DH pressuring me to find a job

[Macadamiamama]

Need some context otherwise I’ll definitely be unreasonable.
DH is a well paid lawyer in London, whatever that means nowadays.
I’m not from the UK, I went to uni and started working in my country but since moving here I only ever did a few jobs here and there and stopped since having babies.
I have been supported by my DH for about 9 years now and he’s probably had enough of that. I need to add: he works long hours, is often very stressed. He doesn’t have much time for the kids, he helps with bath when he’s home otherwise it’s only me. I understand.
Now our youngest is about to go to reception in September and my time is ticking as he wants me to start contributing financially. I don’t feel able to find a good job in the hours I have or skills. I worked from home last year and it was a disaster I had to quit as I had no time to do anything around the house and the kids.
We have no luxuries apart from not checking prices at the supermarket. We never go on holiday. We own a flat and would like to buy a house soon.
The idea of work is nice but I feel stressed as I think I already do so much, I also wouldn’t get much money so it’s not very appealing. I have my ambitions, just don’t feel it’s worth at the moment when we have no debt and live a reasonably comfortable life.
He won’t change anything in his life when I start double shifting (work+kids) apparently I’ll have so much free time I won’t know what to with myself!
He mentions jobs in retail, waitress, receptionist. No disrespect for people doing that but he’ll go out the house in his suit and tie and I’d be going out in a uniform.
I’m not saying he needs to support me forever but I don’t feel confident enough to get a job atm. He won’t pay for further education either as that’d be taking money from the kids. Am I being too superior?

Let's be real, he's probably stashing the money away in case of divorce

Well, the money's going somewhere - he's had lots of promotions, but they still can't afford a holiday once a year on a hot-shot lawyer's salary. Curiouser and curiouser.

Do you have access to the family finances OP? Do you have a joint account?

You would be right if it wasn't for the fact that taking care of small kids with no help is certainly not "sitting on your bum" and because this is an arrangement that they both agreed on as they are partners.

So why now should he be allowed to dictate to her whether she should get a job, which job should she get and solely deciding whether to pay for additional training? That's not what a partnership should look like.

DCs could be in private education, that would eat up a lot each year.

Yes maybe. Though if they’re struggling for holidays and live in a flat I’d assume private education not a priority. And this would have been a key bit of info!

It's pointless her taking on a low-wage part-time job if they then need to get a cleaner, childminder etc to keep the household afloat. It sounds as if her husband expects her to carry on as a full-time mum AND work a low wage (but NOT 'low stress' despite what some posters who've clearly never worked in retail/hospitality seem to think) job. In which case, he can either pull his weight and start doing half the school pick-ups, cleaning and childcare himself (unlikely because of his Important Job) or forget the idea of his wife going back to work. It sounds almost like he's just being controlling for the sake of it. It would make more sense if he helped her retrain for a decent well-paid job to rival his own.

I'm not sure why it's such a race to the bottom here. No-one gets a trophy for live being extra stressful.

Yes, she could go back P/T to a minimum wage job. This would add a relatively small amount to the family budget which would pay for some luxuries. The price for this is increased stress for both of them, more juggling and less flexibility.

Or they have the current 'luxury' of him not using to worry about drop offs, school holidays, child sickness. He doesn't need to leave the office early to make pick up and then cook a family dinner before working till midnight to make up for the time he's lost. The house will be tidier, and everyone will be a lot less stressed. The luxury of an unstressed household may be with more than holidays in the short term.

What he can't have is both, and I'm not sure he realises that yet. He can't continue on with his unimpeded lifestyle and have the extra income.

I'm not saying that the OP should be a SAHM, I'm saying there's no point going back unless it's what she wants or worth it for the family.

I don't find it that strange.

We don't know what the OP means by well paid - could be anything from 70k upwards.

We also don't know how old he is and therefore how long he has been earning

If it's around £100k, and he hasn't been earning that all the way through, and is say 35 I don't find it hard to believe there isn't lots of money for luxuries.

He would pay a lot of tax and potentially also had student loans
Saving up for a flat deposit could have taken a while
Probably has a big mortgage even though it's a flat
Likely saving for retirement - esp with a wife who doesn't work - and for the kids

Yes that’s what I’ve been saying. He’s not willing to pull his weight. He’s said this. So where does that leave her?

She has been a SAHM for 9 years whilst her DC have been at school, she doesn’t say if they had cleaners, my friends once their DC started school complained that they had nothing to do (they had cleaners and shopping delivered) they also said it was much easier being at home than working.

Young children is very different to school age children especially if you have ledgers, shopping delivered etc.

To be fair, his salary covers her salary as a SAHM/W but if he’s earning as much as she says I am surprised as to what he’s doing with it. Depending on the area of law he’s in he could be on as much as £150-£200K if not more and that’s even in house but it doesn’t come without stresses and as far as I’m aware a few wfh but a lot are back in the office and no family friendly working hours, or very little.

Her youngest isn’t in reception yet.

At least one of the kids is in school! She’s been at home 9 years!

She even said that once she got her degree she worked here and there and stopped when having babies. That’s stopped not planned to return. Working here and there either means she budgeted to not work when she pleased or he bankrolled her. So it doesn’t look like she has a great work ethic.

I don’t deny she should have choices and say in her future career plans, divisions of housework and childcare but from how i see it she’s sat back, supported her DH but been very happy not to work until he asked her to. I’ve got friends who say the same it’s easier not to work but their DH holds the purse strings so a few have returned to work simply so they have their own money as some DH (contrary to what MN says they should do) are quite controlling with money (though lots do have a budget to go out with DC etc) if they do stay home.

Her children haven’t been at school for 9 years. She has been at home having kids/looking after kids for that time and now the youngest is about to start reception in Sept I guess.

I looked into this option and the cost of childcare was a considerable chunk of earnings. I think if you have a OH that is unable to support child sickness it is also a factor.

Work from home is another option. You may still have to work with your child at home at times which isn't ideal. Dependent on your skills you can find work from home options online.

The cost of childcare in school holidays is astronomical where I live. That's another factor to consider.

This is a ridiculous stance. The view that looking after children involves simply sitting on your bum is obviously very silly.

Ive been back at work 6 years after being a SAHM, never had to miss a single day of my part-time job for sickness. I guess ive been lucky that they must have either got ill on days im home. I think they miss 1-2 days of school a year for illness at most.

I dont think a Mum should not return to work on the chance her kids might need a few days off school a year. Employers are generally very understanding of that with 80% of women working in the UK. Plenty of jobs are also either WFH or hybrid (so she could WFH on days her children are ill). The DH may also be able to WFH to cover child sickness aswell.

A couple both working would divide annual leave between them to cover as much of the school holidays as possible. Thats completely normal and what we do. The rest of the time they would use holiday clubs (plenty on offer where I live so I can only imagine there must be large choice in London).

On the first mortgage! But you’re right…we definitely need more and that’s why I’ll get a job, the one million question is what job.

The sums don't add up. She says they are 'frugal', but to not be able to afford a holiday once a year - on a lawyer's salary? Very hard to believe.

Yeah "looking after the kids" and "sat back on her bum" are incompatible. Pick one or the other. I hate how women throw other women under the bus like this. A man spends his effort on his own career, wellbeing, future, using his financial power over his wife to make her into nothing but his fulltime nanny/housekeeper, and then turns around and complains that he's fed up with her because she didn't manage to advance her career while he was sucking every drop of lifeblood out of her.

It wasn’t a matter of affording, but prioritising other things until now combined to the fact that mr. DH has no time or interest in going away with screaming kids.

I do. Tks. We visit family abroad but that’s not what we consider a holiday but a duty like a tax for living so far. We do travel for that but not for leisure.

Ah, that makes more sense. There is a running theme on your posts; he wants you to get a minimum wage job so you do. He doesn't want to spend money on re-training so you don't. He doesn't want to travel with kids so you don't... Your problem isn't getting a job, it's that your husband is a selfish prick.