Dh resents my lack of ambitions… DS is 3 yo

[Blipblopblap]

Dh and I have a 3 year old son who is due to start morning school nursery soon. I currently work 2.5 days a week and Dh is full time self employed. He earns a lot and we’re comfortable at the moment but we don’t like where we live and want to move to a different area and get a bigger house. Dh actually hates our house… it’s a new build and the neighbours are a nightmare, the parkings atrocious, the house itself is pretty naff… it makes him super angry every single day.
I have an ordinary type of job and the money is poor. I don’t pay anything towards bills but I pay for childcare and bits and bobs like clothes and toys and the like.
Recently arguments have been brewing. He’s clearly resenting me that we rely so heavily on his earnings. He says for us to move to a bigger and better house I need to be working and earning more to help cover the bills should he be out of work (his work is contract based).
The only thing is then we would need a lot more childcare. And i love the routine I have at the moment and the thought of seeing my son a lot less literally makes me cry. I’m sure other mothers will understand this but he really doesn’t get it.
It’s all come to a head and he has threatened to sell up and get a divorce due to my “lack of ambition.” I don’t want this. He gets frustrated because Im not a career person but he has known this since he met me 14 years ago. But he is so unhappy in this house it’s making him ill, he’s desperate to move which is why there is so much pressure on me. I’ve told him I’ll do whatever it takes so I’m going to start looking at better jobs/courses etc. I just wanted to see what you all thought. As a mother to a young child it just feels wrong. But clearly it’s what my relationship needs.

It’s certainly not. At our daycare (like most in the country) there are two uni (3,5 years) educated teachers + one with a shorter education. The standard is very, very high and the teachers are always updated on the latest research etc. It’s excellent! Our 1-year olds has already been taught sign language..

I actually absolutely love that - especially since I've heard knowing some signs makes communication easier for children who cannot speak yet (forming words is harder than hand gestures)

but even a regular daycare providers better experience in terms of development than playgroups alone

Yes it is pretty cool. They can’t yet use their word, or not many, but they can still sign that they would like more milk, go outside or which song the would like to sing.

No, the only couple I know who both continue to work full time in very senior, fantastically well paid high profile jobs do this. Everyone else we know from university days now have either one or occasionally both parents working in a lower profile / lower hours job to accommodate family life. It tends to be the woman but not always. Boarding schools such as Rugby, Winchester, Wycombe Abbey etc have an awful lot of London professionals amongst the parents.

there are people who simply are not that fond of their children and will pay any money they have to not have to take cara of them but that's definitely not a standard rule.

Even people in a very high up positions that I know spend time with their kids and many have moved to remote work to have more time for their families

Quite. For example, today I did the nursery drop off and pick up, just finished bath and bedtime and am now logging on again to finish working. There’s a big difference between juggling a full time job with family life and not actually wanting to spend time with your kids.

But again, most people who work full time do not work 60 hours per week, plus travel. Nor do they need to travel all the time. My CEO (Huge UK based company) doesn't do those hours and his kids are adults.

I have a long term aortmer now who helps me out with my youngest if I have to travel. But as its UK I always go and come back in a day. Both me and the CEO may have a few weeks where it's 60 hours, but it's not the norm and not day in day out.

Are you saying that all your friends who work, work 60 hours plus travel? And travel where they don't come home at night, very regularly too? That's normal to you? And you only know 1 couple who both work and other happen to have jobs that make them extreme outliers.

And this couples set up is what surprises you that so many other people manage it? Your example is an extreme one and not one you can't take it as the norm.

That like me saying i am surprised that so many people make being sahp work and have healthy, happy kids because I knew Shannon Matthews mother and she is the only sahp I have known and was an awful sahp. Do you see? Taking an extreme example and then faking surprise that not everyone is the same as that extreme version.

I’m intrigued by how 2 married lawyers who are partners in a city law firm make it work. The average working hours are 11 -12 hours a day and as I understand it most are back in the office pretty much full time. A nanny can’t do more than 60 hours a week so adding in the commute and evening social and work commitments how do couples like this do it?

same at my step daughter's school - the two showings are due to limited space and tickets are limited. So the assumption is that one parent attends only one show

Exactly, and I don't think that's a bad thing.
I danced competitively as a child and my parents couldn't attend every competition because of the cost. My mum was a SAHM and we really struggled financially. I never resented my parents for not attending absolutely everything.

I don’t think that’s true, every law firm I have worked with (in a professional capacity) recently in London has some form of hybrid strategy. For some that’s 3 days a week, for some that’s only 1!

But again constantly going on about 2 lawyers in the city is a bit disingenuous when discussing working parents as anything close to the hours you are talking about is far, far from the norm.

OP, you are paying bills if you’re paying for childcare and clothes and bits and bins. All of those should be joint expenses.

Few things to consider:

1. how much extra will childcare be for you to work full time?
2. how much is holiday cover going to cost?
3. are you going to be solely funding the increased childcare costs?
4. is there availability at nursery etc or will you have to find a new provider?
5. who will do drop offs/pickups? If you’re going to have to do them all, will you be able to find a job near childcare or will that time be added onto your day?
6. who will be responsible for being off when DS is ill?
7. will your DH cover childcare/housework etc if you need to do training/qualifications to further your career to fulfil his wish for you to be more ambitious?

How come you live in a new build he hates? Did he not see it before buying it? I wouldn’t be bending over backwards to accommodate anyone who threatened me with divorce because I lacked ambition. Yes it’s good to want more for your family but not at one partners expense. If he was going to take on more at home while you train etc then ok. How much does he do at the moment with housework etc? Is he too busy and stressed to do anything around the house? If you’re both working full time then you need to have equal down time, do equal shares of childcare and equal housework. Pushing yourself to work FT while still doing all the mum stuff so your DH can move to a different house isn’t on.

Ok, I’ll go away now but my friends at Magic Circle firms all seem to be in the office (the ones who are partners anyway) and as I said, my dh still does the same job I used to do. He spends one week a month at least travelling and this seems pretty normal for his peer group. We both used to work 60 hours a week in the office and it was a nightmare after we had children for obvious reasons.

I certainly never meant to suggest it was the norm!

Another thought is the cost-benefit. Is the op working an extra 2.5 days going o make a significant difference? Or is the op going to have to retrain or upskill?
Is she able to do so? How will that affect the family structure?
The other point is people should actually work out what their income is after expenses, most people would be should, after expenses and travel the majority aren't bringing home much more than min wage for an adult.
Wage slaves.

Arrg typo city.
I meant to say would be shocked after expenses not, 'Should'-going to not 'O'.

I can tell you with certainty that pretty much all the magic circle firms have flexible working and don’t require 5 days in the office.
If you know tonnes of people working as partners in a magic circle firm and working 70 hour weeks in the office then they have a very dated concept of work, are pushing presenteeism and are definitely not contracted to do it.

My ex threatened divorce to get his own way twice so I kicked him out. I dont much appreciate having my marriage shat on so he could get his own way.
Is he prepared to do half of all housework and child care if you work full time or are you expected to do that?

Most are not back in the office almost full time. The standard is still a 60/40 split. If a couple alternates their wfh days you can cover most of the week so that a parent is home when the child arrives home from school.

Why would a nanny need to do more than 60 hours a week? Most kids go to private schools and tend to do after school sports and music or homework clubs which help with childcare whilst providing the child with a benefit. Nanny then does school pick up if parents are not around or child is not old enough for school bus. Nanny might then sort dinner until parents get home or, if there is a work emergency, the nanny stays longer.

Other ways of making it work:

Catch up once kids are in bed.

Take it in turns to have long days.

Senior lawyers also have a great deal of flexibility which allows them to attend kids’ events during the day because taking a 2hr lunch is more than made up at some point.

most people, even childless, would absolutely not want to work 60h a week. and most dont

On the working FT front, it is absolutely achievable to work FT and still be a good parent. I don't know many people who gave up work after having children. Some of my friends went PT for a while then up to FT. A good number just resumed their FT jobs. Mostly because their family finances required it.

Children adapt very quickly to circumstances, and the younger your child is when you revert to FT working, the less it will bother them IME.

I'm not saying there's a right and a wrong way. Just that being a SAHP isn't the only way, and your child will be fine whatever you do.

All that aside, keep watch on your DH's treatment of you. If he's going back on a previous agreement / if he's giving you grief daily about the house / if he's hankering for a house that's much more expensive than you actually need / if there's a chance he'll just find something else to moan about once you've moved - you have a DH problem.

But he chooses a job where he spends approx 25% of his time away? There’s plenty of high flying jobs that aren’t. That’s a choice yes? If you both chose to work, he may have chose a different path? And you would have managed.

and I know loads of very senior people who have partners who travel. And still work. One of our Most Senior directors, regular schedules his work around his wife who has to travel to Europe. Kids never went to boarding school.

Apart from when his wife is out of the country they both ensure they are home on an evening.

If you don’t want to do it, don’t. It’s fine, but let’s not fake surprise that anyone can manage it or pretend that most people couldn’t manage it because your friends who all seem to work for magic circle firms but in the most demanding jobs, with the most hours, most travel.

Its really bizarre.

Being a SAHM is what you make of it. You cannot convince me that nursery ratios will EVER provide the same level of care that a motivated and educated SAHP would.

But like others have said, if finances are such that both parents have to work, that's a different scenario.

i do not believe that any SAHM provides the quality of education / developmental care that a trained professional can...unless she is a trained professional herself. Most do what you said they do - to go playground and playground and call it "socialising"

@PaintedEgg i call it socialising because that's what it is. When I was at playgroups, I wasn't hovering over my child (once they were comfortable in the setting anyway) and the same kids were generally there every week. But I was certainly on hand to get involved if another kid snatched a toy away or if another child hit mine. Seeing how adults deal with those situations is how they learn. And I want my kids to learn my way of doing things, not the way of a nursery worker.

That is exactly it. You only know what you know. You simply can’t broaden the horizons in the same way, and your child is not you.

Best of both worlds would be great.