Are attitudes to SAHM mothers on here overly negative?

[Anonfortoday2]

I’ve been reading through the replies to my recent post about being a SAHM, and I’m honestly just a bit saddened by how negative people are about it.
So many of the responses were filled with really extreme, worst case what if scenarios. Things like what if he leaves you, what if he financially abuses you, or what if the worst happens and you are left with nothing?
It feels a bit exhausting to look at life that way. Of course, nobody knows what the future holds, but you can’t live your life constantly planning for absolute disaster.
It's often made out like SAHMs don't have a brain cell between them, but so many of us are actually completely financially safe. Lots of couples have the property in both names, and arrange private pensions and savings accounts in the mum's own name so she is fully protected.
If anything, some SAHM setups are much more financially secure than a two-income family. So many working couples have a massive mortgage that they absolutely could not afford if they separated, meaning they'd have to sell up anyway. In real life, I actually know more working couples who stay in terrible marriages simply because they can’t afford to live in the same area on their own.
People on here only ever focus on money, but they completely ignore how much value it brings to the household. My husband deeply appreciates me being at home because it removes a massive amount of stress from his life too. We don't have the constant headache of covering sick days, school holidays, or rushing around at bedtime. It makes the whole house run smoother.
Outside the Mumsnet echo chamber, so many families are completely happy with this setup. Being a SAHM was the norm for generations, and it still works beautifully for millions of couples today. For most of us, marriage is a genuine partnership built on mutual love, shared goals, and deep trust. It’s not a business transaction where you are always preparing for a divorce.
I just find it a shame that it’s so hard for people on here to accept that some men really love and support their wives, and that this lifestyle can be a lovely, successful choice for a family.
Am I the only one who thinks the endless worry and negativity about SAHMs on here is a bit disconnected from everyday reality?

It makes no difference if the woman has a property, pension and savings in her own name; when it comes to divorce, it all goes into one pot and the judge decides who gets to keep what. She may end up in the same situation as she would have if all that had remained in her husband's sole name.

I am not sure that the courts do consider SAHP's sacrifice. They are primarily concerned to house the children, so if a mother is the primary parent she often gets to keep the house in order to house the children, but it is not because of her sacrifice to be a SAHM, it is because she is the primary parent, which she can still be even if she had been working all through the marriage.

Decades ago, spousal maintenance was a thing, so if a woman had been a SAHP and then a housewife for decades, she got maintenance for herself (not just for the children). But that is now vanishingly rare, because the courts now consider that divorced women should pay for themselves by earning.

Even if a divorced woman can retrain or start a business, she is still likely to be decades 'behind' her ex-H in terms of career and earnings. She has taken a hit to her level of wealth and standard of living that her ex hasn't taken.

So, whilst it is a lovely thing to be a SAHM, and can be great for the children and the marriage, it is not a decision to be taken lightly. Women who go into it should be aware of the financial risks to themselves, and weigh them up against the benefits. Some women who are not materially-orientated, or who are optimistic, may decide that the benefits far outweigh the financial risks.

Not having an income is a vunerable position

Yes but the problem is for many that there is a 10 plus year gap on their CV, maybe more. Not a risk many women want to take no matter how secure their relationship and shared assets seem. Life changes and people can change. I always make sure I can always take care of myself without relying on anyone else otherwise how will take care of my kids in the worse case scenario... and the worse case scenario isn't that rare it happens to many women all the time. The woman is left with no career and doing almost all of the care of their children.

@Marroonyep!!!

I think i could understand other positions more if I didnt know how to make money and/or had no family support.

Nope, this isn’t automatically true whatsoever.

For someone who says they couldn't care less, you seem remarkably bothered!
Did you need validation from me by commenting? I started this thread to call out the ridiculous doom mongering on here, which is totally disconnected from real life.
It makes me wonder why you took your precious time to stick your nose into a thread about a lifestyle you claim to have no interest in. If you genuinely don't care, do yourself a favour and scroll past.

But why do you think 2 workers automatically means bigger mortgage?

We've always been 2 workers and have never had a large mortgage (in fact we have no mortgage now, 2 salaries meant we were able to overpay significantly). I know plenty of families with SAHMs who do have massive mortgages...

Of course it is.

If you don't have an income of your own (be that from earnings, pensions, assets or investments) you are extremely financially vulnerable.

But realistically how many stay at home mums who have been out of work for years have a large sum of money sat in a bank account. If you have half a million sat in your own account to restart your life alone then obviously thats different but I would imagine that is less then 1% of stay at home mums

oh you are so naive!!!!! I am
guessing your husband brings home a huge salary? What about the majority of society you idiot

Yes it's a contradiction! But it's also insurance.

We don't expect to have a dreadful accident on holiday but we STILL get travel insurance don't we?!

Only on Mumsnet.
When I was a sahm, the overriding opinion of the school mum's was how lucky I was to be able to afford it.

One Mum said to me that when she met her husband to be, she told him that she would never become a kept woman. After she'd had her children and wished to be a sahm, he reminded her of her earlier declaration 🤣

Yes but not because our partner might hurt us in the pool. See the difference?

I think it comes from a place of not trusting men rather than seeing women as lazy or work dodgers. It makes you vulnerable.

I wasn't speaking to you personally.
Also, I didn't mean that two workers automatically means a bigger mortgage! It’s great that you were able to overpay yours and clear it that’s a brilliant position to be in. We are actually mortgage free too, so I completely get how lovely that financial freedom feels.
My point was just that some working couples stretch themselves to the limit on a mortgage that relies on two salaries, which can leave them feeling stuck if things go wrong.
Financial risks and tough situations can happen in any family setup, whether you work or stay at home. Every family is just trying to do what works best for them.

Not really. I loved parenting, raising my children and building a family as did DH, and I enjoyed achieving in an interesting role and being able to financially contribute to the family, build my pensions and my own savings and investments in addition to the joint ones as did DH.

I enjoyed feeling valued and respected as a person, not just a mother, just as much as DH enjoyed being valued and respected as a perdon, not just a Dad. And I enjoyed being a healthy role model to my young adult daughters who have healthy attitudes to both relationships and careers, just as my DH enjoyed role modelling to them what they should look for in equal and respectful partners/husbands.

Yes i agree OP its very negative here. It's also generally negative about relationships and family life too. I guess that's the nature of this forum, people post when there's a problem when things have already taken a negative turn in their lives.

Whatever about a general negativity, it's the absolute nastiness and disrespect i find hard to deal with. People say it works both ways but I don't think so, there are occasionally comments from a blunt MIL about childcare but generally SAHPs are respectful of working parents and if anything are amazed by how they manage it all. Many working mothers on here are judgmental and sneery, that's not my experience in real life though, and I'd take it with a pinch of salt.

What I can't understand is the 'but what if he leaves you' argument. Do people really spent every minute of married life planning its end? What if you both work and either of you gets cancer and the mortgage can't be paid? It's probably as likely to happen but no one uses that argument as a reason to buy a smaller house. Life throws curve balls and we deal with it, if this is your only motivation to work, doing 40 hours a week having no free time and feeling constantly overwhelmed cannot balance the risk of the unlikely scenario happening. It's entirely a different matter when a woman wants to work because she enjoys it and gives her status, or because she feels she has no choice financially. I respect the first and feel sorry for the second. I just can't understand the contempt at another person's life choice when it has no bearing whatsoever.

I think some of the stereotypes are a bit off, I have mortgage free property in my name that provides a small income (equivalent of a part time job) lump sums only I can access, pension topped up bracket, most of that was earned by DH, he volunteered it.

DH is a very hands on dad (I only do bedtime when he’s travelling, he regularly does bath time) so no I’m not in a situation where he’s leaving everything to me (also have a cleaner in most days) but yes the demands of his schedule would mean a lot of ad hoc childcare if I were working. I absolutely could but the juggle would be painful.

I do think it’s reasonable to point out that when you have been a SAHM for a long time you are at risk without any recent work experience. I think particularly if your husband doesn’t share his finances with you etc then you should be even more worried. But it is in no way wrong that not working for long periods could have dire consequences later unless you were already very comfortable.

Depends, Maybe when they are preschool age. After that its not really - and often costs to live are so high that you need 2 people working.

Trust is a massive part of any marriage, but we haven't just crossed our fingers and hoped for the best we’ve planned financially as a team. Risks exist in every setup, but you can be a SAHM and still be smart about your future.

Being a sahm means you don’t work at that time, it doesn’t make any comment at all to having savings, investments, assets.
It’s naive to assume anyone who steps back from the workplace after children must be financially illiterate and beholden to their DH and any penny he might give them.

@Anonfortoday2 you suggested some people have no respect for SAHPs and think they are stupid. I think this post sums it up for you.

The doom mongering is important because it forces those that make the decision to remove themselves from the workforce to look at what could happen if something was to happen to them, their spouse, their relationship. It doesn't have to mean divorce, the husband being made redundant and out of work for a long time is much more risky when you only have one income coming in and the other person has compromised their earning capabilities. Or he could have a stroke and unable to ever go back to work. It's not always about how much you trust your husband, it can just as likely be about bad luck. Part of being a parent is being able to provide for the children, and by dividing providing financially and providing emotionally/practically the whole situation becomes more precarious for the whole family.

No.