To want to stay at home with children, even though I've always been against it?

[thisareainparticular]

I've always believed (and still do) that providing financially shouldn't just fall on one partner. I believe I need to safeguard my own future. I believe it's sexist and wrong that I should feel pressure to stay home while DH doesn't.

But. A week off. I feel like a new woman.

I want to give up work so much

Division of labour makes sense IF both parties are fully on board with it and all money is legally and practically shared (i.e. house is jointly owned and money goes into a joint account). There is still an element of trust involved. I’m not surprised you feel better.

The labour should be divided fairly but there's no reason each have to provide financially. If one is in a high paid, stable job they enjoy and the other wants to stay home that might well be the best option for both. I do think you have to consider your long term financial security though - is the working partner insured sufficiently against illness/death? What about divorce - would you be able to become independent? What about when the kids are older - will you feel lost or will you have other things to occupy you? If those eventualities are taken care of I think it's fine.

A lot of people feel as you do, op. I did but quite honestly going to work was good for me and I enjoyed it.

Hope you get it all worked out.

It isn't fair to assume one person is happy to shoulder the financial burden. Plus I'd probably have to work at some point. When can I retire!?

Your head and your lived experience are two different things. I used to see things on black and white often idealistic terms when I was young, now I’m aging it’s less so.
Life experience just keeps on informing us.

So you've changed your mind - nothing wrong with that. If your DH is OK with it and you've thought of the pros and cons then why not?

Realistically it can never happen. I just feel so down.

It isn't fair to assume one person is happy to shoulder the financial burden

LOL yes I definitely think it would only be by mutual consent. Not just rage quitting because work is annoying!

It doesn't have to be a permanent choice. I took 6 years to be present for their formative years and didn't commit professional suicide in the process. Quite frankly I can't imagine I would have the same connection had I been away from them 3/4s of their wakeful day. I'd give it serious consideration if you're in a decent relationship with a manageable level of outgoings.

Third baby, back to work, then a week off on leave and I am so with you.

I enjoyed this maternity leave. Having a parent at home all the time makes family life so much easier.

But... it can’t be done, at least not in a way which will make me any happier long term.

I was a bit ambivalent about having kids
When I was pg I had the nursery booked from when baby would be 6 months old and I could get back to my career, which of course wouldn’t be even slightly affected by having a baby
Let’s just say we lost our nursery deposit

I’m glad that dh and I decided that I would stay home when the dc were tiny but my god as soon as dc3 started school I was back at work that week!
7 years at home and I was desperate to start working again.

Do you feel like a new woman after one week off because of sleep deprivation? If so, how old is your DC - hopefully things will improve at some point!

Or because DH isn't pulling his weight domestically? If so you can talk to him about getting a better balance.

If neither of those apply, could you go part time? Might be the best of both worlds?

A week off in June isn’t like being off permanently. It’s basically a holiday.

Months and years off through cold dark winters and with kids who no longer find your presence a novel treat is not the same.

don't you have some unpaid parental leave you could use maybe a 3 week block later in the year to see how you feel then

if you are serious can you try living on less so you can build up a financial reserve how much less can you realistically live on? not just for a few weeks but months on end
if you could live on 75% of current income assuming you both work FT you could drop 2.5 working days a week between you
many people are downsizing expenditure in order to have a better work life balance but some things that cost money have to be sacrificed maybe the bigger house, dining out, holidays, expensive hobbies designer clothes second hand car instead of a new one etc
you will gain some money as tax will proportionally be less, less commuting costs, but maybe more heating in winter, you might cook more from scratch so slight saving on food especially if in the habit of buying lunch and coffee

Do a different job? Carrying on like this to retirement doesn’t seem ideal. But there are a lot of things between that and stopping working - part time, retrain, go self-employed, get promoted, have a career break. Talk to your partner about what you both want.

It isn't fair to assume one person is happy to shoulder the financial burden

Well no, but generally it would be explicit discussed and not assumed? You’ll find most SAHMs shoulder a disproportionate amount of the parenting/housework burden (all night feeds all cooking cleaning - even at weekends etc.) so it’s not just the working parent who is potentially “burdened” by the set up.

It can work wonderfully well when there’s mutual respect and can be completely fair for both parties so there’s nothing to be “against” really.

I don't think taking a few years out of work to look after children does necessarily mean that one partner is shouldering the entire financial burden. I think it's something you've got to look at the big picture on.

Having one partner at home can save money in various ways, childcare costs being the main one, so can be a financially sound decision. Of course it can also impact that partner's career, so should be carefully considered from that angle too.

If one of you wanted/needed time out to do something that would long term benefit your career or the family as a whole, would it be unfair then or justified, as short-term with a definite end in sight? For example, retraining, starting a business, a long distance move? Or if one of you (god forbid) were to fall ill and be unable to work for a perod of time. To me these are all things which might reasonably happen during a marriage where one partner might take the financial reins for a bit.

I don't think it's very helpful to try and see things in terms of "fairness", you should feel and act like a team IMO. And teamwork doesn't mean that everybody has a direct effect on the same things, but collectively you should feel that everything is covered.

Why can't it happen? You just cut your cloth accordingly and think of the thousands you'll save not having to shell out for childcare.
If you can afford childcare put the amount away for their future or your pension.
That's what I did because I felt the same, no regrets at all and a lovely pension to take whenever I like. With dh still working and likely to always work we are poor but lucky and very happy.
Good luck, it's lovely if you both enjoy your lives.

Firstly. There is nothing “sexist” about the maternal drive to stay with your own children! It’s the most basic instinct in the world. Sure it’s not for everyone, but if it is there and you try and deny it on the grounds of “equality” or whatever, you run the risk of making yourself ill. Yes men and women are equal, but we are also different in some fundamental ways and this is one of them.

Why would it not be possible for you to SAH OP? What is your DH’s view - have you told him how you feel?

How old are the dc? I don’t think taking a few years out and planning carefully to return is the same as making a once and for all decision. Early years are important. I changed my mind from your starting point over many years and two dc.

I’ve not worked in 20 yrs.im a SAHM,
I would of worked,but I’ve 2 autism,and no school,
Long story ,but yeah I don’t work due to dc refusing to leave house etc.

we managed somehow.morgage not far from being paid of .
Modest house ,but no new cars ,no sky tv,camping holidays,no expensive clothes...when friends moved to bigger houses we made do.
Never took the kids abroad.
It was worth it ,just as well as I didn’t have a choice

Work from home ? Part time ?

I’m a SAHM to two children (1&3), and as far as I see it I save us £24,000 a year in nursery fees. I consider that a massive financial contribution - my work may not earn us any money but it saves us an absolute shitload.

I loved my job but always wanted to be a SAHM, and whilst I do miss having an outside job (and kids are tough sometimes), DH and I see this as a totally fair division of labour. We’re both contributing, and we both have a positive impact on our overall household income.

Also this article is pretty reassuring...
www.forbes.com/sites/jennagoudreau/2011/05/02/why-stay-at-home-moms-should-earn-a-115000-salary/#4117dffa75f4

If you want to stay at home, go for it. If you do it for a while and hate it, get another job.....nothing is set in stone, so do what’s right for you at the time.

I was the one working and dh was sahd. There is lots.of self pressure being the main bread winner. We now both work. I could never see myself not working without considerable financial security that was just mine