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

[Anonymous]

While not absolutely necessary in all cases, generally the non-biglaw spouse is the default parent. DH and I met at a law firm and realized that we jointly wanted to be thoughtful about how to make things work with kids. I'm now at a much more flexible job, still in law, and am for the most part the default parent. If his absence due to being at a firm is too much at some point, though, there's no expectation that I would stay home and be the 100% parent while he goes missing. We've agreed that, if either of if isn't happy over a period of time, we'll both figure out what's best for the family. That may mean his leaving the firm for a more flexible or less stressful position, whether because he wants to or because I have a good opportunity or I'd generally like the space to ramp back up at work. And I may ramp up into a more stable position if he'd prefer that we not need to rely as much on his income. Or, we're very open to having a different economic lifestyle from what we enjoy now, and we've already fully funded college and retirement, so we could both slow down or concentrate on public service work. For us, the key is to be flexible, both emotionally and financially. I don't feel beholden to my DH's firm job just because it currently brings in the big bucks, and he doesn't feel he's committed to a life of intense work because he knows I"m happy to ramp back up if he wants to take a less stressful job. We're partners, and know we'll work it out.

And to those who say OP should suck it up because she married a lawyer and should have known the path her marriage would take, I think you are misinformed. Many, many lawyers work at a firm for years to pay off loans, get experience, and rack up some cash, then leave to have a more balanced life once they are more financially comfortable or kids come along. There's no reason, unless they agreed ahead of time, that OP would have had reason to assume her job would need to take such a back seat for such a long time just because her DH is a lawyer. I say this as a former litigator at a major firm married to another litigator at a major firm.

Also, every law practice is different. Your schedule depends not only on your area of practice (litigation, corporate, advisory, etc.), but also on the size and location of your clients, whether their matters are DC-based (or national or international) and how your firm does staffing. So, really, while there are many similarities, comparing a partner's workload and flexibility to that of another lawyer may not be the most helpful approach as it's likely an apples to oranges comparison.

Good luck t you and your family, OP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While not absolutely necessary in all cases, generally the non-biglaw spouse is the default parent. DH and I met at a law firm and realized that we jointly wanted to be thoughtful about how to make things work with kids. I'm now at a much more flexible job, still in law, and am for the most part the default parent. If his absence due to being at a firm is too much at some point, though, there's no expectation that I would stay home and be the 100% parent while he goes missing. We've agreed that, if either of if isn't happy over a period of time, we'll both figure out what's best for the family. That may mean his leaving the firm for a more flexible or less stressful position, whether because he wants to or because I have a good opportunity or I'd generally like the space to ramp back up at work. And I may ramp up into a more stable position if he'd prefer that we not need to rely as much on his income. Or, we're very open to having a different economic lifestyle from what we enjoy now, and we've already fully funded college and retirement, so we could both slow down or concentrate on public service work. For us, the key is to be flexible, both emotionally and financially. I don't feel beholden to my DH's firm job just because it currently brings in the big bucks, and he doesn't feel he's committed to a life of intense work because he knows I"m happy to ramp back up if he wants to take a less stressful job. We're partners, and know we'll work it out.

And to those who say OP should suck it up because she married a lawyer and should have known the path her marriage would take, I think you are misinformed. Many, many lawyers work at a firm for years to pay off loans, get experience, and rack up some cash, then leave to have a more balanced life once they are more financially comfortable or kids come along. There's no reason, unless they agreed ahead of time, that OP would have had reason to assume her job would need to take such a back seat for such a long time just because her DH is a lawyer. I say this as a former litigator at a major firm married to another litigator at a major firm.

Also, every law practice is different. Your schedule depends not only on your area of practice (litigation, corporate, advisory, etc.), but also on the size and location of your clients, whether their matters are DC-based (or national or international) and how your firm does staffing. So, really, while there are many similarities, comparing a partner's workload and flexibility to that of another lawyer may not be the most helpful approach as it's likely an apples to oranges comparison.

Good luck t you and your family, OP.

I think you miss the point. OP's child is quite young. Certainly her dh's desire/trajectory to make partner was clear three years ago before the child was conceived. That was the best time to think things through, no one is claiming a law student should be clairvoyant.

As a former big law lawyer myself, I think it is disingenuous for those woman partners with a full time nanny and a spouse that works 9 to 5 claiming to be the default parent. Not buying it. Nothing wrong with outsourcing the majority of child care, in fact, I think the job is not doable without either a spouse willing to pick up the slack or paid help to do the same. Perhaps OP needs to switch to a f/t nanny or au pair to make things work better for her family. But going to doctor appointments and class parties doesn't make you the default parent.

[Anonymous]

Do you enjoy your highy figure or low 7 figure incomeifestyle? If so, stop complaining and pull your weight in the famiy.

[Anonymous]

There is alot wrong with outsourcing childcare. You will find out 20-30 years from now when your children tell you how they really felt about their mother abandoning them for most of their waking hours. I know. because I was one of those children brought up by a nanny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is alot wrong with outsourcing childcare. You will find out 20-30 years from now when your children tell you how they really felt about their mother abandoning them for most of their waking hours. I know. because I was one of those children brought up by a nanny.

But how do you feel about your father leaving childcare to the nanny? You didn't mention him.

[Anonymous]

Really depends on how much you like the money. What was going on in your marriage when he was trying to make partner? What's the surprise to you now? I bet he would prefer you quit.


Not everyone wants to be a partner or be married to a partner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is alot wrong with outsourcing childcare. You will find out 20-30 years from now when your children tell you how they really felt about their mother abandoning them for most of their waking hours. I know. because I was one of those children brought up by a nanny.

PP who wrote about the need for a nanny or au pair. This isn't a fair statement--plenty of well-adjusted kids have a nanny or au pair, sounds like there was more issues going on in your household than just the nanny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is alot wrong with outsourcing childcare. You rwill find out 20-30 years from now when your children tell you how they really felt about their mother abandoning them for most of their waking hours. I know. because I was one of those children brought up by a nanny.

PP who wrote about the need for a nanny or au pair. This isn't a fair statement--plenty of well-adjusted kids have a nanny or au pair, sounds like there was more issues going on in your household than just the nanny.

He was dead and left a multi-million dollar estate. Like so many of you, her life was of greater importance than her children.

[Anonymous]

If he's not willing to do it, then yes, you must be the default parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is alot wrong with outsourcing childcare. You rwill find out 20-30 years from now when your children tell you how they really felt about their mother abandoning them for most of their waking hours. I know. because I was one of those children brought up by a nanny.

PP who wrote about the need for a nanny or au pair. This isn't a fair statement--plenty of well-adjusted kids have a nanny or au pair, sounds like there was more issues going on in your household than just the nanny.

He was dead and left a multi-million dollar estate. Like so many of you, her life was of greater importance than her children.

I'm going to assume that the situation of a child whose father is dead, whose mother inherited the multi-million dollar estate, and who was brought up by a nanny is probably not comparable to the situation of most children of DCUM posters who use paid child-care providers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:BigLaw wife here: Most of the wives of partners have low hour jobs. Or they do not work at all, especially when the kids are young. Very few double partner couples with children. Those who do, have a LOT of extra help. Female BigLaw partners often do not have children. Check it out -- there are not that many female Biglaw partners in the first place.

Yes, we are like the mythical Bigfoot. Who knows if we really even exist? (Sorry, but having a husband who works for a law firm doesn't make you an expert on the legal industry. Especially not an expert on WOMEN in the legal industry.)

Honestly, I think a lot of people posting comments about how hard it is to be in BigLaw and have kids are being fed a bunch of baloney by their spouses. Yes, it's a lot of work to be a litigation partner at an international law firm. No, it doesn't mean that you get to abdicate being a parent, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BigLaw wife here: Most of the wives of partners have low hour jobs. Or they do not work at all, especially when the kids are young. Very few double partner couples with children. Those who do, have a LOT of extra help. Female BigLaw partners often do not have children. Check it out -- there are not that many female Biglaw partners in the first place.

Yes, we are like the mythical Bigfoot. Who knows if we really even exist? (Sorry, but having a husband who works for a law firm doesn't make you an expert on the legal industry. Especially not an expert on WOMEN in the legal industry.)

Honestly, I think a lot of people posting comments about how hard it is to be in BigLaw and have kids are being fed a bunch of baloney by their spouses. Yes, it's a lot of work to be a litigation partner at an international law firm. No, it doesn't mean that you get to abdicate being a parent, too.

I think most of us posting about working in big law have worked in big law, tthanks for the lovely helping of condescension thoughw, very charming,

[Anonymous]

Here's the thread's synopsis: if you're DH is a big law partner, you are the default parent (even if you are a big law partner as well).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BigLaw wife here: Most of the wives of partners have low hour jobs. Or they do not work at all, especially when the kids are young. Very few double partner couples with children. Those who do, have a LOT of extra help. Female BigLaw partners often do not have children. Check it out -- there are not that many female Biglaw partners in the first place.

Yes, we are like the mythical Bigfoot. Who knows if we really even exist? (Sorry, but having a husband who works for a law firm doesn't make you an expert on the legal industry. Especially not an expert on WOMEN in the legal industry.)

Honestly, I think a lot of people posting comments about how hard it is to be in BigLaw and have kids are being fed a bunch of baloney by their spouses. Yes, it's a lot of work to be a litigation partner at an international law firm. No, it doesn't mean that you get to abdicate being a parent, too.

NP, here. Husband is a biglaw partner, I'm former biglaw too. Between us, we have worked at 5 large law firms with large DC offices. I agree with the person you're responding to--there are few biglaw female partners. Further, many of them don't have children. Most of the ones who have children do have spouses who stay home or have low hour jobs. Further, there are very very very few female partners who are true rainmakers. I can only point to one or two that I have met--and those ladies were definitely not meeting their kids at the bus stop or taking them to piano lessons or doctors appointments.

So yes, if you're a regulatory partner or a service partner, it will be a lot easier for you to cover regular parenting duties. But, if you're a rainmaker who's responsible for bringing in work and heading multimillion dollar deals, it's going to be impossible for you to make dinner and tuck the kids in with any sort of regularity.

[Anonymous]

DH is not a law firm partner but he is a surgeon. He has never cancelled a surgery or cancelled clinic for the kids. I am always the default parent. Last year's snow days were difficult. I have 2 kids and they took turns getting sick. We have interviewed about 20 people from various sources so we have back up plan A,B,C,D,E and F.

DH has carved out time to occasionally attend school events and takes a few days off from work to spend with the kids on random teacher workdays. The kids really love that daddy time.

We are from NYC and have many power couple friends. These are people who make 7 figures each. They have around the clock help and outsource everything. We had a neighbor whose husband traveled internationally for work and the mom was an investment banker. They had toddler twins and had 2 nannies at all times. I swear they had 6 nannies on their payroll.