One partner not working through choice

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

Deleted%20User wrote: »

Actually Miss Biggles or who ever else you use to post under, not quite correct. My aunt who rarely worked during her work life and is pretty much the average council tenant, has managed to anger my father when recently was awarded help towards a stair lift, whereas my brother and sister in law used their entire life savings to fund his adapted housing needs.

So if you know how to play the system right, well.

Just because he got it for free from family members and she got a proportion from council tax revenue?

Seems somewhat unfair of him. Or was that partly because you didn't chip in as well?


Mind you, 'playing the system' is an interesting turn of phrase for somebody having medical mobility needs to the extent that adult social services and occupational health have got involved. Personally, I'd have happily swapped having a condition that led to needing help for being well enough to earn the money to purchase my own home and fully fund all adaptations - or having family with enough income and savings and caring enough to be prepared to pay for that stuff for me.

enthusiasticsaver

I have been in your position twice. When we first had children, when maternity provision was not as good my husband suggested I stay home to look after the children. At the time we both earned the same but my husband worked erratic hours but had a company car and my hours were more predictable. We had a small age gap between our two daughters though so double childcare costs so we both decided I would stay home which I did for about 3-4 years. Eventually though financially we started struggling so I returned to part time work.

The second time I did it was when my job became stressful and OH said it was not worth the stress of my working so I took about 18 months out and 12 months of that was used to retrain to go into a different career. I then returned to work initially part time, then full time and then part time just before early retirement at 58.

My OH would have been happy to support me as a SAHM but my income enabled us to do lots of nice holidays, work on the house and save and invest for early retirement for both of us. I have no doubt if I had not returned to work my DH would have had to work until 65 and we would have missed out on many holidays and I would have had little to no pension provision in my own right. I also enjoyed the company, part time work enabled me still to do other things and be there for the children in secondary school and do housework/shopping etc during the week rather than weekends so we had family time. My career suffered for it though and by the end of our working lives my DH was earning more than twice my salary even full time.

You do have to bear in mind what happens if you and your DH split later in life and how you would be able to support yourself then. My sister found this and had to return to full time work in her 50s when her husband left her. Up until then she had worked part time even though her children were grown up but unlike my DH my BIL resented her doing this.

[Deleted User]

AylesburyDuck wrote: »

We have always worked on the basis that any money coming into the relationship was "family" money, earnings, bonuses, inheritances, all of it, what was mine is his and what was his was mine.
t!

This is how we see it in our house with 4 children, whether I am studying, temping or just at home in school holidays or whatever, everything goes in one pot and we just use money out of that for everything, never asking each other for money - I think if you have chosen a life together everything should be shared. But then again we are both savers and not stupid with money but never go without things we wan, holidays etc.

zagfles

Spendingqueen wrote: »

This is how we see it in our house with 4 children, whether I am studying, temping or just at home in school holidays or whatever, everything goes in one pot and we just use money out of that for everything, never asking each other for money - I think if you have chosen a life together everything should be shared. But then again we are both savers and not stupid with money but never go without things we wan, holidays etc.

Yes we do to - don't understand married couples who do otherwise, unless one of them can't be trusted with money. Giving your spouse an "allowance" is IMO treating them like a child, or an employee.

Spendless

Many people have talked about what if you have a negative thing happen in your life with only one income coming in. What about if a positive opportunity happens and you can't take it up due to lack of funds?

Today my DD has performed at a drama festival and done wonderfully well. The head of drama followed my DD out and said he'd like her to be at his (private) school as he'd love to teach her. DD replied 'if we had the money' and there was then talk of bursaries and scholarships, but looking at their website it still doesn't sound affordable to us.

Maybe something else to think about?

Syntax753

I'm old-fashioned maybe, but from a kid I always felt that I needed to achieve as much as I could to be able one day to give the woman/wife I was with the freedom to chose what to do.

And I worked from the age of 11 and now I'm 39. I took my first holiday 3 years ago.

At no point have I ever *expected* the woman in my relationship to contribute towards rent or bills etc (which obviously wasn't a lot when I just had a room in a house share but now it's a bit more than that). And it's interesting to look back at the dynamics. Certainly they change for the most part. Most of the time, she would keep working even if didn't necessarily *need* to. This is usually wanting to feel independent. However, the money earned was never used to contribute directly since that wasn't *necessary*. So it was good in my opinion because the dynamics in those cases compliment each other - not full support from me and independence, but still appreciating support too.

Then there's the flip side. And that coin is greed. This usually manifests itself by the person relying on the other financially taking things "for granted". It's quite the opposite to my previous example. From experience, this is the beginning of the end really as it inevitably turns into increasingly controlling behaviour until the value of money goes from appreciating money for the work that has been put into it vs seeing money as something which hasn't yet been spent.

I left the third case last as it's usually the main outcome people worry about - that's when the sole earner becomes controlling as the one responsible for the income and therefore feels empowered. The solution for that is simple though - leave that person. It's an honour to be able to look after someone else - a family, or a partner. And the future is bleak if a person sees that as an opportunity of control over someone else.

Enjoy the value of nothing, and then you can always enjoy each other.

Tabbytabitha

Deleted%20User wrote: »

Actually Miss Biggles or who ever else you use to post under, not quite correct. My aunt who rarely worked during her work life and is pretty much the average council tenant, has managed to anger my father when recently was awarded help towards a stair lift, whereas my brother and sister in law used their entire life savings to fund his adapted housing needs.

So if you know how to play the system right, well.

Why would you want to wait for the council to do things for you rather than having it done immediately and to your own taste with your own money? It isn't just home alterations either - you can buy much better mobility equipment than you'd be likely to be provided with if you're paying for yourself as well as things like portable oxygen concentrators that the state just doesn't supply.

In addition, there's things like paying for help in the house and garden, possibly some private health procedures and the money to go on holidays whilst you still can. Nothing beats your own money for giving you comfort and choice.

Beans27

Really interesting reading everyone's different experiences:beer: I am in the minority, female working full time (although flexible hours) and my partner is a stay at home dad to our toddler, whilst doing a bit of self employed work on the days he doesn't have him.


Works alright for us, after 9 months maternity leave I needed to go back to work for my sanity, and he needed to leave the place he was working for his! The downside is I only really earn enough to cover the monthly costs (mortgage, bills, cars, food etc) there's not a lot left over so we rely on anything he earns for extras. I wondered recently if I was being unreasonable expecting him to do the majority around the house.....I imagine women are better at 'looking after' the other half when they do this role.....


On the plus side, we don't have to pay for childcare or a dog walker, he is great at playing and having fun with our son which I'm a bit rubbish at, and his mental health is far better than when he was working.

enthusiasticsaver

I do think there is a problem with either SAHM or SAHD if they are out of the workplace for long in that it can be difficult to get back into work. Personally we never wanted to rely on just one wage long term in case anything happened to the main earner and also to have spare money for doing things.

Fireflyaway

Interesting points. I don't think it helps that I'm so up and down at work. One moment I hate it, then it's ok and then I just feel bored and resent all the stuff I'm missing out on. Then I'm paid and feel happy and then I spend it all and think, what's the point! I might feel I've done a good job one day but the next day feel a failure.