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?

I still breastfeed my ds at bedtime... just imagining snapping at my dh "if I wasn't doing this you'd have to pay a wetnurse"! Surprised that didn't make it onto op's list

Just googled these... they exist!
"Experience with graphic design, for example birthday invitations"

Annoys me that people say it’s a ‘choice’ to be a SAHM when financially it may be the ONLY choice. When I was pregnant I was on a £75k in the city. A high salary by MN standards, esp 20 years ago. However, I had to be on a train at 7am and rarely got home before 730pm. To maintain that I’d have needed a FT nanny 5 days a week. At £22/hr that comes to over £70k (so also likely to covered by two nannies because of the 48hr working rules and to provide holiday and sick cover). After tax and train fare/season ticket I cleared £48k, so OBVIOUSLY the sensible decision was to become a SAHP and support my DH in furthering his career.

As it turned out both my kids are on the spectrum/ADHD and needed significant support, including homeschooling one for nearly a year when there was no local state school provision. One of them had severe tonsillitis 7 times in a two year period that would have likely led to me being fired/made redundant as it took that many episodes/courses of antibiotics before she was referred to have them removed. DH has never been able to take time off work for the DC’s illness and we have noone else. Even working PT has not been possible, so aside from a brief period of childminding my focus has HAD to be on my kids and the pressures of childcare costs have framed our decisions. Thing is, I know I’m not an extreme case - lots of my friends have had no support from GPs who are either still working, too elderly, or gallivanting around the world on cruises enjoying their retirement. We’ve all had to try and help each other where we can, but I now many mothers who gave up corporate jobs or their own businesses because they simply could not manage them and deal with speech therapists, OT, long drives to special schools etc.

As a SAHM I’ve hardly spent the last 20 years watching day time tv, going to the gym or pilates, or ‘lunching’. I’ve supported two young people into a position where one has finally started uni today, the other will hopefully follow next year; I’ve taken a modest 3/4 bed ramshackle and neglected home and tripled it’s value through extension and renovation; I’ve picked up 2 degrees so far (hopefully a 3rd, a PhD, by next summer) and am hoping I might start work after that as a 16+teacher once they are both settled in uni. And I’ve done all this while ensuring the man I met at 23 has gone on to have stellar career in his field in the knowledge that I have everything covered at home and his kids are prioritised.

But, yeah, SAHM are just women making lifestyle choices that mean they are lazy and have nothing going on between their ears, apparently.

ETA ie people make choices based on their individual circumstances and it is no-one’s place to judge or denigrate a women for being a SAHM

He’d have the same options that everyone else has: to get a more family friendly job, or make arrangements with other families locally to care for each other’s children on different days, or pay for childcare and as I said, after school doesn’t cost £80 per day like the post I was responding to had claimed. The contention that somebody would be unable to work at all without a stay at home parent to collect their children from school is absurd.

I never get this argument that WOHMs use, that they are being positive role models to their daughters by working?

DM was a SAHM, because she didn’t get a proper education and left school at 15 with no qualifications - because her parents thought it was a waste of money her going to a grammar school, because all girls could do was become a secretary! They sent her to a useless private school instead.

I didn’t need her to be a role model for me. I was brought up with the idea that I was going to grammar school, university and into a profession - all the male members of the family had gone into medicine. My grammar school had exactly the same attitude - either girls went to work at Woolworths (laughter at the very idea) or university. There was nowhere in between for most of us! That’s what I did.

Ditto DH except he came from a Northern working class family, who didn’t have two half pennies to rub together - but his parents, who had no qualifications between them, pushed all three of their DC to go to university; and they did!

Right....she wanted you have to a different life. So not like the other posters talking about how infinitely valuable being a SAHM is then?!

These are roles of mother and housewife, which are done alongside working by many, so I don't think they can be admitted for payment purposes?

Assets are surely the only viable things that can be counted.

Miaow

I can't wait to apply for jobs and list all this as my experience 🤣🤣

Most single men wouldn't bother with a surrogate if they were single, but surely it's exactly the same as you'd do if you had a job. My working friends had their own babies, funnily enough.

You can't have Nanny and Child minder seperatly listed. It is the one role I'd agree with though. Single working fathers or working couples usually pay to outsource childcare in the early years / wrap around care etc. I went out to work full time, what I'd earn would be swallowed up by childcare costs though so it cancels itself out. I'd only pay my half, but I'd also be paying half the other bills too. He doesn't pay for childcare, I don't pay mortgage and utilities.

Nurse / medical secretary etc. Nonsense. And I say that as someone with a child with additional medical needs. What I do doesn't come anywhere near what a nurse or medical secretary does, and I'd still have to do it all if I worked / we'd share it as much as we do now. Yes I do the hospital visits, but one of us would have to regardless. You can't outsource that.

Chauffeur, working parents usually have to do some type of chauffeuring even if it's to childcare, and most will have to do tons outside of school / weekends. I don't know any working parents who outsource that.

Social secretary / PA again, surely the same role? Who do you think sorts this out in a working couple? Them. Exactly the same as in a one adult working home.

Housekeeper / cleaner / scullery maid / pot wash - all roses by another name. Yes you're doing more if you're home with the kids all day, but see above re childcare. What it would cost to clean the house if I wasn't there balances out with the bills I'm not paying.

Cook / waitress - maybe an extra meal a day of the kids are at home but otherwise, do you not eat if you work??

Laundry / ironing service - I don't know many working couples who pay someone else to do this. There might be a few, but I expect there a few SAHMs who do too if they can afford it from their husbands wags.

Gardener - if you're doing more gardening than a typical working couple, it's choice / a hobby

Dog walker / trainer / sitter - do I get less divorce money if I don't have a pet??

Mediator / negotiator - you mean parenting??

Teacher - do you mean homeschooling? That's USUALLY a choice the h/s makes. Otherwise, it comes under the aforementioned Nanny role / parenting we all do.

Interior designer/ decorator - how many average wages couples do you know who pay out for an interior designer? I'll concede you might be more inclined to pay for decorators if you both work full time, but I'd say it's just as likely the bloke is doing it in either couple when he's not in work

Not catty, just fact. It's like me saying that I do everything that a professional FT cleaner does because I clean my own house. I probably do roughly the same activities to keep my house clean but the scale is completely different. It's not a moral judgement!

Arguably a woman working 40 hours a week to pay their share of the bills is not providing the same amount of childcare (and the associated tie ins as per ops list) as a SAHM, especially if the children are pre school.

Wow what an unfeminist statement from someone that probably sees themselves as a feminist! Your post simply alludes to the fact that the domestic and childcare workload is so unevenly split at a cultural level that we now don't value this contribution at all whether it's done by a working mother or SAHM. Women are far more likely to make career sacrifices to support the family. This is every bit as important to the family unit as financial contributions and can support the well-being of everyone involved, especially young children. Conveniently though according to you, assets funded through financial contribution should be the only thing that counts? This is wonderful for men and terrible for women (working and non working) as a population but you don't care about this? Anything to screw over SAHPs.

Helping on all school trips and at school events, being a parent governor who is actively involved (getting to know all parents through daily conversation).

That's bollocks, I work FT and would be the only parent offering to go on school trips 🙄

No, of course they aren’t physically providing the same hours of childcare, changing the same number of nappies or cooking the exact same number of lunches as they would be if their child didn’t go to nursery/ childminder/ nanny for some of the time.

But the actual raising of children as has been said before on this forum is more than the sum of hours spent changing nappies, playing peek a boo or cooking their lunch. The parents are by far the central people, whether one, both or neither work. raising happy, well balanced children isn’t dependent on one parent stopping work. It’s a choice for some families but that doesn’t make it a better choice per se. It’s a different choice. The very fact that the OP cant just say ‘some women get to middle age without having a proper job’ but has to dress it up as if they’re some super human, multi tasking, medical professional/ social secretary, peace negotiator yadda yadda says it all really.

OK, OP, some mums get to middle age and have never had a proper job. Other mums get to middle age and have raised their children into happy successful grown ups while also having their own career and pension. Quite frankly, the real issue isn’t trying to big up what the non working woman has done, it’s questioning why the hell she’s allowed herself to get into such a precarious position. Working mums wouldn’t give a second thought to that list of roles the OP reels off… they just get on and do it!

You can tell exactly how much it’s valued in a divorce court according to how much spousal maintenance you get. That used to be much more common than it now is, because of the expectation on women to work.

Nobody forced me, I adored my FIL and wanted to help. It is to do with being a SAHM/homemaker- most people associate the role with looking after your own children or cleaning, but it actually means you give your time willingly to provide care for wider family members and neighbours too. You are time rich, and that time should be shared wisely and shared to better the lives of those around you. That is the truest sense of home making.

Have you spent a significant amount of time daily caring for someone who can’t stand up, is in agony, on multiple medications which need carefully timing and administering, every drink and meal prepared, friendly conversation to distract them from pain, cannot do anything around their house? Its not something that can be conveniently fitted in around a demanding FT career.

Do you have any idea of the cost this type of care in the home costs to outsource? I can assure you that it is enormously high, and not easy at all to afford for many.

Anyone caring for a spouse/elderly relative at this level undeniably saves their family a substantial amount of money. Do some research on it.

I used those terms because OP shares she has been a mother and housewife. Believe me I am completely pro equality in all forms and assumed most would relate the response to the question.

I don't and won't decipher the misinterpretations that could be construed from fact derived assertion.

A bit frustrated by the idea that being a SAHM and reliant on spousal income is antifeminist
.
Feminism is about equality of opportunities and choices - the fact that a woman should be able to choose whether to stay at home or return to work (FT or PT) in consultation with her chosen life partner, who should have similar choices (ie men should be able to choose to reduce their hours or take a parenting sabbatical with no repercussions in the work place). It’s about the work that women do when they are FT mothers/home makers being recognised, respected and VALUED. I highlight that last word because from many of the posts here, it is clear that it isn’t valued - either vis a vis paid employment or in its own right. There is no recognition that many women have no extended family to support them (and their partner) in the raising of their children, no understanding that every woman’s experience of motherhood is different, that many many children have specific and complex individual needs that make booking their child into expensive FT childcare so that they can return to work is a pipe dream.

What feminism was supposed to be about was understanding individual differences in the lives, cultures and needs of women in society - and changing that society to support them in the decisions they make, by broadening the opportunities available and making different forms of childcare and working practices for both men and women to support modern families.

Feminism is about equality of opportunities and choices - the fact that a woman should be able to choose whether to stay at home or return to work (FT or PT) in consultation with her chosen life partner, who should have similar choices (ie men should be able to choose to reduce their hours or take a parenting sabbatical with no repercussions in the work place).

@CautiousLurker01 That’s how I’ve always viewed feminism as well, equality of opportunities and choices. What people choose is up to them, I’m not going to dictate what’s “feminist” or not, it’s none of my business.

With your role as full time carer, keeping two beautifully landscaped gardens, running the PTA, marshalling school trips etc. sounds like you actually have less time to spend with your kids than many working parents!

I find it baffling how some SAHMs reel off this enormous list of jobs they’re apparently doing yet still claim their children have top quality, engaged care 100% of the day. In some ways it could be argued that nursery is actually better some of the time as they have someone fully engaged and doing activities with them rather than ploughing through endless piles of laundry and social calendar arranging that apparently needs doing.

Not at all. My children were the primary focus aged 0-4. My day/week was carefully blocked out around their schedule, ie majority of mornings at a play group/with their Nana/at the park/swimming/with friends/doing lovely indoor/outdoor activities at home. I set up my whole house and garden to facilitate their learning, development and interests at each age and stage.

They enjoyed doing the weekly shop with me. Housework during naps or housework/gardening alongside them playing, just at a slower pace. Society is so keen to rush children along, to shuttle them constantly from thing to thing, place to place, missing opportunities to truly connect via relaxed conversation and shared moments. My children have always been involved with cooking, tidying toys, loading the washing machine, raking and watering the garden, etc. It is very important that they understand how to properly care for their own home, it’s everything. They also are being brought up to understand the importance of spending time with and caring for their elderly relatives. We do things in-house, all care of young and old is done at home.

Any time and energy I have goes into my own home and family, it’s a beautiful, peaceful way of life.

As has been said many times before, what should this value of SAHM look like? You would have thought that the woman doing it, and her partner who presumably wants this set up and supports her financially, are the ones who should value it. Why does it matter to anyone else? Surely the value should come from the parents involved?

tbh I don’t care at all what other set up families choose. I chose to continue my work while raising my children into wonderful, happy adults, as did my DH. Some of my friends did the same, some stopped work. We have all raised our children into happy, well rounded adults, which is surely what matters.

my sense of value from work came from professional appraisals, clients, and of course from my salary and pension, as you would expect. I certainly didn’t expect anyone else to be telling me how amazing it was that I had a job. Likewise I didn’t expect people to tell me I was amazing because I was parenting 3 children. Dh didn’t expect it either.

I honestly think most people just get on and live their life without agonising over what others do. To return to the OP, if a woman has got to middle age without having had a proper job, presumably she and her partner found value in that situation. They chose that set up (obvious disclaimer if there’s been coercion on either side to get that set up.)

As much as her lawyer can get.

You sound fab tbh The sort of SAHM who would be able to hold a really interesting conversation that didn't revolve around homemaking which doesn't fascinate me at all.

I totally agree that women should feel free to choose their path in life. Some have no choice and financial necessity means they juggle. Some have choices they might never have planned (adapting to children with SEN or ill health)

I think the issue employed parents have is with the idea that SAHM are immediately wonderfully skilled homemakers and parents. A bit like employees it's fairly variable and most employees don't get to do their own PDR as many would be wildly inaccurate about their performance 🙂

You can also be a great engaged parent and a good employee. I was on the PTA, read in school with the class, went on school trips as parent help, worked full time, did a PgD and a MSc and also ran marathons, dabbled in triathlons. I was also a carer for elderly parents and a sibling. This was over the course of several years not all at once. When the children were young I just hoped to sleep... I renovated a house, landscaped the garden but was a lazy cook. I've ended up with a great pension, a fab career and five lovely adults (who I nurtured and still do). I was a single mother for part of this and tbh life was pretty tough. I guess it's this experience that makes me chuckle at the idea of SAHM being able to list accomplishments as if they are unique.

But....we all have our own paths in life and I probably wouldn't have chosen mine as it was pretty hard work. It has however rewarded me in so many ways and one of the biggest is my financial independence and relationship with my DC who respect what I did.

Your life path is different but in many ways similar having pushed beyond the hum drum. Anyone caring for a child with SEN gets my full admiration

What in the 1950s is a homemaker? 🤣

I haven’t personally had to provide full-time care for an adult, but my partner recently cared for his mum through cancer, and my grandmother needs round-the-clock support so I do have some idea of what it involves. My mum and her sisters manage whilst having senior full-time jobs. Fortunately, in Scotland we have free personal care, so the idea that you’re “saving the family substantial money” doesn’t stack up. What you’re actually doing is giving up a full wage and losing years of pension contributions, which leaves you financially worse off in the long run. It's a financial hit to the family pot, not a gain.

It’s important work, yes. It’s emotionally heavy, yes. Romanticising it as some noble choice doesn't help anyone. The key is most women don't choose between caring and working, they do both.
Pretending unpaid family responsibility is some stand-alone role just erases the reality that millions of women are already carrying that exact load and turning up to paid employment every day. Let’s not dress it up as anything else.