Pre-Teen is resentful of how much I work

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The bolded parts are not from one of my posts; I specifically distinguished myself from that poster when I first responded. When I said my experience tracked what that person who posted, I was referring to the broader idea of starting out with both people ambitious, mom's career getting mommy-tracked and eventually sidelined while husband's career took off. All of this was written in response to that poster's initial premise, which is that SAHMs are not all lazy and unmotivated. You took it in a different direction after my first post and I responded to you, but that doesn't change the context in which I first engaged in the discussion.

Contextual reading. It helps.

[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.

No one is throwing rocks at anyone who is actually "doing their best." The single parent, the widower - of course they're all doing their best. There's only one parent, am I rite? You're comparing apples and oranges. A married couple, who have BOTH CHOSEN to work long hours - again, key word: CHOSEN - aren't going to get any sympathy. Either one (or both) needs to cut back their hours and put their children first, or they need to stop complaining.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Are you deliberately obtuse, or just not very bright? You're completely off-topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Wow, are you projecting. DP, btw. It's really not worth it trying to have a rational discussion with you, because you'll simply twist everything to suit your spin on things. You're ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The bolded parts are not from one of my posts; I specifically distinguished myself from that poster when I first responded. When I said my experience tracked what that person who posted, I was referring to the broader idea of starting out with both people ambitious, mom's career getting mommy-tracked and eventually sidelined while husband's career took off. All of this was written in response to that poster's initial premise, which is that SAHMs are not all lazy and unmotivated. You took it in a different direction after my first post and I responded to you, but that doesn't change the context in which I first engaged in the discussion.

Contextual reading. It helps.

Your H and the OP work the same schedule. It does not matter their gender.

But you say OP is not engaged with her kids enough, then you say your H is totally engaged with his kids.

You can't have it both ways.

Either

OP is fine, she has the same schedule as your ambitious H and they are both totally engaged with their kids

or

OP and your H both need to scale back their work and engage in their children's lives.

[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: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.

The bolded parts are not from one of my posts; I specifically distinguished myself from that poster when I first responded. When I said my experience tracked what that person who posted, I was referring to the broader idea of starting out with both people ambitious, mom's career getting mommy-tracked and eventually sidelined while husband's career took off. All of this was written in response to that poster's initial premise, which is that SAHMs are not all lazy and unmotivated. You took it in a different direction after my first post and I responded to you, but that doesn't change the context in which I first engaged in the discussion.

Contextual reading. It helps.

Your H and the OP work the same schedule. It does not matter their gender.

But you say OP is not engaged with her kids enough, then you say your H is totally engaged with his kids.

You can't have it both ways.

Either

OP is fine, she has the same schedule as your ambitious H and they are both totally engaged with their kids

or

OP and your H both need to scale back their work and engage in their children's lives.

Not the PP, but again and again you keep missing the point. Try reading slowly. It helps.

In OP's situation, both parents work extremely long hours, travel, etc. Neither parent sees much of the kids. Bad situation. Period.

In PP's case, the husband used to work long hours and traveled, but now that he's in a more senior position, he has much more flexibility and can be home earlier, participate in their activities, etc. But the biggest point of all that you have SERIOUSLY MISSED is this: the PP is a SAHP. There is a parent available to their kids. She is that parent. So not only is she spending lots of time with the kids, but she's able to get things done by the time her husband comes home so that HE can ALSO spend time with them.

What about this are you not getting? I think you just want to argue because you're envious.

[Anonymous]

OP, this is definitely beside the point, but here's a good list of supplies to keep in a bin or closet somewhere so you don't have to make a last minute run for a school project:

http://themamazone.com/products-for-school-projects/


I would add, report covers, graph paper, and masking tape

[Anonymous]

[/b]Do avoid working weekends I often am working until 12-1am on weeknights[b]

So, are you working at home or the office will 12-1am? Is nanny or somebody home with the kids? You say your DH also works a lot. Who is cooking and feeding the kids? Do you do it and then work late at home, or your DH does dinner and bed time? I think the fact that you say your DD has stopped even asking to go places where her friends are going means that if you are working from home, your younger kids are sleeping, or in your DD's case awake, but feeling alone. Also, why is your 12 year old awake so late? When does she wake up to go to school?
I think you need somebody to drive your kids, if during the day they are in daycare or aftercare, then you need a nanny that can drive to be there for your kids in the evenings. Things are only going to get worse, as in high school there is a lot of socializing and going out, and your DD will feel even more resentful. You say you can't do any of these because of your job, so how about a compromise where you hire somebody to do it? It is not going to be the same as you spending time with your DD, which I say is what she wants, but at least she will get to do something fun.

[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: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.

The bolded parts are not from one of my posts; I specifically distinguished myself from that poster when I first responded. When I said my experience tracked what that person who posted, I was referring to the broader idea of starting out with both people ambitious, mom's career getting mommy-tracked and eventually sidelined while husband's career took off. All of this was written in response to that poster's initial premise, which is that SAHMs are not all lazy and unmotivated. You took it in a different direction after my first post and I responded to you, but that doesn't change the context in which I first engaged in the discussion.

Contextual reading. It helps.

Your H and the OP work the same schedule. It does not matter their gender.

But you say OP is not engaged with her kids enough, then you say your H is totally engaged with his kids.

You can't have it both ways.

Either

OP is fine, she has the same schedule as your ambitious H and they are both totally engaged with their kids

or

OP and your H both need to scale back their work and engage in their children's lives.

Not the PP, but again and again you keep missing the point. Try reading slowly. It helps.

In OP's situation, both parents work extremely long hours, travel, etc. Neither parent sees much of the kids. Bad situation. Period.

In PP's case, the husband used to work long hours and traveled, but now that he's in a more senior position, he has much more flexibility and can be home earlier, participate in their activities, etc. But the biggest point of all that you have SERIOUSLY MISSED is this: the PP is a SAHP. There is a parent available to their kids. She is that parent. So not only is she spending lots of time with the kids, but she's able to get things done by the time her husband comes home so that HE can ALSO spend time with them.

What about this are you not getting? I think you just want to argue because you're envious.

Read slowly so you can understand.

Her children for a large majority of their life were raised by a single parent with an absentee dad. Just because he is working does not excuse that for years he was absent from their lives.

It is a bad model for raising kids. I would not model it. Stop using it as an example of how it should be done.

Stop acting like it is the golden standard. It is a horrible example of parenting.

[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: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.

The bolded parts are not from one of my posts; I specifically distinguished myself from that poster when I first responded. When I said my experience tracked what that person who posted, I was referring to the broader idea of starting out with both people ambitious, mom's career getting mommy-tracked and eventually sidelined while husband's career took off. All of this was written in response to that poster's initial premise, which is that SAHMs are not all lazy and unmotivated. You took it in a different direction after my first post and I responded to you, but that doesn't change the context in which I first engaged in the discussion.

Contextual reading. It helps.

Your H and the OP work the same schedule. It does not matter their gender.

But you say OP is not engaged with her kids enough, then you say your H is totally engaged with his kids.

You can't have it both ways.

Either

OP is fine, she has the same schedule as your ambitious H and they are both totally engaged with their kids

or

OP and your H both need to scale back their work and engage in their children's lives.

Not the PP, but again and again you keep missing the point. Try reading slowly. It helps.

In OP's situation, both parents work extremely long hours, travel, etc. Neither parent sees much of the kids. Bad situation. Period.

In PP's case, the husband used to work long hours and traveled, but now that he's in a more senior position, he has much more flexibility and can be home earlier, participate in their activities, etc. But the biggest point of all that you have SERIOUSLY MISSED is this: the PP is a SAHP. There is a parent available to their kids. She is that parent. So not only is she spending lots of time with the kids, but she's able to get things done by the time her husband comes home so that HE can ALSO spend time with them.

What about this are you not getting? I think you just want to argue because you're envious.

PP here, you get it, thank you. Only detail is that while I used to be a SAHP, I'm now a WAHP but run my business in a way that allows me to not work while my children are home and awake, which was a conscious choice. My business could be far more profitable if I put my kids in aftercare and kept working more hours, but I choose not to do that during this phase of life.

[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: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.

The bolded parts are not from one of my posts; I specifically distinguished myself from that poster when I first responded. When I said my experience tracked what that person who posted, I was referring to the broader idea of starting out with both people ambitious, mom's career getting mommy-tracked and eventually sidelined while husband's career took off. All of this was written in response to that poster's initial premise, which is that SAHMs are not all lazy and unmotivated. You took it in a different direction after my first post and I responded to you, but that doesn't change the context in which I first engaged in the discussion.

Contextual reading. It helps.

Your H and the OP work the same schedule. It does not matter their gender.

But you say OP is not engaged with her kids enough, then you say your H is totally engaged with his kids.

You can't have it both ways.

Either

OP is fine, she has the same schedule as your ambitious H and they are both totally engaged with their kids

or

OP and your H both need to scale back their work and engage in their children's lives.

Not the PP, but again and again you keep missing the point. Try reading slowly. It helps.

In OP's situation, both parents work extremely long hours, travel, etc. Neither parent sees much of the kids. Bad situation. Period.

In PP's case, the husband used to work long hours and traveled, but now that he's in a more senior position, he has much more flexibility and can be home earlier, participate in their activities, etc. But the biggest point of all that you have SERIOUSLY MISSED is this: the PP is a SAHP. There is a parent available to their kids. She is that parent. So not only is she spending lots of time with the kids, but she's able to get things done by the time her husband comes home so that HE can ALSO spend time with them.

What about this are you not getting? I think you just want to argue because you're envious.

Read slowly so you can understand.

Her children for a large majority of their life were raised by a single parent with an absentee dad. Just because he is working does not excuse that for years he was absent from their lives.

It is a bad model for raising kids. I would not model it. Stop using it as an example of how it should be done.

Stop acting like it is the golden standard. It is a horrible example of parenting.

He wasn't absent, I have no idea where you get that idea. He has given them dedicated time every single day since they were babies. He's able to do more of it on the weekends than during the week but that's true of any working parent, even if they have a strict 9-5 job.

I can't even get mad about this anymore, I just feel sorry for you because anyone who wasn't deeply unhappy wouldn't be contorting themselves like this.

[Anonymous]

^^^ from traveling often to dedicated time everyday.

Keep changing your story.

OP is not going to stay home. She AND her H need to scale back because kids deserve 2 parents.

The workaholic/SAHPis not a good plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^^ from traveling often to dedicated time everyday.

Keep changing your story.

OP is not going to stay home. She AND her H need to scale back because kids deserve 2 parents.

The workaholic/SAHPis not a good plan.

Too bad OP isn't willing to do that. Poor kid has no parents, at least kids with workaholic/SAHP have one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^ from traveling often to dedicated time everyday.

Keep changing your story.

OP is not going to stay home. She AND her H need to scale back because kids deserve 2 parents.

The workaholic/SAHPis not a good plan.

Too bad OP isn't willing to do that. Poor kid has no parents, at least kids with workaholic/SAHP have one.

I agree, but kids might wonder why that 1 patent condones an absentee parent.