Speaking on a case concerning the grant of maintenance in a marital dispute, the Delhi High Court dismissed the myth of the ‘idle’ wife. The fact that a woman is educated and able to earn does not disqualify her from maintenance if she is not actually earning when the marriage breaks down. She has devoted her time and energy to sustaining the household, creating the structure on which many families thrive. In India, many women qualified or already employed are persuaded to give up their opportunities of financial income in order to look after the household after marriage. Such women are not idle or deliberately dependent. The high court made a distinction between ‘capable of earning’ and ‘actually earning’ in setting aside the denial of maintenance by the magistrate and appellate courts. Hearteningly, the Delhi High Court emphasised the economic value of the contribution made by a wife through her labour for the functioning of the household, even though the wife’s labour does not show in bank statements or tax reports. This recognition of women’s invisible labour is vital.

The value of a wife’s work, however, goes beyond the economic. Through the care she takes of her husband and, often, his parents, and the nurture of her children, she creates the environment of security at home. This is, on the one hand, the result of physical labour. The wife’s physical work is not unthinking though; organising, planning, directing the work in some cases and managing her own and others’ stress take enormous mental energy every day. Inextricable from all this is something that is still largely invisible, although it is now more acknowledged than it was before. That is the emotional labour that makes such daily energy possible. The care that goes into ensuring a smoothly running household, the pains, hurts and disappointments that are specific to the efforts of maintaining relationships on an everyday basis, all add up to an emotional cost. It might be argued that a wife receives shelter and financial security in return — reports of gender inequality and domestic abuse may undermine the positive aspects of that — but it cannot be said that the scale of work she puts in is recognised or appreciated. It is time that the myth of the idle wife was decisively dismissed, and not by a high court alone.