Working parents - feel like I spend no time with my kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not a zero sum game.

You could look for a part time that pays less and is more flexible. Your kids would still get some financial benefits like vacations and possibly private school.

It’s nit just work at your current job or quit and take a 200K hit. There is a world of options in-between. Start exploring them.

This. So many SAHMs never even explored flexible arrangements. Start looking into finding a new job or flexibility from your current employer. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing.

Really? Many of us tried and were told no. Or, we didn't have that kind of income where we could hire a nanny and make it work. You are pretty clueless. I had absolutely no flexibility.

How many jobs did you apply for?

NP. 1) So many people on this site say they have a flexible job, when what they really have is a job where they are in the office 9-5, have to work from home at night and on the weekends, and have a decent amount of sick/vacation time that they can take for various things. If you are happy with that, great. But that's not what most SAHM-types think of as flexible.

2) So is OP - who is already strapped for time - supposed to spend the next few months endlessly applying for jobs and going to interviews....? How does that help her not miss out on infancy?

This is false.

No it's not! I've seen it so many times. Someone goes on an on about their flexible job, and then they finally clarify that they are really like a doctor that has gone "part-time" (so, still 50 hours), or they are a lawyer who used to work til 8 pm in the office everynight, but now they leave at 5, do dinner bath and bedtime, then get back on the computer. Or they have one telework day a week, where they are working a full 8+ hrs but get to see their kids a little more in the morning and evening, and they call that flexible.

Whatever makes you feel better about not working.

I have a truly flexible job. 10 min commute. Complete flexibility - come and go whenever I please. Co-workers do the same and we schedule meetings etc around our schedules. I travel a few times a year, short trips, and never work on Fridays. Make about 100k.

I'm lucky, but far from alone. For example, my kid plays on a soccer team with practice starting at 4pm. We rotated which parent was there to help out - 75% of these moms work, and everyone was able to show up. SAHMs refuse to believe flexibility exists because their husbands convince them it's impossible or they never got senior enough to have it as an option.

NP Oh gosh I've seen this brought up so many times. It's completely false. No our husbands don't tell us what to do, no we aren't stupid unlike smart you and don't know about flexible options. We just made a different choice than you, for a wide variety of reasons. I walked away from a stimulating career with flexibility because I preferred to be a SAHM. Full stop. It wasn't because of my husband or because I didn't understand about choices or because I wasn't senior.

This.

Most SAHMs I know (parents at my kids private school) are highly educated and were at the top of their fields when they left. I get that there are many women in this country who SAH because they are not in a marriage of equals, or because their income won't cover childcare, or because they never had the resume to get the job they wanted - but those women are few and far between in this area. SAHMs in urban areas like DC are increasingly likely to be highly educated and wealthy (wish I still had the citation for this but there have been some NYT articles).

Even worse to be a SAHM when you're highly educated.

Why? Is it ok to retire and play golf when you are highly educated? Is it ok to become a chef or write a novel or take time off to persue some other passion when you are highly educated? Or once you receive that education are you locked into working in that field until you die.

And speaking of dying, is it ok to die young? What about people who are highly educated that die by suicide or from participating in risky activities like skiing or riding motorcycles? Is that ok?

The truth is that I never see these things disparaged as wasting an education. However, when a woman wants to take a few years off to take care of her children, suddenly her spot in med school/law school/Ivy League college should have been given to a man. Why is that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a lawyer and was formerly biglaw, so my current job that pays over $200k and has me in the office from 9-5:30 but rarely on weekends is a big improvement. It is flexible in the sense that I can take my kids for their checkups and come to their room parties and skip out early for soccer practice from time to time, but I pay for those things with my promotion track and questions about my "commitment" to the job even though my hours are the same as anyone else's.

OP, I would counsel you to stick it out. I found the absolute hardest time was when my second was a baby and my oldest not very far from the baby stage herself. This will improve and you will have a different perspective in only a few more months because they change so fast. Hang on to that high paying job and save as much as possible. It will buy you more flexibility when they're older, which is when they really start to need YOU the parent not just you the caregiver.

+1. Really, infants don't *need* you; they just need a trusted family member/caregiver to meet their physical needs. I only have an elementary-aged child, but parents of teens say that that's the stage where they need their parents emotionally/psychologically, and that it's actually pretty important to be available at that stage.

Wow.

My reaction exactly. A cat is a better mother.

Give me a break. An infant needs a caring and stable caregiver. That caregiver doesn't have to be a mother. Either you're willfully ignorant or trying to justify your lifestyle, or both.

Wow. You are a sociopath.

-1. What PP wrote is actually true. An infant really doesn’t need to be with his or her mom. Someone else will do as long as they get fed, changed and attended to. Staying home with an infant helps fulfill the emotional needs of a woman full of hormones telling her not to leave her baby. The hormones are there because if not the human race would have died off. But if you have access to a nanny there really is no benefit to staying home for a baby. None. The benefit is all for the mom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a lawyer and was formerly biglaw, so my current job that pays over $200k and has me in the office from 9-5:30 but rarely on weekends is a big improvement. It is flexible in the sense that I can take my kids for their checkups and come to their room parties and skip out early for soccer practice from time to time, but I pay for those things with my promotion track and questions about my "commitment" to the job even though my hours are the same as anyone else's.

OP, I would counsel you to stick it out. I found the absolute hardest time was when my second was a baby and my oldest not very far from the baby stage herself. This will improve and you will have a different perspective in only a few more months because they change so fast. Hang on to that high paying job and save as much as possible. It will buy you more flexibility when they're older, which is when they really start to need YOU the parent not just you the caregiver.

+1. Really, infants don't *need* you; they just need a trusted family member/caregiver to meet their physical needs. I only have an elementary-aged child, but parents of teens say that that's the stage where they need their parents emotionally/psychologically, and that it's actually pretty important to be available at that stage.

Wow.

My reaction exactly. A cat is a better mother.

Give me a break. An infant needs a caring and stable caregiver. That caregiver doesn't have to be a mother. Either you're willfully ignorant or trying to justify your lifestyle, or both.

An infant will bond with his caregiver. If you're okay with that being someone you pay, who doesn't love him/her, then more power to you. I guarantee those teens years will go much better if the child is CONNECTED to his/her parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not a zero sum game.

You could look for a part time that pays less and is more flexible. Your kids would still get some financial benefits like vacations and possibly private school.

It’s nit just work at your current job or quit and take a 200K hit. There is a world of options in-between. Start exploring them.

This. So many SAHMs never even explored flexible arrangements. Start looking into finding a new job or flexibility from your current employer. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing.

Really? Many of us tried and were told no. Or, we didn't have that kind of income where we could hire a nanny and make it work. You are pretty clueless. I had absolutely no flexibility.

How many jobs did you apply for?

NP. 1) So many people on this site say they have a flexible job, when what they really have is a job where they are in the office 9-5, have to work from home at night and on the weekends, and have a decent amount of sick/vacation time that they can take for various things. If you are happy with that, great. But that's not what most SAHM-types think of as flexible.

2) So is OP - who is already strapped for time - supposed to spend the next few months endlessly applying for jobs and going to interviews....? How does that help her not miss out on infancy?

This is false.

No it's not! I've seen it so many times. Someone goes on an on about their flexible job, and then they finally clarify that they are really like a doctor that has gone "part-time" (so, still 50 hours), or they are a lawyer who used to work til 8 pm in the office everynight, but now they leave at 5, do dinner bath and bedtime, then get back on the computer. Or they have one telework day a week, where they are working a full 8+ hrs but get to see their kids a little more in the morning and evening, and they call that flexible.

Whatever makes you feel better about not working.

I have a truly flexible job. 10 min commute. Complete flexibility - come and go whenever I please. Co-workers do the same and we schedule meetings etc around our schedules. I travel a few times a year, short trips, and never work on Fridays. Make about 100k.

I'm lucky, but far from alone. For example, my kid plays on a soccer team with practice starting at 4pm. We rotated which parent was there to help out - 75% of these moms work, and everyone was able to show up. SAHMs refuse to believe flexibility exists because their husbands convince them it's impossible or they never got senior enough to have it as an option.

NP Oh gosh I've seen this brought up so many times. It's completely false. No our husbands don't tell us what to do, no we aren't stupid unlike smart you and don't know about flexible options. We just made a different choice than you, for a wide variety of reasons. I walked away from a stimulating career with flexibility because I preferred to be a SAHM. Full stop. It wasn't because of my husband or because I didn't understand about choices or because I wasn't senior.

This.

Most SAHMs I know (parents at my kids private school) are highly educated and were at the top of their fields when they left. I get that there are many women in this country who SAH because they are not in a marriage of equals, or because their income won't cover childcare, or because they never had the resume to get the job they wanted - but those women are few and far between in this area. SAHMs in urban areas like DC are increasingly likely to be highly educated and wealthy (wish I still had the citation for this but there have been some NYT articles).

Even worse to be a SAHM when you're highly educated.

Why? Is it ok to retire and play golf when you are highly educated? Is it ok to become a chef or write a novel or take time off to persue some other passion when you are highly educated? Or once you receive that education are you locked into working in that field until you die.

And speaking of dying, is it ok to die young? What about people who are highly educated that die by suicide or from participating in risky activities like skiing or riding motorcycles? Is that ok?

The truth is that I never see these things disparaged as wasting an education. However, when a woman wants to take a few years off to take care of her children, suddenly her spot in med school/law school/Ivy League college should have been given to a man. Why is that?

Because the man will most likely work from ages 25-6 through 60 plus. Many women who drop out of the workforce never return. It’s a huge waste of resources to attend law or medical school to only practice for say,, 5 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not a zero sum game.

You could look for a part time that pays less and is more flexible. Your kids would still get some financial benefits like vacations and possibly private school.

It’s nit just work at your current job or quit and take a 200K hit. There is a world of options in-between. Start exploring them.

This. So many SAHMs never even explored flexible arrangements. Start looking into finding a new job or flexibility from your current employer. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing.

Really? Many of us tried and were told no. Or, we didn't have that kind of income where we could hire a nanny and make it work. You are pretty clueless. I had absolutely no flexibility.

How many jobs did you apply for?

NP. 1) So many people on this site say they have a flexible job, when what they really have is a job where they are in the office 9-5, have to work from home at night and on the weekends, and have a decent amount of sick/vacation time that they can take for various things. If you are happy with that, great. But that's not what most SAHM-types think of as flexible.

2) So is OP - who is already strapped for time - supposed to spend the next few months endlessly applying for jobs and going to interviews....? How does that help her not miss out on infancy?

This is false.

No it's not! I've seen it so many times. Someone goes on an on about their flexible job, and then they finally clarify that they are really like a doctor that has gone "part-time" (so, still 50 hours), or they are a lawyer who used to work til 8 pm in the office everynight, but now they leave at 5, do dinner bath and bedtime, then get back on the computer. Or they have one telework day a week, where they are working a full 8+ hrs but get to see their kids a little more in the morning and evening, and they call that flexible.

Whatever makes you feel better about not working.

I have a truly flexible job. 10 min commute. Complete flexibility - come and go whenever I please. Co-workers do the same and we schedule meetings etc around our schedules. I travel a few times a year, short trips, and never work on Fridays. Make about 100k.

I'm lucky, but far from alone. For example, my kid plays on a soccer team with practice starting at 4pm. We rotated which parent was there to help out - 75% of these moms work, and everyone was able to show up. SAHMs refuse to believe flexibility exists because their husbands convince them it's impossible or they never got senior enough to have it as an option.

NP Oh gosh I've seen this brought up so many times. It's completely false. No our husbands don't tell us what to do, no we aren't stupid unlike smart you and don't know about flexible options. We just made a different choice than you, for a wide variety of reasons. I walked away from a stimulating career with flexibility because I preferred to be a SAHM. Full stop. It wasn't because of my husband or because I didn't understand about choices or because I wasn't senior.

This.

Most SAHMs I know (parents at my kids private school) are highly educated and were at the top of their fields when they left. I get that there are many women in this country who SAH because they are not in a marriage of equals, or because their income won't cover childcare, or because they never had the resume to get the job they wanted - but those women are few and far between in this area. SAHMs in urban areas like DC are increasingly likely to be highly educated and wealthy (wish I still had the citation for this but there have been some NYT articles).

Even worse to be a SAHM when you're highly educated.

Why? Is it ok to retire and play golf when you are highly educated? Is it ok to become a chef or write a novel or take time off to persue some other passion when you are highly educated? Or once you receive that education are you locked into working in that field until you die.

And speaking of dying, is it ok to die young? What about people who are highly educated that die by suicide or from participating in risky activities like skiing or riding motorcycles? Is that ok?

The truth is that I never see these things disparaged as wasting an education. However, when a woman wants to take a few years off to take care of her children, suddenly her spot in med school/law school/Ivy League college should have been given to a man. Why is that?

I'm not the PP you are responding to, but the point, I believe, is that women shouldn't have to leave the careers they've studied and worked hard for in order to raise children. Like it or not, raising children is unskilled, unpaid labor. Yes, yes, plenty of women choose to SAH, but only because it's socially acceptable/expected. Plenty of SAHM I know view it as a badge of success that they are wealthy enough to "waste" their education being the best, most educated SAHMs in the bunch. Let's work toward a society that values both work and parenting as worthy objectives for both men and women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a lawyer and was formerly biglaw, so my current job that pays over $200k and has me in the office from 9-5:30 but rarely on weekends is a big improvement. It is flexible in the sense that I can take my kids for their checkups and come to their room parties and skip out early for soccer practice from time to time, but I pay for those things with my promotion track and questions about my "commitment" to the job even though my hours are the same as anyone else's.

OP, I would counsel you to stick it out. I found the absolute hardest time was when my second was a baby and my oldest not very far from the baby stage herself. This will improve and you will have a different perspective in only a few more months because they change so fast. Hang on to that high paying job and save as much as possible. It will buy you more flexibility when they're older, which is when they really start to need YOU the parent not just you the caregiver.

+1. Really, infants don't *need* you; they just need a trusted family member/caregiver to meet their physical needs. I only have an elementary-aged child, but parents of teens say that that's the stage where they need their parents emotionally/psychologically, and that it's actually pretty important to be available at that stage.

Wow.

My reaction exactly. A cat is a better mother.

Give me a break. An infant needs a caring and stable caregiver. That caregiver doesn't have to be a mother. Either you're willfully ignorant or trying to justify your lifestyle, or both.

An infant will bond with his caregiver. If you're okay with that being someone you pay, who doesn't love him/her, then more power to you. I guarantee those teens years will go much better if the child is CONNECTED to his/her parents.

Thank you, thank you. OMG so perfect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a lawyer and was formerly biglaw, so my current job that pays over $200k and has me in the office from 9-5:30 but rarely on weekends is a big improvement. It is flexible in the sense that I can take my kids for their checkups and come to their room parties and skip out early for soccer practice from time to time, but I pay for those things with my promotion track and questions about my "commitment" to the job even though my hours are the same as anyone else's.

OP, I would counsel you to stick it out. I found the absolute hardest time was when my second was a baby and my oldest not very far from the baby stage herself. This will improve and you will have a different perspective in only a few more months because they change so fast. Hang on to that high paying job and save as much as possible. It will buy you more flexibility when they're older, which is when they really start to need YOU the parent not just you the caregiver.

+1. Really, infants don't *need* you; they just need a trusted family member/caregiver to meet their physical needs. I only have an elementary-aged child, but parents of teens say that that's the stage where they need their parents emotionally/psychologically, and that it's actually pretty important to be available at that stage.

Wow.

My reaction exactly. A cat is a better mother.

Give me a break. An infant needs a caring and stable caregiver. That caregiver doesn't have to be a mother. Either you're willfully ignorant or trying to justify your lifestyle, or both.

An infant will bond with his caregiver. If you're okay with that being someone you pay, who doesn't love him/her, then more power to you. I guarantee those teens years will go much better if the child is CONNECTED to his/her parents.

LOL yes, not changing every diaper and feeding every bottle means no connection when they're teenagers. Do you hear yourself? In fact they'll probably be more likely to resent you smothering them ...

+1. My own mother was a psycho helicopter mom and smotherer. She truly thought any woman working wasn’t raising her kids. She thinks in extremes. What I learned from my childhood was that staying home may not be best for children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would look for a different job that is more flexible. You will probably take a salary hit so you have to weigh how important private school is vs public school or other life style choices. Your job might not be as fulfilling as your current job.

I have a very flexible job that allows me to be home after school. It is great for my child and for me. It pays well, but not $200,000 but not that far off, and cuts off at 40 hours. There is no chance of working from home. I am good at it, my customer likes the work that I do, I get good reviews. I am also bored, it is not mentally challenging. I like the people that I work with and the salary and the hours but it is boring. I am fine with that because I like being home after school and helping with his after school activities. We are able to save for college and take nice vacations. I suppose we could pay for private school but the public schools in our area are solid and provide some great opportunities so I we don't feel the need to pay for school. We live in a nice but smaller house, we choose to buy on one persons salary instead of both of ours to make saving easier.

I am also aware that I have a rare type position, in terms of salary, hours, and flexibility, but they are out there. I know I could be making more if I took a different job but I would not be home after school and would need to work over 40 hours a week. It would be more challenging, which would be nice, but I am not willing to give up the time with my child.

I have a friend who works 32 hours a week and has Friday off with a flexible schedule. She thinks that she might have to move to 40 hours, although keeping the hours, some time soon if she wants to be promoted and is tryng to make that choice.

Take a look at the jobs out there and see if there is something that looks interesting at a salary that you can accept. Apply for those positions.

What do you do? I don’t mind being bored if I could work and spend the afternoons with my kids.

Contractor who briefs at a government agency. I have to be available to brief at 8 AM so I need to be in the office at 6:30 to check on things and prepare any material that needs to be briefed. So I am at work from 6:30-2:30. We have a good number of people who are responsible for putting together briefing materials who are in between 4:30-6:30 AM. i would assume that there are a good number of similar positions in the DC area given the number of government agencies in the area. I would estimate that 70% of the people who work in my building are in by 6:30 for work purposes or because the commute is easier and no one minds people being in early.

So not in the medical field or a teacher.

[Anonymous]

^ Agreed! women who are terrible mothers shouldn’t stay home with their children.

If you think you might be physically, emotionally or otherwise abusive please outsource as much childcare as possible! Your children will be better off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not a zero sum game.

You could look for a part time that pays less and is more flexible. Your kids would still get some financial benefits like vacations and possibly private school.

It’s nit just work at your current job or quit and take a 200K hit. There is a world of options in-between. Start exploring them.

This. So many SAHMs never even explored flexible arrangements. Start looking into finding a new job or flexibility from your current employer. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing.

Really? Many of us tried and were told no. Or, we didn't have that kind of income where we could hire a nanny and make it work. You are pretty clueless. I had absolutely no flexibility.

How many jobs did you apply for?

NP. 1) So many people on this site say they have a flexible job, when what they really have is a job where they are in the office 9-5, have to work from home at night and on the weekends, and have a decent amount of sick/vacation time that they can take for various things. If you are happy with that, great. But that's not what most SAHM-types think of as flexible.

2) So is OP - who is already strapped for time - supposed to spend the next few months endlessly applying for jobs and going to interviews....? How does that help her not miss out on infancy?

This is false.

No it's not! I've seen it so many times. Someone goes on an on about their flexible job, and then they finally clarify that they are really like a doctor that has gone "part-time" (so, still 50 hours), or they are a lawyer who used to work til 8 pm in the office everynight, but now they leave at 5, do dinner bath and bedtime, then get back on the computer. Or they have one telework day a week, where they are working a full 8+ hrs but get to see their kids a little more in the morning and evening, and they call that flexible.

Whatever makes you feel better about not working.

I have a truly flexible job. 10 min commute. Complete flexibility - come and go whenever I please. Co-workers do the same and we schedule meetings etc around our schedules. I travel a few times a year, short trips, and never work on Fridays. Make about 100k.

I'm lucky, but far from alone. For example, my kid plays on a soccer team with practice starting at 4pm. We rotated which parent was there to help out - 75% of these moms work, and everyone was able to show up. SAHMs refuse to believe flexibility exists because their husbands convince them it's impossible or they never got senior enough to have it as an option.

NP Oh gosh I've seen this brought up so many times. It's completely false. No our husbands don't tell us what to do, no we aren't stupid unlike smart you and don't know about flexible options. We just made a different choice than you, for a wide variety of reasons. I walked away from a stimulating career with flexibility because I preferred to be a SAHM. Full stop. It wasn't because of my husband or because I didn't understand about choices or because I wasn't senior.

This.

Most SAHMs I know (parents at my kids private school) are highly educated and were at the top of their fields when they left. I get that there are many women in this country who SAH because they are not in a marriage of equals, or because their income won't cover childcare, or because they never had the resume to get the job they wanted - but those women are few and far between in this area. SAHMs in urban areas like DC are increasingly likely to be highly educated and wealthy (wish I still had the citation for this but there have been some NYT articles).

Even worse to be a SAHM when you're highly educated.

Why? Is it ok to retire and play golf when you are highly educated? Is it ok to become a chef or write a novel or take time off to persue some other passion when you are highly educated? Or once you receive that education are you locked into working in that field until you die.

And speaking of dying, is it ok to die young? What about people who are highly educated that die by suicide or from participating in risky activities like skiing or riding motorcycles? Is that ok?

The truth is that I never see these things disparaged as wasting an education. However, when a woman wants to take a few years off to take care of her children, suddenly her spot in med school/law school/Ivy League college should have been given to a man. Why is that?

Because the man will most likely work from ages 25-6 through 60 plus. Many women who drop out of the workforce never return. It’s a huge waste of resources to attend law or medical school to only practice for say,, 5 years.

That’s actually not true. Most highly educated women who drop out go back and work later into life than their male counterparts.
But that isn’t the point. The point is, is it ok for Micheal Creighton not to practice medicine? Is it ok for Ken Jeong to be an actor? And if thise things are ok, then why isn’t it ok to be a SAHM?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Find a more flexible job. Possibly telework. Try to go part time.

It’s just not possible at my current company. I have looked into it and the jobs that are part time and/or super flexible pay like half of what I make... which pretty much just covers childcare after taxes.

Look at other companies. At that salary level, you must have transferrable skills.

childcare does not cost 100k. That makes no sense.

No, but if her DH makes over $200k/yr, then everything she is making is taxed at 35-37%. Plus state and local taxes.
And childcare for two kids does cost $40-50k. So, maybe she would be bronging home a few hundred a month after paying for outsourcing, commute, work wardrobe, etc.
At some point it isn’t worth it.

You really don't understand how taxes work do you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not a zero sum game.

You could look for a part time that pays less and is more flexible. Your kids would still get some financial benefits like vacations and possibly private school.

It’s nit just work at your current job or quit and take a 200K hit. There is a world of options in-between. Start exploring them.

This. So many SAHMs never even explored flexible arrangements. Start looking into finding a new job or flexibility from your current employer. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing.

Really? Many of us tried and were told no. Or, we didn't have that kind of income where we could hire a nanny and make it work. You are pretty clueless. I had absolutely no flexibility.

How many jobs did you apply for?

NP. 1) So many people on this site say they have a flexible job, when what they really have is a job where they are in the office 9-5, have to work from home at night and on the weekends, and have a decent amount of sick/vacation time that they can take for various things. If you are happy with that, great. But that's not what most SAHM-types think of as flexible.

2) So is OP - who is already strapped for time - supposed to spend the next few months endlessly applying for jobs and going to interviews....? How does that help her not miss out on infancy?

This is false.

No it's not! I've seen it so many times. Someone goes on an on about their flexible job, and then they finally clarify that they are really like a doctor that has gone "part-time" (so, still 50 hours), or they are a lawyer who used to work til 8 pm in the office everynight, but now they leave at 5, do dinner bath and bedtime, then get back on the computer. Or they have one telework day a week, where they are working a full 8+ hrs but get to see their kids a little more in the morning and evening, and they call that flexible.

Whatever makes you feel better about not working.

I have a truly flexible job. 10 min commute. Complete flexibility - come and go whenever I please. Co-workers do the same and we schedule meetings etc around our schedules. I travel a few times a year, short trips, and never work on Fridays. Make about 100k.

I'm lucky, but far from alone. For example, my kid plays on a soccer team with practice starting at 4pm. We rotated which parent was there to help out - 75% of these moms work, and everyone was able to show up. SAHMs refuse to believe flexibility exists because their husbands convince them it's impossible or they never got senior enough to have it as an option.

NP Oh gosh I've seen this brought up so many times. It's completely false. No our husbands don't tell us what to do, no we aren't stupid unlike smart you and don't know about flexible options. We just made a different choice than you, for a wide variety of reasons. I walked away from a stimulating career with flexibility because I preferred to be a SAHM. Full stop. It wasn't because of my husband or because I didn't understand about choices or because I wasn't senior.

This.

Most SAHMs I know (parents at my kids private school) are highly educated and were at the top of their fields when they left. I get that there are many women in this country who SAH because they are not in a marriage of equals, or because their income won't cover childcare, or because they never had the resume to get the job they wanted - but those women are few and far between in this area. SAHMs in urban areas like DC are increasingly likely to be highly educated and wealthy (wish I still had the citation for this but there have been some NYT articles).

Even worse to be a SAHM when you're highly educated.

Why? Is it ok to retire and play golf when you are highly educated? Is it ok to become a chef or write a novel or take time off to persue some other passion when you are highly educated? Or once you receive that education are you locked into working in that field until you die.

And speaking of dying, is it ok to die young? What about people who are highly educated that die by suicide or from participating in risky activities like skiing or riding motorcycles? Is that ok?

The truth is that I never see these things disparaged as wasting an education. However, when a woman wants to take a few years off to take care of her children, suddenly her spot in med school/law school/Ivy League college should have been given to a man. Why is that?

Because the man will most likely work from ages 25-6 through 60 plus. Many women who drop out of the workforce never return. It’s a huge waste of resources to attend law or medical school to only practice for say,, 5 years.

That’s actually not true. Most highly educated women who drop out go back and work later into life than their male counterparts.
But that isn’t the point. The point is, is it ok for Micheal Creighton not to practice medicine? Is it ok for Ken Jeong to be an actor? And if thise things are ok, then why isn’t it ok to be a SAHM?

How is this a question? Because both men are still working, not dropping out of the workforce to raise babies. Look, I'm all in favor of people following their bliss, but it's a problem when the people who are finding their bliss in unpaid work are overwhelmingly women.

[Anonymous]

Tired of the quotes so responding to 1448.

I could careless what level of education a person has who chooses to stay home as long as both members of the couple are ok with someone being home and they can meet their financial needs. I don’t think someone who leaves the work force or changes to a totally different profession then they trained for is damaging anyone. Everyone can do what they want with their education.

I do think that there are a good number of people who struggle with finding a work life balance that they are happy with. They want to be home with their families but they want that career that is challenging/high paying/combination of both. It is hard to find jobs that merge both goals. I know that some people out there have the best of both worlds but that strikes me as rare.

And I understand that Moms with a new baby are really torn between returning to jobs that they enjoy/need/love and wanting to be with their child at home.

I think that people should make choices that work for them and we should all stop judging.

I would love a job that is more challenging but I don’t want the hours that come with those jobs. I am OK with my choice but there are folks who tell me I am crazy because I could make more. They are welcome to their opinion.

OP is looking for something that allows her that better balance without losing a job that it sounds like she loves and pays well. The answer doesn’t have to be stay at home, there are other jobs that provide flexibility and might offer her the balance that she is interested in but there are sacrifices that she will likely have to make. It sounds like her husband is fine with that so she has to decide what she is comfortable with.

I have one friend who went back to work full time and feels like she is dropping the ball but she wasn’t happy not working full time. A part of her wants to be home and another part of her wants the job that she is passionate about because it challenges her in a way that being a Mom didn’t. It is hard to watcch her struggle but it is a balance that she has to find for her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not a zero sum game.

You could look for a part time that pays less and is more flexible. Your kids would still get some financial benefits like vacations and possibly private school.

It’s nit just work at your current job or quit and take a 200K hit. There is a world of options in-between. Start exploring them.

This. So many SAHMs never even explored flexible arrangements. Start looking into finding a new job or flexibility from your current employer. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing.

Really? Many of us tried and were told no. Or, we didn't have that kind of income where we could hire a nanny and make it work. You are pretty clueless. I had absolutely no flexibility.

How many jobs did you apply for?

NP. 1) So many people on this site say they have a flexible job, when what they really have is a job where they are in the office 9-5, have to work from home at night and on the weekends, and have a decent amount of sick/vacation time that they can take for various things. If you are happy with that, great. But that's not what most SAHM-types think of as flexible.

2) So is OP - who is already strapped for time - supposed to spend the next few months endlessly applying for jobs and going to interviews....? How does that help her not miss out on infancy?

This is false.

+1. I don’t know a single woman who works in the weekends besides one real estate agent I’m friends with. Very few men are even working on the weekends. But you’re convinced that moms with flexible jobs are working weekends? You’re insane.

There really are flexible jobs out there. Just because you couldn’t get one or didn’t even try doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

I am just saying what I see on dcum all the time. Yes, I know there are part-time jobs out there. Yes, I know there are truly flexible jobs out there. I do not think they are as common as dcum would have you believe, because, from what I've seen, a lot of the dcum posters who say "flexible jobs are so easy to get! They are everywhere!" are really talking about scaled back big jobs, not truly flexible jobs the way most people would think of it. It's becuase they are in dc and their reference point is big jobs with big hours.

PP, why don't you give me some examples of these plentiful flexible jobs you are talking about?

You're embarassing yourself. A dozen people so far have talked about their jobs being flexible and not working evenings weekends. I'll give you my personal examples:

The first year of my first child's life, I worked four 8-hour days and was paid 80% of my salary. My husband worked four 10-hour days at 100% of his salary. This meant our baby was only in daycare 3 days a week. On one of my four at-work days that was my husband's stay-home day, I was able to come home for an hour at lunchtime to attend my child's physical therapy appointment (in home because it was through Early Intervention). I worked in an industry where I was not allowed access to my work e-mail or files outside of the office, so no, there was no evening/weekend work happening. I worked 32 hours a week - no more, sometimes less (and I was able to stay late an hour if I had a doctor's appointment the previous day or whatever).

Currently, I'm in a more senior position and can basically come and go as I please as long as I get my 40 hours in. Thursday morning, I took a half day off to take my younger child to a specialist. I made up those hours by working an hour on Saturday, an hour on Sunday, and will stay a half hour later every day this week. You may not think of that as flexible because I still have to work 40 hours and OMG had to work at night, but I'm only working 40 hours a week and getting $160K a year to do so. I am able to go to every single school event, I can take my kids to appointments, hell, I even volunteered at school a couple times. I'm doing a lot of the same things as you are, bitter SAHM, while working full time in a very flexible job.

I have DOZENS of friends with similar stories in dozens of industries across the country! Just because you don't know anyone like this, doesn't mean they don't exist. I'm sorry you're in denial/feel sorry for yourself that you didn't realize this was an option/or worked in industry where this isn't possible, but that doesn't mean it hasn't been possible for a TON of people.

DP— you left out a crucial detail— which industry? Which job?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Find a more flexible job. Possibly telework. Try to go part time.

It’s just not possible at my current company. I have looked into it and the jobs that are part time and/or super flexible pay like half of what I make... which pretty much just covers childcare after taxes.

Look at other companies. At that salary level, you must have transferrable skills.

childcare does not cost 100k. That makes no sense.

No, but if her DH makes over $200k/yr, then everything she is making is taxed at 35-37%. Plus state and local taxes.
And childcare for two kids does cost $40-50k. So, maybe she would be bronging home a few hundred a month after paying for outsourcing, commute, work wardrobe, etc.
At some point it isn’t worth it.

You really don't understand how taxes work do you?

For MFJ, the PP's idea is right but the percentages are off a bit. More like any marginal $$ she earns vs staying home are taxed at 24% + 7.65% = 31.65% + state and local of 5.75 (VA) to almost 9% (MoCo) if her husband makes more than $200K. Eventually the social security tax drops out, but the federal bracket also goes up to 32% so I'm ignoring that for simplicity. If you file jointly and are deciding between one earner or two, the additional wages of the second earner aren't going to allow the family unit to utilize the lower tax brackets a second time. Again, this is just from a decision standpoint and measuring the net additional cash the family will have if the second earner works vs stays home.