Stay-at-home-spouses (movies, single, child support, spouse)

[moonshadow]

Originally Posted by doglover29

I am pretty torn on this issue.

On the one hand, I consider myself a stay-at-home-spouse (no kids) and I do not do all of the household chores. I try to stay on top of some or most of it, but I don't do it all. I'm not a domestic person and chores are boring in my opinion. If I did everything on a daily basis it would probably take me 4-5 hours, including cooking. I prefer to spend my time on intellectually enriching activities when I'm not working (I work part-time). I can see why many people think it's important for the stay-at-home spouse to do all the chores and I see your point, I just don't know if I would be happy spending all day every day doing that.

The other thing is that the reason I only work part-time is because I cannot find a well-paid, good job. I have had to take (and am currently in) a low-paying, low-status job, which is boring and not a good use of my skills/talent. But I am working part-time in the hopes of moving up to something better.

Ok, how would you feel if the situation was reversed? Because I can't see that what you're doing is in any way wrong. There are things that you don't like doing or you're not good at and you don't do them. If you've negotiated with your husband and he's happy and you're happy, so be it. This is how things are for now, they could change. There may come a time when you are the main bread winner and your husband stays at home. If he's not particularly domesticated you might end up with the nicest garden on the street but you can't invite anyone inside , but I'm sure you'll sort it out. That's what it's about. Working out what suits you both for the current circumstances.

[fjtee]

I had some friends in that situation. She stayed at home and did her artwork while he worked. But, prior to that, she did work full-time and supported them while he was in grad school. Once he graduated and they moved to a new state where his job was, she stopped working. She kept busy with her art and gardening. There was no resentment on her husband's part. She eventually decided to teach, went back to school, then just as she was set to teach, the kiddies showed up. So, now she's home with the kids. I do recall some people in our circle felt she was taking advantage of the situation by not working. However, those people didn't know her before. They didn't understand that she worked bad jobs, sometimes two, in order for her husband to get through grad school. And, he loved her and didn't want her to return to work unless it was going to be something fulfilling.

[Fickle]

I have a very good friend who stays at home and her husband makes a very good living running a business.

(This lady is also a relative)

95% of the other females (her "equals") in the family are so green with envy. She gets to stay at home, follow what makes her happy and the other females have to slave away at a job that they hate and barely make ends meat.

My view is this, why would anyone want to stay at home most of their days? Why do they not have something they are passionate about?

Seems to me that being a preschool teacher would be a good way to just do something that you like (if that fuels your passion). Just find something to do, you will end up becoming very bored and your husband might end up resenting you later.

[Niki]

Originally Posted by Mrss

I think that this depends upon the situation. In some instances, the professional "working spouse" has such a demanding schedule that the 'stay at home' spouse is kept very busy taking care of all other details of life - from meals and entertaining to routine chores to schedules to managing the calendar and maintaining the home, watching the finances, making sure the cars are clean and in good repair, running errands and doing things like driving them to the airport. Also, many times these "non working" spouses do many professionally-related tasks for their professional spouse - for example, typing, proofreading, research and correspondence - they just don't talk about it or get paid for it. In these marriages, if both couples were equally career minded, there would be no support system at home and in that way there would be less sense of home and a lower quality of life. ALSO - in some tax brackets, the additional income really causes more tax obligation without adding that much to standard of living. Depending upon the career, some of these professional spouses work odd hours or long overtime and it helps them to have someone at home who doesn't mind serving dinner to them at 10 pm or making coffee for them at 5 a.m. It's very easy to assume that someone who has no career 'does nothing all day' - but usually I've found that this is far from the truth. Most highly driven career types are very discriminating and they marry very smart hard working people who use their time and talent at home.

This is close to how things are for my husband and I. Add two kids and four pets to the mix though. lol My husband works much more than 40 hours a week (his job demands it) and is often out of town (and out of state) for anywhere from a few days to a couple months at a time. It's up to me to do the housework (naturally), run errands, take care of business (such as our house being the market and other things), pay bills, take care of the kids, do the grocery shopping, and so on. I too have to do research for my husband sometimes and help with arrangements of things.

All of that is a full-time job in itself. Just because a person isn't getting a paycheck doesn't mean they're not working or contributing to society. There are more important things than making money. Much of which gets taken by the government anyway. lol

Anyway, we figured out that if I were to get a job outside of the house (though I do a lot outside of the house being a SAHM), it wouldn't benefit us at all financially. After taxes, gas, lunch, etc., I'd barely bring home anything. It's not worth it. What's best for us is that I work at home (and often outside the home). And I'm perfectly fine with that.

[quelinda]

If the spouse is staying home cuz the couple can well afford it, then it sounds totally fine.

If the couple is not well off and the spouse just "doesn't feel like" working, then tough sh** on the lazy person, get off your a** and contribute to the household. I mean, is the couple going to go broke cuz the spouse would rather stay home and read books?

But if they are well off and the wife or husband stays home, you better believe they should be responsible for most of the home chores. First off, they can probably afford a cleaner at least once a week or twice a month for vacuuming and deep cleaning. The stay at home spouse should be arranging all that. If they cant afford it then the SAHS has plenty of time to do that. In addition, the SAHS should straighten up every day and cook their spouse a nice meal for dinner.

If the SAHS thinks they should sit home all day but then share equally in the household chores, big problems will soon be coming their way. THe working spouse will get very annoyed and resentful when he or she comes home after a long tiring day being out in the world and the SAHS can't even be assed to make them a nice home cooked meal or clean up or do the laundry.

If the SAHS is happy sitting around all day, like many of us might be, then its OK to do nothing. But I would think it would be more interesting to take some classes or at least organize some regular activities with a club or something. It would get really boring after a while if there are no kids at home.

[Ivorytickler]

I used to think it was weird but then I spent several years sitting next to a guy who had a stay at home wife. He was really happy with the arrangement. She was too. They both had strong feelings about taking care of family and obilgations to church. Her working got in the way of both.

I worked with another man with a stay at home wife who spent her time volunteering for the local theater. He used to say he didn't do charitiable contrutions because supporting what his wife did was his charitiable contribution.

Personally, I woudln't do it. There's too much at risk. You are betting your marriage survives and your spouse will have it set up so that you're taken care of in event of his death. Divorce can be devestating for a woman with no job skills. And then there's that the court will award alimony to a woman in such a case and he may be left asking why he has to keep on paying because he indulged her for all those years. I worked with a guy who ended up in this position too. He made no bones about his desire for his wife to work but she didn't want to. Then he was just dismayed when she divorced him and got alimony for half the number of years they were married. He also got the bill to send her to college. The court acted like he was the one who prevented her from working and left her with no means to support herself when it was all her doing.

In this day and age, what I'd really be for is both parties working part time. Then you both have time to do what you want and don't feel time strapped. I think it's risky for both partners to have one not working. Too many marriages fail and you will continue to support a spouse you were supporting at home before the divorce no matter who caused the divorce or who wanted who home.

[jimboburnsy]

Originally Posted by doglover29

I'm interested to hear about what people's perceptions of stay-at-home spouses (no children) are.

This is a spouse who stays at home (when there are no children), while the other spouse works, either because there is no financial need for that person to work or because he or she doesn't want to.

For instance, take a newly married, young couple where the husband is a corporate lawyer and the wife was a preschool teacher. Because the wife makes in a day what the husband makes in 15 minutes, the wife decides to quit her job and stay home, even though they don't plan to have kids for many years. The wife just doesn't think it's worth her time to work given that the husband's salary supports them both well.

Or, perhaps the stay-at-home spouse never found a career/job passion and instead would rather just to what he or she feels like doing, whether it's working on hobbies all day, reading, or whatever.

Is the stay-at-home spouse considered lazy? If there is no financial need for them to work, should they do so anyway? Or is contributing in some way to society acceptable (i.e. volunteer work). Must the stay-at-home spouse contribute in an equal way to the home through chores? If so, how can you judge what an acceptable contribution would be? Or do you think it's okay for the stay-at-home spouse to just do whatever he or she wants, and have fun, while the other spouse is working.

I'm interested in hearing people's opinions on this.

I don't think there is any particular problem with the situation described hereinabove, but how people will perceive this woman (or man I suppose) depends largely on how she conducts herself. A woman who sits on the couch watching daytime TV while eating bon-bons and gaining weight will not just be perceived as lazy, she is lazy. Furthermore, she's going to slowly lose her mind not doing anything. A woman who spends hours in the gym everyday, manages the household, oversees the family finances like a pro and stays active will receive admiration with a twinge of jealousy from those around her. I don't think that she needs to be a live-in maid (it sounds like she can afford to hire one), but rather that she needs to stay busy, keep herself in shape and run the house. That's a job in itself.

[andreaspercheron]

Even if there is no need financially to work are you that clairvoyant that you can predict a future where you will be forever married, forever having that money coming in and you will never ever need to socialize at work or keep up with the times as far as keeping your learned skills honed? I mean, why on Gods green earth WOULD you want to stay home especially if you have no kids.
I wouldn't be comfortable with it. I think when you do that you lose not only the resume you have built, your skills, experience, etc but you also lose yourself.
Now, the flip side is that if you are fortunate enough to not have to work and you are using that time to educate yourself or pursue your own business then I think it could work and be okay.
For me personally, I have to work - financially and for my own mental health LOL

[jimboburnsy]

Originally Posted by andreaspercheron

Even if there is no need financially to work are you that clairvoyant that you can predict a future where you will be forever married, forever having that money coming in and you will never ever need to socialize at work or keep up with the times as far as keeping your learned skills honed? I mean, why on Gods green earth WOULD you want to stay home especially if you have no kids.
I wouldn't be comfortable with it. I think when you do that you lose not only the resume you have built, your skills, experience, etc but you also lose yourself.
Now, the flip side is that if you are fortunate enough to not have to work and you are using that time to educate yourself or pursue your own business then I think it could work and be okay.
For me personally, I have to work - financially and for my own mental health LOL

Depending on the state, if you have been un-employed for a number of years you are entitled to allimony.

[sierraAZ]

Originally Posted by Fickle

My view is this, why would anyone want to stay at home most of their days? Why do they not have something they are passionate about?

And what makes you think she doesn't do the things she enjoys and have a nice life? I don't know a whole lot of women who feel so passionate about their jobs that they can't live without them given a choice.