What would you do?

Pollycat

Hedghog wrote: »

I may have nswered my own question here but I love him and most of the time things are great. It's when he is annoyed for whatever reason, be it me or something else, that he brings up me being a 'scrounger'

It sounds to me that this guy has a deep-seated resentment against the OP that surfaces when he is angry about something - anything.

Nothing will change unless she tackles this issue head-on and gets to the bottom of it, it may be something as simple as her being a SAHM was never discussed/agreed.

DUTR

Pollycat wrote: »

It sounds to me that this guy has a deep-seated resentment against the OP that surfaces when he is angry about something - anything.

Nothing will change unless she tackles this issue head-on and gets to the bottom of it, it may be something as simple as her being a SAHM was never discussed/agreed.

That is the way I read it .
Perhaps it's not going to be a win win situation for the OP and her family.

Snakey

Could be that there wasn't much discussion about the OP getting pregnant, and he's feeling just a little put-upon that what he thought was an enjoyable, fun relationship between two adults working full-time has changed to him working to support himself plus two dependents. Perhaps this wasn't how he imagined his life would look at whatever age he is. Which wouldn't excuse his behaviour, I'm just saying that we really need more information about how this all came about before assigning bad guy/victim roles and suggesting that the way she handle this is to present him with a bill for childcare or for making the bed in the morning to make him realise how lucky he is!

If that's dead wrong and actually they both discussed everything in advance and decided, together, that they wanted to try for a baby and for the OP to give up work to raise the kid, and now he's acting like this, then I'd be concerned that this might become a properly abusive relationship.

Either way, while I'm not sure I'd be rushing back when the little one is only eight months old, I would definitely be thinking about my own future. Kids aren't young for ever, and most of the State help for unwaged and low-waged people (and single parents, should you end up in that position) vanishes once you no longer have dependent children. I'm 43 and some of my peer group who had their kids relatively young have recently been realising just how little their part-time jobs are actually paying once the government subsidy for raising kids has been removed - which, with no qualifications or experience to go and do anything better, and 25 years still to go until State pension age, isn't making them feel positive about their future.

pinkandblueshoe

Well if this is some people's favourite topic, I can't understand why some posters think no matter how bad it is for a woman in a relationship she has to stay and if any poster suggests that she should leave we are all man hating.

There has to be some balance. If a partner has issues with someone spending "his" money, only allows his partner to spend child benefit and refuses to allow the partner to get an evening or weekend job, Id say that's controlling, not positive at all.

Anyone who gives advice of stay together no matter what when some threads on here, the person in that relationship has been suffering, they need to look at getting a sense of perspective.

It shouldn't boil down to men v women either, men and women can both be abused in relationships.

Pollycat

Snakey wrote: »

Could be that there wasn't much discussion about the OP getting pregnant, and he's feeling just a little put-upon that what he thought was an enjoyable, fun relationship between two adults working full-time has changed to him working to support himself plus two dependents. Perhaps this wasn't how he imagined his life would look at whatever age he is. Which wouldn't excuse his behaviour, I'm just saying that we really need more information about how this all came about before assigning bad guy/victim roles and suggesting that the way she handle this is to present him with a bill for childcare or for making the bed in the morning to make him realise how lucky he is!

If that's dead wrong and actually they both discussed everything in advance and decided, together, that they wanted to try for a baby and for the OP to give up work to raise the kid, and now he's acting like this, then I'd be concerned that this might become a properly abusive relationship.

I agree with the above.
A couple of posters have asked the OP if her being a SAHM was discussed.

Hedghog wrote: »

Hi all,

I am new here but need some advice.

I have been with my boyfriend about 3 years. We have a son together (8 months old). I do not work as I am bringing up our son, however, my bf likes to remind that it is 'his money' whenever I like to spend the odd bit. I rarely spend on myself. Mainly on our child or him. If I was to work, it would be pointless as I would be earning less than childcare costs. How do I make him understand this? Or would you just leave? Iam fed up of feeling worthless even though I look after the house and cook meals aswell as raising our child. What would you do? I am open to most suggestions

Thanks x

I wonder if the OP's partner feels she is wasting money, maybe buying too many clothes/toys for the baby and stuff for him that he doesn't really want or need.

DUTR

pinkandblueshoe wrote: »

Well if this is some people's favourite topic, I can't understand why some posters think no matter how bad it is for a woman in a relationship she has to stay and if any poster suggests that she should leave we are all man hating.

There has to be some balance. If a partner has issues with someone spending "his" money, only allows his partner to spend child benefit and refuses to allow the partner to get an evening or weekend job, Id say that's controlling, not positive at all.

Anyone who gives advice of stay together no matter what when some threads on here, the person in that relationship has been suffering, they need to look at getting a sense of perspective.

It shouldn't boil down to men v women either, men and women can both be abused in relationships.

We (at work) were discussing the SAHM topic 4/5 of the ladies that sit around me are Mothers and are there in the office full time.
They were the ones that had the strongest views against sah parenting.
Until the OP comes back with the answers asked earlier in the thread, it is hard to conclude if the OP or her partner is being taken advantage of (abused is a bit too strong) .
If even having child(ren) were not discussed then they are both in the wrong and they will have to make strong compromises, which could mean them splitting for they sake of them not left feeling taken advantage of.

David301

BigAunty

This issue crops up fairly regularly on this forum, with varying degrees of pressure tactics and cruelty involved. It's a shame that the search facility on this forum is so poor otherwise you could have unearthed these posts.

The central theme is that the main earner resents contributing to the expense of the household and the main way it seems to be expressed is in insulting language and behaviour towards the mother of their child(ren), in particular a huge hostility towards their partner's having any disposable income.

Generally, they are excluded from household finances - their partner will refuse to discuss money, may not let them access bills, will control the bank accounts and so forth.

For instance, one woman was criticised for spending a small sum on cordial to contribute to a food bank because it is is 'his money'. This was despite her partner having a high income and good savings, he kept her in penury.

In another, she was only allowed to have access to the child benefit for what he considered to be 'her child' (it was his, too but would quite pointedly tell her she was responsible for all costs associated with the child).

In another, the lady was allowed to spend the child tax credits and her own income which barely covered the child care costs and the rent but when her partner's income rose, her benefits were slashed while her outgoings were not. her partner refused to change his contribution and would not discuss his finances. I think this left her with £4 to her name after essentials each week while her partner had several hundred pounds at least each month. She was responsible for paying the rent with her ever falling income and she said she was certain that if she couldn't meet the rent, he would refuse to pay and would rather be evicted.

In another, a woman was refused to be allowed to work or study by her partner who also would not let her claim the child benefits which would have kept her NI stamp up to date and contributed towards the state pension.

In another thread, a lady worked while her partner did not but he claimed all their benefits and her employment income and would not give her any money. He drove her to and from work and phoned her all the time, would not let her out, would not let her contact people. She ended up in emergency housing but then it became apparent he had hacked her email and may have installed a tracking device on her mobile phone so she was moved again.

The threads then descend into whether or not the OP has a relationship issue, a money issue or a domestic violence issue.

For DV, many people do not realise that a common sign of domestic abuse is that their partner controls all the money, committing a form of financial violence on them. Also, that domestic abusers can play a long game and may wait until their partner is tied to them financially, typically when a child makes them more dependent on them, before starting up their campaign of disrespectful and abusive behaviour.

On that topic, only the OP can know the true picture and there is a checklist on the Womens Aid website to determine if a person is experiencing abuse as it is about a pattern of behaviours.

DUTR

BigAunty wrote: »

This issue crops up fairly regularly on this forum, with varying degrees of pressure tactics and cruelty involved. It's a shame that the search facility on this forum is so poor otherwise you could have unearthed these posts.

The central theme is that the main earner resents contributing to the expense of the household and the main way it seems to be expressed is in insulting language and behaviour towards the mother of their child(ren), in particular a huge hostility towards their partner's having any disposable income.

Generally, they are excluded from household finances - their partner will refuse to discuss money, may not let them access bills, will control the bank accounts and so forth.

[snip]
that topic, only the OP can know the true picture and there is a checklist on the Womens Aid website to determine if a person is experiencing abuse as it is about a pattern of behaviours.

Interesting reading, however perhaps the OP may not return, so it is difficult to determine who is being abused, if they never agreed to the sahm concept then I can see why there would be resentment expressed in the way you describe, the OP may have to explore one of the single mum model concepts if she is determined to be a sahm and the partner is not in agreement, he can contribute his 15% net (or 12% ) gross but then the OP has her own income from elsewhere without any of the headaches and insults the partner is levying at her.

lilmissmup

Not really got anything useful to say but I am in a similar situation, I am officially quitting my job this week to be a SAHM for next few years and my OH pays all the bills etc now and I feel guilty if I spend any money.

I saved some money whilst still working but it's dwindling away plus I am in debt.

he hasn't paid for much towards our daughter at all yet, he pays for her food but clothes/toys wise it's all down to me.

He hasn't called me a name and says I can spend the money in our bills account but I can't because its dwindling fast as it is.

I feel a bit like an unpaid slave these days doing all the cooking and cleaning plus helping with his two older children and tbh going back to work might be nice but there is no point in me doing it as all my wages would go on childcare.

So to reiterate you are not alone.