A woman has divided opinion after revealing that ever since her husband got a pay rise, she has wanted to spend more money on a bigger home, a new car, and other luxury goods.

Taking to British parenting forum Mumsnet, the anonymous mother described how her career had taken a back seat after she and her husband had children, with her taking on the main responsibility when it came to childcare. 

Conversely, her husband was able to focus on his career with the support of his wife, and as a result, has enjoyed some considerable success.

The post, titled 'Am I spoilt or is he tight?', said: 'The background is that both my husband and I work but he is the breadwinner, as my career took a back seat to look after kids and support his career.

'A few years ago he got a new job with a considerable pay rise. We share costs but he brings in more cash so he pays for more, but I do everything household and child related.

According to a woman writing on Mumsnet, she took over primary caretaking duties when it came to looking after their children - freeing up her husband to concentrate on his career. But now, she says, her husband doesn't want to spend money on treats for the family (stock image)

'I would like to move house - we could do with more space, but also because where we live is fairly isolated, you can’t walk anywhere (which was and still is a pain with having two young boys) and it’s been lonely not being close to friends or family.

'With our combined salary we could easily buy a bigger house in a nice area, closer to school etc and could afford to double our budget. However my husband refuses.'

She continued: 'Every time I raise it it’s an argument and he always has an excuse, which I feel are overly cautious - I.e interest rates have risen, he might earn less next year and so on and so on. 

'I appreciate his worries and I think there are things we can do to mitigate them. I’m also not talking about going mad and trying to buy a mansion, but more just to use the income we have.

'He also doesn’t want to spend any money on nice cars, holidays, days out etc etc - ie all the things I thought we’d do now he earns more. We do have savings and I'm not a huge spend thrift.

'Am I just being spoilt and grabby, or is he being a miser?!'

Some respondents suggested that the poster was being slightly unreasonable in expecting to invest so much money into a more expensive lifestyle. 

One wrote: 'Perhaps he would feel more confident if you increased your financial contribution. What’s the current split of your respective contributions?'

In the post, the woman opened up about how her husband had been able to concentrate on his career because she was the primary caregiver to their children 

In agreement, another added: 'I guess if nice things are very important to you then you need to earn more to fund them. It must be very stressful to be the main earner and be expected to stretch yourself financially to keep your spouse sweet.' 

And a third said: 'It’s difficult to really say if you are being unreasonable or not but I can see your husband’s point of view. 

'You aren’t just pushing for a bigger house but a bigger house, in a better area, with fancier holidays and fancier cars plus more day to day spending. It’s sounding like a lot.' 

Meanwhile, another wrote: 'Who is the main breadwinner is irrelevant. But in the current climate, the OP and her husband would be mad to double their mortgage and splash out on luxury cars and holidays.' 

And a fifth explained why they empathised with the husband in this situation, noting: 'As the top earner in my household I tend to agree with your husband.

'Yes my salary would allow us to get a better house, pay for more holidays etc, but it would put a lot of pressure on me to maintain that salary in the future and I am not willing to do that.

Some Mumsnetters felt that the husband was under pressure to keep earning well, because of his wife's suggestions of buying a more expensive home and other items

'It doesn't mean that my partner doesn't have equal say in how we spend our money!

'It means that I don't want the responsibility to support our high income for the next 30 years to pay for a mortgage, and this way loosing my freedom to change my priorities.'

However, others noted that in taking on the bulk of unpaid work, in being the primary caregiver, the woman had inadvertently put herself in a weaker financial position, while her husband had been able to continue earning well.

One wrote: 'It sounds that due to you sacrificing your career and earning power to look after your and his children, his career has progressed well and he is earning more. What is he doing with the extra money?'

Another added: 'I would not be at happy with this set up and I think a new house is the least of your worries.

'Why is he not doing any housework or childcare? Why does he get final say in financial decisions?

However, many respondents were sympathetic to the poster, and felt that by taking on the primary caregiving duties, she should have equal parity with her husband when it came to making financial decisions

'Why on earth did you give up your financial independence to support his career?'

And a third agreed, saying: 'How does it make sense when you're now in a position of financial insecurity and your each is treating you like a maid and a nanny?'

Meanwhile, a fourth wrote: 'He's in a winning position - he has a job and gets to keep his money that you have facilitated him earning. 

'You work, do everything for the children and house and have no power over how family money is spent.'

And a fifth seemed to agree, chiming in to add: 'If I were you I would be demanding that money is spent on extra childcare and funding you to retrain into a role where you can start to earn decent money too. He owes you that in the least.

'Your children wont need you home forever, and with your husbands controlling, secretive attitude to family money, I would not want to be the position of relying on him any longer than I had to.'