2017: Has marriage & 4-6 kids become the ultimate signal of real wealth?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Maybe we do run in different circles. My circle, I think, is a pretty typical Upper NW DC/Chevy Chase/Bethesda, private-school group. The moms work because they are extremely good at their careers and are very impressive in their own right. The ones who don't work often have some mitigating circumstance. In other words, for these moms, it's not a decision about money or affording a certain lifestyle. The dads, in general, are pretty involved, which helps a lot. |
Anonymous
You.....you realize you sound like an absolutely ignorant idiot, correct? |
Anonymous
This |
Anonymous
No, once both kids are in elementary school, the moms go back to work. |
Anonymous
NP. This is my experience too. I do know some SAHMs, of course, but all but one of them had a not very remunerative job and limited career ambition before kids. They were always focused more on an old fashioned model (dad works, mom raises the kids and runs the house) and less on career ambition. The women I know who were ambitious and chose professional careers in areas like law and finance for the most part are still working. Often one spouse takes a less demanding job, e.g. in a government agency, at least for a few years, and both share parenting responsibility. I do know one successful banker who quit when her second child reached school age, but she was nearing 40 and had 15-20 years of work and savings under her belt, and can therefore probably return at some point. And her husband is a successful PE guy. Nonetheless, we were all surprised when she made this choice. |
Anonymous
+4 Your job is not a measure of self-worth in these circles. Being able to have one parent available to the kids and to the household without relying on a network of nannies and babysitters to pick up the slack when there are unforeseen circumstances is a pretty big plus. The pp a few posts above states: "You can pick jobs that don't pay well and aren't terribly demanding of your time but are really meaningful to society, and you can afford nannies and babysitters should there be a scheduling conflict.'' Parents that don't collect a paycheck can also have jobs (volunteer) in areas with with institutions that are really meaningful to society. In fact, many non-profits are practically run by volunteers or made possible solely because of the support of volunteers. Yet that same poster states: "It's only inconsequential if your only measure is income." --- Disregarding this type of non-paid work simply because there is not paycheck to collect along with makes your measure of self-worth tied to income not the SAHP that doesn't see why they should hire a bunch of babysitters and work full time to earn a mere fraction of their HHI. Pretty hypocritical. Signed, WOHM- That works because I NEED money. |
Anonymous
Nope not in my experience, not among the people who have gobs of money such that an extra 100k does zip for their lifestyle. In fact, within this group, you actually see more women becoming SAHMs who didn't want to do it when the kids were little. With multiple kids in multiple activities, you need two people (a SAHP AND a babysitter) to get them to and fro. Plus homework, days off, half days, sick days, school events, summer break, etc. |
Anonymous
Weird that you think the second income would be 5 figure. DH makes $400-$500K depending on bonus (maybe even up to $600K). I do not have to work for financial reasons. But I earn $250K, so my income is not inconsequential to our total savings etc. |
Anonymous
| Gosh, all that money and you don't understand how averages work. |
Anonymous
| I think of Tori Spelling. Crazy mess |
Anonymous
I don't know what you mean by "gobs of money," but I'm talking about prestigious law firm partner set, not the Manhattan hedge fund crowd. In the DC-centric $1M+ HHI group that I know, the clear majority of moms do go back to work once the kids are in elementary. But, I think that DC attracts different families than NYC. Most of the DC families I know started off with both parents equally invested in their careers with equally strong work and educational pedigrees; then once the kids came, the wife usually took time off or went part-time. But, once the kids were in school all day, the moms pretty much all started back to work if they took time off, or continued to work. We all manage homework, days off, vacations, school events, etc., often with the help of a babysitter or nanny, and a husband who shares in childcare. (IMHO, DC parenting culture is more egalitarian than NYC parenting--a lot more dads here seem to be involved with their children than in NYC. Not equal, by any means, but more balanced.) |
Anonymous
NP. I think you guys are comparing apples and oranges. It's pretty clear what PP is talking about. Anyone who has lived in Manhattan for a time knows the type (man works in finance and earns 7 figures with bonus, woman works in a high prestige but low wage profession like PR, magazines, book publishing, art gallery, etc.). They marry, she continues to work for appearances and something to do until the kiddos come along. If she is particularly committed to her career, she might work for a while after the first child but usually logistics are such that she gives up by the time the second child arrives. I can see however why a woman who has a law degree and made partner would not want to give that up, as you are talking about OP. Two law firm partners both have very demanding careers. I'm not sure what you are talking about with "egalitarian" parenting unless you mean both are largely absent? In the dual partner marriages I know, they have a nanny/housekeeper AND other paid help like an afternoon babysitter in order to manage it all. |
Anonymous
I don't know why this would be. Manhattan is the finance hub and DC has more lawyers but both are demanding professions. In fact, I would think lawerying is MORE demanding if the lawyer in question does litigation. Is there anything more demanding and stressful than a long trial? |
Anonymous
| I still haven't read one argument for why having 4-6 kids is a reasonable thing to do. |
Anonymous
Hint: it's no one's job to convince you that their own life choices are reasonable. Guarantee you do plenty that other people would consider unreasonable...but that's not how the world works. Also, the question here was whether it is the ultimate signal of true wealth, not whether it's reasonable. Of course it's reasonable. |