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.

Millions of people live in squalid conditions and are malnourished. Billions of people live with other people they disagree with. There are billions of people in the world living in different circumstances from other people.

What is clearly not the case here is that the OP is a stay at home spouse. And comparisons with millions and billions of other people who have very little in common with the OP’s situation are pointless.

Same here. I've been in the workforce 45 years and managed to do quite well despite not having anyone in the home to help me; also have simultaneously done several rounds of eldercare / end-of-life care for ill parents/relatives, run a freelance business on the side, taken care of rescue dogs, volunteered locally and maintain a large perennial garden, all own DIY etc etc. Somehow managed it all.

One could just as easily say that someone could progress even further/better in their career if they didn't have the expense and distractions of a dependent spouse and children.

It's like that rubbish about a housewife being the same value as a trained nurse, educator, chef, professional driver, etc etc. all rolled into one. Yeah, right. Are they held to professional standards?

The plain fact of the matter is that there are millions of two-earner households with children; it can be done.

Saving on childcare fees at the start might seem appealing but look what happens when someone is out of the workforce until the kids are school age. Even if there isn't much net financial benefit, there is pension contributions, keeping training up, networking, establishing a job history, gaining experience, etc. etc. and all of those intangibles really add up.

“Clearly not the case” you think…🤔

This. Plus all the non-financial benefits: independence, self esteem, self-sufficiency, knowing your relationship is a choice and not a financial necessity, showing your children the importance of a work ethic.

How much does he do at home? I would say you would go full time if he bumps up to doing 50/50 domestic duties, including dropping the eldest half the time when they start college.

Well said.

And you know what? He can say "Fine, pack your bags and be out by 6pm" and there's not a single thing she can do but pack her bags, because she has no legal right to be in that house.

She needs to get to work ASAP for HERSELF, regardless of what he thinks or doesn't think, does or does not do. It is imperative that she establishes some sort of livelihood for herself, so that she isn't at the mercy of his whims. Especially if the relationship already is contentious. How much housework either of them does is irrelevant at this point.

Unless she wants to wake up every single day wondering if she'll have a roof over her head tomorrow.

If your partner is willing to take on 50 per cent of the free labour you have been providing for years then go ahead and work full time.

If working full time will mean doing all the household labour as a second shift on top of that while your partner continues to do as he pleases don't bother.

Or you could work full time and get your own place and do as you please like your partner does now.

It's like that rubbish about a housewife being the same value as a trained nurse, educator, chef, professional driver, etc etc. all rolled into one. Yeah, right. Are they held to professional standards?

A much more realistic comparison would be the cost of an au pair.

If you are doing more household chores than he is,and I imagine you absolutely are, then this is what your part time hours allow. Going full time would mean less gets done or he has to do more. Is there a way to demonstrate that unpaid work you do to him?

The issue here is you aren't on the mortgage with no stake in the home potentially. Sounds very risky

This. Plus all the non-financial benefits: independence, self esteem, self-sufficiency, knowing your relationship is a choice and not a financial necessity, showing your children the importance of a work ethic.
Agree with this.
It's also better for relationships to not end up in a place where one partner drifts into feeling like they should be able to not work / only work part time indefinitely and resents their partner raising the conversation, and the partner growing in resentment that what started as an arrangement that suited the family has quickly turned into them indefinitely being expected to run a household and support a partner.

It's to couples to decide the best way to allocate responsibilities in their household. It's not going to work where one person feels like they've become the de facto main earner for life when they'd actually want their partner to share that load.

I'm so sorry you're dealing with all this. I've had similarly unfortunate experiences.

Please realize my comments below are only my interpretation of your situation and my advice to you. Feel free to take what helps and ditch the rest.

Your name definitely SHOULD be on your house. Your mother helped pay for it but your "partner" is the only owner of your home? WTF!?!?

I'd say get out when you can and work as many hours as you can. Put money into an account he has NO ACCESS TO.

He has NEVER seen you as a partner; he only sees you as a possession. I'm sure he sees the children as his possessions too, but he feels he shouldn't have to take care of them or spend money on them because that is what he has YOU for.

He obviously expects you to go back to full-time work outside the home and more than full-time work inside the home with no help from him or the kids.

Get your kids doing regular chores ASAP. The college bound kid should be responsible enough to get himself to and from the train to school.

Exactly this. Lots of posters don’t seem to realise how precarious a position Op is in. She’s got less rights than a lodger, she’s basically a house guest.
The other scenario is if he dies eg car crash. Op has no idea if he has a will.
He could have made a will when he bought his first house in 1989 as a single bloke and never updated it. Left everything to his mum or donkey sanctuary etc.
There was a poster on here a few years ago who was shocked to be given a week to move out of his house when her partner died but she had no legal right to be in his house.

in my view just because your kids are teenagers doesn’t mean they don’t require some level of care or supervision. My kids are the same age and I work around on average 25 hours per week. DH works FT but I do everything around the house so in fact I probably more than exceed his FT hours!! With teenager children come regular orthodontic appointments in working hours and running around to sports clubs etc after school (none of which are easily accessible by bus!). If I worked FT there would be no way of covering this.

If anyone is freeloading here it’s the partner. Yes he works FT but it sounds very much in his interest given the house is in his sole name. I’d be interested to know the division of house work too.

If anyone is freeloading here it’s the partner. Yes he works FT but it sounds very much in his interest given the house is in his sole name. I’d be interested to know the division of house work too

This is all entirely irrelevant. It doesn't matter whether anyone thinks the partner is freeloading: what matters is that the OP's relationship is not great anyway, and she has precisely zero legal rights.

I think a lot of people on here seem to be missing out on the fact that OP's partner wants her to work full time, do all the housework, be responsible for everything to do with the kids and yet still have no stake in the family home.

All those saying that the OP needs to work full time to protect herself, I agree but I get the feeling that her partner is expecting her to put her wages into the "family" pot. How is she supposed to save if that is the situation?

This is not a short relationship. They have been together for a long time and the children are joint children. This is a totally different situation to one where the man has children from another relationship so needs to protect their interest in the house. Or where the relationship is a short one and the non-owning partner is looking to be put on the deeds.

OP realises that she has made some decisions that, with hindsight, she wouldn't make again and to equate her to a "cocklodger" is very unkind.

I'm not sure about that either.

The simple fact is that cooking, cleaning etc in your own home and taking care of your own children is what most people (with children) have to do.

Right; it's just "life." Everyone has to maintain his/her own household, or divide up chores with a partner, roommate, spouse, children, etc. That doesn't exempt one from earning a living unless all parties are on board, and OP's partner certainly isn't.

Wow

Exactly. Going on and on about what the partner "should" think/do/say is beside the point. He has demonstrated quite clearly that he doesn't give a damn about the OP's longterm financial security; the fact that some internet strangers think he "should" do is irrelevant.

She has lost her prime earning years and has zero legal claim on his assets. She doesn't know how much he earns, if he has a will or whether she is the beneficiary of his insurance policy.

If he won't marry her, make her his heir and get her name on the property deed(s) as a joint owner, then she needs to face reality and put all energy into earning and into training to earn more. Because at age 48, life really speeds up.

I know, but if you're going to try to place monetary value on having someone cook, clean and do some childcare, an au pair is more realistic than a list of hospitality professionals.

The only person who could place a value on OP's household toil is the partner, and he has made clear that he doesn't value it. So the question is really moot.

The question now is how, and how fast, can she make herself independent of his whims.

No many people are able to work and look after their children simultaneously.

16 hours a week is pretty low working hours when your kids are the ages they are. If I was your partner I'd expect you to look for more hours/contribute more financially. I also don't see why the college kid can't get themselves to the station. Having said all this, if you are to work full time, your partner will need to share more of the home responsibilities.

Of course. Though older children are in school anyway.