Are you a stay-at-home wife?

[DLgal]

I guess its different if you have special needs kids. My kids go once a year for a check up and twice yearly for a dental cleaning. No biggie.

We both cook and my teen is learning to cook. I can't imagine someone not knowing how to cook as its a life skill. Too bad your husband didn't learn.

If something happened to me my husband would be at a loss with passwords and stuff as I do most of the bill paying. I have a spreadsheet with it all written up but who knows if he will remember will to find it!

Again I thin kthere is a huge difference between SAHP and SAHW. The OP is a SAHW not a SAHP.

I blame my MIL. She did EVERYTHING for her kids for WAY too long. They never were taught basic skills like laundry, cleaning, and cooking. My own 13 year old autistic son has better cooking and cleaning skills than my husband. I bet he would take over for me, actually.

I mean, my husband isn't an idiot. He is a highly successful military officer. He has incredible survival and improvisational skills. He wouldn't curl up and die without me, but it would be a steep learning curve.

 

[disykat]

I completely agree and was just coming on to post the same thing. All the "my husband would be completely lost without me" and "I really run things, he just makes the money" and "my family has time together because I care enough to stay home" smacks of pejorative judgment and self-aggrandizement, to my eyes. My life is a partnership, as well, it just happens to be one where we both make money and support each other.

I couldn't disagree with this more. People who stay home are defending themselves against being seen as "worthless" and you are choosing to nitpick and be offended. I've been all three, SAHM, part time, and full time working mom. I'm currently at home with no children, like the OP asked. None of those have defined my worth or DH's in our opinion. However, I've never felt the need to defend my worth when working. IMO, there have been quite a few posts on this thread devaluing the worth of someone who doesn't work outside the home.

Saying you enjoy having more time together when you stay home doesn't mean that person is judging those who work. That's just ridiculous. We might as well say all the people here planning Disney trips are insulting those of us who aren't.

 

[sk!mom]

I completely agree and was just coming on to post the same thing. All the "my husband would be completely lost without me" and "I really run things, he just makes the money" and "my family has time together because I care enough to stay home" smacks of pejorative judgment and self-aggrandizement, to my eyes. My life is a partnership, as well, it just happens to be one where we both make money and support each other.

Right, in any successful partnership roles and responsibilities are divided. My DH doesn't cook at all, ever. He's a college educated adult though, who has taught himself to play the piano and learned two languages fluently all after age 35 so I've no doubt that if cooking suddenly became his role he'd figure it out.

We thought I was going to do that too... but now that we're staring down the barrel of college for our second child (first is in a trade program at community college, no debt, no worries), it turns out that would be a mistake. Doubling our household income at this point, with her a junior in HS, would torpedo her eligibility for most need-based institutional aid at her top three schools. So we're going to revisit the math in a year or so when the acceptances come in, and again in 4 or 5 years when she's wrapping up her undergrad program.

We've also made a deal with our kids about student loans. If they do need to borrow, we will help with repayment provided that they're not borrowing frivolously and they complete their programs in a timely fashion. DS won't need that help; he'll graduate debt-free into a high-demand trade, making a good wage. DD might. Even with the generous aid the schools she's looking at offer, she may have to borrow to cover things like study abroad or field placements, summer internship opportunities, etc. And I don't think that's a bad way to get a positive credit history started, provided it is done wisely, so I'm not as anti-loan as I used to be.

You might be correct, Staying home might be more advantageous for college fin aid. Plus you'll have the fall back of returning to work if the aid doesn't pan out as you hope. You only have to read every "Class of xxxx" thread to see that college fin aid isn't panning out quite as many expected these days. It's a whole new ball game. Good luck!

 

[sk!mom]

I blame my MIL. She did EVERYTHING for her kids for WAY too long. They never were taught basic skills like laundry, cleaning, and cooking. My own 13 year old autistic son has better cooking and cleaning skills than my husband. I bet he would take over for me, actually.

I mean, my husband isn't an idiot. He is a highly successful military officer. He has incredible survival and improvisational skills. He wouldn't curl up and die without me, but it would be a steep learning curve.

My faith in our national security requires me to believe that a "highly successful military officer" could handle independent living and child raising if the need arose.

The fact that you would even say that though is sad to me and illustrates how judged you must feel for your choices and the need to defend them. I've said, that no one needs to defend anything to me. Staying home wasn't right for me but that is ONLY me.

 

[Colleen27]

You might be correct, Staying home might be more advantageous for college fin aid. Plus you'll have the fall back of returning to work if the aid doesn't pan out as you hope. You only have to read every "Class of xxxx" thread to see that college fin aid isn't panning out quite as many expected these days. It's a whole new ball game. Good luck!

Yeah, it is NUTS. I'm so glad we sent DD to the school she's at, because she's been working with a college counselor since 8th grade to go over all of the options, financial aid programs, etc. I consider myself a relatively bright person and a solid researcher, but there are things that I don't think ever would have crossed my mind if I'd been doing this without guidance. Looking at schools that cost more than our annual household income is one of them. But if she can get into one of her highly selective top choice schools, our mid-5-figure income will get her a lot in need-based aid - potentially more than my entry-level/return-to-work salary would be at this point. But if she ends up at her fallback, which is still expensive and out-of-state but less consistent with need-based aid, off to work I'll go.

 

[Shanti]

It's not an option for me, as I'm a working mom of a special needs child, living with a longtime boyfriend who is not my son's father. I need (don't just want) the money, benefits & security of my job. I'm a schoolteacher, so I do get summers off to spend at home, which is great. My boyfriend is very old-fashioned in regards to gender roles (& I am, too, basically), so I end up doing housewifely duties in addition to my schoolteaching work. It's a lot of work. I wish I could have been a homemaker- that was my dream growing up, but when I became pregnant and the father was nonsupportive, that became an impossibility. I think women who get to be homemakers are lucky.

 

[Magpie]

You might be correct, Staying home might be more advantageous for college fin aid. Plus you'll have the fall back of returning to work if the aid doesn't pan out as you hope. You only have to read every "Class of xxxx" thread to see that college fin aid isn't panning out quite as many expected these days. It's a whole new ball game. Good luck!

Yes, actually, for a few years I had to be careful how much I made tutoring and selling crafts, because even though it was just a small amount, it was actually really close to raising our household income to the point where we wouldn't get certain education grants. So, we'd be losing more money than we'd be making.

 

[piccolopat]

As I said in an earlier post, I strongly believe every adult should be able to support themselves, whether they choose to work or not. When a spouse is financially dependent on the other, it is risky to think you can just jump into the job market if something unfortunate happens. In today's job market, employers require relevant and current job experience for most better paying jobs. A spouse who is dependent on the other for running the household can always hire someone to help cook, clean and take care of the kids. A spouse who is financially dependent can't hire someone to support them. Without skills or experience, they may only have minimum wage job opportunities available to them.

 

[Magpie]

It's not an option for me, as I'm a working mom of a special needs child, living with a longtime boyfriend who is not my son's father. I need (don't just want) the money, benefits & security of my job. I'm a schoolteacher, so I do get summers off to spend at home, which is great. My boyfriend is very old-fashioned in regards to gender roles (& I am, too, basically), so I end up doing housewifely duties in addition to my schoolteaching work. It's a lot of work. I wish I could have been a homemaker- that was my dream growing up, but when I became pregnant and the father was nonsupportive, that became an impossibility. I think women who get to be homemakers are very lucky.

I definitely think I'm very lucky, in large part because I got to be a homemaker. But I also understand that some women just don't want, or aren't suited, to this job. And forcing them to be homemakers just because they're female would be horrible.

I'm actually not at all "old-fashioned" when it comes to gender roles, for all that you might look at us and think we're terribly traditional in the way we do things. I don't think there should be gender roles at all. People should just take on the tasks they're good at and most willing to do, regardless of what their biology is. In our household, my husband is the one who vacuums, because I loathe the sound of that infernal machine. It makes my skin crawl. So I excuse myself to another room, while he gets all the crud up off the carpet. I do the rest of the housekeeping, though, because he's at work all day and I have the time and inclination to do it.

There are jobs that need to be done. No one should have to work harder than anyone else, just because they're one gender or another. People should just work together, to ensure their lives run smoothly.

Anyone who actually gets to do what they want in life is a very lucky person, no matter what they're doing.

 

[AustinMommyofThree]

I couldn't disagree with this more. People who stay home are defending themselves against being seen as "worthless" and you are choosing to nitpick and be offended. I've been all three, SAHM, part time, and full time working mom. I'm currently at home with no children, like the OP asked. None of those have defined my worth or DH's in our opinion. However, I've never felt the need to defend my worth when working. IMO, there have been quite a few posts on this thread devaluing the worth of someone who doesn't work outside the home.

Saying you enjoy having more time together when you stay home doesn't mean that person is judging those who work. That's just ridiculous. We might as well say all the people here planning Disney trips are insulting those of us who aren't.

And I couldn't disagree with you more. We all have opinions and perspectives, and you are appearing, based on your postings, to hold a very defensive one. You see stay at home mothers being devalued. I have personally been lectured on this same thread about making sure that I value my children and that I need to be proud of them regardless of the choices they make (having given no reason to think that I don't) while the same poster smugly extolled the warm dinners she cooks for her husband and the errands she runs during the day (as if to imply my family is eating cold cereal out of a trough).

You don't appear to see what I see, and I'm seeing what you see but also seeing it go both ways. In my opinion it's two sides of the exact same coin and encourage you to try harder to refrain from dismissing the feelings of people who disagree with you. Then perhaps you won't feel so devalued or attacked.

 

[Magpie]

As I said in an earlier post, I strongly believe every adult should be able to support themselves, whether they choose to work or not. When a spouse is financially dependent on the other, it is risky to think you can just jump into the job market if something unfortunate happens. In today's job market, employers require relevant and current job experience for most better paying jobs. A spouse who is dependent on the other for running the household can always hire someone to help cook, clean and take care of the kids. A spouse who is financially dependent can't hire someone to support them. Without skills or experience, they may only have minimum wage job opportunities available to them.

And someone who spends their whole adult life working at one particular type of job, may find themselves unsuited for any other kind of job, should they unexpectedly lose that job.

Yes, I actually could "just jump into the job market". I have friends and connections, and I know people who would help me find employment. I might end up working retail again, but I am totally fine with that.

Not to mention, between my husband's pension and life insurance and the equity we have in our house, etc., I really don't have much to worry about. Every time I talk about finding a job in the event of his untimely demise, he always says, "But, you wouldn't have to." Well, yes, but I imagine I'd appreciate the distraction from my grief.

It's not like we've never thought about this scenario.

There are far riskier things I could have done with my life, than become a SAHW. Especially in a country like Canada, where I don't need to worry about things like health insurance.

 

[disykat]

And I couldn't disagree with you more. We all have opinions and perspectives, and you are appearing, based on your postings, to hold a very defensive one. You see stay at home mothers being devalued. I have personally been lectured on this same thread about making sure that I value my children and that I need to be proud of them regardless of the choices they make (having given no reason to think that I don't) while the same poster smugly extolled the warm dinners she cooks for her husband and the errands she runs during the day (as if to imply my family is eating cold cereal out of a trough).

You don't appear to see what I see, and I'm seeing what you see but also seeing it go both ways. In my opinion it's two sides of the exact same coin and encourage you to try harder to refrain from dismissing the feelings of people who disagree with you. Then perhaps you won't feel so devalued or attacked.

Now I'm not even sure what we're talking about. You also seem to be taking this all very personally and I'm not sure why. It is personal for me. I'm on this thread because I was directly answering the OP due to my current circumstance mirroring what she was discussing. She asked if anyone is a stay at home wife. I currently am one. I'm curious what made you join the discussion?

 

[piccolopat]

And someone who spends their whole adult life working at one particular type of job, may find themselves unsuited for any other kind of job, should they unexpectedly lose that job. Yes, I actually could "just jump into the job market". I have friends and connections, and I know people who would help me find employment. I might end up working retail again, but I am totally fine with that.Not to mention, between my husband's pension and life insurance and the equity we have in our house, etc., I really don't have much to worry about. Every time I talk about finding a job in the event of his untimely demise, he always says, "But, you wouldn't have to." Well, yes, but I imagine I'd appreciate the distraction from my grief. It's not like we've never thought about this scenario. There are far riskier things I could have done with my life, than become a SAHW. Especially in a country like Canada, where I don't need to worry about things like health insurance.

Your point about diversifying your skills is a good one but as someone who is involved with hiring staff, I would be more inclined to consider training someone with recent work history in a different field than someone in the field who hasn't worked in many years. I'm glad things would work well for you but for many others that is no true. I have plenty of SAHM & SAHW friends, including all three of my SILs. They all have friends and connections but they would all likely end up in retail or some other minimum wage job if they were suddenly alone. Those jobs would not pay the expenses because we are in a high cost area. Some pensions end when a person dies as not all have survivor benefits. Some people don't have much equity in their homes or are unable to buy enough life insurance. A dear friend was widowed earlier this year. Her husband's pension stopped when he died. He lost his life insurance when he stopped working as he got it through his employer and was not healthy enough to buy private insurance when he retired. She will likely lose her house since she can't pay the high taxes and maintenance. She worked for IBM many years ago as a secretary but that was in the era before computers and so her skills are too out of date. A niece faced an unexpected divorce and now has to support her kids alone. She was a SAHM for the last decade and is thankful she went back to school and got a job in a new field just before her marriage went bad. Her previous job was in a STEM field and her skills were too out of date to be useful.

My post may not be relevant to you but I hope it gives others some reason to think about the what if's and plan accordingly.

 

[HarperLeigh]

It's not an option for me, as I'm a working mom of a special needs child, living with a longtime boyfriend who is not my son's father. I need (don't just want) the money, benefits & security of my job. I'm a schoolteacher, so I do get summers off to spend at home, which is great. My boyfriend is very old-fashioned in regards to gender roles (& I am, too, basically), so I end up doing housewifely duties in addition to my schoolteaching work. It's a lot of work. I wish I could have been a homemaker- that was my dream growing up, but when I became pregnant and the father was nonsupportive, that became an impossibility. I think women who get to be homemakers are lucky.

I am lucky in that I have the choice of not working and it makes me happy. Why that upsets some women, I have no idea.

 

[HarperLeigh]

Your point about diversifying your skills is a good one but as someone who is involved with hiring staff, I would be more inclined to consider training someone with recent work history in a different field than someone in the field who hasn't worked in many years. I'm glad things would work well for you but for many others that is no true. I have plenty of SAHM & SAHW friends, including all three of my SILs. They all have friends and connections but they would all likely end up in retail or some other minimum wage job if they were suddenly alone. Those jobs would not pay the expenses because we are in a high cost area. Some pensions end when a person dies as not all have survivor benefits. Some people don't have much equity in their homes or are unable to buy enough life insurance. A dear friend was widowed earlier this year. Her husband's pension stopped when he died. He lost his life insurance when he stopped working as he got it through his employer and was not healthy enough to buy private insurance when he retired. She will likely lose her house since she can't pay the high taxes and maintenance. She worked for IBM many years ago as a secretary but that was in the era before computers and so her skills are too out of date. A niece faced an unexpected divorce and now has to support her kids alone. She was a SAHM for the last decade and is thankful she went back to school and got a job in a new field just before her marriage went bad. Her previous job was in a STEM field and her skills were too out of date to be useful.

My post may not be relevant to you but I hope it gives others some reason to think about the what if's and plan accordingly.

If my husband dies before I do, I would never have to work again.

 

[quandrea]

Your point about diversifying your skills is a good one but as someone who is involved with hiring staff, I would be more inclined to consider training someone with recent work history in a different field than someone in the field who hasn't worked in many years. I'm glad things would work well for you but for many others that is no true. I have plenty of SAHM & SAHW friends, including all three of my SILs. They all have friends and connections but they would all likely end up in retail or some other minimum wage job if they were suddenly alone. Those jobs would not pay the expenses because we are in a high cost area. Some pensions end when a person dies as not all have survivor benefits. Some people don't have much equity in their homes or are unable to buy enough life insurance. A dear friend was widowed earlier this year. Her husband's pension stopped when he died. He lost his life insurance when he stopped working as he got it through his employer and was not healthy enough to buy private insurance when he retired. She will likely lose her house since she can't pay the high taxes and maintenance. She worked for IBM many years ago as a secretary but that was in the era before computers and so her skills are too out of date. A niece faced an unexpected divorce and now has to support her kids alone. She was a SAHM for the last decade and is thankful she went back to school and got a job in a new field just before her marriage went bad. Her previous job was in a STEM field and her skills were too out of date to be useful.

My post may not be relevant to you but I hope it gives others some reason to think about the what if's and plan accordingly.

Most of the examples cited above are scenarios that would ensue as a result of poor financial planning.

 

[Magpie]

Your point about diversifying your skills is a good one but as someone who is involved with hiring staff, I would be more inclined to consider training someone with recent work history in a different field than someone in the field who hasn't worked in many years. I'm glad things would work well for you but for many others that is no true. I have plenty of SAHM & SAHW friends, including all three of my SILs. They all have friends and connections but they would all likely end up in retail or some other minimum wage job if they were suddenly alone. Those jobs would not pay the expenses because we are in a high cost area. Some pensions end when a person dies as not all have survivor benefits. Some people don't have much equity in their homes or are unable to buy enough life insurance. A dear friend was widowed earlier this year. Her husband's pension stopped when he died. He lost his life insurance when he stopped working as he got it through his employer and was not healthy enough to buy private insurance when he retired. She will likely lose her house since she can't pay the high taxes and maintenance. She worked for IBM many years ago as a secretary but that was in the era before computers and so her skills are too out of date. A niece faced an unexpected divorce and now has to support her kids alone. She was a SAHM for the last decade and is thankful she went back to school and got a job in a new field just before her marriage went bad. Her previous job was in a STEM field and her skills were too out of date to be useful.

My post may not be relevant to you but I hope it gives others some reason to think about the what if's and plan accordingly.

That's the whole point, I think.

People make their own decisions in life. Some choices are foolish and some are wise, and we all have an opinion on which is which. But I don't automatically assume that all SAHWs need to be informed of the risks of their life choices, any more than I would assume all working parents need to be reminded not to neglect their children.

I really doubt your post will help anyone, any more than posting woeful tales of miserable working mothers who regret their life choices would help anyone.

And I agree with quandrea... It's really all about smart financial planning. I know people who've worked their whole lives, who are in horrible straits due to the poor financial choices they've made.

 

[dish rag]

I am lucky in that I have the choice of not working and it makes me happy. Why that upsets some women, I have no idea.

Could be because they made poor choices.

 

[piccolopat]

Some families have more resources than others. Some of those resources can be lost overnight through no one's fault. I'm happy some of you won't ever face financial difficulties but I know that too many people who worked hard, saved money and planned for their financial future and then everything came crashing down. No need to respond further - I understand you disagree with me and so let's leave it at that.

 

[Magpie]

Some families have more resources than others. Some of those resources can be lost overnight through no one's fault. I'm happy some of you won't ever face financial difficulties but I know that too many people who worked hard, saved money and planned for their financial future and then everything came crashing down. No need to respond further - I understand you disagree with me and so let's leave it at that.

What is your point, though?

Are you saying both spouses must always work, regardless of their circumstances, because no matter how much they may think they've planned, something unforeseen could happen and it could all come crashing down?

What about people who feel their lives are improved by having one spouse stay home? Are you saying it doesn't matter how many benefits they're currently enjoying, or how happy they are, the only right thing to do is give it all up and have both spouses work?

If you're not saying these things, then what are you saying?