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?

No, being a sahp isn't easy at all, keeping the house running and organised and ferrying teens about and making sure that they have everything that they need is a lot of work

A lot of work that those of us in full time employment while raising teens, still managed to do.

Pretty much everything a SAHP does (I was one for seven years) also has to be done by a parent WOTH, outside their working hours. Which of them do you think has the hardest job?

I'll defend anyone's choice to be a SAHM in the early years, but when kids are in their teens, being a SAHM is hardly taxing, and it's bizarre to claim that it is.

It slightly depends on what was agreed with the SAHM. However if this is unclear you need to reach a new agreement which achieves a bit of equality.

If the SAHP has been out of the job market for 18 years the chances of them making real money seem quite slim, so I would probably try to find a way to rebalance the home stuff rather than force them back to work as a token gesture.

So many women desperate for this SAHP to "do all the housework" or "get a job." Listen to yourselves!

You don't know anything about this "SAHP." They could be 60 for all you know. Maybe they think OP should soon retire too, but OP refuses.

Agree with this. My two are about to leave for uni. I’ve been a SAHP for 20 years. A little different to OP/DW as my two were ASD/ADHD and one needed considerable support and was even home schooled during that time. However, I always planned to return to work at some point, for my sanity and self esteem if nothing else. During my SAHP I have run beavers/brownies and been a district commissioner, set up and ran an after-school care/childminding business for 4 years, obtained a BSc and MA and am currently doing a PhD. Am planning to train as a 16+ teacher for the final decade of my ‘working’ life. Not because we need the money, but because I can see that my DH is getting tired and find work at his senior level increasingly stressful and it impacts his health; he is also more vulnerable to redundancy which would severely impact our ability to underwrite children’s uni costs.

By working, even if I am bringing a tiny teaching salary, I would be taking a bit of the load off financially if the worst happens, but can also pitch in with the kids’ uni related costs. It is easy, as a SAHP, to forget how stressful working life is - the politicking with colleagues, uncertainty over job security due to world events and volatile markets, the not knowing if everything you put in place last week has to be scrapped and renegotiated because Trump has made another announcement on tariffs over night.

By going back to work, getting back into the real world, I’ll be stepping outside my bubble of SEN/doctors/school&exam stuff [which admittedly, I have protected/sheltered him from for 20 years so he can focus on his career - so it’s not a one way street]. I can’t imagine lounging in bed until 8 and wandering off to walk the dogs/gave coffee with friends at 11 knowing he’s been up since 530 and at his desk working since 7am. I already feel guilty about it.

The working parent is a person. They are a person with their own needs, vulnerabilities and limitations.

Some people are particularly career driven, works all the hours are never home etc. Most people just have jobs they would very gladly take early retirement from.

SAHP are adults, they should be part of an equal partnership where both people needs and discussed and met.

Both partners are equally entitled to enjoy life and be supported by the other.

This question has made me think. .... I have worked most of my life. I was a SAHM for about 3 years while my two were very young. I had always done the lion's share of housework.

DP ended up retiring before me. I was happy in my work, but also I needed to stay longer for a better pension. The few years being a SAHM had impacted my pension. My only resentment was the fact that I had had no help with the housework over the years. We don't have a garden, he opted out of DIY and I was the driver of the family so had to look after the car. I said that he could start doing the cleaning in the house since I had done everything when I had not been in a full-time job. I was too stubborn to take over but he really was a rubbish cleaner.

OK so I would have demanded different t&cs in my life if I were doing it again. but that is not the point I am making. I really wanted to comment on having offspring at university.

Although they were at uni, they still took up a surprising amount from my day (e.g. WhatsApp messages asking for recipes for pancakes). They are not grown ups at the age of 18!!! They come home for long holidays. They got summer jobs but they were still around for long periods. There were at least 6 journeys back and forth for each academic years. There were 10 academic years between the two! Then support with various bits of paperwork around grants and taxes. They also needed a bit of help when they followed the travel opportunities uni presents. I have been needed in many more ways. To list them might give the impression that my children have been molly coddled. This is not the case. They needed a bedroom in my house at least until their mid-twenties. Rent AND saving for their first home just do not work.

I am no longer full-time employed. I'm genuinely not sure what the OPs partner expects from the supposed retirement. Is it more time to do the TLC that the house and garden need? Is it to be able to support elderly parents and younger family members who need support with child-care? Is it more time to exercise and travel? Retirement is not all about watching A Place in the Sun - there is too much to do.

Being totally honest, I initially assumed this. Then I spoke to some mothers of teens who explained that after years working FT, that was actually the time they felt most needed behaviourally/emotionally, and needed to make adjustments to be there after school more. Perhaps not quitting their jobs entirely, but certainly scaling back more than when they were younger and at a time they had not anticipated.

Have a read of Anne-Marie Slaughter’s (highly accomplished lady who held a very prominent job in the US foreign office, but stepped back to support her teenage son) reflections on this.

I just think there's a mentality of 'well i have to work so why don't they' so the sahp won't get a fair hearing here

Working partners don't do the lions share of the child rearing in comparison to the sahp, and why should they, they should do a bit here and there

Spending your life raising kids and then being turfed back to work is nasty treatment by the working partner and women in this situation deserve better - a lesson to be careful who you marry 🥺

Each to their own though, some women want to be sent back to work by their husbands after decades of sleepless nights and child rearing, cooking, cleaning, taxis, after school clubs, uni applications, etc - more power to them

• the original post is genderless, I know.

I’m guessing you’re the wife?

What's nasty about it? It's something that the majority of adults do and agreeing to a SAHP doesn't mean agreeing that they never work again.

Only if you view it as being “turfed back to work” instead of supporting your partner and household.

While SAHP was doing those tasks the other partner was working. So why should only one person get to take early retirement?

If your partner said to you I’m exhausted from all the stuff that’s gone on in the office the last few years, I want to take a step back so I need you to get a job, you’d say no I need you to support me?!

I’m burnt out from the corporate world, I have a difficult conversation first thing this week where someone is going to give out to me again for not working to their impossible standards. I asked for support, I got none. I know many people struggling in work. I’ve been thinking about work all weekend. I have years and years left on the clock.

I see you’ve commented again without providing the links to the schemes that Assist women over 50 back into the workplace
Will they be forthcoming or do they not exist?

I'm sorry you're struggling in work - please find a way to improve your life, cutting back on costs so that you can work less/choose a less stressful career

You being in this situation doesn't mean that other women should suffer though x

While the other person was working, they had free childcare, free reign to live their life without worrying about the kids or the house, knowing that they were safe and maintained.

In this situation if I was the wage earner I'd be making a joint plan as to what the SAHP could do to now to ensure I only needed to work 5 or 10 years (rather than 15) before retirement. Whether that is a contribution towards decreasing outgoings or earning some income or indeed supporting me to step up my own earning capacity...there'd be a few options there. Or indeed could you do something significant (major downsize?) so that you could both be 'retired' together within 18 months? I think they key would be to keep operating as a team. The use of the word 'retire' would really really irk me. It's quite goady IMO.

They would've had other worries though, maybe even worries like pp. How could someone like OP cut back costs and work less if they have someone who refuses to help relieve them of the pressure to be solely financially responsible for a family?

To be honest @SouthLondonMum22 , what would you know about SAHPs when you are on another thread about how you put your kids in childcare asap and never wanted to be around for them full-time?

Your kids are still babies by the sound of it. Wait until they're teenagers and then come back and tell everyone how easy SAHPs have it.

Work stress? They have work stress 😩, but zero other stresses being that they had a person who took on all of the home stress, unpaid, for decades

Work stress on top of being the primary parent is so difficult to endure. But a man being stressed at work whilst having his kids and home taken care of, isn't the same

Since the kids are at uni, the op and their partner can decide to cut back on stuff, move to a smaller home etc - lots of options other than force the person who took care of home to get a job

I think it’s a good time for the SAHP to train in an area they like and could do part time once the children leave home (I.e. librarian, IT, counsellor etc). They could also take on a volunteering role in the meantime, to get work experience and references for when they need to re-enter the workforce. Lots of volunteering organisations provide quality training and transferable skills, due to the complex systems and processes involved (I.e foodbank, Citizens advice etc)

I would frame the discussion as being that by re-entering the workforce they would have focus, direction, structure and community after the kids leave the home, and the additional income (even if part time) could allow the working partner to retire earlier/ could boost savings for the kids that would allow them to enter the property ladder. I would come with numbers - I.e 1k a month extra added to the pension pot over a period of 6 years, would allow both of you to retire X years earlier together.

I would frame the discussion in a way that highlights the benefits of the additional income and work, rather than the unfairness of only one partner working/ resentment you feel.

I’m sorry to hear that you are feeling burnt out.

I’m a SAHM to a 3 and 6 year old. My DH is a teacher.

Our arrangement has both of our full agreement. If my DH was unhappy, I would certainly take that very seriously and make changes.

I have always assumed I would return to work in any of the following scenarios:

• My DH being diagnosed with a life threatening illness/dying.
• My DH losing his job (unlikely, but it could happen).
• My DH becoming increasingly burnt out with teaching FT and wanting to reduce his own hours- entirely reasonable.
• Our household bills rising beyond what my DH could shoulder- I would absolutely step in.

For me, I did make it clear when I met my DH 15 years ago that I wanted to be at home until our children started school, so he knew this from his early 20s and never had any issue with it. I always agreed though that of course circumstances can change- we both know that more than most, as we both had a parent die young ourselves. You do need a plan B!

Not sure if you’re aware, but all employers have to provide a pension now if you’re over 22 and earn over £10k, so in answer to your question- pretty much any job will facilitate them earning a pension.

The sahp doesn’t have to take “any job at all” but should be supported by the earning partner to get back on the career ladder in whatever industry they choose. Being a sahp from your 20s/30s (maybe even 40s) doesn’t mean you never have to work outside the home for the rest of your life, especially now that standard retirement age is close to 70.

I could also say what do people know about financially providing for a family when they've never done it before? Which is funny considering some seem to think it's so easy but then refuse to actually do it.

Again, SAHP to young children is very different than claiming to be ''SAHP'' to teenagers.

Most couples would not usually agree that one parent stay at home forever once the child is of an age where they are in education and getting more independence. It leaves the SAHP very vulnerable in a breakup as they have no financial independence and the working employed parent resentful at funding a lifestyle for both on their own. The very fact that the working parent (you) have not been over funding your own retirement plans indicates you have left yourself vulnerable financially by carrying the whole financial load. I would never do that to my husband and I think it sets a poor example to children in these days if equality. I needed the financial independence which comes with paid employment.

Both of us then discussed retirement plans together and made a financial plan together. The very fact your children are almost at University age and you haven’t discussed your partner returning to work or making a financial plan together secure your future is honestly astounding. How is University to be funded. Your partner is lazy and self centred. Of course they don’t get to retire and I would have stopped those investments into their pension much earlier. How old are the children?

There should have been frequent discussion over the years about each other’s expectations.
I’ve been at home for 15 years now, we’ve got two DC in their 20’s and two teens. It wasn’t originally the plan for me to be at home this long.
DH’s job changed quite drastically, I’ve had some health issues. Now we have a new plan.
The dialogue between us has always been open and we’ve made sure we’re both happy with the arrangement. I appreciate the stress DH is under as the sole earner and he appreciates the sacrifice I’ve made in terms of my career.
You can’t just sleep walk through this dynamic and be surprised you both have different expectations. It’s not fair on either of you.

Except that didn't happen because OP does some of the house stuff too.

If you've never had to financially provide for your family, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss work stress or what it feels like to have the financial responsibility of having mouths to feed on your shoulders. To lay awake at night and wonder what would happen if you lost your job? If you got ill? because all of the financial burden is on you and you alone.

I have this nasty thing called debt and outgoings so I can’t simply cut back on costs. I can’t simply step back. That is not realistic. I don’t know many people that would be realistic for in a COL crisis.

It is not about wanting other women to suffer, pointing out that’s it’s unfair the one partner expects to be rewarded for their role, while the other partner is expected to just get on with it for another 15 years is unreasonable is not expecting other women to suffer.

I would expect two adults to act like they are in a partnership where both deserve to be supported by the other, and one’s right to enjoy their life does not come at the other’s expense.

Working people do not have “free rein to live their life”, they are answerable to bosses and clients, it’s not some fun, enjoyable fulfilling experience where everyone is having a great time.