of us wanted to find ourselves doing work we hated, once the kids had left home/were no longer very young. I didn't want to be left high and dry should anything happen to my marriage or my DH.

Other people make different choices and that's fine. Other people aren't able to make those choices at all. I feel lucky to have been able to.

Winterview - that's absolutely your prerogative and if it works for your family then great, but how can you suggest your way should be the OP's way? Money isn't always the most important thing.

In an effort to "show our daughters a good example" we are in danger of teaching that caring for others is a losers game.

I loved my career.

I also felt that being a SAHM was crucially important.

I was lucky to be in a position to be able to give up work.

Having time at home has given me freedom to explore other ways of contributing without being in the workplace.

My kids have learned valuable life lessons from that.

My DH has dramatically drawn back on his career since we've had kids, he has the ability to step into a sox figure job but it would mean travelling the world all the time and I didn't want to have children with someone who wasn't there so he chose to take a back step, he still earns well but is also home every night and weekend which means I can work too (I earn a lot less than he does) and he is always considerate of my job when working out his and it makes me respect him 10x more.

I will never ( unless there's a fluke sale) make what my DH makes, because he is very senior in a very lucrative industry.

However, a few years ago he suggested we give my career more priority, because I love it, am good at it and very few get the opportunities I've had.

To support me he drastically rearranged his work patterns.

There was quite a bit of from various quarters. But everyone has been a winner. My career has taken off, DH's has not remotely nosedived (he had his best financial year ever in 2016) and the DC have been properly co parented which has been wonderful for them ( especially as they leave home in a few short weeks ).

In an effort to "show our daughters a good example" we are in danger of teaching that caring for others is a losers game.

You don't have to be a SAHM to "care for others" you know... I don't think that you needed to give up a career you loved for your daughters to "learn that valuable life lesson".

roomster- you misunderstand me.

I said "Having time at home has given me freedom to explore other ways of contributing without being in the workplace.

My kids have learned valuable life lessons from that."

That's what has been valuable.

Just because one person earns the higher salary there is no reason why they can't take days off to cover the DC's sickness and do a share of drop offs/pick ups. Often the more senior in an organization you are the easier it is to have control of your work diary and ability to decide when meetings start and finish.

If you're both happy that he may be restricted to reach a higher salary then your approach is fine. Depends how important the money and therefore money related lifestyle is important to you both.

I'm the higher earner. If my DH wanted/tried to progress his career we would be in deep shit with chilcare and getting homework done etc. There has to be some give. Thankfully my DH is happy to fall on his sword whilst I work the longer hours and manage the stress whilst he takes the slack at home.

If DH changed his tune and wanted more from his career I'd say right, you'd better get to the estate agents for us to buy a smaller house, cancel the holidays and forget about a new car as his earning potential is nowhere in a million years anywhere near mine. And he knows that, so he won't change his tune.

Yes being the boss or being higher up in the company means you control your diary rather than someone else doing so. As long as the work gets done, which could even be from home.

DH earns over 10 times my salary so yes his career comes first but without even speaking about it, we are absolutely equal in childcare, cooking etc. After all, I'm still working.

james being senior certainly helped DH reorganise his work life to take on much more domestic/family responsibility.

He already had a sound client base who would work around him ( to some extent) and none of his colleagues would expect to have any input into his routine.

GetAHaircutCarl yes, it's similar with my husband. He usually starts work at 10am each day and can leave for home whenever, work from home, take days off without having to clear it with anyone. I'm lucky he has been able to do that since his mid twenties, so we have spent a lot of time together as a couple. It's sadly not the case for many, but I think a lot people do seem to think that along with a high salary comes a huge payoff and sacrifice of family time etc. which puts them off from being ambitious.

My mother also found that the fact my father was very senior in his business as well as high earning made it easier rather than harder for her to have a career. Not only did he have more autonomy but they also could pay for cleaners/gardeners/decorators etc. In fact she is always quite sceptical when women say that they can't work because their DH have a high flying career. She thinks it more likely that they just don't need to work for financial reasons so choose to put their feet up. I agree and while I think it is fine for anyone to choose not to work (if they can afford it) I find it a bit irritating when friends who DH's are apparently so senior and high flying suggest that it is more difficult for them to work than it is for me.

room I think different jobs have different issues. Some lend themselves to being more flexible than others.

That said, my DH's view is that too many men don't even try. They seem to buy into the notion that well paid careers require ridiculous attendance and complete flexibility.