Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think life is a lot easier & more relaxed if there’s one Sahp?

161 replies

Boredofwatchingthisonthebox · 16/05/2025 17:54

Worked all my life, part time as a teen, through college, then Uni, then full time and some weekends.
Had Dc a little later in life and stayed at home for the first five years (worked three hours per week when Dh got home)
It wasn’t always easy, I was tired a lot, but grateful to be home. Life seemed to run a lot more smoothly. I was able to get any chores done during the day/week, there was no washing or cleaning the house or food shopping needing to be done at the weekends.
Now it’s back to full time, it’s all a juggle, we all barely see each other for long in the evenings, weekends are full of chores for one of the days, it’s all rushed etc

Aibu to think that having one Sahp (be it the mum or dad (if the dad were to do everything as efficiently 😆) is a better model?

OP posts:
Breadandsticks · 16/05/2025 22:35

Not necessarily parent, but somebody at home when you have children.

For some it’s actually grandparents that offer to take on a lot of the childcare - for some it’s paid for.

I think for me we are both ambitious so SAH wouldn’t really be better - but easier for the one that needs to be out and about as other PPs have said .

Unexpectedlysinglemum · 17/05/2025 12:58

I think the ideal would be two parents both being part time so they can both get some time to themselves and adult convo and both take responsibility for home life, and they understand and empathize with each other better. As home vs long hours and commute are tiring in different ways. And the kids get time and school pick ups from both parents.
I do everything all the time work 3.5 days in 3 so very little downtime or prep or planning time and I'm tired!

Sharptonguedwoman · 17/05/2025 13:28

Lookingforwardto2025 · 16/05/2025 18:38

We are a family that needs a lot of chill time so life became much easier for us when I stopped working when DS was 4. I am now working again, very part time but even that has had an impact.

IMO the ideal would probably be both parents working 3 days a week. I don't think both parents working 5 days a week is good for anyone but unfortunately it is needed in many families. I would love it if society changed so that it was possible for all people to be part time.

Assuming DS is now at school, how has your working had an impact? Genuinely interested. There's lots of time in a week assuming you aren't doing a massive building project or similar.
Personally, I'd have hated not working but that is just me.

Lookingforwardto2025 · 18/05/2025 07:40

It is little things that absolutely aren't necessary but were nice @Sharptonguedwoman. I would make my own naan, pitta and tortilla wraps from scratch for example and lunch was always a proper cooked meal. Now I buy in most bread products and lunch tends to be a sandwich or shop bought quiche and salad.

I do a lot of voluntary work as well so adding on a job even very part time has had an impact.

Don't get me wrong our life is still much easier and more relaxed than when I was working 5 days a week and I am very grateful for that.

Sharptonguedwoman · 18/05/2025 07:59

Lookingforwardto2025 · 18/05/2025 07:40

It is little things that absolutely aren't necessary but were nice @Sharptonguedwoman. I would make my own naan, pitta and tortilla wraps from scratch for example and lunch was always a proper cooked meal. Now I buy in most bread products and lunch tends to be a sandwich or shop bought quiche and salad.

I do a lot of voluntary work as well so adding on a job even very part time has had an impact.

Don't get me wrong our life is still much easier and more relaxed than when I was working 5 days a week and I am very grateful for that.

Well I guess you could volunteer less and cook more if you are concerned about not cooking from scratch. We all prioritise different things though. I would never dream of trying to cook naan and the like though so well done to you.

CaptainFuture · 18/05/2025 08:04

Tripleblue · 16/05/2025 18:35

That one parent makes themselves economically unviable and dependant on the other.
Essentially pays hundreds of thousands in earnings opportunity losses for the privilege to be "supported".
Complertey at the mercy of the other parent.
What a way to live. Like a child.

This, and then it's a query if the sahm parent ever plans to return to work...

Thepeopleversuswork · 18/05/2025 08:21

Radra · 16/05/2025 18:16

It really depends on the people involved.

It wouldn't be more relaxed for us because neither of us want to be a SAHP so whoever did it would be bitter and resentful.

I also TBH don't feel like we are "rushing around" but I think that's more of a personality thing. I don't like having lots of down time or "chill" time the way that a lot of posters seem to.

Interesting that this phrase “rushing around” has become political and loaded. It’s become code to subtly judge working mums. it implies that being busy is a bad thing for a woman. Which I don’t agree with. I like being busy and I don’t think it does kids any harm to have a busy mother either.

Picklepower · 18/05/2025 08:22

Depends on the people. I would be very depressed if my whole life revolved around chores. I work part time and that's the perfect balance for me

crossstitchingnana · 18/05/2025 08:23

I agree OP. I was a SAHP for 8 years then I had a term time job, PT. My kids are adults now, one still at home, and me and DH are both FT. I feel like there’s never enough time for chilling. We do the chores together but I still do the extra bits (put bins out, sort out insurance, take pets to vets etc) and it’s exhausting. Plan is for me to step it down in a couple of years when youngest has finished uni (that’s crippling us ATM). And before anyone says my DH is lazy, I should LTB I think that we’re all different and I am more motivated to get stuff done. He helps with stuff if I ask him to and that works for us.

Scratchingaroundinthesameoldhole · 18/05/2025 08:24

Or part time. Worth thinking about retirement age though. If being a SAHP means everyone working til they are 65-70 then not worth it. It's the lack of pension, savings and earning potential that not working hits as well.

sunshinespringtime · 18/05/2025 08:28

Yes I agree.

I worked park time with my DC were small - and life was much easier in terms of keeping on top of the house.

If I had been able to stay at home full time I believe that it would have made everyone’s lives easier overall.

Yes I had hard days on my “days off” where I felt harassed, overstimulated and ready to hand the baby over the minute DH walked in the door.

But I think about the drop offs, pick ups, rushing to make decent meals, rushing to make sure the DC went to bed at a decent time. Nights stuck in traffic when trying to get to the childminder. Coming home to a messy house and leaving a messy house in the morning, knowing that it could/would be tackled at the weekend.

It was exhausting. If I had a chance to do it again I would have stayed in our smaller home for longer and stayed at home. 100%.

Thepeopleversuswork · 18/05/2025 08:28

It may be technically more efficient to have one person at home. But it’s only for a few years and it comes at the cost of one person’s financial agency (and often also their mental health).

So not a worthwhile trade off in my opinion. But each to their own.

Swampdonkey123 · 18/05/2025 08:30

Best model for us was both parents going part time. It meant we were both still earning and kept the responsibility for home and childcare equal.

Tarantella6 · 18/05/2025 08:31

I finish at 2.30 a few days a week to do the school run and those days are so much easier, there is time to cook dinner, it's not bedtime before you've even sat down etc.

And yes getting everyone out the door in the morning is frazzling especially with toddlers!

But I also like being able to afford holidays so we are where we are 😅

Fluffyyellowball · 18/05/2025 08:33

I gave up work when our first child was born (now 25 and 20). We had no offer of childcare from parents as they were already looking after siblings children. My job was highly stressful and badly paid and I hated it. I would have been working to simply pay nursery fees. My DH had a very well paid job so me becoming a SAHP was the best decision for us and it has been wonderful.
DHs salary has afforded us a lovely lifestyle and I have always been around to do school and house stuff. They had a lovely upbringing and played sport at a high level growing up, something we couldn’t have managed to get them to with two of us working.
I always see here that it is very much frowned upon to give up work to support your husband and raise your children but honestly it was the perfect decision for us as a family. DH will take retirement in the next few years and we plan to travel the world.

DiscoBeat · 18/05/2025 08:35

We were both SAHPs by the time no 2 came along and it was brilliant, both being able to go to school events and do the school run together. It works well for us even now that they are teenagers, especially as their schools are in different directions and it takes about 45 mins to drive them there. But it won't work if it would cause a hiatus in your career, or if you can't afford to do it. There's never a one-size-fits-all to it.

WobblyBoots · 18/05/2025 08:44

Me and DH are both PT and we're still frazzled but definitely not as frazzled as we would be if we weee both FT.

The downside is because we're both PT we have a lot less money and can't buy in help like a cleaner or childcare when we don't need it for work. We also have professional jobs and while they are supposed to be PT we both end up keeping on top of things on our days off.

It IS nice because we both get more time with the kids, the kids only need two days childcare a week, neither of us are taking a big career break etc. I wouldn't change it but it's defo not easy. We often talk about how it would be easier (not financially but logistically) of one of us worked and one of us was a SAHP.

LBFseBrom · 18/05/2025 08:46

I get your point but people have to be able to afford one of them staying at home for years. Two salaries makes life easier in many ways, even if one is part time. I always worked part time when mine was small (two or three days), and managed quite well, the money made a tremendous difference which is not to be discounted.

Autisticsahp · 18/05/2025 08:48

I can’t work due to my ASD and I can see how it is ideal to have one parent at home. If I wasn’t autistic I think we would both work part time

Radra · 18/05/2025 08:49

Thepeopleversuswork · 18/05/2025 08:21

Interesting that this phrase “rushing around” has become political and loaded. It’s become code to subtly judge working mums. it implies that being busy is a bad thing for a woman. Which I don’t agree with. I like being busy and I don’t think it does kids any harm to have a busy mother either.

Thank you for saying this.

I couldn't really put my finger on what it is about the phrase "rushing around" that I dislike.

Funnily enough, it's my non working day when I feel like I need to rush - I find it quite stressful having to pick up from school on the dot of 3:15. After school club is open till 6:30 so I have loads of time those days

GorillaJoe · 18/05/2025 08:52

I personally think it should be illegal to work more than three days a week. Everyone would be more relaxed, happier, healthier and have more time for family, friends and things that bring them joy.

Come the revolution!

Dweetfidilove · 18/05/2025 08:52

I used to think it makes life easier, but MN has made me rethink...

There are so many SAHP who seem to struggle with the children/housework/husband that it seems hardly worth it.

There often seems to be the most baffling expectations of who does what and partners are in conflict around the role of each parent.

You can scarcely rely on the other parent not to get bored/fed up or otherwise and just take off, leaving the other in a quandary.

What should make life smoother can cause so many problems, it's hard to tell now.

Agix · 18/05/2025 08:58

Tripleblue · 16/05/2025 18:35

That one parent makes themselves economically unviable and dependant on the other.
Essentially pays hundreds of thousands in earnings opportunity losses for the privilege to be "supported".
Complertey at the mercy of the other parent.
What a way to live. Like a child.

This is stupid capitalism-ass-kissing bullshit. Oh no, earnings losses - so what, if the family are earning enough? What do you need, a gold plated toilet? The SAHP isn't living like a child, they're living like an adult who is being financially supported by another.

The only reason for the above attitude is absolute jealously - because someone cannot imagine having a partner they trust enough to be able to rely on them, because they're too insecure in themselves that they need a full time "career" (read: time-waste) to feel worthwhile, or whatever else. Total jealously - because not having to go to work is amazing. Not being part of the rat race is fucking glorious. Why do you NEED to be ordered around like a slave by a stranger to feel useful?

I don't know why we pretend that working your ass off every day to make a stranger rich is a good thing to aspire to (well, I do, because that's how we're told to feel) ... Much more fulfilling to spend your time working for your family, and much nicer to actually do.

Ftr, I'm childfree and working, so no skin in this game. I just think bashing SAHP is stupid. Why wouldn't they choose that, if they can? I'd not work if I could afford it too. So more power to them, be there for your kids, it's wonderful.

commonsense61 · 18/05/2025 08:59

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the poster's request.

LongTermSahm · 18/05/2025 09:04

As my username suggests I was a long term sahm. I became one due to ill health so stopped working the part time hours I was and Dc1 was a toddler. It wasn't something I chose, Dh and I were unsure as to how long I would be out of work and I could literally walk back into the job I had because it wasn't some cutting edge career, it was an office job.

Dc2 came along and I stayed home and they are now at university. My health has improved but not to the extent that I could work, even part time. Dh and I both acknowledge that. Dh has been able to progress his career but he was always home for family dinner and if he needed to do more work he could in the evening. He worked for a family oriented business, very flexible so you can take time out to attend sports days and swimming galas.

Dh was hands on from day one with the children. He pulled his weight with household stuff, never came home and shirked responsibility. I am very organised by nature, love lists, spreadsheets and the house ran very smoothly. All housework was done in school hours so I was always available for anything the children needed, no need to finish the laundry etc because it was done and Dh could come home and do nothing for the house, just spend time with the children, eat dinner as a family, bath and bedtime routine and then sit down, there is nothing to do.

It worked for us because I loved doing it, but I can totally understand how for a lot of people they would be bored shit less or worried about rejoining the workforce and possibly damaging their chance at progression. I am glad that as time has gone on there are audio books and podcasts to listen to whilst getting household stuff done and you can rewind radio if you missed something. Streaming and on demand tv makes it bearable. It also worked on the financial side, Dh earned good money, I had my own car, access to all finances, we had great holidays, it never felt like I was struggling or suffering.

Swipe left for the next trending thread