Is it acceptable to be a provider husband?

[Xantippe]

ETA: Wroting as a woman, wife, and mother,no longer in jer 20s…

Each family’s situation is different, and each person is different. I think if a husband has sufficient income, a SAH wife is a fabulous idea, for one thing, she won’t be taking a job another person might really need.

In the olden days when the ideal was for wives to not have jobs, non-employed wives provided a lot of volunteer labor which helped a lot of people and got a lot done in the community.

And I would certainly recommend this whenever possible so that the wife could learn the many things she will need or want to know once she had children: food management (not just using coupons but preserving); gardening, sewing, knitting, crocheting, household repairs.

And I think that if this is a possibility, which so often it isn’t, then it is a wonderful thing to do, and lovely that the OP would like to aim for when he is planning his life. I’m sure that there are enough women out there who would like this type of family; after all,he only needs one

Is crocheting really that economically valuable as a skill? (I’ve seen a lot of UGLY crocheted items over the years.)

Also, are home sewing and knitting really an economic plus these days? I know that it could be emotionally satisfying to make stuff and you might be able to make things that you can’t find in the store or online, but (purely economically) is there any actual savings involved over buying from the Carter’s clearance rack or Walmart? (I suppose home hemming and curtain making could save a lot.) Families today just don’t spend a lot on clothing, so there isn’t a lot to be saved by the home production of clothing, even if we could count mom’s labor as costing nothing, which I don’t think we should.

I think you can make a much better case for gardening and household repairs (and of course, cooking).

 

[Gliggle]

I think you can achieve this and there is no rule against it, and there would be women who are happy for it and will love your ideal, but in the modern world, I think it may perhaps not work out as you imagine, but hey, that’s marriage

My main point is, if it’s what you want, don’t be afraid to say it out loud or you will never find the lady who is right for you

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Is crocheting really that economically valuable as a skill? (I’ve seen a lot of UGLY crocheted items over the years.)

Also, are home sewing and knitting really an economic plus these days? I know that it could be emotionally satisfying to make stuff and you might be able to make things that you can’t find in the store or online, but (purely economically) is there any actual savings involved over buying from the Carter’s clearance rack or Walmart? (I suppose home hemming and curtain making could save a lot.) Families today just don’t spend a lot on clothing, so there isn’t a lot to be saved by the home production of clothing, even if we could count mom’s labor as costing nothing, which I don’t think we should.

I think you can make a much better case for gardening and household repairs (and of course, cooking).

Knitting pays off economically if you view it as a nice gift. I’ve saved a lot of money knitting things (baby blankets, NFL hat, glove, and scarf sets, afghans, etc) for friends and family instead of buying expensive gifts for special occasions. People love receiving high quality, handmade presents and it’s even kind of a novelty these days. But for everyday clothing? It just isn’t worth the sweat equity, much less the yarn money.

 

[1990Domer]

Yes.

Likewise, you never know when the working spouse is going to need to step up and do more home stuff because the home spouse is incapacitated. I’m an SAHM, but with my last pregnancy, I had a lot of complications and for the last two trimesters, my husband had to do 90% of home stuff. I just lay around like a queen bee, gestating, watching my diet, and checking my blood sugars four times a day, because that’s all I could do. (Plus a little driving.)

You can’t really plan to do dad-does-all-earning and mom-does-all-home-and-kid-stuff because you can’t guarantee that either is always going to be able to do that.

Uh, that’s true. Having the swine flu was sure a wake-up for DH who soon realized all the other miscellaneous deeds I did around the house.

 

[1990Domer]

Most young couples won’t be in that position. If our OP is a doctor (or similar) then that might be an option, but I’m assuming he makes a lot less than that.

When my husband and I got married years ago, we both made around $12k each as graduate students. When I was unemployed after grad school, it was URGENT that I get a job. After my husband finished his doctorate, he was on a good career track, but one with a very gentle upward earning slope. When we had our first baby we were living in the DC metro area, I was at home and (as I recall) for a year we had $800 left subtracting our rent from my husband’s take home income–that $800 needed to cover our groceries, transportation, clothes, utilities, medical copays, baby stuff, etc. I did not realize it at the time, but that was financially a disaster waiting to happen–but at the time, I didn’t understand why we never seemed to be able to stick to the $800 budget. (Our rent was $1560 a month.)

We were able by some miracle to find a free housing situation on campus (glory be!) and squeaked through another four years in the DC metro area on a moderate income, but it’s only now that I realize how close to disaster we came. We just didn’t have enough money to be living where we were living as a single-income family of three and then four.

We moved to TX and were on much more solid financial ground and I started doing the Dave Ramsey program. Over the course of the next six years, we paid off our debt, saved an emergency fund, started saving for a house downpayment, had a third child, and finally bought a house. It took 15 years of marriage, three kids, and some grandma and grandpa help before we were able to buy our first house. Once you have kids, even if you have a good income (which we do now), it’s hard to make progress, because the family financial pie is cut up into so many narrow slices and there are so many different important priorities.

So I would caution the OP that unless he has a solidly upper middle class income and lives in a moderate-cost area, he’s going to find himself substantially poorer when he has a family to support.

Heres my old favorite, The Practical Conservative’s Guide to the Care and Feeding of the SAHM.

thepracticalconservative.wordpress.com/the-practical-conservative-guide-to-proper-care-and-feeding-of-a-sahm/

I really need to check out Dave Ramsey. I only know him from MarketWatch. I will Google his name and financial planning.

 

[CatholicSheila]

No two women are alike. The best thing to do is talk to your future wife and ask her what her preferences are.

Been a stay-at-home wife would be disastrous for me. I need the schedule that work provides and also the adult contact. Due to my mental health, my doctors have actually given me instructions that unless I am going away on holiday I shouldn’t have more than a week off work at a time - and even that is best to avoid if possible.

Yet, my sister-in-law was a stay at home wife before having children and she loved it. My brother went through periods of high income and low income and she managed the household successfully through both. She was in her element.

As a husband, I’d encourage you to want what is best for your wife in this area rather that get stuck on the idea that one way is automatically better than another.

A second good thing is that if the couple is already accustomed to the living off the husband’s income, that they will not be shocked at the big change in lifestyle when baby comes, because they are already not relying upon her income. Especially if they practice a good savings plan, and keep their expenses as low as possible when it is just the two of them, then they will have savings to help with the expenses of a new baby.

Of course that can be done whilst earning two incomes. Simply live off hubbys income and wifes goes into savings 100%. Not only does it provide the learnings and experience of living off one income, the couple goes into children with a comfortable fall back account in the event of a disaster.

 

[1ke]

I find it odd, and sad, that this persistent cultural myth that in the “good old days” women did not work has taken hold so pervasively in Catholic culture that it is now viewed as “ideal” and that work is disparaged so on these boards.

Women have always worked. What has changed is the nature of the work, the industrialization of our country. Women and men worked side by side on family farms, laboring in the fields, caring for livestock, producing income, caring for children, caring for the home, and committing volunteer time to church and community.

Only upper class women, the VERY upper class, did not do physical or menial work. And they had (women) servants doing that work.

Now for the last 150 years or so, men and women of all but the very upper classes have gone off to work, creating a child care and home care dilemma.

It is only post WWII that the Cleaver and Brady style family ideal, the idle wife, has been presented on TV as the way it should be.

Whether the wife works in or out of the home, for money or not, is a decision the family makes together. It is NOT a Church teaching that women stay home and men work.

There is more than enough work to go around caring for home and children, so if a family is able to swing one income and a stay at home parent, that is wonderful, but it is not a badge of honor to be wielded against those who do not conform to this notion. It is also not an ideal to be held up with the notion that those who do otherwise are “less than”.

 

[pensmama87]

I find it odd, and sad, that this persistent cultural myth that in the “good old days” women did not work has taken hold so pervasively in Catholic culture that it is now viewed as “ideal” and that work is disparaged so on these boards.

Women have always worked. What has changed is the nature of the work, the industrialization of our country. Women and men worked side by side on family farms, laboring in the fields, caring for livestock, producing income, caring for children, caring for the home, and committing volunteer time to church and community.

Only upper class women, the VERY upper class, did not do physical or menial work. And they had (women) servants doing that work.

Now for the last 150 years or so, men and women of all but the very upper classes have gone off to work, creating a child care and home care dilemma.

It is only post WWII that the Cleaver and Brady style family ideal, the idle wife, has been presented on TV as the way it should be.

Whether the wife works in or out of the home, for money or not, is a decision the family makes together. It is NOT a Church teaching that women stay home and men work.

There is more than enough work to go around caring for home and children, so if a family is able to swing one income and a stay at home parent, that is wonderful, but it is not a badge of honor to be wielded against those who do not conform to this notion. It is also not an ideal to be held up with the notion that those who do otherwise are “less than”.

I agree with this. Actually, a lot of what I would do as a “stay at home wife” would be the things that women used to do at home. If I had learned them growing up, maybe I could do some of those things with a lot of littles underfoot, but since I have a lot to learn, this is probably not the best time for me to start learning many of those things. I’d like to have a little garden, to learn how to preserve food, to sew. I used to bake our own bread and I *loved *that. I’d also have a lot of time to read those “hard books” that you really need to focus on, in a way that’s hard with a nursing grabby baby without a reliable sleep schedule.

I do think it’s true that in this day and age, the advent of new technology means that a lot of the skill in homemaking has been passed on to others or eliminated entirely. But I’m finding that I actually enjoy a lot of these “lost arts,” and I don’t think I only enjoy them because I’m not the brightest tool in the shed. As I said before, I’m a driven person and I do very well with lots of unstructured time. I’m motivated by and interested in self-improvement. I feel like going to a job would get in the way. I’ll have a job if I have to earn money, but really, that’s all the fulfillment I see in it. I have no desire to pursue a new profession. I don’t particularly want to go back to teaching, which is what I did before I became a mom. I volunteer as a catechist, and that is enough for me.

I guess the gist of what I’m saying is: I don’t feel like I need to have a paycheck to achieve personal growth. Obviously a certain amount of financial freedom would make that possible, but most of us are planning on retiring some day, yes? We’ll also, presumably, have lots of free time that isn’t only going to be filled up with grandchildren. Some of us may continue working, sure, but you wouldn’t think that a person who chose to fill their time with other things is destined to be bored and lonely.

 

[Xantippe]

I really need to check out Dave Ramsey. I only know him from MarketWatch. I will Google his name and financial planning.

I don’t watch him there, but I expect that he doesn’t really shine in that context. His best stuff is solving personal financial problems, debt repayment, budgeting, and big picture family financial planning (rather than actual nuts and bolts investing).

Here are some different DR sources:

–the radio/internet radio
–the website
–the Financial Peace University 9-week course
–The Total Money Makeover book (it’s the long version of the Baby Steps)
–Smart Money, Smart Kids (love that book)
–The Legacy Journey book

The Smart Money, Smart Kids book is especially helpful for parents of school age kids and older. I was surrprised to discover that DR is actually kind of a big softie with regard to certain things for older children.

Come to think of it, I would suggest reading The Total Money Makeover or doing FPU before having either spouse quit a job.

 

[Xantippe]

As a husband, I’d encourage you to want what is best for your wife in this area rather that get stuck on the idea that one way is automatically better than another.

Yes.

Also, it’s hard enough finding a good spouse without having such precise ideas about what your future wife should want (when it’s not a question of morals). Plus, even if she agrees, what if it turns out that following that plan (her never working) makes her unhappy?

It’s possible to get your dream and then realize that your dream doesn’t work for you. (I had that happen with graduate school.)

 

[Sarcelle]

I find it odd, and sad, that this persistent cultural myth that in the “good old days” women did not work has taken hold so pervasively in Catholic culture that it is now viewed as “ideal” and that work is disparaged so on these boards.

Women have always worked. What has changed is the nature of the work, the industrialization of our country. Women and men worked side by side on family farms, laboring in the fields, caring for livestock, producing income, caring for children, caring for the home, and committing volunteer time to church and community.

Only upper class women, the VERY upper class, did not do physical or menial work. And they had (women) servants doing that work.

Now for the last 150 years or so, men and women of all but the very upper classes have gone off to work, creating a child care and home care dilemma.

It is only post WWII that the Cleaver and Brady style family ideal, the idle wife, has been presented on TV as the way it should be.

Whether the wife works in or out of the home, for money or not, is a decision the family makes together. It is NOT a Church teaching that women stay home and men work.

There is more than enough work to go around caring for home and children, so if a family is able to swing one income and a stay at home parent, that is wonderful, but it is not a badge of honor to be wielded against those who do not conform to this notion. It is also not an ideal to be held up with the notion that those who do otherwise are “less than”.

In my extended family, I knew a lot of married couples who ran their own businesses together. So it’s not only the husband at work with outside employer while wife stays at home which seem to be the gold standard primarily in the conservative, Evangelical world.

 

[Kelfa28]

I see this quite a bit by particular posters who seem to think that a woman who stays at home is the proper and most ideal choice for all women.

All women cannot conform to this ideal…married or unmarried.

We don’t expect men to work a very specific job…we expect them to work jobs that play to their strengths and talents.

You certainly don’t expect men who have not gone to college or excelled in fields of science or math to be a high schooler teacher or college professor and you don’t expect men who are small and scrawny but have a masters in Chemistry to do manual labor.

Why do we assume that all women fit the mold of housewife and SAHM?

Talk about trying to force a square peg into a round hole.

So, are these women expected to not marry?

That couldn’t bode well for a population that needs to grow and needs more holy women to devote themselves to marriage.

Being a married woman doesn’t automatically mean you’re the one who has to fall on your sword and be the only one who makes sacrifices.

I’m tired of being the one expected to give up my education, my career, my friends and my home in order to chase an ideal that revolves around my husband and his potential and not mine.

I can’t be a SAHM. I’m prone to depression and manic thoughts. That isn’t helpful for me or my children.
Personally, I don’t think medicating me and sending me off to weekly sessions with a Catholic therapist just so I can be shoved back into the cave I see as my home is not helpful.

I know I’m happier and healthier working…even if we didn’t need the money.

I saw a beautiful post on Facebook yesterday about a mother and wife who, at the age of 35, finally hit a milestone of having a car registered in her name. She and her husband had worked so hard, for so long and made a lot of sacrifices because she wanted to be a stay at home wife and mom.
It would have been so much easier for her to work but that wasn’t what she wanted to do.
It was hailed as a beautiful, sacrificial and holy thing for this family to make.

Similarly, I’ve been struggling to finish my degree…going through similar trials and difficulties. Wanting to give up because it’s just too hard.

I’ve been told…in real life and on these boards that I’m selfish for wanting this, I have a family to care for and this is God’s way of telling me to quit.

 

[LaughingBoy1503]

Hi everyone, I was wondering, is it Catholically permitted for a man to provide for his wife?

There are a couple of reasons why I’m asking. First, not having been married before, I didn’t know if maybe there is a rule against it. Also, I’d always been taught that the husband should provide for his wife, and if/when the day comes that I am married to someone, I’d expect to (and be happy to) take care of my wife financially.

Also, is it common for women in their 20’s to want their husband to fully provide for them? I ask because it’s not something that typically comes up in normal conversation, so, I was wondering what Catholic women in their 20’s who want to be married one day feel about having their husband as the full provider?

Is it acceptable? Odd question. I knew from since I was a little boy that it is the way it should be. Not that women should not work. If I ever got married and my wife loves her job, I am not going to try to take that away.

What on earth would make you question if it is permitted for a man to provide for his wife in The Catholic Religion? Unless I am missing something…

The words “Husband” and “Provider” should always go hand in hand. I understand sometimes the woman is the provider these days but I am talking about besides the rare exceptions.

 

[Xantippe]

I see this quite a bit by particular posters who seem to think that a woman who stays at home is the proper and most ideal choice for all women.

All women cannot conform to this ideal…married or unmarried.

We don’t expect men to work a very specific job…we expect them to work jobs that play to their strengths and talents.

You certainly don’t expect men who have not gone to college or excelled in fields of science or math to be a high schooler teacher or college professor and you don’t expect men who are small and scrawny but have a masters in Chemistry to do manual labor.

Why do we assume that all women fit the mold of housewife and SAHM?

Talk about trying to force a square peg into a round hole.

So, are these women expected to not marry?

I think it’s worse than that–what if we expected every single man to work in agriculture, no matter what his particular temperament and talents?

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Hi everyone, I was wondering, is it Catholically permitted for a man to provide for his wife?

There are a couple of reasons why I’m asking. First, not having been married before, I didn’t know if maybe there is a rule against it. Also, I’d always been taught that the husband should provide for his wife, and if/when the day comes that I am married to someone, I’d expect to (and be happy to) take care of my wife financially.

Also, is it common for women in their 20’s to want their husband to fully provide for them? I ask because it’s not something that typically comes up in normal conversation, so, I was wondering what Catholic women in their 20’s who want to be married one day feel about having their husband as the full provider?

A rule against it? That’s a new one.

What do you think a husbands job us and a wife’s job is?

 

[Kelfa28]

I think it’s worse than that–what if we expected every single man to work in agriculture, no matter what his particular temperament and talents?

This is exactly what I wanted to convey but the synapses weren’t connecting very well and the thought didn’t quite make it to the keyboard!

A rule against it? That’s a new one.

What do you think a husbands job us and a wife’s job is?

You know what the clear, or “ideal” answer is for a lot of people who post here.

The husband “provides” and the wife stays at home.

Like I said before…trying to jam a square peg into a round hole and if you can’t do it…you aren’t holy enough.

 

[Kay_Cee]

I was a SAHM, and I appreciated everything my husband gave up going to work every day. It wasn’t only his time that he sacrificed; it was time that could have been spent with our children.

My husband contributed the income, and I helped by stemming the outgo. I baked from scratch, used a clothesline, and sold on eBay.

We didn’t have any of the finer things in life like the bigger house or the fancier car, but we considered it worth the sacrifice to have a parent at home with the kids. (Both of our cars were 1994 Toyotas, and we only a few months ago finally bought a new car.)

Now my older daughter is getting married. Like all couples, she and her fiance will have to work out whatever arrangement is best for them. I’m sure it’s different for each family.

 

[bitterhope]

What I don’t understand is why a woman who doesn’t enjoy staying home doesn’t just start working at a job she enjoys. It is not morally wrong for a woman to work outside the home. Many women do it and it is best for their family. For me it’s better being home. I have worked as needed throughout my marriage and I make a steady income through sewing and crochet as well as child care. Some people consider that working from home, others consider it a housewife, others say stay at home mom. To me it’s just what works best for my family. I don’t understand how vile discussions turn in regards to the way a woman parents or whether she’s home or away during the day. Find what works and do it. It just doesn’t make sense to complain about what another family decides is best for them or even about how much it isn’t working for yourself unless you take action to fix it. If it’s not working, fix it. But don’t project your unhappiness onto everyone else. Not everyone is alike and I don’t think in the US there is any one thing currently considered the ideal. In some countries it is considered ideal to have a wife at home. In some countries a working wife is considered ideal. In the US both are culturally acceptable and morally equal. Individual families need to decide that themselves and it really is no one else’s place to try to sway them one way or the other.

My mom worked full time days. My dad farmed during the day and worked nights (2nd shift usually, sometimes 3rd) as a police detective. Dad carried us on his back in the fields as babies doing what many men during those days thought was being Mr. Mom. He cooked, did most the cleaning, most the child care, because he was home when it needed done. It worked for them. It would not work for my family. There isn’t just one way to have a catholic family. If it works for you then that is what is best.

OP, don’t rush into marriage. Be choosey and don’t settle for less than what you are comfortable with. Yes, a catholic husband should be the provider but that doesn’t just mean monetarily. Men should beyond all else provide love, support, respect, joy, laughter and peace. As long as those things are provided he has done his job well. If you are also able to be the provider monetarily so be it. A wife should be your partner in life and take care of the things you provide. As caretaker if that means she must work outside the home in order to properly care for the family, than so be it. Find a woman that shares your values and the rest will fall into place.

 

[St_Francis]

What I don’t understand is why a woman who doesn’t enjoy staying home doesn’t just start working at a job she enjoys. It is not morally wrong for a woman to work outside the home. Many women do it and it is best for their family. For me it’s better being home. I have worked as needed throughout my marriage and I make a steady income through sewing and crochet as well as child care. Some people consider that working from home, others consider it a housewife, others say stay at home mom. To me it’s just what works best for my family. I don’t understand how vile discussions turn in regards to the way a woman parents or whether she’s home or away during the day. Find what works and do it. It just doesn’t make sense to complain about what another family decides is best for them or even about how much it isn’t working for yourself unless you take action to fix it. If it’s not working, fix it. But don’t project your unhappiness onto everyone else. Not everyone is alike and I don’t think in the US there is any one thing currently considered the ideal. In some countries it is considered ideal to have a wife at home. In some countries a working wife is considered ideal. In the US both are culturally acceptable and morally equal. Individual families need to decide that themselves and it really is no one else’s place to try to sway them one way or the other.

My mom worked full time days. My dad farmed during the day and worked nights (2nd shift usually, sometimes 3rd) as a police detective. Dad carried us on his back in the fields as babies doing what many men during those days thought was being Mr. Mom. He cooked, did most the cleaning, most the child care, because he was home when it needed done. It worked for them. It would not work for my family. There isn’t just one way to have a catholic family. If it works for you then that is what is best.

OP, don’t rush into marriage. Be choosey and don’t settle for less than what you are comfortable with. Yes, a catholic husband should be the provider but that doesn’t just mean monetarily. Men should beyond all else provide love, support, respect, joy, laughter and peace. As long as those things are provided he has done his job well. If you are also able to be the provider monetarily so be it. A wife should be your partner in life and take care of the things you provide. As caretaker if that means she must work outside the home in order to properly care for the family, than so be it. Find a woman that shares your values and the rest will fall into place.

I really like what you said, esp about each family doing what works for them. So often people put this as an either/or thing where only one is the correct answer!

I was into feminism when I was young, and I ran into a very wise young woman who bluntly said, I cannot earn enough to replace what I can save by being at home. That was how I learned that not every woman in the US aspired to working throughout their lives.

OTOH, I have also met lots of women who worked through their family years and that worked well for their families. No one should be looking down on family arrangements–that is far too personal to make a judgement on and we know far too little about the interior workings of other families.

Each family has a different set of unique people. The needs of each and of all need to be taken into account, and doing that means that each family will come up with a different scenario, right?

 

[bitterhope]

I really like what you said, esp about each family doing what works for them. So often people put this as an either/or thing where only one is the correct answer!

I was into feminism when I was young, and I ran into a very wise young woman who bluntly said, I cannot earn enough to replace what I can save by being at home. That was how I learned that not every woman in the US aspired to working throughout their lives.

OTOH, I have also met lots of women who worked through their family years and that worked well for their families. No one should be looking down on family arrangements–that is far too personal to make a judgement on and we know far too little about the interior workings of other families.

Each family has a different set of unique people. The needs of each and of all need to be taken into account, and doing that means that each family will come up with a different scenario, right?

Exactly. It’s not always about money either.