Anonymous wrote:This is OP and I cannot believe this is a 16 page thread. Never stop dcum, never stop.

Update- DH and I have talked a a lot since my OP (not about this thread- he would abhor me posting this on here). And just to clarify a few things about my husband- yes we met in undergrad at UVA and got married right after law school. I supported us with my teaching salary while he was in law school (luckily life was cheap back then). My husband is an incredible person and could care less about material things. Hence why the power and money draw of big law aren’t as meaningful to him as other people who crave that. He drives a ten year old car. His suits are from Jos A Bank, not Brooks Brothers. He’s wanted to buy himself a pool table for our basement for five years and hasn’t done it because he said it’s a want and not a need.

He doesn’t set a budget for me. Ever. But I’m also not a big spender and I don’t care about jewelry or purses or fancy clothes. We do not hold back for our kids and they do expensive extracurricular sports but they go to public (minus the little one but she goes to a church preschool) but we make sure our kids know every single day that they are lucky and blessed and we encourage giving back all the time.

DH took this job for us. He has stayed in this job for us. And he doesn’t want me going back to work because he genuinely believes it’s best to have me home with the kids. Again, not in a controlling way. We just value this.

He has decided to stay with his firm for another year and see how it goes. Save as much as we can. And then reassess. Yes he wants to go to the govt eventually and whether that’s in one year or three or ten is TBD. And yes he knows that his time there will likely be temporary and not permanent and he may have to go back to a different firm or go in house. But we will cross that bridge when the time comes.

Thank you to everyone who gave kind and helpful advice. And to everyone who has been in this boat or is currently navigating something similar, I send you hope that it all works out. All we can do is what’s best for us and our families. I am very very lucky that my husband and I are truly a partnership who support each other (which is why the posters who suggested I’m an awful person who is a gold digger just made me laugh. You truly don’t even know). You just have to do your best. That’s all we can all do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been following this thread with some interest. I'm a woman in biglaw and the main breadwinner. Our pretax HHI is around 650K, with my DH bringing in around $130K of it as a non-lawyer fed. Our financials are not super different; retirement is only $950K and 529 is only $300K total (I think OP had more on both counts), but we have about $1.8 in brokerage accounts so about the same total. Our mortgage is higher and we have less equity, but also have some special circumstances that resulted in that -- i.e., parents who moved in with us so we can help with health issues but who happily contribute to mortgage/bills/etc -- and we left a very low mortgage ($2200) to accommodate them. We'd be happy to downsize house if my parents no longer needed the space.

My kids are 6 and 3 and I often think of leaving big law in the next 3-5 years. I don't think I want to be a partner, but I'm fairly confident I could stay in my counsel position for a while if I wanted to do so. Part of me thinks I should just to save up, pay for life, keep doing it while it feels manageable. Part of me would love to pursue other options (which have uncertain or certainly lower salaries) that I think I would enjoy more. The overwhelming majority of folks on this thread seem to think operating on fed salary and drawing down savings to fill the gap is insane, though, which would probably be our plan too.

This is insane. You have SO much money. 300k in 529s when your kids are 6 and under? 1.8 in brokerage and you are worried about living off 2 fed salaries? Look with these numbers, you cannot complain about life work balance. You are consciously making the decision to work your ass off in big law in order to support your lifestyle and be able to buy $900 shoes at whim (or whatever the example was people gave). And that is a totally fine decision but you can't complain you are miserable. It would be insanely easy to take a step back, live off 300k instead of 800k/year, and yes face a moderate change in your lifestyle but having the time to find joy in other things and maybe even enjoy your work.

Anonymous wrote:This is OP and I cannot believe this is a 16 page thread. Never stop dcum, never stop.

Update- DH and I have talked a a lot since my OP (not about this thread- he would abhor me posting this on here). And just to clarify a few things about my husband- yes we met in undergrad at UVA and got married right after law school. I supported us with my teaching salary while he was in law school (luckily life was cheap back then). My husband is an incredible person and could care less about material things. Hence why the power and money draw of big law aren’t as meaningful to him as other people who crave that. He drives a ten year old car. His suits are from Jos A Bank, not Brooks Brothers. He’s wanted to buy himself a pool table for our basement for five years and hasn’t done it because he said it’s a want and not a need.

He doesn’t set a budget for me. Ever. But I’m also not a big spender and I don’t care about jewelry or purses or fancy clothes. We do not hold back for our kids and they do expensive extracurricular sports but they go to public (minus the little one but she goes to a church preschool) but we make sure our kids know every single day that they are lucky and blessed and we encourage giving back all the time.

DH took this job for us. He has stayed in this job for us. And he doesn’t want me going back to work because he genuinely believes it’s best to have me home with the kids. Again, not in a controlling way. We just value this.

He has decided to stay with his firm for another year and see how it goes. Save as much as we can. And then reassess. Yes he wants to go to the govt eventually and whether that’s in one year or three or ten is TBD. And yes he knows that his time there will likely be temporary and not permanent and he may have to go back to a different firm or go in house. But we will cross that bridge when the time comes.

Thank you to everyone who gave kind and helpful advice. And to everyone who has been in this boat or is currently navigating something similar, I send you hope that it all works out. All we can do is what’s best for us and our families. I am very very lucky that my husband and I are truly a partnership who support each other (which is why the posters who suggested I’m an awful person who is a gold digger just made me laugh. You truly don’t even know). You just have to do your best. That’s all we can all do.

Anonymous wrote:I've been following this thread with some interest. I'm a woman in biglaw and the main breadwinner. Our pretax HHI is around 650K, with my DH bringing in around $130K of it as a non-lawyer fed. Our financials are not super different; retirement is only $950K and 529 is only $300K total (I think OP had more on both counts), but we have about $1.8 in brokerage accounts so about the same total. Our mortgage is higher and we have less equity, but also have some special circumstances that resulted in that -- i.e., parents who moved in with us so we can help with health issues but who happily contribute to mortgage/bills/etc -- and we left a very low mortgage ($2200) to accommodate them. We'd be happy to downsize house if my parents no longer needed the space.

My kids are 6 and 3 and I often think of leaving big law in the next 3-5 years. I don't think I want to be a partner, but I'm fairly confident I could stay in my counsel position for a while if I wanted to do so. Part of me thinks I should just to save up, pay for life, keep doing it while it feels manageable. Part of me would love to pursue other options (which have uncertain or certainly lower salaries) that I think I would enjoy more. The overwhelming majority of folks on this thread seem to think operating on fed salary and drawing down savings to fill the gap is insane, though, which would probably be our plan too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So these husbands are indentured servants? Make X minimum salary forever or else? Or else what?

I mean that is called being a man. You decide how to structure your life. If the idea was that biglaw could go away any second you would keep spouse working and save like crazy. If you go the route that OP's family did here -- it is on the spouse in biglaw --- one thing if he was fired or could not bring in enough work but otherwise you do not get to leave. You made the choice --- if you watch what you do -- no reason you cannot make the move at age 50ish. But have that as your plan. You gave up on the other job when you went this route.

No. It’s called people can change their minds and they adjust accordingly. It’s not some sort of permanent servitude so you never have to work. I feel sorry for your husband.

DP.

Oh please. Grow up.

As is the case in every other aspect of life, there are consequences and processes involved in changing your mind. That's life. He needs to suck it up for a little longer.

OP was working at home, catering to this man's every need.

If OP was a man with a biglaw wife, your response would be completely different. I’ve never heard the phrase “grow up” from someone mature.

What's your solution, Mature One?

Her DH makes 183k and she goes back to school while they pay for preschool?

Or they sell their house and move somewhere cheaper?

They are not making it in Bethesda on 183k .

This. He can take a pay cut but it’s going to require a complete restructuring of their life with the assumption he will never go back, because that’s what’s most likely. And that will likely mean giving up other things he wants, like working a prestigious post at Main Justice. Choices have consequences.

If I were his wife I’d be freaking out because he seems to be indulging in a complete fantasy about how this will play out. The plan to spend down their savings to avoid the reality of how this move doesn’t fit with their current burn rate is alarming.

This is the risk a woman takes when she puts all of her financial eggs in her husband's basket. I'm sure her husband understands exactly what needs to happen for this to work financially, but he's just knows his wife is going to freak out about the end of the gravy train.

Isn’t it more the risk a man takes when he marries a man with no meaningful career prospects?

Nah. The husband is fine going down to the Fed salary. Its the wife that has a problem with it. She can't "make" him stay in BigLaw.

I don’t see how he’s fine with it given that he’s clearly delusional about what he actually needs to do to make it work.

Where does OP say this? I think he’s minimizing it to keep HER off the ledge. He’s done Fed work before - he knows.

Where does it say he’s worked in fed gov before?? Not in the OP…

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So these husbands are indentured servants? Make X minimum salary forever or else? Or else what?

I mean that is called being a man. You decide how to structure your life. If the idea was that biglaw could go away any second you would keep spouse working and save like crazy. If you go the route that OP's family did here -- it is on the spouse in biglaw --- one thing if he was fired or could not bring in enough work but otherwise you do not get to leave. You made the choice --- if you watch what you do -- no reason you cannot make the move at age 50ish. But have that as your plan. You gave up on the other job when you went this route.

No. It’s called people can change their minds and they adjust accordingly. It’s not some sort of permanent servitude so you never have to work. I feel sorry for your husband.

DP.

Oh please. Grow up.

As is the case in every other aspect of life, there are consequences and processes involved in changing your mind. That's life. He needs to suck it up for a little longer.

OP was working at home, catering to this man's every need.

If OP was a man with a biglaw wife, your response would be completely different. I’ve never heard the phrase “grow up” from someone mature.

What's your solution, Mature One?

Her DH makes 183k and she goes back to school while they pay for preschool?

Or they sell their house and move somewhere cheaper?

They are not making it in Bethesda on 183k .

This. He can take a pay cut but it’s going to require a complete restructuring of their life with the assumption he will never go back, because that’s what’s most likely. And that will likely mean giving up other things he wants, like working a prestigious post at Main Justice. Choices have consequences.

If I were his wife I’d be freaking out because he seems to be indulging in a complete fantasy about how this will play out. The plan to spend down their savings to avoid the reality of how this move doesn’t fit with their current burn rate is alarming.

This is the risk a woman takes when she puts all of her financial eggs in her husband's basket. I'm sure her husband understands exactly what needs to happen for this to work financially, but he's just knows his wife is going to freak out about the end of the gravy train.

Isn’t it more the risk a man takes when he marries a man with no meaningful career prospects?

Nah. The husband is fine going down to the Fed salary. Its the wife that has a problem with it. She can't "make" him stay in BigLaw.

I don’t see how he’s fine with it given that he’s clearly delusional about what he actually needs to do to make it work.

Where does OP say this? I think he’s minimizing it to keep HER off the ledge. He’s done Fed work before - he knows.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So these husbands are indentured servants? Make X minimum salary forever or else? Or else what?

I mean that is called being a man. You decide how to structure your life. If the idea was that biglaw could go away any second you would keep spouse working and save like crazy. If you go the route that OP's family did here -- it is on the spouse in biglaw --- one thing if he was fired or could not bring in enough work but otherwise you do not get to leave. You made the choice --- if you watch what you do -- no reason you cannot make the move at age 50ish. But have that as your plan. You gave up on the other job when you went this route.

No. It’s called people can change their minds and they adjust accordingly. It’s not some sort of permanent servitude so you never have to work. I feel sorry for your husband.

DP.

Oh please. Grow up.

As is the case in every other aspect of life, there are consequences and processes involved in changing your mind. That's life. He needs to suck it up for a little longer.

OP was working at home, catering to this man's every need.

If OP was a man with a biglaw wife, your response would be completely different. I’ve never heard the phrase “grow up” from someone mature.

What's your solution, Mature One?

Her DH makes 183k and she goes back to school while they pay for preschool?

Or they sell their house and move somewhere cheaper?

They are not making it in Bethesda on 183k .

This. He can take a pay cut but it’s going to require a complete restructuring of their life with the assumption he will never go back, because that’s what’s most likely. And that will likely mean giving up other things he wants, like working a prestigious post at Main Justice. Choices have consequences.

If I were his wife I’d be freaking out because he seems to be indulging in a complete fantasy about how this will play out. The plan to spend down their savings to avoid the reality of how this move doesn’t fit with their current burn rate is alarming.

This is the risk a woman takes when she puts all of her financial eggs in her husband's basket. I'm sure her husband understands exactly what needs to happen for this to work financially, but he's just knows his wife is going to freak out about the end of the gravy train.

Isn’t it more the risk a man takes when he marries a man with no meaningful career prospects?

Nah. The husband is fine going down to the Fed salary. Its the wife that has a problem with it. She can't "make" him stay in BigLaw.

I don’t see how he’s fine with it given that he’s clearly delusional about what he actually needs to do to make it work.

Where does OP say this? I think he’s minimizing it to keep HER off the ledge. He’s done Fed work before - he knows.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s going to freak out when he has to buy a suit at Joseph a bank and they have to budget for it.

He probably has plenty of nice suits from his big law days. They have a lot in savings and their child’s preschool is like $3K/year. They won’t have a ton of extra income if they stay in their home, but if OP can make $30-40K/year then that will give them wiggle room. He’ll also have a pension and they have $2M saved.

Perhaps but I wouldn’t discount how someone with a big law salary is used to spending money freely and has likely lost perspective.

My DH will purchase a $900 pair of shoes, drop $400 on dinner and even just spent $300 on BS on a Saturday. We can do this because of our salaries. Dropping down to $180k will be a HUGE change. The DH will likely be shocked when he needs new shoes and is told to go to Macy’s after he gets paid next. Or when they want to grab dinner with friends but can’t afford the tab without dipping into savings. Trust me when I say this DH is going to be completely shocked. He is living a very comfortable life despite the hours and reality will hit hard.

Anonymous wrote:I've been following this thread with some interest. I'm a woman in biglaw and the main breadwinner. Our pretax HHI is around 650K, with my DH bringing in around $130K of it as a non-lawyer fed. Our financials are not super different; retirement is only $950K and 529 is only $300K total (I think OP had more on both counts), but we have about $1.8 in brokerage accounts so about the same total. Our mortgage is higher and we have less equity, but also have some special circumstances that resulted in that -- i.e., parents who moved in with us so we can help with health issues but who happily contribute to mortgage/bills/etc -- and we left a very low mortgage ($2200) to accommodate them. We'd be happy to downsize house if my parents no longer needed the space.

My kids are 6 and 3 and I often think of leaving big law in the next 3-5 years. I don't think I want to be a partner, but I'm fairly confident I could stay in my counsel position for a while if I wanted to do so. Part of me thinks I should just to save up, pay for life, keep doing it while it feels manageable. Part of me would love to pursue other options (which have uncertain or certainly lower salaries) that I think I would enjoy more. The overwhelming majority of folks on this thread seem to think operating on fed salary and drawing down savings to fill the gap is insane, though, which would probably be our plan too.