“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?

I’m sure my h would be in the same job now if he was single and never had a wife. But he’d not have the children he so desperately wanted (and is still lobbying for a 4th) at home. He doesn’t care if I work or not but he has made it clear he will not be able to be relied upon for any childcare or domestic input. He’ll never cook a meal or do a wash etc.

This is asked from a place of genuine confusion - what does really wanting children actually mean if he also isn't prepared to do any childcare? Does it mean he wants adult children some day but not the slog of raising them, does it mean he has a thing about continuing his line, does he like the idea of being a father? I guess I can't see what pleasure you'd get from having children without taking on any of the work of having them at all.

Yes, I have always thought this

I kind of see your point although when my first DC was born DH was in the army serving away from home so I did become a SAHM as DD rarely saw her dad so I wanted to make sure I was home a lot to take care of her. When she turned 3 I returned to work but I do feel that my career plays second fiddle to DHs as I am expected to do school drop off, pick up, pay wrap around childcare fees plus I have to make sure tea is cooked, house clean, uniform and work shifts ironed etc although I’m starting to think I may be a bit too accommodating so that could change. I’d love to go for a role like I used
To have before kids but it involved travelling and that’s something I couldn’t do anymore as DHs job takes priority as he does earn much more.

@HeelsHandbagPerfumeCoffee

It’s nonsense trotted out by women who wanted to be housewives and seized his career as an excuse to stay home It’s a mn perennial. Male high achievers who need a woman home. Couldn’t manage otherwise. Men who apparently problem solve,kick ass but cannot manage any level of domesticity or buy their own clothes. So domestically incapacitated that they need a sahm. Bullshit of course

In actuality people plan,buy childcare and don’t need an adult to give work for them to progress at work

Brutal. I don't necessarily disagree with you though.

@donewithitalltodayandxmas

Maybe some of us actually want to stay home and look after our children and don't give a toss about a career, why is that wrong And actually why bother having kids at all if you both have to work 12 hr days and travel / weekends etc Many one parent will take a less demanding job so the other can do the hrs If both parents work 7-7 5 days a week when do the kids get to see a parent

I sort of agree to some extent but this is why I can't understand why anyone actively chooses a set-up where one person works constantly and the trade off is that the other one is home - don't you both want to see and enjoy your children? If it's pointless having children if you both work like that then isn't it pointless for the one who does work like that even if their spouse doesn't?

It's nearly always a choice isn't it? Even for those very low earners there are tax credits to help out if they are single.

I don’t agree. If you have the luxury of family nearby who are able to help out when your child is too sick to go to nursery etc then perhaps. I know so many women who scoff at the idea that it’s not possible to be a working mother while each set of grandparents takes their children two days a week while they work. Or they can just get their mum to take the kids at short notice if they’re ill.

I realise our circumstances made it very difficult for us (twins so double any childcare costs, no family around and both twins being disabled), but even now they have started at specialist school I couldn’t work a full time or even fixed day part time job. Annual leave wouldn’t even cover all scheduled appointments, let alone illness, and there’s no holiday childcare we can access.

Similarly I know so many parents of disabled children (some of them single parents) whose children have been placed on unlawful part time timetables or are unable to attend school at all and it often takes well over a year to get it sorted. Hell, there are thousands of children in the U.K. with EHCPs / statements and no school place or EOTAS arrangements.

And that’s not even getting into those mothers with physical or mental health issues which aren’t significant enough to warrant disability benefits but which prevent them from working reliably.

And people will say this is rare but I don’t agree, I know so many people in similar situations. So it’s not “nearly always” a choice - those who have the choice are very fortunate.

You're saying that when my husband worked away all week for ten years that he could have done this without me with excellent wrap around care?

I think people saying this stuff mostly don't have kids themselves. To me it seems like madness. Of course being a mother involves a lot of sacrifices, whether you choose/want them or not!

YAB massively U

Very high earning partners manage well, because a full-time nanny et all the help they can need is easily affordable. I know a few very successful mothers, but not everyone with a "career" is earning that much.

Couple with a lot of family help and support manage well too. It makes a huge difference when you don't look at your watch every 5 minutes because you need to pick up the kids, when you don't have to refuse to go on a trip or work certain shifts and are off every time your chid is unwell.

I don't know anyone who managed a successful career with no help. I know plenty who have an ok job and juggle things around constantly, but you can't be taken seriously in many roles if you are only available 9 to 5 if that.

I know on MN planet you just find a child minder or a club open 7 to 7 even during the Christmas school break, but where I live that's not the case. With no help, either I or DH would have been late for work if we had to wait for the breakfast club to open, and would have had to leave early to pick up in the evening. No way would have my boss been remotely impressed by this.

@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.

I was going to ask the same thing.

Male high achievers who need a woman home. Couldn’t manage otherwise. Men who apparently problem solve,kick ass but cannot manage any level of domesticity or buy their own clothes. So domestically incapacitated that they need a sahm. Bullshit of course

It’s not that they can’t buy their own clothes. It’s more about the fact that if they’re in court, or the operating theatre, or chairing a board meeting in New York, they can’t drop everything to go and pick up little Johnny who’s vomited at nursery and needs to be collected.

@HeelsHandbagPerfumeCoffee

It’s nonsense trotted out by women who wanted to be housewives and seized his career as an excuse to stay home It’s a mn perennial. Male high achievers who need a woman home. Couldn’t manage otherwise. Men who apparently problem solve,kick ass but cannot manage any level of domesticity or buy their own clothes. So domestically incapacitated that they need a sahm. Bullshit of course

In actuality people plan,buy childcare and don’t need an adult to give work for them to progress at work

My husband has worked 6-8/9pm every week day for the last ten years. For much of that time he was abroad. He loves his children and plays with them in his spare time. I handle everything to do with the children to allow him to work at this level of intensity. We are a team. You are a rude and narrow-minded person.

sort of agree to some extent but this is why I can't understand why anyone actively chooses a set-up where one person works constantly and the trade off is that the other one is home - don't you both want to see and enjoy your children? If it's pointless having children if you both work like that then isn't it pointless for the one who does work like that even if their spouse doesn't?

But do you think it's that easy? I didn't have a choice of "just" cutting down my hours. Either I worked, or I didn't - or I was free to change role entirely. It paid off, because first we have a lot of family help (including SAHM sisters... wouldn't have worked otherwise) and going up meant being more relax with my hours
but it was the same for DH. Either stay and go up, accepting the hours and work involved, or do something else.

In an ideal world, I would be delighted to work part-time with DH for the same income or near the same

Hmm. I know a couple of marriages that broke up because the dw and dh argued constantly over whose career should be prioritised and who accused each other of not taking any interest in their own children and/or holding each other back. Most of their money goes on double the nannies or external childcare, as they each need someone for when it’s their “turn” having the kids. So no, I don’t think the sort of man who separates from a woman who stayed at home looking after the kids would actually have been just as happy and successful with an equally high powered woman, as she has every bit as much chance of turning out to be tiresome to him and holding him back in his career with her expectations of him.

@Hardbackwriter

I’m sure my h would be in the same job now if he was single and never had a wife. But he’d not have the children he so desperately wanted (and is still lobbying for a 4th) at home. He doesn’t care if I work or not but he has made it clear he will not be able to be relied upon for any childcare or domestic input. He’ll never cook a meal or do a wash etc.

This is asked from a place of genuine confusion - what does really wanting children actually mean if he also isn't prepared to do any childcare? Does it mean he wants adult children some day but not the slog of raising them, does it mean he has a thing about continuing his line, does he like the idea of being a father? I guess I can't see what pleasure you'd get from having children without taking on any of the work of having them at all.

I didn’t say he isn’t prepared to do childcare. But that he can’t be relied upon. For 2 years he did +50% travel (2 weeks on off in the states and then often to other places in the 2 weeks he was meant to be home). He’s been sent at short notice for 2 weeks the first 2 weeks of December the last 4 years and missed every nativity. I signed up for a night course to retrain 8-10pm but only attended half the classes because he couldn’t get home for 8pm. Since lockdown it’s been great, he’ll do drop offs every morning and pickups if he can. He finishes at 6.30 and then sees the kids whereas before he was home at 8.30pm. He loves being with the kids he just can’t commit to a set time. He once said to me ‘think of yourself as a single mum, see everything with the kids as your responsibility to be available for, then if I can do it it’s a bonus’.

I'm the higher earner in my marriage. My husband is self employed and took the hit when we had kids. I could not do as much as I do without him being there to pick up the kids, sort breakfast, put them on the bus etc. No question.

I find it interesting, however, that my friends who have the other way round (man = higher earner and woman = pt/sahp) find that the higher earner man takes his partner for granted. Practically every sahm I know is in charge of 100% shopping/meals/cleaning/homework/pick ups/life admin/pets/play dates etc. My dh and I are definitely more even steven.

There is a load more to having kids than just minding them.

He once said to me ‘think of yourself as a single mum, see everything with the kids as your responsibility to be available for, then if I can do it it’s a bonus’.

Yikes. I would actually be a single mum if my DH said that to me.

I hate this SAHM-bashing threads.

There's no valid reason why anyone would give a fuck how other couples organise their finance and life but jealousy. It has no impact on anyone if someone goes back to work or stays home. None.

I even have a couple of friends who are SAH wives as they don't even want kids

As long as one person is happy to shoulder the entire financial responsibility and the stress of work, and the other person happy to handle the house and children, why is that anyone's concern.

If we could afford to keep the same lifestyle and plan for our kids with 1 salary only, I would happily stop working. I'd keep the cleaner.

@hardbackwriter yes i agree my dh worked 7-5 so was always home to see kids / help in evening
I wanted to stay at home whilst they were little and having a high flying career was not of interest to
Me ,compared to spending those years with my kids. We sacrificed a lot going to one wage and when my youngest ds was 3 i went back to part time evening job so one of us was home so no childcare.
When at school i went parr time in days and slowly increased my hrs S they got older but luckily had a flexible job that fitted on ok with illness / school pick ups etc
My dh always wished he could of been at more sports days but his job isn't one that offers much part time working
So we aren't rich but we spend and have spent lots of quality time with dc's and now they are 17/15 we have 20 odd years work ahead of us if we wish to persue our careers

Well said @SinkGirl

No one ever tells you or thinks about the impacts of sick children or the constant illnesses parents pick up from their children. My DH and I were constantly ill for years picking up bugs from the DCs, especially when they start mixing with other children.

Nor the constant medical visits, I’ve got one child under the paediatric unit, 1 under dermatology & allergy specialist, another under podiatrist and now SEN, all of which have taken years of GP and hospital visits and pushing to get here. It’s never ending.

If we both worked it would be impossible for us to keep up with everything and give are best to our jobs and our children.

@SinkGirl

He once said to me ‘think of yourself as a single mum, see everything with the kids as your responsibility to be available for, then if I can do it it’s a bonus’.

Yikes. I would actually be a single mum if my DH said that to me.

Yes it certainly was a low point (one of many!)

YANBU.

My husband has a very good job, he has made great strides in his career. This has not happened because he has a SAHM.

I work and I have always worked, including after our children arrived and my husband’s career would be where it is now whether I chose to be a SAHM or not.

@heseesyouwhenyouaresleeping I chose the do something else option, and both DH and I choose to work four days a week. Of course there's a lot of privilege to being able to make that choice, and obviously it has financial implications, but then there is in one partner being able to give up work entirely. I just can't understand why so many women on MN think it would be appalling or mean they had no relationship with their children if they themselves worked long hours, but think that their DH doing the same is fine and great.

There is an element of choice. I know several SAHMs of secondary age children who have not worked since DC were born and have no desire to return to work. I also know of many others (including myself) who have opted for part-time work, not necessarily in the field they are trained/qualified in, in order to maintain some kind of work life family balance at home. Arguably both sections have made some kind of sacrifice - or perhaps more accurately weighed up the pros and cons and decided that one particular way makes more sense for them as a family.

I notice that on threads like this there are very often posters who trot out phrases like 'wrap around care' without, I suspect, really understanding the reality of what wrap around care actually is when both parents have full on full time jobs. DH is a high earner who can very often be on conference calls (or, pre covid, on business trips) that begin around 7 and finish around 11pm. Most 'wrap around care' provision begins at 7:45/8am and finishes 6pm latest. Many jobs, high-flying or not, cannot be sustainable when DC need to be dropped off / collected to/from wrap around care. It only 'wraps around' to a certain extent. So unless parents can afford a nanny (and even then, the hours worked by a nanny are rarely longer than 7:30am - 6:30pm) they are very restricted in terms of hours they can each work - unless they have grandparents ready to support/take over/do last minute pickups at the drop of a hat.

The reality is that the so called 'full time childcare' is nowhere near as flexible as having one parent there to pick up the childcare slack - either as a PT worker, or as a SAHP. Usually there has to be a compromise somewhere, and usually it's the woman who compromises.

Four day working is a great idea for family life. Not available from most employers though.

@ThornAmongstRoses

YANBU.

My husband has a very good job, he has made great strides in his career. This has not happened because he has a SAHM.

I work and I have always worked, including after our children arrived and my husband’s career would be where it is now whether I chose to be a SAHM or not.

You're judging others on your own experience. Every family is different. There is no way in this world that my other half could have devoted himself to his work in the way that he has without me there to care for the children. Whatsmore, he wanted me there to care for the children as their mother, full time. And so did I. Why can people not accept that a SAHP can be an intrinsic part of a partnership which benefits the family as a whole, rather than some coasting, self-indulgent tv-watcher?