“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?

@pensivepigeon

What makes you think you know more about other people's relationships and careers than they do themselves? What vested interest do you have in devaluing the SAHP's contribution to the family? Is it that you have a somewhat desperate psychological need to vindicate your own choices? See that question doesn't feel very nice does it? Judging you like that would be uncalled for wouldn't it?

It’s just a point to debate. Don’t overthink it.

YABU. Ok some women are talking horseshit, but it is true having someone at home facilitates the others career.

I’m a senior level single mum, but without someone keeping the home fires burning it’s bloody hard and could be a detriment to the children if I didn’t keep balance.

I am now stuck, because realistically the next step (CEO+) while possible with a full time nanny would be absolutely wrong for the kids as they only have me for their emotional growth and need to be prioritised.

So yes in some cases a SahP will facilitate the others career prospects BUT that’s only at a very senior level that takes a huge amount of focused time outside the home, and not really being mentally there when they are there!

Well I used to have a very high flying career untilI had DC, the problem was so did exH and he would never ever compromise his work time. Needless to say his career has always flourished. A typical day for me was 8am -9pm. Any earlier and you were perceived to be slacking.

I had two nannies, a day nanny and an evening nanny, but the reality is that no nanny wants to work until 9.45 every evening and I was always scrabbling and stressing about when I would be able to get away. Sometimes I had to work through the night and the nannies were always furious about having to stay until exH got home.

Then a combination of being moved whilst I was on mat leave to a shit role and DC1 having to be hospitalised and then being diagnosed as having SEN meant I was always running to catch up and never succeeding. All decisions in my partnership were taken by the men before they ever got to a meeting and they just closed ranks against my perceived lack of commitment. Eventually I had a breakdown and left work when DC1was expelled from mainstream school which is when exH escalated his affairs.

We don't all have a choice and it is usually the woman who holds the shit end of the stick. I look back on my bright ambitious hopeful young self and I want to weep for her naivety.

Also I would say I've literally seen attitudes change in the last 15 years while I've worked. When I started I would agree, but the generations of younger men coming up to management level are more involved with their families do expectations have changed. Property prices mean fewer men can afford a huge house/expensive lifestyle without a wife earning good money too, so DH certainly hasnt been competing against peers with wives facilitating them. All the men in his office under 40 do some school runs, cover days with sick children etc.

I work but have turned down three promotions and we would need two Nannies if I didn’t work. Nurseries and nannies don’t work 24hrs. My husband works extremely hard and often at weekends/Christmas day/nights. He appreciates that I work and do all the other day to day stuff and that I bear most of the childcare responsibility. I appreciate he works very hard and bears most of the financial responsibility. We both love our jobs and we both love our kids. We have both made sacrifices.

A lot of posting exceptions that prove the rule here. I’m happy to read about shared parenting but that’s not the reality for most women.

But they did have the children though so it is true. So are you saying that without a wife they wouldn't have children and therfore wouldn't have needed somone to make the sacrifice to look after the children?

Or are you saying most men are ambivalent about having children therefor if it's the woman who pushes for them they should do the child care?

I know a few women who have been dragged to several new locations and countries over the years as their husbands advance as well. Hard to keep a job whilst that is going on.

@burnoutbabe

I often want to ask quite what high flying career the mum has sacrificed, having shown no actual career goals or drive before hand.

Maybe they just mean gave up a job.

Maybe it was just a job, but it will become a career if they’re not working, or maybe their career didn’t pay well yet or isn’t that well paid ever.

They probably thought they could restart their career later or get another just a job and didn’t realise how hard that is to do after not working...

Yab judgmental and short sighted.

Wrap around childcare is no good if the husband needs to go abroad, or needs to work until 2am to meet a deadline, or do something at very short notice without childcare arranged. I have most certainly facilitated my DH’s career by being available 24/7 for the kids and it’s meant that in 20 years he’s only had to say no to one thing on one occasion when one of the kids was in hospital. He has definitely advanced quicker than other parents who have had to say no to stuff as he’s now more senior than them.

Why do you give a shit what other people do?

If I had to pick a SAHM I'd pick a woman, put it that way

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 think the crucial bit of this is that, yes, the truth is that a lot of men who prioritise their career and work very long hours would have been perfectly happy not having kids - or happier, at least, than they would have been to limit their own ambition and goals to do childcare. So I agree with you OP, what they normally mean is that the man wouldn't have been able to have his job and children without his wife doing all childcare, but that takes it as granted that he still would have had the children.

I agree .. I didn't "sacrifice" anything .. I was 100% more interested in raising my children rather than being at work sitting at a laptop or sitting in a boardroom with people I couldn't care less about. Me being home benefitted my children obviously, but also did benefit my husband in that he could work and travel without having to juggle childcare pickups & drop offs.. he was happy for me to quit my job but also would have supported me if I wanted to keep working.

@grassisjeweled

What always amazes me is how men are apparently blind to the amount of unseen /'women's work' that goes on.

If you had a single dad, high-flying career, with no wife, he'd have to pay not only for a nanny but also a cook and probably housekeeper.

If you paid each of those people a measly £10 per hour the amount would be shocking.

It would take the wife to walk out to demonstrate that.

Isn’t the point that he wouldn’t bother with kids. Or at least a normal family set up. Maybe a girlfriend or two living elsewhere with his child, paying maintenance after he insists on a DNA test and the odd visit when work allows?

I am now stuck, because realistically the next step (CEO+) while possible with a full time nanny would be absolutely wrong for the kids as they only have me for their emotional growth and need to be prioritised.

The thing is most top level CEOs are older? Secondary school age teens etc simply do not need -want- parents around as much and certainly not during the sort of hours that form most of the working day. So you dont have the same time conflicts as someone with young kids juggling school runs, childcare, cooking, etc. A 14 year old can get their own school uniform washed and hung up, can cook dinner a couple of times a week etc and pitch in a lot with chores around the house.

YANBU, I'm actually pleased to see a thread about this because I feel like it's taboo to talk about and I think in majority of cases what you've said is spot on. I'll get flamed for agreeing I'm sure but - I.don't.care!!

Totally depends on the situation. If you're married to say someone who does odd hours (eg NHS consultant) or someone who travels abroad a lot for work and the other person had a job with similar constraints then yes you probably did need one of them to stop work or significantly change their career as even a nanny wont want to work weekends and every night.

If you have two high fliers who between them can work it out that one of them is home by 7pm then its probably different

I took a couple years out after our second was born, I don’t think it benefited DHs career massively, but he has enjoyed being able to travel at a moments notice and work late if he wanted/needed to. I work full time now and DH has stepped back to be more flexible for the DC.

I think what would work best would be to have a full complement of hands on engaged grandparents willing to sacrifice their hard earned retirement.

It's each couples choice. Nobody is being forced into anything.

There's a reason busy, well off people hire a nanny and/ or a housekeeper!

Property prices mean fewer men can afford a huge house/expensive lifestyle without a wife earning good money too, so DH certainly hasnt been competing against peers with wives facilitating them

Good point

if the husband needs to go abroad, or needs to work until 2am to meet a deadline, or do something at very short notice without childcare arranged.

Times have changed. DH has to go abroad regularly. I flex my hours/wfh to accommodate extra childcare drop offs and use an odd half day of annual leave if needed. In busy season at my work I often have to work late, I do so at home in the evenings while the kids are asleep in bed.

Most modern employers eg FTSE 250 and FTSE 100 no longer expect an employee to "drop everything" at short notice.

I've learned (from working in mergers and acquisitions) that actually, nothing is that important. We aren't hospital doctors, no one is dying, it can always wait a few hours while you juggle other commitments.

I think you’re right. It’s primarily the woman pushing for marriage and children and the man is often completely unprepared for everything that goes along with it. I’m currently a SAHM but I can assure you I’m not milking it and would work (I was previously self employed) if we had the facilities for me to do so. As it is I’ve decided to finance my own training in another field and I should then earn enough to contribute a decent amount into the pot whilst remaining flexible for my children. I absolutely was the person who wanted the children. DP made it very clear he was happy to just have me.

I think it depends upon how high flying. My DH and I were both very high-flying back in 2008 after having our first kids. Both on comfortable 6 figure salaries and I was a city lawyer who had a direct track to partnership (and equity partners at that time were on circa a million a year). We had twins, desperately wanted by both of us. They were our world. We had a full time nanny and a cleaner but we still both struggled to make everything work (house was always messy, loads of kids things forgotten - swimming lessons needed to be booked early or all gone and the nanny just didn't really see all that admin as her role). You need to manage people working for you to a degree and that also takes time. Both of our jobs impinged into the weekends regularly and we decided that this wasnot what we wanted. So I went part-time and then gave up after having third child - on paper it should have been him but he didn't want to and I didn't care so long as we were all happy. Since then he earns more than I ever could have- director of a FTSE company, he still works like an idiot but when he is with kids, he is with them and everything else is done by me (holiday booking, club booking, treats at christmas, food shopping, cleaning, building work, parent care). There is no point me working in a paid job to fit hours round kids as the money I would earn would add nothing to our lifestyle but would massively add to our stress. I use my legal skills for charitable work instead which keeps my brain ticking but doesn't detract from the main job. I think that he couldn't do his role without me, so does he for that matter.