“He wouldn’t be where he is if I hadn’t sacrificed my career”

[BooFuckingHoo2]

I am expecting a flaming for this .

AIBU to think this is often untrue? I know many men with stay at home wives and kids who, in all honesty, whilst happy to have kids (because the wife does all the wifework) would probably have been equally happy with either no kids or extensive wraparound childcare and an equally high earning wife.

I often see it trotted out on here “I sacrificed my career to look after our children” - but the for the majority of women (aside from some exceptions e.g. husband working abroad) I’m sure it was a welcome choice and not something they were strong armed into. In my experience (unless childcare costs eclipse the wife’s salary) the husband is usually indifferent (aside from the wankers who want a trophy wife) as to whether the wife works or not.

Equally “he wouldn’t be where he is in his career if it wasn’t for me”. I’m sure there’s a small minority of women who’ve accelerated their husbands career but I think for most, they’d have been the same with or without their wife, although granted possibly with no children or higher childcare costs.

AIBU?

sorry I don't understand. I said having kids does impact a women's career.
It makes sense there is a historic pay gap as women in general haven't worked as long.
I think it will change as more women decide not to have children.

My partner wanted kids. We had one and my God it was a shock. I'm part time now, and he's full time in a job he doesn't love. As my hours have increased, the house, the food, the organisation has all become more haphazard. Things are forgotten, there's more take away, there's washing everywhere and a long list of maintenance that needs doing. Things are generally harder work. When I reluctantly agreed to having a kid, I thought it would be different... but here we are. (Love my kid, she's awesome, glad she's here. But I'm glad we stopped at one. And yep, my partner needs a kick up the arse... but I'd have to organise that and I'm tired.)

I agree that the husband is often indifferent. Which is why women end up doing everything. He's indifferent as to whether the baby is eating well, indifferent to who looks after them, indifferent to what they wear to school, homework, shows, fancy dress days, indifferent to whether his family get Christmas presents or see their kids. Indifference doesn't mean they dont benefit. Children are a mutual decision. If the parents split and had 50 50 care then their careers could be more equal.

From a personal point of view my husband was happy to work long hrs so that I was at home full time with the children .he saw this as my job and his to support us .he would not gave been happy for me to work and put kids in nursery and have someone else bring them up as he put it .I dont think I advanced his career any I was happy to bring up children and he preffered working long hrs
If it was a choice of shorter hrs and me get a job but him do some housework childcare and the likes he would not have been up for it
Some folk like an old fashioned set up. But no we are not old barely middle aged

So its not that he wouldn't be where is without me... but I do think his (and my child's) home life would be substantially more shit if I were full time.

Just do what you want

I will, just need to tackle the guilt first.

The truth Is you never really know what was said between man and wife and what agreements have been made. Many women do give up careers and are happy to at the time bec they assume the marriage is forever - only to find he hasn't kept his side of the deal. Of course people are bound to feel cheated (pardon the pun) when this happens.

I also think sometimes men say one thing to their wife and then to friends its "I didnt care either way".

I think you're being unreasonable - there just isnt a one size fits all answer to this.

You forgot shamed for having a job that fits around their kids

not really - but having (or wanting) to chose such a job just proves that it's not always a cope-out for one partner to have a higher paid career and the other to chose to give it up.

Despite what posters are pretending on here, it's not a choice for most people.

Added to the fact that wanting to spending time with your kids should not be seen as so outrageous.

@LolaSmiles I understood your point. We can both agree to live and let live. My point is that you are misrepresenting what the majority of SAHMs are saying here. There are those making points about wrap around care/money not being the panacea and others who have kids with disabilities. I don't see anyone moaning about sacrifices or having not made a conscious choice based on their circumstances. You're brushing over all that and claiming there are hoards of deluded SAHMs trying to justify their existence. Personally, my husband's job is incompatible with family life in the week and I am definitely not deluded about that. But thanks for suggesting I, or others like me, are.

@BooFuckingHoo2 haven't read the whole thread but completely agree with you! I have always worked albeit part time and we have our life thanks to my husband's career. Whilst some could say I have a backseat in my career, I don't have the same earning potential as him.

I feel privileged to have watched my kids grow up and spent so much time with them and have the type of lifestyle I had have stress free. This is thanks to my husband

If we were to divorce, I am quite prepared to walk away with nothing and make my way as long as he looks after the kids interests.

Let me tell you all right now, when one of your kids dies then none of this matters one little shit. If you’re farming your kids out 7am-6pm every day so you can have your swanky ski holidays then I hope it never happens to you and you regret the time not spent with them

@RUOKHon

women in their 20s & I think early 30s now outearn men

If they’re in their early 20s and 30s they probably don’t have kids yet!

And that doesn’t change the fact that historically, there has always been a gender pay gap.

I've known a lot of men who piss around in their early 20s, sometimes travelling, working part time, playing in a band - that kind of thing. But eventually, often initiated by a GF who wants more stability and with an eye on the future, they get it together then start to fly ahead.

I know one young couple who a few years ago were in this position, the woman had a steady job and the man was somewhat 'free spirited'. Once he decided to get serious he did that thing that men are quite good at - getting a decent job via a friend of a friend. Now roughly four years down the line he earns nearly 3x what she does.

@scepticalface82 for high achieving individuals yes the support is useful But there is not a cause and effect. Not A direct causal link, they’d earn well and achieve irrespective.
As other posters have said it’s simply a way to replicate a trad family set up

As for the children brought up by someone else. Ahh yes, I love that ol line. It’s double barrelled

1. Women know your place eg bring up his kids. Don’t be the someone else mum
2. Pejorative to other parents who use the someone else. Also implied it’s some glassy reprobate who really is unsuitable

But surely in examples where the DH has the big job that isn't compatible with family life he's earning 6 figures

Not necessarily, like if he’s on an oil rig for two weeks of the month, for example.

In my case, DH doesn’t earn six figures but his salary now is more than twice what our combined working salary was. And we’d rather have the disposable income we save on childcare than spend it on nursery fees. But even though we’re well off by most people’s standards, we still couldn’t comfortably afford a nanny.

Having said all that, that is our unique situation, specific to our circumstances (which include us having to have a massive mortgage to live in a ridiculously expensive part of the country so DH can be near enough to see DSC regularly).

Of course not in every example but ime the jobs with a bad work life balance are generally better paid.

YABU,
Maybe things are becoming more equal.but when i had my eldest DC 21years ago, there was only 12 hours free child care term time only from.age of 4 years, no paternity leave, maternity leave was not as generous, there was no right to request working part time/ flexible working, no wrap around care at schools.
We decided ,tbh it was DHs idea initially ,that i would give up work and look after dc until they started school, I really enjoyed time with them but it did damage my career/work prospects and it totally facilated his career, he could travel abroad for work, work long hours, never did a school run ,or took time off when they were sick or to take them to a medical appt etc etc
Being able to concentrate on his career without compromise definitely helped him progress, particularly when we first had DC when perhaps flexibility to look after kids ( particularly for men) was frowned upon. He did work very hard ( as did i bringing up dc) but I do think if childcare had been split equally he couldn't have taken advantage of some opportunities at work which would have limited his career prospects/ promotions.
My career prospects definitely took a hit after taking time out to raise dc and then needing flexible part time work to fit around childcare as when i returned to work DH career had taken off and we prioritised his job as he could earn far more than me and his salary was paying the mortgage ,bills etc so it seemed pragmatic at the time.
I think the only way to keep it equal is from the very start everything to be split 50/50, working hours, childcare, housework etc etc as soon as a partner starts doing more of one thing the dynamics change and its harder to row back from.

@HeelsHandbagPerfumeCoffee actually, no, in some cases, for instance partners who work abroad, or parents of children with health needs or a myriad other circumstances, the working partner would not do well if they had childcare responsibilities. What you are saying is false.

I do sort of agree op. I’m a high earner and many of the women I work with juggle kids and have working partners. But a lot of the men have sahw. It’s hard work but many women make it work so I don’t know why more men can’t. But it’s such crazy hard work. Ultimately we need working patterns that work for everyone, not just men.

I do agree though that the vast majority of men would still be in the same place in their career without sahw.

@scepticalface82 no,not false. Simply not to your liking. There’s a difference

I imagine the women who make these statements about sacrificing their career because they may feel a twinge of sadness about what could have been re their career. Once you give it up its hard to get it back.

But my bigger question is why all these women give up so much and work so hard to enable all these high flying men? I get that these women love their children but do they really love their husbands or the lifestyle provided to facilitate them so?

I'm single by choice and work FT so I know the challenges of not having the financial support of a husband but by golly I just couldn't do all that wifework and enabling so a man can get what he wants and have his best career. No, just no.

In my case, DH doesn’t earn six figures but his salary now is more than twice what our combined working salary was

But if you had stayed in work wouldn't it have been higher?

And we’d rather have the disposable income we save on childcare than spend it on nursery fees

childcare is expensive but if you earn under 100k the tax free & 30 hours does help.

Tax wise it's often better to have 2 good earners vs 1 high earner eg 1 person on 120k takes home 6.2k a month, 2 people earning 60k each have a total of 7.2k a month plus the 30 hours & tax free childcare & 2 employees paying into a pension.

@Waferbiscuit

I imagine the women who make these statements about sacrificing their career because they may feel a twinge of sadness about what could have been re their career. Once you give it up its hard to get it back.

But my bigger question is why all these women give up so much and work so hard to enable all these high flying men? I get that these women love their children but do they really love their husbands or the lifestyle provided to facilitate them so?

I'm single by choice and work FT so I know the challenges of not having the financial support of a husband but by golly I just couldn't do all that wifework and enabling so a man can get what he wants and have his best career. No, just no.

I would say in a lot of cases it happens incrementally. Like the boiled frog analogy. Often you can find yourself in a situation and only with hindsight see all the small things that built up to it.

I do think his (and my child's) home life would be substantially more shit if I were full time

Yes absolutely this was the case with us. I won’t lie, we are all so much happier all round without me working full time.

I know one young couple who a few years ago were in this position, the woman had a steady job and the man was somewhat 'free spirited'. Once he decided to get serious he did that thing that men are quite good at - getting a decent job via a friend of a friend. Now roughly four years down the line he earns nearly 3x what she does

Exactly the same happened with my brother. He dicked around until he was about 27 and then knuckled down. In ten years he’s worked his way up to a six figure salary. No kids though!

You aren’t envisioning the range of experiences that lead to women disproportionately sacrificing career progression and earnings when a couple has a family.

You’re imagining high flying Jo and John deciding to start a family (you assume at Jo’s instigation too which may not be the case) and either Jo and John make the choice to continue their high flying careers and pay out for high quality wrap around childcare or Jo gives up her career and that’s her choice

But that’s not the situation for most families. Most likely when Jo and John have kids, they are younger and lower paid and John is more likely to have a boss who isn’t accommodating of days off when the kids are sick so Jo goes part time to save the nursery fees they can’t afford and covers all the sick days and forever more she’ll be playing catch up in her career. So 10 years on they could perhaps pay for that extensive wrap around childcare but it’s a bit late now.

Or maybe John and Jo both have jobs that involve lots of travel but not yet the pay to cover that sort of childcare. Now John could change careers but well Jo’s still breastfeeding and little Sophie prefers Mummy anyway and so it’s Jo who changes her job or stops for a year or two.

Or perhaps Jo and John are prepared to pay out for that childcare, they even have the money but Sophie is born preterm with multiple disabilities and suddenly their life is a round of medical appointments and well again Jo knows more about Sophie’s health as she’s been off on mat leave, so who takes the hit again?

The reality is that men do not do their fair share of childcare and not primarily because women won’t let them but because

• mat leave starts the childcare with the woman as primary carer so she has an advantage there
• men are more likely to be in professions where taking shared mat leave, parental leave, days off to cover nursery closures etc is frowned upon by colleagues if not by management. Therefore women often pick up the slack.

Women give birth and breastfeed. It makes sense for many families for the woman to take more time off at the beginning which then leads to her becoming the default carer.

Then when parents are divorcing 12, 15 years down the line, the reality of those hard choices is forgotten and the fact that the woman is at a material disadvantage is blamed on her. ‘I earn more’

The fairest way to view this, is to see childcare and housework as a third job. Each adult
Is responsible for 50% of the money and 50% of the home work. As your percentage of one drops, the other must increase.

Plus I just couldn't be making choices that actively continue a culture of male dominated senior management.

Those orgs with an old fashioned culture of men at the top only having SAH wives - who are these wives and are they aware of what they support? Sure they will all say the set up 'works for our family' but it's hardly facilitating positive change.