How do families have SAHMs?

[LikeDaisies]

Financially - I cannot comprehend how it’s possible!

Husband is a teacher. Earns around £44,000. That isn’t enough to cover our bills if I were to leave my job and stay at home with our baby.

Mortgage is £900. Other bills come to around £700 - not considering food, leisure, etc.

Not that I’d want to leave my job, but I’d love to be able to drop down to 3 days a week. But financially it just isn’t possible. We wouldn’t be able to afford our mortgage and bills.

So it leaves me wondering how I see so many families who are able to manage having a SAHM.

Please can anyone who is in this situation explain how it is possible/how you make it work?

I can’t see my nether regions on account of my massive tits, but nice try. Not a man, never a man, just a woman apparently pushing alone against the everyday harms done to my fellow women. We do exist.

Careful - you’ll be accused of having a cock any second.

Heya - thanks for your post. If your husband is on £44k, and his take home pay after tax is about £35k a year, that means he is bringing home about £3000 per month. I guess he is making some pension contributions, so if we remove that then maybe he is bringing home about £2,800 per month. £2,800 minus £1,600 for mortgage and bills leaves your household with £1,200. Minus food leaves your household with about £600 a month to spend on transport, leisure, gifts, home maintenance. To me that sounds like just about enough for you to quit your job or go part time, but does that seem like too little to you?

I have intentionally become a SAHP as I was made redundant last year whilst 8 weeks pregnant. I couldn't find a new job before being obviously pregnant. We found quite quickly that there was a significant benefit to my eldest having me at home and contrary to expectations she was needing more support from us since starting school compared to the years in nursery.

I am now looking at a 2 year career break and now looking for a much more part time and flexible role than previously. I was doing a 4 day/32h role progressing up the career ladder.

We have been able to afford it because we have always based our life according to one salary. It took us nearly 10 years to qualify when we had a household income of £25k after qualifying this more than doubled in a year. We made only a few changes to our lifestyles which meant we saved a significant proportion of our salary. We bought our first house and went for one nearly half of what we could afford. We went for a cheaper area, a smaller house and a semi rather than detached. We were both in new roles and didn't know how they were develop so wanted the flexibility if either didn't work out so we wanted a house we could afford on one of our salaries. My partners job wasn't as expected and it was making him miserable. We learnt that the biggest luxury we could have was the freedom to leave an unhappy situation. As it happened he was able to move positions before reaching the point he needed to resign from his position.

Our eldest came along and we had to move town. We found a house at the bottom our budget and worth 1/3 less than if we maxed out our budget. We have continued to live frugally, this has meant we have had plenty of savings. The result of this is we have a low mortgage (~£700 a month of a £500k house), we bought our cars out right so our essential house hold costs average at £2k a month and we are able to use the interest we get on our savings to fund the nice to haves like holidays and days out without needing to dip into the savings themselves. My partners salary more than covers our outgoings and we are still adding to our savings and not having to watch every penny although that is a habit we have never managed to break since living on a low household income.

I won’t say I didn’t feel sorry for myself at times. And it absolutely was miserable to be struggling to afford necessities or worrying that a mechanical break down or a doctor’s visit would push us to the brink.

But once we got to a point of having enough, I found that there were really very few luxuries that I cared about. Living frugally has a way of raising your standards really high. If I’m sitting in a cafe now, drinking an expensive coffee, struggling to hear the conversation over the hissing and banging machines, eating a super sugary cake that tastes a bit plasticky and trying to wedge napkins under the leg of the table to stop it rocking, it’s hard to convince me that it’s worth the expense when I could sit in my cosy kitchen, eat fresh cake at a clean table.

In one scenario I have to make the cake myself, in the other I have to exchange my labour for capital. There’s more choice at the consumption point but it’s not necessarily better. That’s just one example. But there are a lot of expensive activities that are over hyped.

That said, we were only on the bones of our arses for about 18 months, and then when there was a little bit of extra money it was put into rebuilding some savings, so from that point the privations, while still necessary, felt voluntary which is a huge difference from living in long term poverty.

My personal view was that it was worthwhile. For us. But it certainly is not the right choice for everyone.

What are you spending £700 on other bills that aren't food??
I was a SAHM from 2012 to 2021 but we lived very frugally plus had a small mortgage as I was nearly 39 and hubby was well over 40 by the time I had my 2nd child and decided to stay home to raise the kids as we had limited family support for childcare.
Our car was bought from a redundancy payout (this was approx 14 yrs back when cars were much cheaper - only £14k new) so we didn't have monthly car payments to make...and this was before the cost of living spiralled. We relied a lot on Tesco vouchers to eat out/activities. Cooked from scratch. Didn't waste food. Cheap outings with the kids etc. Cheap holidays (e.g camping) interspersed with a slightly nicer holiday. We just were pretty tight....
We couldn't have afforded it today though... everythings gone through the roof!
My sympathies x

Or like we did, have kids later, lower mortgage and live frugally....not all SAHMums have hubbies that earn vast amounts...

Wow....that's amazing that you work 1.5 days and still earn £18k

To those saying women shouldn’t be taking themselves out the workforce.

My children were happier to have me at home than when I was working. I want to be there for them. That’s why.

Why do we have to force ourselves to work and make our children unhappy in the name of feminism. Feminism is about having the choice.

The thing is, in many cases I don't think Bob's salary is actually taken up by all the bills. I think people underestimate how unpleasantly men who have the upper hand financially can behave when it comes to splitting costs. I'm perhaps very cynical but I've heard and seen horror stories from many women where the scenario is they earn significantly less than their DH but are expected to shoulder disproportionate share of the bills whilst the DH pays his 'share' and keeps the extra money he has for himself. It's why I've always encouraged women to maintain their earning power and remain in work if possible because the pay imbalance between the sexes really screws women over.

I would not have had my DC if it meant giving up work because of childcare costs so we looked into nursery and childminder fees in the area beforehand, worked out a CM would be a better option (slightly cheaper but more flexible) and then planned on 2 DC with a gap that meant we wouldn't be paying 2x FT childcare costs at once. I'm aware were incredibly fortunate that it went to plan, we had DC when we wanted and found a great CM

I honestly don't think having kids, giving up work because of childcare costs and losing your capacity to maintain any kind of financial independence is a good look but I know lots of women are happy or accepting of this situation so I'll say no more!

The thing is, in many cases I don't think Bob's salary is actually taken up by all the bills. I think people underestimate how unpleasantly men who have the upper hand financially can behave when it comes to splitting costs. I'm perhaps very cynical but I've heard and seen horror stories from many women where the scenario is they earn significantly less than their DH but are expected to shoulder disproportionate share of the bills whilst the DH pays his 'share' and keeps the extra money he has for himself. It's why I've always encouraged women to maintain their earning power and remain in work if possible because the pay imbalance between the sexes really screws women over.

I would not have had my DC if it meant giving up work because of childcare costs so we looked into nursery and childminder fees in the area beforehand, worked out a CM would be a better option (slightly cheaper but more flexible) and then planned on 2 DC with a gap that meant we wouldn't be paying 2x FT childcare costs at once. I'm aware were incredibly fortunate that it went to plan, we had DC when we wanted and found a great CM

I honestly don't think having kids, giving up work because of childcare costs and losing your capacity to maintain any kind of financial independence is a good look but I know lots of women are happy or accepting of this situation so I'll say no more!

Feminism is about equality.

This choice is not applied equally to men, restricting female choice.

Either by making sacrifices and having benefit top ups if on a low income, or having one high income from the sole earner.

I was a SAHM 2018/2019 and husband earnt about 30k (with one young child)
I had post natal anxiety after having her and was so petrified of leaving her i quit my job.
Money was really tight but we just about made it work.
Went down to one car which saved alot and I walked or took the bus to toddler groups.
U/C top up was a godsend.
Life was simpler for us then though, we couldn't do it now with the running costs of more kids, needing 2nd car for me to do school/nursery runs, costs of the kids clubs etc.We struggle financially even with me working part time and U/C paying towards some of our childcare costs.

Well quite! I’m the first woman in my family for many generations who had the choice to not go to work while my children were (are) young. My gran went back to work with my uncle nursing at her breast at a few days old.

My mum worked her arse off when we were little, because she had to, not because she wanted to. If she had the chance to stay at home til we went to school she’d have taken it. She still died poor. Every person, every family, every household is different. Surely we can all only do what’s best for us, whether that’s going to work or taking a few years out. 🙂

I agree. I had no interest in getting back to my career. I preferred being at home. And still do. That's my choice. But I am very aware there are sacrifices that have been made. I can live with that.

My DH is a student. His study will lead directly into a career and is funded by his future employer. Rent is also paid by said employer. If I went back to work a certain percentage of his living costs would be deducted from what I earn. If I went back to work and earned more than we were currently given plus enough to cover childcare then it would be worth it. And if I worked VERY part time we'd be slightly better off but again, the effort and childcare costs wouldn't be worth it.

We only have just enough to live on. We're not quite counting pennies but we can't really put much into savings. But I love being a SAHM and DH will be in a great career at the end of it, so it's worth it for us.

The obvious variables here are mortgage costs. Some of the amounts on here are tiny and no-where near what lots of people in London/south east will be having to find. Our mortgage is massive and couldn’t be sustained on one lower salary. But… building up house equity gives us a choice that if we really needed to, we could move somewhere cheaper and have no mortgage at all.

The economic case is different for children under 5 and for more children/children with additional needs. We sunk thousands on nursery costs while I worked part time but it kept me in a career, built up my pension pot and put us in a better position longer-term. If I’d been earning less then I’m not sure it would have been as clear cut. I’ve never really got the ‘nursery comes out of both salaries’ thing. We have fully joint finances so it did but you are weighing up the cost against the lower earner and whether that cost is worth it versus taking that individual out of work for the potential benefits. The economic case for school aged kids just isn’t the same unless you’ve got at least 3-4.

Agreed! I was happy to sacrifice my career for the benefit of being with my family. Looking back, it was the right choice for us! Feminism is indeed about choice.

But only for women. We make sure they take all the physical and mental risks of actually having the children, and also limit their opportunities to climb the career ladder so that the menz can have those and it “makes sense” for the women to stay at home. And no woman has ever been left high and dry after years out of the workplace, eroding skills and earning capability and ultimately their pension provision, so it’s all tickety boo ( if you have a penis).

I don’t need to ‘climb the career ladder’ after having children in order to be financially secure with a good pension to look forward to. Planning ahead before you have children and investing your money wisely gives you more options!

For me, I went job share. I had the best of both worlds. However, I did stop applying for promoted posts as I didn’t want to do longer hours which meant more time away from my children. The 12 years job share and then staying where I was meant my pension was 6 years less ( I did get two promotions but didn’t apply for them). BUT, I retired at 60, still pay tax etc. No mortgage.

Women have choices now. My choice wasn’t better than yours and vice versa.

Don’t you think that women making the choice to spend as much time as they can afford with their children is a good thing?

We can’t have it all but having the choice do decide is surely a bonus?

There's more to life than my job. There's my happiness and fulfillment and that of my children.

I've married a man I love and trust and I'm not going to spend my life suspicious of him and sacrificing my contentment at home by worrying he's going to up and leave.

Am I losing skills? Or am I gaining new ones? This entire forum is based on people needing parenting advice and support. Perhaps if more people stayed home then more families would feel confident in their parenting and have greater support networks. This isn't to disparage those who go back to work. It's their choice. But there are huge benefits for the entire family if a parent stays home too.

Loved being at home with my children. We had no money. Rarely went on holiday and had to be super careful . But I look back so happily on those days. We are so ingrained by this idea that we have to work hard all our lives to buy ‘nice’ materialistic things we seem to be avoiding the taking joy in the little pleasures of life. I didn’t want a fancy car or posh holidays or a show home. I was just happy hanging out with my children. What’s the point in having children if you don’t have time to spend with them?

You are speaking entirely for yourself though.
Some women WANT to work because there’s more to life than just being a mum…some don’t have the ability to live in complete trust of a man…being a sahm doesn’t automatically make you confident in your parenting, we see that on here every day! There’s also huge benefits for a family when the woman can choose to work.