To ask would you rather you or your partner was the sole breadwinner and you didn’t have to work...

[Merryoldgoat]

Or that you were both pretty equally responsible for bringing in the money?

My DH and I are not high flyers but we’re both professional and have decent jobs and live comfortably.

He earns around 60k, me around 38k part-time.

He’s recently taken a step up so he’s working longer hours.

However I also have a responsible job and need to work pretty intensely at various times.

We have a cleaner and some support from PIL, childminder etc.

But I find it a grind.

I sometimes feel like encouraging him to get a much better paid job (this is possible if he changed sectors) and me taking a step down to a less challenging job so I had some time to get stuff sorted at home - it’s all a bloody rush atm.

If you have seen any previous threads of mine I have two children with additional needs and it’s quite a grind sometimes.

On the other hand I’m not a natural SAHM and I love my job.

I’m just musing really.

DH is great, does his share with everything but I do wonder if life would be better and/or easier if I wasn’t working as much/at the level I do.

YABU - better to both work and share the load
YANBU - better for one ‘breadwinner’ and someone dealing with mostly home stuff

Both parents should be equal as breadwinners and homemakers. That way if either or both of you become single parents you are capable of giving your children security and stability. And you should be your best at both for the sake of your children.

I would also like to get rid of the idea and actuality that men are having their careers enabled. Most of the time this is unnecessary but if it does happen it’s probably causing disadvantage to other working parents.

If you decide to be a SAHP, then plan for consequences explicitly with your partner. That includes funding your pension and a possible split.

Merry - yes we’ll there’s a resson In the workplace that people “specialise” rather than trying to a a bit of everything . It’s obviously reduces time-wasting and stress and increases productivity.

I’m not saying the SAH model is for everyone and I do agree women need to be very careful indeed. But, where it works well and there is mutual respect, it means that partners are providing a lot of freedom to each other to fulfil the roles they feel most motivated by. In this way, it can be if huge benefit to everyone.

Capr

Yes the “specialisation” part of the SAHP model is partly why it’s so seductive as you say. It’s much more efficient in some ways: everyone focuses on what they are doing rather than trying to multitask.

But it puts too much power on one side of the equation. It depends on a perfect trust and respect that you refer to between the two parties. But the divorce statistics show that that isn’t achieved even in a majority of cases.

Basically if you depend on someone else for financial security you are handing over control of your children’s financial future to someone else based on a mercurial and unpredictable set of circumstances. Long term it’s too much of a gamble.

@Capr1

Merry - yes we’ll there’s a resson In the workplace that people “specialise” rather than trying to a a bit of everything . It’s obviously reduces time-wasting and stress and increases productivity.

I’m not saying the SAH model is for everyone and I do agree women need to be very careful indeed. But, where it works well and there is mutual respect, it means that partners are providing a lot of freedom to each other to fulfil the roles they feel most motivated by. In this way, it can be if huge benefit to everyone.

There’s no equivalency here. Employers wouldn’t ever want to rely on only having one specialist counterbalanced by another specialist. It would make them totally vulnerable. In a small workforce specialism is rare and generalism is needed for business continuity.

Big organisations can afford teams of specialists. But nobody is indispensable.

The other misconception on here is this idea that if you can’t get back into your old job at the same level, well, that’s the end for you and you are doomed. The reality is, that most women I know who are SAH for say, 5 or 10 years or often longer, actually have no intention whatsoever of going back into that role, so it’s irrelevant. In that time you change a lot and you might well find your priorities shift and you identify differently. Think about the time as an opportunity to change direction or train in something else - reinvent yourself if you want. I have friends who have become fluent in several languages in this time and are now translators. So many have started their own businesses because when they return to some form of paid work, they want it to be on their own terms. There are women who used to work in the corporate sphere, but are now psychotherapists or similar, working from home and on their own terms. There are so many options - nobody needs to be locked into one route for life as if it’s the end all and be all (well, not unless they want to).

I've been pretty much a SAHM for the last 11 years as my DH is a high earner ( a bit more than your husband). We did it to avoid childcare stress/costs etc

I enjoyed it, it's been lovely to see our eldest all the way through school ( he's just left secondary) and youngest has just left primary. I've been getting itchy feet for the last year or so, and it's be very hard finding work. I have very little up to date experience ( I have a qualification but it's outdated now), so I'd recommend anyone hoping to do the same try and keep themselves in somewhere. I've also found myself being fussy as we don't need the money, so I've been looking for the perfect job with no annoying bits...!!

Basically if you depend on someone else for financial security you are handing over control of your children’s financial future to someone else based on a mercurial and unpredictable set of circumstances. Long term it’s too much of a gamble.

Absolutely, and it bases a woman and her children's economic security overwhelmingly on the risky basis of the woman's husband continuing to want to be married to her. And puts her in a vulnerable position should she be unhappy in the relationship and want to leave, especially when she's deskilled by a long period out of the workforce.

You would be crazy to make yourself and your children economically dependent based on your love life.

But the point I was making up the thread was less about a negotiated situation where both spouses discuss one of them becoming a SAHP than about the (to me bizarre) assumption that because of the earnings of one spouse the other 'doesn't need to work'.

@Capr1

The other misconception on here is this idea that if you can’t get back into your old job at the same level, well, that’s the end for you and you are doomed. The reality is, that most women I know who are SAH for say, 5 or 10 years or often longer, actually have no intention whatsoever of going back into that role, so it’s irrelevant. In that time you change a lot and you might well find your priorities shift and you identify differently. Think about the time as an opportunity to change direction or train in something else - reinvent yourself if you want. I have friends who have become fluent in several languages in this time and are now translators. So many have started their own businesses because when they return to some form of paid work, they want it to be on their own terms. There are women who used to work in the corporate sphere, but are now psychotherapists or similar, working from home and on their own terms. There are so many options - nobody needs to be locked into one route for life as if it’s the end all and be all (well, not unless they want to).

That can be true and yes if you're lucky it can be an opportunity to stand back and get some perspective, retool etc and change career.

But its unarguable that 5-10 years out of the workforce will impact your employability and your earning power. If you're in the lucky position of having the financial backing to retrain as a psychotherapist that's great but that relies on you having amassed a certain amount of capital or income to support that. A lot of women find themselves high and dry with no warning because their marriage comes to an abrupt end and they suddenly have to become the sole breadwinner more or less overnight.

If you've been out of the labour force for a decade and suddenly have to support yourself and your kids are unlikely to have the luxury of being able to retrain for a nice second career in psychotherapy and many women end up in fairly menial jobs in these circumstances because they have nothing to fall back on.

You'll be in much better shape if you have worked, even part-time, throughout and have some money that's yours and yours alone and a recent work track record.

I’ve found this thread very interesting.

I’m tired. But I love working, like my job itself and like the flexibility it affords me.

I had a presumptive ASD diagnosis for my toddler and with all of the SALT and Portage etc I’m starting to feel anxious.

However, I’m 42 and I’ve had a job in some capacity since I was 16. I grew up in poverty in a dysfunctional family and made a promise to myself my children would have better than I did, materially but more importantly, emotionally.

There is no way I could really stop work for my own self-esteem - but it’s an undeniable grind when you’re both doing it. It doesn’t help that my husband is a very kind and generous man. He shares everything with me, he’s never once asked me to justify any spending etc and we have had a joint account since we moved in together 13 years ago.

I’m probably just coming to terms with having two children who need additional support - it’s a bit of a difficult thing to get my head around and I’m panicking about all of the appointments etc that will be coming up.

I suppose it depends on wheee you live and what your outgoings are . Your joint salaries posted are way higher than mine and my DH's have ever been but we have low outgoings .

There are two ways you could do this if you are currently struggling with the amount of stuff to do at home .

Either you could drop to a role with less responsibility or drop more hours so that your DH is the clear breadwinner and you are responsible for the home ; or ; your DH could look at reducing his hours so that your responsibilities both for earning and around the house are more equal .

In our house DH always worked FT and I did PT plus all the domestics . I don't think I could ever not work though.

Looking at the ages of your children I think it is likely to be hard work for you for quite a while yet so if you could get by on less money I would certainly recommend that either you or your DH try to reduce your hours a bit. How you do this depends on what's right for you .

I'm the opposite way around to your thread title - I'd like to be the sole breadwinner and have my DH be a SAHP. I would love to be a facilitated woman and not have to worry about the housework or the childcare! lol

I earn twice what my DH does, with the potential to earn even more over the next 5-10 years, so it would definitely be feasible for him to go stop work. But he loves his job, and unfortunately his industry doesn't really 'do' PT. It's FT or nothing, and he'd be pretty bored in a SAHP role (as would I). So we both continue working FT and juggling our commitments.

Absolutely, categorically not. No way.

I have always been, and will always be, financially independent. That is 100% non-negotiable. I will never, ever be dependent on anyone else for the roof over my head or the food on my table. Never.

thepeople - I don’t disagree, but what I’m trying to say is that when people ask things like, “My DH now earns £200k so AIBU to be a SAHM,” everyone will pile in with a view, but really it’s the wrong question to ask.

For instance, your DH earns £200k, but you have a massive mortgage, no family savings, credit cards up to your ears for whatever reason and little flexibility to the-enter the workforce if need be? Don’t do it!

But, if your DH earns this kind of amount, your house is worth millions with no mortgage; you have wealth accrued in accounts in both your names; maybe a property portfolio or all manner of investments, then clearly, his salary won’t matter so much if you were to split and he takes it with him. Also, you may have greater flexibility to return to work if need be or, if you don’t want to, other ideas for future career paths. So yes, it’s a fortunate position, but these are the questions women need to be asking themselves before they give up their earning potential or risking their future. In areas / demographics where there are very high propitious of SAHMs it Is precisely because the women are in this kind of scenario so it’s not such a risk, coupled with the fact the DHs are often extremely career-driven types (regardless of whether the wife works or not).

@shinynewapple2020

We have fairly large outgoings - biggish mortgage (London), substantial childcare costs, travel into London (although this may not be the case in the future).

I think I’ll talk to my husband about making a few changes and buying in a bit more help with a few things.

The ideal would be to win the lottery and stay at home without relying on anyone 😂

That is our set up OP, I don't think I am a kept woman, he deals with work outside the home I deal with kids and admin. We both cook, tidy etc, I don't think you both need to work to be in a equal relationship. We are equal, just have different responsibilities.
I too have always worked before having children, I just see what I do now as a different kind of job in a way.
Could you cut your hours? Children need time as well as economic security.

No. I've had it drummed into me to never, ever be financially dependent on your partner. Plus, I would feel useless and bit of a scrounger living off someone else's money. Just me though!

I was a SAHM for 8 years.

Lovely lifestyle: large detached house, DCs in private school, fab holidays, housekeeper, no money worries.

Thought I had a great relationship until the day I picked up his phone and realised he was shagging one of my best friends.

Wanted to leave but couldn’t afford to.

I stayed with him, licked my wounds and went back to work. Ten years later I’m out earning him ten fold.

We’re still together but the feeling my success gives me, plus the knowledge that everything my DC and have is down to me is with everything to me.

No, I would never want to stay at home. I don’t have or want children, but I know I’d go mad as a SAHM.

Up until recently I was earning more than DH but I took a pay cut to study, which should help me get into a different (better paid) career. I love what I do, I’ve worked really hard to get here and can’t imagine giving it up.

I’m a SAHP (with occasional freelance work) and adore it. It helps that I’m in a town with a significant at-home population, so I’m never lonely. Plus it’s given me the opportunity to work on a lifelong career dream, which has almost come to fruition.

I don’t have the fear factor about my husband leaving me. It could happen, but I choose not to live my life thinking “what if?”, and would be financially secure in any case.

I would hate to be a SAHP and so would DH. We both work, and it suits us both very well.

I'd quite like the sort of set-up where we both worked four days and shared the childcare/housework. But DC is very social and freaking loves nursery and would always choose to go if he had the choice, so I think he actively prefers going five days a week to three, especially with all the toddler groups being cancelled.

Financial independence, pension etc is v v important to me, but agree that at times things can be a grind. Must be way harder with DC with additional needs. lots of relationships end, and if that happens it’s good to have earning power.

Very few people have said they want to work, but do it incase their husband/partner leaves. If you really think that why are you with them? I know of two people who s partners died young and they had to go back to work but think it's really sad if you honestly worry that much about your partner leaving you.

I would still work if I inherited a fortune, but wise up, @Rosebel, something like 42% of marriages in England Wales end in divorce. You don’t have to be either particularly gloomy or a statistician to consider it as a possibility, and recognise that making yourself economically dependent on a marriage partner is a bad idea.

Posters advocating WoH haven’t said we ONLY do it in case of relationship breakdown! As with SAH there are a range of pros and cons.

If SaH and all the risks that entails was so great, many, many more men would do it!

Most people don’t expect their relationship to end, but many do. Risk of this is even higher in families with DC with additional needs.