Anonymous wrote:Honestly, if you’re a SAHM who wants to hire 24/7 help for 3 months, I’d balk at that too.
Anonymous wrote:I wonder how much of this is just people balking at someone having a $775k HHI.
OP it sounds like you could benefit from therapy. Your marriage sounds hostile and lonely.[/quote]
100% this. This guy's gone 12 hours a day, doesn't help at all when he's there, it doesn't sound like he is emotionally present, and he pressured you to get pregnant yet doesn't think you need or deserve any help or breaks. You're basically expected to be "on" 24/7. Given your financial situation, I would negotiate - maybe not 24/7 help, but a mother's helper during the day and a night nurse a few nights per week for the first few months.
And yeah, therapy. Not a happy marriage.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think you are just used to a rich lifestyle of having someone else do all the work at home and your husband is getting annoyed. He does work himself all day and so the idea that you can't look after the kids and need to outsource childcare despite being at home is frustrating.
99% of parents at home with their kids don't have nannies or night nurses to provide the child care while they come and go as they please.
I think this is a difference in values more than anything. You say your husband works 10-12 hours a day and that work is the financial income you live off of but you don't seem to really want to contribute anything back to the household. You want a carefree life of leisure while others are paid to do all the work. I doubt you cook or clean or do much around the house either - likely that is all outsourced as well.
Are you much younger than your DH? Did you see marrying him and his money as a golden ticket to a life of no work?
Since you don't want to look after the kids, you should get a job and use that money to pay the childcare costs.
Please explain why you think someone who's legitimately rich should live as if they're poor.
Not everyone, including Ops DH thinks that being rich means you outsourced your SAHM role. It isn't only the poors who raise their own kids. Your idea that rich means you outsource everything isn't the case. OPs DH hasn't outsourced his work - he still has to go and work hard and make this money they have to be rich. It isn't an inheritance and trust fund where he also just plays all day with no responsibilities. I get that OP didn't want this baby and therefore is resentful that she might have to provide some childcare but that is where OP and DH are not on the same page. He sees her as also being a contributing member of the household and having responsibilities despite the money he earns while working all the time. Op sees her role was just to birth the children and then step away and hire people to do the rest. There are many rich people who still work and have responsibilities and raise their own kids and contribute either financially or through work at home - your view that only the poors do this is strange.
I don't disagree with your analysis of the situation--in fact, it's right on--but I just have to point out that referring to people as "the poors" is really distasteful and detracts from the otherwise sensible and thoughtful nature of your post.
You are right and it isn't a way I would ever refer to people. I was referring back (kind of sarcastically) to the post I quoted of someone talking about living like the rich vs the poor. However I can see that that point may have been lost and it just looks distasteful.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think you are just used to a rich lifestyle of having someone else do all the work at home and your husband is getting annoyed. He does work himself all day and so the idea that you can't look after the kids and need to outsource childcare despite being at home is frustrating.
99% of parents at home with their kids don't have nannies or night nurses to provide the child care while they come and go as they please.
I think this is a difference in values more than anything. You say your husband works 10-12 hours a day and that work is the financial income you live off of but you don't seem to really want to contribute anything back to the household. You want a carefree life of leisure while others are paid to do all the work. I doubt you cook or clean or do much around the house either - likely that is all outsourced as well.
Are you much younger than your DH? Did you see marrying him and his money as a golden ticket to a life of no work?
Since you don't want to look after the kids, you should get a job and use that money to pay the childcare costs.
Please explain why you think someone who's legitimately rich should live as if they're poor.
Not everyone, including Ops DH thinks that being rich means you outsourced your SAHM role. It isn't only the poors who raise their own kids. Your idea that rich means you outsource everything isn't the case. OPs DH hasn't outsourced his work - he still has to go and work hard and make this money they have to be rich. It isn't an inheritance and trust fund where he also just plays all day with no responsibilities. I get that OP didn't want this baby and therefore is resentful that she might have to provide some childcare but that is where OP and DH are not on the same page. He sees her as also being a contributing member of the household and having responsibilities despite the money he earns while working all the time. Op sees her role was just to birth the children and then step away and hire people to do the rest. There are many rich people who still work and have responsibilities and raise their own kids and contribute either financially or through work at home - your view that only the poors do this is strange.
I don't disagree with your analysis of the situation--in fact, it's right on--but I just have to point out that referring to people as "the poors" is really distasteful and detracts from the otherwise sensible and thoughtful nature of your post.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I wonder how much of this is just people balking at someone having a $775k HHI.
OP it sounds like you could benefit from therapy. Your marriage sounds hostile and lonely.
A lot of it.
I think OP should get help around the house, and the only thing that gives me pause is she seems to want the kind of help that lets her hang out with the older kid exclusively and hand off the baby. I think there are some signs of ambivalence and resentment toward the baby in her posts, and the idea that dad had to have a boy and pushed her to get pregnant before she was ready while also being no help -- it sounds like a recipe for PPD/A.
Beef up the house cleaning and get a night nurse, but don't check out on this baby before he gets here. You're mad at dad, not baby.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think you are just used to a rich lifestyle of having someone else do all the work at home and your husband is getting annoyed. He does work himself all day and so the idea that you can't look after the kids and need to outsource childcare despite being at home is frustrating.
99% of parents at home with their kids don't have nannies or night nurses to provide the child care while they come and go as they please.
I think this is a difference in values more than anything. You say your husband works 10-12 hours a day and that work is the financial income you live off of but you don't seem to really want to contribute anything back to the household. You want a carefree life of leisure while others are paid to do all the work. I doubt you cook or clean or do much around the house either - likely that is all outsourced as well.
Are you much younger than your DH? Did you see marrying him and his money as a golden ticket to a life of no work?
Since you don't want to look after the kids, you should get a job and use that money to pay the childcare costs.
Please explain why you think someone who's legitimately rich should live as if they're poor.
Not everyone, including Ops DH thinks that being rich means you outsourced your SAHM role. It isn't only the poors who raise their own kids. Your idea that rich means you outsource everything isn't the case. OPs DH hasn't outsourced his work - he still has to go and work hard and make this money they have to be rich. It isn't an inheritance and trust fund where he also just plays all day with no responsibilities. I get that OP didn't want this baby and therefore is resentful that she might have to provide some childcare but that is where OP and DH are not on the same page. He sees her as also being a contributing member of the household and having responsibilities despite the money he earns while working all the time. Op sees her role was just to birth the children and then step away and hire people to do the rest. There are many rich people who still work and have responsibilities and raise their own kids and contribute either financially or through work at home - your view that only the poors do this is strange.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I wonder how much of this is just people balking at someone having a $775k HHI.
OP it sounds like you could benefit from therapy. Your marriage sounds hostile and lonely.
A lot of it.
I think OP should get help around the house, and the only thing that gives me pause is she seems to want the kind of help that lets her hang out with the older kid exclusively and hand off the baby. I think there are some signs of ambivalence and resentment toward the baby in her posts, and the idea that dad had to have a boy and pushed her to get pregnant before she was ready while also being no help -- it sounds like a recipe for PPD/A.
Beef up the house cleaning and get a night nurse, but don't check out on this baby before he gets here. You're mad at dad, not baby.
Anonymous wrote:I wonder how much of this is just people balking at someone having a $775k HHI.
OP it sounds like you could benefit from therapy. Your marriage sounds hostile and lonely.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think you are just used to a rich lifestyle of having someone else do all the work at home and your husband is getting annoyed. He does work himself all day and so the idea that you can't look after the kids and need to outsource childcare despite being at home is frustrating.
99% of parents at home with their kids don't have nannies or night nurses to provide the child care while they come and go as they please.
I think this is a difference in values more than anything. You say your husband works 10-12 hours a day and that work is the financial income you live off of but you don't seem to really want to contribute anything back to the household. You want a carefree life of leisure while others are paid to do all the work. I doubt you cook or clean or do much around the house either - likely that is all outsourced as well.
Are you much younger than your DH? Did you see marrying him and his money as a golden ticket to a life of no work?
Since you don't want to look after the kids, you should get a job and use that money to pay the childcare costs.
Please explain why you think someone who's legitimately rich should live as if they're poor.
Not everyone, including Ops DH thinks that being rich means you outsourced your SAHM role. It isn't only the poors who raise their own kids. Your idea that rich means you outsource everything isn't the case. OPs DH hasn't outsourced his work - he still has to go and work hard and make this money they have to be rich. It isn't an inheritance and trust fund where he also just plays all day with no responsibilities. I get that OP didn't want this baby and therefore is resentful that she might have to provide some childcare but that is where OP and DH are not on the same page. He sees her as also being a contributing member of the household and having responsibilities despite the money he earns while working all the time. Op sees her role was just to birth the children and then step away and hire people to do the rest. There are many rich people who still work and have responsibilities and raise their own kids and contribute either financially or through work at home - your view that only the poors do this is strange.
First, OP's DH has presumably outsourced his cleaning, laundry, cooking and every other thing that isn't work.
Second, OP doesn't say she wants to outsource EVERYTHING. She cares for her toddler now and she said nothing about nannies or daycare so let's assume she's doing 100% of the childcare for the older child. She wants to spend time with her toddler and she wants to have a good night's sleep once in a while. She says she has cleaners but she didn't say she has cooks or laundresses or drivers or personal errand-runners. At this income level, having help is completely normal. Newborns are needy even if healthy. I never had a toddler AND a newborn at home but if I did, you bet I'd have help. Actually what I would do is have the toddler in 100% daycare before the newborn arrives.
Yeah, and I’ll point out that every WOHM I’ve ever known has kept their older kid in daycare when they had 3 months maternity leave, and no one ever questions that (nor should they). But when a SAHM wants help with multiple young children suddenly she’s called lazy...