Stay at home parent looking forward to retirement

[Equalitystreets]

One partner is and has always been the sole breadwinner.

Other is a stay at home parent who as the children have gotten older has gradually had more free time during the day.

They always share the household chores equally.

When the children go to University, the stay at home parent has said they will be retiring and ‘they can’t wait’.

The partner with the job has at least another 15 years of work to do (and all their retirement funding will come from this partner’s investments, or investments set up in the stay at home parent’s name that were set up and funded by the working partner).

Is the stay at home partner being reasonable to declare their job is completed when the children are 18, even if the other partner has another 15 years of work to do?

What is this nonsense. Sahp should get a job, end of. What a lazy entitled person.
I hate this mentality, its how my parents operated and my mum who was the sahp just moaned continuously that her life was unfulfilled because she was a sahp while my dad worked 70 hour weeks. I just used to think, get a job then like the rest of us.
Presumably the sahp will still be using various things paid for by taxes and should contribute ti society.
I am utterly sick sick sick of people of working age not working, perfectly happy for the rest of us to pay for them.
Sahp might as well be on jobseekers benefits in my eyes if they are economically inactive but using services paid for by taxes of the others.

I have mentioned before I call the OP a man and the SAHM a woman as that is, by far, more usually the set up. But if the OP ever bothers to return and correct that, happy to change that.

Looks like the OP has pissed off anyway.

With another 15 years to go until the working partner can retire, the SAHP should now start working with the kids gone, even if only part time, to try and bring that 15 years down so both can retire 🤷‍♀️

My mother effectively retired around age 50 when we relocated due to my father's career. She continued to do 100% of the household tasks, supported him in his career, took an OU degree, and threw herself into volunteering in the community. She did have her own investments from when she had worked though, which she used to fund herself and my father gave her a weekly sum for all the household things. Would this kind of arrangement suit @Equalitystreets ? Do the investments in your partner's name return enough for them to live off?

How much longer do you need to work until you can retire? I suspect that you will both need to compromise or your only other option will be to separate. Depending on your ages, you may find that you are not much better off doing this. Whatever you do, you do need to do something or the resentment will destroy the relationship anyway.

Tell them you’ll be retiring then too.

Most employers are not going to take on older staff close to retirement when they have the option of hiring a young and energetic person that can commit to many more years and can work their way up! You are speaking like age discrimination isn’t a thing - it absolutely is. Many 50+ employees find themselves on the scrap heap. Sone industries wouldn’t even consider a much older person at all.

You are only adding to the problems with your denial that securing a job in older age is easy - it certainly isn’t. And somehow someone out of work for decades will be a better bet than a young person fresh out of university! It’s ridiculously inaccurate.

Impossible to vote as we don't know which partner is you.

Edited to say I see now you made that clear later. I don’t understand what the SAH partner is going to be retiring from. Wong they still be cooking, washing, cleaning etc? But now for only two people so ought to have time to get at least a part-time job to help with finances.

Plenty of sectors are struggling to recruit and would welcome someone in their 50s, what you really mean is someone who has voluntarily left paid employment for decades won't be able to walk into the job they want rather than able to get a job?

What are these sectors that are desperate to recruit aging staff with no experience, skills or training? Given an approaching 60 year old woman is unlikely to be able to manage heavy manual labour what do you suggest?

That is also an issue with workplaces though.

I know one couple who are both teachers where Mum and Dad both switched to part-time teaching when they had their twins. They are the closest I have witnessed IRL to a couple who do everything 50:50. Both earn, both clean, both garden, both do all of the same tasks with their girls.

However, when Dad, who hugely valued his time at home, applied for a teaching job which was closer to home (so he could reduce his commute on his teaching days as they car-share), he was told he would have got the job if he was FT. He was gutted.

So some Dads are keen, but employers less so. Which is a shame, as again this is not respecting their family’s preferred arrangement.

Nope, this is completely untrue. In the job I work in, which I won't discuss as it is outing, we mainly hire older women and younger people who are studying. The older women stay, the uni students leave after a year or two, and at present there are 7 women over 50 in my workplace, plus a variety of 30-50 year old men and women and a few 20 somethings.

There are indeed industries and jobs to suit absolutely everyone. If she wants a job she will find a job. if she wants to make excuses she won't.

Correct.

Retiring from what 🤣? As the working partner l would say "cool, go for it". But obviously wouldn't be supporting them financially anymore

So your industry takes on 50/60 year old women with no skills or experience to do what exactly? I just don’t believe you unless you can say what it is.

I agree

In my opinion, a SAHP semi-retires when the youngest is 4 and attends school. The next 14 years of drop offs/ pick ups plus house work are not what I would consider real work when you have at least 6.5 hours a day off for housework and cooking. If SAHP and working parent share the chores then SAHP really is taking the piss.

If I was in that marriage, I would be checking-out emotionally, physically or legally if SAHP continued to be such a slacker.

I appreciate that SEN children and home schooled children are different. However I work part time. For me, my two days with the kids, no matter how challenging the day, is no where near as hard as working and is genuinely more rewarding, even though I love my job. If someone would pay me what I earn to look after my kids, I would pick that option in a heartbeat. SAHPs are extremely fortunate (caveats aside).

My son will be going to QE boys from September. Is anyone live around Stevenage and planning to send their son to QE from around there? We are looking for parents to car pool with. Thank you

I think you need to approach it together rather than deciding that she should do X or Y. Realistically, her career options are going to be somewhat limited after a 20 year break. What is your financial situation like? If you're earning ££££ in the City then I'm not sure that it's reasonable for your wife to be expected to take any job she can get, stacking shelves etc. OTOH if you've been stacking shelves for 20 years then of course it would be reasonable for her to do the same.

I'm not in this situation but know LOTS of people who are- one spouse a big earner, one took on all the childcare etc. In every case the wife has taken on additional responsibilities once the children are grown up but none of them have been focused on money making- one woman trained as a yoga teacher, one now volunteers 3 days a week at a food bank, one is doing a PhD etc etc. All these women had big careers pre kids and then gave them up. In every case the woman has been keen to do something new but the couple has recognised that this isn't going to be picking up the old career. Whether something like this would be an option for your wife again depends on your financial circs but I suspect it would be more interesting than doing nothing.

I was struck by this part of the OP- "all their retirement funding will come from this partner’s investments, or investments set up in the stay at home parent’s name that were set up and funded by the working partner". Well, duh. How else would they fund it? This is part of the package that comes with having one working parent and one SAHP. Were you imagining that your spouse would spend 20 years raising your kids and then start again from scratch?

Having one parent as a SAHP means you need to work as a unit- there are pros and cons for both the working parent and the SAHP (who ends up in a very vulnerable position) so you need to be sure you can rely on one another. Doesn't sound as if either of you is thinking like this.

The sahp should have been doing ALL the chores from the off
I mostly did on a part time job- as soon as I could I went full time.
So if they want to ‘retire’ fine - but they take over the house in it entirety, and do a cracking job.

Interesting that you assume that the working parent is a man and the stay at home parent a woman.

you might be right… but the OP hasn’t said either way.

So your response is assumptive.

It is call centre based work but it is a government initiative and a bit niche. And too bad if that's not enough for you as I am not comfortable discussing further.

Call centres generally are a good way to get back into work as they will usually provide training and are always shedding staff - and it's desk work. My particular niche is a great place to work, not all are, but the OP's wife can get herself a job first and worry about getting one she loves later, like everybody else has to.

I am 57, not in fabulous health, but can still get around ok, definitely cannot do heavy lifting or manage stairs or lots of walking. My job previous to this one was unrelated and so yes I had a working history but NO history at all of this sort of work. Most who come to work with us have not done this particular niche job at all.

I had to find work after having to give up work again to spend two years at home caring for someone and so had a big gap in my resume, and was in my early 50s at the time.

If she wants a job, she will find a job.

By the way, I always assume people who think other people are all liars are liars themselves.

That is definitely true.

It's a reason why I'm not part time. My company are willing to be flexible with WFH, managing my own diary, flexing hours around DH who works for the same company etc but the case in many workplaces is that if you are part time, you will miss out on certain opportunities. In my case, I wouldn't have progressed any more if I had gone down the 'mummy track' as it is often called.

It needs to change in that regard as well but it would also be pointless if it was only something women are encouraged to do. We need both parents to be doing it when possible.

My first question is why household tasks are split? I think if one person isn't working they should be doing the vast majority.

Also, it was a bit silly not to have any kind of discussions about this issue until now.

What career did the SAHP parent have before the children? Presumably they have been a SAHP for a long time now and will likely be difficult to employ.

Top Answer.
Show your partner this.
There is nothing that they could argue which round hold water.

SAH parenting is a recipe for disaster unless it's for the preschool years only.
Basically you've got a selfish partner who is prepared to take advantage of you and you've allowed that to be the case for years already so they think it can continue.
Suggest you have a major reassessment of duties now the kids are approaching uni age with the underlying theme being that you both have equal rights to retire at the same time. It should have happened far sooner, at the latest when the kids went to school, but better late than never. It's just more difficult now because resentment has built and the SAHP has no chance of getting a decent job having been out of the market for so long. You are complicit in allowing that parent to become vulnerable.
There are unreasonable arguments you can use, e.g. if DP retires early, their contributions to the joint pension pot cease at that point, so they can spend less money later in life - but any such argument leads nowhere and just raises the "tit for tat" element.