SAHM’s - anyone successfully convince DH to support their staying home long term?

[Anonymous]

Totally agree about DH laying groundwork for divorce. I would never agree to be a SAHM unless my husband made at least $300K with no debt other than the mortgage, and a prenup that was very favorable to me, including a provision for all of his pension benefits to go to me even if he remarried.

Women need to stop quitting work unless there is a prenup in place. Or write up a post-nup or whatever that's called before you submit your resignation letter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I was married to a doctor and stayed home. Worked out to my advantage when he traded me in for a new model. Alimony for life.

And now you don't have to wash his socks either. I divorced my wealthy husband and I will get his retirement since I was the beneficiary, not his current widow. A SAHM is often financially secure. Something many don't understand.

+ 1
Educated, working moms making a livable wage, who quit to become SAHMs do that ONLY after making sure that they and kids are provided for if something changes.

I realize this article is super old, but it made an impression on me and i still think about it occasionally. https://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/11/magazine/the-opt-out-generation-wants-back-in.html

But yes, it works out well for lots of women, and is often worth whatever risk is involved. You just have to make sure you have yourself as covered as you can, in whatever way makes sense for you and your family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I was married to a doctor and stayed home. Worked out to my advantage when he traded me in for a new model. Alimony for life.

And now you don't have to wash his socks either. I divorced my wealthy husband and I will get his retirement since I was the beneficiary, not his current widow. A SAHM is often financially secure. Something many don't understand.

I go to half his practice and half of his retirement. I literally do not need to work. I do have a full time job just for the benefits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Surprised no one mentioned that her DH is laying groundwork for divorce? That’s always a good reason to push SAHM back to workforce.

All the more reason to resist. She has been out of the workforce for over a decade (maybe closer to two decades depending on age of oldest child). That means she probably didn’t have much time to establish much of a career before, and will have zero leverage on return to the workforce. If his plan is divorce, he is really snd truly screwing her over and she should soak him for every penny, not get some BS admin job that will reduce her support award.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I was married to a doctor and stayed home. Worked out to my advantage when he traded me in for a new model. Alimony for life.

And now you don't have to wash his socks either. I divorced my wealthy husband and I will get his retirement since I was the beneficiary, not his current widow. A SAHM is often financially secure. Something many don't understand.

+ 1
Educated, working moms making a livable wage, who quit to become SAHMs do that ONLY after making sure that they and kids are provided for if something changes.

I realize this article is super old, but it made an impression on me and i still think about it occasionally. https://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/11/magazine/the-opt-out-generation-wants-back-in.html

But yes, it works out well for lots of women, and is often worth whatever risk is involved. You just have to make sure you have yourself as covered as you can, in whatever way makes sense for you and your family.

It’s behind a paywall, care to summarize?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Surprised no one mentioned that her DH is laying groundwork for divorce? That’s always a good reason to push SAHM back to workforce.

No. She's been working, but wants to quit. That could be another one of his reasons though. Still I'd rather be home with my kids, you can't get that time back. Plus she can always get a job which is over rated imo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I was married to a doctor and stayed home. Worked out to my advantage when he traded me in for a new model. Alimony for life.

And now you don't have to wash his socks either. I divorced my wealthy husband and I will get his retirement since I was the beneficiary, not his current widow. A SAHM is often financially secure. Something many don't understand.

This is statistically simply not true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I was married to a doctor and stayed home. Worked out to my advantage when he traded me in for a new model. Alimony for life.

And now you don't have to wash his socks either. I divorced my wealthy husband and I will get his retirement since I was the beneficiary, not his current widow. A SAHM is often financially secure. Something many don't understand.

This is statistically simply not true.

It is when you marry a rich man.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I was married to a doctor and stayed home. Worked out to my advantage when he traded me in for a new model. Alimony for life.

And now you don't have to wash his socks either. I divorced my wealthy husband and I will get his retirement since I was the beneficiary, not his current widow. A SAHM is often financially secure. Something many don't understand.

I go to half his practice and half of his retirement. I literally do not need to work. I do have a full time job just for the benefits.

It's both of your practice and both of your retirement to begin with fyi.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I was married to a doctor and stayed home. Worked out to my advantage when he traded me in for a new model. Alimony for life.

And now you don't have to wash his socks either. I divorced my wealthy husband and I will get his retirement since I was the beneficiary, not his current widow. A SAHM is often financially secure. Something many don't understand.

This is statistically simply not true.

It is when you marry a rich man.

No not necessarily. Usually couples plan for that or have other assets to ensure all will be fine in case of a death etc. It called good money management!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was another thread on this where someone did the math on childcare hours of little kids vs school age kids, and there are only about 10 fewer hours of childcare with older kids. School aged kids sleep about 3 hours less a day than little kids (9-10 hours vs 12-13 hours), and so when kids go to school, you typically lose that time in the evening that you would normally have to yourself.

What are you talking about? My school age kids help with chores and entertain themselves before bed. I have more leisure time than ever. But we don’t sign up for travel sports so that helps.

Well, my kids go to bed at 9pm now, and they wake up at 7am, needing to be at school by 8am. They used to go to sleep at 7pm and wake up at 7am only needing to have their diaper changed.
So, I go to bed at 10pm and wake up at 6am so that I’m ready to go by 7. I used to have 3-4 hours every evening on my own, and now I really don’t.

It’s not that it’s hard, but I never really thought any of it was that hard. It’s still childcare, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was another thread on this where someone did the math on childcare hours of little kids vs school age kids, and there are only about 10 fewer hours of childcare with older kids. School aged kids sleep about 3 hours less a day than little kids (9-10 hours vs 12-13 hours), and so when kids go to school, you typically lose that time in the evening that you would normally have to yourself.

What are you talking about? My school age kids help with chores and entertain themselves before bed. I have more leisure time than ever. But we don’t sign up for travel sports so that helps.

Well, my kids go to bed at 9pm now, and they wake up at 7am, needing to be at school by 8am. They used to go to sleep at 7pm and wake up at 7am only needing to have their diaper changed.
So, I go to bed at 10pm and wake up at 6am so that I’m ready to go by 7. I used to have 3-4 hours every evening on my own, and now I really don’t.

It’s not that it’s hard, but I never really thought any of it was that hard. It’s still childcare, though.

Yup. I found the baby/toddler phase a lot less work in a lot of ways, because kids are pliable and still sleep a lot at that age. I feel like babies are time consuming but generally quite easy, get progressively more challenging until about age 7 or 8, and then typically get easier from there but it is highly kid-dependent. I certainly know plenty of kids where the really hard work of parenting didn't even start getting tough until they were in elementary school due to special academic needs that arose or social issues. So a 10 yo or 14 yo could, in my opinion, easily require more effort and energy than a baby, and potentially even more time. What parent does not sometimes think fondly back to that first year and three naps a day and a bedtime that consisted of nothing but a bottle and a diaper change? Babies aren't "easy" but they are exceedingly simple. School age kids are rarely simple.

[Anonymous]

Why would you want to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question: what do you do with the six+ Hours when your kids are out of the house? I can’t imagine having that much time for myself every day. I mean, any logistics/chores could all be done within three hours. And with no boss breathing down your neck. I can see how your husband could be resentful.

Not OP but it isn’t that much time. Not OP, but I workout at a gym daily and between going there, taking a shower, running some errands, cleaning up areas of the house (I do a daily pick up plus deep clean parts on a weekly schedule), yard work, I bake our bread daily and cook meals from scratch and that is very time consuming too. Six hours flies by.

Oh, barf. Working moms do all of this with a job (except “bake bread” — WTF — but if they really wanted to do that, they’d do it on the weekend).

You take a shower, work out and run some errands? Wow! Color us all impressed.

^ This.

Exactly - I work, have kids, drive them to activities, and make every meal at home. Oh, and I take a shower. BFD. You are so lazy.

Do you want a cookie?

🍪

This is why you don't want to get a job - you are ignorant

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was another thread on this where someone did the math on childcare hours of little kids vs school age kids, and there are only about 10 fewer hours of childcare with older kids. School aged kids sleep about 3 hours less a day than little kids (9-10 hours vs 12-13 hours), and so when kids go to school, you typically lose that time in the evening that you would normally have to yourself.

What are you talking about? My school age kids help with chores and entertain themselves before bed. I have more leisure time than ever. But we don’t sign up for travel sports so that helps.

Well, my kids go to bed at 9pm now, and they wake up at 7am, needing to be at school by 8am. They used to go to sleep at 7pm and wake up at 7am only needing to have their diaper changed.
So, I go to bed at 10pm and wake up at 6am so that I’m ready to go by 7. I used to have 3-4 hours every evening on my own, and now I really don’t.

It’s not that it’s hard, but I never really thought any of it was that hard. It’s still childcare, though.

Yup. I found the baby/toddler phase a lot less work in a lot of ways, because kids are pliable and still sleep a lot at that age. I feel like babies are time consuming but generally quite easy, get progressively more challenging until about age 7 or 8, and then typically get easier from there but it is highly kid-dependent. I certainly know plenty of kids where the really hard work of parenting didn't even start getting tough until they were in elementary school due to special academic needs that arose or social issues. So a 10 yo or 14 yo could, in my opinion, easily require more effort and energy than a baby, and potentially even more time. What parent does not sometimes think fondly back to that first year and three naps a day and a bedtime that consisted of nothing but a bottle and a diaper change? Babies aren't "easy" but they are exceedingly simple. School age kids are rarely simple.

But you have the whole day they are in school so BFD