To ask for more money

[lucyvic]

My partner gives me 700 pound a month.We have a 3yrd old and a 3 month year old.This is to provide all groceries for the family,petrol mobile phone for me.All kids clothes and activties.
I dont have any outside hobbies or vices that cost money but the money goes and I find it just a bit difficult to manage on.What does the average family of 4 need to live on !?

OP, If that's his position, then you probably will have to approach it as though you were an employee asking for a pay rise, as presumably that's how he sees it. Make your case, professionally, maybe he will respond to it on that level.

If you?re not happy with the outcome, then maybe just get go back to your career and you can both pay for the childcare that you need. Unless, it's worth putting up with his attitude, so you can stay at home if that is what is important to you?

I think it is quite hard to change people's fundamental feelings and stance towards money ? you can tell them it's a partnership until you're blue in the face, but if they don't see it in that way, then it's unlikely you'll get them to change their behaviour accordingly.

how fucking sad that the mother of his children has to debase herself by putting a "business case" forward for a few more quid to feed and clothe his kids and herself

this is one of the most shocking threads I have read on MN

OP...you are very, very foolish to accept those "terms and conditions"

perhaps you could present him with a bill of goods...

eg. iron 5 shirts £10
take children to park £10
wash kitchen floor £5
blowjob £50

that kinda thing

When we married (1966) we opened a joint current account and joint savings account. We each had take home of £15 pw + £3 casual earnings. 4 years working and saving like mad to fund starting a family. 8 years of me being SAHM - DH working 2 jobs, me doing bits and bobs from home, then back to work part-time gradually increased to full time and me earning approx 2xDH's income.

Then I was made redundant, 6 months on job seekers, got part time low wage job for 3 years, then full time job for 3 years, then both retired. I have the bigger state pension, DH has the bigger private pension.

I think our history illustrates the ups and downs of family income and how it all balances out. Although our total income has doubled and halved we have always lived within our means. Any surplus has been spent on DDs and now on DGC.

My mother, who always worked, told me before I was married that low waged men handed over their pay packets unopened to their wives, expecting to get their 'pocket money' and leaving the wife to juggle budget for bills, food, etc. OTOH, men with fat salaries gave their wife a housekeeping allowance and took control of the rest themselves. She advised the joint finances route and it has certainly worked for us.

have just seen you have 3 month old OP. OK, then you clearly CANT return to work right now. Hopefully the indignation on here will stir you up.GOOD LUCK

Whilst I see what anyfucker means, it might be that to approach this commercially and pragnatically might be the best way here, if he pays people £100K he clearly see that value in what THEY do, he know needs to see that the work you do, is worth FAR FAR more than a mingy £700

That's an interesting post Granny23. I agree that a good partnership is about give and take,and ensuring that over the course of the relationship,things are balanced so that neither partner feels they are getting the raw deal. That may mean one partner working more, or earning more, at various times, as long as both partners are comfortable with the situation.

The problem with the OP is clearly not about the details of the money, but about the actual relationship, and I think that's often the case. It's easy to transfer onto something tangible, like money, rather than discuss the deeper issue of whether each partner is happy in their role. Roles are far less fixed these days too - gone are the days when a woman packed in work when she got married and then stayed at home, possibly doing a little voluntary work when the kids grew up. Women are more likely to have a career than at any other time in the past, and men are probably more likely to want to be hands on dads, involved with household stuff, cooking etc

That's why it's so important to keep communicating, and staying open to doing things differently. And although CUKAmbassador's post was quite a rant, I think it served a useful purpose in showing that actually some men do feel like that. they don't want the pressure of being the sole financial provider for the family.They would welcome the chance to lessen some of the pressure there, and take on more responsibility in the home.

porca - why can't a woman return to work with a 3 month old? I'm not saying she necessarily should, but it's nonsense to say she 'can't'! Many women did in the past, before extended ML, and some still do now.

they can, they can. But most dont. Not saying its right or wrong, but in the UK we are lucky enought with Mat Leave to mean that the earliest most UK women go back is 6 months. Not so in the US, where they get about 3 days poor things.

I dont know anyone in the UK that has, or would want to, go back when their baby is 3 months.

do you?????

Yes, I did after dc1, as did many of my friends, as this was totally the norm in the early 90s (Less Mat Leave and very high mortgage interest rates). Hard work, but totally do-able, and most of us continued bf too.

I agree though, that most women take longer off these days. However, the OP could certainly start the planning to go back now, if that's the best solution to the situation. It certainly sounds as though neither of them are happy. She wants more financial independence, and he clearly feels she's not budgeting carefully enough.

Some of us have to return to work at 3 months. I am TTC at the moment and would love to live in a world where I can say I just can't go back to work.

agree, its just that if she wants to work till they are school agre could hardly see her goihg back at 3 months IYKWIM

anyway, I am making HUGE assumptions here

back to my high flying career and off this thread

I am a SAHM, my choice after having a successful career, I chose to stay at home and look after my babies for a set period of time, I am very happy in that choice and we as a family have made adjustments to our life to accommodate this joint choice.

DP (yes we are not married either) works FT and every pay day we sit down and go through our finances, what is coming up etc, most of the big bills come out his account and a few out of mine. The savings accounts are topped up and the rest of the spending money is divided up with me having the larger proportion (something like 70/30) as I buy the DCs things.

This works for us, I wouldn't want a joint account then he would be saying "SK why have you spent X on this today?" instead I have control over my spending and he trusts me to get what we need.

Some people on here find this type of set up offensive and that is their opinion, I respect it and respect that some women could not rely on a man for money, I just wish that they could respect SAHMs a bit more and realise we are hardly downtrodden women stuck in the 1940s. It's great that we as women can have a choice to work or not to work.

OP - I think you have to sit down with your DP and work out exactly what you have coming in and where it is going, let him see what you are spending your money on and why you feel you need more.

I respect SAHM's, I hope my last post was not read as if I was disrespectful in any way towards them

what I am railing against is this situation and this man's fucking awful sense of entitlement

and my utter shock that any woman, SAHM or otherwise, who would put up with that in this day and age

just wanted to clarify that

Anyfucker - I agree, I think it is extremely important when you become a SAHM that finances are discussed out in the open. I hate the terms "kept woman" or "allowance" no I have chosen to not outsource the childcare. My DP has never referred to our money as his and calls it our wages. That is very important to me and if he did start saying "well I earn it I should decide on what it is spent on etc" I would be straight out looking for a job and he would be spending a good percentage of it on childcare.

OP - you need a spreadsheet of what is coming in, the bills, then what is left, out of that it should either be 50/50 with him contributing to all the childrens/household things or a proportion to each of you.

I do think it is terrible when a man gives a woman an allowance expecting her to scrimp and save whilst taking his share and blowing it on hobbies etc

It sounds very meagre. I really don't understand how you can manage on that, tbh. I get roughly as much for me and our kids for "pocket money" and we still run out.

"I totally agree - if the DH wants his wife at home all day, then that gives her more leverage to say 'Hang on, I need more money for this'. However, has he actually said that? For all we know, he might be perfectly happy if she said she wants to get back to work. "

Indeed he might be doing this to make her work because he believes all women should work and this is a way to get her back paying her way and presumably he hasn't married her because he wants to protect those unmortgaged properties in his sole name and his business in his sole name. Wonder if the family home is even in joint names? Sounds like none of the bank accounts are.

Bloody hell! I didn't think this thread could frustrate me any more than it did last night.

SK, the only disrespect shown towards SAHMs has come from Xenia and our visitor who seems to have taken his latest IT contract at MN. In fact, it is because I think their role should be respected that I argued til I was blue last night that they should have equal access to the household funds.

When I fell pg with DS1, I had just been promoted to and earned 35k. Granted, not a huge salary, but not too bad plus I loved my job. We decided together that I should give up work. DH would def have been disappointed had I wanted to go back but he would have supported me whatever I chose. However, the decision has allowed him to go further in his career, to work long hours, often away.

CUK, of course there's pressure in being the only wage earner but there's also enormous pressure being at home with small children. The monotony and boredom can drive you insane.

-All the time thinking back to your previous life which society (and some partners) seem to deem more worthwhile.

So really, the partner who stays at home does not need to be demeamed any further by having to rely on an allowance.

Well really, if he believes all women should work he should have made that clear before you embarked on parenthood together!

With that in mind, he should also have discussed who you would best both provide childcare and how you would both run the house including all the chores.

OP - you need to make sure that some of those assets are in your name. What will you do if he ups and leaves you in 10 years time? This is far more pertinent than how much money you have to spend per month. I am truely shocked by your situation.

At the moment I'm a SAHM. DH and I both believe passionately that children are better off at home with a parent than in childcare when they are preschool age.
DH loves his work, I hated mine so it was obvious that it would be me to stay at home. Once we have completed our family and the youngest is at school then I will re-train and go back to work. At that stage I will still have about 25 years to build a career for myself.
So DH earns the money, but all our savings are in my name in an account which only I have access to. We own our house jointly - and we are married, and we pay into a private pension for me each month so that I am not losing out on that by not earning at the moment.

Get a job?

I agree with that point brogan.

Most of these situations arise out of a fundamental lack of communication.

When you get together with someone, and decide to start a family, the big questions of childcare, earning, household responsibilties, are all things that are up for discussion.

There is no rule that says the husband should go out and earn, and the wife shouldn't, or the one person should do the cooking, or one person should do the laundry. Neither is there any expectation in society any more that these are clear cut gender roles - thank god! There is no reason why a woman can't have just as good a career as a man , and no reason why a man stay at home.

Why on earth don't people have these discussions with the person they choose to partner?!

I completely agree it's the lack of communication thing.

My DP feels very happy going to work every morning knowing that our children are being looked after by me, he has never expected me to stay at home but he has supported me and feels the children are better off for it.

Yes I would like to work but I also want to be with my children as much as I can, I clearly couldn't have both so something had to give, I think it's great in this day and age we as women have the choice.

I have been belittled in conversations with other Mums when they say "oh I couldn't stay at home with my children I would find it SO boring" as if you must have a lower IQ or something to not find it boring. I would never turn around to someone working and say "I could never go out to work and pay someone else to look after my children" It's everyone's individual choice and we have to respect each others.

I sometimes find it bizarre that it seems acceptable to belittle SAHMs with their "allowances" and ironing shirts whilst we are not allowed to slate WOHMs. Why is one OK and the other not?

Why can we not accept that for some families, both parents work, some the man does and in some the woman does?

And in the ones where one partner works or works less than the other, there should be a family pot of money not one person having control over it?

"it seems acceptable to belittle SAHMs with their "allowances" and ironing shirts whilst we are not allowed to slate WOHMs.....

Careful, only 2 people (IT man/Zenia) have slated SAHMs

lets not turn this into a SAHM/WOHM bitch fest please

Absolutely porca.

Don't look for an issue when there isn't one. If people are happy with their choice then fine.

IT man is a self-confessed troll

Xenia always slates SAHM's, it goes without saying

That sorted that one out

porca - sorry just want I have found on MN and in RL over the years

This is what I am meaning instead of trying to help the OP with her issue it quickly descends into another SAHM/WOHM debate, why is that?

Having re-read the OP I don't think £700 is enough not for groceries as well. Although it is comparative, if the OPs DP had £30 left for himself then yes it would be acceptable but if he has £1000 left for his spends this it is certainly not.