in thinking that if we have monthly income of £3700 net we could spare £120 to spend on a cleaner?

[effedorf]

3+ years posting here, namechange for obvious reasons.

But, seriously, what do you think?

The income all comes from dh and I am sahm. We have two primary school age children. I truly hate cleaning and I do 95% of the food shopping and cooking and 100% of the laundry and 95% of all the other things that makes a family tick over.

Or am I being unreasonable?

same here lily, at the mo I earn about 1/4 of what dh earns but we make decisions together.

wondering - I think you're over simplifying my response.

I don't think it's about the main earner holding the trump card - it's about discussing and coming to an agreement.

The OP doesn't suggest remotely that her DH doesn't value her. He seems to have been perfectly happy to be the sole earner, not only while their children are pre-school age, but now they're at school as well! All that's happened is that she wants to re-negotiate the situation - she now wants to be at home, with the kids at school AND have a cleaner. Nothing wrong with that if they are both happy - but clearly her DH isn't. Could be for all sorts of reasons. Maybe he's secretly worrying about the responsibility of earning, maybe he's fretting about interest rates going up again, maybe he thinks his wife needs to pull her weight a bit more. After all, the deal is different to when she had two kids at home. That's hard work. Being at home when they're at school isn't.

I just think all long term relationships are about frequent communication and re-negotiation. If her DH isn't happy to use the household income on a cleaner, then he's entitled to that view. As I said, if I were the WOHP and my DH was staying at home, I would probably agree a cleaner was reasonable while the kids were small, but tbh, once they were at school I'd be expecting him to either take on all the household stuff, or go out and earn!

Exactly - there are lots of things I take full responsibility for - parent/teacher meetings, all the children's homework supervision, packed lunches, school-related paperwork, liaising with health professionals (vaccinations, eye tests, SALT appointments, hearing tests), arranging all the children's activities - music lessons, swimming lessons etc, arranging transport to all of these if I'm not taking them, birthday parties, present buying, music practice, cooking/shopping etc.

I do work as well, but only v part time, and am for the most part self-employed, most of my work is done in evenings and weekends.

But it's a partnership of EQUALS. Who brings in precisely what money is irrelevant. If a husband and wife both worked full time but brought in vastly differing salaries, should the main earner still have the final say? And in our case, if dh had to do all the childcare related things, he would not be ABLE to work full time, so I ENABLE him to earn his salary, because of course the children are BOTH of our responsibility.

I don't think its about the DH having the final say, but it IS about both partners feeling that things are fair. Without getting into competitive 'who has the hardest life' parenting, I think it is understandable if DH works very long hours, to expect DW to work hard too. If both parties feel it is fair to have a cleaner then that's fine, but it depends on the situation.
For example, I think it would be unreasonable for a SAHM with kids in school, to have a cleaner AND expect DH to contribute to household tasks if he is working very long hours in effect to pay for the cleaner. MOST of us can't have the cake and eat it.
I'm not sure what my DH would think about a cleaner, but I'm pretty sure he would be happy about it if it meant he was excused from cleaning related tasks, but if I had a cleaner AND expected him to do household chores when he got in from work, then we may have a problem!

I didn't have a cleaner for ages and I was working f/t and so was dh. When I moved abroad to accompany dh, we kept on the cleaner he had over here, and it is fab. I hate doing floors, loos and bathrooms, and she does it brilliantly. I have about 2 hours on a Friday when she has gone and before ds and dh come home when the house is tidy and quiet and it is bliss.

I spend ?60 per week on my cleaner and it is worth every cent.

Undercova - very well put.

Without it becoming a competition, it is important for both partners to feel valued, and for that to happen, there's got to be a sense of balance, of equality. Not necessarily doing the same things, or even working the same number of hours, but an OVERALL balance and sense that neither partner is having to put in a much greater workload than the other. If there isn't a balance, then resentments and misunderstandings an occur.

It seems on the face of it, that the OP and her DH probably had a good balance when their children were small, but now they're at school, the balance has shifted. No one in their right mind can argue that having kids out at school all day is as hard as having them at home.

If the OP's DH had suddenly dropped his hours down to part time, as a unilateral decision, then the OP would probably have something to say about it. But in effect, that's the equivalent of the OP's situation - she was looking after two pre-school children (and presumably doing the housework too!!) and now her children are out at school between about 9 and 3.30. That's a change in circumstance. Fact. And actually, it seems that her DH has been perfectly happy for her to remain home, even with no kids there for most of the day. He's just drawing the line at spending on a cleaner too. I still can't see why this is a big deal, and I still think that if the OP has really strong feelings about hating the housework, the obvious solution is to earn enough to pay a cleaner so that everyone is quids in!

I think where we differ, violet, is that I think if I take on the home-maker role, so long as there's enough money in the pot, I make the decisions about how the work/money/outsourcing.

So as long as spending money on a cleaner doesn't impact adversely on the OP's financial security (which it seems it does not), I don't think DH has a say in it! He's out at work all day.

I think it is quite controlling to be happy to have your DW running the house but then hold the pursestrings so that dictates how she does it.

I see your point wondering, but my point is that the OP's home maker role has changed really significantly over the last few years hasn't it? So what was the agreed deal has shifted. I think there's a huge difference between staying home with two pre-school children and staying home when they're at school. Maybe her DH doesn't mind providing the entire income, but DOES draw the line at funding a cleaner when his wife could quite reasonably be expected to do it! I don't think being at home all day gives that partner total control over how the home is run, any more than being the worker gives total control over how money is spent.

Maybe her DH would prioritise saving what they would spend over a year and blowing it on a holiday. Who knows? I would simply suggest the OP goes back to her DH and asks what his objections are. But she needs to be prepared to listen to his response. Because ultimately, he may say 'Well actually, I think you've got it pretty easy being home all day now, so do it yourself, or go out to work!'

but if the op dh suddenly dropped his hours and it didn't affect the op maybe she wouldn't be bothered.

If he dropped his hours and it meant less money (which it obviously would!) then it would have an impact though wouldn't it?

So this is similar. The cleaner will cost a chunk of the monthy earnings. We can't possibly tell what impact that will have, because we don't know all the details, but it will definitely cost.

Maybe the DH is thinking ahead to interest rates rising (which they undoubtedly will). Maybe he would prioritise other things over a cleaner. That's what they need to discuss.

I see violet. I think if he'd earmarked the money for something else, then it is a bit more legitimate. But if it is just a 'no' then that seems a bit controlling.

And I'm not suggesting that you approve of this or suggesting this is the case with the OP, but it does seem to me, amongst several of my friends' partners, that there's a real 'I earn the money so I call the shots' attitude which is really unpleasant and selfish. To the point where the DW won't buy clothes, or gym membership, or even spend any time doing something for herself, whereas the 'earner' gets plenty of 'time off' and treats because 'he's been at work'.

And that attitude makes me cross - I think there are a large number of households where women's financial dependence is exploited, when their contribution (socially and within the family unit) should be valued much more highly.

I agree entirely, wondering, that any situation where a partner is being exploited is dreadful. And that can cut both ways - either working partner devaluing the SAHP,and being controlling over money, or SAHP taking the piss and choosing not to make a financial contribution just because they're selfish and lazy.

All good partnerships need balance, and when you know that your partner is working as hard as you are, whether that's at home or in the workplace, then you will value what they do. And that brings respect.

I agree with you that if the OP's DH is just saying 'No' for no apparent reason, then that's a sign that he lacks respect for her, and it's time to sit down and talk about WHY, and whether they need to re-negotiate. TBH my gut feeling is maybe he thinks she ought to be doing more now that their children are in school - whether that's keeping the house clean, or earning money to pay for a cleaner, or writing a novel or whatever. At the end of the day, people respect their partner for the life they live, and the contribution they make. That doesn't have to be a monetary contribution - it could be looking after pre-school children. But if her DH feels she's not pulling her weight, then she needs to acknowledge that and address it.

Agree with that last point, Lenin. But there has to be OVERALL balance. Maybe the OP's DH has decided that the balance needs to be redressed.

YANBU. I do see how having a cleaner is different to anything else you choose to spend money on.

Am totally with Violethill - if the Op's DH feels that she should do the cleaning (given that we are only talking 3 or 4 hours a week here), then I think she should do the cleaning. After all, laundry, food shopping and house organisation hardly take up a whole week when the kids are at school every day. If he was fine with it then fair enough, great even, but I'm guessing he's a bit pissed off with the imbalance of it all, which is fair enough really.

oops, don't

"I have a cleaner, I am a SAHM with one DC at school. Yes, I could do it, I absolutely have time to, but I don't want to and can afford to get someone else to do it for me.

DH couldn't give a fuck either way as long as he doesn't have to do it. It is excellent!"

PMSL

I don't think the op husband sounds bothered tbh.She is just questioning it herself.Really what sane person would clean if they could get someone else to do it!

Violet - honestly - you are reading way too much between the lines.

But pmsl I should work 45 or 50 hours a week on domestic stuff in order to make an equal contribution to our household. DH enjoys what he does and is well rewarded for it. He more or less chooses when he works and is free to do things like agree to go to Cape Town next year for 30 days without too much fuss on my part. I think I posed the question because I was having an argument with myself along the lines of what we have seen on this thread: is it lazy of me? is it a waste of money (we aren't exactly rolling in it) or is it a justifiable expense given all the domestic stuff I already do and how much I hate cleaning.

Thanks for an interesting thread, it has been an eye-opener.

(oh gawd)