Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is nothing wrong with staying home with the kids and raising them and taking care of your husband and household, providing that his income is 500k to a mil annually, it will work, I'll be the best wife and mother I can be.
Provided that some of that money is given or routed to my own personal account so I can have my own money.
The breadwinner making 500K means nothing, if he wants to leave, you have young kids and you haven't worked in 10 years.
I was raised by two strong women (mom and aunt) until mom got remarried….then also a loving step dad…so I'm not against men by any means. I just know that crap happens…..and if you don't have your own, you're vulnerable and at the mercy of others.
We really need a reality check about the topic.
It sounds like the big concern is "what if he leaves?"
Well, let's take a look at that.
First, roughly 2/3rds of all divorced are initiated by the wife as it were. If someone is leaving, it's going to be the wife.
Second, there's such a thing as alimony. And child support. And in many states, the wife gets a fair cut of the assets (typically around half) if not more.
Third, How much are you really expecting to make on your own? I can understand if you've got a not-so-useless degree, but for the majority of the population that's not college educated, that's not likely an issue. Being a few years, or decades even, out of the workforce isn't going to hurt you.
But look at what cost. Most kids grow up without a parent raising them. 9 hours in daycare until school starts, then the same thing. All the way through high school. No wonder so many kids don't respect their parents and family means nothing to them. They don't even know their parents anymore. Yet so many here are just money hungry. You want that second income so badly, where half of it is spent to accommodate the second job's expenses you wouldn't have otherwise (fast food, extra transportation costs, child care costs, etc). You dream of doubling your income when you're far from it, but happily depreciating social and societal values for a slight chance at breaking into minimum wage gains.
I hear about strong women, but the ones with true strength take pride in their maternal nature, not shun it off.
We really need a reality check about the topic.
It sounds like the big concern is "what if he leaves?"
Well, let's take a look at that.
First, roughly 2/3rds of all divorced are initiated by the wife as it were. If someone is leaving, it's going to be the wife.
Sorry, that still leaves 1/3 possibility that HE leaves. And it may not just be a divorce. What if he gets hit by a truck tomorrow and is disabled or dead, or for whatever reason there is a loss of your only means of income, which may be a big deal depending on how well insured you were, how old both of you are when this happens, medical expenses, etc. A lot of possibilities. It's just not wise to have all your eggs in one basket - one earner.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Setchel
Second, there's such a thing as alimony. And child support. And in many states, the wife gets a fair cut of the assets (typically around half) if not more.
This is nice when it happens, but it's not something I would bet my future on. Maybe I'm just paranoid, but I don't count what I *might* get in a divorce as something I *will definitely* get. He might get a better lawyer than me. He might squirrel away all the assets so I'm left with nothing. Or he may just not pay or make it so it's really hard to find him or to enforce this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Setchel
Third, How much are you really expecting to make on your own? I can understand if you've got a not-so-useless degree, but for the majority of the population that's not college educated, that's not likely an issue. Being a few years, or decades even, out of the workforce isn't going to hurt you.
But look at what cost. Most kids grow up without a parent raising them. 9 hours in daycare until school starts, then the same thing. All the way through high school. No wonder so many kids don't respect their parents and family means nothing to them. They don't even know their parents anymore. Yet so many here are just money hungry. You want that second income so badly, where half of it is spent to accommodate the second job's expenses you wouldn't have otherwise (fast food, extra transportation costs, child care costs, etc). You dream of doubling your income when you're far from it, but happily depreciating social and societal values for a slight chance at breaking into minimum wage gains.
I agree with you to the extent that if the 2nd spouse can only expect to make near minimum wage (or barely any money after paying all the associate expenses of 2 working spouses) then it probably makes sense for the lower earner to stay home, especially if the no work history will not negatively affect your future earnings. However, this only applies to the couples where they are able to subsist on a single income and the income potential of the other person is minimum.
As for the cost - that depends. Some moms need to get away from the kids to regain some sanity - it makes them more amicable mothers if they *do* work. Sometimes kids benefit from being exposed to varied environments - not just being stuck in the same old home situation (consider home-schooled kids vs public school kids). Sometimes that mom is able to enlist relatives to watch the kids - which in my opinion is the best situation.
Kids not respecting parents has nothing to do with whether or not both parents work - that's absolutely ridiculous. If anything, I would wager that kids respect mothers more when they have a profession and not just sit around the house like the kids do. In either case, respect has nothing to do with how often you see that person. Otherwise, working dads would get less respect from the kids than stay at home moms.
As for not knowing their parents - memory doesn't really kick in until around age 5, and understanding of the other person comes even later. Just being present doesn't mean your kid gets to know you. You actually have to talk to them. And there is enough time to talk to them on the weekends and after work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Setchel
I hear about strong women, but the ones with true strength take pride in their maternal nature, not shun it off.
A strong woman does what she feels best, not what society tells her a strong woman should do. If she feels she must stay with the kids, then she stays. If she feels she needs to work for whatever reason, then she works. The thread asks if it is stupid/trusting/naive to give up your own money and career - sometimes it is. It is definitely trusting. It's a risk and it needs to be a calculated risk, not a naive trust in what tradition tells you - because tradition doesn't always have your best interests in mind.
I'm sorry if I misunderstood.
Please correct me. Did you not say: "Being a few years, or decades even, out of the workforce isn't going to hurt you."
If I misconstrued that, how did you mean it?
> Second, there's such a thing as alimony. And child support. And in many states, the wife gets a fair cut of the assets (typically around half) if not more.
That's some rather pie in the sky thinking. You're assuming the money is there to begin with (many divorces are about money). You're assuming the person saddled with payments is working (or working to potential). You're assuming that even with half, it's enough to keep things afloat until the kids are gone. You're assuming that the payor will actually work, pay and act like a responsible adult. You're assuming that even with a responsible payor, it will still be enough to support the children in a split home.
Nah, certainly the payor wouldn't be bitter about the wife filing for divorce. Certainly he wouldn't voluntarily take a lower paying job, or quit working, or work and get paid under the table, or just refuse to pay. Certainly he wouldn't get bitter and assume that the mom is spending the money on a new boyfriend. Certainly, he wouldn't go impregnate someone else and get the support modification.
Nah, none of that ever happens. (/s)
Talk to any family lawyer. Child support enforcement is a nightmare. and commonplace. and it's not free. and the government is loathe to help.
And what happens when the kids are grown, alimony is spent and there's no more child support? You're now going to re-enter the workforce, even later, even older, without a skill set, in an environment that's hostile to minimum wage.
Wow. You are so right, dlleon. It is FAR better to live in fear of a worst case scenario than to plan one's own actual life, using the data applicable to one's own personal situation.
I'm just seeing a lot of people in this thread that have no business getting married. Why would you marry someone you can't trust?
But let's look at the alternative situation. Both spouses work. You each pay half of the bills, half the chores/housework.
First off, why not just have a roommate? You clearly aren't comfortable intermingling anything with this person you're swearing your life with and giving legal power of attorney to.
Second, you're just prepping to get divorced from the moment you start living like that. It's well documented that relationships with shared chores have significantly higher rates than someone designated to handle the household chores (or perhaps the people who insist on shared chores are more likely to have a divorce. Causation vs correlation. I'm not one to state which). I won't even touch the concerns of both spouses being stressed from work and having to constantly eat fast food or miserable time cooking and cleaning in a couple of hours before bed and starting it all over again, and the lack of intimacy.
Third, while it is smart to consider a worse case scenario, you can handle that in a marriage with a stay at home spouse. Really that worried your working husband is going to ditch you? Insist on an "allowance" that you can shove into a savings account, just in case. Or siphon funds toward it if you feel you need to be sneaky about it. It's a good idea to have a savings anyway.
And hey, when that divorce rolls around, both working spouses have it real clean and simple, right? Sure does sound pretty good to have a divorce then with how everyone here is talking about it. And realistically if you're in a divorce where you need a lawyer, of course it's going to be relatively nasty. That's the lawyer's job to go for the throat and cause trouble on top of any that might be present before.
My comment about not being hurt by not being in the workforce for years applies to unskilled labor, which in the typical dual income household, at least one of the spouses is working in. A 40 year old that hasn't worked a waitressing job since she was 20 isn't going to be missing much in skill to keep her from getting into it again.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
