AIBU expecting DP to fund everything?

[TLBftm]

Ok so I have a newborn. I’ve taken 9 months mat leave but I don’t plan on going back to my place of work, which will be fine as I’m only getting smp so won’t owe anything back. Reason being it’s over an hour away from home and I hated the place anyway, I was looking to move on when I discovered I was pregnant but stuck around then.

Anyway, I keep saying to DP we need to discuss what will happen after the 9 month but we just never get round to the convo.
I text him today saying can we discuss it tonight as we need to get a plan in place, he agreed and asked what I’m thinking about it all. To which I said, ideally, I’d like to take a year off and then go back part time for a while. I don’t want to leave my child with anyone else until he’s 1. And I want a day or two In the week with him when I do go back. He didn’t really like that response and mentioned money, then said let’s chat tonight. I asked what’s his thoughts or suggestions then, and he said he doesn’t know, he doesn’t really have an answer.

Is it unreasonable to expect him to pay everything so I can have a year off with my DS, then to foot more than we were once used to so I can work part time?

I feel like the convo is going to be awkward, he’s already paying our mortgage and bills and food. I use my smp for my direct debits and for DS. But he does complain about that. He’s used to carrying 100’s over each month and now he can’t. He spends a fair amount of money each month on football bets, beers with the lads and clothes, and other things that could easily be cut back on. I feel wrong to expect him to cut back. Not asking him to stop, but we would be ok money wise for me to take a year off and go back part time if he can make sacrifices, it’s just like he doesn’t wanna.

AIBU here? And how do I speak to him about this?! I think he feels it’s unfair he has to work full time and pay everything (that’s the vibe I get) but I see it as I’ve always worked and payed half, I’ve sacrificed a lot having DS (which I’m not complaining about) I run the household, cleaning cooking organising the shopping etc and general other things is women do. Again I’m not complaining or saying I want his help, truth is I’d rather do it all myself I enjoy it and know it’s all done and all done properly. So in saying that, I feel bad for saying this, he doesn’t do much for us.. if that makes sense? He’s a great DP and great Dad and we have a great relationship, I just don’t know how to make him see that he needs to step up financially.... or am I in the wrong?

What does everyone else do and how can I get this across?

It is not long after the birth.

i dont know why op is getting such a hard time, it’s not unreasonable to want to stay at home with your baby for a year, although you really should’ve discussed it before he was born.

He sounds like a stingy git tbh.

Nothing to do with MIL :) and yes I did comment that I’ll be going back January...

Will update fully in the morning as I best sleep for now, who knows when DS will be awake :) but I think an outcome has been reached... goodnight MN

Yanbu. It’s a very short amount of time to go from 9months to a year old, by which time baby will be more able to cope with childcare. You only want to go what many,many other women do- go back part time.

As for finances, does he know how much nursery fees cost? If not family money, then he needs to be paying in proportion to his wages a share of the childcare. Once he realises the costs, he may well change his mind about part time being a good idea (never mind that it’s ibviously what you want and what your son would benefit from!).

Wow. Taking a year off and then working part time is so common as to almost not be worth mentioning. You can discuss stuff all you like before being pregnant, it’s hard to know until the baby is here how you’ll feel about going back to work.

Then the OP's DP needs to pay half the full-time nursery bill and half the cost for a cleaner and ready made meals.

Why do they need a cleaner and ready made meals?

They divide the cooking and cleaning in half and each do their share. If OP decides to out source her share of cooking and cleaning then she should pay for her half. Maybe her partner is happy to do his share himself.

Op can't just demand a lifestyle and instruct her partner to provide it.

The man should start acting like a man, grow a pair and proudly be the breadwinner.

Maybe the man would like to be the SAHP. Why can't OP grow a pair and proudly be the breadwinner to support her partner and child?

Since when did the man have to be the breadwinner?

Decomposing Because I highly doubt OPs DP is going to step up and do 50% of housework and cooking. Instead OP will end up doing it. And looking after your own baby is not a "lifestyle". Babies need to be taken care of.

clairemcnam

My point is this all needs discussing as a couple and a joint decision made. It's not for one person to dictate what will happen.

Maybe he is worried that his job is uncertain and he doesn't want the financial responsibility on his shoulders?

It sounds like OP doesn't like her job and this is a way of giving it up. How easy will it be to find a job later on or is the year off likely to stretch out into the future? Will you be anymore ready to put DS in a nursery at 12 months rather than 9 months?

Yes it all needs discussing. But you have to be realistic. I would not believe a man who currently does no housework, cooking and childcare, that he is going to start doing half of it. Very few fathers do, and those that do, do their share from the start. Because they don't need anyone to discuss it with them, they are just decent people that understand when they get home from work, they need to step up at home too. Not go off out drinking with mates.
My DP would not have needed me to discuss that he needed to do his fair share. He just does.
And I can not imagine going out drinking with mates after working a full day, and leaving my partner at home with a new born baby.

So fine talk about the ideal, but you have to also look at how people are actually behaving and be realistic.

But you can't just unilaterally decide the lifestyle that you want and then tell your partner to provide it.

There are so many options available now - compressed hours, both working part time, dp taking paternity leave while OP goes back to work.

I worked evenings and weekends when my children were little so as dh came in I went to work. That maintained our income, I maintained my career and dh enjoyed his time with the children.

You have to approach negotiations being realistic about your situation. Sure there are lots of options that would work with a partner who does their share. Far less with a partner that does not.
And looking after a baby is not a lifestyle. Someone has to look after the baby. Realistically that is going to be paid childcare or the OP.
You are thinking of the conversations you would have with an equal caring partner. The OP does not have that.

I'm pleased you've found a solution.
I hope it doesn't mean that you're feeling grateful for being allowed to raise his child while doing all the housework and having evenings in on your own while he swan's off to the pub, comedians, and football.

Surely you discussed or thought about this before. I saved up before my mat leave.

Yes, sorry, I was thinking about the caregiver being ill rather than the child, but you're right - from what I hear, nurseries are usually incredibly strict about not taking kids who are a little bit under the weather.

Another point against nurseries, then, but I'm sure that those who choose them have their reasons.grin

Yes they do. I decided I would rather take time off to mind my sick children than take time off when a nanny was sick. You possibly felt differently - I'm sure you had your reasons.

YANBU

From a evolutionary/biological perspective: We spend years 'interviewing' a woman (in your husband's case) suitable to bear and raise our children...then dump them with a childminder or nanny who we interview for 30 minutes! It makes no sense.

My wife is a SAHM. After the kid is 3 or 4 then I'd like her to back to work, for her own sake as much as anything else. Will cross that bridge when we come to it.

This thread is totally batshit, in what world is it better for a 9 mo to be sent to nursery just so the mother works, to earn the same money nursery costs??? And diddums that the father no longer has a few tons left to carry over each month. The poor sod! I am finding it hard to believe his earning power when he can't do a simple equation Baby = Less money!

I'm struggling to get my head round the idea that the Op has seemingly spent her early 20s actively encouraging her partner to prioritise himself and take her for granted . She's enthusiastically taken on responsibility for what she happily declares to be "women's work", even cutting her discretionary spending to the bone in order to pay her equal half, and apparently didn't mind at all that he could still afford to enjoy himself while she played house. All pre dc.

I have every sympathy when a poster complains that they've ended up taking on the lions share of housework and child care while at the same time being financially disadvantaged, because it gradually happened during a period of maternity leave/being sahm and their partner got a bit too used to it! That I can understand and I'd be the first to say it's completely unfair and encourage her to force some changes.

In this case though the Op seems to have been working towards her 1950s housewife vision for their entire relationship but it's not at all clear whether this young couple have ever properly discussed what they want their lives together to be. I can't help thinking Op assumed that the pay off for martyring herself for years would be that once dc came along she'd be "provided for" 1950s style... However unattractive any of us might find the idea, if they were BOTH planning to live according to that 50s stereotype it might have been workable though I really doubt it but in reality I suspect she just found herself a young man who was happy to go from his mum cooking his dinners and washing his undies to a partner doing the very same! It's not terribly unusual unfortunately but it's a big mistake to imagine that means he's on board with being sole financial provider in return. Generally they only like the "traditional" stuff that goes in their favour.

It’s a very short amount of time to go from 9months to a year old, by which time baby will be more able to cope with childcare
Wrong! The child reaches peek separation anxiety at about a year old.
The

HaudYerWheesh This is not about funding a "lifestyle", but about looking after a baby. Few mums who don't have to would be happy to have a tiny baby in full-time childcare.

I wasn’t speaking of the childcare element, my comment was in relation to her comments that he would just have to stop with the bets/socialising with his friends/buying new clothes to fund her choice of not returning to work.

She cannot unalterably decide for him that he's going to be the sole earner in the household.

This thread is totally batshit, in what world is it better for a 9 mo to be sent to nursery just so the mother works, to earn the same money nursery costs??? And diddums that the father no longer has a few tons left to carry over each month. The poor sod! I am finding it hard to believe his earning power when he can't do a simple equation Baby = Less money!

- you whole post is just frustrating beyond belief, it isn’t just about the cost of childcare, when he maternity is up she will have no income at all, however she’s expecting him to pay all the household bills (inc her share of the mortgage, CT, utility bills, food etc) plus her own direct debits when she stops receiving SMP... hardly him being unfair when he may not want to be the sole earner in the household.

She can work evenings, work from home etc... I did when my children were little so they were not placed in a child care setting.

Another one here who is very surprised that this discussion didn't happen when you started TTC, or found out you were expecting. I don't think YABU in your wants, and it sounds like DP is living a bit of a bachelor lifestyle which would annoy me too, but it's not really fair to suddenly spring this on him.

Glad that it sounds like you're making headway on the issues now, good luck.

I think the sahm v childcare debate is something of a side issue here tbh. People can and probably will always debate that one but on this particular thread I'd be far more concerned that a young woman wants to make herself (and her dc) completely financially dependent on a man despite the fact that they seem not to have discussed this in any detail. Op appears to have assumed he'll be willing to be the responsible financial provider when there's been no indication of this through their relationship so far.

I'm not someone who thinks women must always retain financial independence no matter what, I can totally understand that having a sahp suits various families for various reasons but surely that's something that should be discussed and agreed before ttc rather than after the baby is born? IMO they're equally unreasonable to have failed to communicate and check that they're on the same page. I'm surprised that in this day and age a woman in her 20s would be this oblivious to the risks of putting herself in such a dependent position.

What kind of man wants his child in being with strangers all day while its mother works?

He needs to step up and be a good provider.

This thread is bizarre and worrying.

Initially I was in agreement with other posters that you can't just unilaterally declare that you want your DP to fund time at home with your shared child. As a SAHM, I totally understand why OP wants this additional time and actually do think it's important for the baby, but both parents have to be happy with their respective roles and responsibilities for it to work. This clearly isn't the case here and as OP isn't married she needs to think very carefully about putting herself in a financially vulnerable position with a man who is incredibly reluctant to support her.

Reading subsequent posts has made me increasingly concerned for OP. She describes a 1950's setup where she does all the domestic work/childcare, but doesn't seem to realise that her DP wants all the benefits of this kind of set up alongside her contributing significantly financially too i.e. he is keen to cherry pick the bits that leave OP with the bulk of responsibility. I think she had assumed by doing all the "women's work" that he would naturally agree to her transitioning to a SAHM/working PT as it was just an extension of a role she had adopted pre-kids. She's now shocked that he doesn't share this vision, but I'm not not.

I think the only healthy relationships that exist are ones where both parties view each other as equals. This doesn't mean that you have to both do the same thing and contribute in the same way, but it means that the contributions you do make must be valued equally. OP's DP clearly thinks that his effort and contribution is worth more than OP's irrespective of what she is actually doing. He was happy for her to work FT and run around doing the domestic work and he will be happy for her to take responsibility for their child, do the domestic work and work FT. He is not happy for her to seek parity and to equalise efforts e.g. she does more domestic/childcare work in exchange for working PT. That is a huge red flag and a very different issue than just expecting partner to find more time off work to look after the child. It's about division of labour and the value/worth of each person in the relationship.