Active discussions

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

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to be a little hacked off with dp

109 replies

happyharry · 06/12/2009 10:47

Earlier in the the year I went on holiday with my mum, siblings and dc to celebrate my brothers milestone birthday. The actual holiday was paid for by my mum. All it cost me was about £150 spending money. Dp made a huge fuss about not wanting holiday to cost him money as he wasn't going. I am a SAHM. Yet in the same year he has spent £300 on a football season ticket. Took his mum to a concert for a birthday.Now he wantys to take her to a play for her Christmas present.

OP posts:
BananaPudding · 06/12/2009 17:29

So what you are saying is that you believe it wrong for a cohabitating and yet unmarried parent to be a SAHP? That the SAHP is somehow taking advantage of the working parent, despte the working parent having been included in the decision that one would devote their time to child-rearing.

To many people "marriage" is simply a piece of paper, and they have made a serious commitment to each other wihout having signed on the dotted line.

skidoodle · 06/12/2009 17:31

I think marantha has a point, actually.

Marriage is not "a piece of paper", it's a legal agreement between two people that is recognised by the state.

Having a child together is a massive commitment, which is why if you want the protections of marriage when you have children you should get married (or enter a civil partnership if that is what is open to you).

Having a kid together doesn't make you married.

marantha · 06/12/2009 17:32

bergentulip, no offence but any old quick s**g can produce a baby. It's no indicator of commitment.
Maybe this is what happened to OP (I honestly CANNOT know) and her partner is doing the decent thing and standing by her.
Marriage, on the other hand, entered into freely is a far, far bigger indicator of commitment.

diddl · 06/12/2009 17:33

But married or not, a SAHM is at the "mercy" of the wage earner financially, aren´t they?

StewieGriffinsMom · 06/12/2009 17:34

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

marantha · 06/12/2009 17:35

You women all stick together, though. I don't expect any of you to try to see the bloke's view for one microsecond. Nobody is going to agree with me. I accept that.

BananaPudding · 06/12/2009 17:35
Biscuit
ComeOveneer · 06/12/2009 17:36

Doing the decent thing and standing by her?!?!?!? FFS it is called living up o your responsibilities. It takes two to tango etc, You make it sound like it is all the woman's ""fault" in becoming pregnant!!!

girlsyearapart · 06/12/2009 17:37

ignoring what marantha has said..

my dh is a bit like this too OP. He's always saying 'The money I earn is our money' yet scans through the bank statements saying 'you spent WHAT??' He doesn't get it that it is a very big adjustment not to earn any money of my own after years of doing so..

marantha · 06/12/2009 17:37

Having a child is a joint decision? Try telling that to the man whose girlfriend lied about using contraception (in the form of the pill). I am sorry to be un-PC, but it is usually the woman's decision.

RumourOfAHurricane · 06/12/2009 17:37

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

ComeOveneer · 06/12/2009 17:38

What utter toss, it is general just the woman's decision!

SouthMum · 06/12/2009 17:38

LOL at the shit-stirrer.

Do one and take your violin with you.....

marantha · 06/12/2009 17:40

Yeah, Comeoveneer, the guy IS living up to his responsibilities: he is supporting child and mother financially.

To be honest now, if the OP was male and the "breadwinner" female would all the posters be on his side? I very much doubt it.

BananaPudding · 06/12/2009 17:40

So Marantha is the bitter and resentful father of an accidental child he must support. Now it all makes sense.

ComeOveneer · 06/12/2009 17:42

Yes actually, I would be on the OP's side regardless of gender. In a relationship afaiac you are partners/equals irrelevant of gender of job description, and thus I would expect to treat and be treated as such!

marantha · 06/12/2009 17:43

I bet the responses would be along the lines of: "Your partner has a hard time going out to work all day, she supports you and your child financially. What more do you want? She needs that football ticket to unwind".

StewieGriffinsMom · 06/12/2009 17:44

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

expatinscotland · 06/12/2009 17:45

Well, I see the bloke's point of view, and I think any man who goes and shags someone with no condom and gets her sprogged up isn't doing his child a favour by supporting him/her financially - roof, food and all. That's called being a responsible adult. Any other sort of person is a twat

I do think, however, that women who give up their jobs to be a SAHM without either the protection of marriage as a legal institution or comparable legal agreements in place are foolish by putting themselves and their children at real financial risk.

The minute I found out the 'partner' wasn't of the 'any money earned is family money once kids come along', that would have been the end of us.

Because whilst I love the father of my children, who is my husband, I love me and my children's financial security and peace of mind more.

That may sound harsh, but my day's of being a fool for love, which I paid dearly for financially, are long gone.

marantha · 06/12/2009 17:47

Relationships are NEVER equal, ComeOveneer, one "partner" is always at some point more advantaged than the other (of course, this "advantage" may pass from one partner to the other during the course of a relationship.)

BitOfFun · 06/12/2009 17:48

A SAHM does contribute financially to the household. She provides domestic services that enable the father to work without having to pay out for laundry, cooking, shopping, cleaning etc. And above all else, she provides the care for HIS child, enabling him to go out and earn good money and not have to worry that if that child is sick etc he may lose his job for taking time off etc. She provides things that would otherwise cost him a fortune, as well as giving him support and companionship.

She gives so much to the household, that it is completely ridiculous to act as though the household money is his alone.

You are rather silly marantha- does this childish attention-seeking behaviour carry over into your domestic life?

bergentulip · 06/12/2009 17:48

You know, it's weird, I was outraged by your first post Marantha, however start to see a valid point in there somewhere.....

fair point about the quick s**g, however it would appear the op and DP do live together, therefore somewhere down the line have decided, yes, we are in a committed relationship and will bring this child / children up together.

Op has potentially been naive if the DP is not prepared to support her and share both monetary and emotional possessions with her, however he needs a kick up the backside to put two and two together and figure out that if he is with the mother of his child who has no job surely he will be expected to pay for it.

ComeOveneer · 06/12/2009 17:50

I disagree marantha, dh and I consider ourselves 100% equal.

marantha · 06/12/2009 17:51

StewieGriffinsmum, I know of too many women who have accidentally-on-purpose gotten pregnant when their trusting partner believed them to be on the pill, to believe for one second that the decision to get pregnant is always a joint one.
You are an idiot if YOU believe otherwise.

ComeOveneer · 06/12/2009 17:53

Well you must move in unusual circles, as I don't know a single person who has tricked her partner/husband into getting her pregnant.

Swipe left for the next trending thread