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:

Anonymous wrote:I am a WOHM but the life OP describes would not be worth it to me. Flexibility is key when you have kids. And by that I mean the ability to come in late or leave early fairly regularly (and make it up at night) and WFH 1-2x a week.

My question is where is the DH in this?

My DH and I work staggered schedules to minimize childcare hours to 25-30 per week (half of which is spent napping anyway). And we each WFH a different day in the week so we can take the kids to various classes. He makes over $200k and I make $150k which is pretty good in our early-mid 30s.

I think it’s sad when women have to quit their jobs solely because their neanderthal husbands refuse to do something more flexible. It’s nice for kids to spend one-on-one time with their dads too (not just occasional “babysitting” time like DHs of SAHMs do). It’s also nice for them to see both parents be equal partners at home and helping each other achieve their goals outside the home.

This!!!!

Why do some supposedly happy WOHMs make comments like this about other people's realities? This is not the reality for many SAHMs who have involved, caring dads who are present in their kids' lives, who help out 50 50 with chores when home, who support their wives' goals. And on the flip side, disinterested workaholic and unhelpful husbands are the reality for some WOHMs who have the burden of an unequal partnership AND full time jobs. Every relationship is different but let's not paint all families with one brush.

My post was not about all SAHMs, only the ones who enjoyed working but we’re essentially forced to quit because their DH prioritized career advancement over family time. I mean, I miss my kids too, but if they can’t be with me then knowing they’re with their Dad for a good chunk of the day makes me feel better. If DH had been unwilling to negotiate flexibility with his employer then I would probably have quit. And anyway, it’s good for the workforce if men also force their employers to promote work-life balance.

Dp here. DH is a surgeon and he can’t work from home. However, he is a very involved parent. He takes kids to sports and we eat dinner with him most nights. Problem is I can never rely on him to pick up. Never know if surgery will have a complication or a pt shows up in the ER.

I was responsible for all drop offs, pick ups, school events, sick days, snow days and after school activities. I tried for years to get perfect mix of help. I had equal or higher income potential than DH. I decided I wanted to do the child activities I was trying to hire someone to do. And I hated that guilt when you miss the school parties that last a whole 15 minutes.

That’s the thing. Majority of men never feel that guilt.

+1. I'm a woman, but I feel about as much guilt for missing those parties as my husband does--that is to say, not much. And kid's school has lots of working parents, so in general it's not unusual for parents to miss these events.

Another woman here who doesn’t feel much guilt. I’m missing that chip that makes a woman lose her identity and quit her job for her kids. I love my kids but didn’t cry the first time I left one with a sitter or the first day of K. I consider myself lucky because most of the SAHMs I know seem to be staying home out of emotion instead of legitimate reasons.

NP here.

I think there are very legitimate reasons to stay home, but our society -and the husbands of these SAHMs- do not value those reasons.

I do not know any stay at home moms who have a good deal going. In my experience, they have husbands who have become self-centered and unaware of the work it takes to keep the house running.

However, I do not know any working mom whose "identity" is attached to their jobs-not even my cardiologist girlfriend. So that argument usually baffles me.

Yeah, I've never understood how HR manager at the Department of Agriculture is somehow a legit 'identity'.

Well I never understand how an educated, smart woman can do nothing while her kids are at school but get her hair done but YMMV. What exactly does your meal ticket - oh sorry, husband - do?

Wow. This thread got ugly fast. I went to Harvard, have two masters and was crushing it in my career. I excel at everything that I do. There is absolutely nothing that I am more passionate about than my children. If I could go back, I will pick my children every single time over my career. My issue was that I was not interested in crap work that paid decently. I earned high six figures and no amount of money was worth not seeing my children.

I do not know one woman who has it all. I know many women at the top of their industries and their family lives often suffer. I do think it is doable for two mediocre careers to achieve optimal work life balance. In my circles, our friends and colleagues are not the types to do mediocre.

Yours is the one of the ugliest post. "Mediocre careers?" Is that what you think of the careers your children's teachers, nurses, pediatricians, pharmacist, postal service workers, gym instructors, grocery store owners etc? Wow!

[Anonymous]

Don't feel bad op. Until recent times mothers really didn't spend that much time with their kids, not even the rich or nobility. For them it was the choice, but for majority of women it was a necessity, they worked on their farms, cooking took all day, farming all day, working in factory all day, till you were dead at 30 and your kids were roaming the streets hungry. So, apart from last hundred years, give or take a few, your kids are much, much better off. Heck, even in 70s SAHM let their kids out as soon as they were old enough and called them for lunch. You are comparing to some new patriarchal idiocy that has no business telling women how they should raise their kids, sadly it is not men that enforce it, it is other women.

[Anonymous]

Your friends don’t do mediocre? Wow how arrogant is that. So they have no balance because they are either all in for work or all in for raising kids. That sounds kind of limiting and, well, mediocre. And arrogant. Don’t forget the arrogant.

I don’t think DH and I have mediocre careers. We did not prioritize climbing the corporate ladder but that does not equate with being mediocre. We decided that we valued work that was important and useful and ended at 40 hours so that we would have time with our child. Our combined salaries are more then enough to afford a very comfortable standard of living while fully saving for retirement, college, and keeping a full years salary with in easy reach if something should happen to one of us.

Both of us could push ourselves to be higher paid. My DH could go back to school for his masters and I could actually take a corporate leadership job. I earned my Doctorate a while back and have no interest in returning to school. He is not interested in taking the time out his day and our sons life to get his masters and I want nothing to do with 60-80 hour days.

More importantly, we are both content with were we are and thrilled to be able to coach baseball, help with Cub Scouts, and take our son backpacking when we want to.

If you wish to call that mediocrity, feel free. But DS is happy, enjoys school and his activities. I call that balanced.

Not everyone feels like it is important to “win” by climbing to the top of the corporate ladder or a hgh ranking government official. Some folks are happier with a nice balance in life while taking great vacations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a WOHM but the life OP describes would not be worth it to me. Flexibility is key when you have kids. And by that I mean the ability to come in late or leave early fairly regularly (and make it up at night) and WFH 1-2x a week.

My question is where is the DH in this?

My DH and I work staggered schedules to minimize childcare hours to 25-30 per week (half of which is spent napping anyway). And we each WFH a different day in the week so we can take the kids to various classes. He makes over $200k and I make $150k which is pretty good in our early-mid 30s.

I think it’s sad when women have to quit their jobs solely because their neanderthal husbands refuse to do something more flexible. It’s nice for kids to spend one-on-one time with their dads too (not just occasional “babysitting” time like DHs of SAHMs do). It’s also nice for them to see both parents be equal partners at home and helping each other achieve their goals outside the home.

This!!!!

Why do some supposedly happy WOHMs make comments like this about other people's realities? This is not the reality for many SAHMs who have involved, caring dads who are present in their kids' lives, who help out 50 50 with chores when home, who support their wives' goals. And on the flip side, disinterested workaholic and unhelpful husbands are the reality for some WOHMs who have the burden of an unequal partnership AND full time jobs. Every relationship is different but let's not paint all families with one brush.

My post was not about all SAHMs, only the ones who enjoyed working but we’re essentially forced to quit because their DH prioritized career advancement over family time. I mean, I miss my kids too, but if they can’t be with me then knowing they’re with their Dad for a good chunk of the day makes me feel better. If DH had been unwilling to negotiate flexibility with his employer then I would probably have quit. And anyway, it’s good for the workforce if men also force their employers to promote work-life balance.

Dp here. DH is a surgeon and he can’t work from home. However, he is a very involved parent. He takes kids to sports and we eat dinner with him most nights. Problem is I can never rely on him to pick up. Never know if surgery will have a complication or a pt shows up in the ER.

I was responsible for all drop offs, pick ups, school events, sick days, snow days and after school activities. I tried for years to get perfect mix of help. I had equal or higher income potential than DH. I decided I wanted to do the child activities I was trying to hire someone to do. And I hated that guilt when you miss the school parties that last a whole 15 minutes.

I get that surgeons can’t work from home, but that’s why the ones who prioritize work-life balance usually only work 3-4 days a week.

[Anonymous]

I hope the “mediocre careers” poster is not passing that same all-or-nothing attitude to their children. At a societal level, the answer is to push for work-life balance for *all* careers, not to promote 80-hour-a-week careers for those who can hack it and nothing at all for the others. And no, there is no structural reason why a big law partner, investment banker, or surgeon needs to work 80 hours a week.

[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:I am a WOHM but the life OP describes would not be worth it to me. Flexibility is key when you have kids. And by that I mean the ability to come in late or leave early fairly regularly (and make it up at night) and WFH 1-2x a week.

My question is where is the DH in this?

My DH and I work staggered schedules to minimize childcare hours to 25-30 per week (half of which is spent napping anyway). And we each WFH a different day in the week so we can take the kids to various classes. He makes over $200k and I make $150k which is pretty good in our early-mid 30s.

I think it’s sad when women have to quit their jobs solely because their neanderthal husbands refuse to do something more flexible. It’s nice for kids to spend one-on-one time with their dads too (not just occasional “babysitting” time like DHs of SAHMs do). It’s also nice for them to see both parents be equal partners at home and helping each other achieve their goals outside the home.

This!!!!

Why do some supposedly happy WOHMs make comments like this about other people's realities? This is not the reality for many SAHMs who have involved, caring dads who are present in their kids' lives, who help out 50 50 with chores when home, who support their wives' goals. And on the flip side, disinterested workaholic and unhelpful husbands are the reality for some WOHMs who have the burden of an unequal partnership AND full time jobs. Every relationship is different but let's not paint all families with one brush.

My post was not about all SAHMs, only the ones who enjoyed working but we’re essentially forced to quit because their DH prioritized career advancement over family time. I mean, I miss my kids too, but if they can’t be with me then knowing they’re with their Dad for a good chunk of the day makes me feel better. If DH had been unwilling to negotiate flexibility with his employer then I would probably have quit. And anyway, it’s good for the workforce if men also force their employers to promote work-life balance.

Dp here. DH is a surgeon and he can’t work from home. However, he is a very involved parent. He takes kids to sports and we eat dinner with him most nights. Problem is I can never rely on him to pick up. Never know if surgery will have a complication or a pt shows up in the ER.

I was responsible for all drop offs, pick ups, school events, sick days, snow days and after school activities. I tried for years to get perfect mix of help. I had equal or higher income potential than DH. I decided I wanted to do the child activities I was trying to hire someone to do. And I hated that guilt when you miss the school parties that last a whole 15 minutes.

That’s the thing. Majority of men never feel that guilt.

+1. I'm a woman, but I feel about as much guilt for missing those parties as my husband does--that is to say, not much. And kid's school has lots of working parents, so in general it's not unusual for parents to miss these events.

Another woman here who doesn’t feel much guilt. I’m missing that chip that makes a woman lose her identity and quit her job for her kids. I love my kids but didn’t cry the first time I left one with a sitter or the first day of K. I consider myself lucky because most of the SAHMs I know seem to be staying home out of emotion instead of legitimate reasons.

NP here.

I think there are very legitimate reasons to stay home, but our society -and the husbands of these SAHMs- do not value those reasons.

I do not know any stay at home moms who have a good deal going. In my experience, they have husbands who have become self-centered and unaware of the work it takes to keep the house running.

However, I do not know any working mom whose "identity" is attached to their jobs-not even my cardiologist girlfriend. So that argument usually baffles me.

Yeah, I've never understood how HR manager at the Department of Agriculture is somehow a legit 'identity'.

Well I never understand how an educated, smart woman can do nothing while her kids are at school but get her hair done but YMMV. What exactly does your meal ticket - oh sorry, husband - do?

Wow. This thread got ugly fast. I went to Harvard, have two masters and was crushing it in my career. I excel at everything that I do. There is absolutely nothing that I am more passionate about than my children. If I could go back, I will pick my children every single time over my career. My issue was that I was not interested in crap work that paid decently. I earned high six figures and no amount of money was worth not seeing my children.

I do not know one woman who has it all. I know many women at the top of their industries and their family lives often suffer. I do think it is doable for two mediocre careers to achieve optimal work life balance. In my circles, our friends and colleagues are not the types to do mediocre.

Yikes you need some perspective.

[Anonymous]

Do you want to vacation, or see your children?

If you’re working to afford vacation and other niceties but sacrificing your life, then that’s hardly worth it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a WOHM but the life OP describes would not be worth it to me. Flexibility is key when you have kids. And by that I mean the ability to come in late or leave early fairly regularly (and make it up at night) and WFH 1-2x a week.

My question is where is the DH in this?

My DH and I work staggered schedules to minimize childcare hours to 25-30 per week (half of which is spent napping anyway). And we each WFH a different day in the week so we can take the kids to various classes. He makes over $200k and I make $150k which is pretty good in our early-mid 30s.

I think it’s sad when women have to quit their jobs solely because their neanderthal husbands refuse to do something more flexible. It’s nice for kids to spend one-on-one time with their dads too (not just occasional “babysitting” time like DHs of SAHMs do). It’s also nice for them to see both parents be equal partners at home and helping each other achieve their goals outside the home.

This!!!!

Why do some supposedly happy WOHMs make comments like this about other people's realities? This is not the reality for many SAHMs who have involved, caring dads who are present in their kids' lives, who help out 50 50 with chores when home, who support their wives' goals. And on the flip side, disinterested workaholic and unhelpful husbands are the reality for some WOHMs who have the burden of an unequal partnership AND full time jobs. Every relationship is different but let's not paint all families with one brush.

My post was not about all SAHMs, only the ones who enjoyed working but we’re essentially forced to quit because their DH prioritized career advancement over family time. I mean, I miss my kids too, but if they can’t be with me then knowing they’re with their Dad for a good chunk of the day makes me feel better. If DH had been unwilling to negotiate flexibility with his employer then I would probably have quit. And anyway, it’s good for the workforce if men also force their employers to promote work-life balance.

Dp here. DH is a surgeon and he can’t work from home. However, he is a very involved parent. He takes kids to sports and we eat dinner with him most nights. Problem is I can never rely on him to pick up. Never know if surgery will have a complication or a pt shows up in the ER.

I was responsible for all drop offs, pick ups, school events, sick days, snow days and after school activities. I tried for years to get perfect mix of help. I had equal or higher income potential than DH. I decided I wanted to do the child activities I was trying to hire someone to do. And I hated that guilt when you miss the school parties that last a whole 15 minutes.

That’s the thing. Majority of men never feel that guilt.

+1. I'm a woman, but I feel about as much guilt for missing those parties as my husband does--that is to say, not much. And kid's school has lots of working parents, so in general it's not unusual for parents to miss these events.

Another woman here who doesn’t feel much guilt. I’m missing that chip that makes a woman lose her identity and quit her job for her kids. I love my kids but didn’t cry the first time I left one with a sitter or the first day of K. I consider myself lucky because most of the SAHMs I know seem to be staying home out of emotion instead of legitimate reasons.

NP here.

I think there are very legitimate reasons to stay home, but our society -and the husbands of these SAHMs- do not value those reasons.

I do not know any stay at home moms who have a good deal going. In my experience, they have husbands who have become self-centered and unaware of the work it takes to keep the house running.

However, I do not know any working mom whose "identity" is attached to their jobs-not even my cardiologist girlfriend. So that argument usually baffles me.

Yeah, I've never understood how HR manager at the Department of Agriculture is somehow a legit 'identity'.

Well I never understand how an educated, smart woman can do nothing while her kids are at school but get her hair done but YMMV. What exactly does your meal ticket - oh sorry, husband - do?

Are you going to put GS-15 on your tombstone? So everyone will know that you spent your time making sure everyone took their sensitivity training and knows who to call If they have questions about their EOBs from BCBS? How noble and worthy indeed.

[Anonymous]

I went back to work and suddenly I was welcomed back into the club of "working moms". I became more "acceptable" because I had a "job". Misery indeed loves company.

[Anonymous]

Well, one day soon your kids will leave the nest and then you will have an empty house. If you continue to work, you will see less of your children and it won't hurt so much when they leave. A rock feels no pain, and an island never cries....

[Anonymous]

Wow. This thread got ugly fast. I went to Harvard, have two masters and was crushing it in my career. I excel at everything that I do. There is absolutely nothing that I am more passionate about than my children. If I could go back, I will pick my children every single time over my career. My issue was that I was not interested in crap work that paid decently. I earned high six figures and no amount of money was worth not seeing my children.

I do not know one woman who has it all. I know many women at the top of their industries and their family lives often suffer. I do think it is doable for two mediocre careers to achieve optimal work life balance. In my circles, our friends and colleagues are not the types to do mediocre.

Good god you rep the worst of DC, please stay there forever, you and DC deserve each other. Insufferable.

[Anonymous]

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.

Many DC areas moms are like this - they usually were pretty well-established in their jobs/careers before kids and had kids later. That gives them the seniority to have some flexibility. There was a study that showed kids negatively affected women's careers unless the women had them before 25 or after 37 (or something like that).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, one day soon your kids will leave the nest and then you will have an empty house. If you continue to work, you will see less of your children and it won't hurt so much when they leave. A rock feels no pain, and an island never cries....

This is me actually and part of why I went back to work. It's painful enough to watch them grow up in some ways and to feel the nostalgia of baby and early childhood go by. I needed something else to throw myself into to bridge over to them having independence. I have done that and thank God.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Wow. This thread got ugly fast. I went to Harvard, have two masters and was crushing it in my career. I excel at everything that I do. There is absolutely nothing that I am more passionate about than my children. If I could go back, I will pick my children every single time over my career. My issue was that I was not interested in crap work that paid decently. I earned high six figures and no amount of money was worth not seeing my children.

I do not know one woman who has it all. I know many women at the top of their industries and their family lives often suffer. I do think it is doable for two mediocre careers to achieve optimal work life balance. In my circles, our friends and colleagues are not the types to do mediocre.

Good god you rep the worst of DC, please stay there forever, you and DC deserve each other. Insufferable.

+1. Yikes, very black-and-white, rigid thinking from the mediocre PP.

[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.

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.

Many DC areas moms are like this - they usually were pretty well-established in their jobs/careers before kids and had kids later. That gives them the seniority to have some flexibility. There was a study that showed kids negatively affected women's careers unless the women had them before 25 or after 37 (or something like that).

It took a lot of us older professional moms quitting to SAHM for you younger ladies to get the work-file flexibility you now enjoy.