Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think it's a bit sad that both people nowadays need to work to afford a household?

701 replies

Lowef · 30/04/2021 19:24

I know this isn't a popular opinion on MN but was thinking how rubbish it is that today mostly both parents need to be working to be able to afford the basics of food, clothing, rent. mortgage etc for the family without being on the breadline.

I have really fond memories of playing with my mum in the garden planting pots, watching her cook whilst i sat on the worktop. She'd collect us from school everyday and on fridays she'd have baked some warm muffins, sweet buns which were still warm and fresh from the oven. She'd give some to my friends too. She taught me so many things like sewing, cooking, gardening (she was very green fingered), growing veg. She spent alot of time with us kids and i look back at those days really fondly.

In comparison I am nothing like this with my children - I just don't seem to have the time and energy for the things she did. I can't bake cupcakes in time for the kids school pick up as they're in the after school club. Dinner is a quick whisk up whatever I have in the freezer / fridge , I'm too frazzled and tired for spending lots of time with the kids. DH is the same.

In an an ideal world i would love to be a SAHM and have more energy and time for my family and myself too instead of just rushing through life. The years are going by so fast and most of my energy and life is taken up by work. The children are growing up so quickly.

Not sure if anyone else feels the same too or if ill get an MN roasting!

OP posts:
Ellpellwood · 30/04/2021 20:03

children can wear hand me downs

Really? My only child with no cousins can wear hand-me-downs? Who is doing the handing?

ivfgottwins · 30/04/2021 20:03

It is what it is. I went to a girls school - very much raised that girls can do anything career wise. I always knew i would most likely out earn my future husband and would therefore not have the opportunity to be a STAHM. Growing up in a household where my mother didn't work there was a lot of resentment about the lack of financial contribution and I swore that would never be me.

DH and I split all school holidays as annual leave, we have a cleaner, even a gardener, food shopping is done on line when the kids are asleep, all so that weekends and holidays are purely family time

Kids are knackered after school anyway so we wouldn't be doing anything Mon-Fri that we can't do because we are working parents

PattyPan · 30/04/2021 20:03

It is sad and housing costs are to blame. I live in the SE, it’s where I’m from and where all my family is so I don’t want to move. I live in a 2 up 2 down and my mortgage is over £1k a month, more than half my take home pay. I’d never be able to afford multiple children just on my salary.

Pumperthepumper · 30/04/2021 20:04

@SnackSizeRaisin

Like heating and electricity and water and clothes? All luxuries?

A large proportion of heating and electricity is for luxury use, yes. Central heating is a new thing, 40 years ago you only heated one or two rooms and wore a lot of clothes in winter. A lot of electricity goes on electronic entertainment devices. Anyway the cost of bills isn't doubled for more people in the house. Most clothes are also luxury purchases. Adults can wear the same thing for years and children can wear hand me downs.

Hand me downs from who? And of course it is, the more people having a shower, the more it costs to heat the water. Or are showers also a luxury in this weird puritanical fantasy?
SnackSizeRaisin · 30/04/2021 20:05

hello daily mail subscriber - your sum can total less than £50, hardly a months salary. In fact the things you describe are cheaper than they were in the 90s- a BT line rental & aol dial up was extortionate.

I also listed other things besides the 2 you picked there. And internet didn't exist in the 80s. Most people didn't have it in their own home until the 2000s. The cost of a bt landline was less than 2 phone contracts are now, and many have broadband WiFi so are still paying some kind of line rental anyway.

Tealightsandd · 30/04/2021 20:06

@MrsFin

Women (rightly) wanted equality and to earn on a par with men. We largely have that now - with exceptions.

People's expectations change as their income changes. Things like washing machines, which were considered luxuries not so long ago, are now essential.

I'd say equality and being on a par with men would be having a SAHP (at least part-time) - but it being accepted as the norm that this could be the father as much as the mother.

Loads of people had washing machines in the 80s and 90s. They weren't considered a luxury by then. Not everyone has one but that's still the same today.

JoanWilderbeast · 30/04/2021 20:08

This is my soapbox rant. If the main cost of living essential, ie. a flipping roof over your head, had been kept in line with earnings, as it should have been, we'd be in a much better place. Angry

Crazybunnylady123 · 30/04/2021 20:08

I am a full time stay at home mum to two under fives. My dp earns enough for us to pay our living costs. We have a nice house, run one car and have pets.
But there is no money for extras like sky, cinema, holidays or days out. But I can be with the kids and that’s our choice for now. I think once kids are both at primary I will look for work. But for now this is how we are and I don’t find it easy and I miss work sometimes. But things change and kids grow up so I’m just going to go with the flow.

BackforGood · 30/04/2021 20:09

It used to be one member on an average income would be ok running a household - just enough to live comfortably with a modest lifestyle

When are you talking about, exactly ?

Tiddleypoms · 30/04/2021 20:10

I stayed at home until school started . However , it came at a price . I had to give my car up . No hair appts etc. At one point i funded staying at home by training as a childminder so i was earing whilst being a stay at home mum
.happiest years.
Felt like freedom . It was not a popular choice amongst some of my professinal peers but it suited us. .i somwtimes think that people say they cant afford to so it and that may be true ,but alongside that statment expect to still have the car, not live frugally . We cdnt do it and keep the same lifestyle by any means.
Quite a lot depends on what the other parent earns , outgoings, nature ofplace where you live ( walk to platgroup for eg ) as well as a potential willingess to surrender certain expectations. Certianly with 2 under 2 it would have been v v expensive to have full time chikdcare.

SnackSizeRaisin · 30/04/2021 20:10

Hand me downs from who? And of course it is, the more people having a shower, the more it costs to heat the water. Or are showers also a luxury in this weird puritanical fantasy?

You are proving my point that what is seen as a modest lifestyle is what has changed! Things like a hot shower every day are exactly the kind of thing that would have been an unimaginable luxury in the 50s. A modest lifestyle would not necessarily have included hot running water or an inside bathroom. If you want these things then they need to be paid for, but yes they are luxuries. Ask anyone over 70 if they had a daily hot shower or bath when they were young.

OnlyFoolsnMothers · 30/04/2021 20:12

user1487194234 sorry but I disagree, I’m the main bread winner, fair enough my husband does equal baths, food shops etc but trust me the mental load of a primary school aged child is on the mother- or did we all dream that the pandemic shafted working mothers?!

Pumperthepumper · 30/04/2021 20:12

@SnackSizeRaisin

Hand me downs from who? And of course it is, the more people having a shower, the more it costs to heat the water. Or are showers also a luxury in this weird puritanical fantasy?

You are proving my point that what is seen as a modest lifestyle is what has changed! Things like a hot shower every day are exactly the kind of thing that would have been an unimaginable luxury in the 50s. A modest lifestyle would not necessarily have included hot running water or an inside bathroom. If you want these things then they need to be paid for, but yes they are luxuries. Ask anyone over 70 if they had a daily hot shower or bath when they were young.

WTF is this now? So you want people to live as they did in the 1940s but not reduce the cost of housing?
SnackSizeRaisin · 30/04/2021 20:13

Really? My only child with no cousins can wear hand-me-downs? Who is doing the handing?

Friends? They don't have to come from a blood relative

Original poster
Lowef · 30/04/2021 20:13

@ThornAmongstRoses

My experience is the opposite of yours OP as when I was growing up (1980’s born) my mum was hardly around at all because she had to work 9-5 Mon-Fri.

I know she had no other option but I really feel sad that I didn’t have a more present mother figure.

I have two children and reduced my hours to 25 hours so I could be around for them in the way my mother couldn’t be, though I know that’s not an option for a lot of women.

It’s pretty crap really.

This is exactly what i would want for my kids - i want to be around more for them and present as a parent. i remember a thread a few years ago where the poster asked whether others felt sad if they weren't picked up from school by parents and most posters felt sad and wished theyd had a parent to pick them up.
OP posts:
name674398 · 30/04/2021 20:14

No I don't think it's "sad". If we wanted one person to stay home we'd move to a cheaper area and limit our lifestyle. As it happens we are both very career orientated as well as being very lifestyle orientated, give me multiple holidays abroad, meals out and fun days out with my family over cakes in the oven at 4pm every day. That life sounds a bit small to me, fine for those who want it, but I want more for myself and my family. I don't think attending clubs after school is sad or much of a sacrifice for all we gain from it, quite the opposite.

OnlyFoolsnMothers · 30/04/2021 20:15

SnackSizeRaisin my last Bt landline was £40 a month, my iPhone contract sim only is £20.
Mobile phones aren’t a luxury - neither is the internet.

It’s very obvious who on this thread lives in modern day Britain and who believes all the crap they read in certain newspapers.

Take a 30k wage, minus the rent of a two bed flat, council tax, bills etc. And see what is left....

EssentialHummus · 30/04/2021 20:15

Everything is too hard, and working hard is no longer enough to secure you a decent (not lavish) life. I have friends who work really, really hard and still can't quite make it work. Things have gone wrong somewhere for sure.

This for me too. I am sad at the long hours culture in the UK (or my bit of the UK? London? The SE?). We’re really lucky in my family, and we’ve made some decisions to prioritise time/family life but I have good friends rushing from one thing to the other, kids in nursery/school/holiday club 8-6 51 weeks a year, everything a stressful exercise from the weekly shop to the car needing a service. It’s really really tough.

user1487194234 · 30/04/2021 20:16

Ok well giving up my car ,hair appointments and a (twice) daily shower is just not happening

OnlyFoolsnMothers · 30/04/2021 20:16

@name674398

No I don't think it's "sad". If we wanted one person to stay home we'd move to a cheaper area and limit our lifestyle. As it happens we are both very career orientated as well as being very lifestyle orientated, give me multiple holidays abroad, meals out and fun days out with my family over cakes in the oven at 4pm every day. That life sounds a bit small to me, fine for those who want it, but I want more for myself and my family. I don't think attending clubs after school is sad or much of a sacrifice for all we gain from it, quite the opposite.
Cheaper areas are cheap for a reason- I could move out of London and my housing cost would drop by half, my income would drop by 2/3rds, also if I lost a job there are far fewer opportunities in small more remote locations
Bagelsandbrie · 30/04/2021 20:18

@SnackSizeRaisin

Society does not value the stay at home parent.

That's because a stay at home parent is generally not contributing to society. It's only of value to their own family. Nothing wrong with being a stay at home parent, but it's of no value to society in general

Rather simplistic view. Stay at home parents do impact on society as a whole, if families work better for having them (and that’s not always true, granted). If a family benefits from having one parent at home then society in general benefits - the next generation of human beings benefits.

We as a society place way too much emphasis on our sense of self worth being tied up in wealth, economy and careers. (I’ve also experienced the fact people seem to think you cease to exist as a person when you are unable to work due to chronic long term disability, that’s another shit show).

MiddlesexGirl · 30/04/2021 20:18

@SnackSizeRaisin

Society does not value the stay at home parent.

That's because a stay at home parent is generally not contributing to society. It's only of value to their own family. Nothing wrong with being a stay at home parent, but it's of no value to society in general

No value to society?????!!!!!!
name674398 · 30/04/2021 20:18

@OnlyFoolsnMothers DH and I are public sector workers we get the same wages wherever we go, I'm home based, he is military so can be posted to numerous locations. We actually already live in a really cheap area, but could go cheaper and still earn the same.

SnackSizeRaisin · 30/04/2021 20:19

So you want people to live as they did in the 1940s but not reduce the cost of housing?

I don't want people to live any particular way. I just think that people fail to realise that standards of living have risen hugely and that all these things we are constantly being sold as essential were not enjoyed by previous generations, and that is why they were able to live in a single salary. Housing has always been a large proportion of the cost of running a household. That hasn't changed. What has changed is the extra things that people now view as essential.

lynsey91 · 30/04/2021 20:19

I am in my 60's and both my mum and dad worked full time when I was young. Mum went back to work when my youngest sibling was born and I was about 6 (I am the oldest).

Even with them both working we really did not have a luxurious life. We didn't have a washing machine until I was about 14, no tv until I was about 16. I know my mum and dad went without food to feed us. From my birth until I left home at 22 we had a total of 5 holidays, all in the UK and all cheap ones.

As others have said, lots of couples could live on 1 wage if they didn't want 2 cars, foreign holidays, sky tv, the newest phone etc.

Most of my neighbours are youngish couples with children. In most of the couples both work full time but they all have 2 cars (decent cars too not old bangers). The ones I know quite well have sky with movies and sports (that costs a fortune), netflix, always have to have the newest phone, takeaways a couple of times a week etc. If they cut back I am pretty sure they could manage on 1 wage