Kids vs. career: New top job with travel

[Anonymous]

OP here. Thanks everyone. The back and forth here is exactly what I have been doing in my head.

We have a good HHI and no debt and are able to comfortably meet all our financial goals on our current income.

The salary increase after tax would more than cover any incremental expenses due to nanny. time crunch issues etc.

DH is our main breadwinner pulling in 70% of our HHI. Hes in his late 40s . Due to job stress and job insecurity issues I am not sure how long he will continue to have his earning capacity. I can support our family on my current salary.

The new salary would put us 55% (DH)/45% (me) in terms of salary distribution. FWIW, DH has said he will scale back travel when he can to accommodate me.

So financially, we dont really need the money but its a big enough increase to make it worth it and insulate us from the vagaries of the job market.

On the kids front - the kids are 6 & 8, and (touchwood) doing well. Our nanny has been with us for 3 years and knows their schedule, after school activities and friends. She also does light housework laundry etc so all that will be under control.

However, there is no doubt that i am the primary parent and their emotional anchor. The travel schedule means that i will see less of them and that is what is holding me back.

Im interested in PPs who have said they know families who did this and it has always ended in disaster. Can you give more details. At my end I dont know any families who do this.

[Anonymous]

Just a thought- can you look for a higher paying position that requires less travel? I've been aggressive in my career but the main thing I've learned is that family is much more important. So, I would try to determine if this will improve your family or not. It sounds like your husband may need to pull back, which means that it would improve your family. Also, if he steps up more, that may also be good for the kids.

[Anonymous]

I would not do this. Agree with pp - when in doubt choose the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It comes down to what are you willing to miss. If you take the job, you'll miss many small and more than a few big moments with your kids. You will have a good relationship with your kids, but it will be different. If you don't take the job, you'll miss the challenges, triumphs, stimulation, reward, and recognition of a big job.

You can't have everything. So which set of missed opportunists hits you in your gut harder? Either answer is fine and your kids will be fine. Listen to yourself and not what others say to do or societal expectations tell you.

Agree with this. If you're a working parent, you'll miss some things--you have to figure out what proportion of missed experiences with your kids feels okay to you.

FWIW, my spouse's parents missed a lot due to demanding careers. They had a live-in nanny for their kids for many years. However, because they were at the top of their professions, they were able to pay fully to send three kids to excellent private schools, elite colleges, they have multiple homes, and have offered to pay for grandkids' private school. They missed out on a lot of moments, no doubt, but perhaps they made up for it somewhat by providing a more secure financial future for their kids and grandkids.

I have a friend who has this background. She is more materialistic and cares more about money than anyone I know. Her dad cared about financial success and titles. I would not want this for my kids. I am thankful I have memories of my dad playing catch with me. He may not be able to help me with a down payment but at the end of the day, after a certain amount of money, you are just buying more or shiner stuff...

PP here. Not sure one can attribute cause and effect. In case of my ILs, one of the kids is fairly materialistic and status-conscious. The other two (one of whom is my spouse) are not at all, despite impressive credentials. In fact, my spouse doesn't drive a fancy car or advertise any other markers of status, and is an introvert. Spouse also prefers not to have a nanny, whereas the status-conscious sib has a celebrity nanny. It's really hard to say whether any one set of parenting practices led to a specific outcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It comes down to what are you willing to miss. If you take the job, you'll miss many small and more than a few big moments with your kids. You will have a good relationship with your kids, but it will be different. If you don't take the job, you'll miss the challenges, triumphs, stimulation, reward, and recognition of a big job.

You can't have everything. So which set of missed opportunists hits you in your gut harder? Either answer is fine and your kids will be fine. Listen to yourself and not what others say to do or societal expectations tell you.

Agree with this. If you're a working parent, you'll miss some things--you have to figure out what proportion of missed experiences with your kids feels okay to you.

FWIW, my spouse's parents missed a lot due to demanding careers. They had a live-in nanny for their kids for many years. However, because they were at the top of their professions, they were able to pay fully to send three kids to excellent private schools, elite colleges, they have multiple homes, and have offered to pay for grandkids' private school. They missed out on a lot of moments, no doubt, but perhaps they made up for it somewhat by providing a more secure financial future for their kids and grandkids.

I have a friend who has this background. She is more materialistic and cares more about money than anyone I know. Her dad cared about financial success and titles. I would not want this for my kids. I am thankful I have memories of my dad playing catch with me. He may not be able to help me with a down payment but at the end of the day, after a certain amount of money, you are just buying more or shiner stuff...

PP here. Not sure one can attribute cause and effect. In case of my ILs, one of the kids is fairly materialistic and status-conscious. The other two (one of whom is my spouse) are not at all, despite impressive credentials. In fact, my spouse doesn't drive a fancy car or advertise any other markers of status, and is an introvert. Spouse also prefers not to have a nanny, whereas the status-conscious sib has a celebrity nanny. It's really hard to say whether any one set of parenting practices led to a specific outcome.

New poster here. This is very interesting outcome it's clear they are dealing with a lack of real emotional parental presence but their response is on the polar ends of the spectrum.

Curious to know which sibling is older your spouse or his sibling?

[Anonymous]

I would never ever consider that, and I am a LeanIn type with a senior job at a large media network. One rung higher and it would be a strain on my family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asking on DCUM may be asking to be judged ... most here wil be biased toward thinking you are not a "good mom" if you do the job. But lots of career-fulfilled moms are also better moms for it and figure out how to balance quality time and actually having a thriving successful career mom can benefit lots of kids and the research generally supports that many kids thrive from
More independence than this generation often has they will be more career successful themselves in the future

I don't think most of people would judge a woman for having a career. Or even a career involving travel. However, two parents with demanding jobs requiring frequent travel is a whole different situation. And that's what the OP is describing. There is no way in this world to make that good for young children. You can have the best nanny in the world and tons of family as back up. You're child is still going to spend the majority of his time away from his parents. Will the kids survive? Sure. Will you be happy? Maybe. I wouldn't. I know several families who have tried to make it work. It's been a disaster in every one of them.

09:19 here and I agree. It's not about judging someone because she isn't a stay at home, it's about recognizing the unique situation here - a husband who travels a lot, multiple young kids and a mom who is the self proclaimed primary parent who already has a comfortable income that could support the family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don't do it. Your kids are more important.

This
I actually would think less of you for considering it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Thanks everyone. The back and forth here is exactly what I have been doing in my head.

We have a good HHI and no debt and are able to comfortably meet all our financial goals on our current income.

The salary increase after tax would more than cover any incremental expenses due to nanny. time crunch issues etc.

DH is our main breadwinner pulling in 70% of our HHI. Hes in his late 40s . Due to job stress and job insecurity issues I am not sure how long he will continue to have his earning capacity. I can support our family on my current salary.

The new salary would put us 55% (DH)/45% (me) in terms of salary distribution. FWIW, DH has said he will scale back travel when he can to accommodate me.

So financially, we dont really need the money but its a big enough increase to make it worth it and insulate us from the vagaries of the job market.

On the kids front - the kids are 6 & 8, and (touchwood) doing well. Our nanny has been with us for 3 years and knows their schedule, after school activities and friends. She also does light housework laundry etc so all that will be under control.

However, there is no doubt that i am the primary parent and their emotional anchor. The travel schedule means that i will see less of them and that is what is holding me back.

Im interested in PPs who have said they know families who did this and it has always ended in disaster. Can you give more details. At my end I dont know any families who do this.

I've do it. I have friends who do it. MY mom did it. And it's not a 'disaster' but does require mommy jenga to make the most of your time and attention/focus. But on DCUM you are going to get the bias not to do it that you seem to be looking for, so if that's the case, don't do it.

[Anonymous]

Im interested in PPs who have said they know families who did this and it has always ended in disaster. Can you give more details. At my end I dont know any families who do this.

We both leaned in with our jobs and it ended in disaster (sort of). DH both commuted to work about an hour plus traveled frequently and I had a high level DC type job about 10 minutes from our house. We were well supported with child care but never had a down moment. Eventually the arrangements took a severe toll on my health. That was the immediate crisis that forced us to cut back. Emotionally righting our kids took some time and counseling too. Some people do make it work, and have great families, I just didn't have the stamina and we had too many kids (three kids, I think it would be easier to work like that and meet the needs of one child, maybe 2). There is a reason why you don't know many families who do this -- it is very hard. We were working, or gone, well over 100 hours a week between the two of us and lasted at that pace for about 3 years.

[Anonymous]

PP here. We were working (not always gone) over 100 hours a week between the two of us. Someone was always home between 6:30 to bedtime but then the parent home often went back to work in our home office. The kids didn't see DH 2 or 3 weeknights each week because of travel or work.

[Anonymous]

What will the after school activities look like in a year or two? Having one nanny and no other support and two kids needing to be different places could be tough with field trips, sick days, extracurriculars, volunteering, etc. What have you done in that regard and what do you envision? That's how the whole answer would be for me...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if I read you right, every other week the kids will be with the nanny for 3 days & nights while both you and DH are on the road? Is that tenable? (Answer: no, unless you have Grandma living with you, or some other arrangement you haven't mentioned).

Will DH quit or scale back if you take this?

Well - some of the travel will be day trips and I have told the company that the weeks DH is travelling I can only do day trips and not overnight. Right now they are making all the right noises about working with me on this.

Yes DH has offered to scale back and work with me on this.

We might have the odd occasion when the nanny will have to stay over.

But its still a lot of travel. No family locally but have some good friends who I can call on in a pinch.

If he is serious about this and is realistic and willing to take on the task of being the default parent (for an extended time- not just a month or two) and your nanny can work flexible hours on the fly, it can work. I have a backup overnight nanny on call too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Thanks everyone. The back and forth here is exactly what I have been doing in my head.

We have a good HHI and no debt and are able to comfortably meet all our financial goals on our current income.

The salary increase after tax would more than cover any incremental expenses due to nanny. time crunch issues etc.

DH is our main breadwinner pulling in 70% of our HHI. Hes in his late 40s . Due to job stress and job insecurity issues I am not sure how long he will continue to have his earning capacity. I can support our family on my current salary.

The new salary would put us 55% (DH)/45% (me) in terms of salary distribution. FWIW, DH has said he will scale back travel when he can to accommodate me.

So financially, we dont really need the money but its a big enough increase to make it worth it and insulate us from the vagaries of the job market.

On the kids front - the kids are 6 & 8, and (touchwood) doing well. Our nanny has been with us for 3 years and knows their schedule, after school activities and friends. She also does light housework laundry etc so all that will be under control.

However, there is no doubt that i am the primary parent and their emotional anchor. The travel schedule means that i will see less of them and that is what is holding me back.

Im interested in PPs who have said they know families who did this and it has always ended in disaster. Can you give more details. At my end I dont know any families who do this.

The key to making this work is your DH's willingness to be the primary parent during the weeks that he does not travel. He will have to get home at a reasonable time to do the dinner, homework, bedtime routines. You can schedule your overnight travel on the other weeks. Keeping the calendar is also key. You will have to set a schedule to determine whose travel schedule comes first on which week. Having a reliable nanny that can be very flexible is also important. Has your DH ever had to stay home for a sick child (the first day) or come home early to pickup a sick child? What is his schedule like during the weeks when he is at home? How does he do when he has to change up his schedule on the fly?

Elementary school is a sweet spot as their are still plenty of after school activities and before/after care options around. You have a few years to iron things out before you hit MS. At that time, your DH may need to take his turn to the the primary parent on an ongoing basis. Especially if his career is winding down and yours is heating up (that could be a difficult thing for the both of you).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It comes down to what are you willing to miss. If you take the job, you'll miss many small and more than a few big moments with your kids. You will have a good relationship with your kids, but it will be different. If you don't take the job, you'll miss the challenges, triumphs, stimulation, reward, and recognition of a big job.

You can't have everything. So which set of missed opportunists hits you in your gut harder? Either answer is fine and your kids will be fine. Listen to yourself and not what others say to do or societal expectations tell you.

Agree with this. If you're a working parent, you'll miss some things--you have to figure out what proportion of missed experiences with your kids feels okay to you.

FWIW, my spouse's parents missed a lot due to demanding careers. They had a live-in nanny for their kids for many years. However, because they were at the top of their professions, they were able to pay fully to send three kids to excellent private schools, elite colleges, they have multiple homes, and have offered to pay for grandkids' private school. They missed out on a lot of moments, no doubt, but perhaps they made up for it somewhat by providing a more secure financial future for their kids and grandkids.

I have a friend who has this background. She is more materialistic and cares more about money than anyone I know. Her dad cared about financial success and titles. I would not want this for my kids. I am thankful I have memories of my dad playing catch with me. He may not be able to help me with a down payment but at the end of the day, after a certain amount of money, you are just buying more or shiner stuff...

PP here. Not sure one can attribute cause and effect. In case of my ILs, one of the kids is fairly materialistic and status-conscious. The other two (one of whom is my spouse) are not at all, despite impressive credentials. In fact, my spouse doesn't drive a fancy car or advertise any other markers of status, and is an introvert. Spouse also prefers not to have a nanny, whereas the status-conscious sib has a celebrity nanny. It's really hard to say whether any one set of parenting practices led to a specific outcome.

New poster here. This is very interesting outcome it's clear they are dealing with a lack of real emotional parental presence but their response is on the polar ends of the spectrum.

Curious to know which sibling is older your spouse or his sibling?

PP again. I would again say it's tough to attribute cause and effect. I doubt that parenting in this manner "caused" the differences I've noted in spouse and sibs. They seem to be wired differently from a young age. The differences in their personalities predated the really intense work schedules. I think we as humans are wired to try to notice patterns and make sense of our lives, but I really don't think in this case anyone could say with certainty that my ILs' intense work schedules led directly to the differences in their kids' current personalities, values, and lifestyles. The only thing I can say with certainty is that their family is a lot more financially secure than they would've been if they'd leaned out.