Being a working parent sucks

[Anonymous]

Our aftercare was great for K-4th- they went outside for an hour and then they played on mats with toys. Totally fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it so hard to admit that daycare/aftercare is a lesser experience for kids than sahp, barring strange outliers? It doesn’t mean it’s a *bad* experience or that you’re a bad parent. It’s just reality.

I couldn’t breastfeed my children. I acknowledge the reality that this was a negative for them. They lost out on bonding and lifelong health benefits. But it was out of my hands and there was nothing more I could do.

I couldn’t have a vaginal delivery. Again, a lesser experience for them in terms of future health, etc.

It’s magical thinking to not admit some scenarios are simply better for kids. I personally think if we want society to start improving childcare we need to start with a shared understanding of what benefits infants and toddlers, not corporations or bank accounts.

because I genuinely don't think that's universally the case.
We have HHI of aprox $700-$750. My kids go to aftercare when we could easily afford childcare. That's because it's way more fun for them to be in aftercare (where they do sports and activities and play pick up basketball with their friends) than it is to come home and sit in our apartment.
I also genuinely do not think that formula or vaginal delivery are 'better'. I breastfed and had a vaginal delivery but I wouldn't have cared at ALL if I didn't do either.
I think what objectively does make a difference for kids is money. Being able to to to private school if your kid needs it. Not having money saved for college, not having any parental help to buy their first home. Money is a huge differentiator when it comes to 'future health'. So I work because i think that these small things that parents stress about -LIKE breastfeeding and aftercare and all that crp -absolutely pale in terms of impact on children in comparison to having less net worth and less ability to help your kids.

Be honest. You don’t actually think about or deeply consider any of this stuff, and I do not believe you have ever put even an hour’s worth of effort into reading actual research on any of these topics. You just want to do what you want to do, and that’s the end of the story. You can come up with all sorts of justifications as to why your way is not only fine, but actually better, and they may or may not be true. But that doesn’t actually matter to you.

(And for whatever it’s worth, money for college or a downpayment on a home isn’t something you’re doing for kids… it’s something you’re planning to do for future adults.)

Enormous amounts of research.
Plus the wild move of actually asking my kids what they want to do.
Semantics are irrelevant.

I mean, some kids can sense that they’re an afterthought, or an accessory, or in your case a status symbol. The claim that your kids prefer aftercare to spending more time with you (undoubtedly being nonstop “productive” and doing “enriching” activities) is the most honest thing you’ve said. Other than that your 750K HHI is merely a sacrifice you’re making “for the children” of course

Look I hate working. But I do it because it gets my kids an amazing education, nice camps, good aftercare and college savings accounts so they won’t go into debt.

Your assertion is that the child of every working mother is doomed to think of themselves as an ‘afterthought’. No idea what you’re doing on the jobs board but that’s some pretty mysogynistic, antiquated and toxic bs right there

I did not assert that at all. I am speaking to YOU, specifically. I’m actually a working mother myself, but I’m not so flippant about “all those things parents think matter” (which from your posts basically encompasses the parenting part of being a parent). I also don’t delude myself into thinking that a HHI of 350k vs 700k or whatever matters in the least when it comes to a child’s health and happiness.

YOU, specific PP who does not speak for all working mothers, YOU clearly value money more than time with your kids. That’s all.

There is absolutely nothing that I’ve said that would remotely insinuate that that’s true. I said that I think money will make a big impact on their lives and I prioritize it and that’s true and in no way makes me a bad mother who does not prioritize her kids.
If for some reason it makes you feel better about your choices to believe that’s the case then I feel bad for you.
Judging other parents in this way bc you feel ‘less than’ for whatever reason is pretty damn toxic and probably worse for your kids as an unaddressed part of your persona than any aftercare or otherwise could possibly be

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it so hard to admit that daycare/aftercare is a lesser experience for kids than sahp, barring strange outliers? It doesn’t mean it’s a *bad* experience or that you’re a bad parent. It’s just reality.

I couldn’t breastfeed my children. I acknowledge the reality that this was a negative for them. They lost out on bonding and lifelong health benefits. But it was out of my hands and there was nothing more I could do.

I couldn’t have a vaginal delivery. Again, a lesser experience for them in terms of future health, etc.

It’s magical thinking to not admit some scenarios are simply better for kids. I personally think if we want society to start improving childcare we need to start with a shared understanding of what benefits infants and toddlers, not corporations or bank accounts.

because I genuinely don't think that's universally the case.
We have HHI of aprox $700-$750. My kids go to aftercare when we could easily afford childcare. That's because it's way more fun for them to be in aftercare (where they do sports and activities and play pick up basketball with their friends) than it is to come home and sit in our apartment.
I also genuinely do not think that formula or vaginal delivery are 'better'. I breastfed and had a vaginal delivery but I wouldn't have cared at ALL if I didn't do either.
I think what objectively does make a difference for kids is money. Being able to to to private school if your kid needs it. Not having money saved for college, not having any parental help to buy their first home. Money is a huge differentiator when it comes to 'future health'. So I work because i think that these small things that parents stress about -LIKE breastfeeding and aftercare and all that crp -absolutely pale in terms of impact on children in comparison to having less net worth and less ability to help your kids.

Be honest. You don’t actually think about or deeply consider any of this stuff, and I do not believe you have ever put even an hour’s worth of effort into reading actual research on any of these topics. You just want to do what you want to do, and that’s the end of the story. You can come up with all sorts of justifications as to why your way is not only fine, but actually better, and they may or may not be true. But that doesn’t actually matter to you.

(And for whatever it’s worth, money for college or a downpayment on a home isn’t something you’re doing for kids… it’s something you’re planning to do for future adults.)

Enormous amounts of research.
Plus the wild move of actually asking my kids what they want to do.
Semantics are irrelevant.

I mean, some kids can sense that they’re an afterthought, or an accessory, or in your case a status symbol. The claim that your kids prefer aftercare to spending more time with you (undoubtedly being nonstop “productive” and doing “enriching” activities) is the most honest thing you’ve said. Other than that your 750K HHI is merely a sacrifice you’re making “for the children” of course

Look I hate working. But I do it because it gets my kids an amazing education, nice camps, good aftercare and college savings accounts so they won’t go into debt.

Your assertion is that the child of every working mother is doomed to think of themselves as an ‘afterthought’. No idea what you’re doing on the jobs board but that’s some pretty mysogynistic, antiquated and toxic bs right there

That woman’s use of language like “afterthought” and “accessory” to describe suburban kids in one of the world’s most privileged areas shows she’s a small-minded fool. I wouldn’t have bothered replying to her if I were you.

It’s likely misplaced bitterness about something very different that only a therapist can unwind.
Look I think working moms make hard choices every day and they make the right choices for their family and clearly most working mothers value money or they wouldn’t do it. But telling another mother than she doesn’t care about her kids and they’re an accessory or status symbol for absolutely no reason is pretty effed up behavior. Working mothers have enough challenges in life without being torn down by other working mothers. Yeesh.

[Anonymous]

So I think Brunch Grandma got on here and just tried to make every working mother feel like crap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I think Brunch Grandma got on here and just tried to make every working mother feel like crap.

Who??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it so hard to admit that daycare/aftercare is a lesser experience for kids than sahp, barring strange outliers? It doesn’t mean it’s a *bad* experience or that you’re a bad parent. It’s just reality.

I couldn’t breastfeed my children. I acknowledge the reality that this was a negative for them. They lost out on bonding and lifelong health benefits. But it was out of my hands and there was nothing more I could do.

I couldn’t have a vaginal delivery. Again, a lesser experience for them in terms of future health, etc.

It’s magical thinking to not admit some scenarios are simply better for kids. I personally think if we want society to start improving childcare we need to start with a shared understanding of what benefits infants and toddlers, not corporations or bank accounts.

because I genuinely don't think that's universally the case.
We have HHI of aprox $700-$750. My kids go to aftercare when we could easily afford childcare. That's because it's way more fun for them to be in aftercare (where they do sports and activities and play pick up basketball with their friends) than it is to come home and sit in our apartment.
I also genuinely do not think that formula or vaginal delivery are 'better'. I breastfed and had a vaginal delivery but I wouldn't have cared at ALL if I didn't do either.
I think what objectively does make a difference for kids is money. Being able to to to private school if your kid needs it. Not having money saved for college, not having any parental help to buy their first home. Money is a huge differentiator when it comes to 'future health'. So I work because i think that these small things that parents stress about -LIKE breastfeeding and aftercare and all that crp -absolutely pale in terms of impact on children in comparison to having less net worth and less ability to help your kids.

Be honest. You don’t actually think about or deeply consider any of this stuff, and I do not believe you have ever put even an hour’s worth of effort into reading actual research on any of these topics. You just want to do what you want to do, and that’s the end of the story. You can come up with all sorts of justifications as to why your way is not only fine, but actually better, and they may or may not be true. But that doesn’t actually matter to you.

(And for whatever it’s worth, money for college or a downpayment on a home isn’t something you’re doing for kids… it’s something you’re planning to do for future adults.)

Enormous amounts of research.
Plus the wild move of actually asking my kids what they want to do.
Semantics are irrelevant.

I mean, some kids can sense that they’re an afterthought, or an accessory, or in your case a status symbol. The claim that your kids prefer aftercare to spending more time with you (undoubtedly being nonstop “productive” and doing “enriching” activities) is the most honest thing you’ve said. Other than that your 750K HHI is merely a sacrifice you’re making “for the children” of course

Look I hate working. But I do it because it gets my kids an amazing education, nice camps, good aftercare and college savings accounts so they won’t go into debt.

Your assertion is that the child of every working mother is doomed to think of themselves as an ‘afterthought’. No idea what you’re doing on the jobs board but that’s some pretty mysogynistic, antiquated and toxic bs right there

That woman’s use of language like “afterthought” and “accessory” to describe suburban kids in one of the world’s most privileged areas shows she’s a small-minded fool. I wouldn’t have bothered replying to her if I were you.

It’s likely misplaced bitterness about something very different that only a therapist can unwind.
Look I think working moms make hard choices every day and they make the right choices for their family and clearly most working mothers value money or they wouldn’t do it. But telling another mother than she doesn’t care about her kids and they’re an accessory or status symbol for absolutely no reason is pretty effed up behavior. Working mothers have enough challenges in life without being torn down by other working mothers. Yeesh.

+1 Amen

That poster should really explore why she felt it was okay to say that to someone she's never even met. I'm not someone who likes blithely telling others to "get help" but that was not okay and speaks to something being deeply wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is it so hard to admit that daycare/aftercare is a lesser experience for kids than sahp, barring strange outliers? It doesn’t mean it’s a *bad* experience or that you’re a bad parent. It’s just reality.

I couldn’t breastfeed my children. I acknowledge the reality that this was a negative for them. They lost out on bonding and lifelong health benefits. But it was out of my hands and there was nothing more I could do.

I couldn’t have a vaginal delivery. Again, a lesser experience for them in terms of future health, etc.

It’s magical thinking to not admit some scenarios are simply better for kids. I personally think if we want society to start improving childcare we need to start with a shared understanding of what benefits infants and toddlers, not corporations or bank accounts.

Because many of us don’t believe daycare and aftercare are a blessed experience than having a SAHP. For some it probably is and for some it definitely is not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I think Brunch Grandma got on here and just tried to make every working mother feel like crap.

lol - I sometimes think sahms come on this into this sub to troll us - only explanation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it so hard to admit that daycare/aftercare is a lesser experience for kids than sahp, barring strange outliers? It doesn’t mean it’s a *bad* experience or that you’re a bad parent. It’s just reality.

I couldn’t breastfeed my children. I acknowledge the reality that this was a negative for them. They lost out on bonding and lifelong health benefits. But it was out of my hands and there was nothing more I could do.

I couldn’t have a vaginal delivery. Again, a lesser experience for them in terms of future health, etc.

It’s magical thinking to not admit some scenarios are simply better for kids. I personally think if we want society to start improving childcare we need to start with a shared understanding of what benefits infants and toddlers, not corporations or bank accounts.

Because many of us don’t believe daycare and aftercare are a blessed experience than having a SAHP. For some it probably is and for some it definitely is not.

Again. WHY ARE YOU ON THE JOBS FORUM IF YOU THINK WOMEN WHO WORK ARE BAD PARENTS?
Like literally to troll us?
Hands up who'd rather have a working human or an internet troll as a mom?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I think Brunch Grandma got on here and just tried to make every working mother feel like crap.

Who??

Pp here. "Brunch granny" was someone on threads awhile ago who was obsessed with women have kids young. She would totally shame working moms.

[Anonymous]

this idea that 'aftercare is less than' is so damaging. It is not a monolith - just like working moms are not a monolith.

Some aftercare is amazing. Some home life sucks. some aftercare sucks, some home life is amazing.
If your kid at aftercare is playing on a basketball team and at home is doing playstation then send them to aftercare!
If your kid at aftercare is smoking camels in an alley while a disinterested monitor scrolls their phone where you're available to instead coach them in origami in french - then sure - make a different plan.
we have to assume everyone is doing their best and then talk from there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm the parent who keeps the flex schedule so kids aren't in SACC till 6 or stuck in camp aftercare which is ALWAYS terrible. But my career is so stymied by being parent friendly. Really wish we had focused on breadwinner SAHM model rather than equality and "do it all" fallacy.

That's all. Off to pick up my kids from camp.

+1 In your same boat OP. My husband was working in big law when I had my first and told me he'd happily be the breadwinner if I wanted to stay at home. I blame years of indoctrination from my education and even my own parents that WOMEN MUST HAVE A CAREER AND YES THEY CAN HAVE IT ALL, I chose to stay in my well paid but stressful consulting job. As much as it hurt to see my baby get whisked off by a nanny (yes, we had the privilege of affording a nanny but I still didn't love the arrangement), I just could not give up my career. I didn't even love my job, but I loved that I had a career and that's what my peers and society told me I had to have.

Fast forward 5 years, we've had a second kid and husband now works as a government lawyer. I essentially had to mommy track at some point and now I'm neither here nor there. No longer work for the prestigious big name company but still have to keep working so I'm constantly stretched thing as the primary back-up care person, especially in the summer.

Wish I had chosen to be a SAHM when the chance was there. Or not had kids. Or just had one.

When we decide to go to college or grad school, we don't also tell ourselves we just have to have that full-time job simultaneously. Nor do most people embark starting a business, or starting a family as an undergraduate. For some phases of life we understand that it is full commitment.
Strangely enough, when we birth utterly dependent creatures, we (men and women) think it's optional to have a career and optional to care for the child.

[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:We have a 4.5 year-old and a baby just over 1. Baby in full day daycare and the older one has done DCPS PreK + aftercare for the past two years which he loved. Now in summer camp + aftercare, though he deeply misses all his school friends (who scatter to the wind during the summer).

Two kids is wild. One of us is home by 545 with the kids, dinner, play, bath time, etc. Our oldest kid won't go to bed at 715pm anymore and is stretching out bed time + longer daylight hours. We don't get a free moment until 9pm; it's killing us. Have a long list of babysitters and we rotate through them, it's been nice to get out of the house in the evening once the baby is down for the night.

Strongly considering an au pair. We can afford it ($250K x 2 jobs). Would be super helpful for getting kids ready in the AM, picking up our oldest kid from school/camp, packing the lunch box, etc.

Get a real nanny. At your income you can afford it and sounds like you really need the help

Why get a "real nanny"? I'd need to hire a top-notch nanny for her to cover everything my baby does in his Montessori daycare (with instructors who have college degrees). So probably at least $70K after-tax to get a high quality nanny. Doesn't seem worth it.

Literally only need an extra set of hands for 1 hour in the morning and 3 hours in the evening. Plus have an au pair do sporadic kid stuff - laundry, lunch boxes, straightening up their rooms - throughout the week. I don't think an au pair would even hit 40 hours with us in a week.

You do you. I'm not a fan of kids taking care of kids and especially babies.

What are you talking about? Our au pair is 26 with a college degree. She's using her au pair year to perfect her English so she can get a job with a multinational company when she goes home. She's absolutely an adult and is fantastic.

At our aftercare a parent came to pick up their kid with their leashed dog. Apparently a kid asked to pet the dog and the adult said okay. Then the dog lunged and bit the child in the face. The bleeding kid ran to the bathroom. The parent with the dog left. The aftercare staff saw *none* of this, even though all the kids were aware and there was a big commotion. When the parent of the bleeding kid showed up for pickup the staff still had no idea. The kid ended up needing several stitches on his face. It was a huge deal at our school.

I don't even consider aftercare to be childcare--no one actually watches or cares for the kids. It's basically a fee you pay so your child can hang at the school until you get off work. We're much happier with our au pair.

Sounds like it worked out for you.
Most au pairs are teenagers

I disagree. Most are in their 20s. The program is for 18-26 yos.

We've never had an au pair under the age of 21 as we don't want to worry about under age drinking laws. Similar for other families we know.

The prefrontal cortex isn't fully developed until 26-ish. The one that works out goof judgment, memory retrieval, stress control, and behavioral flexibility.

So you have no childcare ever by people under the age of 26? That's nuts. I can assure you that my kids are totally fine being watched by someone I've vetted who is in their 20s. They eat breakfast, get ready for school and walk to school with her. After school she meets them and then they play with friends on the playground before walking home for a snack and homework. It's basic childcare, not brain surgery.

Sure we have teen baby sitters for a couple of hours. But no, my family doesn't have anyone under 26 drive my babies around or provide childcare for extended times every day. It's that so unusual? Most familied I know have slightly older nannies (not au pairs) at least over 30. And yes, they are expensive because they need to paid a living wage.

I mean rental cars won't let 25 year old drive, they shouldn't be driving small children

That's so silly. Not too long ago, 26 year olds had 2 to 3 kids already.

That 26 yo is going to take care of her own children a lot better than she takes care of yours

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm the parent who keeps the flex schedule so kids aren't in SACC till 6 or stuck in camp aftercare which is ALWAYS terrible. But my career is so stymied by being parent friendly. Really wish we had focused on breadwinner SAHM model rather than equality and "do it all" fallacy.

That's all. Off to pick up my kids from camp.

+1 In your same boat OP. My husband was working in big law when I had my first and told me he'd happily be the breadwinner if I wanted to stay at home. I blame years of indoctrination from my education and even my own parents that WOMEN MUST HAVE A CAREER AND YES THEY CAN HAVE IT ALL, I chose to stay in my well paid but stressful consulting job. As much as it hurt to see my baby get whisked off by a nanny (yes, we had the privilege of affording a nanny but I still didn't love the arrangement), I just could not give up my career. I didn't even love my job, but I loved that I had a career and that's what my peers and society told me I had to have.

Fast forward 5 years, we've had a second kid and husband now works as a government lawyer. I essentially had to mommy track at some point and now I'm neither here nor there. No longer work for the prestigious big name company but still have to keep working so I'm constantly stretched thing as the primary back-up care person, especially in the summer.

Wish I had chosen to be a SAHM when the chance was there. Or not had kids. Or just had one.

When we decide to go to college or grad school, we don't also tell ourselves we just have to have that full-time job simultaneously. Nor do most people embark starting a business, or starting a family as an undergraduate. For some phases of life we understand that it is full commitment.
Strangely enough, when we birth utterly dependent creatures, we (men and women) think it's optional to have a career and optional to care for the child.

We have an entire system of student loans, dorms, financial aid, work study, etc that makes that full commitment possible for many. (And there are many people who DO work through college too). Other countries have long parental leaves and more flexibility for mothers to work part time due to health insurance benefits not being tied to full-time employment. We have NO system for parents to stay at home for 5 years PER KID and then return to work other than "marry someone whose salary can support you all," which is not a system that works for anyone making a median salary these days. So what would you look to see happen to recognize the full commitment needed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm the parent who keeps the flex schedule so kids aren't in SACC till 6 or stuck in camp aftercare which is ALWAYS terrible. But my career is so stymied by being parent friendly. Really wish we had focused on breadwinner SAHM model rather than equality and "do it all" fallacy.

That's all. Off to pick up my kids from camp.

+1 In your same boat OP. My husband was working in big law when I had my first and told me he'd happily be the breadwinner if I wanted to stay at home. I blame years of indoctrination from my education and even my own parents that WOMEN MUST HAVE A CAREER AND YES THEY CAN HAVE IT ALL, I chose to stay in my well paid but stressful consulting job. As much as it hurt to see my baby get whisked off by a nanny (yes, we had the privilege of affording a nanny but I still didn't love the arrangement), I just could not give up my career. I didn't even love my job, but I loved that I had a career and that's what my peers and society told me I had to have.

Fast forward 5 years, we've had a second kid and husband now works as a government lawyer. I essentially had to mommy track at some point and now I'm neither here nor there. No longer work for the prestigious big name company but still have to keep working so I'm constantly stretched thing as the primary back-up care person, especially in the summer.

Wish I had chosen to be a SAHM when the chance was there. Or not had kids. Or just had one.

When we decide to go to college or grad school, we don't also tell ourselves we just have to have that full-time job simultaneously. Nor do most people embark starting a business, or starting a family as an undergraduate. For some phases of life we understand that it is full commitment.
Strangely enough, when we birth utterly dependent creatures, we (men and women) think it's optional to have a career and optional to care for the child.

Brunch granny, many people work full time and go to college. Or work part time and go part time college.

Nice shaming of parents who didn’t come from wealth or marry into it so work is optional for all “phases” of life.