Undervalued, unappreciated SAHM

[UnpaidMaid]

I've worked my entire life. I worked as a teenager, even when I went to uni, I kept a near full time job going at the same time, then got a job straight out of uni and went back to work after DC1 full time. When DC2 was born, I went back except reduced it to 4 full days a week instead of 5. I hated it but got on with it as financially as we needed the income. Since then DH has had several promotions and we finally agreed that I could quit my job, which I was losing interest in, and focus on the kids and look after the house instead. Great for me, I was really excited by the prospect, giving me time to be with the kids instead of with grandparents/childminder, which I always resented.
However instead of the great family life I was expecting, I find that DH seems to resent the fact I am not bringing in any money any more. Yes we've had a few debts to pay off and have not been living the high life since I quit, but to me it's more important that I take care of family life myself and I am more than happy doing that. I don't think it's to do with financial hardship so much, as that he doesn't see the value in what I'm doing. I get the impression from him that he thinks I'm living an easy life being looked after by him and spending his money. I am hardly lunching and going out pampering myself - far from it. Every minute of my day is spent looking after the house and kids and I hardly have anything to spend on me.
Does anyone else have this issue? I just want to show DH the value of my contribution even if it's not financial. We both decided to have kids and I'd much rather one of us looked after them if we can afford it rather than us both work, pay for childcare and miss out on our children's early years. How can I get him to understand that I'd rather we live frugally but happily as a close family than have more money but spend less time together?

It doesn't really matter whether he's being a dick - you need to be able to discuss it with him. Carrying on with him resenting you and what you are doing is a recipe for disaster! It's also not completely unreasonable for him to want you to work too so he can buy things. Being sole breadwinner might not be his cup of tea and he might not agree that the children are better off with you than with GPs or at nursery - there are plenty of opinions on such things and no one knows really whether there's a right answer.

When I've been at home with the kids (which is not very much!) I've totally resented dh though he rather liked it. He acts a bit like he's the king and i'm everybody's assistant, and claims his right to do bugger all when not at the office 'because he's been working so hard and is tired'. I think he really thinks that I'm very lucky in that situation to have plenty of free time and be maintained by him and feels quite proud of that (this might be how your friends' partners feel for example). This despite the fact that he goes to great pains to avoid ever having the kids on his own as finds it too tiring. I think this is in some respects a replica of his parents' relationship.

So that sounds like he's an idiot (!) but in fact it's resolved for us by me working full time too so there's no question at all about full equality over all matters. And we can afford to pay people to do the chores. The kids would prefer it if I was around more, but then I don't think dh and I would get on well, which would be infinitely worse over all. I think we both have a proud and competitive streak that we have to accommodate somehow (I'm not proud of this btw but you need to be realistic about what the problems are that you're trying to solve). We are now all very happy most of the time!

I was a SAHM for many years, largely through circumstance. The cost of childcare for three children when they were still very young more than wiped out my earnings, so we were going to be worse off and getting into more debt if I worked.

In the early years my husband definitely understood it and was fine about it. It had very much been a joint decision. As time went on though he seemed to forget why we made the decision we did (no local family support network anywhere near) and would make digs. He only saw things in terms of sacrifices he felt he was making. He conveniently forgot the fact that I had had to give up a good job that I enjoyed and which gave me a pretty good future earning potential. It had been a real wrench to do so, and it was a decision I deliberated and procrastinated over for many months. There was no other realistic option for us though.

Money was tight for a lot of the time, no doubt about that. Hubby's employer also went through a lot of shake-ups and re-organisations over the years (just like many others have too) so there was always a sense of insecurity on the job front. As the sole wage earner too I think he really felt the responsibility and that was how it manifested itself.

I do now have a part time job which I am really enjoying. We will never be wealthy, but things are a lot easier than they used to be. Hubby too feels less tense about the money situation and has quietened right down.

I am not saying go back to work just to suit your husband. I am not defending his put-downs of you being an SAHM either because in all probability he has absolutely zero idea what it is like with small children day in, day out. I am just saying that you do need to open up dialogue about what is worrying him, and perhaps discuss what the realistic options available to you are, until your children are old enough to be left alone and take care of themselves.

As the main breadwinner in our family, I think I'd probably resent DH if he was a sahp for an extended period. He did it for a short whileto give dd a bit of stability when when we moved, and I think we both recognised then that having a sahp wouldn't really add any value for our family, it would just put more pressure on the main earner.

Personally, I don't think it can work unless both partners feel it's the best option for the whole family.

I struggle to see what is in it for your dh. He has to work hard but not see the fruits of his labour because he has to live frugally so that you can stay at home to look after the children which he cannot see as much because he is working to provide the family with the bread to spend.

Hold on OP - what gas your DH actually SAID about this? You say you "get the impression" he resents your SAH status, but does he really?

Could you be being defensive, and misunderstanding his comments? Next time he says you must be having an easy time of it, try agreeing. Say something like, "yes, I have had a lovely day. I love being home with our kids and looking after the house. I really do. And I couldn't do it without you going out to work every day to support all of us. So THANK YOU. You've made he really happy."

Maybe yes actually the one feeling unappreciated? Maybe you've accidentally turned a bit moany, stressed, harassed-looking so as to justify what you do all day. Do you know what I mean?

And don't ever imply you're skint now you don't work. Never! Make him believe that he is earning enough to support you all. Help him feel proud of his contribution.

I know this will be an unpopular opinion, but why not try it. Tell him you're happy staying at home and grateful that his job can support the whole family.

I'm another one who thinks that he has a point. Unless you can demonstrate that childcare now would cost more than you would earn by working, then you have basically enforced a tight budget on him, along with all the scary responsibility of being the only wage earner, so that you can stay at home and play fingerpainting supermum. You have quite possibly become boring company, as well - do you ever think or talk about anything other than pottytraining or Cbeebies any more?
It does sound as though you have got your own way and he is expected to put up with it and smile all the way.

Perversely, your DH would probably prefer it if you were going out and treating yourself, with his money. Rather than making a point of scrimping and saving (which you think he'd be supportive of, but which actually makes him feel like he doesn't earn enough to make you happy).

Why not treat yourself to something, something frivolous, then look delighted with it, and thank him?

Someone's probably suggested this already - if so, sorry, I'm tired

Try costing out the paid value of everything you do. Not only childcare but housework, 'secretarial' admin (including event diaries, remembering birthdays, etc), chauffeuring, shopping, laundry, DIY, gardening, everything. Wifework is fucking expensive if you have to pay people to do it all. Do you start work when DH leaves the house and finish when he settles on the sofa? Thought not.

There must be online calculators for this, but I'm afraid I don't have any bookmarked. Try calling some upmarket domestic agencies and 'personal assistant' outfits and asking them to quote for the whole caboodle.

Oh, yeah, and give him a copy of Wifework.

Perversely, your DH would probably prefer it if you were going out and treating yourself, with his money. Rather than making a point of scrimping and saving (which you think he'd be supportive of, but which actually makes him feel like he doesn't earn enough to make you happy). Why not treat yourself to something, something frivolous, then look delighted with it, and thank him?

Whats, this has to be the BEST excuse for a fabulous handbag I've ever seen!

Hang on, if the OP didn't stop work until the younger child was 2, then they were already spending money on childcare and possibly some domestic work as well. Yet now her wage is gone, they have to live frugally.
I find people who chose to enforce frugal living on their families when they could live comfortably to be tiresome and self-righteous. Self denial is not a virtue.

Try costing out the paid value of everything you do. Not only childcare but housework, 'secretarial' admin (including event diaries, remembering birthdays, etc), chauffeuring, shopping, laundry, DIY, gardening, everything. Wifework is fucking expensive if you have to pay people to do it all.

Yes, but if the OP was working outside the home, they wouldn't have to pay for all of it, would they? Probably just a few hours of childcare, and I assume that would be less than what the OP was previously earning.

Obviously, if the OP went back to work, then her DH would have to be prepared to take back half of the domestic work, but it would be a cost in time, not money.

PMSL at secretarial work. House admin, cleaning and DIY is done by working and non working adults. It's trotted out like its something unique to SAHPs on here.

" You have quite possibly become boring company, as well - do you ever think or talk about anything other than pottytraining or Cbeebies any more?"

But cbeebies and potty training are the only things any sahms talk about arn't they? God I know I only talked about that for years. Having been at home with the dc what I wanted when DH got him was not to talk about politics or art or current affairs or sport or music - "DH" I would cry " let me tell you about this thing on something special today. They were at the zoo and this lama did this great thing with his arse and a bucket of fish. Look I can show you with my finger paints and a potato print"

That's how I liked to relax of an evening.

I guess it depends on what's more important to the couple, quality time, or money.

The most important think is to talk together and be on the same page.

Wouldn't surprise me in cases like this if the SAHP went back to work and heR DH didn't take on half the chores and childcare or expect her to be the one to have days off if the kids are ill etc.

I'm probably being very unfair but that's my general thoughts.

The sad thing is that I never got to go back to work. So without that mystical transformation that occurs when you leave you home, move to a different location and work for 8 hours, I have remained ever thus - a middle aged woman trying to persuade DS to phone me from uni and let me guess where he is now on his percentile chart in his red book.

If only I had worked. I could be so fab and interesting but instead I'm just here with poor old DH having to put up with me. He is so unlucky.

I find people who chose to enforce frugal living on their families when they could live comfortably to be tiresome and self-righteous

Obviously, SolidGoldBrass, you are perfectly happy having your children in childcare and that is totally valid. I had my dd in a creche etc for six hours a day. But some people are not so happy with that. Surely we all spend our money in different ways, depending on our priorities. OP's husband is missing his toys and gadgets but OP feels that her time is better spent on her children at the moment rather than earning the money for these gadgets. Different strokes...

It isn't clear from your post whether he thought there was a problem before you gave up work. Were you unhappy with your job or unhappy with the balance between childcare and work or worried about the children? and what did he think? if he didn't think there was a problem before- he won't see the benefit now.
I'm a wohp and I think the advantages to a SAHP in being a SAHP outweigh the advantages to me. Do i think it helps the family as a whole? yes- especially when the children are all at school and childcare isn't available- so its a good thing for the family, a good thing for SAHP as an individual and not necessarily a good thing for me alone.
and having the family financially totally dependent on you is quite stressful

I think the fundamental problem here is that you and your husband clearly have different priorities and views on life and parenthood, and you need to seriously sit down and discuss this ASAP, and to find a compromise. It sounds like you think it's more important to spend time with the children when they are young (note: this only benefits you though in the couple, since he may well have to spend more time away from the children to bring in the required income). He may be thinking it's more important to have a financially secure future in the long term. Neither of you are wrong.

Contrary to what some posters have implied, there is no "RIGHT" way of balancing work and family, and someone not wanting their partner to give up work is not "selfish" or "dickish". Everyone's circumstances will be so different that it's impossible to have a one size fits all approach.

You ask why some men are happy for their wives to be stay at home whilst others aren't. Well, it's not really very complicated - everyone is different! Some couples will share the view that it is very important for their children to spend their younger years being looked after by a parent, to bond with them, to ensure that they are being looked after in a particular way, whatever, and are prepared to make financial sacrifices to do that.

For others, the cost of childcare would simply be impossible to balance if both parents work full time. Charging around £1000 a month for full time care is insane, but not even an exaggerated cost. Now imagine you have twins, or siblings born fairly close together. Even with a (laughable) 5-10% on the second child, most families aren't going to be able to cope with those costs, so unless you are lucky enough to have close family nearby who are able and willing to provide childcare while you work, there is no choice.

Cleaning, bills, diary planning, appointments etc aren't things that only uniquely spring into existence when one parent is stay at home. Thousands of couples who work full time have to do those things as well, and don't contribute them to some list to justify their contributions to the household. It's bloody rare that any couple will bring in a paid employer to do those things, so you aren't exactly saving any money in that respect.

One compromise would be that you work part time. That way you still get to spend lots of time with your children, but you also keep your toe in the employment pool. That way when you do decide to go back to work full time, you aren't starting from ground zero. A huge number of women find it difficult to get back into decent jobs after extended time away from the workforce. That isn't a myth. But if you keep working even a couple of days a week, then you will be in a much better position.

Financially, it won't help your household at all. In fact, it will probably just about balance out the cost of the childcare you will be using. But in the long run it's a very sensible idea, and it gives your husband reassurances that you will be able to go back to work in a few years, and he won't be stuck being the sole wage earner for the rest of his working life.

My point was about UnpaidMaid's complaint of undervaluing & lack of appreciation. Being a full-time mother and housekeeper is work and, as I said, I bet her hours are longer than her husband's. Setting this out - what the job involves, the hours, and the commercial value (opportunity cost, if he had no 'unpaid maid') is one way of clarifying this.

Of course there are as many different ways to run a household as there are households. But I can't help feeling some respondents here would do well to read Wifework, too.

I think the thing for us was discussing what gave the best quality of life in our situation.

Our daughter got to talk about her day immediately, do her clubs and have someone read with her and do homework.

My DH got to concentrate on his career which he loves. He could be late home, work extra hours, put himself out to be noticed and climb the ladder. He got to keep his non-9-5 job and could come home and enjoy quality time with us when he was home as home wasn't a place of work.

Me, I got to be in my daughter's life. My mum was a career bod and my memories of her are few until if grown up and could stay up later. She wasn't much of a feature in my life. I dabble in bits when time allows and I'm the lynchpin of my immediate and more extended family so they are all happier and supported. I've got more that a little dash of the 'pleaser' in me so that satisfies that aspect of my personality. I also got yo do a bit of property developing and work got myself which is not have done if I'd worked.

It works for us, mostly

I wouldn't say we were right and everyone else was wrong though, or try to undermine others, as so many people with strong views do.

I've not read the entire thread but I do think your DH has a point. You wanted to be a SAHP. This is your dream, not your husband's, by the sound of it. He has made some major sacrifices (having to live much more frugally whilst not getting any more family time or down time himself). It sounds to me as though you had an idealistic idea of what being a SAHM would be like and now that you've discovered it isn't all skipping to the park and baking cakes you're pissed off with it and trying to find someone to blame.

You're looking at this from the wrong angle. You want him to appreciate the value of your contribution which really means you want to be recognized for the sacrifices (in terms of hard work) you make towards your family's life. Yet, the person who is really making the sacrifices is you DH - he's the one who can't realize his dreams (of having 'stuff') because you're realizing yours (of being a SAHM). What you really need to do is to show him how much you appreciate the value of his contribution. It will be much easier to get his help and support if you're happy and grateful for what you already have rather than irritable and miserable because you want more.

The idea that the OP would have nothing to talk about now is plain daft. If she was an intelligent, articulate woman before becoming a SAHM, then she will probably still be one now. If she was a fool with limited conversational skills, then....well, you get the picture!

What I dislike is that some WOHP seem to see a chink in the armour as soon as their spouses become SAHP and wade in with criticism, no matter what the SAHP has done before or will do in the future - fuelled by society's lack of value for the SAHP role. This is particularly unreasonable when the WOHP has actively or tacitly encouraged the spouse to become a SAHP, or puts barriers in the way of them working once children come along. In those cases it is shitty behaviour of the worst kind.

the person who is really making the sacrifices is you DH - he's the one who can't realize his dreams (of having 'stuff') because you're realizing yours (of being a SAHM)

Permanentlyexhausted, I can see you are not a feminist. And not because you take the man's point of view here, but because you place no value whatsoever on the work involved with looking after/educating children and housework.

My mother had to work when I was small and the pain of hardly seeing her during the week was one reason I only took part-time jobs when my dd was small.

I'm sure it is not fair to characterise the father in this case as wanting stuff (though I did that myself), but why would you have children if wanting stuff is more important than their happiness?

No, you're quite wrong there Coyoacan, although I'm not a feminist in perhaps the sense you mean. I'm a feminist in the sense that I believe men and women should be equal. I'm not a feminist who puts a high value on housework though (WTAF - did you really mean that??!). I put a very high value on looking after/educating children (my own as well as the 22 others that I currently look after in my guise as Brown Owl).

In the case of the OP, each partner should have an equal opportunity to follow their dreams and aspirations. The OP's dream was to be a SAHM. She is, although she doesn't seem to like the work that goes with the job much. The OP's husband's dreams are of equal value and importance, so he should have an equal opportunity to follow them.

It is not for me, or you, to judge whether one of those dreams is more valid than the other.