SAH with Older Kids?

[Anonymous]

For the people we know who have kids and two working parents, across the board, one of the parents has a very flexible job (part time, work for family business, work at home, work early hours to get out at noon). Nobody we know has both spouses leaving the house at 7:00, commuting an hour by metro/car, working 8.5 hrs, commuting back 1hr, and getting home 5:30/6:00p.m. Basically, all you would be doing is making dinner and putting the kids to bed (if they are younger).

We didn't have that set up (of great flexibility), so the higher earner kept working and the other runs the house/kids/school. It's a reciprocal relatioship, but it would be nice if one of us had the flexible or part time schedule. There are a lot of school activities/needs/days off/events.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing about the PP's post sounds jealous. Why is so hard to admit some people find a career fulfilling - especially when data shows 80 percent of SAHMs do so because they can't afford childcare? Statistically women who have advanced degrees with high earning husbands chose to stay in the workforce. Average time off is two years away. You can look this up. Not everyone wants to stay at home.

And it is hard to find intellectually challenging volunteer work. There are legal implications to not paying a worker so a lot of companies only accept this type of work for grad school credit.

I don't think it is wrong at all to say some people want a fulfilling career, but two parents can not have careers and also raise their kids full time, whether they are young or in school. There is a choice and it seems like so many woman think they can do both but you can't without sacrificing one or the other every single day. You are choosing to be with a client instead of at your child's soccer practice. You are choosing to have a Nanny come take care of your child with a fever because you can't take another sick day. If you stay home with your child, you miss a meeting that potentially changes your career. You are stuck in traffic and miss your child's final performance. When your teen is devastated about their first break-up, you can't console them because you are at a convention for a few days. Sure, people can say this is life. The kids should understand. But most parents don't watch their kids grow up and say "I should have been there less."

I tried to do it. I had a wonderful job with tons of perks but once I had kids, they became my priority. I tried to do both but the last straw was pumping in a hotel room by myself on my child's first Halloween. I landed a great client and made a shit load in commission that day but all I cared about was wanting to be with my child. I am sure there are working moms that wouldn't have cared. I mean really, my child couldn't even walk yet and wouldn't remember it. But I would and it bothered me. And when I tried to go back again a few years later, the juggling between my husband and I and 2 kids took it's toll. I knew my job was not to work FT. It was to be a mom FT. It was the more important job. We could have made a shit load more money and easily hired a nanny but I wouldn't take any of these years back. It has been an absolute joy to raise my now 3 kids. I still work about 10-16 hours a month and make pennies but it keeps my foot in the door and that is the only reason I do it.

This is a great article.....

http://theweek.com/articles/627821/ugly-secret-working-moms

I think your post rings true for moms with babies (like your story about pumping in a hotel room), but this thread is about having kids in elementary school. For many moms (not all), when the kids are in school 5 days a week, the conflict you mentions is less of an issue. We have a babysitter every day after school for one hour, which allows me to work full-time. So I'm able to keep doing the work I love and the kids get to spend time with another person who cares for them. The babysitter has been with us for years, and we love her. This idea that kids have to spend all of their time after school with their mommies is ridiculous. All over the world and throughout history, women have worked and when they did the kids spent time with family or community members. This is actually GOOD for kids, to be around other influences, to see that they are not completely dependent on mommy and daddy but can connect with other people. The idea of not working so that I could have those five extra hours a week with my kids (the time they are with a babysitter until I get home at 4:30) is crazy.

But there are so many days they are not in school. Summer, Spring break, winter break. In fact there are only 180 or so school days. So, half the days of the year.

Most camps go to 3. My kids went to full day camp,even when I was a sah because that is what all their friends do. We take several
Week long family vacations, and several three to four day ones over holiday weekends. I get all federal holidays off, and have a generous leave policy, plus compressed work week.

DC seems to filled with flexible flex jobs that pay decently. $100-150k. No one is earning 500k-$1million+ working these flex jobs with generous leave policies.

DH used to be a military physician. He came home by 3pm everyday. Now he works until 7. He also earns 5x what he earned in the military.

My husband makes $500-$600k (bonus dependent) and has a lot of flexibility. Works from home, can wrap up work by 3 if i need him to pick up our son from preschool. Takes days off when he needs to. I make $250k and work a pretty standard 30 hour work week, lots of flexibility to work from home whenever i want to (i usually work from home 2 days a week), roll in late or early, and just get my work done when i want to. These jobs exist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing about the PP's post sounds jealous. Why is so hard to admit some people find a career fulfilling - especially when data shows 80 percent of SAHMs do so because they can't afford childcare? Statistically women who have advanced degrees with high earning husbands chose to stay in the workforce. Average time off is two years away. You can look this up. Not everyone wants to stay at home.

And it is hard to find intellectually challenging volunteer work. There are legal implications to not paying a worker so a lot of companies only accept this type of work for grad school credit.

I don't think it is wrong at all to say some people want a fulfilling career, but two parents can not have careers and also raise their kids full time, whether they are young or in school. There is a choice and it seems like so many woman think they can do both but you can't without sacrificing one or the other every single day. You are choosing to be with a client instead of at your child's soccer practice. You are choosing to have a Nanny come take care of your child with a fever because you can't take another sick day. If you stay home with your child, you miss a meeting that potentially changes your career. You are stuck in traffic and miss your child's final performance. When your teen is devastated about their first break-up, you can't console them because you are at a convention for a few days. Sure, people can say this is life. The kids should understand. But most parents don't watch their kids grow up and say "I should have been there less."

I tried to do it. I had a wonderful job with tons of perks but once I had kids, they became my priority. I tried to do both but the last straw was pumping in a hotel room by myself on my child's first Halloween. I landed a great client and made a shit load in commission that day but all I cared about was wanting to be with my child. I am sure there are working moms that wouldn't have cared. I mean really, my child couldn't even walk yet and wouldn't remember it. But I would and it bothered me. And when I tried to go back again a few years later, the juggling between my husband and I and 2 kids took it's toll. I knew my job was not to work FT. It was to be a mom FT. It was the more important job. We could have made a shit load more money and easily hired a nanny but I wouldn't take any of these years back. It has been an absolute joy to raise my now 3 kids. I still work about 10-16 hours a month and make pennies but it keeps my foot in the door and that is the only reason I do it.

This is a great article.....

http://theweek.com/articles/627821/ugly-secret-working-moms

I think your post rings true for moms with babies (like your story about pumping in a hotel room), but this thread is about having kids in elementary school. For many moms (not all), when the kids are in school 5 days a week, the conflict you mentions is less of an issue. We have a babysitter every day after school for one hour, which allows me to work full-time. So I'm able to keep doing the work I love and the kids get to spend time with another person who cares for them. The babysitter has been with us for years, and we love her. This idea that kids have to spend all of their time after school with their mommies is ridiculous. All over the world and throughout history, women have worked and when they did the kids spent time with family or community members. This is actually GOOD for kids, to be around other influences, to see that they are not completely dependent on mommy and daddy but can connect with other people. The idea of not working so that I could have those five extra hours a week with my kids (the time they are with a babysitter until I get home at 4:30) is crazy.

But there are so many days they are not in school. Summer, Spring break, winter break. In fact there are only 180 or so school days. So, half the days of the year.

I'm a new poster...and what about when they get sick?! I only work part time and even still, am always seeming to have to reschedule this or that cause someone has strep or something. Thank god my job is flexible. Elementary school seems like an easy babysitter, until you are in it and realizing the demands are, well, demanding.

[Anonymous]

Just don't let your kids do activities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing about the PP's post sounds jealous. Why is so hard to admit some people find a career fulfilling - especially when data shows 80 percent of SAHMs do so because they can't afford childcare? Statistically women who have advanced degrees with high earning husbands chose to stay in the workforce. Average time off is two years away. You can look this up. Not everyone wants to stay at home.

And it is hard to find intellectually challenging volunteer work. There are legal implications to not paying a worker so a lot of companies only accept this type of work for grad school credit.

I don't think it is wrong at all to say some people want a fulfilling career, but two parents can not have careers and also raise their kids full time, whether they are young or in school. There is a choice and it seems like so many woman think they can do both but you can't without sacrificing one or the other every single day. You are choosing to be with a client instead of at your child's soccer practice. You are choosing to have a Nanny come take care of your child with a fever because you can't take another sick day. If you stay home with your child, you miss a meeting that potentially changes your career. You are stuck in traffic and miss your child's final performance. When your teen is devastated about their first break-up, you can't console them because you are at a convention for a few days. Sure, people can say this is life. The kids should understand. But most parents don't watch their kids grow up and say "I should have been there less."

I tried to do it. I had a wonderful job with tons of perks but once I had kids, they became my priority. I tried to do both but the last straw was pumping in a hotel room by myself on my child's first Halloween. I landed a great client and made a shit load in commission that day but all I cared about was wanting to be with my child. I am sure there are working moms that wouldn't have cared. I mean really, my child couldn't even walk yet and wouldn't remember it. But I would and it bothered me. And when I tried to go back again a few years later, the juggling between my husband and I and 2 kids took it's toll. I knew my job was not to work FT. It was to be a mom FT. It was the more important job. We could have made a shit load more money and easily hired a nanny but I wouldn't take any of these years back. It has been an absolute joy to raise my now 3 kids. I still work about 10-16 hours a month and make pennies but it keeps my foot in the door and that is the only reason I do it.

This is a great article.....

http://theweek.com/articles/627821/ugly-secret-working-moms

I think your post rings true for moms with babies (like your story about pumping in a hotel room), but this thread is about having kids in elementary school. For many moms (not all), when the kids are in school 5 days a week, the conflict you mentions is less of an issue. We have a babysitter every day after school for one hour, which allows me to work full-time. So I'm able to keep doing the work I love and the kids get to spend time with another person who cares for them. The babysitter has been with us for years, and we love her. This idea that kids have to spend all of their time after school with their mommies is ridiculous. All over the world and throughout history, women have worked and when they did the kids spent time with family or community members. This is actually GOOD for kids, to be around other influences, to see that they are not completely dependent on mommy and daddy but can connect with other people. The idea of not working so that I could have those five extra hours a week with my kids (the time they are with a babysitter until I get home at 4:30) is crazy.

But there are so many days they are not in school. Summer, Spring break, winter break. In fact there are only 180 or so school days. So, half the days of the year.

I'm a new poster...and what about when they get sick?! I only work part time and even still, am always seeming to have to reschedule this or that cause someone has strep or something. Thank god my job is flexible. Elementary school seems like an easy babysitter, until you are in it and realizing the demands are, well, demanding.

My nanny usually covers that, we had only 1.5 sick days this year, which is fairly typical for us since my kids are older However, I a get 3 weeks of sick time a year, so could take off if necessary. I take them to most doctor appointments,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing about the PP's post sounds jealous. Why is so hard to admit some people find a career fulfilling - especially when data shows 80 percent of SAHMs do so because they can't afford childcare? Statistically women who have advanced degrees with high earning husbands chose to stay in the workforce. Average time off is two years away. You can look this up. Not everyone wants to stay at home.

And it is hard to find intellectually challenging volunteer work. There are legal implications to not paying a worker so a lot of companies only accept this type of work for grad school credit.

I don't think it is wrong at all to say some people want a fulfilling career, but two parents can not have careers and also raise their kids full time, whether they are young or in school. There is a choice and it seems like so many woman think they can do both but you can't without sacrificing one or the other every single day. You are choosing to be with a client instead of at your child's soccer practice. You are choosing to have a Nanny come take care of your child with a fever because you can't take another sick day. If you stay home with your child, you miss a meeting that potentially changes your career. You are stuck in traffic and miss your child's final performance. When your teen is devastated about their first break-up, you can't console them because you are at a convention for a few days. Sure, people can say this is life. The kids should understand. But most parents don't watch their kids grow up and say "I should have been there less."

I tried to do it. I had a wonderful job with tons of perks but once I had kids, they became my priority. I tried to do both but the last straw was pumping in a hotel room by myself on my child's first Halloween. I landed a great client and made a shit load in commission that day but all I cared about was wanting to be with my child. I am sure there are working moms that wouldn't have cared. I mean really, my child couldn't even walk yet and wouldn't remember it. But I would and it bothered me. And when I tried to go back again a few years later, the juggling between my husband and I and 2 kids took it's toll. I knew my job was not to work FT. It was to be a mom FT. It was the more important job. We could have made a shit load more money and easily hired a nanny but I wouldn't take any of these years back. It has been an absolute joy to raise my now 3 kids. I still work about 10-16 hours a month and make pennies but it keeps my foot in the door and that is the only reason I do it.

This is a great article.....

http://theweek.com/articles/627821/ugly-secret-working-moms

I think your post rings true for moms with babies (like your story about pumping in a hotel room), but this thread is about having kids in elementary school. For many moms (not all), when the kids are in school 5 days a week, the conflict you mentions is less of an issue. We have a babysitter every day after school for one hour, which allows me to work full-time. So I'm able to keep doing the work I love and the kids get to spend time with another person who cares for them. The babysitter has been with us for years, and we love her. This idea that kids have to spend all of their time after school with their mommies is ridiculous. All over the world and throughout history, women have worked and when they did the kids spent time with family or community members. This is actually GOOD for kids, to be around other influences, to see that they are not completely dependent on mommy and daddy but can connect with other people. The idea of not working so that I could have those five extra hours a week with my kids (the time they are with a babysitter until I get home at 4:30) is crazy.

But there are so many days they are not in school. Summer, Spring break, winter break. In fact there are only 180 or so school days. So, half the days of the year.

Most camps go to 3. My kids went to full day camp,even when I was a sah because that is what all their friends do. We take several
Week long family vacations, and several three to four day ones over holiday weekends. I get all federal holidays off, and have a generous leave policy, plus compressed work week.

DC seems to filled with flexible flex jobs that pay decently. $100-150k. No one is earning 500k-$1million+ working these flex jobs with generous leave policies.

DH used to be a military physician. He came home by 3pm everyday. Now he works until 7. He also earns 5x what he earned in the military.

My husband makes $500-$600k (bonus dependent) and has a lot of flexibility. Works from home, can wrap up work by 3 if i need him to pick up our son from preschool. Takes days off when he needs to. I make $250k and work a pretty standard 30 hour work week, lots of flexibility to work from home whenever i want to (i usually work from home 2 days a week), roll in late or early, and just get my work done when i want to. These jobs exist.

Would you mind sharing what you guys do? I would love a PT job earning 250k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To set the record straight, many men and women with families just like me have jobs in IT. Many of us work for companies that have gone IPO and have made a killing. I can name quite a few in recent years, such as Splunk, Nutanix (any day now), ServiceNow, PaloAlto, Bluecoat (any day now). I work for one such company, as does my DH. We got loads of restricted stick that we got for pennies and have cashed in, some held. We both still work. Not only do we work, we are constantly on the look out to land a job with the next hot chick at the bar.

People who build wealth and have anbition, don't do so by not working. Working for said PROGRESSIVE IT companies lends itself to job flexibility and all of these companies have Tele work options or are nearly 100% telework.

It is absolutely false that just because people have money and a lot of it, that we somehow yearn for days filled with maincures.

So you have worked for one company that has been profitable in the past decade? What is your plan when tech bubble pops, have you cashed in about $2M I hope? VC funding is changing and looking at bottom line much harder. So you will get a chance to sit back and get manicures!

No. Three. I started as an original UUNet employee. It's what got me hooked on riding the wave. I learned back in 1999, by sheer luck to cash in when the getting is good. Most people do these days.

I won't even consider a company without a huge upside. We are in the IT land of milk and honey here in NoVA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the people we know who have kids and two working parents, across the board, one of the parents has a very flexible job (part time, work for family business, work at home, work early hours to get out at noon). Nobody we know has both spouses leaving the house at 7:00, commuting an hour by metro/car, working 8.5 hrs, commuting back 1hr, and getting home 5:30/6:00p.m. Basically, all you would be doing is making dinner and putting the kids to bed (if they are younger).
We didn't have that set up (of great flexibility), so the higher earner kept working and the other runs the house/kids/school. It's a reciprocal relatioship, but it would be nice if one of us had the flexible or part time schedule. There are a lot of school activities/needs/days off/events.

Most of the families I know from work have this set-up, myself included, and it's not ideal. SACC is fun, but it's not really fair to have a kid at school 11 hours a day. Traffic is only getting worse, and yet my federal agency has done little to increase telework. My one day a week is nice, and my husband also has one day a week, but those other three days are still quite stressful. I think it's great that many PP have much more flexibility, but I still think we have a long way to go in this area. I can cover any teacher work days, sick days and snow days due to my seniority and generous federal leave, but still, the daily grind gets old.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Most people work bc they have to not because it gives their life meaning so it shouldn't be a surprise that your friends feel spending time with their kids is "living the dream".

+1

I make more money than my spouse, but neither one of us makes enough to support a family in this region - nothing but two full-time jobs would work for us and there hasn't been any money left over for nannies and au pairs.

I don't think it would have been better for my kids if I had been SAH - just different. I probably would have been terrible at it and I actually admire parents who can throw themselves into school volunteering, chauffeuring to 4:00 sports practices, cooking meals, spotless houses, maintaining strict bedtime routines, etc. I'm kind of glad to have an excuse for not being good at any of that stuff! (Yes, yes, I know most WOH moms somehow manage to do all that stuff and work full time but I am not one of those people).

Having done it, it was extremely boring to me, once my kids started school. It is really amazing to me that people yearn to stay at home with older kids, but if you work when your kids are small and come home for the second shift, I can see how some burn out.

Not the least boring for me. My DH is retired so we are now both at home with our rising 4th grader. During the school day, we are free to do whatever we like, golf, tennis, hiking, working out, dine out, shop, movies, volunteer, etc. Our kid has a lot of activities during the week as well as a weekend activity that we travel all over the country for, usually at least one plane trip a month, while the other 2-3 weekends are local. Doubtful most people would choose to work if they did not have to earn a living. It is much more fun to stay at home with an older kid that's for sure!

I disagree. Your life sounds lovely minus the monthly plane ride (sounds awful) but not all of us want a life of leisure. I've worked hard for my career as has my spouse and we are committed to both family and career. My father retired a multimillionaire at 52 and chose to start a new company. Some people are driven to contribute and challenge themselves. Some people volunteer, true, you don't HAVE to have a career but not true that if given the chance all of us would give it up.

DH and I are both Ivy educated attorneys so we both had careers. We prefer our current life.

It's not really career or no career for most of the PPs, from what I can tell. I went to Harvard, and am a successful policy advisor in national security, but having gone to Harvard and my current line of work are just two data points, they don't really preordain that I will work for 40 years straight in the same field. I find so many people on DCUM are hyper-formulaic in their approach to life, and think some magical algorithm applies to all decisions (if you stay home do it when they are young, if you make $250K, you are crazy to stay home...unless your spouse makes $1M, then see part C..., if you quit your job you will become a bitter shrew, if you don't stay home with your kids, they will never know you and will end up druggies) It's madness, these assumptions! Life is iterative, and making changes is all part of the fun if you are open to it.

Can we please acknowledge that "making changes" is a luxury afforded by the wealthy? Most Americans have relatively few choices where working is concerned. They must work to support their families. Or they must stay home, because their earning potential so poor they can't earn enough to pay for childcare. That is the reality for the vast majority of households.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing about the PP's post sounds jealous. Why is so hard to admit some people find a career fulfilling - especially when data shows 80 percent of SAHMs do so because they can't afford childcare? Statistically women who have advanced degrees with high earning husbands chose to stay in the workforce. Average time off is two years away. You can look this up. Not everyone wants to stay at home.

And it is hard to find intellectually challenging volunteer work. There are legal implications to not paying a worker so a lot of companies only accept this type of work for grad school credit.

I don't think it is wrong at all to say some people want a fulfilling career, but two parents can not have careers and also raise their kids full time, whether they are young or in school. There is a choice and it seems like so many woman think they can do both but you can't without sacrificing one or the other every single day. You are choosing to be with a client instead of at your child's soccer practice. You are choosing to have a Nanny come take care of your child with a fever because you can't take another sick day. If you stay home with your child, you miss a meeting that potentially changes your career. You are stuck in traffic and miss your child's final performance. When your teen is devastated about their first break-up, you can't console them because you are at a convention for a few days. Sure, people can say this is life. The kids should understand. But most parents don't watch their kids grow up and say "I should have been there less."

I tried to do it. I had a wonderful job with tons of perks but once I had kids, they became my priority. I tried to do both but the last straw was pumping in a hotel room by myself on my child's first Halloween. I landed a great client and made a shit load in commission that day but all I cared about was wanting to be with my child. I am sure there are working moms that wouldn't have cared. I mean really, my child couldn't even walk yet and wouldn't remember it. But I would and it bothered me. And when I tried to go back again a few years later, the juggling between my husband and I and 2 kids took it's toll. I knew my job was not to work FT. It was to be a mom FT. It was the more important job. We could have made a shit load more money and easily hired a nanny but I wouldn't take any of these years back. It has been an absolute joy to raise my now 3 kids. I still work about 10-16 hours a month and make pennies but it keeps my foot in the door and that is the only reason I do it.

This is a great article.....

http://theweek.com/articles/627821/ugly-secret-working-moms

I think your post rings true for moms with babies (like your story about pumping in a hotel room), but this thread is about having kids in elementary school. For many moms (not all), when the kids are in school 5 days a week, the conflict you mentions is less of an issue. We have a babysitter every day after school for one hour, which allows me to work full-time. So I'm able to keep doing the work I love and the kids get to spend time with another person who cares for them. The babysitter has been with us for years, and we love her. This idea that kids have to spend all of their time after school with their mommies is ridiculous. All over the world and throughout history, women have worked and when they did the kids spent time with family or community members. This is actually GOOD for kids, to be around other influences, to see that they are not completely dependent on mommy and daddy but can connect with other people. The idea of not working so that I could have those five extra hours a week with my kids (the time they are with a babysitter until I get home at 4:30) is crazy.

But there are so many days they are not in school. Summer, Spring break, winter break. In fact there are only 180 or so school days. So, half the days of the year.

Here's some fuzzy math! LOL!

180 instructional days. Don't burn too many brain cells processing that.

Don't know what school you're kids are at that they are only there 6 months out of the year, but I'm sure there's a line of teachers waiting to work at Unicorn County Public Schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Can you do basic math? My kids are with nanny for a grand total of one to one point five hours a day

How did you find a nanny who only wants to work 1.5 hours a day?

If you read original post, you would see she came a few hours before kids got home to do stuff around house, walk dogs, and errands.

Are we reading the same original post? OP wanted to know if it got harder when kids went to elementary school.

I posted that it was harder for me. When kids were in daycare, I only had to worry about sick days. Daycare doesn't have spring breaks, teacher work days and don't have so many events during the middle of the day. When my child started kindergarten, he had a ton of snow days, early dismissals, 2 hour delays, middle of the day events on top of the planned days off like teacher work days and breaks. It isn't so easy to find sporadic care.

We do know dual working families who keep FT nannies/housekeepers or au pairs. Families where a parent works from home or both parents have flex jobs could probably make it work with relative ease. If you have a full time job without much flexibility and can't telework, it is hard to get coverage for all that time off of school. We looked into white house nannies but just couldn't bring ourselves to leave our kids with a complete stranger.

I was speaking of my original post about our nanny to which the question was posed.

I would agree if you are unwarranted lying to hire child care, one can't work outside the home. Most people don't have this issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Can you do basic math? My kids are with nanny for a grand total of one to one point five hours a day

How did you find a nanny who only wants to work 1.5 hours a day?

If you read original post, you would see she came a few hours before kids got home to do stuff around house, walk dogs, and errands.

Are we reading the same original post? OP wanted to know if it got harder when kids went to elementary school.

I posted that it was harder for me. When kids were in daycare, I only had to worry about sick days. Daycare doesn't have spring breaks, teacher work days and don't have so many events during the middle of the day. When my child started kindergarten, he had a ton of snow days, early dismissals, 2 hour delays, middle of the day events on top of the planned days off like teacher work days and breaks. It isn't so easy to find sporadic care.

We do know dual working families who keep FT nannies/housekeepers or au pairs. Families where a parent works from home or both parents have flex jobs could probably make it work with relative ease. If you have a full time job without much flexibility and can't telework, it is hard to get coverage for all that time off of school. We looked into white house nannies but just couldn't bring ourselves to leave our kids with a complete stranger.

I was speaking of my original post about our nanny to which the question was posed.

I would agree if you are unwarranted lying to hire child care, one can't work outside the home. Most people don't have this issue.

Unwilling to hire

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Most people work bc they have to not because it gives their life meaning so it shouldn't be a surprise that your friends feel spending time with their kids is "living the dream".

+1

I make more money than my spouse, but neither one of us makes enough to support a family in this region - nothing but two full-time jobs would work for us and there hasn't been any money left over for nannies and au pairs.

I don't think it would have been better for my kids if I had been SAH - just different. I probably would have been terrible at it and I actually admire parents who can throw themselves into school volunteering, chauffeuring to 4:00 sports practices, cooking meals, spotless houses, maintaining strict bedtime routines, etc. I'm kind of glad to have an excuse for not being good at any of that stuff! (Yes, yes, I know most WOH moms somehow manage to do all that stuff and work full time but I am not one of those people).

Having done it, it was extremely boring to me, once my kids started school. It is really amazing to me that people yearn to stay at home with older kids, but if you work when your kids are small and come home for the second shift, I can see how some burn out.

Not the least boring for me. My DH is retired so we are now both at home with our rising 4th grader. During the school day, we are free to do whatever we like, golf, tennis, hiking, working out, dine out, shop, movies, volunteer, etc. Our kid has a lot of activities during the week as well as a weekend activity that we travel all over the country for, usually at least one plane trip a month, while the other 2-3 weekends are local. Doubtful most people would choose to work if they did not have to earn a living. It is much more fun to stay at home with an older kid that's for sure!

I disagree. Your life sounds lovely minus the monthly plane ride (sounds awful) but not all of us want a life of leisure. I've worked hard for my career as has my spouse and we are committed to both family and career. My father retired a multimillionaire at 52 and chose to start a new company. Some people are driven to contribute and challenge themselves. Some people volunteer, true, you don't HAVE to have a career but not true that if given the chance all of us would give it up.

DH and I are both Ivy educated attorneys so we both had careers. We prefer our current life.

It's not really career or no career for most of the PPs, from what I can tell. I went to Harvard, and am a successful policy advisor in national security, but having gone to Harvard and my current line of work are just two data points, they don't really preordain that I will work for 40 years straight in the same field. I find so many people on DCUM are hyper-formulaic in their approach to life, and think some magical algorithm applies to all decisions (if you stay home do it when they are young, if you make $250K, you are crazy to stay home...unless your spouse makes $1M, then see part C..., if you quit your job you will become a bitter shrew, if you don't stay home with your kids, they will never know you and will end up druggies) It's madness, these assumptions! Life is iterative, and making changes is all part of the fun if you are open to it.

Can we please acknowledge that "making changes" is a luxury afforded by the wealthy? Most Americans have relatively few choices where working is concerned. They must work to support their families. Or they must stay home, because their earning potential so poor they can't earn enough to pay for childcare. That is the reality for the vast majority of households.

I am the PP you quoted, and yes I agree fully. As the child of divorced parents where my single mom made $38K, I am acutely aware that this isn't a choice for the vast majority. I remember well being elated that my mom was going to buy Happy Meals for me and my friend when came for a sleep over, because that seemed like so much money to spend, and McDonalds was a rare treat (which of course ended up being better for my health!) My only point was that for those who do have options, sometimes their limitations are self-imposed and they don't really explore another way of living (and I am not referring to those who love their current jobs).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing about the PP's post sounds jealous. Why is so hard to admit some people find a career fulfilling - especially when data shows 80 percent of SAHMs do so because they can't afford childcare? Statistically women who have advanced degrees with high earning husbands chose to stay in the workforce. Average time off is two years away. You can look this up. Not everyone wants to stay at home.

And it is hard to find intellectually challenging volunteer work. There are legal implications to not paying a worker so a lot of companies only accept this type of work for grad school credit.

I don't think it is wrong at all to say some people want a fulfilling career, but two parents can not have careers and also raise their kids full time, whether they are young or in school. There is a choice and it seems like so many woman think they can do both but you can't without sacrificing one or the other every single day. You are choosing to be with a client instead of at your child's soccer practice. You are choosing to have a Nanny come take care of your child with a fever because you can't take another sick day. If you stay home with your child, you miss a meeting that potentially changes your career. You are stuck in traffic and miss your child's final performance. When your teen is devastated about their first break-up, you can't console them because you are at a convention for a few days. Sure, people can say this is life. The kids should understand. But most parents don't watch their kids grow up and say "I should have been there less."

I tried to do it. I had a wonderful job with tons of perks but once I had kids, they became my priority. I tried to do both but the last straw was pumping in a hotel room by myself on my child's first Halloween. I landed a great client and made a shit load in commission that day but all I cared about was wanting to be with my child. I am sure there are working moms that wouldn't have cared. I mean really, my child couldn't even walk yet and wouldn't remember it. But I would and it bothered me. And when I tried to go back again a few years later, the juggling between my husband and I and 2 kids took it's toll. I knew my job was not to work FT. It was to be a mom FT. It was the more important job. We could have made a shit load more money and easily hired a nanny but I wouldn't take any of these years back. It has been an absolute joy to raise my now 3 kids. I still work about 10-16 hours a month and make pennies but it keeps my foot in the door and that is the only reason I do it.

This is a great article.....

http://theweek.com/articles/627821/ugly-secret-working-moms

Sorry can't relate to that article. Seems like that is an older woman working before telecommute and flex schedules and the like.
My husband and I wanted both parents to raise our kids so we are both working flex schedules vs. the traditional paycheck dad. A lot of our friends are choosing the same thing - likely a generational thing.

You are living in a dream. 95% of families don't have a luxury of two parents working telecommuting and flex schedules. It isn't a generational thing. It is a Chevy Chase thing.

This article was written this week. And 79% of woman from dual income families say they still do most of the cleaning, errands, shopping, scheduling and cooking even if they work full time like their husband. So instead of trying to make things equal, woman are just increasing their workload. Maybe a few lucky people here on DCUM can outsource housekeeping, errands, laundry, shopping but most woman still have to do it themselves. Dads are not driving home from work worrying "did I make Suzy's well visit appointment?" "Did Johnny get his Halloween costume ready?" "What will I make for dinner, let's stop at the store."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing about the PP's post sounds jealous. Why is so hard to admit some people find a career fulfilling - especially when data shows 80 percent of SAHMs do so because they can't afford childcare? Statistically women who have advanced degrees with high earning husbands chose to stay in the workforce. Average time off is two years away. You can look this up. Not everyone wants to stay at home.

And it is hard to find intellectually challenging volunteer work. There are legal implications to not paying a worker so a lot of companies only accept this type of work for grad school credit.

I don't think it is wrong at all to say some people want a fulfilling career, but two parents can not have careers and also raise their kids full time, whether they are young or in school. There is a choice and it seems like so many woman think they can do both but you can't without sacrificing one or the other every single day. You are choosing to be with a client instead of at your child's soccer practice. You are choosing to have a Nanny come take care of your child with a fever because you can't take another sick day. If you stay home with your child, you miss a meeting that potentially changes your career. You are stuck in traffic and miss your child's final performance. When your teen is devastated about their first break-up, you can't console them because you are at a convention for a few days. Sure, people can say this is life. The kids should understand. But most parents don't watch their kids grow up and say "I should have been there less."

I tried to do it. I had a wonderful job with tons of perks but once I had kids, they became my priority. I tried to do both but the last straw was pumping in a hotel room by myself on my child's first Halloween. I landed a great client and made a shit load in commission that day but all I cared about was wanting to be with my child. I am sure there are working moms that wouldn't have cared. I mean really, my child couldn't even walk yet and wouldn't remember it. But I would and it bothered me. And when I tried to go back again a few years later, the juggling between my husband and I and 2 kids took it's toll. I knew my job was not to work FT. It was to be a mom FT. It was the more important job. We could have made a shit load more money and easily hired a nanny but I wouldn't take any of these years back. It has been an absolute joy to raise my now 3 kids. I still work about 10-16 hours a month and make pennies but it keeps my foot in the door and that is the only reason I do it.

This is a great article.....

http://theweek.com/articles/627821/ugly-secret-working-moms

Sorry can't relate to that article. Seems like that is an older woman working before telecommute and flex schedules and the like.
My husband and I wanted both parents to raise our kids so we are both working flex schedules vs. the traditional paycheck dad. A lot of our friends are choosing the same thing - likely a generational thing.

You are living in a dream. 95% of families don't have a luxury of two parents working telecommuting and flex schedules. It isn't a generational thing. It is a Chevy Chase thing.

This article was written this week. And 79% of woman from dual income families say they still do most of the cleaning, errands, shopping, scheduling and cooking even if they work full time like their husband. So instead of trying to make things equal, woman are just increasing their workload. Maybe a few lucky people here on DCUM can outsource housekeeping, errands, laundry, shopping but most woman still have to do it themselves. Dads are not driving home from work worrying "did I make Suzy's well visit appointment?" "Did Johnny get his Halloween costume ready?" "What will I make for dinner, let's stop at the store."

So you think the right solution is for women to give up on working? Good grief.