Breadwinner wants out of the rat race

[Anonymous]

Is there an option for him other than going fed? Would an in house job somewhere give him a higher income than a fed salary, but give him a more flexible schedule at the same time?

I think if your reaction is just the initial reaction it’s understandable, but you need to work together to find a solution that gets him out of the rat race (and, that allows him to contribute more at home - he doesn’t get to work less and still have you do 100% of the home front work).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like your main concern is the drop in income and lifestyle adjustments that will need to happen. Understandable, but that's not really fair to the person who is burdened with maintaining that. I think you need to be as supportive as possible of what your DH wants to do about his career, and find a way as a couple to make that happen for him - just as you'd want him to support your career choices. Sit down together and go over the budget to figure out how things will look, and discuss your concerns with him. But at the end of the day, you really need to trust that he'll make the decision that's best for everyone. Otherwise there's going to be a lot of resentment between you two.

I also don't think you can expect him to handle it the same way you would if you were the one who had stayed in BigLaw. And like you said, you really DON'T know how you'd be feeling at this point in your career had you stayed, so that line of thinking is totally irrelevant.

If you are really concerned about the money, go back to a firm or get a higher paying job yourself.

OP here. Thank you for some actual advice. These are helpful suggestions. As I hope was clear in my post, I do want to support him and do want him to be less stressed and happier. I'm just trying to figure out how to re-jigger the way we save because I want to be prudent about college savings, retirement, etc. and admittedly it was a lot easier to do that with a sky-high HHI.

I'll ignore the other trolls.

NP. Why do you think they are trolls? They are pointing out things that seem to come across in your OP. You may not have meant it to come across this way, but reading this as a DW who has had a long, happy marriage, I thought your OP sounded pretty callous towards your DH. You say here that you really do want to support him and want him to be happier, but that wasn't the impression I got from your OP.

FWIW I am in a marriage where we both decided a long time ago that we wouldn't put breadwinner stress on one person. It's just too much, particularly Biglaw. Biglaw is corrosive; I would never, ever push someone to stay in Biglaw who didn't want to be there.

I am definitely not a troll.

[Anonymous]

If you can make it work on the lower salary -- I say its better that you both have less stress and more family time. That is much more precious in my opinion.

[Anonymous]

It's totally .understandable that looking at a future where you might have less money/need to live modestly makes you nervous. But, I don't think it's fair to ask your DH to do a job you rejected because it was too many hours and too stressful.

[Anonymous]

You should both get in-house counsel jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like your main concern is the drop in income and lifestyle adjustments that will need to happen. Understandable, but that's not really fair to the person who is burdened with maintaining that. I think you need to be as supportive as possible of what your DH wants to do about his career, and find a way as a couple to make that happen for him - just as you'd want him to support your career choices. Sit down together and go over the budget to figure out how things will look, and discuss your concerns with him. But at the end of the day, you really need to trust that he'll make the decision that's best for everyone. Otherwise there's going to be a lot of resentment between you two.

I also don't think you can expect him to handle it the same way you would if you were the one who had stayed in BigLaw. And like you said, you really DON'T know how you'd be feeling at this point in your career had you stayed, so that line of thinking is totally irrelevant.

If you are really concerned about the money, go back to a firm or get a higher paying job yourself.

OP here. Thank you for some actual advice. These are helpful suggestions. As I hope was clear in my post, I do want to support him and do want him to be less stressed and happier. I'm just trying to figure out how to re-jigger the way we save because I want to be prudent about college savings, retirement, etc. and admittedly it was a lot easier to do that with a sky-high HHI.

I'll ignore the other trolls.

Trolls??? Because you don't like the answers?

[Anonymous]

Why don’t you try a pilot test of living with the reduced salary for 6-12 months to try it out before he switches jobs? Although he won’t have extra time, it will give you both a chance to see what life would be like on a tighter budget. If it’s not so bad, it will be less scary when he moves to the federal job. Also, you’ll save a good chunk of money for that 6-12 months that you could stash away for smaller splurges later.

[Anonymous]

OP, I know you think you understand Biglaw, but the internal firm politics and pressure to bring in business make it a different animal when you are a partner. For many people it is more stressful and just not sustainable. I guarantee that if you were still working 70 hour weeks with a little one and a second on the way you would not think twice about asking to re-examine your bargain.

[Anonymous]

You don’t make bargains in a marriage. You make decisions that work. If you would begrudge your DH what you enjoy then you’re not going to make it together until retirement. Go back to law and let him transition to fed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why don’t you try a pilot test of living with the reduced salary for 6-12 months to try it out before he switches jobs? Although he won’t have extra time, it will give you both a chance to see what life would be like on a tighter budget. If it’s not so bad, it will be less scary when he moves to the federal job. Also, you’ll save a good chunk of money for that 6-12 months that you could stash away for smaller splurges later.

It's not really an accurate representation, though. There is a certain amount of money that has to be spent by a breadwinner who is working 70 hours of week because of time and career limitations. In other words, he could do this, but it would probably be pretty unrepresentative of what their life would be like if he started working 40 hours a week instead of 70 hours a week.

It might make OP feel better, but I think it will be even more stress on her DH.

[Anonymous]

Hey OP. I’m double biglaw now so I really understand what you’re saying. Ignore the MRA trolls. Nothing you said was selfish or wrong.

Making partner is a great gold star. You guys have a ton of longer term options. You’re totally right that the comp is back-loaded but walking away from partner *today* doesn’t mean walking away from that comp forever. I work at one of the old school white shoe firms an I know a bunch of partners who did a stint in gov or in house and came back. He just has to be strategic. Help him develop a long term plan that keeps doors open and him at home for a while.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I know you think you understand Biglaw, but the internal firm politics and pressure to bring in business make it a different animal when you are a partner. For many people it is more stressful and just not sustainable. I guarantee that if you were still working 70 hour weeks with a little one and a second on the way you would not think twice about asking to re-examine your bargain.

+1 Absolutely

Associates who leave firms after five years have no idea what it really means to be a partner. They just think they do. I think it's pretty arrogant of OP to think she wouldn't be asking for the same thing if the roles were switched.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hey OP. I’m double biglaw now so I really understand what you’re saying. Ignore the MRA trolls. Nothing you said was selfish or wrong.

Making partner is a great gold star. You guys have a ton of longer term options. You’re totally right that the comp is back-loaded but walking away from partner *today* doesn’t mean walking away from that comp forever. I work at one of the old school white shoe firms an I know a bunch of partners who did a stint in gov or in house and came back. He just has to be strategic. Help him develop a long term plan that keeps doors open and him at home for a while.

I agree with your second paragraph, but I am absolutely not an MRA troll, and I think OP came across as pretty callous and selfish in her OP. I am a working mom with a happy long-term marriage.

[Anonymous]

OP, the other thing that I'd encourage you to consider - now and moving forward in your life - is that no decision that you and your spouse make together at a point in time in your lives should be considered a bargain struck that is set in stone.

Things change, life happens, people become more or less happy, health issues pop up or crash down, tradeoffs become more or less important.

If you can't talk about those things and make adjustments to keep your family unit working as well as it can together, then you will likely grow apart over time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You don't care about his happiness or mental/physical health. You want enjoy your high income lifestyle. At least, be honest about it.

+1. You're a jerk. You purport to care soooo much about DH but reality is you're used to your 800k lifestyle and it's up to your DH to provide 90% of it and now God forbid you attempt to live on 250k.