If it was compulsory to do 50/50 do you think a lot of men would not agree to have children?

[honeylulu]

If it was compulsory for all childcare and domestic tasks to be split 50/50, do you think that a lot less men would agree to have children?

It's hypothetical as of course itsunenforceable (but imagine that it was enforceable). I guess you also have to assume in that scenario that both parties work equal hours outside the home.

I share everything equally with my husband and it's worked out fine BUT I would say that he enjoyed our dual income/ no kids lifestyle and was happy to leave it like that. I had to talk him into having children and he kind of assumed I'd bear the brunt of the increase in domestic life and take a bit to my career (while his would remain unaffected). I was honest about wanting to share everything and go back to work but he admitted afterwards he thought I would change my mind about this once I'd had the baby.

Things worked out fine for us (we now have two and he's a great dad) but sometimes I doubt he would have agreed to have a baby (an idea he was otherwise not terribly keen on) if he knew he was getting lumbered with half of everything as well as what we already had on our plates.

I don't think he was that unusual. Interested in what others think.

I dont think anything would change as I think a lot of men think they do or would do 50% of the work, when of course it's no where near that.

My DH and I split chores 50-50, but in his mind he does 90% of the work. I guess because in his mind he doesnt really have to do chores but is kindly volunteering to do so, whereas I "have too". Or maybe he doesn't respect or just doesn't see the chores I do.

Obviously I cannot speak on behalf of an entire population (And I don't like to generalise either... i.e. all men are xy and all women are xyz) but in my (very limited) experience DH would still absolutely have children.
We are expecting our first in a few weeks. DH wants a child as much as I do. He said he would love to have been a SAHP but he earns more than I do... not by a huge amount but by enough that is isn't feasible for us to live on my salary.
He has more experience with babies than me (loads of nieces and nephews) he has learned much more about child development than me so far and has also researched nurseries in the area for when/if I go back to work. He is also trying to change his work circumstances so that he can work from home more often in order to share all responsibilities etc.
In all honesty I think I need to step up a bit

I think this is an interesting question and I suspect the simple answer is that a lot of men would not want children if they knew they had to literally do half of everything. I'm sure there would be plenty that would want them though. I've known quite a few SAH dads who have always done the majority of the house and child work. It wasn't really a big decision in any if their cases. The woman was earning far more so it made much more sense for the woman to work.

I think true 50/50 might work brilliantly for some couples who have a similar outlook.

Interesting...
It was my ex who wanted children more than me, so I didn't have to do any begging and negotiating. I also worked full time, except for mat leave. I was adamant I wanted an equal relationship, it was very important to me.
The reality is that he was very passive aggressive in trying to achieve what he wanted, which certainly wasn't an equal relationship.
He must have known that had he been overt about trying to make sure I shouldered most of the burden and the cost, I would have simply left, so he set about manipulating me into it gradually instead. Things like - he never washed up because he did other jobs like the admin. The admin allowed him to control most of the money. Doing half a job of the shopping, whilst not discussing the joint account with me ever, meant I had to complete the shopping from my own account. He would claim that he was subsidising me - I had little choice but to believe him. He would make me feel guilty about money, I would try to compensate. Actually, he was lining his own account.
He would be late for everything, unless it was to his benefit to be in time. This was deliberate, so that I had to pick up the slack (I.e. Do the job myself, or the kids would suffer)
I think he wanted to just take all the benefits of marriage without making any compromises or meeting the needs of the other person, but knew full well it wouldn't last long if he was outright abusive. I came to realise this, and started to push back. I let the house run out of key shopping. I let the kids be late because of him. I ran mine and the kids lives with or without him. If he wasnt ready on time, I went without him. I refused to rely on him to pick me up or meet him, knowing it gave him the choice to make me wait and inconvenience me. I stopped bothering to bite my tongue around his mother. I stopped bothering to remember or buy gifts for his family birthdays. Things went downhill from there, and it all came to an end.
So no, I think most men are just takers in life.
But I might be a bit biased

DH and I have both done 50/50, or like for like. Both worked a 4 day week when the kids were young, 50/50 on all commitment to parenting, household responsibilities etc. Both now have jobs that we really enjoy and pay ‘ok’ (not high, at all£ rather than one of us having a massive salary.

Yes, DH very much wanted kids and to be a hands on parent.

I think you’re right.

honey - Yes, and I should add to my post that I think it's a fundamental sign of love that people can't say that after they have kids. Thinking about a hypothetical baby that doesn't yet exist is very different from talking about an actual one.

I do think it's unfair, however, that the kind of underlying assumption in so many cases is that this is something that will change the woman's life hugely but the man's far less. Not least because I think there's some equation that runs like this, which "values" waged work far more highly than domestic:

domestic labour and childrearing = waged work
(underlying: 12-14 hours a day = 8-9 hours a day)

I think a lot of men end up as parents because they trusted the woman when she said contraception was in place or because they get talked into it or threatened with an ultimatum.

I know plenty who do 50/50, DH included. I wouldn't have settled for less and certainly wouldn't of ever had children with a partner who quite clearly didn't want to be a parent.

I don't think it's as simple as making them do 50/50 though. Many woman still believe that once children come along the man should go to work and they stay home. In those circumstances, the man certainly shouldn't also have to do 50% on top of being the only worker.

I think you are right. I also think that if it was compulsory, wages would either have to rise or costs would have to come down as everyone would be living on half a salary but having much more family time each. I think it would be great! I also agree with you that most men given the choice wouldn't agree to children if that was the case. My DH would have been quite happy without. He does do half the cooking and more chores than some but the mental stuff like thinking about dinner and school stuff is mostly me.

I think you're right. I also think a lot of women wouldn't have agreed to have children if they'd known beforehand what it would mean for them. Me for one.

I think I depends on the bloke and his attitude to gendered stereotypes to be honest. In such a society I would expect birth rates to go down slightly but not significantly as these stereotypes would be challenged by the division of work. Fraser's Universal Caregiver proposes a model where the assumption is that everyone takes part in care work as well as paid work. Those without kids would do caring work in their local communities. People would prob earn a bit less but house prices would have to go down to reflect this.

I wonder how many women would choose NOT to have DC if the knew they were going to have to do 100% (ish) of childcare and domestic tasks. I bet a lot would still have kids.

DH and I didn't really think things through. 😂 We just thought we would see how things went once we had kids. I ended up being almost 100% in charge of the kids and domestic stuff with DH working long hours at work. It's honestly worked well for us. 🤷🏻‍♀️ I can't fault DH for a second. He has worked far harder than I have and never complains about it but he is also very grateful and appreciative of everything I have done. I fee like we are a team doing what's bests for our family as a whole. I'm nearly certain DH would have still wanted DC if he had had to do a proper 50/50 split
I think it's sad when I read of so many people on Mumsnet who are in relationships that are filled with resentment.

" I guess you also have to assume in that scenario that both parties work equal hours outside the home. "

I wonder how many women would have children if they had to work equal hours outside the home? It would definitely have affected my decision if I couldn't spend as much time as I have with them.

The question in the OP assumes that women are the ones who want kids and men just agree to it or not. That's often the case, and it really influences some men's attitudes towards women they're with. I was surprised at how often boyfriends of mine, no matter how obviously unsuited to parenthood, assumed I was keen to have children with them.
My favourite was the one who was the penniless, unemployed 40-year-old boyfriend of two months who rang me at work from my house, where he was staying because he'd been evicted from his for non-payment of rent. He didn't bother saying hello, just burst out with: "I'll have a kid with you, but I won't marry you!" It hadn't crossed my mind to discuss anything like marriage. He'd just assumed he was in a position to dictate such things to me because Women Want Babies.
That's a dramatic example, but that and various other instances made me understand that there's a paradigm: women are desperate to reproduce and men take advantage of that. If I had been keen to have children, it might have been harder to see.

There is a great deal of research to show that men suffer from the burden from being the sole breadwinner and women benefit

www.theguardian.com/money/2016/aug/19/men-breadwinners-health-effects-wellbeing

www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/08/19/being-sole-breadwinner-is-bad-for-mens-health-but-good-for-women/

I dislike the smugness from some mothers who never take on any real financial responsibility for their children. I lose count of the times mums on here whose children are at secondary school, university or adults who boast about having a lovely life of freedom, volunteering and going to classes and the gym but seem to think that it is the man' responsibility to provide financially for the family.
In my experience, when both parents have equal responsibility for finances, childcare is much more likely to be shared.
I agree with the poster who pointed out that financial responsibility for families is under rated on here.

I don't know. My DH identity is very tied up in his career, but if all men had to do 50/50 his workplace would be more accommodating, so perhaps his career wouldn't have been affected in that scenario. I think he would have had one but wouldn't have gone on to have another.

He really loves his children and enjoys doing things with them like bike rides and cooking etc, but the boring grind of parenting, well let's say we started of very equal with us both doing part time hours and that was how we agreed things would be, then when I was 35 weeks pregnant with number 2 he got an opportunity for a promotion abroad and he just took it leaving me at home. We have never been anything approaching equal since.

I would love to know (if anyone has data) whether there the number of mothers who work full time has risen or fallen over the past twenty years.

I think the number must have risen. The number of mother's in work has certainly gone up by quite a lot. I think the stats might be skewed at the moment by the amount of part time work and underemployment, where people want and need full time work but are only being offered part time.

I think a lot of people would reconsider children if everyone had to split the work 50:50, including women.

If all domestic chores and responsibility for childcare had to be split 50:50 (whether in the home or using a third party) but that both sets of working hours matched. Fo both parents work 35 hours Mon-Fri and do equal drop offs and pick ups; both work 3.5 days or 4 days on 4 days off and never sharing days off.

We aim for 50:50 (probably more 80:20 arm as on maternity leave). But I wouldn't have wanted children with someone who couldn't do their share

I think a lot of men aren't bothered about having kids at all to be honest.

In my experience, when both parents have equal responsibility for finances, childcare is much more likely to be shared.

See in my experience, the opposite is true. My Dad, ex FIL and my ex H were all convinced that the woman should be working to share the financial load AND do the bulk of childcare and domestic labour too and even when they did work their jobs still didn't count as much as his. I've seen this time and time again right here on this forum too.

I agree about the financial responsibility angle. I have sisters and sister-in-laws who were either SAHP or had a part time job for years and years whilst their partners shouldered the finances and some of the household/childcare. I was envious for quite a while as I worked through my fantasies of having a salaryman.
But most of us can’t have everything we’d like. Would it have put OH off, having to be the sole provider? Yes. Did he like being a SAHP working part-time? Mostly.

I wonder how many women would have children if they had to work equal hours outside the home?

Absolutely.

My OH works a 60 hour week, is often on call overnight or weekends.

I wouldn't want to do that and have kids.

I know lots of men that wanted kids - most of my friends married men that wanted them. Whether they do 50/50 is another matter entirely.

However, I think if society was structured so you could support a family without working all hours or that part time work covered childcare costs a lot of women I know who sahm or work very part time would work more. I don’t know anyone that is a sahm and isn’t studying, setting up or running a business, a carer or doing community work - even with very little ones. I know men that have wanted to work pt or a bit less but haven’t had the opportunity so if it was there I think those men (the ones that wanted children) would like to do that in the kind of society where not working ever hour god sends is not seen as some kind of personal failing.