Requiring Spouse to Work?

[catccc]

Would you want your husband to make more money because you think he would be having it easy as the SAHP and you don't think it's fair. Or do you just want more income to reach your financial goals faster? Reading your post I get a sense of resentment.

Oh, no resentment at all! Like I said, I truly value what he does as a SAHP. But when the kids are in school for 6 hours a day, that is different.

I know he doesn't have it easy as the SAHP. Read my posts #18 & 22. I did it for a while, too. For goodness sake, I get a lunch break! He can barely take a potty break for himself!

 

[Tyro]

Honestly, it seems to me his or her opinion is more important than the sum of all the opinions you're going to get here.

+1. This, IOO, is/should be part of the whole conversation/plan regarding family & finances -- a conversation that is ongoing throughout a domestic partnership.

Tyro

 

[FIREd]

Oh, no resentment at all! Like I said, I truly value what he does as a SAHP. But when the kids are in school for 6 hours a day, that is different.

I know he doesn't have it easy as the SAHP. Read my posts #18 & 22. I did it for a while, too. For goodness sake, I get a lunch break! He can barely take a potty break for himself!

I meant, would you be resentful if he remained a full time SAHP once the kids started school? When you decided that he would be a SAHP, did you set a time limit with the understanding that he would have to go back to work once his duties as full time SAHP ended?

 

[catccc]

Gender is irrelevant to this. That is my opinion. However, my sense is that many people see stay at home moms as normal and OK while stay at home dads are simply men failing to provide for their family. Why do so many think it is reasonable to expect a man to provide for his family but never seem to think that a woman should do so if she has a male spouse? (Question is rhetorical, not looking for an actual answer)

I know you said this was rhetorical, but this is exactly why I attempted to mask the gender. DH is a stand up, hard working guy. We both feel the pressure equally to provide for our family.

I have always, always, always felt that it was unfair for one of the partners to stay at home and be supported by the other partner unless there was a compelling reason for it such as health or possibly small children (I say possibly because I certainly don't think there is anything wrong with a parent of small children working a regular but I can see the reason not to do before the children go to school).

yes, We agree that a SAHP at this stage in our kids lives is preferable. It works for us and it is what we want. I'm proud that we can afford to have him at home, just as I was proud when we could afford to have me at home and him at work.

Once children are in school, I personally would find it unfair for one parent to stay at home with a no-profit side business while the other parent was toiling away each day.

Most of us here, of course, would like to eventually stay home all day, and so I understand that desire. However, I find it unfair to put fulfillment of that desire entirely or almost entirely on the back of the working spouse. I can understand to some extent one spouse working full time and the other working part time if the family can afford to do that and still meet their goals.

If possible - and I understand this may not always be possible - I think it is preferable for spouses to alternate stay at home time. That is, perhaps the spouse who stays home while children are small then works full time later and the other spouse works part-time. I do understand that work situations and income potential may be such that this won't work in a given situation.

Of course, every situation is different and I do think that the spouses need to work out what they think is fair. But, frankly, if it was me I would be agreeing with the OP here.

Thanks for this response, well thought out and I appreciate you sharing your opinion frankly. Our income differential is why I work and he stays at home, but we did take turns to the extent that we could in previous years. We would certainly be able to both work part time in coming years. But that would delay total FIRE, of course. If I work full time we can get there faster. If he works at all we can get there faster.

 

[catccc]

I couldn't say whether it was reasonable or not for you to want him to earn 10k unless you say why you would like him to earn the 10k.

Do you need the money?
Do you not like the idea or are jealous of him having free time between 9 and 3?
Will the extra income let you retire sooner?
Do you feel it's not fair?

I'm sorry I put 10K out there. It's not some magic number. I guess it is just what I think might be reasonable to earn working 20 hours a week or so.

We don't need the money. I earn over 90K and we spent about 45K last year. The rest was for taxes or saved. But of course the extra income will help us retire sooner.

I think it is more than fair currently for him to work as a SAHP while I work outside of the home. I'm not sure how I'll feel about it when he has free time between 9 and 3. Ask me in 4 years. No, wait, I can answer this. It depends greatly on what he does with it. If he works his biz that earns some nominal amount and gets to go on a daily 5K run, yes, I will be a little jealous, wouldn't you? C'mon this forum is full of people that want to retire early, remember?

 

[GandK]

The key to solving your problem is more clarity. You and your SO need more concrete joint financial goals than "saving aggressively for retirement and continuing to live below our means." That's not a goal at all, it's a lifestyle choice. WHY are you doing that? Not only do you need to spell all that out in detail, but you also need to figure out how to merge your vision of post-retirement life and your SO's, because your SO will never want to take on work that they don't enjoy in order to fund a vision they're not on board with. Either the end goal you've decided upon** is worth that sacrifice to them or it isn't.

** A hint here: I used to be the reluctant spouse. The key in getting someone on board with a level of frugality and sacrifice that isn't natural or agreeable to them is to get them to envision how they'd spend their day if they had all of their time at their own disposal, and then ask them what price they'd pay to get themselves there. Ask your SO that, and then just listen. This may take weeks. Make it about THEIR dreams, not yours... after all, you're already on board. A lot of people shoot themselves in the foot by talking incessantly about their own vision, and then basically turn to their complete opposite spouse and say "Don't you want this too?!? Wouldn't that be FUN?!?" (Answer: probably not for them, they're your opposite.) People will naturally get excited about making their own dreams come true, though. They don't need to be pushed/pulled to work hard when they know that the end result will be to their own liking.

 

[FIREd]

I think it is more than fair currently for him to work as a SAHP while I work outside of the home. I'm not sure how I'll feel about it when he has free time between 9 and 3. Ask me in 4 years. No, wait, I can answer this. It depends greatly on what he does with it. If he works his biz that earns some nominal amount and gets to go on a daily 5K run, yes, I will be a little jealous, wouldn't you? C'mon this forum is full of people that want to retire early, remember?

OK, that's what I wanted to know. Then I think you have to make it clear to him that his duties as full time SAHP will end as soon as the kids start school. I would not "require" him to make a set amount of money, but you have to start setting expectations now. If he is on board with the FIRE thing, I would use that angle, "look honey if we made $10K more per year we could retire 3 years earlier!".

 

[aaronc879]

Oh, no resentment at all! Like I said, I truly value what he does as a SAHP. But when the kids are in school for 6 hours a day, that is different.

I think a good job option would be driving a school bus. That way he is always home when the kids are off school. He can work on his small business between the morning and afternoon busing. Of course if he has specialized training like IT or Accounting, then he can probably find other more lucrative jobs that still have a flexible schedule.

 

[Calico]

...not to mention the price that cannot be put on the concommitant nurturing/parenting.

First, thank you for editing my post in your response! I don't know how to edit the original.

Secondly, I absolutely agree about the immeasurable value of nurturing/parenting. My original response focused on the financial value because that seemed (to me) to be the focus of the OP's concern - the financial contribution that was/was not being made by the SO.

 

[catccc]

I meant, would you be resentful if he remained a full time SAHP once the kids started school? When you decided that he would be a SAHP, did you set a time limit with the understanding that he would have to go back to work once his duties as full time SAHP ended?

No, that's not going to happen, him remaining a full time SAHP... We both understand that the SAHP thing is temporary while the kids are young. We both want him to have this side biz turn into more lucrative work. He doesn't want to remain a SAHP, when they are in school he wants to "work."

 

[Tyro]

I've been married over 30 years and have found that "requiring" DW to do anything is a totally losing proposition. That will teach me to marry a [-]stubborn[/-]headstrong woman.

Yet many DHs are "required" to do certain things -- like leaving the seat down.

 

[FIREd]

No, that's not going to happen, him remaining a full time SAHP... We both understand that the SAHP thing is temporary while the kids are young. We both want him to have this side biz turn into more lucrative work. He doesn't want to remain a SAHP, when they are in school he wants to "work."

Then maybe you are worrying for nothing. You said earlier he barely has time to take a bathroom brake now so the fact that he is not making any money is quite understandable. Once he has more time to work on the business, the income should ramp up.

 

[catccc]

Then maybe you are worrying for nothing. You said earlier he barely has time to take a bathroom brake now so the fact that he is not making any money is quite understandable. Once he has more time to work on the business, the income should ramp up.

This is true. I guess I just worry that the business won't be as lucrative as we hope? Maybe my real question is, how long do you let your spouse run a business that isn't very profitable? How profitable does it have to be?

 

[FIREd]

This is true. I guess I just worry that the business won't be as lucrative as we hope? Maybe my real question is, how long do you let your spouse run a business that isn't very profitable? How profitable does it have to be?

I will let seasoned business people answer that one. But I think you have to give him a real chance at making the business profitable. He can't do that as long as the kids require 100% of his time.

 

[catccc]

First, thank you for editing my post in your response! I don't know how to edit the original.

Secondly, I absolutely agree about the immeasurable value of nurturing/parenting. My original response focused on the financial value because that seemed (to me) to be the focus of the OP's concern - the financial contribution that was/was not being made by the SO.

I just want to reiterate that I have no issue whatsoever with the current situation. We both highly value a SAHP, and that is why SO stays at home. I'm talking about when both me and SO agree that there is no need for a SAHP, at least not to the same extent...

 

[Tyro]

This is true. I guess I just worry that the business won't be as lucrative as we hope? Maybe my real question is, how long do you let your spouse run a business that isn't very profitable? How profitable does it have to be?

Again, part of the whole revisitable conversation. Most small businesses take at least 2 years to get going. After that, it's negotiable. Hard to put a value on pursuing a dream. Another factor is business income vs. hrs spent running it; IOW, how much is he working for? Some home/small businesses require only a few hours a week (hobby time), while others demand a more substantial committment. (At some point, it may be decided for you; if a business isn't profitable enough, there's a point where the IRS comes in and says, "This isn't a business; it's a hobby" and eliminates deductions. How the business is set up (sole proprietorship, partnership, Sub-"S", Full Corp.) also has a bearing on this).

Tyro

 

[catccc]

Again, part of the whole revisitable conversation. Most small businesses take at least 2 years to get going. After that, it's negotiable. Hard to put a value on pursuing a dream. Another factor is business income vs. hrs spent running it; IOW, how much is he working for? Some home/small businesses require only a few hours a week (hobby time), while others demand a more substantial committment. (At some point, it may be decided for you; if a business isn't profitable enough, there's a point where the IRS comes in and says, "This isn't a business; it's a hobby" and eliminates deductions. How the business is set up (sole proprietorship, partnership, Sub-"S", Full Corp.) also has a bearing on this).

Tyro

Thanks for the response, it's an LLC. Actually, I'm a licensed as a CPA (but left public long ago), so I'm aware of hobby loss rules. It's just a tough biz, agriculture related, and the weather can wipe you out, demand is unpredictable, etc. This is my dilemma, it is really "hard to put a value on pursuing a dream."

 

[Sesq]

When my wife and I started on the path for kids we talked about it and agreed that when the kids were full time in school she'd look for something to pull in 5-15K per year. We planned that her income would go into college and vacation funds. Assuming you all discuss and agree to a plan, you may find that he finds more purpose in the work if he has a mission (e.g. the college fund).

In our case seven years later and a couple promotions, her rejoining the work force in two years is not looking terribly necessary. But the promotions have ramped up my responsibilities. To that end, absent hiring in care, anything she would pick would have to work around the school schedule, I can't. That really limits the field some, so I no longer care about her bringing cash, and really value that home base is ably covered (not just kid care, but well, everything).

The one thing I won't support is a volunteer position that turns into essentially a full time job, with no pay. My wife is very diligent, and wouldn't leave something half done. So if she were to take on that kind of stress, I want her to be pulling in a check. Also, no "party sales" type stuff where all your profits go back into inventory and you alienate all your friends.

 

[catccc]

When my wife and I started on the path for kids we talked about it and agreed that when the kids were full time in school she'd look for something to pull in 5-15K per year. We planned that her income would go into college and vacation funds. Assuming you all discuss and agree to a plan, you may find that he finds more purpose in the work if he has a mission (e.g. the college fund).

In our case seven years later and a couple promotions, her rejoining the work force in two years is not looking terribly necessary. But the promotions have ramped up my responsibilities. To that end, absent hiring in care, anything she would pick would have to work around the school schedule, I can't. That really limits the field some, so I no longer care about her bringing cash, and really value that home base is ably covered (not just kid care, but well, everything).

The one thing I won't support is a volunteer position that turns into essentially a full time job, with no pay. My wife is very diligent, and wouldn't leave something half done. So if she were to take on that kind of stress, I want her to be pulling in a check. Also, no "party sales" type stuff where all your profits go back into inventory and you alienate all your friends.

Thanks so much for sharing your experience. 5-15K is a big range, it seems. But it also seems reasonable (with my not-thought-out 10K point right in there.)

I worry a little that his side business will be something like a volunteer position in that he will put in way more time than is worth for what he is earning. But I guess that remains to be seen, how exactly that turns out.

 

[haha]

This is true. I guess I just worry that the business won't be as lucrative as we hope? Maybe my real question is, how long do you let your spouse run a business that isn't very profitable? How profitable does it have to be?

Your use of the word "let" is very telling. You, as the big earner, also are the big boss. As with most marital conflicts, power and its role over the other partner is basic. This is also a very fast way to get into big relationship trouble.

I certainly do not blame you for feeling that your "husband" should have plans for remunerative work, almost all women feel the same, and increasingly, most men do too. Kill-time businesses don't cut it. Reminds me of when I was young, very successful male doctors and lawyers would often have wives who ran fashionable but money losing dress shops, or galleries or whatever might spare them from the dreaded housewife moniker.

Attitudes have not fully caught up with changing realiities, and they may never. These issues are partly why our divorce rate is high. In years past, people for the most part accepted social directives about these major life roles, and just fulfilled them as best they could, or failed and went AWOL or were in some other way marginalized.

Interesting to me is that gay male couples seem to be less conflicted than hetero couples about assignment of earner vs homemaker roles. My totally untested idea is that at bottom, being subordinate to or dependent on a female mate reminds us too much of mommy.

Ha

 

[comicbookgujy]

I don't ask my wife to work, as long as she's not wasting money on unnecessity.

Now if she decides she wants expensive vacation and nice things and start complaining, then I will tell her that she can go work for it.

 

[EvrClrx311]

when DW stopped working to stay at home with the kids we made sure to go over our budgeting on a regular basis to make sure that everything was working out and we were both happy. It is what we both wanted for our kids and our family, but we also needed to make sure it fit with finances, since her salary at the time was 28% of our take home.

If we had a new want, it was never an assumption that one or the other had to make money for it. It was "How can we afford this together? Where can we find extra time for one of us to make a little more income for it? Is that sacrifice worth it?"

We went through a short phase of DW picking up a side business on her own, but the stress and work involved was not worth it. She started to notice that her time with the kids wasn't as quality as it was before. She started getting a shorter fuse and recognized it. The stress made her suffer at her job as a SAHM, which I have to say she's always been amazing at (I got lucky with her, can't imagine a better parent at home with the kids). We decided to adjust our budget and cut things out instead.

As the first poster responded, what is most important is the two of you. Goes without saying, but any advice you receive here should not be used as a negotiation tactic.

 

[MichaelB]

Thanks all for the responses... and I get a kick out of the fact that a handful made assumptions about gender roles! I phrased my post with neutrality in mind, because I felt people would treat the situation differently based on the gender of the SAHP. So I'm going to keep it that way. Sorry to be annoying like that.

This too is a gender based assumption.

I just want to reiterate that I have no issue whatsoever with the current situation. We both highly value a SAHP, and that is why SO stays at home. I'm talking about when both me and SO agree that there is no need for a SAHP, at least not to the same extent...

Parenting and working are both required over a lifetime when couples have children. How much each spouse contributes is a very individual thing. In our case DW did the family-rearing heavy lifting when I was busy making the $$, and I always felt that was an equal contribution to the family, so as the kids left the nest and her time became more her own I felt she was free to use it as she wished.

This is not something most couples talk about in their 20's because that moment in life is so far away. Still, how each contributes depends on so many factors, and free time is just one.

 

[Calico]

This too is a gender based assumption........

+1

 

[Brett_Cameron]

I find it interesting that responding posts thus far assume the stay at home adult is female.

Interesting that you should say that. The times have changed and will continue to change. It takes longer for people to change.