Would you be a sahp?

[UraniumFlowerpot]

I’ve noticed a theme of advice along the lines of never give up your career / income to care for kids because who knows what might happen down the line with the earning partner, you might find yourself single and penniless.

I’m currently considering my options when baby arrives later this year. Hadn’t ever planned to be a sahp but husband out-earns me many times over and I’m finding my career motivation mostly gone by now. Just naturally reached a plateau and got bored. Seems pointlessly stressful to work and put baby in full time childcare for a salary that will realistically make no difference to our standard of living. Current career couldn’t be picked up again after a break, I could return later to something else likely for less money. Current career could, at a stretch, support a family. Potential careers after a break almost certainly couldn’t.

I’ve talked with DH about the vulnerability of giving up work, he’s very happy to pay generously into pension and savings for me — not sure how much difference this legally makes since it would all be matrimonial assets anyway, but the understanding and willingness is there. He’s not pushing me to give up work but definitely values that role a lot. I also already have savings from before marriage that would see me through a transition period if we split, and a small pension (plus up to date with NI payments).

So my question to mumsnet is: What amount of personal or matrimonial assets, or what arrangement with the earning partner, would make you feel comfortable with the decision to become a sahp or substantially reduce earning potential to better accommodate kids?

There is no amount. I’m ambitious and always have been so would struggle with my self image if I chose to be a housewife / SAHM. This is a me issue though.

The kid era (we have 4) meant my ambition took a back seat due to exhaustion at times but I did start 3 companies while in the thick of it.

I’m now in my 50s and have retrained twice. I’m an early adopter of tech so for me it is an exciting time to be alive and learning new stuff. And 3/4 kids have left home so now I get to go for it.

But I live in a country where childcare is well subsidized and plentiful and SAHM pretty much don’t exist. so there’s a cultural element too.

No because I always want to be responsible for myself always have and always will, I may be female but I am an adult even though I have been married a very long time I am still me

Each to one's own - it was not something that would have worked for me.My mum was a SAHM. When I was growing up in the 70s/80s, I was embarrassed that she didn't work, staying home to look after a baby and clean the house seemed very dull. When I went on maternity leave myself I discovered I was correct.

I am a SAHM. I have commented on these posts before and often get a lot of comments from working mums attacking my lifestyle - I’m not sure why as I would never attack there’s. We are not rich, but we get by on just the one wage just fine. I enjoy my life - it is peaceful and I have the time to get things done in the day which makes our downtime easier. I am available to look after my children, which is really important to us as our daughter has epilepsy so is often sent home from school. I am well educated, smart and hardworking and one day I’m sure I will return to work. Someone always replies to statements like mine with “yes, I do all that and work” which is great! As I said, I cast no aspersions towards working people and believe everyone should live and let live.

No, I wouldn't.

I was very lonely during my maternity leave. Everyone I know works. I tried mum&baby groups but they weren't my thing and I was bored silly. Ds & 1 spent the summer hiking instead.

Then during Covid I was furloughed and had months at home with 11yo ds. It was OK, we coped better than most but I was happy to go back to work.

Plus ex proved himself to be hopeless with long term financial planning despite out-earning me 3:1
My career proved to be essential for us to have a decent standard of living.

I would need to be independendly wealthy to consider giving up the ability to support myself and my children.

If we could get by and have a decent quality of life on one income. Your kids are only kids once. You only live once.

I rarely hear men ever say that

Thanks everyone. This sounds like it’s often more about identity than money. For sure worried about being judged and looked down on.

Does it follow that not having paid work means you’re not an adult? Would you also consider it a loss of adulthood to reduce your working hours or salary in order to raise your kids? These are genuine questions, I’m honestly really shocked to find myself considering even a year or two out of work and trying to explore the values behind either decision.

I was for 3 years when we had DS. I was desperate to get back to work after 2 years as I found it so boring once my NCT friends had gone back to work.

I'm a widow so it's never going to be an option for me. Your husband seems decent, with his offer to pay into pensions and savings accounts. Just make sure you have considered all the worst case scenarios.

Well to me it is simple to have my own income I either need be a billionaire or have a paid job to not rely on another adult so in my case my husband a million things can happen to change that but my starting point is being as adult means I do this myself not rely on my husband so I do this

Well typically because they are the higher earner and it just would never be an option for them. Especially among the higher socioeconomic classes.

Where the woman is the higher earner and/or has the more secure but demanding career, the men I know personally have had no issue stepping back from their career to be SAHDs. They like the chance to see if their side hustle has any legs, too.

A lot of mothers (and it is almost always mothers) are part time, so the MN line of not being dependent on men is a wee bit daft as most of us would struggle without two salaries, in all honesty.

Personally if the choice was between FT work and SAHP I would opt for SAHP.

I would never be a stay at home parent, I personally don’t think being unemployed sets a good example to children, I think modelling hardwork, ambition and financial responsibility is really important. I have no desire to be unemployed and I hope my children don’t desire that for their futures either, no amount of money would change that.

Mmmm
in theory i wouldnt mind it... in fact while kids are small id say I'd find it lovely and relaxing short term. Long term I dont know ...

What amount of personal or matrimonial assets, or what arrangement with the earning partner, would make you feel comfortable with the decision to become a sahp or substantially reduce earning potential to better accommodate kids?

I'd need us as a couple to have a combined net worth of about £4-5m
This is would mean I was independently wealthy

I would dislike the financial reliance.
Your dh sounds very decent but the fear would hold me back I've seen it so badly wrong too many times..

My plan is to downshift as the kids get older

I think most SAHPs work bloody hard as it happens @Simonjt … but anyway.

I think being a sahm isn't for everyone. I personally have never felt more purpose and peace than since staying home with my kids. Before kids I was a teacher and had a mid management role - I found it stressful. I couldnt imagine doing it with kids to sort out too - although obviously if circumstances changed could easily get back into it I guess and probably afford to get by (just about).

I'm honestly relieved not to have the responsibility of earning and the rat race. The weight of parenting does weigh heavily though as naturally I am the default parent - it's beautiful but it's not easy!

since staying home I've softened a lot and I like this version of me. Working full time made me hardened and anxious. Perhaps I was in the wrong career. The slow pace has been great for my mental health. I know some women find the slow pace 'boring' compared to working.

my kids are still small so maybe I'll feel differently and want to go back to work once their older but for now I'm super content.

It sounds as if you're switched on financially and have savings of your own. Your arrangement sounds sensible.
mumsnet is full of horror stories about women being cheated on and being vulnerable financially but no one has a crystal ball you've just got to do what feel right. You are taking good precautions. I rationalised it to myself that I am either going to be of service to a school/company that doesn't really care for me, or I'm going to be of service to my family who truly value me. For me the risk of staying home and being vulnerable for a while felt better than the risk of burning myself out trying to 'have it all'. Maybe I'll live to regret it but the years at home with my small kids I wouldn't change for the world. I haven't missed a thing - done every nap time, soothed every tantrum, made every meal. I'll always remember these years so fondly, although I know my little ones won't remember them 🥲

Basically if my dh earned enough I would. I think I’d have been quite happy on the 1950s because to me it feels so counterintuitive going off to work when I just want to be with my kids and I find it so odd that there’s a ten hour gap where I literally don’t know what my youngest has done beyond what nursery put on an app. Sadly though I didn’t marry rich so that’s the way it is!

But mothers can go choose to go full time and their partners can go part time

Do you think a lot of those mothers would choose to go full time and have their partner go PT instead?

I don't.

I think people who can afford to choose to work less. Of course, for a lot of people, it costs more to go FT due to childcare costs so that is what holds them back.

Yes, the man could go PT, but often he earns the most money so it would mean less money for the family, even with the woman working FT. This seems to be more the case with higher earners in my view. The women I know who make 6 figures have husbands who earn higher 6 figure or 7 figure salaries. The few families I know like this seem to have both adapted work to some degree to accommodate their role as parents.

But when there is a situation where one parent could work less to be at home more without there being a financial hit, I think women generally want to be that person who has more time with the kids or in the home. I think a lot of women would feel aggrieved if their partner wanted it otherwise.

Of course but in practice it usually is that way around.

I have known a couple of families where both parents work four days a week but have different days off, so parent A works Tuesday - Friday and parent b Monday - Thursday, children attend nursery Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. But that only works if you have similar income levels I think.

It wouldn’t suit our family at all, but to be honest that’s completely irrelevant to you! I think you just need to do what works for you.

For a lot of people it’s not just about the financial side of things. It’s like someone saying to me, what amount of money would you need to be a teacher/join the army/be a lorry driver - no amount of money in the world!! Neither of us wanted to be SAHP, we love our jobs and our family and have found a way to make things work for us. You just need to do what works for your family.

So then women get the choice on what they do but not men?