Just how much is a stay at home wife and mother worth in a divorce?

[JFDIYOLO]

Reading some stories today of women in middle age whose husbands suddenly announce they are divorcing them - and that because the wives never had a 'proper job' or brought in any income while creating their family and home life, they are not entitled to any financial settlement ...

I got to thinking just what jobs SAH women do in a marriage, and what it would cost their husbands to hire in those services, if they did not have that free labour under their roof?

These home roles spring to mind ...

Surrogacy / adoption costs and fees if applicable where you are
Nanny
Nurse
First aider
Childminder / babysitter
Chauffeur
Social secretary and kinkeeper
Medical secretary
PA
Housekeeper
Shopper and grocery delivery service
Cook
Scullery maid / pot washer
Waitress
Cleaner
Laundry and ironing service
Gardener
Dog walker / dog trainer / pet sitter
Mediator / negotiator
Teacher
Dressmaker
Interior designer / decorator

Just noticed many of these roles could come under Downton Abbey-type paid service jobs.

Then multiply that by the number of years of marriage, to arrive at a realistic sum for an invoice ...

In these divorce cases, might it be worth having this kind of calculation done as a matter of course?

What's missing?

Depends on the field. Plenty of governmental pushing to ‘woo’ SAHPs back to the workforce generally, especially ex-teachers, who are graduate/masters level. Free counselling re-training courses available in certain areas which are fully government funded at times during the day specifically aimed at Mums on the school run.

Perhaps some companies/employers/recruiters need to ask themselves why they look down their noses at unpaid carers with varied skill sets and re-visit their own inclusive recruitment policies in this day and age. It’s as bad as not hiring someone who is pregnant or older.

Maybe for some jobs. I have a SAHM friend who has only been out of the workforce for 3 years but her industry has moved on so much that she is really struggling to get something else. Luckily it isn’t an issue for her family at the moment but she is finding it really upsetting and worrying.

Same here, I work shifts so when I’m in work, I’m in work for long hours and then I get set days off where I do everything there except garden because I’m fairly incapable in that department so DH handles it. We also run a small business on the side.

I never missed a school event and mine are in their late teens now. One of them even came on work experience to my place as he intends to follow me into the job, which is lovely.

I think having one parent as a SAHM is fantastic when the dc are young but don’t always understand the value of it once the dc are more independent and the financial support is of more use to the family. It’s stressful being the only earner in the family and the university years will be expensive, I’d prefer my DH not to have to take that burden on alone when I am perfectly capable of sharing.

Well that’s an issue her workforce should be addressing in this day and age. A re-visit of their attitudes and induction policy sounds needed. Hope she’s OK and there will definitely be something else out there for her where she’ll be appreciated when she’s ready.

When my kids were young my DH and I had a row about this in relation to his needing to take out life insurance to cover me if I died. He was initially dismissive until I wrote out on a piece of paper how much it would cost him to hire 2 nannies (he works long hours and travels with his job), register with an emergency nanny service for when either of those were sick/on holiday/left suddenly, cleaners, laundry service, decorators (as he’d not have time for that and I do it all)… all just to ensure he could continue to do his job, pursue a high flying career and retain custody of his children. His parents were present and started adding to the list.

He took out life insurance of half a million in the end as we estimated he would need at least that to get the support he’d need until the kids were old enough to get themselves to school and take care of themselves at home alone. And even then, he’d have had to find a way to arrange childcare when he travels.

After that I stopped feeling guilty about treating myself to decent make up at the Clarins/Clinique counter as I realised I ‘earned’ it… he has his career and a family because I facilitated it.

The judges take the family role that women have performed into account when agreeing the financial settlement. Most family court judges are women.

I applaud you for recognising and celebrating the full worth of your huge contribution towards your marriage, family income and children. Fantastic!

And actually my comment didn’t say anything about the ability of SAHPs to go back to work, just that if you’re unmarried without independent means you are putting yourself in a very vulnerable position. I’m surprised this is news.

Even if it is easy to go back to work after 7 years or 17 years (which I don’t think is the case for most professional careers) having to do so in the event of a relationship breakdown where you have been left with nothing is a very different prospect from choosing to take on a different role for a while.

Perhaps some companies/employers/recruiters need to ask themselves why they look down their noses at unpaid carers with varied skill sets

But this is what we're trying to explain... working parents have all the same skill sets. Our gardens might not be as thrivingly landscaped but we still do broadly all the same categories of tasks as a sahp does, we just work as well.

There's very little, if any, unique skills a SAHM can demonstrate to an employer that a working mum can't also demonstrate. The difference being that the working mum also has recent relevant industry experience, which is obviously going to be important.

Sure, a school might want to woo ex teachers back into teaching. Not as much as the school will want to woo a current teacher into their vacancy, I assure you.

She doesn’t have a ‘workforce’! She is a SAHM looking for a new job in the area she had previously worked in.

No one will give her a job at the moment - induction policies and attitudes are entirely irrelevant when she’s not even getting past the interview stage. The employers are not doing anything wrong by not hiring her, but it is not at all easy to walk back into a lot of careers.

I have younger children, so can’t comment fully on older children. I can only imagine things do shift as they get older and more independent, I’m already seeing a shift in that now they are at school, hence why I’ve returned to some study/work. It goes without saying life is insanely expensive for everyone right now.

I have been surprised recently though by working Mum friends with older children stepping back at the end of primary/during secondary school. They are saying they feel more needed than ever emotionally/for mental health reasons. I do worry ahead about this. I guess we may always be needed at some point more than we can plan for.

There have been some attempts to quantify this - for cases where the wife has died, maybe in a RTA and the insurers are asked to pay out. Examples https://freedomsprout.com/stay-at-home-spouse/ and https://www.smitheconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/05-chapter5.pdf Also relevant to how much a husband might want to insure his wife for.

I’ve read some application forms which explicitly state that they want full details about your home/child/family commitments which explain gaps. It’s very inclusive and thinking of them.

Or does it make people happier to think anyone who has taken time out should never return? That’s really spiteful if so, and it particularly towards women.

You need to think about what their financial contribution would have been in employment, had they not had to give up work and stay at home to look after children. There is also the matter of the workplace pension contributions they have not been able to make, and all the years they have missed in paying NI contributions towards their state pension.

In any case, both parents have been making a contribution to family life and running the home/looking after children. The contribution is different (one being financial and the other not) but that should not make a difference. Someone who has had to give up their career to support the other should not be penalised for doing so.

Until that convo I kind of felt I should be grateful for being allowed to be a SAHM. It wasn’t until I did the cost analysis that I realised the ‘opportunity cost’ of my absence. We’d both decided I would be a SAHP as we did not live near family (I don’t have any anyway) so we knew we’d be raising a family/making a home together unsupported but we really hadn’t worked out the finances. Being a FT SAHM is so looked down on, even where (like us) we have children with ND issues that made getting a job impossible. I am taking my eldest to university today, the youngest goes nest year and I am now finally wondering whether I can get a job of some sorts for the final ten years before the state pension is payable! I am probably a bit more replaceable… but not telling DH in case he cancels that life insurance policy LOL

Their loss then- she’ll find something better for her which aligns better with her family values. I’d never work anywhere which didn’t respect the time I’ve put into being a wife and mother, that’s for sure. I’ve already achieved that. Any conflict or disrespect though, and I won’t hesitate to resign again.

That's not how it works - the husband would never employ all these people if he was e.g. suddenly widowed and a single father. Just like a single mother never does all these jobs. They do what they think is essential e.g. kids are fed and clothed, frozen food heated in the oven/microwave, looked after by a grandma after school or in a club. And that's it. Hardly anybody hires a cleaner or a cook(!).
It's really not essential for a parent to stay full-time at home once the children are at school.
If you want to find out what happens, go to see your parents for 1-2 weeks and leave kids with dad. I guarantee he will not pay for help unless it's really essential.

I would never dream of putting myself in the position of being a SAHM because men aren't men any more. They don't want to look after a wife and family.
You have to be prepared to go it alone with half of marriages failing.
Look at my mother, put up with affairs and other unspeakable things which I can't talk about and is now living in a gilded cage for the rest of her life entirely dependant on her husband. She has no pension because she's never worked, no life of her own, no money of her own.
I'd never trust a man. I've always worked. I'd sooner rely on benefits than a man, not that I need to.

Listing it like this makes it sound like the M nevet wanted kids and just provided the service for the D....

She doesn’t have a ‘workforce’! She is a SAHM looking for a new job in the area she had previously worked in.

No one will give her a job at the moment.

Once your friend gets out of the mindset that she needs to get back into the same area she previously worked in, she might end up fine. That's what happened to me after several years off, nobody would hire me in my old field so I just went to the job centre, they were great and I had part time work literally less than a month later. I'm doing just fine now, albeit in a totally different field!

In a divorce, the priority is to

a) ensure each party has a fair division of the assets to enable them each to be self-supporting and basic needs met. If the husband has better job prospects that the wife, that is a factor included as part of the financial split. pension pots are now part of divorce settlements, because the court consider that if the man was in more regular stable employment than the wife due to child care, then the wife would be entitled to a share of that pot so they ringfence x % for each party.

b) consider the financial needs of any children to ensure their needs are met, including the care split between parents.

your original post is irrelevant to that level of detail, that isn't what the courts consider.

It isn’t free of charge though, is it? Instead of paying a childminder/ nursery the working parent is paying the full living costs of the SAHP.

Nobody is forced to become a SAHP. Everyone knows this makes you financially vulnerable unless you have a lot of independent wealth. Divorce settlements already reflect future earning capacity so disadvantage the main earner. Those most disadvantaged by divorce are actually women who are the main earner but also the main carer (as most women are regardless of whether they earn more) because the law presumes you are one or the other.

It’s just plain silly to list out standard household tasks that every household does - including lone parents who also work full time! - and try to equate these to a professional service and pretend adults are doing that in their own homes. If that was the case would SAHPs be happy to sign contracts setting out their tasks and responsibilities, be required to report on the work they’ve completed, be required to follow instructions on work priorities for their day or week regardless of their own preferences, be subject the performance reviews and disciplinary procedures and performance improvement plans if deemed to be underperforming? You can’t have it both ways, saying that both roles are equal and then try to pretend household tasks are performed in an equivalent way to how they’d be completed by a paid service provider without any of the requirements and restrictions being a paid contractor/ employee entails.

She doesn’t have to work at all but wants to now that her children will be leaving home in 2 years time. She would like to work in the area she had 20 years’ experience in and was very good at, but it seems to be virtually impossible for returners to go in at that career level.

There are certainly jobs she could do and do brilliantly if she had to work, but saying that time out makes no difference in a professional career is just not true.

You missed sex out. That doesn't come cheap or without risk if they pay.

Most of the working mums that I know pay for quite a bit of child care and cleaning or their DH does a very large share at home. A lot of the house admin gets done from work including bill paying, holiday organising, appointment scheduling and family present buying (At Christmas time our reception area at work is full of Amazon deliveries).

I certainly put myself into this category. I don’t do anything extra for wider family and nothing for my in-laws. Most household jobs take months to get sorted.

Apart from on MN, I never come across these working mums who seem be able to do everything a SAHM does and work full time.