Is it wrong to expect dh to provide for you??

[mower]

Hoping to relocate soon and talking about jobs I am more employable then dh. ATM I stay at home and only work two evenings a week and am so so happy doing this. DS is 8 months and am 20 weeks pregnant also.

Am so scared of relocating incase dh cannot find a job and I am pushed into a corner to work full time and dh look after the babies.

Will work part time two evenings a week but my money will only cover groups and things me and the babies need.

Am I being selfish expecting dh to pay all the bills and provide for the family while I stay at home and look after the babies??

Given that you are 20 weeks pg, I don't think you are a particulary attractive new employee at the moment! I think when push comes to shove you have to do what is best for you and your dh. I went back to work full time after DS so that DH could study (and look after DS part-time) Now he has a much better paid job and I hope to stay at home for a while with no. 2. Who knows what life will throw at you? Like everybody else you will have to roll with the punches, and this might involve you going back to work at some point to keep a roof over your heads, but even if you do, things can change. I hope you get to stay at home for quite a bit longer with your babies as this is obviously what you want.

depends. are you planning to breastfeed?

On the pregnancy issue, I will say that I interviewed for my job at 28 weeks pregnant; they interviewed five people that day and I was the only one they made an offer to, despite the fact I could hardly disguise my forthcoming lack of availability!

I don't understand why you are hoping to relocate even though that will make it harder for your dh to find work?

It's perfectly understandable that you would rather stay home with your children, and equally understandable that your dh would rather go out to work (in my case, it's the other way around, dh is a SAHD) but I do believe we are talking about preferences; when it comes to providing for your family, you have to do what you have to do. Ideally that would coincide with what both parties want to do but not always.

Well, there aren't any right or wrong answers on this one - it's just one of those things that you have to decide between you as a couple.

FWIW I am the breadwinner and DH is a SAHD - we have three boys - and I do find that I am often alternately scared (because I am solely responsible for the economic wellbeing of five human beings) and resentful (I feel I miss out, and I feel he has an easier time than me) (cue hollow laughter from all the SAHMs out there, I bet!). So, y'know, there are no easy solutions.

I don't think it's a case of one person "providing for" the other. Once you have kids you're a famiy unit. as a family unit you need to pay the bills and ensure the children are well looked after. as a family unit you decide how best to achieve these two things. if you're lucky you can achieve these things whilst accomodating personal individual preferences - be they staying at home (whether mum or dad); having a decent career (again, whether mum or dad); or having en enoyable p-t job etc etc. I'm a huge fan of collectivity when it comes to families. It's all a team effort

hold on - he's not "providing for you" any more than you are "providing child care for him". You are a family. Work needs to be done inside and outside of the home. Your children need to be cared for. How you divide this up is up to you - but no-one is getting some kind of free ride. In a family I think it is distasteful and unhelpful to talk about being "provided for".
You and your dh need to be sure that each of you in happy with the arrangements and negotiate and discuss but if push comes to shove then you need to be prepared to go outside the home to work. Your responsibilities are to your whole family.
best of luck

IMO you are both working - it's just that your dh gets a salary and you don't. You're a partnership, and each supports the other. Of course if one parent stays at home to look after the children, then the other must provide for them all.

ATM you are pg, and your elder child is still very young, so it makes sense for you to be the at-home parent, while dh is the provider. If everyone is happy with this, then that's fine. If not, then when the children are older you might find that it is better for the family all round if you work part-time. It might not be what you want, but you're a partnership and each must compromise a bit for the other.

OTOH if, at some point in the future, your dh wants a chance to be the at-home parent then you are actually in a very advantageous position: it's possible for you to swap. My dh would love a chance to be the FTD, but my earning potential is a mere fraction of his, and we know it's just not going to happen.

X posts hat woman

very good points you two!

Very true, harpsi. I'd be well pissed off if DH said that he "provided the childcare".

Agree with hatwoman and harpsi. Though I know dh occasionally gets to wobbles about the responsibility of it all (am a sahm) and you're right to be trying to work it out sensibly. ATM dh's salary double what mine would be. So he works.
I'm confused as to who would get the more financially viable job? And isn't care-home work based around shifts?

Up until the last few months i have been the one who works and dh had been looking after dd1 as i could get a higher wage than him.

Dh did a great job looking after the house and dd1 and it worked realy well for us.

Now since having dd2 dh has got a new job (part time) and when my mat leave runs out i will be working part time.

I would never expect dh to provide for us (but it would be nice).

We never needed to make that decision. DH earns way more than I ever could and we both decided before kids that I would stay at home to look after them. I was working when DHwas a uni so I supported us then, he supports us know.

But I have friends whos DH has just been made redundant from a resonably well paid job, she works part time in a very well paid job. He is struggling to find a job so she is starting full time and he will stay at home to look after 3 small children, the youngest is 6 weeks old until he can sort himself out.

Correct me if I am wrong, but there seems to be a general consensus here that the deciding factor in who stays at home should be financial, who earns the most dosh. Equality of parenting is all very well, but shouldn't what's best for the child enter into it?

Who can say that definitively though, Quanglewangle? If breastfeeding then the mother is the one to provide this, but if not then..?

I do know one thing, I'd have fought anyone tooth and nail if they tried to usurp my position as primary carer after I had DS. In this situation, hormones have to be accounted for.

I think most people would like to do whats best for the child, but as much as we try its not always possible. In some families, both parents have to work and they child goes to a nursery/child minder, not personally for me but some people just dont have a choice. The dad I know who looks after the kids does a fantastic job, he is a wonderful father. It was that or the family would have to sell their house as they couldnt afford the mortgage on one part time wage.

Just because your a women it does not necessarily mean that you have a strong maternal instinct, some dads are just as capable.

I know things aint so simple in reality. It just struck me that the tone of the thread was beginning to sound more mercenary than I would imagine was intended. And I just thought I would comment.

no easy answers for sure. But i do love a gorgeous, breadwinning female fabster, dinosaure. So many famlies shy away from letting that work, I suspect.

The decision has to be essentially financial. There isn't a shadow of a doubt that dh would make a good FTD, and certainly a better home-maker than me, but would living on the income that I could provide make for a good life for all of use? Is it worth the compromises we owuld have to make? And always wonder whether life would be better if we swapped roles so that I stayed at home.

Even in our egalitarian society men's incomes tend to be higher than women's. And what will never change is the fact that it is the woman who gives birth, the woman who is best equipped to feed, the woman whose hormones are rampaging to keep her with her children. For a while, anyway!

I think it depends on what you mean by provide. My dp provides me and dd with love, commitment and stability. We are a family. I earn over 2.5times as much as he does but it doesn't matter to us. We each give what our family needs in terms of emotional, practical and financial matters. Hope it continues this way and I don't get my commeuppance for sounding so smug!

as some of the other girls have suggested i dont think you should expect it. being honest with you pregnant you have another while to go before you are going to be employed anyway so to be fair there is no choice but for him to provide however, i do think that if, as you say the reason for this move is a better quality of life and your partner cant find a good paying job then there is no reason why, for a little while you cant be the breadwinner. Its not forever and if it gives you the start your family deserves i dont see whats so bad about it. i do feel that sometimes a role swap can be great, as it gives kids time to see that a. mums are not just homemakers and dads arent just workers and its a fantastic opportunity for your kids to bond in a way with their dad that a lot of children dont get to and for you too to put yourselves in each others shoes for a while. i also wouldnt think it was fair for him to have to work two jobs to provide what you can do in one. but thats just my opinion.