So fed up of dh's attitude to money

[MsAdorabelleDearheartVonLipwig]

Had a lovely day out with the dds today. A real treat, out with friends, nice lunch, trip to the theatre. A lovely day. Came home and told dh all about it and how it was a bit of an extravagant treat and could he top the joint account up for the school holidays and he went up the wall.

Apparently I spend too much. Like I do that sort of thing every day. Then he started bringing other stuff into the row, stuff I'd already paid for with my own money. He's far better off than me and they're not just my children so why are they my financial responsibility when they're off school? He is the breadwinner and pays all the bills, I'm a sahm but I earn a little bit, enough to contribute here and there.

He's a high earner and we don't have any money worries. Well apart from the usual cost of living. He's just had a massive overtime pay cheque. He's not hard up. He says I spend too much - I don't - it's the bloody school holidays and the occasional trip out is nice.

So fed up of the continuous control over the purse strings. Apparently he's 'had to tell me' to reign it in. I've told him he's a miserable fucker who sucks the joy out of life and to fuck off. Why the fuck is it up to him? He's so like his father. He was a tight git too.

How can I move forward? We've just had a massive row. We hardly ever row. Whenever we do though it's about money. We never go out, we don't smoke or drink, we don't drive flash cars, we never go abroad. I buy a bit of pottery because it makes me fucking happy. More so than he does, just lately.

I can't give him too hard a time, I know he's very worried about his dad who's not well but Christ, if I get one more patronising lecture about money I might actually divorce him. I'd be better off if I did, I'd get half the house, the money and the pension!

[AttilaTheMeerkat]

From OPs initial post.

"He is the breadwinner and pays all the bills, I'm a sahm but I earn a little bit, enough to contribute here and there".

So she is working outside the home as well.

£120 as well spent across three people is not disproportionate either seeing as it was spent on matinee theatre tickets and meals.

[Muddlingthroughtoo]

I work part time and my husband has a good job. When we had children it was always assumed that I would be the one who dropped the hours and my career would be put on hold. We are both shift workers so getting child care is impossible.
He often brings things up though, like if my car is a bit dirty he freaks (despite his car being messy) and points out that he's the one paying for it. Also when he wanted to go away on an overnight trip, he pointed out that he could only afford for him and he's not paying for me (he didn't end up going).
It does piss me off for I contribute too, and if it wasn't for me ditching my chance of career advancement and staying at home then he would not have been able to have the job he has now.

[mouldycheesefan]

£50k is not a lot for a family of four.
The average income is ££33k so actually your household income is below average.
£120 of unbudgeted expenditure is quite a lot.
You sound like you leave all the finances to him. Make sure you understand the income and outgoing so. Agree a budget for school holidays.
£36k net income would soon be eaten up by mortgage, council tax, utilities, insurance, car expenses, groceries, etc etc
I think you don't understand the household budget and spend what you like and expect him to 'top it up" that is not an equal relationship.

[derxa]

I'd be better off if I did, I'd get half the house, the money and the pension!
God Almighty!

[Muddlingthroughtoo]

So my point is, if OP wasn't doing what she's doing, it would make life a lot harder for her OH.

[llhj]

You need to earn your own money. The days of sahp are over. There's too much resentment now, life has moved on. He can't bare they you're chilling out and spending 'his' money.
Going forward, sahparrnting has no traction once kids are in school and actually even before they hit school it's a dying model of family life.

[Joysmum]

I'd prefer one account for "our" money, but on the understanding that all big spends are negotiated

I couldn't think of anything worse and would never have a joint current account for everyday spending.

My DH consistently spends more a month than I do and it all adds up. I like to live frugally then spend lump sums. I do not want to be keeping tabs and gatekeeping money to work out what's fair!

Having equal spending money divided into seperate current accounts means we have our own budgets and know our spending is the same over time.

Why 'negotiate' big spends when my big spends aren't more than his continuous small spends. There's too much opportunity for disagreement if you can't spend without asking for permission or the intentions of the other person to know if you've got enough. Why not just have seperate current accounts so you know what you have?

[Blu]

A £50k household income with more than one child isn't one where £120 a day spends are insignificant, especially if there has already been one the previous week.

However, him behaving as if the money is his and he is in charge is an issue.

OP you say you asked him to top up the joint account. Top it up from where? Does he hang on to his earnings and allocate an amount to the joint account which he deigns to share? Or do you have savings accounts that only he has access to?

I would start with sitting down and budgeting with him how much things cost in the school hols, lunches need covering as no school
meals, activities etc.

But then you need a wider understanding from him about teamwork as a family, respect for all roles, trust about money, etc.

You may need to get support from Relate or suchlike to create an arena within which to explore those issues and have the discussion.

[redhat]

But why would you constantly be trying to work out was was "fair" joysmum? when its all in one pot you just make sensible joint financial decisions. DH and I had always had everything in one account. We don't sit down and say "oh you bought a cornetto last week, I now need to spend an extra £1.50 to even things up"

[davos]

This is one of those threads where I can see both points of view. Also a lot of what would make me decide is missing.

For example if the kids are at school, whose decision was it to be a sahp or continue to be a sahp. Personally if dh decided to be a sahp to our school aged kids, I wouldn't take the financial hit. We don't need a sahp and I would hate to be the sole bread winner.

Op says she earns a bit, has she opted to be a sahp and work for herself even though the business isn't raising much money. Is the financial pressure too much for the dh.

Or is the dh a twunt. I cant tell yet.


How much are the bills, travel cost etc?

Me and dh have joint and separate finances. Which works for us as we both earn the same. No way would I spend £120 on a day out and then expect him to top up my money.

I budget my own money. If I can't afford something, I can't afford it. Dh is the same.

I also have a relative who is a sahm, who constantly complains about them not having much money, but thinks nothing of spending £100 on a day out. She also has no idea of what bills cost and has left them with very little money or not even being able to pay bills. Which is a using problems between her and her dh. They have complete joint finances. But it's not working.

So joint finances don't always work out perfectly either.

[Twowrongsdontmakearight]

I'm in two minds about this. I've been a SAHM and even when I returned to work I earned a fraction of DH's salary. The money has always gone into a joint account and is joint money. DH earns and I spend in that I do the shopping, buy clothes for DC and DH etc.

We always expected costs to go up in the hols as we had lots of days out but I wouldn't have spent that much. That would have been three days worth of treats IYSWIM. Lunch out is a treat. Theatre is a treat. Dinner out is a treat. If we go to the theatre (DH isn't keen) then even now we'll eat at home first and just have ice cream there. We never made it to Alton Towers as the prices were too high (£100) even with cereal packets. If we had gone we'd have had to take a picnic as food out too would have been OTT.

So I can understand him being cross as two meals out in one days seem unnecessarily expensive and extravagant.

[HenryIX]

I think accusations of financial abuse and/or sahm not contributing are a bit OTT.
It seems to me that he possibly had a busy day, has been working overtime, and got home to a demand for money cos the op had spent lots on a day having fun. Perhaps he was just a bit pissed off at working hard and missing out, and it doesn't sound like op was v polite, just 'told ' him he had to give her more money.

I think a few hours to calm down and a sensible conversation should sort it all out.

[gamerchick]

I think if you go on this thread you would think that the sahp thing is now there with benefit scroungers.

[redhat]

Its nothing at all to do with the OP being a SAHM

Its to do with having sensible financial discussions about large purchases.

[Naicehamshop]

muddling - your DH needs a massive talking to! How dare he behave like that towards you? !

[Fairylea]

Mumsnet seems to be turning into a place where people hate sahps of children who are school age. If the op and her husband have decided that they are happy for them to have that arrangement then it's not for anyone else to judge. It's not the point of the thread. If the op had come on and written a post saying her dh resents her being a stay at home parent then that would welcome those kind of responses but it doesn't. It's about spending- a topic which affects all kinds of couples in all kinds of arrangements. We don't know the whole backstory or what the dh thinks about the op being a stay at home parent but people telling her to get a job is irrelevant and missing the point entirely. The op could have a full time job earning more or less than her dh and the disagreement could still be there.

[Sidge]

Joysmum I meant one account for family spending. "Our money" meaning money to be spent on the whole family.

Pearlman she's not at home with 2 young preschool children (which IS a slog). She's out for the day having lunch, dinner and going to the theatre with older children. Hardly comparable to slogging it out at work.

[Donthate]

I agree that you probably think he has more money available than he does. You should have mentioned the day out before you went and budgeted it in.

I was a sahp while the Dec were little and sh was on that kind of wage. It was ok but much easier now I'm working again.

[davos]

He isn't GIVING her money. Jesus.

but he is if both decided this money set up.

This isn't the relevant factor. OP is a SAHP. We have no reason to believe this isn't a mutually agreed model for their family.

but we have no reason to assume it is mutually agreed either. May be he would prefer it if she went back to work. Which is why I said there is information missing that could change my point of view. That is one of the things that could change my point of view.