money money money

[jen333]

AIBU in feeling resentful about being given pocket money (£50 per week), and my personal current account kept to the overdrawn limit? I am a stay at home mum with no income of my own.

I don't feel as though he means to punish me - think he is just fearful of loosing control. But .... in effect I am being penalised for being a sahm. I do work (not housework) but am unpaid. I could try to find a paid job that fits in with school hours its true (but not easy) or try to start my own business, and these are things I am looking at now.

You have a point curlychips. Obviously it is not OK for only one parent to do paid work these days.

Sorry jen333 - I wasn't suggesting it's not OK for one parent to do unpaid work - I just know some men who see being a SAHM as fun whereas many paid jobs aren't fun (I would certainly choose to be a SAHM if my DH gave me the chance but he is adamant that I must do paid work too. I know my DH thinks it is just 'having a nice time at home' - what a charmer!).

Also I think it is patronising to give you 'pocket money' as though you are a child. You should have a joint account or he needs counselling to figure out why he wants to control you!

You could get a job doing community moderating and WFH! Any job like that means you can fit it around your other commitments.

We have our own seperate accounts, all our expenses, mortage, bills etc come out of his as he earns a phenomenal amount more than me but to make it fair i transfer some of my wage to pay for the shopping and petrol and as he will be paying for the baby then i will be letting him have the child benefit. Thats why i chose to work part time then i have my own money and i dont have to ask for money

This is fiinancial abuse. Go on the owmens aid website and take a look and then discuss with him how you are not prepared for this stupid and disrespectful treatment to continue and present him with a new plan.

I Agree with curlychips- and I don't think shes being rude, just trying to establish the underlying issue.

I also think you should be looking for paid work now your child has been in school for a couple of years, rather than living off £50 a week. Voluntary work is all well and good, but it doesn't pay the bill, and maybe he is getting frustrated by the financial situation. School hours only jobs are like gold dust, but childcare for one child outside school hours wont break the bank tbh- you are getting six hours a day when your dd is in school and you're paying nothing.
I am assuming that as you are now raising this issue after its been going on for six years, you intend to be at home not earning for the foreseeable future. Your dh sounds like a bit of a twat in how he is dealing with this- but tbh I don't think you're being reasonable by expecting to just work on a voluntary basis forever while he's paying the bills

OK - taking all your comments on board, and I don't think any of them are rude at all - just practical. Only ever worked during school hours (until kids were at secondary school) and don't want to do any different now. Totally understand that it is a luxury, and doing so means big compromises. Am lucky in many respects - just having a moan.

your not lucky at all, being lucky would mean you were in a partnership but youre not.

just Has he no respect for you whatsoever? Agree with pinkbraces, you are not in a partnership.

I just don't understand how you don't have know how much money as a family you have - savings, investments etc... He is not exactly showing much commitment. You put all your money in the house, maybe you should ask for it back and pay rent?

pink £10? You have the RIGHT as main carer to have all tax credits and benefits put into the account of your choice. (jen have you made that call to the benefits office yet?)

Don't discuss it, just do it. Be assertive with OH and if he complains don't back down. Jen - insist you get half of the rental income on his other home as well.

I don't like the sound of this. There is nothing wrong with a coule agreing that one person will be the SAHP as long as they are both happy with the situation. But it sounds like this man considers himself your boss/owner. Was he controlling before you stopped work? Does he act as though you are his servant in other respects (eg he decides what food is prepared and when, he decides what activities are done at the weekend, he feels entitled to tell you what housework to do next)?

I agree about relationships being a partnership and I agree he isn't treating you nicely over this, but I still think you are being unreasonable too in a way. You may have only worked school hours until secondary school with your sons from a previous relationship but they are adults so that's some time ago. Times have changed, jobs are less secure and cost of living is horrendous. Tbh if I told my husband I would only work school hours until my youngest child is 11, and that if I can't find school hours I'll stay at home and do voluntary work for 11 years, then frankly he'd laugh his socks off. I think you are being unrealistic in your expectations, and he's being a bit of a twat in how he deals with it all.
Communication and compromise needed!

I know I'm going to get flamed here but why can't the DH set the spending limit if you are not bringing any money into the house?

It is for this reason that in my relationship we keep separate accounts. Household expenses are shared between us equally, and all the rest of our money is our own to do what we like. I will soon have no income, apart from jobseekers, and I don't expect him to give me money just because I'm not earning.

I think a good, mutually respectful ground rule for relationships is: don't expect anything of your partner which you wouldn't be prepared to do yourself. Op, if your husband turned around and told you he would only work school hours for the next 5 years, until your child is 11, even knowing such jobs are like gold dust, and that if he couldn't find one he'd just do a bit of voluntary work while expecting you to foot all the bills... Seriously, what would you think! I bet you'd be none too happy with the arrangement- yet this is what you expect from him. Also, it's pointless to compare how you did things with your grown up sons, because that was a different marriage. You first husband may have been content with that arrangement but it sounds like this one isn't. I reckon this is his way of saying, actually, I don't want to be sole provider any longer

Oh FFS, unless the OP has good specialist skills she has kept up with, it's going to be really bloody difficult for her to find a job at all in the current climate. DOing voluntary work, if you can't get paid work, is a good way of making yourself more employable, or so it's often said.
However the issue here seems to be that the H considers the money to be his and he is keeping the OP short, despite the fact that she is contributing to the household in ways other than wage-earning. DOn't forget she contributed to the purchase of the family home by selling her own property and putting all the money into said family home while the H hung on to his own property and derives further income from renting it out.
Yes it's reasonable for there to be a spending limit on 'treats' ie whatever is left when the bills have been paid and the groceries bought but that should be divided equally and discussed.

Yes, its going to be diffiicult in the current climate, which is why it makes sense to not be ridiculously picky about jobs. To decide that one can't possibly consider anything other than a term time school hours job for 11 years is frankly writing yourself out of the job Market. And I don't think thats a sensible or supportive way for an adult to behave .

I have made it clear I don't think the husband is behaving nicely either- I think this is his way of saying he's not happy with the status quo. And yes, in an Ideal world he would verbalise that but often people find that hard.

I'm thinking about the timing of this. The situation has gone on for over 6 years already- and clearly the op is raising this because she can see it continuing for another 6 years. It's madness to decide you aren't going to earn and contribute financially for that long. Op needs to get some independence and take control of her situation

The issue here is not that the OP doesn't have a paid job.

The issue is that her husband is an arsehole who is keeping her in relative poverty and treating her like a child.
There is nothing wrong with £50 a week, if that is all that the family budget allows, but that is not the situation.

I'm a SAHM, DH earns good money. I manage all our finances and all our assets are in my name apart from the house which is jointly owned. This is my security for giving up my earning ability to earn for the moment.

flyingintheattic You wont get jobseekers if your DH is working with a certain income. I don't know if you have considered this but the government wont care what your financial agreement is with your H, as a couple you have a joint income in their eyes.

Actually having just looked all that up on their website I am even more confused now. I did not get jobseekers when I lived with exH as he was working that is all I can tell you.

why shouldnt he 'set' the limit because she is bringing in nothing...????! are you serious? is this 1954>? erm - she is not bringing in nothing, she is doing full time childcare - which I presume they have agreed. If he would like her to work, as adults and partners, they would sit down and discuss that.

Since when is being a SAHM 'not contributing' financially? good god this is depressing.

OP - your husband is treating you like a child, he is patronising you and controlling you by not allowing you financial involvement in the household. My partner would give me his last penny if I asked for it - he loves me and everything that is his, is mine. If he thought I needed to be earning more we owuld have a conversation about that - he wouldnt simply deny me money.

If one person looks after the child - and the other earns money - that money belongs EQUALLY to both parents.

Also - money aside - if one partner is unhappy with a situation - then that is addressed through talking - the man doesn't 'decide' how much money to hand out on a single handed basis, because he is the one working. As SCGB says - women who stop working reduce their ability to find work later on.

Do you have written records that you contributed to the joint house purchase? Are the deeds and the mortgage in joint names, esp as you are unmarried you ne3d tto protect yourself. What are these insurances you are paying out? Do you &ave a will? Your, and pinks dps sound like controlling pricks and what both of you are describing is financial abuse.

Yes, house/mortgage etc all in joint names. I have been silly - but not that.... :)

Lynehamrose - actually, I believe that am behaving in a sensible way re: childcare. I think that my time spent caring for my child is well worth the financial sacrifices. How do you manage to arrange your childcare after school, during holidays and sickness?

She is not doing full time childcare waterat - the child is in school! Its a tad unrealistic these days to decide you're going to do voluntary work for 11 years!
Jen- I use a childminder for before and after school and holidays . Works out as cost effective once they are in school. Its the 'pre school years which cost an arm and a leg! You are entitled to time off for medical appointments and sickness - though my children are pretty healthy generally.

And I don't think £50 per week is unreasonable if he is paying the mortgage, bills, food etc. Thats £200 per month which frankly is as much or more than Many people have left over each. Its the 'pocket money ' approach which I agree is not pleasant- but I suspect the underlying reason is that he's resenting the set up now. Perhaps it worked for the first 6 years but now time for a rethink ?

Why are people dismissing contributions to family life that are non financial? Why is only the main wage earner considered as a contributor?

Choosing to be the carer of your own children rather than doing work and paying someone else to look after them is a normal and perfectly valid choice -it is a real step backwards for women's rights - or indeed for the rights of any family who choose that path - if that is seen as a lesser role

The fact is that pink and op are not being treated az the equal part of a partnership or family - it is not loving or respectful or right