To not work full time?

[Lazym]

I have two children 16 and 12. Since my oldest turned 7 months I have worked part time. I cleaned in the evening for 8 years and for last 7 1/2 years I've worked in a supermarket 4 mornings a week, 4 - 8. Obviously when kids were younger this worked out well as I was back home for the school run and partner went to work. My youngest started secondary in September, so now childcare costs aren't an issue I've had comments from partner about finding a full time job. My point is I enjoy my job and am good at it so why should I leave this job to potentially start a job I could hate? The job I have doesn't have full time hours. I contribute to the household financially, pay for two weeks of food shopping every month and pretty much pay for all of the kids needs/clothes. One example, just spent £200 on my lad for his prom, partner paid nothing. So I work and do the usual household chores cook, clean, washing etc. Partner is very money obsessed, but I feel I pay my way too. From when they were very young he's always swanned off and done his own thing, leaving me to it. Another issue with working full time is my lad will be starting college in sept and he'll need a lift to the train station which is 6 miles away and collecting, so how am I supposed to do that? Just needed an opinion. Can never reason with partner as he's never wrong.

Yeah that’s fair enough everyone’s different!

Absolute bollocks.

😅 any particular reason why you disagree, or do you just enjoy shouting down the opinions of others?

Find a thread and evidence your claim where everyone who is currently on this thread stating she’s being financially abused have previously posted on other threads, where the sexes are reversed, and we have cheered the woman on.
It hasn’t happened.
Stop minimising financial abuse.

I know the OP only works 16 hours a week, but man, supermarket work and house cleaning, it's so hard at 48. I wouldn't be able to hack it. Cleaning my own house is bad enough. Perhaps that's why I feel sympathetic. I don't know what her DP does but perhaps easier? Can't he be a bit nicer to her?

Yanbu. I expect your partner hasn’t got a clue about all the house things you do. Has he said he’d step up and do more of that if you went ft? Also could you meet in the middle somewhere. Keep this job and increase your hours or get a job to top up.m but not necessarily to full time. But then you’d have less time to do the home stuff so again will he step up to do som of them? X

Of course the answers would be different. In fact a female in the situation above would be told to never put the BF's name on the house, and to make sure it only went to her kids.

Are you confused? I didn’t say there were threads where people had said that?

Some of the things WA say constitute financial abuse:
using credit cards without permission
putting contractual obligations in their partner’s name
gambling with family assets
no money for basic essentials such as food and clothing
no access to their own bank accounts
no access to any independent income

Funnily enough, nowhere, do Women’s Aid say refusing to fund someone’s PT life and refusing to add someone’s name to a house you own that they don’t pay for is financial abuse. Also the OPs partner wants her to work full time and therefore have access to her own income.

Please don’t compare the experience of someone who simply doesn’t want to work full time with the experiences of women who have lost their children’s homes due to gambling debts, had to beg on their knees for money to feed their children and all the other genuine experiences of financial abuse that people have gone through.

https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/financial-abuse/

Find it.
Find the thread where this is happening and all the same posters you’re accusing are saying that.

I worked in domestic abuse victim support before having children. Please don’t.

If that’s true then that’s worrying and I can only hope training and staff knowledge has improved massively since you left to have children.

@GrinAndVomit Stop minimising financial abuse.

It isn't financial abuse to not want to financially support a partner who doesn't want to work more than 16 hours a week.

What do you do for a living?

Yes, being able to Google financial abuse makes you both much better qualified to spot red flags than me. Perhaps you could have extended your Google search by open just a few more websites to find more examples of financial abuse that OP has mentioned:

Making significant financial decisions without your input

Hiding or taking funds

It’s not particularly relevant but I’m a teacher in a deprived area (60%+ FSM) working with many actual victims of abuse who have had their lives destroyed by men who financially abuse them. As in, don’t let them feed and clothe their children. My school has a food and clothing bank set up to help them, access to a
development worker who helps with refuge placements etc, and we work closely with social work and have in depth staff training and knowledge of what constitutes abuse. Hence why I agree with @Sissynova - refusing to support someone’s lack of work ethic is not abuse and is insulting to genuine abuse victims.

(My husband also works full time by the way. We share house work and child care 50/50 because we’re both adults and I don’t expect someone to hand me half a house for free. 2023 and all that.)

Of course the answers would be different. In fact a female in the situation above would be told to never put the BF's name on the house, and to make sure it only went to her kids.

But in this situation the children are his as well.

Is she abusing him then? As she has made the significant financial decision to only work 16 hours despite his disagreement?

There's no way I will ever put my partner on the deeds of my house.

That's not abusive - it's sensible.

She has no say over big financial decisions such as the purchasing of houses.
She is not on the mortgage for house despite her mum putting money in for that purchase and despite her working part time to help pay bills.
They have been together long enough to have a 16 year old child together.
She has to do all the housework and childcare.
She has to pay for all the children’s upkeep.

Are you really so blinded to this because she dares to only work 16 hours a week?

How can she possibly have a say over house purchases? She has no money to pay for a house? She doesn’t pay towards the mortgage; she pays for food and some clothing as per her own posts. Whether or not her Mum should have a vested interest/ring fenced deposit agreement is a different issue.

Can you honestly tell me that if your female friend told you they were going to put their long term boyfriend who had never contributed towards the mortgage on the deeds of her house, you’d advise her to go ahead?

There's no evidence they didn't decide on the house together.

She should've talked to him about all this before they had children.

Am I abusive because I won't put my partner on the deeds of my house?

And it's very sensible of her partner not to let her contribute to the mortgage payments as she would potentially be accruing an equitable interest if she did so.

This is a very very airbrushed list. She has to pay for "all" the children's upkeep does she? Does housing not count towards their upkeep? The bills to keep a roof over their head? Keeping them warm? Keeping the food stocked?

Lets face it 16 hours a week in a supermarket doesn't allow you to make a decent financial contribution to the costs of running a 4 person household.

Buying the odd schoolbag or prom outfit isn't shouldering all the children's upkeep.

It doesn't sound like OP had no say over the current house they live in, OP certainly doesn't say that.

And if her mums money should be ring fenced, so should his parents from when they helped him in 1989.

Exactly. Let's face it 'a couple of thousand' on a 3 bedroom house in most of the country is a minuscule amount of equity. Plus the money might not have been towards the house, it could have been given for furniture or moving costs.

Women need to realise that when the step back from the workforce in a major capacity that doesn't mean their boyfriend has to house them indefinitely or give them 50% of the equity on the home. That is just the reality. OP chose to work around the kids, she seems to think there is no way she could have worked full time while having children but that just isn't true.

No one is forced to only work a few hours a week, it is a choice and a choice that quite obviously comes with negative financial consequences.