Would you turn down a 200k job to be a SAHM?

[Anonymous]

It's really hard on the family to have both parents have a demanding, inflexible, travel-required job. But lots of people do it, usually with 1 or 2 nannies and cleaning crew. You really have to make choices and priorities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Try it. We are in a similar financial situation and I work 30 hours a week for 155k. We have three kids, 5, 7 and 1. We have a nanny and it works well. You can afford to outsource all cleaning, etc, so weekends and evenings are true quality time. I get home at 5 and the big kids get home at 4, so I am not missing too much. It is worth 155K, IMO.

Not the same. You work 30 hours. She is talking about working 50. I'm guessing 30 hours a week for $155 would be a no-brainier for OP at this point.

Not PP but most of us that work those hours for that type of pay did not walk in the door doing that, you prove yourself, you build a good reputation and then you work it out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to be the odd one out, but I'd say -- take it IF DH is supportive. That means that he realizes that yours is the new job and thus you cannot be the one to deal with dr's appointments and kid events for a while until your bosses get to know you -- so either he deals or you find a super reliable nanny.

It's hard for a SAHM to get back into the work force as substantially as you'd be getting back in. Worst case scenario -- if you get back in, are unhappy, your kids are unhappy or it just doesn't work -- you can always quit and know that that type of job/lifestyle isn't for you. As PP suggested, if your bosses end up liking you enough, you could end up with a flexible arrangement or a reduced travel arrangement. If you don't take it, you'll wonder if you could have made it work.

I agree with this. The only caveat I would add is to consider now the potential long term impact of quitting this job after a short period if you end up being unhappy with the situation compared with not having taken it in the first place.

[Anonymous]

I have been in a similar situation and ended up leaving my job. I hated having both DH and I away at the same time even though I trusted out nanny and often able to get my MIL to stay over too. It was just too much stress for me and I realized I could not sufficiently be there for my kids with this type of work schedule.

[Anonymous]

I quit a job making close to $300k (senior assoc in biglaw) and am staying at home. It got to be way too much to have a husband with a very demanding career and travel. Our lives were basically unraveling and there wasn't time for anything; we were always running around trying to patch everything together. If I go back to work, it will be to a much less demanding job - something with no travel and set hours. It is very hard for me to have gone from having a fantastic well-paid, respected career, to not working, but I think it is best for our family and that is my priority.

Good luck with your decision. It is great to have choices, but these are tough decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why don't I believe this?

+1

+2. Sounds like OP saw an opportunity for a humblebrag. Getting really tired of these posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why don't I believe this?

+1

+2. Sounds like OP saw an opportunity for a humblebrag. Getting really tired of these posts.

Why don't you believe it? There are sooooo many people around here who make that much. And if your husband makes $350k, you are more likely to make a lot yourself.

[Anonymous]

Absolutely not.

Our household runs optimally for everyone when DH and I work a maximum of 60 hours combined. Right now that is 40 hrs for DH and 20 hrs for me, both with minimal travel.

My advice is to keep looking for something part time / project or contract based / worst case, 40 hrs with no travel.

To me, given your family's net worth and DH's income, the incremental value of the extra $$$ you'd earn in that full- job vs a part time job is not worth it at this stage. After taxes and nanny costs, it's surprisingly little.

On the other hand, the marginal value of those 20-50 hours of your time is huge. In our house, that's the difference between a calm and happy home environment and a stressed, rushed, ball-dropping home environment.
GL

[Anonymous]

To the no believers: I'm another former biglaw partner who walked away from much more money to SAH. After years and years running the hamster wheel, I'm loving SAH. DH and kids are thrilled too.

[Anonymous]

No, I wouldn't.
My husband works 50+ hours in a demanding job and I work 30 from home.
Our kids are 7, 7, 4 and we often feel like we're just keeping all the balls in the air.

I think it's easier to have two parents work very demanding jobs and outsource childcare with 1 or 2 nannies, etc when the kids are really young.
Yours are almost school aged and will start to notice when they are always with the nanny and not either parent.
In my experience of now having 2 second graders, you can often tell when school aged kids never see their parents and instead spend most of their waking hours with a nanny.
9 times out of 10, the "difficult" kids in our NW DC school are products of this type of arrangement.
Bottom line, infants/todders don't care who is holding them/feeding them/keeping them safe. School aged kids definitely notice who is (or is not) on the sidelines, doing home work with them, etc.

[Anonymous]

My DH and I each work about 50 hours (sometimes I work a lot more). It's hard on our kids, and harder our marriage, and we get virtually no downtime. But we also don't have any household help, and don't have a nanny.

[Anonymous]

I wouldn't go back at 50 hours plus travel unless you really LOVE the work and you have family to help on overnights when you and DH are both Out of town.

I would look for something less extreme. Or just enjoy being a SAHM to older kids? I know most people want to SAH with their babies but I personally think it would be more enjoyable for MOM (or dad) to do it with older kids.

[Anonymous]

Yes, I would turn it down. What are your DH's thoughts? That would definitely play into my decision. Money isn't everything.

[Anonymous]

If there is no flexibility and lots of travel, I would turn it down. This is coming from someone who makes more than $200K and has occasional travel and lots of flexibility.

It also depends in part on how secure you and your husband feel about his long-term earning potential. If his job is on the rocks, it is a different analysis.

[Anonymous]

I recently went back to work and realized that at least one parent has to have a regular 40 hour job. I switched from a 60 hour work week pre baby to this new 40 hour job post baby, but even with those relatively short hours I am barely making it work. Maybe the first month is tough, but I'm considering going part time. Only when I went back to work did I realize how much quality time I enjoyed with my baby for a year. With your net worth and husband's income, I would SAH.