We could afford for me to SAHM but it would reduce DPs savings each month.

[Whatsocurringmervin]

I am sorry if this isn’t the usual query on this forum, I suppose I am looking for some kind of similar experiences. My partner and I (together a long time but not married) have a young child together. I returned from maternity leave recently to my current role as I had an enhanced maternity payment scheme and had to return for 6 months or else pay back my 12 months maternity pay, which made sense to me financially even though it was challenging emotionally. Next month, my 6 months will be up and I can leave without a financial penalty for my work. I returned part time and I earn around £1,400 a month. My partner (who is a much higher earner than I) saves £1,700 into his personal savings a month. I am not super financially literate but trying to get my head in the game with it all. I had assumed he was maybe saving £400/£500 a month, not more than my current monthly salary. It wasn’t until recently I asked him to confirm the amount. He said this means we can do holidays and cover finances etc that we might need. Obviously we won’t spend £1,700 a month on holidays and just to reiterate that this is his personal savings that I have no access to in any way (something that would not bother me usually, pre baby) Some might say that it’s his salary and his right to 1) expect me to contribute financially as an adult in the family and 2) he can do as he wishes with his salary. I suppose it is the age old, what would a SAHP earn if they totalled up all the sleepless nights (I do them all, working or not) meals cooked, house cleaned etc. mental load for the household yada yada. Ideally, I’d prefer to be a SAHM until my child is in school, my partner has felt the same but said we just couldn’t afford it which made me sad but given the current financial climate I figured I had to suck it up. I would like to (and expect to) return to work when the baby is of school age, in an ideal world if I did stop working during this time. I am a bit shocked / upset to learn that he saves more than my monthly salary (this gives an indication of his high salary to you, I think)

And now I’m not sure where the “we simply can’t afford it darling” comes from… am I wrong to think we could afford it for the next few years and reduce his personal savings, or is that totally unreasonable? I am aware that this could all sound very brattish. I know we sound really lucky all in.

For the sake of all information, I do contribute financially to our household currently on my part time salary.

We do not pay for childcare on the days I work, our child is with family.

This money goes into his personal savings, we have personal savings and not combined which is how it has been throughout. His personal savings are around 35/40k. mine around 10k.

If this is TLDR in a nutshell it’s that we could afford for me to stay at home with our child until they are at school. Doing so would mean my partner reduces his personal savings pot for awhile whilst I don’t work outside the home. His salary is will go up yearly, if not biannually at the least.

No she's not. Or at least she's paying £500 towards all bills. Which is unlikely to be remotely near half of all of them. So if she's paying half of the mortgage, she's not paying towards much else. Unless their mortgage is tiny.

That is why I said his spidery sense is giving him a red light.

Why not just have him contribute to a fair percentage of the bills. Sounds like he earns double your salary, in which case, how about he contributes 70% to bills and child costs, you contribute 30%. Then with the 20% extra he pays, you can put this in to savings. Means you are both contributing to the family as per your means and you can save a fair amount. If you think this year been unfair for a while, then maybe backdate this by 6 months

Your suggestions of just been given handouts from him would make anyone nervous of marrying you.

You are clearly in a bad situation with him that needs to be fixed. But you don't fix a problem by becoming the problem yourself. You need it to be fair for both you and him. If you are unreasonable now, it does indicate you would be unreasonable at divorce which is his fear, don't exacerbate the fear unnecessarily

That is why I said his spidery sense is giving him a red light

irs going to be a whole room of flashing red lights when she sticks her hand out at fhe weekend,

But he isn't asking her to be a SAHM - she wants to.

Unless her salary + pension is lower than childcare, not clear he should be willing to subsidise her choice.

He is being put in a worse position as otherwise technically he should pay 50% or nursery fees

This!

She isn't in a position to be making these crazy demands tbh

It's too late to make demands that include being a SAHM + full compensation now that she decided to have a baby without being married

You know SAHP exist? And most married people or people with kids treat their income as family money.

Not sure why you'd tell your partner to fuck off if they were able to provide your kids with a stay at home parent & save a fortune on childcare.

Somehow you'd rather give a stranger a fortune instead to look after your kids? Alright lol

You know a financial contribution isn't the only contribution that matters in a family unit? How are women supposed to advance if their contribution is seen as worthless because it's not monetary.

Of course looking after your children and house has value.
Unfortunately not the type that keeps a roof over your head or food on the table when the SHTF.
I'm not sure what you mean about women advancing? Advance where? Unfortunately if you choose to become a SAHP then you are not advancing your skills in a workplace role. Unless it's cleaning or childcare.

So he isn't contributing towards the cost of childcare then, because your family do it for free?

So he is paying half the expense of the house and bills (but not childcare) and saving loads.
You are paying half, saving nothing, and providing free housekeeping and childcare?

OP no one here is saying they think marriage is the ultimate ‘prize’. That’s the kind of belittling language used by a ‘cool wife’ (or girlfriend) who is far too laid back and self assured to need to push a man to marry her. Misogynistic bullshit which is designed to prevent women recognising the law and empowering themselves with that knowledge.

Marriage isn’t a prize, it’s basic common sense and responsibility, if you’re taking a financial and career hit to have children with someone. Which you have done.

A wedding ring isn’t some kind of anti feminist statement, and caring whether you’re married doesn’t make you somehow needy or desperate. It just means you’re not foolish enough to sacrifice your financial security for a boyfriend who can up and leave you at any moment without owing you a penny of the wealth you’ve facilitated him hoarding.

But he doesn't want to get married, does he ?.

Most people will earn more than childcare costs. Especially after finding kicks in. The idea that a SAHP saves the family money is in the vast majority of cases a complete myth. There are other advantages of course but pretending it benefits the family financially is usually guff trotted out by someone who doesn’t want to work. You always know someone’s agenda when they use the word ‘stranger’ when talking about any form of paid childcare 🤣

*funding

Yes ..... not sure how you resolve that?

No, so I agree it’s kind of irrelevant. But i was responding to the OP’s latest post in which she implies posters on here see marriage as the ultimate prize, and there’s a strong undertone of her making out she’s not bothered, that she’s not that desperate. Im just pointing out that she absolutely should care hugely about marriage not because it’s a ‘prize’ but because it’s legal security! Doesn’t mean he will agree but she needs to understand why people are telling her marriage matters.

You work and on days you don’t work it’s because you do childcare. I do not understand why you would also do all the cooking and housework. You contribute, you’re not the housekeeper or house slave. How about as part of your discussion you say my job matters too and my days off are for looking after our child. it isn’t fair at all that I do all the cooking and housework. I’d like you to plan and cook 2 nights a week please, and do a reasonable amount of washing and tidying. That’s much less than a single man would have to, and means all my time isn’t taken up cleaning. I’m not the maid.

@Miajk OP mentioned she has her own personal bills as well. If my partner wanted me to pay into his savings and pay his personal bills as well as paying all the house hold bills, food bill and cost of running a car, to right he'd be getting told where to get off. And I would fully expect him to say the same to me.
And piss off with your giving my kids to a stranger bullshit. You have no idea what my childcare arrangements are or what hours I work.

@TheChoiceIsYours didn't you know? Us working mums just lob our kids at the first stranger we see in the morning and go merrily on our way for the day 🙄

This is both purposefully missing the point of what people are trying to explain.

And also slightly amusingly, the wrong word. Or possibly the right word for what people are trying to express: marriage as the step before the actual aim, which is a partner who has some financial obligations towards you when he’s been benefitting from your childcare and career sacrifices.

I also agree with others that you’re being somewhat ridiculous to expect him to pay you £1400 a month so you can be a SAHM. Especially since he’s showing no inclination that he wants you not to work. Why should he? The income coming into the household drops by £1400 to suit what you want and then he has to compensate you for it. From his perspective, FT nursery and you working FT would be cheaper.

Not everyone gets to be a SAHM. Even if they want to. It’s a luxury for many people. And one that the earning partner needs to be fully on board for.

She pays five hundred ro all joint bills. You must live cheap if your total costs are 1k a month. Lucky you.

Do not even consider this without getting married. And even then, he needs to make contributions to your pension as that’s a big loss in addition to losing salary, depending how much your employer contributes. I’d be very reluctant (even with those things sorted) so be full time SAHM. Can you do 2 days work, 3 days home for example? So many benefits to keeping your foot in the door at work.

What part of he doesn’t wish to marry her is confusing here…

I just read the ops posts.

she’s just found out he saves 1700 a month.

so she wants him to give her half of this every month as a cash payment and also to stop paying the 500 a month she contribures. She then wants him to pay all joint bills for her so she can live for free. In this scenario she keeps working part time. She just wants his money and to be paid for.

if she can get him to agree to her stopping working , she wants him To give her the whole 1700 a month, so it covers earnings and pension. And she wants him to pay all joint bills on top of this.

irs outrageous. It’s like she’s just found out he’s got some money and is working out how she can get it off him. She’s literally seen pound signs in her eyes.

she says he doesn’t want to marry her as he’s worried about the financial impact on him. After she steps up and shows she this much of a chancer he will be doubling down on that. 😂

This is quite a good summary.

From his perspective, it’s obvious that marrying her would not be a great idea - even if she viewed it as ‘the penultimate prize’.

You should work out all your bills, mortgage, etc., and how much they cost each month. Then you each pay a proportionate amount of the bills. That's fair, considering your different salaries.

You could also talk about marriage and see what he says.