Women taking on the "main childcarer" role at the expense of their earning potential

[minipie]

Bear with me, this is rather long winded. Inspired by a recent thread on the divorce/separation board.

Ok, so DH and I are both in jobs involving long hours. When we had DD it was clear that either one or both of us was going to have to take our work down a notch in order to do pick ups/ensure DD saw a parent at bedtime (we both agreed this was important).

Financially, it was much better for us as a family for only one of us to take a large step down and do most of the pick ups/bedtimes etc, with the other staying full time, rather than both of us take a smaller step down and do 50% bedtimes each.

I earn less. Mainly for this reason, it was me who went part time, reducing my earnings and shelving any promotion prospects, and DH who carried on full time climbing the promotion ladder.

Fast forward a few years and I can see that my career/earning power will be stagnant at best, while DH's will have gone from strength to strength.

If we stay together, that's all well and good. But what if we split? What if DH decides to waltz off into the sunset (BTW I have absolutely no reason to think this will happen but then nobody ever does, right?)

I gather there is no right to spousal maintenance any more. Ex wives are expected to support themselves, by and large. Therefore, if we split, there will be no recompense for the fact that I buggered my future earnings potential to look after our child, and DH did not.

This of course applies not just to me but to millions of women who take on the "main childcarer" role at the expense of their earnings - especially those who become SAHMs.

I kind of feel I should get some sort of acknowledgement/agreement from DH that I am compromising my future earnings in this way - ideally, I would get an agreement that he will make some sort of recompense to me if we do split. (I have no idea if this would even be enforceable mind you). DH on the other hand is pretty horrified by the idea - he agrees in principle, but hates the idea of having these sorts of legalistic/antagonistic discussions with his DW. I can see his point.

So, has anyone else considered this? Anyone else tried to protect themselves somehow from the long term effects of going part time/becoming a SAHM - in the event of a split? Or is the only true protection to ensure both parents do 50% childcare and take equal knocks to their earnings/career?

Thoughts?

[scottishmummy]

Yes you're right there is a difference between mothers and childless women earning
I don't all the reasons but I expect mat leave,going pt have impact.and family demands may conflict with work
I simply don't have the ability to relocate or take a risk in job,as I do have to consider the kids

[OneDreamOnly]

My very big issue is that, if the woman happens to have young children, it's leaving a bit of time for her to get back on her feet. Some maintenance for the dcs, some benefits plus a part time job and she can sort of live from it and in time regain a potential for a better wage/full time job. But move on a few years when the dcs have just left school. There is no maintenance any more, she will be 50ish, no work history. Who on earth is going to employ her? but she is still supposed to stand on her two feet all on her own.

And that is completely unfair for all the reasons above.

[scottishmummy]

Yes,that's the risk of giving up career,job for a Man.so don't do it!
In situation you describe she'd have to retrain or start NMW job together experience

[OneDreamOnly]

If you chose to put yourself in a disadvantageous position,its a risk.be aware of the implication

That is true except that, as a society, we don't actually give that opportunity to women. If a woman actually raises the issue of 'but what would happen to me if we get divorced in 3 years time?' she will be just met with the fact that she is a hard core feminist (read just annoying defending ideas that are stupid at best) or 'but why do you think you will get divorced? Don't love your DH?' or 'But isn't the well-being of your dcs paramount and worth a little sacrifice?'
It would be very hard for any woman to refuse to go part time/SAHM when her stopping work will mean more disposable income for the family.

I think you should also add to that societal pressure and 'that's what we do around here' type of attitude.

I certainly was influenced by that when I had my 2 dcs and stopped working. It has taken me 3 years training and 4 years in practice to go back to nearly what I was earning 10 years ago. Meanwhile, DH just went up and up.
But my new job was to be able to fit around the dcs whilst allowing me to 'work'.
That is until I decided that not being financially independent was 'bad' and I decided to reclaim my earning potential.

[scottishmummy]

And of course a adult who keeps good health is expected to stand own her own two feet.all on her own
Why on earth wouldn't any woman in that situation.are you suggesting male pay her in perpetuity
I'd say grow a spine,and start looking for a job,instead of ooh hinge two feet all on her own

[OneDreamOnly]

And yes I also chose to be self employed to avoid the issue of being looked at 'less employable' because I have dcs still at primary.

[scottishmummy]

I don't talk about my kids or domestic arrangements in interviews

[OneDreamOnly]

No I'm suggesting a massive shift in expectation where both partners have equal responsibility for the dcs and in turn both take a step back in their career.
Instead of a society that is build around the idea that there is someone (a woman!) to look after the dcs, pick up the pieces so you don't need to system to support workers in place (ie childcare but also schools attitude), a society that recognise that both parents will have an input and to expect it from both the father and the mother.
And for mothers to stop thinking that have to stop working when the dcs are small.

Then after all that, and wo pressure from society to be a good mother, ie be a SAHM, then it's possible to take a decision that will enable both parents to stand on their two feet.
Until then you are asking women to do one thing (be at home, pick up the slack) whilst at the same time be able to be financially independent, which aren't compatible.

[OneDreamOnly]

You don't need to as a pp said before. Your age is a deterrent enough. And you will be asked if it's Ms or MRs'.

[scottishmummy]

I continued to work ft.yes there was disapproval,tsks from postnatal group
Work however were supportive,they knew I was returning I kept in touch
The only derision,or why have em if someone else watch em has been from women.not men

[scottishmummy]

I've not been asked any leading question about marital or parental status

[OneDreamOnly]

Work wasn't supportive at all. They made me redundant instead, a couple of weeks before returning from maternity leave....
And I'm sure I'm not the only one it happened too.

Maybe it depends on the industry (mine was very very make orientated, I was the only woman not in an admin job). Maybe it depends on the job.
Mine did involve trips abroad with overnight stay and literally 2 hours notice. I was at the point where I always had my passport with me as I had no time to get back home to pick up clothes etc.
But I would certainly not start with the idea that if I am showing that I was fully involved with work etc... then work would automatically be supportive.

[scottishmummy]

Sorry that happens.it's grim
Yes the stats are their,riskiest career time is immediate pg,mat leave
There is some legal recourse,but if course that burdensome