the cost of working - SAHM vs WOHM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Daycare is the cost of working split between both parents. It’s not a cost that’s only charged to women. Ugh!!

It is a cost that only needs to occur if both parents work. Don't make it about sexism. It's math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Daycare comes out of MY salary when doing calculations. Because if I choose to SAH, the expense is gone.

I quit my job until my kids were in school. I wasn't going to give away half my pay to daycare when I wanted to be with my kids. Why would I work for half pay and be away from my kids?

Is your spouse incapable of SAH? I don't understand why the only person in your marriage with that choice is you...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Daycare is the cost of working split between both parents. It’s not a cost that’s only charged to women. Ugh!!

It is a cost that only needs to occur if both parents work. Don't make it about sexism. It's math.

DP and sure, but this thread presumes it comes out of the woman’s salary. If you want to do the math, do the math for both partners to work vs. not, and the costs for both of them. Include things like retirement savings, increased social security, etc., on the benefits side.

There are less tangible benefits to working for many people. I don’t know if I could put a specific dollar amount on the meaning I derive from using my graduate degree to (hopefully) make the world a better place, but I sure would miss it if I didn’t work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Daycare is the cost of working split between both parents. It’s not a cost that’s only charged to women. Ugh!!

It is a cost that only needs to occur if both parents work. Don't make it about sexism. It's math.

DP and sure, but this thread presumes it comes out of the woman’s salary. If you want to do the math, do the math for both partners to work vs. not, and the costs for both of them. Include things like retirement savings, increased social security, etc., on the benefits side.

There are less tangible benefits to working for many people. I don’t know if I could put a specific dollar amount on the meaning I derive from using my graduate degree to (hopefully) make the world a better place, but I sure would miss it if I didn’t work.

What you find are the less tangible benefits are benefits to you but not others. Regardless of if you work or not, its always good to have education.

Some of us had enough credits for social security before we became SAHM's. I did. We still save for my retirement and I have money from when I did work.

It doesn't matter whose money day care comes from but if you look at the total cost of day care vs. the lower earning spouse, then you look at the cost/benefits. If I was barely making enough to cover day care for one child, what is the point in working?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Daycare comes out of MY salary when doing calculations. Because if I choose to SAH, the expense is gone.

I quit my job until my kids were in school. I wasn't going to give away half my pay to daycare when I wanted to be with my kids. Why would I work for half pay and be away from my kids?

Is your spouse incapable of SAH? I don't understand why the only person in your marriage with that choice is you...

Well I could be a man. You don't know. Male or female, when anyone becomes a SAHM, the expense is gone.

[Anonymous]

To answer the last few PPs:

I agree that daycare is a shared cost and should be calculated out of the joint household income. I don't think the default should be to compare daycare costs to the woman's salary. That's gross.

HOWEVER having been through this, if you are a woman who develops an interest in SAHMing, one of the first things you do (before even talking to your DH) is calculate cost of childcare against your salary. Because you are considering dropping that salary. This becomes a huge part of the discussion as to whether or not a family can afford for the woman to stay home, and if so for how long.

I think if the male partner in a couple was interesting in SAH, the conversation would be identical -- how much does he make, how does this impact our childcare costs (yes "our"), what are the financial pluses and minuses of this move.

It's just that men rarely choose to take that step. Whether they want to stay at home or not (I personally think more men fantasize about being a SAH than we think) they don't view it as a real option and thus never get to the phase of comparing their income to the cost of childcare. I also think men are far less confident that they can offer a level of childcare superior to what they can pay for, whereas women often feel this way. Men are not raised or encouraged to be caregivers, they are often particularly unconfident about parenting in the early years. They are far less likely to get or take a decent-sized paternity leave, they worry more about career stigma around staying home, etc. Also, some are straight up sexist and don't think men should stay home. There are lots of reasons men don't pursue staying home, and they are all bound up in gender norms and sometimes misogyny.

But none of that means that women who want to stay home, and therefore run the calculation on whether the savings on childcare might sufficiently counterbalance the loss of their income on their household budget and long term financial plans, are doing something wrong. They are thinking practically about a choice that may or may not make sense for their family. But by and large, those calculations only happen because they want to stay home. Which might not be the choice you'd make, but is still a choice and also not automatically a regressive one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So everyone’s story is different. I worked with 3 kids until my oldest was out of FT preschool at which point even with before and after care, the school schedule was not conducive to Ft work. I held it together with some nannying help but then my mom got diagnosed with Alzheimer’s (only child and she was divorced) and my husband took a job with lots of international travel.

Motherhood is wonderful but it’s hard. If you have parents close by that can help out that is a tremendous advantage. If you have an understanding boss that helps. In today’s zoom world, more options of working front home help (you still need childcare of course but the luxury of throwing a load
of laundry in or cutting veggies while listening to a meeting is HuGE) some industries are better than others in allow for PT schedules. It’s also ok to quit bc it’s all too much.

I cared for my mom and my kids. After she passed I volunteered in my community (not all school related) abs at almost 50 I have just now entered a graduate program and hope that allows me to transition back to paid work. While I won’t earn as much as I did before, I hope there’s a fulfilling second act for me. I guess wcausee see.

In the meantime, choices are tough and no one should judge another…and pls don’t judge yourself either.

We had zero family help. Both of us worked because, among other reasons, we could then afford childcare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have you ever calculated how much it costs to work?

I was chatting with a friend who lives in the NYC area about how much it costs her to work (suburban train, after school care etc etc). While SAHM is not an option for them, she has a hard time accepting how much it costs her to work.

It got me thinking....how much do a spend to WOHM? (Not an argument on the long-term financial security, retirement benefits or earning potential....just a budgeting/expenses question).

Me? I estimated some average monthly costs I can attribute to WOHM.

Daycare - $3300 (though part of that is preschool I would have likely had to pay for, at least a few days a week)
Commute - Gas, wear and tear (?) - $100
Parking - $120
Cleaning Services - $400
Clothing - $200 (suits, dress shoes etc)
Dry Cleaning - $100
Lunches - $80
Coffees/Breakfast on the Run - $30
Takeout - $200


Yikes!

Why is this conversation always about whether “it makes sense” for the mom/wife to work? What about your spouse? Why not run the numbers to decide whether he should go back to work or SAH?

Because IRL and also mirrored here, the husbands do not pull their weight in taking care of the household and kids and the women take care of the vast majority of the burden. So most of them decide to stay home because they have to do 2 jobs - WOH and WAH taking care of everything, from managing appointments, to cooking, cleaning, homework, shopping etc. Add several kids or a kid with special needs and the double work becomes unbearable and sometimes impossible, if the kid with special needs requires multiple appointments. I have a unicorn - a very well paid job FH and a H who is very hands on and does things without me asking, in addition to making $$$$. I bet if other women would have more opportunities like mine and involved spouses, the selection would change. But corporate America is not kind to moms, despite all that lip service, and lots of men are too good to do homework with the kids or laundry properly or take the trash out when needed and not when asked.

You don't have a unicorn, you just made a good decision as did I! Most people choose a dud husband and complain incessantly about him and his lack of childcare/involvement in home etc. Buck up women!! Raise your expectations if you want the world to change! You are in the driver's seat of your life! Make better choices or stop whining about your bad choices. You chose to marry that dud.

I tell my daughters the biggest investment in their career and self is choosing a spouse that wants for them what they want for themselves and vice versa. Childcare and the cost of work (or not) is purely a family decision. It is definitely NOT the cost for a WOMAN.. that thought pattern holds us back. It is a family cost that supports the whole family PERIOD.

I hear you, but I'm bone tired of the task changing men to be one more thing for women to do.

Telling women they just need to "raise their expectations" isn't at all helpful. Do you think any of us married someone we thought would be an unequal partner? Of course not. Practical advice would be appreciated for those (such as myself) who find themselves in an unequal marriage. Like the guy is generally nice, shovels the walk for the elderly neighbor, will take the kids either if you ask or if you're at your complete rock bottom but not before, and even then often his version of time with the kids is everyone on their devices. Eats anything you cook/reheat and tells the kids to say thank you, but the only cleaning he can remember on his own is to roll the garbage cans to the curb once a week. Anything else needs multiple reminders and even then the response is just a shrug "yeah, I guess I didn't do it" or "well doing X was worth keeping the peace" comment. No, I didn't see any of this before we got married. He either had roommates (and as it turns out enough social sense to clean up behind himself in a communal living situation) or in student housing (most grad students did this where he went). Should I have dated only men with enough $ to already own their own house and lived alone? (I probably would have wondered about their lack of financial sense). My spouse feels like he wants for me what I want for myself. Wanting and doing are 2 very different things. He feels I'm free to clean up behind everyone if it matters so much to me. He'll cheer me on from the couch. Wanting isn't enough. Blaming women for men's failures compounds the problem. "I had no idea my wife was so unhappy. Why didn't she say anything." Even that blames women. And I'm sure she did say something. Many. Many. Many times.

Anecdotally, every woman I know married to a man who doesn’t do his share, actively does things to enable the behavior. From quitting her job, EBF, not sleep training, never leaving the kids to go away for a weekend, not demanding her husband takes any parental leave etc. I am in a egalitarian marriage with a husband who does 50/50 and supports my career. I have taken a different path than some of my friends but they would probably describe me as lucky to have a husband who actively parents and does his share.

But my friends never:

1. Formula fed so their husband was responsible for a window of time for the baby
2. Left their young baby without instructions for the day with their husband
3. Returned to work
4. Went away for the weekend with girlfriends
5. Refused to have more kids if their husband didn’t take parental leave

If you EBF and quit your job while your husband returns to work, you’re essentially saying the child is 100% your responsibility and not your husband’s. You’re saying your husband earns the $ and you do the housework/childcare. It’s very hard to break these habits. Men get very used to having a career while their wife stays home and does everything else.

My husband did 50% of the parenting but 10% of the household work. I returned to work after 12 weeks with both kids. He took leave to take care of our first born after I went back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where is gender equality here? If I was the breadwinner husband and if my wife decided not to work anymore, I think I would lose some respect for her. Will most of those marriages end when one of the sides hit a mid life crisis?

By our third date, my husband was telling me he only wanted to marry a woman who would continue to work after marriage and kids. I appreciate his forthrightness and as I never had any interest in SAH, we ended up getting married and being dual WOHP. My guess is that most people discuss this extensively with prospective spouses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Daycare is the cost of working split between both parents. It’s not a cost that’s only charged to women. Ugh!!

It is a cost that only needs to occur if both parents work. Don't make it about sexism. It's math.

DP and sure, but this thread presumes it comes out of the woman’s salary. If you want to do the math, do the math for both partners to work vs. not, and the costs for both of them. Include things like retirement savings, increased social security, etc., on the benefits side.

There are less tangible benefits to working for many people. I don’t know if I could put a specific dollar amount on the meaning I derive from using my graduate degree to (hopefully) make the world a better place, but I sure would miss it if I didn’t work.

What you find are the less tangible benefits are benefits to you but not others. Regardless of if you work or not, its always good to have education.

Some of us had enough credits for social security before we became SAHM's. I did. We still save for my retirement and I have money from when I did work.

It doesn't matter whose money day care comes from but if you look at the total cost of day care vs. the lower earning spouse, then you look at the cost/benefits. If I was barely making enough to cover day care for one child, what is the point in working?

Were you calculating the net present value of all lost wages and social security credits and income when saying that you barely made enough to cover day care for one child? Even with two good incomes, daycare was a strain on our budgets. However, childcare is only expensive the first few years and compared to a lifetime of earning potential, it's good to take the long view.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:First of all, daycare is an expense to be split between the husband's and the wife's salaries. It skews the cost of working if you attribute it to only one of the parents.

And the obvious answer is, if you can make big bucks, this analysis is easy. I personally wanted a career, and now that my children are either in college out of town or grown, it was a no brainer for me to have a career.


Daycare - $3300 (though part of that is preschool I would have likely had to pay for, at least a few days a week) - only 50% attributable to one parent
Commute - Gas, wear and tear (?) - $100 - same if you are SAH and running kids around to activities, etc.
Parking - $120 - at my office, parking is free
Cleaning Services - $400 - I had a housecleaner before I got married and had kids, so I would pay this even if I were SAH
Clothing - $200 (suits, dress shoes etc) - way low for me. I spend between $2,000 and $3,000 a year on professional attire.
Dry Cleaning - $100
Lunches - $80 - do you mean $80 more than SAHMs spend on lunches?
Coffees/Breakfast on the Run - $30 - in my case, I eat at home, so zero
Takeout - $200 Don't SAHMs get takeout too?

Absolutely +1 to the above. This makes it seem like the woman is the only one who could conceivably be staying home or making that choice. There was a great NYT that pointed that out.

I say this as someone spending $5000/month on childcare (2 kids under 5). It's a joint expense like our mortgage etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is gender equality here? If I was the breadwinner husband and if my wife decided not to work anymore, I think I would lose some respect for her. Will most of those marriages end when one of the sides hit a mid life crisis?

I think a lot of husbands do lose respect in this situation and maybe don't realize it consciously.

Wow!! WOHMs are so concerned for the welfare of SAHMs and so many cautionary tales about DHs cheating on SAHMs. LOL! There is no data to suggest that more SAHMs get cheated on than WOHMs or more SAHMs get divorced.

WOHMs get divorced, cheated on, do more work at home, get paid less than men, don't get promotions and work for bosses from hell regularly. They cannot survive if other lowly paid WOHMs are not taking care of their kids and their homes. The same lowly paid WOHMs also take care of the kids and homes of wealthy SAHMs, but at least wealthy SAHMs do not curl up and sob in a corner when pandemic happens, schools are virtual, cleaning lady stops coming.

Absolutely wrong
"Economists at Boston University found that dual-income marriages are more secure, and couples are less likely to split than those in marriages with only one working spouse. Further, according to the book “Getting to 50/50: How Working Parents Can Have it All,” marriages in which there is a sole breadwinner get divorced at a rate 14% above average, the highest of any income split. And if income and housework is divided evenly, the risk of divorce is 48% lower than average. Why? The authors say it’s got a lot to do with the fact that dual-income marriages have more financial stability. Being a sole breadwinner carries a tremendous amount of stress, and having a partner to share the weight can lead to more harmony and compatibility."

"Researches have shown that stay-at-home parents are more likely to experience depression and anger than their working partners. According to an article in Education News, Stephanie Coontz, co-chair of the Council for Contemporary Families, reports “no matter the income level, mothers who stay home are inclined to more depression, sadness, and anger than their working counterparts.” Coontz also reveals that divorce rates tend to decrease for couples who are both active in the workforce."

DP. I googled the two quotes you posted, and I see no citations or links to studies for either of those statistics. It reminds me of when everyone was passing around the study saying daughters of working moms have better jobs/higher education/etc, but it turns out that the only criteria for a working mom was working for any amount of pay before your daughter is 14! Almost every woman in America does that unless they’re like Amish. Even if that case, the Amish ladies probably sold some pies before their daughter was 14.

A little bit of a rusty brain, isn't it? Marketwatch and abcnews.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My friend who was a working mom all her life, recently died of cancer. She made a whole lot of money and was fairly high up in an organization that is pretty well known in DMV. Her husband was in the same organization but never reached the heights that she did. Her persona was that of a go-getter. The videos of her professional success was all over youtube. No one knew what a lie her personal life was. She reached out to us for some help. Her husband was abusive to her all her life and cheated with prostitutes. Her two grown kids grew up scared, neglected and traumatized in the household. They are hot messes. She could not divorce her husband because there was a lot of wealth involved that she did not want to share/divide.

Behind the façade of a career, there was no aspect of her personal life that was good. I figured out that even after being economically emancipated she was a slave to her thinking. I lost all respect for her because she was a pitiful woman and her life was a wasted life.

WTF. You "lost all respect" for your friend because she struggled with domestic abuse. You are a horrible, awful person. I just cannot understand how you can be such a horrible person.

She's just an insecure witch trying to justify her choice and look less of a loser. If her H cheats and leaves her, she will have no money. She'll have to call her exH and ask for $ for Tampax.

[Anonymous]

Does everyone just decide to keep working if they don't come out ahead? Anyone make decisions based on wanting to be with your kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does everyone just decide to keep working if they don't come out ahead? Anyone make decisions based on wanting to be with your kids?

I am a working mom, ambitious in my career and have a husband who is on the other side. I earn significantly more than him but we still share everything 50/50. I am not coming ahead as fast as I thought it would be, but not giving up either. If I did, I am not sure honestly if I would be spending more time with my kids or at home, I think I already spend good enough time with them. I would probably continue working because 1) I value financial independency 2) set the right example to my daughters 3) use my education and skills for a greater good in the society 4) my retirement benefits will be excellent when that time comes. If you ask the same question my husband, he is looking forward to the day that I get promoted to "that" level so that he can be free from his corporate job and do whatever. He is less likely to put up with office stuff to get ahead or earn more. Is the conclusion then, in general women are more likely to prefer less competitive environments and focus on their short term happiness while men feel pressured to take the opposite role? Our family is the opposite of this.