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?

I'd do it in a heartbeat! As would my husband! He was the main breadwinner for the first part of our relationship but I'm a lot younger than him and I've caught him up. He won't go any higher in his career (by choice, and it's a very sensible one at that) whereas I probably will. I'd absolutely love to get to a position whereby I earned enough for him to be a SAHP or retire early. We both work 4 days, each having a day with our little one, which is the most we can manage at the moment.

Loads and loads of people find the normal parts of parenting hard. Loads. The views I have expressed are, in particular, about staying at home with young kids. But children grow and change and things get easier and people enjoy different stages. Also, there is still significant societal pressure and because you can’t know how you’ll react until you do it. And as someone else has said, the birth rate is dropping because women are wising up to just how hard it is.

I will also bet there’s a sizeable chunk of parents who would have been happy either way - maybe happier had they not had kids.

I imagine lots and lots of parents wonder whether others find the daily grind bits as dull as they do and feel very alone when they can’t talk about it IRL, which is why it’s great fora like these exist.

I would have loved to be a SAHM and would in your shoes if that’s what you want.
Protect yourself financially but yes I think it would be good for you and good for your children while they’re young.
Everyone I know who has done it have been glad they did.
You could think about putting a time limit on it - like until youngest child starts school.

Of course those things need doing.

But when some many families have two FTE working parents, and also are able to keep clean homes that everyone is fed in, I’m not convinced being at home by yourself for 6hrs a day is necessary.

I certainly didn't have children because I was dreaming about changing nappies, managing tantrums and cleaning up after baby-led weaning efforts.

There are countless statistics of women in the labour market, a few comments on mumsnet is hardly a barometer.
The percentage of women who don’t work at all with older chidden is actually small.

What point are you trying to make?

No one’s forcing you to not work, you can make your own choice but it’s redundant and frankly demeaning to attempt to reduce any stay at home parent to someone who only cleans cupboards. It’s completely disingenuous.

Also while it may seem like tedious "work" with someone else's child, most of that - crying, bedtime etc - with your own dc, is something you surely want to be supporting them through.

The work being valuable in raising the child, doesn’t mean people aren’t allowed to find it mind numbingly boring and feel frustrated by it though.

And - look some things you like to be there for - but it’s an unrealistic pressure on mums that they should be there 100% of the time for their babies and loving it all, or presumably they’re just not that interested in them.

He’ll be really fascinating to me once he turns round and says “no mum, I don’t agree with you because…” or equivalent.

The early years, lack of articulate thought so on, are just not for me.

But SAHPs’ actions in staying at home with their kids are definitely of huge worth - not denigrating that at all.

I just don’t want to do it with mine.

It really comes down to how you feel, what works for your relationship, what works for your family and whether you can afford your preferred standard of living.

In your shoes, I would take the maximum time off and then return to work part time. It seems a shame to give up a well paying career (that youll never get back?) And that way you retain independence, an identity outside of the home, your child socialises in nursery and becomes used to other caregivers. If you really dislike your job then perhaps that changes things but i would still work in some capacity. Also as PP mentioned, whats the demographic around you? Will you have people to spend time with in the week? I work evenings/weekends so have the week off but it can be very boring! All the families around us have 2 parents working (albeit some on reduced hours, but not very reduced).

I am a SAHM, DH covers a pension pot and NI contributions, and pays me a monthly “wage” that is just for me (we have a joint account that he pays into for household and kids costs)
the work that I did pre kids, is pretty adaptable and could be picked up and brushed up on.
I have completed online qualifications whilst being a SAHM.
i do 50% of drop offs/pick ups, 75% of household chores, 50% of the cooking.

but I do also have a pre nup that covers me should we split up, and it includes maintenance and school fees.

our kids are 6 and 4, both in full time education. If I saw a job I was desperate to do, I would go for it, but I haven’t. And I enjoy the homemaker part of my life. I don’t feel “less than” as an adult, parent or role model to my children

Yes and I loved it- I would do it again in a heartbeat. I didn't find it boring at all, despite having had a high-powered job before.

On money, it's hard to calculate quite how much of a difference it will make in the longer term. You are not only losing income but pension (and growth on that pension), career advancement and payrises etc.

For us all money has always been completely joint and savings are held by whoever it makes tax sense to hold them (me). In being a SAHP you are making a huge commitment to being a family unit and I wouldn't do it without this being reflected in finances as well- I wouldn't want to be paid an allowance etc or feel that I had to ask permission to spend money on myself.

No, you’re right. There is also hoovering to do.

As I’ve said to PP, it’s a possibility to work full time and raise children - many of us do it.

Not doing so, whether that’s SAMH or part time, is up to personal choice, but it’s not necessity, there’s not enough to do to fill the free time, and it’s not a choice I’d ever make for myself or our family.

It really comes down to how you feel, what works for your relationship, what works for your family and whether you can afford your preferred standard of living.

🎯

I took a 4 year career break after my 2nd as by this time DH was significantly out earning me and we could manage on one salary - I know lots of women who felt they would lose their identity if they didn’t work, and whilst I respect that - my work was never my identity and it does take some courage to just be yourself and not attaching yourself to your job. Many of my friends went back to work, but I was often able to catch up with them on their day offs and arranged to do the same classes with their toddlers like swimming or football - I also made new friends who like me didn’t work and so I made arrangements with them on a regular basis. When my youngest started nursery, 3 hours in the morning a couple of days a week it was often just enough time to get a haircut, go shopping, tidy house, sort admin, go to an appointment.. and it was less stressful to manage their appointments as I wasn’t fitting it around a full time job - everything was more relaxed and I could help out on school trips and sort my house renovations etc . In the midst of this I developed a long term health problem and so I was glad I wasn’t working as it would have been really hard. When my youngest started school I became too bored, and i missed having him with me, also my family don’t live nearby so unlike others I wasn’t spending a lot of time with them. I decided to get a job after that and worked in a school - term time only and school hours and this worked really well for me when they were at primary school. You have to make the decision that’s best for your family and you.

Just out of real interest- if your role in the home is SAHM, why is there a 50% split in school runs and cooking?

I assumed that falls into the SAMH role.

You simply cannot work full time and still spend as much time with your children as a SAHP can.

You’re arguing against time and physics here.

If you are working full time, even with children in school, you need to avail of either paid before and after school childcare or have someone else do that role for free. It’s a valid choice if someone wants to work however many hours that suit their family but it’s nonsense to claim they spend time with their children in the same way or in the same volume.

You’re degrading and patronising comments regarding stay at home parents speak volumes. It’s possible to both work or stay at home with your children and not be an arsehole, many of us do it, but clearly that hasn’t reached you yet.

I am more through circumstance than anything. I think you need to have a DH on 100k plus to not feel the Financial hit iyswim, it's quite common in my bit of SW London, lot's of DHs gone 14-16 hrs/travelling etc

Although I do plan to go back when DC are older for self fulfillment purposes!

There’s no need for name calling, is there. I don’t recall calling you an arsehole?

We have flexi hours, so one of us does always do drop off and pick up, while the other works.

It works out about 1hr per day of crossover, which isn’t the end of the world.

I actually also don’t believe I do need to spend every waking second attached to my child - I’d quite like him to have some independence skills.

I would love to be a SAHM but the financial aspect is probably the most worrying for me. We have quite separate finances because I don't like to feel reliant on DH. If he was the sole provider I would feel guilty about spending the money he earns, especially on frivolous or unnecessary things. But if I was independently wealthy and could afford to not work I would definitely sack off working. At least, the kind of working where I feel pressured to perform well because things rely on it.

As it is, I went down to 4 days after mat leave and although I earn well for 4 days, I rarely have enough left at the end of the month for much savings. DH is a high earner and is putting loads into his pension for us both. I just hope nothing happens to our marriage as it feels like a lot of trust to put in someone, but if the worst did happen I hope they would be considered marital assets etc.

I never understand the 'I don't have anything to talk about if I'm not working' comments. My job is the least interesting thing I can talk about and if people insisted on telling me about their work in great detail I'd probably stop being friends with them. I don't talk about my kids all the time either. There are loads of things to talk about that aren't your job or your kids.

You simply cannot work full time and still spend as much time with your children as a SAHP can.

Common sense says it has to come down to this. You cannot have read to them as much, you cannot have spent as many hours talking to them, showing them things out and about, you cannot have done as many park trips and kicked the autumn leaves about, or watched ants ferrying leaves back to their nest for 45 minutes, or stopped in at a patisserie for a treat after feeding the ducks, all while keeping the household things ticking over as well and also having as much downtime as a family.

The maths just doesn't work.

And a lot of that may not matter at all to some parents, who might find it boring, or don't see the value in it, or might feel that it's fine for a carer to cover all that off. And that's parenting style and is entirely personal choice. But it is pointless arguing it all gets done to the same extent in fewer hours, when a lot of that just requires hours by definition.

I was a SAHM for several years while my children were pre schoolers, then went back to work when my youngest started reception. I enjoyed being a SAHM and I believe that it benefited my DC, and I was lucky to find an interesting, fulfilling job (not the same as my previous career) when I wanted to go back to work. Now my DC are teens and are getting more independent, I'm pleased that I have a job I love as well as a strong relationship with my DC and DH.

So it worked out well for me, but I did take a risk. If I'd split up with DH or struggled to get back into the workplace when I wanted to, I might be looking back with regrets.

@SleeplessInWhereveryour tone has been derogatory and patronising in every single post, claiming the only thing sahp’s have in their life is cleaning cupboards and hoovering.

You clearly think your above someone who has chosen to be a SAHP and that’s an attitude that I cannot get on board with.

I would say there is still a compromise to be had here.

Doesn’t have to be full time or nothing.

DH works full time and I work 80%. We don’t use any wraparound care for DC1 who is in reception.