Pre-Teen is resentful of how much I work

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish I could have kept working, but this thread is one of the reasons why I SAH. If both parents have demanding jobs and can't be there for the kids, they have to hire a lot of help - but kids don't want hired help, they want their parents.
One of you has to become the default parent whether you really want to or not. If both of you can't be flexible, one of you needs to be.

Exactly. Kids don't want a hired person to raise them. They want their parents to do their job - that is, parenting.

Well, I hope you never die, like the PP whose a widower. That poor guy's kids are screwed, am I rite! /sarcasm.

People get by and do their best. If you and your family works and you're fine with your situation, that's fine. But the endless rock throwing is crazy, PPs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sometimes it seems like former female attorneys dropped out to have more time giving attention to this message board, explaining to other moms why they should have had fewer kids.

Seems to me there are plenty of current female attorneys/WOHMs here, giving their attention to this message board... while at work. Hmm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I haven't read through all 7 pages, but wanted to share something from my former law firm days (now in-house). My boss was/is a very driven woman - still there - top of her field, nationally respected, built an amazing practice when it was tough to come up as a woman in BigLaw. She works a ton of hours, in early, on weekends, sending e-mails at hours, etc. BUT, when her kids were in middle and high school? Left on the dot at 6:30 each day to make it home for family dinner at 7. Never fail. She never took calls from anyone while in a meeting (always prioritized face-to-face time even for the most junior associate), but did make an exception for her kids. Those calls (infrequent) were always put through and taken. She couldn't make every school event during the day, but made it to as many sports events as possible, and was at all evening events. She showed up for her kids, and we all knew it and shaped our own family/career priorities as a result. Her children are now grown, and they are all so close as a family. It's really lovely to see. Your DD is telling you in a million ways that she needs more of you. Prioritize her more; you can still have your career, but you can't/shouldn't risk losing her.

This is great and all sounds utterly exhausting for her. Always running from one thing to another. No thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I feel your pain. Attorney here and widower with two kids.

I feel pulled in so many directions between working (I work in-house, thankfully) and getting my two kids places. I've thrown money at the problem (afternoon sitter/driver), but there are still times they need me to be there and I have to figure out how to divide myself between kid 1's sport, kid's 2 recital, and my job. Oh, and then deal with the boring stuff that it takes to run a house hold. I've been doing this alone for 10 years and despite people saying that things will get easier, it doesn't. It's just a different kind of difficult.

It's hard, OP. I feel for you.

Your situation is entirely different. You are a single parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish I could have kept working, but this thread is one of the reasons why I SAH. If both parents have demanding jobs and can't be there for the kids, they have to hire a lot of help - but kids don't want hired help, they want their parents.
One of you has to become the default parent whether you really want to or not. If both of you can't be flexible, one of you needs to be.

Exactly. Kids don't want a hired person to raise them. They want their parents to do their job - that is, parenting.

Well, I hope you never die, like the PP whose a widower. That poor guy's kids are screwed, am I rite! /sarcasm.

People get by and do their best. If you and your family works and you're fine with your situation, that's fine. But the endless rock throwing is crazy, PPs.

DP.. of FFS, don't be so obtuse, if the parent is dead the child obviously doesn't have much of a choice. But, if the parent is alive and able bodied, as is the case with most of us on here, it doesn't matter if the parents are together or divorced, sahm, wohm... whatever combo. ^PP is just stating that kids want their parents. That's a no brainer.

And we are talking about kids; not adult children. Such an obtuse post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish I could have kept working, but this thread is one of the reasons why I SAH. If both parents have demanding jobs and can't be there for the kids, they have to hire a lot of help - but kids don't want hired help, they want their parents.
One of you has to become the default parent whether you really want to or not. If both of you can't be flexible, one of you needs to be.

Exactly. Kids don't want a hired person to raise them. They want their parents to do their job - that is, parenting.

Well, I hope you never die, like the PP whose a widower. That poor guy's kids are screwed, am I rite! /sarcasm.

People get by and do their best. If you and your family works and you're fine with your situation, that's fine. But the endless rock throwing is crazy, PPs.

You clearly don't understand what happens to kids when their father dies.

Those kids will need years of therapy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SAH moms get bashed on DCUM all the time for being lazy, unmotivated, or worse. The reality is often much different.

Imagine that you met your spouse in grad school when you were both young and ambitious. You fell in love, got married, and decided to take the next step and have a family after a few years on the job. Baby arrives and Mom is instantly Mommy-tracked by her bosses. Dad's career takes off and he feels pressure to work more. Travels more, takes on more responsibility at work, and income continues to rise. Moms career gets stalled because she can't travel as much or work til 10 pm. Baby #2 arrives and Mom SAH because she makes a fraction of spouse and DH is working all the time. Add in taking care of aging parents. Life happens, and not always as we planned.

Allowing this model to continue is terrible for both the future of our sons and daughters.

Men need to raise their kids and stop using work as an excuse.

I think that's easy to say, but sometimes harder to put into practice. My situation pretty closely tracked what PP laid out, except that I was the big law associate who was very openly being groomed to make partner in a couple of years while my husband was struggling to find a place professionally. After baby #1, I was very explicitly mommy tracked no matter how hard I worked, while DH finally found a firm that looked promising. We were killing ourselves working, he started making headway while I continued to stall, and when baby #2 was on the way I looked at our lives and realized it wasn't worth killing myself for something that wasn't going to happen and that it would be better for everyone if I gave up, stayed home with the kids and supported DH's career instead. I don't think that's a decision I ever would have made if my career had continued on its pre-baby trajectory, it was directly the result of pretty blatant discrimination at work. Sure, we could have decided that DH would be the one to step back and I'd keep beating my head against a brick wall in the name of gender equality, but neither of us would have been all that happy.

It's not about gender equality at work, it's about your children having 2 parents at home.

You chose 1 huge income instead of 2 reasonable incomes that accommodate your children having 2 parents.

Again, things that are easy to say from the cheap seats. We got into those careers before kids were even an idea for us, and we didn't have a realistic understanding of what it would take to balance those careers and kids at the time. By the time reality hit us, we were in the thick of it and basically took the clearest route to sanity, which was for me to quit and DH to keep working. Trying to figure out two simultaneous career changes (that probably would have required a lot of extra work time on their own to make the transition) when no one was sleeping enough and we were stressed to the hilt just wasn't happening. Or smart.

Since then I've gone back to work, I run my own business from our home that lets me control my own schedule and be available to my kids when they're not in school (but I still don't do 7 pm Target runs). Now that he is a mid-level partner, DH has been able to reclaim some control over his professional schedule and has made adjustments so that he gets meaningful time with our kids every day. He puts the scout meetings and soccer games in his calendar and schedules work around them as best he can so he's there most of the time (and when he can't, I make sure I'm there). We have 1 big income, one significantly smaller income, and kids who know they can count on us because we've made it a priority and structured our lives around making sure they don't get the short end of our choices.

Your choices were exactly that choices. Your H chose to miss a huge chunk of his kids life for money, it was a choice nothing that was put upon you. I am glad he is finally engaging in his kids life, kids should have 2 parents when there are actually 2 parents.

You can color code it any way you want but you children missed out on a bond with their father for parts of their life. Nice to see he is making up for it.

You are reading a lot into my posts that isn't there. My DH has always been engaged, and they didn't miss out on a bond with their father for parts of their life. Even during the periods when he had less control over his schedule and less time at home during the week, I viewed part of my responsibility as SAHM as getting all of the household work and errands out of the way during the week so that when he was home with us, we were all present as a family and not distracted by yard maintenance or trips to Target. Through this whole discussion, I've never said that OP's kids weren't bonded to her and their dad, that's a separate issue from whether the kids have an adult who's present and engaged at any point during the week. We don't always get it right (no parent does), but we make a conscious effort to pay attention to what's happening in our household and to make changes when we realize things are off balance.

You are doing a lot of back peddling here. Your post was all about ambition and your H working long hours and traveling a lot, now you are trying to paint a different picture to feel better.

Here is the deal, tons of SAH moms have H that are engaged/don't travel/are home at 5. This is not a SAH/WOH issue.

Your issue is that your H decided to take a high pressure job with lots of travel and he is not around to raise his kids. He visits and that is nice, but that is not a good model going forward for most people, men/women/children.

Where did I back pedal? You are writing a fantasy about my life that simply isn't grounded in what I wrote. I'm very sorry for whatever's going on in your own life that's leading you to want to dump all over mine, but that's yours to deal with, not mine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Posters here are crazy - OP is saying she works long hours and has difficulty accommodating frivolous requests for last-minutes changes in schedule.

You're all raising spoiled brats if you think OP should bend over backwards to fulfill all these capricious whims.

I agree they are crazy, but the OP, too.

This isn't about rather standard frivolous requests. We could rewrite the OP's post as the following:

I made some choices that aren't working out well for my daughter. Please suggest ways that I can get her to complain less. Be aware that I am very busy and probably can't spend any additional time with her. Please give me a magic pill that will make her complain less.


When I read the original post, it was clear to me that the daughter was acting fairly typical but also could not be clearer that she wasn't getting the emotional support she needs.

When I read the original about "I cant do X because we only have one car" and they clearly have the $$, I thought there were some screwed up priorities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^ It's the "I deserve it all" mentality. Kids have that same mentality, but I expect that from kids, and you teach them that this isn't reality. Some parents need to learn this, too, unfortunately.

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SAH moms get bashed on DCUM all the time for being lazy, unmotivated, or worse. The reality is often much different.

Imagine that you met your spouse in grad school when you were both young and ambitious. You fell in love, got married, and decided to take the next step and have a family after a few years on the job. Baby arrives and Mom is instantly Mommy-tracked by her bosses. Dad's career takes off and he feels pressure to work more. Travels more, takes on more responsibility at work, and income continues to rise. Moms career gets stalled because she can't travel as much or work til 10 pm. Baby #2 arrives and Mom SAH because she makes a fraction of spouse and DH is working all the time. Add in taking care of aging parents. Life happens, and not always as we planned.

Allowing this model to continue is terrible for both the future of our sons and daughters.

Men need to raise their kids and stop using work as an excuse.

I think that's easy to say, but sometimes harder to put into practice. My situation pretty closely tracked what PP laid out, except that I was the big law associate who was very openly being groomed to make partner in a couple of years while my husband was struggling to find a place professionally. After baby #1, I was very explicitly mommy tracked no matter how hard I worked, while DH finally found a firm that looked promising. We were killing ourselves working, he started making headway while I continued to stall, and when baby #2 was on the way I looked at our lives and realized it wasn't worth killing myself for something that wasn't going to happen and that it would be better for everyone if I gave up, stayed home with the kids and supported DH's career instead. I don't think that's a decision I ever would have made if my career had continued on its pre-baby trajectory, it was directly the result of pretty blatant discrimination at work. Sure, we could have decided that DH would be the one to step back and I'd keep beating my head against a brick wall in the name of gender equality, but neither of us would have been all that happy.

It's not about gender equality at work, it's about your children having 2 parents at home.

You chose 1 huge income instead of 2 reasonable incomes that accommodate your children having 2 parents.

Again, things that are easy to say from the cheap seats. We got into those careers before kids were even an idea for us, and we didn't have a realistic understanding of what it would take to balance those careers and kids at the time. By the time reality hit us, we were in the thick of it and basically took the clearest route to sanity, which was for me to quit and DH to keep working. Trying to figure out two simultaneous career changes (that probably would have required a lot of extra work time on their own to make the transition) when no one was sleeping enough and we were stressed to the hilt just wasn't happening. Or smart.

Since then I've gone back to work, I run my own business from our home that lets me control my own schedule and be available to my kids when they're not in school (but I still don't do 7 pm Target runs). Now that he is a mid-level partner, DH has been able to reclaim some control over his professional schedule and has made adjustments so that he gets meaningful time with our kids every day. He puts the scout meetings and soccer games in his calendar and schedules work around them as best he can so he's there most of the time (and when he can't, I make sure I'm there). We have 1 big income, one significantly smaller income, and kids who know they can count on us because we've made it a priority and structured our lives around making sure they don't get the short end of our choices.

Your choices were exactly that choices. Your H chose to miss a huge chunk of his kids life for money, it was a choice nothing that was put upon you. I am glad he is finally engaging in his kids life, kids should have 2 parents when there are actually 2 parents.

You can color code it any way you want but you children missed out on a bond with their father for parts of their life. Nice to see he is making up for it.

You are reading a lot into my posts that isn't there. My DH has always been engaged, and they didn't miss out on a bond with their father for parts of their life. Even during the periods when he had less control over his schedule and less time at home during the week, I viewed part of my responsibility as SAHM as getting all of the household work and errands out of the way during the week so that when he was home with us, we were all present as a family and not distracted by yard maintenance or trips to Target. Through this whole discussion, I've never said that OP's kids weren't bonded to her and their dad, that's a separate issue from whether the kids have an adult who's present and engaged at any point during the week. We don't always get it right (no parent does), but we make a conscious effort to pay attention to what's happening in our household and to make changes when we realize things are off balance.

You are doing a lot of back peddling here. Your post was all about ambition and your H working long hours and traveling a lot, now you are trying to paint a different picture to feel better.

Here is the deal, tons of SAH moms have H that are engaged/don't travel/are home at 5. This is not a SAH/WOH issue.

Your issue is that your H decided to take a high pressure job with lots of travel and he is not around to raise his kids. He visits and that is nice, but that is not a good model going forward for most people, men/women/children.

Where did I back pedal? You are writing a fantasy about my life that simply isn't grounded in what I wrote. I'm very sorry for whatever's going on in your own life that's leading you to want to dump all over mine, but that's yours to deal with, not mine.

You posts state...

Dad's career takes off and he feels pressure to work more. Travels more, takes on more responsibility at work
DH is working all the time
By the time reality hit us, we were in the thick of it
no one was sleeping enough

You chose to keep your H on a path of travel, no sleep, more responsibility and working on the time.

The trade off was that you raised the kids alone and he financially supports that. That is your decision. Not something that just happened to you. It's fine, 1% of people take that path. The rest of us want to see our kids, both parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids want to feel loved, it is that simple. Think about how many wives are posting(yes, it is almost always women posting here) about DH working too much, spending too much with ILS, never being there for them, and a 12 year old is supposed to be all rational and understand that mom can't spend some time with her, when many grown ups feel resentful in the same situation? And yes, 12 year old will be disorganized and forget to pan a week ahead, that is how most teens are. OP, your DD wants you, she wants to spend time with you, and all the rest is just her lashing out in the only way she knows.

Nobody wants a 12 yo to plan a week ahead. But 4 hours would be nice. Not expecting her to think, hey I need to make a plan and not drop stuff on my mom's lap is raising a good kid instead of a brat. Even if I can just drop everything to take my kids somewhere, I expect them to think about it, and take timing/location/etc into consideration.

The problem is that teaching this to your 12 yo takes parenting time/effort, which is something OP and her husband aren't prioritizing.

To me it looks like the SAH moms are not doing it either they just jump.

It takes no time to say, I need 2 hours notice. It's not that the OP is not present it's that she is not willing to get in the car and drive around for an hour or so for a poster.

You must be reading a different thread entirely. The SAH moms who have responded have *ALL* said that even they do not appreciate being told at the last minute that a child needs supplies. They don't just "jump," as you put it. And it certainly is that the OP is not present. She may be physically there, but she's completely consumed by work. She is not available to her kids, at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids want to feel loved, it is that simple. Think about how many wives are posting(yes, it is almost always women posting here) about DH working too much, spending too much with ILS, never being there for them, and a 12 year old is supposed to be all rational and understand that mom can't spend some time with her, when many grown ups feel resentful in the same situation? And yes, 12 year old will be disorganized and forget to pan a week ahead, that is how most teens are. OP, your DD wants you, she wants to spend time with you, and all the rest is just her lashing out in the only way she knows.

Nobody wants a 12 yo to plan a week ahead. But 4 hours would be nice. Not expecting her to think, hey I need to make a plan and not drop stuff on my mom's lap is raising a good kid instead of a brat. Even if I can just drop everything to take my kids somewhere, I expect them to think about it, and take timing/location/etc into consideration.

The problem is that teaching this to your 12 yo takes parenting time/effort, which is something OP and her husband aren't prioritizing.

To me it looks like the SAH moms are not doing it either they just jump.

It takes no time to say, I need 2 hours notice. It's not that the OP is not present it's that she is not willing to get in the car and drive around for an hour or so for a poster.

Take your SAHM bashing elsewhere, it's irrelevant to the this thread. Even if your statement were true (which it isn't as a sweeping statement), it doesn't change the fact that even if OP's kids gave her two hours notice, or even two days notice, it wouldn't matter because the answer they expect to get from their parents is "No, I have to work." This problem most likely could be largely solved by OP and her husband committing to at least one night a week where one of them was home and focused on the kids, rather than home but working with the kids in the background. Then the kids would know they could count on their parents, and could learn to plan their requests around their parents' availability. You can't plan around something that doesn't exist, though.

Well said. This is precisely it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids want to feel loved, it is that simple. Think about how many wives are posting(yes, it is almost always women posting here) about DH working too much, spending too much with ILS, never being there for them, and a 12 year old is supposed to be all rational and understand that mom can't spend some time with her, when many grown ups feel resentful in the same situation? And yes, 12 year old will be disorganized and forget to pan a week ahead, that is how most teens are. OP, your DD wants you, she wants to spend time with you, and all the rest is just her lashing out in the only way she knows.

Nobody wants a 12 yo to plan a week ahead. But 4 hours would be nice. Not expecting her to think, hey I need to make a plan and not drop stuff on my mom's lap is raising a good kid instead of a brat. Even if I can just drop everything to take my kids somewhere, I expect them to think about it, and take timing/location/etc into consideration.

The problem is that teaching this to your 12 yo takes parenting time/effort, which is something OP and her husband aren't prioritizing.

To me it looks like the SAH moms are not doing it either they just jump.

It takes no time to say, I need 2 hours notice. It's not that the OP is not present it's that she is not willing to get in the car and drive around for an hour or so for a poster.

Take your SAHM bashing elsewhere, it's irrelevant to the this thread. Even if your statement were true (which it isn't as a sweeping statement), it doesn't change the fact that even if OP's kids gave her two hours notice, or even two days notice, it wouldn't matter because the answer they expect to get from their parents is "No, I have to work." This problem most likely could be largely solved by OP and her husband committing to at least one night a week where one of them was home and focused on the kids, rather than home but working with the kids in the background. Then the kids would know they could count on their parents, and could learn to plan their requests around their parents' availability. You can't plan around something that doesn't exist, though.

It is not bashing, nor is it irrelevant. All the people saying of course they would run all over the world for their kids are just as wrong is OP.

No. I am not driving to get a poster. Give me a list and we can do it all the shopping at once. That is what a reasonable parent should do. But many parents don't they run all over god creation finding the perfect color poster board because the one at the closest store was not perfect and that is not good either.

OP needs to chill on work AND not accept the ridiculous guilt trip.

SAH moms are also working with the kids in the background, they cook and do laundry, etc.

Everybody needs to spend time with their kids and they all also need to teach kids to be considerate.

Here's the thing: NO ONE has said they would drop everything and "run all over the world for their kids." Where are you even getting that? It seems all the moms, regardless of work status, agree that they expect their kids to plan ahead at least a little bit, and don't appreciate being asked at the last minute, in the evening, to run get supplies. I think we've all actually agreed on that (consensus! Imagine.).

The OP has said herself that she's just not available to do *anything* with or for her kids during the week. That's on her and her husband. They're the only ones who can make some much-needed changes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SAH moms get bashed on DCUM all the time for being lazy, unmotivated, or worse. The reality is often much different.

Imagine that you met your spouse in grad school when you were both young and ambitious. You fell in love, got married, and decided to take the next step and have a family after a few years on the job. Baby arrives and Mom is instantly Mommy-tracked by her bosses. Dad's career takes off and he feels pressure to work more. Travels more, takes on more responsibility at work, and income continues to rise. Moms career gets stalled because she can't travel as much or work til 10 pm. Baby #2 arrives and Mom SAH because she makes a fraction of spouse and DH is working all the time. Add in taking care of aging parents. Life happens, and not always as we planned.

Allowing this model to continue is terrible for both the future of our sons and daughters.

Men need to raise their kids and stop using work as an excuse.

I think that's easy to say, but sometimes harder to put into practice. My situation pretty closely tracked what PP laid out, except that I was the big law associate who was very openly being groomed to make partner in a couple of years while my husband was struggling to find a place professionally. After baby #1, I was very explicitly mommy tracked no matter how hard I worked, while DH finally found a firm that looked promising. We were killing ourselves working, he started making headway while I continued to stall, and when baby #2 was on the way I looked at our lives and realized it wasn't worth killing myself for something that wasn't going to happen and that it would be better for everyone if I gave up, stayed home with the kids and supported DH's career instead. I don't think that's a decision I ever would have made if my career had continued on its pre-baby trajectory, it was directly the result of pretty blatant discrimination at work. Sure, we could have decided that DH would be the one to step back and I'd keep beating my head against a brick wall in the name of gender equality, but neither of us would have been all that happy.

It's not about gender equality at work, it's about your children having 2 parents at home.

You chose 1 huge income instead of 2 reasonable incomes that accommodate your children having 2 parents.

Again, things that are easy to say from the cheap seats. We got into those careers before kids were even an idea for us, and we didn't have a realistic understanding of what it would take to balance those careers and kids at the time. By the time reality hit us, we were in the thick of it and basically took the clearest route to sanity, which was for me to quit and DH to keep working. Trying to figure out two simultaneous career changes (that probably would have required a lot of extra work time on their own to make the transition) when no one was sleeping enough and we were stressed to the hilt just wasn't happening. Or smart.

Since then I've gone back to work, I run my own business from our home that lets me control my own schedule and be available to my kids when they're not in school (but I still don't do 7 pm Target runs). Now that he is a mid-level partner, DH has been able to reclaim some control over his professional schedule and has made adjustments so that he gets meaningful time with our kids every day. He puts the scout meetings and soccer games in his calendar and schedules work around them as best he can so he's there most of the time (and when he can't, I make sure I'm there). We have 1 big income, one significantly smaller income, and kids who know they can count on us because we've made it a priority and structured our lives around making sure they don't get the short end of our choices.

Your choices were exactly that choices. Your H chose to miss a huge chunk of his kids life for money, it was a choice nothing that was put upon you. I am glad he is finally engaging in his kids life, kids should have 2 parents when there are actually 2 parents.

You can color code it any way you want but you children missed out on a bond with their father for parts of their life. Nice to see he is making up for it.

You are reading a lot into my posts that isn't there. My DH has always been engaged, and they didn't miss out on a bond with their father for parts of their life. Even during the periods when he had less control over his schedule and less time at home during the week, I viewed part of my responsibility as SAHM as getting all of the household work and errands out of the way during the week so that when he was home with us, we were all present as a family and not distracted by yard maintenance or trips to Target. Through this whole discussion, I've never said that OP's kids weren't bonded to her and their dad, that's a separate issue from whether the kids have an adult who's present and engaged at any point during the week. We don't always get it right (no parent does), but we make a conscious effort to pay attention to what's happening in our household and to make changes when we realize things are off balance.

+1
Same here. But people like the PP simply don't like SAHMs, period, and so they make it their mission to project onto them their dissatisfaction with their own lives. They don't want to hear about how we get everything done during the day so that BOTH parents can spend time and relax with their kids in the evening and on weekends. PP and people like her will always insist that somehow, that just doesn't work. It's so predictable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if you choose careers that make it difficult to be involved in your kids lives and have a detrimental effect on them...and you have the money to have options, hire someone who can be involved and present for your kids.

They need a stable, reliable person in their lives. Hire an evening nanny who meets them at the end of the day and does all the things a parent would, if they had a parent who was involved. Make them dinner or take them out, help with homework and extracurriculars, and do the on the spot parenting they need.

Then you can focus on your career without interruptions from your kids and they can have someone who is there for them and invested in them.

This is spot-on.

I'm trying to be as respectful as I can here but why do people in this situation have kids. Enjoy your high-powered careers without kids.

I agree, but these PPs do too. The first PP was being sarcastic by saying, if the OP can't parent her kids, then she should hire someone who will. And of course, we all know you can't hire out parenting.