Joint finances when you have children?

BigAunty

Peter333 wrote: »

As I said, it's nothing to do with ANYONE if a woman wants to be a SAHM/homemaker, all her life, even when the children are grown, and even when they leave home; except for her and her husband. IMO, the people who vilify them for it and jealous and bitter.

A bit of devil's advocacy here.

Lone parents (typically 95% female) make up around a quarter of households and this figure is likely to grow. The UK has one of the highest rates of lone parenthood in the EU.

Of course, many work but then again, many work in part time roles that don't pay any or much tax as they are only required to work 16 hours to qualify for working tax credits. Of course, child care is expensive and that's a national scandal.

Originally, lone parents could claim Income Support until their youngest child turned 13 but this has been reduced to 5 when they are now ported onto Job Seekers Allowance.

So from a taxpayers perspective lone parent SAHM are net takers and a drain on the public purse. Yes, of course, they may return back to work later but then again, most of their working age is spent out of the workforce. Yes, of course, their children will pay into the system but then again, lone parents are more likely to begat children who become lone parents themselves.

I personally know a number of lone parents in my social circle and family who haven't worked for 10 or 20 years or have only ever worked on a part time basis in low paid roles so continue to not pay any tax and to receive funds approaching 10 or 20k per annum in benefits.

I'm not suggesting that we go back to the dark days of the 70s where I recall my lone parent next door neighbour having to pull tatties and pick spring onions in the fields to make a bit of extra cash and was so hard up, she used to swap veg she'd picked for tins of beans with my mum.

However, SAHMs can be costly to the public purse.

Peter333

Hi Big Aunty.

I am talking about situations where the woman is NOT a lone parent, and she and the husband are happy with the situation, and his wage is enough for them to live on with no state handouts.

At the end of the day, it's nobody's business but his and hers, if she stays at home, and they live on his income. Much of what you're saying in your post there ^^^ isn't relevant to what I said in my post.

Horses for courses, but all the couples I know where the woman has stayed a homemaker, have a man on a pretty good salary and with a good job.

In addition, they are both happy with the situation, and 'his' salary is the family pot, and she has the same access to it as he does. Of course, I get what you're saying about situations where men keep all the money to themselves, and the woman has nothing, but with the people I know, this is not the case. Moreover, they have no benefits either as the men I know are on very good salaries.

Just offering a different viewpoint, and stressing that if a couple have decided that she will be the homemaker and he brings home the bacon, and they are BOTH happy with this, nobody has any right to judge, or say ' I am NOT happy with THAT!' It sounds arrogant and judgemental. What has it got to do with anyone else? Especially as I said, when the people in question do not have any state handouts?

As Judi said at the end of page 1 to the poster who said they can't accept women staying at home and not going out to work when the kids are grown

Judi wrote: »

Who made you judge and jury?

Mojisola

Peter333 wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with the woman staying at home long term, even when the children are older; being there for the children, the family, the husband, and looking after house and home, whilst the husband goes to work, if that is what she wants, and if that is what the husband wants. As long as they are both happy with the situation, and there is enough income from his wage alone, it's nobody's business if the woman is still off work when the youngest is 20!

It's an arrangement that does suit some couples as long as the SATP understands the vulnerability of their situation. If the working spouse dies young or the relationship breaks up, the SATP would find it very hard to get a job after years of non-employment. It could also have a massive effect on the pension entitlement for their later years.

Like all life choices, people should chose what suits them but also have a eye on the 'what ifs' and plan accordingly.

vroombroom

OH and I have been together for 6 years and have a 4 year old due to start school in September.

We have separate accounts and always have done. It works for us and we've never queried it. All the bills come out of OH's account and I transfer money each month.

I have three jobs - one in a supermarket and two self-employed. The money from the supermarket is transferred in every month for my half of the mortgage and the bills. The little money I make from my self employed jobs (all declared before anyone starts) fluctuates from £12-£50 a week and that is spent on petrol and food.

Occasionally when we need childcare I will pay for it and I use £30 from our child benefit for clothes, toys etc for our son. The rest goes in his savings.

We're also getting married in October and having an extremely small wedding - I'm paying for it and OH is paying for our honeymoon :-)

Works for us, me especially as I am financially secure if things ever went t1ts up for us.

Goldiegirl

Peter333 wrote: »

You may not be able to 'accept' that, but it's really none of your business - or anyone else's - if a woman is a SAHM, even when the children are much older. In fact, from your post, you sound a bit jealous of these women you refer to.

There is nothing wrong with the woman staying at home long term, even when the children are older; being there for the children, the family, the husband, and looking after house and home, whilst the husband goes to work, if that is what she wants, and if that is what the husband wants. As long as they are both happy with the situation, and there is enough income from his wage alone, it's nobody's business if the woman is still off work when the youngest is 20!

I know several woman who are in their 50s and 60s now, and have been homemakers since they were in their mid 20s, and their youngest child is at college or university, and in a couple of cases, the children have left home. One woman is in her early 50s, and has not done paid employment since she was in her mid 20s, but has raised 4 children, and now helps look after 2 grandchildren, and helps care for her parents who are in their 80s... She and her husband are perfectly happy with the situation, and there is no need for her to work. Yet she gets a barrage of catty comments from her peers, acquaintances, and so-called friends.

Women being homemakers, and being there for the husband, children, and maybe even extended family like elderly parents and grandchildren, is fine, if they can afford to do it, and both people in the couple are happy with it. Too many people are too quick to vilify women who stay at home; even when the children are school age, calling them lazy and free-loaders. Several of the women I know are constantly defending themselves when asked 'why don't you work?' The most popular retort is 'because I don't NEED to.'

I put it down to jealousy. The women I know who are homemakers (a few who have grown children,) have had some very catty remarks and put downs over the years, even when the children were younger, and it's always women making the remarks, and the more catty and spiteful the remark, the more I am convinced it's down to jealousy.

As I said, it's nothing to do with ANYONE if a woman wants to be a SAHM/homemaker, all her life, even when the children are grown, and even when they leave home; except for her and her husband. IMO, the people who vilify them for it and jealous and bitter.

Would you be quite so accepting if the woman worked and the man stayed at home long after the children were grown up, just because he didn't NEED to work?

nearlyrich

I don't envy people who don't have to work I have had amazing experiences in my work life which added to my experience as a parent makes me feel my life has been pretty good. I plan to retire early so I think I will have the best of all worlds except I still can't afford a yacht!

LilElvis

Guest101 wrote: »

Why did she not work for 20 years?!

I can understand until youngest is at school. But surely after that you'd go to work?

Possibly because schools aren't open 52 weeks of the year, 9 til 5. This means that for working parents childcare is still needed before/after school and during holidays. Childcare is extremely expensive and the cost might well outweigh the increase in income from the SAHM returning to work.

Jagraf

My MIL is in her 80s and worked until she had children, never to go out to work again. She is extremely resentful that she didn't have a career like women nowadays can have, and cannot understand why they stay at home (except for pre school kids).

I think when kids are little its a massive job being at home. However, as a mum to a sixteen year old and with a husband I'm not sure what running a home, cleaning a house, paying the bills and 'looking after (lol) my husband would entail. All my girlie friends work as do I - we pay all the bills on line (takes a few mins a day), our meals can be prepared at the weekends, the cleaning doesn't really take long if none of us are in, and DD is very messy but its left for her to clean up.

If there are other responsibilities fair enough, but really, it ain't a job when they are older.

Jagraf

LilElvis wrote: »

Possibly because schools aren't open 52 weeks of the year, 9 til 5. This means that for working parents childcare is still needed before/after school and during holidays. Childcare is extremely expensive and the cost might well outweigh the increase in income from the SAHM returning to work.

My childcare equalled my income when it was necessary. However, I kept my skills up to date which enabled me to earn more and make up for it later in life.

Jagraf

Peter333 wrote: »

You may not be able to 'accept' that, but it's really none of your business - or anyone else's - if a woman is a SAHM, even when the children are much older. In fact, from your post, you sound a bit jealous of these women you refer to.

There is nothing wrong with the woman staying at home long term, even when the children are older; being there for the children, the family, the husband, and looking after house and home, whilst the husband goes to work, if that is what she wants, and if that is what the husband wants. As long as they are both happy with the situation, and there is enough income from his wage alone, it's nobody's business if the woman is still off work when the youngest is 20!

I know several woman who are in their 50s and 60s now, and have been homemakers since they were in their mid 20s, and their youngest child is at college or university, and in a couple of cases, the children have left home. One woman is in her early 50s, and has not done paid employment since she was in her mid 20s, but has raised 4 children, and now helps look after 2 grandchildren, and helps care for her parents who are in their 80s... She and her husband are perfectly happy with the situation, and there is no need for her to work. Yet she gets a barrage of catty comments from her peers, acquaintances, and so-called friends.

Women being homemakers, and being there for the husband, children, and maybe even extended family like elderly parents and grandchildren, is fine, if they can afford to do it, and both people in the couple are happy with it. Too many people are too quick to vilify women who stay at home; even when the children are school age, calling them lazy and free-loaders. Several of the women I know are constantly defending themselves when asked 'why don't you work?' The most popular retort is 'because I don't NEED to.'

I put it down to jealousy. The women I know who are homemakers (a few who have grown children,) have had some very catty remarks and put downs over the years, even when the children were younger, and it's always women making the remarks, and the more catty and spiteful the remark, the more I am convinced it's down to jealousy.

As I said, it's nothing to do with ANYONE if a woman wants to be a SAHM/homemaker, all her life, even when the children are grown, and even when they leave home; except for her and her husband. IMO, the people who vilify them for it and jealous and bitter.

Its a very common debate, but I personally felt vilified by others who thought I was wrong to go back to work when my daughter was very young. I don't very often hear the term "home maker" now, it sounds a bit Victorian.