AIBU not wanting to use my savings on the house whilst I’m a SAHM?

[Yogarunningcoffee]

Hi ladies, im looking for some views on this money situation

I am currently a SAHM to my children, and plan to go back to work part time once they start school. Before having my first, DH & I saved up a pot of money to see me through the years I was at home. I topped it up quite heavily by being extra careful with my spending whilst i was pregnant.

DH does give me an ‘allowance’ every month & about 99% of it goes on the children (classes, clothes etc). The pot of money I saved up is for things like having my hair coloured, buying presents, the occasional hen do. Basically anything miscellaneous that I can’t cover in my monthly budget. I’m a few years in and I have been very careful with it so admittedly haven’t really had to touch it.

Anyway, we are at the point with our house now where we could do with a few thousand pounds to really get it finished off with all the finishing touches.

DH thinks I should use my some of my savings towards this but I’m not sure I agree. The purpose of the money was for me to be able to have some of extra cash of my own especially as even when the kids are at school I’m realistically never going to be able to save up any money again as I wouldn’t be going back into the same sort of job / salary.

I’m also a bit hesitant as DH bought himself a something last year (not a car) that cost more than my whole pot of savings. So I sort of feel like Im being penalized a bit for being careful with my money.

IABU for not wanting to use my savings towards the house? Or am I being selfish when DH currently financially supports me?

If they feel so strongly about not wanting “their children to be in a nursery / have a nanny / be in wrap around care”, they could perhaps stay home and look after said children.

You seem to be under the impression the op is forced to stay home, you should maybe clarify that with her.

Im a sahm and I can’t imagine a situation like the OP is describing. I can’t get my head around an allowance. In fact in our case DH is terrible with money so I look after it. I wouldn’t be a sahm in the situation you describe OP.

@laurini First of all, I am not going to do what my husband tells me unless I also want to do it. This includes becoming a SAHM. If he'd have wanted me to take on that role we wouldn't have married or had a child together in the first place. Just in the same way as, as an example, I wouldn't have married him if he would have "insisted" on my family name and title change upon marriage - that was always a firm no.
Equally, many women don't want to give up their career and be entirely reliant upon a man.
I went back to work 4 days a week when my little girl was one. She was never once in a nursery/with a nanny/in wrap around care. She was looked after by my husband (he took unpaid leave one day a week) and her grandparents.
Whilst I would never make the choice myself, I do understand that some woman make the choice to be SAHMs when their children are very young.
What I think is "pushing it" a bit is when the children are in school and the ft SAHM still doesn't work because she simply doesn't want to. Again, her choice, but don't complain when your husband has to work all of the hours to support the entire family financially (including his wife) and therefore you and your kids are missing out because he doesn't have the opportunity to be a present husband and father.

My point was that not all men resent SAHMs not working. Clearly, if a woman is a SAHM she most likely agrees it's the best approach for the family and they've decided between them who is best to stay at home. It's not always some massive plot against the woman 😅

I went back to work 4 days a week when my little girl was one. She was never once in a nursery/with a nanny/in wrap around care. She was looked after by my husband (he took unpaid leave one day a week) and her grandparents.

aren’t you lucky to have flexible employment options and grandparents willing and able to provide childcare…

not everyone very few parents are similarly fortunate.

I was literally referring to the point that some men agree with their wives that having one of them as a SAHP makes most sense. I didnt mean that the woman is forced to do it against her will ffs 😂

@laurini I disagree. My first husband was Mr Big Job and once we had had our first child together he was keen for me to give up my career as we absolutely didn't need the money. It also "emasculated" him. Apparently. Ewwwwwww.
Not a chance.
Thank God.
I needed my career when we divorced.

Yes, obviously he was a complete prick but I dont understand how that negates my point. I replied to a comment that questioned why a man would agree to his wife being a SAHM - i.e. because they BOTH agree that one of them is better at home. I'm obviously not talking about a situation where the woman is somehow forced not to work?!?!?! Clearly that is an insane situation and I cant imagine it applies to most families with a SAHP. I think maybe your own bad experiences are colouring your view.

@laurini Oh I think it happens more than you think it does. Misogynistic men are many; it's a great form of control and a way of ensuring it's harder for a wife to leave.

Firstly, imagine having 4 days a week of grandparent care. What a privilege. We’ve spent the cost of a house on childcare between our 3 dc, and putting kids in childcare is the absolute only way I could go back to work, since I don’t leave 1yos at home by themselves. What kind of virtuous stance are you trying to take here saying I didn’t give up my career so I’m amazing and would never be in this situation but oh also I had none of the costs and difficult decisions other mums have and I can STILL judge them?
secondly, the op has said right at the outset she will go back part time when her youngest starts school. So the judgey rant about sahms with kids at school is irrelevant and I can’t see why you needed to put it. Please don’t come back and explain part time doesn’t count and you worked long days while your dc were at school but also never used wrap around care because grandparents picked them up every day and gave them milk and home made cookies.

When you are a SAHM, you are providing valuable work to the family in the form of the care of children and housework. Go to any nanny or housekeeper forum to find the value of this work, being aware of the fact that nannies don't do housekeeper work and housekeepers don't do nanny work. (In other words, your work is AT LEAST the sum of [nanny hourly wage + housekeeper hourly wage] X number of hours. Make sure to add the nighttime nanny rate, for any overnight care you do without his help, and for any 24 hour periods of care you provide to the baby when he is traveling without you for work or his hobbies. Also, include the pension that you missed out on at work from the opportunity cost to you from not working.)

Half of that amount, is what he owes you, for you doing HIS share of the childcare and housework.

This "allowance," does it add up to that? I doubt it, because if you are a SAHM you are likely working WAY more than 40 hr. per week.

Instead of dipping into your savings, he should be sharing his earnings with you equally. Or, you can bill him for the services you've provided to the family.

I thought that women had reached a position of decent equality in the UK until I joined mumsnet and realised how lots of couples with children actually split their money. It’s made me much more feminist than I used to be.

It’s not just the money it’s the child care and household chores. Many women actually want to do the bulk of it,

see posters writing how she’s caring for his kids, or he should stay home as it’s such a sacrifice or even behave like and employee and bill for child care.

it is for some a natural go to if you’re the woman you’re lessor. It’s utterly shocking in this day and age.

Yes, obviously there are loads of dickhead men out there BUT (I repeat again) i was simply answering a PP's question as to WHY a man would agree to be the sole earner of a family.

I wasn't commenting on situations where women are forced by their husbands to give up their career!

I was explaining that maybe a man would agree to be the sole earner because both the husband and the wife agree that having one parent at home is best for the family.

As mentioned previously, in case it isnt clear:

I DO NOT THINK IT IS A GOOD THING FOR A MAN TO FORCE HIS WIFE TO GIVE UP HER CAREER AND STAY AT HOME TO BRING UP THEIR CHILDREN AGAINST HER WILL.

@Nellodee What would be true equality would be both parents taking financial responsibility for their children as well as sharing their care, no?

There’s debates to be had around equality and equity - I don’t think things have to be symmetrical, but they should be fair.

I am the higher earner out of my husband and I. He took 6 months paternity. He does a lot more of the chores around the house as he works shorter, more school friendly hours. When the kids were little and he was very part time, he still sometimes popped out lines like “I do far more chores that any of the other men I know” and I used to think, “I do far more chores than any of the men you know, too. Do you do more chores than the women you know?”

Men at my workplace (school) when we have conversations about sexism feel that it’s a largely solved problem because they don’t see any at our very politically correct workplace (it’s most definitely there, but not something they necessarily notice, and it definitely is a good employer to work for). They won’t be seeing the women who have to cover their expenses for maternity leave out of savings, or who get an allowance to buy children’s supplies whilst their husband gets to treat himself with his bonus pay.

@Nellodee Absolutely think the way you work things is great - you are clearly a team both working together for your family.
What I don't agree with is women who have children and see that as a permanent "get out" from doing any paid employment permanently.
It really isn't.

Absolutely this! And I suspect the grandparents are making career and financial sacrifices themselves.

Without the luxury of other people making sacrifices for our family unit, I'm not at work. Childcare is unaffordable for us with young twins.

@AffableApple Not at all. Two sets of grandparents - all retired.
Don't people receive childcare vouchers/tax-free childcare these days? It wasn't the case when mine were small.

Yes. But in the same way those not on the property ladder can't afford homes because of all those avocados.

@AffableApple Well we don't own our own home; we long-term privately rent as can't afford to buy. We both work and always have done, but neither of us earn a wage large enough to consider it.
But the point is I was never going to not work. Our daughter is our joint financial responsibility (between my husband and myself).
I will hope that my daughter does the same when she is an adult.

All income money into one pot; household monthly budget allocates for all spending.
anything left over is split between you.
pension contributions, classes, kids clothes - all part of monthly household budget.

you shouldn’t need an allowance…
That’s not what it is anyway: it’s money you need to live off which is normal household expenditure!!