i didn't marry my husband because of his earning potential, either.
Things change too. The man I fell in love with and married didn't make the income he makes now. We couldn't have predicted his current level of income. Nor, could we have predicted that one of us would sah. It wasn't in our plans.
What was in our plans was to live off of one income from the start. That choice, gave us the ability to have more choices and flexibility when our circumstances changed. (More than just a sah/woh decision) The choice to have children in our thirties when our careers were established gave us more choices when our circumstances changed. We could negotiate more flexible arrangements. We earned more money.
If I had met and fell in love with a man whose earnings were not enough to support a sah AND our circumstances were like they are now (where sah is the best fit for our family), he would be the sahp and I would be the wohp. Because, *I* earned enough to support our household before I sah. Plus, we are natural thrifty people - perhaps that is one of the reasons we get along so well.
The reason that we both were lucky enough to earn enough to support a household is because of our parents and grandparents and great-grandparents were education oriented. And we were given the gift of education. We took advantage of that gift. We were lucky enough to find well paying jobs in an area that has a good economic picture. We were lucky enough to be good at what we did to ensure healthy raises and promotions.
I feel lucky to have found someone who approaches life similarly to me. I am lucky to have found a life partner that views the world similarly to me. I am lucky to have given birth to the children I did. We are very lucky that we have the means and time to support our children so that they will have the best chance at a positive outcome. (One stat I read was the only 2% of children with disabilities graduate from college. We are making darn sure that our boys are in that group.)
For *me*, the fact that we can live nicely on DH's current salary is much more complicated than "I was lucky enough to fall in love with a man with a high paying job."
<family, you can
< i think we're lucky int hat my husband's income is comfortable but even if it wasn't, we'd still have a SAHM >
If your husband didn't make enough money to support your family, you would not be able to SAH.
If SAH is something you really want, you can do it IF AND ONLY IF the WOH partner makes enough to support the family.
If s/he doesn't, then both partners have to work.
It's really not rocket surgery (thank you Puss).
"Justice, fairness, and the Aquarian way"
Siggy quote courtesy of
It does require a certain income. Sufficient income to feed, house and clothe the family. There is just no way around that, unless you want to talk about going on welfare in order to SAH.
Just to clarify, since this was brought up by another poster as well, I didn't say "with a high paying job".
I'm sure we could take our family to a subsistence level without going on welfare. We could live in a small bug infested hovel in a dangerous neighborhood, eat very cheaply and use all second had clothes, no sports, one car, and one of us could SAH on a very low income of the other one.
That kind of lifestyle would not be acceptable to my dh and I. It is so hard to imagine it might as well be impossible. We would be a dual WOH family long before we got there. So I think it comes down to a balance. You can be stuck because you are stuck between 1) a lifestyle that is acceptable and 2) the lifestyle that could be had on one salary. You can still be stuck even when down grading your lifestyle is a possibility, you get stuck because downgrading your lifestyle to that subsistence level is unacceptable.
I think what egd3 is saying is that you can always downgrade, so you really aren't stuck. I disagree with that and I think you do too, because it's equally important to have a lifestyle that the couple finds acceptable.
<pregnancy happens when a coupel is least prepared financially or otherwise for it too, so i get that.>>
I'm not sure if you said this to mean specifically about my situation or just in general.