If DH is a law firm partner, must I be the default parent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty much. One of you has to do it, and if he is a partner, he can't.

Says who? I am a BigLaw partner and I am the default parent. Welcome to 2014.

Really, what practice area and what does your spouse do for a living?

Litigation. Spouse works a 9 to 5 job. He spends a lot of time with the kids, but if the nanny calls in sick I cover her. I buy all of their clothes. I take them to the doctor. I handle all parent teacher conferences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know. There is a mom in my son's class who is a law firm partner and she is the only one I have ever seen at drop off or pick up or at any type of school function. It's like the dad doesn't exist. So seems like she's the default parent.

What a shock - it probably depends whether law firm partner is the husband or the wife.

I wonder if that is me you see. I am default 3/4 of the year because DH is a teacher. It is not all that good for my career. The good news is that I have my own clients, and therefore can set my own schedule, more or less. Makes it hard, though.

You realize that you are the default parent not because DH is a teacher, but because you are a woman, right? I am also a teacher and the default parent--as is 95% of the other female-mother teachers I work with, including those whose husbands are in BigLaw. Division of parenting responsibilities--even beyond the breast-feeding stage--is still remarkably sexist.

Because there is no reason for the parent who gets summers and school holidays off to be the default parent other than sexism? Come on.

Did you read the previous PP? This woman is a law firm partner, her DH is a teacher, and SHE is the one who is the default parent.

It makes sense for many reasons for teachers to be the default parent--which is one reason why so many women are attracted to teaching as a career--but it really only serves to reinforce the idea that parenting responsibilities remain largely divided along gender lines.

I don't think that was her point. I think she was saying she was the default parent as far as school events, drop off and pick up, because her DH as a teacher does not have the flexibility to do these things. As a teacher, you must be at work at a certain time and it is very difficult to leave during the school day. I am a teacher and I never do drop off for my kids because I am already teaching 90 minutes before they are in school. My husband (not a lawyer, but still busy at his own job) does all the drop offs and many of the field trips/parties because it is easier for him to run out for a couple of hours during the day.

Doing just drop offs (not pick ups) and volunteering for school events do not constitute default parent. My DH does both drop offs and volunteers on occasion (and he is an attorney), but he is by no means the default. I am the one who *manages* everything having to do with the kids' lives, and I am a teacher. I do pick ups, afterschool, arrange playdates, email teachers, sign up for activities, buy all the clothes and school supplies, keep track of doctor's appointments and--when necessary--dispensing medications, notice and trim nails, buy diapers appropriately sized, notice the types of food that the kids eat, buy the ingredients for lunches, make grocery lists, notice and buy toiletries for the whole family, buy food for the pets, arrange vet appointments, etc. That is the default parent. And I am guessing that PP attorney default mom may not do the drop offs, but she probably does most of the above list.

I am the PP who you are responding to and I agree that what you do is definitely the default. I am teacher and I do the same as you do. But the pp who works at the firm was referencing a post about doing drop offs and pick ups and being at school events. To me, just that is not a default parent. It wasn't clear what else she does and if she does all the things you referenced above as well. If her husband is a teacher and she is doing everything 3/4 of the year because of that - I don't understand that. Because other than the inflexible schedule, a teacher (man or woman) has more time than a law firm partner. And I say this as a teacher myself.

[Anonymous]

why would you marry a lawyer? you know how it will turn out.

[Anonymous]

I am the default parent even though DH and I basically have exactly the same job and get paid exactly the same. I can only imagine how much more default the default parent would be if DH was a law partner ... well, at least we'd have more $$ to make it worth my while!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty much. One of you has to do it, and if he is a partner, he can't.

Says who? I am a BigLaw partner and I am the default parent. Welcome to 2014.

Really, what practice area and what does your spouse do for a living?

Litigation. Spouse works a 9 to 5 job. He spends a lot of time with the kids, but if the nanny calls in sick I cover her. I buy all of their clothes. I take them to the doctor. I handle all parent teacher conferences.

You're doing it with a nanny. Your nanny is the default parent, not you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty much. One of you has to do it, and if he is a partner, he can't.

Says who? I am a BigLaw partner and I am the default parent. Welcome to 2014.

Really, what practice area and what does your spouse do for a living?

Litigation. Spouse works a 9 to 5 job. He spends a lot of time with the kids, but if the nanny calls in sick I cover her. I buy all of their clothes. I take them to the doctor. I handle all parent teacher conferences.

You're doing it with a nanny. Your nanny is the default parent, not you.

+1

[Anonymous]

I am a nanny. Both of my employers are lawyers ( Dad a partner, MB about to make partner). Her schedule is a little more flexible but I work 50-60/hr weeks. Most days I put the baby to bed. I love my job and my employers are involved when they can be but I've learned never to marry a lawyer who plans on being a partner. They make a great loving but the dad works up to 90 hours weeks sometimes. I think both parents should do as much as they can but the mom does tend to do whatever I don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a nanny. Both of my employers are lawyers ( Dad a partner, MB about to make partner). Her schedule is a little more flexible but I work 50-60/hr weeks. Most days I put the baby to bed. I love my job and my employers are involved when they can be but I've learned never to marry a lawyer who plans on being a partner. They make a great loving but the dad works up to 90 hours weeks sometimes. I think both parents should do as much as they can but the mom does tend to do whatever I don't.

That would break my heart. No amount of money in the world is worth being away from your child 50-60 hours a week. Even worse if both parents are doing it. You are their mother at this point. Why do people like that even have kids? And to clarify, I am not anti WOHM. I work. My DH has a very demanding job, but doesn't (and wouldn't) work a 60 hour work week. That's just not fair to the children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, unless you want your child to be brought up by a nanny. If that is the case, get a good one. And a great preschool also.

This is exactly right. As a law firm partner, his clients come first so by definition he cannot commit to any family obligations.

So there are two solutions for his problem of child care for his child.

1. He can compromise.
2. He can tell OP that she has to compromise.

There are a lot of unexamined assumptions here.

The thing is, he can't compromise. The compromise is to get a nanny. The law firm partner (assuming a top tier firm) is never going to be able to cancel a meeting to take a sick kid to the doctor or commit to show up at a play or sports game. Once in a while it will work out, and the partner can come to a sports event or chaperone a field trip, but the other spouse or nanny has got to be there as a back-up if the partner suddenly has a big meeting come up. Just the way it is.

This just isn't true. My dad is a (litigation) partner at one of the top firms in DC, and when my brothers were in high school, came to every single Langley lacrosse game for four years running -- and he wasn't the only similarly situated team dad who did. I work in biglaw now and I see it all the time -- there are people who want to make it work with family, and those who don't. It's not always perfect, but nearly all the time, it's a personality and priorities question, not a job issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a nanny. Both of my employers are lawyers ( Dad a partner, MB about to make partner). Her schedule is a little more flexible but I work 50-60/hr weeks. Most days I put the baby to bed. I love my job and my employers are involved when they can be but I've learned never to marry a lawyer who plans on being a partner. They make a great loving but the dad works up to 90 hours weeks sometimes. I think both parents should do as much as they can but the mom does tend to do whatever I don't.

That would break my heart. No amount of money in the world is worth being away from your child 50-60 hours a week. Even worse if both parents are doing it. You are their mother at this point. Why do people like that even have kids? And to clarify, I am not anti WOHM. I work. My DH has a very demanding job, but doesn't (and wouldn't) work a 60 hour work week. That's just not fair to the children.

I feel like a significant number of working parents in the dc area need 50 hours a week of child care, between work and commuting...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:15:11 again -- I wrote that your DH can absolutely participate equally in shopping for your kids' presents, but I want to add that you can also help him out with a present for your MIL. How hard is it to frame an adorable picture of your kids and order up a wine-and-cheese-of-the-month club membership? The real issue here is why you two aren't on the same team. That's the whole point of marriage, isn't it?

Agree re: the point of marriage, but OP's DH doesn't want to work as a team. He wants to do what he wants to do, and have OP work around that.

Right?

The thing is, we don't [/b]know[b] that. There are 2 sides to every story -- especially in a marriage. And, in any case, somebody has to be the grown-up here. I'm wondering what would happen if OP said to DH, "Let's pick a night when we can talk about Christmas presents after DC is tucked into bed. We'll have a bottle of wine, fire up that internet thang, whip out the plastic and go to town. Whadda ya say, honey?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty much. One of you has to do it, and if he is a partner, he can't.

Says who? I am a BigLaw partner and I am the default parent. Welcome to 2014.

Really, what practice area and what does your spouse do for a living?

Litigation. Spouse works a 9 to 5 job. He spends a lot of time with the kids, but if the nanny calls in sick I cover her. I buy all of their clothes. I take them to the doctor. I handle all parent teacher conferences.

$1000 you're a woman though, and you can "get away" with it in a way he won't feel he can. Plus, the culture at your firm allows for this in a way many others don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, unless you want your child to be brought up by a nanny. If that is the case, get a good one. And a great preschool also.

This is exactly right. As a law firm partner, his clients come first so by definition he cannot commit to any family obligations.

So there are two solutions for his problem of child care for his child.

1. He can compromise.
2. He can tell OP that she has to compromise.

There are a lot of unexamined assumptions here.

The thing is, he can't compromise. The compromise is to get a nanny. The law firm partner (assuming a top tier firm) is never going to be able to cancel a meeting to take a sick kid to the doctor or commit to show up at a play or sports game. Once in a while it will work out, and the partner can come to a sports event or chaperone a field trip, but the other spouse or nanny has got to be there as a back-up if the partner suddenly has a big meeting come up. Just the way it is.

This just isn't true. My dad is a (litigation) partner at one of the top firms in DC, and when my brothers were in high school, came to every single Langley lacrosse game for four years running -- and he wasn't the only similarly situated team dad who did. I work in biglaw now and I see it all the time -- there are people who want to make it work with family, and those who don't. It's not always perfect, but nearly all the time, it's a personality and priorities question, not a job issue.

From my experience in biglaw, this was probably the one thing he did. He wasn't the one to take you to the doctor, shop for clothes, remember to buy the birthday present for the party on the weekend, go to the holiday program, etc. And maybe that was ok. Lacrosse is what he picked. But he wasn't the default parent. Unless you are old and he was a partner when the profession used to be very different and much more reasonable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, unless you want your child to be brought up by a nanny. If that is the case, get a good one. And a great preschool also.

This is exactly right. As a law firm partner, his clients come first so by definition he cannot commit to any family obligations.

So there are two solutions for his problem of child care for his child.

1. He can compromise.
2. He can tell OP that she has to compromise.

There are a lot of unexamined assumptions here.

The thing is, he can't compromise. The compromise is to get a nanny. The law firm partner (assuming a top tier firm) is never going to be able to cancel a meeting to take a sick kid to the doctor or commit to show up at a play or sports game. Once in a while it will work out, and the partner can come to a sports event or chaperone a field trip, but the other spouse or nanny has got to be there as a back-up if the partner suddenly has a big meeting come up. Just the way it is.

This just isn't true. My dad is a (litigation) partner at one of the top firms in DC, and when my brothers were in high school, came to every single Langley lacrosse game for four years running -- and he wasn't the only similarly situated team dad who did. I work in biglaw now and I see it all the time -- there are people who want to make it work with family, and those who don't. It's not always perfect, but nearly all the time, it's a personality and priorities question, not a job issue.

From my experience in biglaw, this was probably the one thing he did. He wasn't the one to take you to the doctor, shop for clothes, remember to buy the birthday present for the party on the weekend, go to the holiday program, etc. And maybe that was ok. Lacrosse is what he picked. But he wasn't the default parent. Unless you are old and he was a partner when the profession used to be very different and much more reasonable.

Did he make lunches and get the kids lunch every morning? Did he read every night? Did he bathe the kids? How often was he there for dinner? Who took the kids to the doctor? Who was home when the kids got sick? If the school nurse called, did he go and get the kid? Was he responsible for school projects? Who went to the PTA metings? It is nice that your dad like Lacrosse, but I don't think that answers the question, as PP noted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, unless you want your child to be brought up by a nanny. If that is the case, get a good one. And a great preschool also.

This is exactly right. As a law firm partner, his clients come first so by definition he cannot commit to any family obligations.

So there are two solutions for his problem of child care for his child.

1. He can compromise.
2. He can tell OP that she has to compromise.

There are a lot of unexamined assumptions here.

The thing is, he can't compromise. The compromise is to get a nanny. The law firm partner (assuming a top tier firm) is never going to be able to cancel a meeting to take a sick kid to the doctor or commit to show up at a play or sports game. Once in a while it will work out, and the partner can come to a sports event or chaperone a field trip, but the other spouse or nanny has got to be there as a back-up if the partner suddenly has a big meeting come up. Just the way it is.

This just isn't true. My dad is a (litigation) partner at one of the top firms in DC, and when my brothers were in high school, came to every single Langley lacrosse game for four years running -- and he wasn't the only similarly situated team dad who did. I work in biglaw now and I see it all the time -- there are people who want to make it work with family, and those who don't. It's not always perfect, but nearly all the time, it's a personality and priorities question, not a job issue.

From my experience in biglaw, this was probably the one thing he did. He wasn't the one to take you to the doctor, shop for clothes, remember to buy the birthday present for the party on the weekend, go to the holiday program, etc. And maybe that was ok. Lacrosse is what he picked. But he wasn't the default parent. Unless you are old and he was a partner when the profession used to be very different and much more reasonable.

Did he make lunches and get the kids lunch every morning? Did he read every night? Did he bathe the kids? How often was he there for dinner? Who took the kids to the doctor? Who was home when the kids got sick? If the school nurse called, did he go and get the kid? Was he responsible for school projects? Who went to the PTA metings? It is nice that your dad like Lacrosse, but I don't think that answers the question, as PP noted.

+1

I doubt he kept track of whether there was toilet paper in the house; planned birthday parties; communicated with teachers about school issues; kept track of immunization records and dental visits. <---- These are just a few of the things that a default parent does.