Do any SAHMs regret it because of financial reasons?

[Anonymous]

$200K PP. I didn't look at this thread for a few days. Looks like my post got a bunch of responses!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly don’t understand why anyone would make babies with someone they don’t trust.

PP.

^ This is the sort of optimism I’m talking about.

Do you mean you’re optimistic when you make those babies? Or is it only the money for you?

Seriously, the having kids with someone is what ties you to them. You can always get a divorce, or another job, or a different house, but you can’t change who the father of your offspring is.

(DP.) The optimism that trust is never misplaced or broken. The optimism that we can always have perfect judgment or foresight about another person. You got lucky. So far.

Yup, this is it exactly. Of course, it's important to make good decisions. But sometimes life happens. Remember in the first Sex and the City movie, Miranda made a comment about "even the good guys screw you!" when Steve cheated on her? I'm talking about stuff like that. I'm *mature* enough to appreciate the importance of good decision-making and *humble* enough to know that even the very best of people can have very, very bad moments when life throws them a curve ball. We're all making a risk calculus of some kind as a PP notes.

Not a 200k DC job. It means OP is a paper pusher and has a BS job. Very few people have truly interesting jobs that other care about. A 200k job is not one of those.

Again, I'm not OP, but I am a woman in a similar financial position to OP. (I'm also not in DC, but in another major city where $200K goes much, much farther.) But calling my $200k job "paper push[ing]" and "BS" says more about you than it will ever about me. But just know, when you meet me at the playground? And talk to me about your kids, your hobbies, your volunteering? I'm not thinking that *your* work is BS because I'm having weird projection issues. I'm wishing you well, because that's what people who are secure in their choices do.

[Anonymous]

I always find it bizarre when women boast about how their husbands never stay home with sick kids so they can prioritize career. The women seem openly proud about how they’ve enabled their husbands to be bad fathers. I genuinely never know how to respond when I hear someone talking about that.

[Anonymous]

I guess the regret will happen only if there is something bad that happens later in life. A SAHM can regret not working if - she gets divorced, her marriage is bad, she lacks money, she lacks support. If everything is working great, why should she care?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I always find it bizarre when women boast about how their husbands never stay home with sick kids so they can prioritize career. The women seem openly proud about how they’ve enabled their husbands to be bad fathers. I genuinely never know how to respond when I hear someone talking about that.

I think they're explaining more than bragging. It's hard to find a really high earning job that also allows for a lot of flexibility and unplanned remote work. They're not bad dads for letting the SAHM or default parent stay home with sick kids. This is usually what it takes to earn a lot of money.

I'm a little jealous and wish that I picked a high-earning husband and I could have stayed home with kids the whole time. Plus had money to outsource to make everyone's lives easier. Of all the combinations, high earning DH with SAHM seems like the best to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly don’t understand why anyone would make babies with someone they don’t trust.

PP.

^ This is the sort of optimism I’m talking about.

Do you mean you’re optimistic when you make those babies? Or is it only the money for you?

Seriously, the having kids with someone is what ties you to them. You can always get a divorce, or another job, or a different house, but you can’t change who the father of your offspring is.

(DP.) The optimism that trust is never misplaced or broken. The optimism that we can always have perfect judgment or foresight about another person. You got lucky. So far.

It's all luck of the draw! Whether you marry Barack Obama or Kevin Federline, one can never know the true character of a man.

Ummm...yes you can

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, and I say this as someone in a very long-term unusually happy marriage, it does seem like there is a huge element of luck involved. I think it’s foolish to think otherwise.

No, it's not "luck". It's a matter of actually getting to know your partner, having meaningful discussions about important things that matter for a future (finances, kids, careers, goals, etc) and being truthful and genuine. It's not that difficult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, it’s sounds like we are strikingly similar. Maybe I can help?

DH and I are worth $5M+, he makes 7 figures, and let’s just say he pays more in taxes than I make (and I’m a $200K+ MD/JD/MBA type.) I still work, and I have deep financial anxiety. I question if being a SAHM is for me, but the thought of making myself dependent on another human being is truly terrifying.

I do talk about it with my therapist. It’s multi-layered, but starts with some real inter generational trauma of having grandmothers and aunts who were financially abused by their spouses (and physically abused to boot). While it never happened to my mother, I do think people truly underestimate how traumatizing it is to watch a woman be trapped in a marriage and *not be able to get out*. It’s like someone who grows up poor – it never really leaves you. I’ve also worked incredibly hard for my career, and while I have moments of wanting to say eff this, I do love having an identity outside of wife and mother, and I love having my own money. I’m still trying to decide if I want to take on a bigger career when my children are older (maybe high school?), or if I’ll just want to throw in the towel and become a lady of leisure who’s sits on charity boards. My solution for now is a highly flexible, work from home job + nanny.

One final note – I have noticed that generally women who become stay at home moms tend to have a higher financial risk appetite naturally. Clearly, I’ve got my own anxiety so I’m not a bellwether, but I have observed this sort of eternal financial and marital optimism in them. Even in the face of talks about divorce and job loss. Good for them; I wish them well. It’s just not who I am.

This post is depressing. It seems sad to spend so many hours working a boring paper pushing 200k job when your husband is earning 7 figures. What a waste of opportunity.

I’d try to get help for anxiety. Technically every single person is dependent on someone else financially. You’re dependent on your employer, his employer and the federal government. Working a 200k job is a false sense of security.

I would try to identify what you’re actually scared of. You think with 5 million you’d need to go on food stamps and live in the projects if he left you? You think you could never be gainfully employed again? The anxiety you have is unreasonable and unfounded.

My own mother has extreme financial anxiety. A high net worth but can’t ever relax. One day I asked her how many more millions she needs to not worry. She couldn’t answer my question because there isn’t an answer. No amount of money will help her stop worrying about money.

She said she loves having an identity outside being a wife and mother and that she's worked hard for her career. I don't think her situation sounds sad at all. She make a lot of money and her husband makes a ton. They probably have lots to talk about with their respective careers. I've never considered SAH but I do think, if I did that, DH and I might relate to each other less and have less to talk about. Careers make people more interesting, IME.

Not a 200k DC job. It means OP is a paper pusher and has a BS job. Very few people have truly interesting jobs that other care about. A 200k job is not one of those.

Many of the most interesting careers are not necessarily the highest paid. UMC status obsessed DC urbanites are so tiresome. these are the only group of boring drone people I have ever met who have no interest in someone if they don’t exceed a certain income. Sheesh.

Perhaps but very few people are interested in hearing about your job, and your job doesn’t make you interesting.

And even fewer people will find the day to day lives of SAHP (kids, hobbies, charities) interesting.

I'm actually interested in people's children, hobbies, and charities. I'm also interested in hearing about their vacations, cooking, current events, and home improvements. Just don't talk to me about work and don't ask me about mine. I've felt this way throughout my 20+ year career.

If you don't want to hear about their kids, hobbies, or charities, then are you really even friends?

It's painful to listen to someone talk on and on about their kids lives, what type of food they're into these days, or whatever hobbies they devote their extra time in the day to. I mean, you can only stretch something superficial so far (unless you have professional experience or deep insights into each topic). Different strokes.

So what do you like to talk about then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, it’s sounds like we are strikingly similar. Maybe I can help?

DH and I are worth $5M+, he makes 7 figures, and let’s just say he pays more in taxes than I make (and I’m a $200K+ MD/JD/MBA type.) I still work, and I have deep financial anxiety. I question if being a SAHM is for me, but the thought of making myself dependent on another human being is truly terrifying.

I do talk about it with my therapist. It’s multi-layered, but starts with some real inter generational trauma of having grandmothers and aunts who were financially abused by their spouses (and physically abused to boot). While it never happened to my mother, I do think people truly underestimate how traumatizing it is to watch a woman be trapped in a marriage and *not be able to get out*. It’s like someone who grows up poor – it never really leaves you. I’ve also worked incredibly hard for my career, and while I have moments of wanting to say eff this, I do love having an identity outside of wife and mother, and I love having my own money. I’m still trying to decide if I want to take on a bigger career when my children are older (maybe high school?), or if I’ll just want to throw in the towel and become a lady of leisure who’s sits on charity boards. My solution for now is a highly flexible, work from home job + nanny.

One final note – I have noticed that generally women who become stay at home moms tend to have a higher financial risk appetite naturally. Clearly, I’ve got my own anxiety so I’m not a bellwether, but I have observed this sort of eternal financial and marital optimism in them. Even in the face of talks about divorce and job loss. Good for them; I wish them well. It’s just not who I am.

This post is depressing. It seems sad to spend so many hours working a boring paper pushing 200k job when your husband is earning 7 figures. What a waste of opportunity.

I’d try to get help for anxiety. Technically every single person is dependent on someone else financially. You’re dependent on your employer, his employer and the federal government. Working a 200k job is a false sense of security.

I would try to identify what you’re actually scared of. You think with 5 million you’d need to go on food stamps and live in the projects if he left you? You think you could never be gainfully employed again? The anxiety you have is unreasonable and unfounded.

My own mother has extreme financial anxiety. A high net worth but can’t ever relax. One day I asked her how many more millions she needs to not worry. She couldn’t answer my question because there isn’t an answer. No amount of money will help her stop worrying about money.

She said she loves having an identity outside being a wife and mother and that she's worked hard for her career. I don't think her situation sounds sad at all. She make a lot of money and her husband makes a ton. They probably have lots to talk about with their respective careers. I've never considered SAH but I do think, if I did that, DH and I might relate to each other less and have less to talk about. Careers make people more interesting, IME.

Not a 200k DC job. It means OP is a paper pusher and has a BS job. Very few people have truly interesting jobs that other care about. A 200k job is not one of those.

Many of the most interesting careers are not necessarily the highest paid. UMC status obsessed DC urbanites are so tiresome. these are the only group of boring drone people I have ever met who have no interest in someone if they don’t exceed a certain income. Sheesh.

Perhaps but very few people are interested in hearing about your job, and your job doesn’t make you interesting.

And even fewer people will find the day to day lives of SAHP (kids, hobbies, charities) interesting.

I'm actually interested in people's children, hobbies, and charities. I'm also interested in hearing about their vacations, cooking, current events, and home improvements. Just don't talk to me about work and don't ask me about mine. I've felt this way throughout my 20+ year career.

If you don't want to hear about their kids, hobbies, or charities, then are you really even friends?

It's painful to listen to someone talk on and on about their kids lives, what type of food they're into these days, or whatever hobbies they devote their extra time in the day to. I mean, you can only stretch something superficial so far (unless you have professional experience or deep insights into each topic). Different strokes.

If you think that "your friends" family and hobbies and daily life are boring and superficial, they why are you friends with them? Doesn't seem like you are really friends if you don't care about them and what matters to them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly don’t understand why anyone would make babies with someone they don’t trust.

PP.

^ This is the sort of optimism I’m talking about.

Do you mean you’re optimistic when you make those babies? Or is it only the money for you?

Seriously, the having kids with someone is what ties you to them. You can always get a divorce, or another job, or a different house, but you can’t change who the father of your offspring is.

(DP.) The optimism that trust is never misplaced or broken. The optimism that we can always have perfect judgment or foresight about another person. You got lucky. So far.

It's not just "lucky", it has to do with being in a great relationship, where you actively discuss the future, your plans and goals and desires....if you pick someone who is a great partner it makes life so much easier.

Denial. You got lucky. I did too. But it wasn't because we were superior "pickers." Jesus.

It's not 100% lucky. Luck is only ~5% or less. Those of us in successful marriages with partners we fully trust got there by work, having meaningful discussions, being genuine and not fake "I'm in lust" relationship. You discuss goals in life, career goals, family goals, financial goals, etc. You move beyond just the physical/in lust relationship and if you do that you can tell a lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP and I haven't read the replies, but I'm giving you mine.

DH and I met in law school and we both started out in Big Law, then I got the consulting job of my dreams so I did that. We had no family nearby. When we decided to have kids, it became clear that something had to give or we'd have to nanny out our kids. I decided to SAH because my job involved too much travel, and even if I went part-time it wouldn't work.

In our situation, DH could really concentrate on work, and because of that, he became a much bigger deal than he otherwise would. It's the same old annoying story, that man who is wildly successful but supported by a woman (or women) who is running everything non-work-related in his life. This model works but yes, there is a bit of invisibility in the job. (my job).

We had some rough times (miscarriage, SN kid, cancer, DH depression at one point, parent illnesses and deaths, mentally unstable teen), but while I felt I was too rusty to re-enter my field, I never felt vulnerable financially partly because of the way we invested our money, but mostly because my DH is the kind of person that would not leave me or us out financially even if the marriage did not work out. He's not mean, hostile, or vindictive, so a bad situation would not trigger that response in him. So my point here is, since it is a financial risk for you, you have to be honest with yourself about your DH's character.

Also, I'll say something that really helped our marriage early on when we had a toddler and an infant. I stopped giving him "the second shift" --basically the honey-do list when he came home. That took a lot of pressure off him, and I think subconciously, made him want to come home, and he found ways to come home earlier. Basically, I just decided to create an environment where he'd want to come home. At work, he's got pressure and the work is never-ending, but also, he had a bunch of people fawning all over him, and both those things contribute to workaholism. While that can be intoxicating, it's still not as good as when your loved ones are excited to see you walk through the door.

We just celebrated our 25th anniversary and were at a hotel and the young staff kept asking us what the secret was. We hadn't reflected on that, so we discussed it at dinner. We decided that it was that we:
1) both considered ourselves lucky to have the other, and
2) both tried hard to be worthy of the other.
That mentality definitely requires adoption by both indivdiuals; it won't work one-sided. But if your marriage has that, then that's a good indicator that you can take the SAH leap of faith.

Good luck, OP!

I think this is a great response and would add one thing. The woman (and it’s nearly always the woman) really needs to be ok that the husband got it “have it all”. Professional success and accolades, intellectual stimulation, respect of professional peers and that network, and also the family and kids and all the rewards that brings later in life to have raised kids well in a healthy and happy home environment. Including adult kids who really respect the professional parent and seek that person out for that type of advice exclusively. If you can do this with zero resentment (very possible), it can work out well.

It's very possible. While I was a SAHP, my kids (college and beyond) all know that I had a great career/was highly educated and made the choice to stay home with the kids. So while they go to working parent for work advice most of the time, they still consult with me regarding that (and I haven't "worked for pay" in over 25 years). They still respect me and consider me more than just someone who "cooks and cleans"

Okay. I'm sure they respect you but anyone asking you for professional advice when you haven't worked in 25 years would be misguided. It is what it is. I don't think the idea is that your kids won't respect you. I think the idea is you have to be okay that you gave up a big part of life (career and career accomplishments) and your spouse didn't have to and in fact will likely reach goals and milestones professionally they wouldn't have otherwise because you gave up that part of your life. Meanwhile, they didn't give up much of anything in the long-run. I think for people who don't value that other big part of life (career), it's no big deal. Just a good thing to reflect on at the outset or when making the decision which is what OP is doing.

What's interesting is that if you went back and asked my HS friends, they would all be shocked. I was top of my class, went to a T10 university with 2 very diverse majors. I was a go getter, be the best, women can do anything (it was the 80s, we still had to fight for our place, especially in STEM), etc. Most would have expected me to be the person in a high powered job, laser focused on career. And I was like that up until I actually had kids. I had a spot reserved at the daycare center at my large company---daycare was actually on the first floor of the building I worked in---so you couldn't get a much better situation. then I realized that I actually wanted to be around for more with the kids---I loved every moment of it (well, 98%---there are always days when you think---being at work would be easier and more sane---especially at the 4pm witching hour with babies and toddlers).

I share great pride in the success of my spouse---they are at the top of their field--was a CEO by 40. Most of my spouses colleagues/business partners know me and don't see me as anything less because I was home with the kids---they all know my background. My spouse fully recognizes that they are where they are in life because of the support from me---they never had to stay home with a sick kid or not travel for work because of kids or me having to travel instead. They never had to leave work for a 6pm daycare pickup or spend 2 hours figuring out a backup nanny when they called in sick that day.

This disgusts me. I am glad that at my company, there are many senior leaders with working spouses who normalize leaving on time for a 6pm daycare pickup, or working from home with a sick kid. Better than a company ruled by workaholic man-children enabled by their housewives.

My partner worked at places where they could have easily done that. All have been small companies (under 5K employees) But the fact is their life is less stressful if they don't have to manage that. It allowed them to completely focus on work. Whether you like it or not, even at companies with "excellent family policies" the people without kids or family obligations to worry about simply have more time to focus on work.
Male or female, most will not make it to CEO/top executive positions without having a spouse or nanny who manages the Homefront well. Simply not possible when they are working 60-70 hour weeks---you are never really "not working"---if issues come up, you have to deal with it, and if company is global that can happen at all hours of the day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I always find it bizarre when women boast about how their husbands never stay home with sick kids so they can prioritize career. The women seem openly proud about how they’ve enabled their husbands to be bad fathers. I genuinely never know how to respond when I hear someone talking about that.

No, they are not "Bad fathers". The family has taken an approach to ensure the kids have involved parents around for the kids---for some that means one stays home and manages the Homefront. Our approach was if one of us was going to be traveling a lot for work, then it made sense to have stability of an at home parent. The working parent is more involved with the kids than many families I know where both parents work and don't travel much for work. Just because a parent is home at 6pm doesn't mean they are actively involved

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, and I say this as someone in a very long-term unusually happy marriage, it does seem like there is a huge element of luck involved. I think it’s foolish to think otherwise.

No, it's not "luck". It's a matter of actually getting to know your partner, having meaningful discussions about important things that matter for a future (finances, kids, careers, goals, etc) and being truthful and genuine. It's not that difficult.

(DP.) Do you really think women who face divorce just had worse judgment than you? Some of them for sure, but think about all the external pressures outside of our control that can do a marriage in: special needs kids, job loss, cancer/bad medical diagnosis, disability.

This just strikes me as deep denial/cognitive dissonance - both on events happening and the belief that your marriage could never fail. It's okay to just say hey, there's a risk, and this is the one I'm choosing to take.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always find it bizarre when women boast about how their husbands never stay home with sick kids so they can prioritize career. The women seem openly proud about how they’ve enabled their husbands to be bad fathers. I genuinely never know how to respond when I hear someone talking about that.

I think they're explaining more than bragging. It's hard to find a really high earning job that also allows for a lot of flexibility and unplanned remote work. They're not bad dads for letting the SAHM or default parent stay home with sick kids. This is usually what it takes to earn a lot of money.

I'm a little jealous and wish that I picked a high-earning husband and I could have stayed home with kids the whole time. Plus had money to outsource to make everyone's lives easier. Of all the combinations, high earning DH with SAHM seems like the best to me.

They are bad dads. Money doesn’t make up for a lack of parenting effort on their part. And this isn’t a universal high-earner thing. There are plenty of high-earning fathers who also take sick time to care for sick children, because it is a priority for them. The ones who don’t have made that choice about their parenting priorities.

You don’t want a hands-off, checked-out father for your children. Don’t wish for that. The money doesn’t make up for the emotional absence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP and I haven't read the replies, but I'm giving you mine.

DH and I met in law school and we both started out in Big Law, then I got the consulting job of my dreams so I did that. We had no family nearby. When we decided to have kids, it became clear that something had to give or we'd have to nanny out our kids. I decided to SAH because my job involved too much travel, and even if I went part-time it wouldn't work.

In our situation, DH could really concentrate on work, and because of that, he became a much bigger deal than he otherwise would. It's the same old annoying story, that man who is wildly successful but supported by a woman (or women) who is running everything non-work-related in his life. This model works but yes, there is a bit of invisibility in the job. (my job).

We had some rough times (miscarriage, SN kid, cancer, DH depression at one point, parent illnesses and deaths, mentally unstable teen), but while I felt I was too rusty to re-enter my field, I never felt vulnerable financially partly because of the way we invested our money, but mostly because my DH is the kind of person that would not leave me or us out financially even if the marriage did not work out. He's not mean, hostile, or vindictive, so a bad situation would not trigger that response in him. So my point here is, since it is a financial risk for you, you have to be honest with yourself about your DH's character.

Also, I'll say something that really helped our marriage early on when we had a toddler and an infant. I stopped giving him "the second shift" --basically the honey-do list when he came home. That took a lot of pressure off him, and I think subconciously, made him want to come home, and he found ways to come home earlier. Basically, I just decided to create an environment where he'd want to come home. At work, he's got pressure and the work is never-ending, but also, he had a bunch of people fawning all over him, and both those things contribute to workaholism. While that can be intoxicating, it's still not as good as when your loved ones are excited to see you walk through the door.

We just celebrated our 25th anniversary and were at a hotel and the young staff kept asking us what the secret was. We hadn't reflected on that, so we discussed it at dinner. We decided that it was that we:
1) both considered ourselves lucky to have the other, and
2) both tried hard to be worthy of the other.
That mentality definitely requires adoption by both indivdiuals; it won't work one-sided. But if your marriage has that, then that's a good indicator that you can take the SAH leap of faith.

Good luck, OP!

I think this is a great response and would add one thing. The woman (and it’s nearly always the woman) really needs to be ok that the husband got it “have it all”. Professional success and accolades, intellectual stimulation, respect of professional peers and that network, and also the family and kids and all the rewards that brings later in life to have raised kids well in a healthy and happy home environment. Including adult kids who really respect the professional parent and seek that person out for that type of advice exclusively. If you can do this with zero resentment (very possible), it can work out well.

It's very possible. While I was a SAHP, my kids (college and beyond) all know that I had a great career/was highly educated and made the choice to stay home with the kids. So while they go to working parent for work advice most of the time, they still consult with me regarding that (and I haven't "worked for pay" in over 25 years). They still respect me and consider me more than just someone who "cooks and cleans"

Okay. I'm sure they respect you but anyone asking you for professional advice when you haven't worked in 25 years would be misguided. It is what it is. I don't think the idea is that your kids won't respect you. I think the idea is you have to be okay that you gave up a big part of life (career and career accomplishments) and your spouse didn't have to and in fact will likely reach goals and milestones professionally they wouldn't have otherwise because you gave up that part of your life. Meanwhile, they didn't give up much of anything in the long-run. I think for people who don't value that other big part of life (career), it's no big deal. Just a good thing to reflect on at the outset or when making the decision which is what OP is doing.

What's interesting is that if you went back and asked my HS friends, they would all be shocked. I was top of my class, went to a T10 university with 2 very diverse majors. I was a go getter, be the best, women can do anything (it was the 80s, we still had to fight for our place, especially in STEM), etc. Most would have expected me to be the person in a high powered job, laser focused on career. And I was like that up until I actually had kids. I had a spot reserved at the daycare center at my large company---daycare was actually on the first floor of the building I worked in---so you couldn't get a much better situation. then I realized that I actually wanted to be around for more with the kids---I loved every moment of it (well, 98%---there are always days when you think---being at work would be easier and more sane---especially at the 4pm witching hour with babies and toddlers).

I share great pride in the success of my spouse---they are at the top of their field--was a CEO by 40. Most of my spouses colleagues/business partners know me and don't see me as anything less because I was home with the kids---they all know my background. My spouse fully recognizes that they are where they are in life because of the support from me---they never had to stay home with a sick kid or not travel for work because of kids or me having to travel instead. They never had to leave work for a 6pm daycare pickup or spend 2 hours figuring out a backup nanny when they called in sick that day.

This disgusts me. I am glad that at my company, there are many senior leaders with working spouses who normalize leaving on time for a 6pm daycare pickup, or working from home with a sick kid. Better than a company ruled by workaholic man-children enabled by their housewives.

My partner worked at places where they could have easily done that. All have been small companies (under 5K employees) But the fact is their life is less stressful if they don't have to manage that. It allowed them to completely focus on work. Whether you like it or not, even at companies with "excellent family policies" the people without kids or family obligations to worry about simply have more time to focus on work.
Male or female, most will not make it to CEO/top executive positions without having a spouse or nanny who manages the Homefront well. Simply not possible when they are working 60-70 hour weeks---you are never really "not working"---if issues come up, you have to deal with it, and if company is global that can happen at all hours of the day.

Sure, but they aren’t good parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always find it bizarre when women boast about how their husbands never stay home with sick kids so they can prioritize career. The women seem openly proud about how they’ve enabled their husbands to be bad fathers. I genuinely never know how to respond when I hear someone talking about that.

I think they're explaining more than bragging. It's hard to find a really high earning job that also allows for a lot of flexibility and unplanned remote work. They're not bad dads for letting the SAHM or default parent stay home with sick kids. This is usually what it takes to earn a lot of money.

I'm a little jealous and wish that I picked a high-earning husband and I could have stayed home with kids the whole time. Plus had money to outsource to make everyone's lives easier. Of all the combinations, high earning DH with SAHM seems like the best to me.

+1

Don't regret it for a minute. For a high earning job that often involves traveling 2 weeks out of a month and evening events (you don't get to the exec level and stay there without having dinners with customers and employees, etc), the best solution for us was to have a SAHP to ensure continuity for the kids and I wanted to be home with them. Sure I could have worked---I was making low 6 figures at 29 when I quit to SAHP, I could have paid for a nanny/outsourcing services but I preferred to be with my kids. Don't regret it at all