Be honest- what do you think about women who are content to be just wives and mothers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll be honest since you requested it OP.

I have a low opinion of parents who do not even want to be the primary caregiver for their children when they are infants and toddlers. I think prioritizing material things and one's own career and self-fulfillment is selfish and indicates a lack of understanding of how important it is for young children to spend most of their time with someone who loves them completely and unconditionally.

A little off of your topic but completely relevant.

When I’m meeting someone who doesn’t work outside the house I am usually bracing for a comment like this, since they are handed out freely with out care for any of the reasons some one might have chosen to work. I have no other thoughts about their choices- how would I know better for them than they do for themselves?

What if I love my work and feel passionately about it and what it does for society, and chose to work even if I don't 'have' to -- do you think those people are less-than parents, too?

I don’t think SAHMs are leaving jobs like this, they’re leaving dead-end menial work. People who are happy and accommodated and valued stay.

I left my career in which I was happy, accommodated, valued, and relatively highly paid. But I couldn’t handle the lifestyle anymore of juggling that career while having three kids, one in daycare and two in before and after care, not to mention the chaos of summer camps and school breaks and snow days. We were all stressed and no one was happy at home. I miss my job sometimes, but my kids are so much happier that so far it’s been worth the sacrifice. I can always go back to work later, when we can all handle it better.

If things like snow days and school breaks are chaos then no, you’re not being accommodated. Some jobs just can’t— ER docs, nurses, etc.— but in 2024 a job that is done at a desk isn’t a matter of life and death, and a couple snow days per winter and breaks known about a year in advance should pose 0 hardship for a well organized employer. The other kind is who people leave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand people who have children but don't have any interest in raising them. What's the point of having kids if you don't want to take care of them? Honest question.

Good Lord. Do you think the mom who has a kid in first grade and a preschooler is raising the preschooler but not the first grader? You don't have to be around your kids all the time to raise them.

There's still a lot to do while they're in school that I had to do on the fly because I had to work -- laundry, shopping, preparing dinner, planning ahead etc. I'm sure I could have filled my days taking care of a lot of things having to do with family even if they weren't there all day. I wish I could have done that.

[Anonymous]

I've read every post on this thread. Still my answer hasn't changed. I have no thoughts or comments about it, one way or another. Lucky them, I guess?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll be honest since you requested it OP.

I have a low opinion of parents who do not even want to be the primary caregiver for their children when they are infants and toddlers. I think prioritizing material things and one's own career and self-fulfillment is selfish and indicates a lack of understanding of how important it is for young children to spend most of their time with someone who loves them completely and unconditionally.

A little off of your topic but completely relevant.

When I’m meeting someone who doesn’t work outside the house I am usually bracing for a comment like this, since they are handed out freely with out care for any of the reasons some one might have chosen to work. I have no other thoughts about their choices- how would I know better for them than they do for themselves?

What if I love my work and feel passionately about it and what it does for society, and chose to work even if I don't 'have' to -- do you think those people are less-than parents, too?

I don’t think SAHMs are leaving jobs like this, they’re leaving dead-end menial work. People who are happy and accommodated and valued stay.

I left my career in which I was happy, accommodated, valued, and relatively highly paid. But I couldn’t handle the lifestyle anymore of juggling that career while having three kids, one in daycare and two in before and after care, not to mention the chaos of summer camps and school breaks and snow days. We were all stressed and no one was happy at home. I miss my job sometimes, but my kids are so much happier that so far it’s been worth the sacrifice. I can always go back to work later, when we can all handle it better.

If things like snow days and school breaks are chaos then no, you’re not being accommodated. Some jobs just can’t— ER docs, nurses, etc.— but in 2024 a job that is done at a desk isn’t a matter of life and death, and a couple snow days per winter and breaks known about a year in advance should pose 0 hardship for a well organized employer. The other kind is who people leave.

Hmmm… I am in a better position than you to understand and speak to how I was treated by my employer. Have you never had a presentation or important meeting the same day as your spouse, and then whoops now a kid is sick or it’s a snow day! And school breaks add up to MONTHS out of the year (you know summer break is a thing right? and planning for, booking, and then doing the daily drop off and pick ups can get pretty complicated, especially with multiple kids)… You’re being ridiculous.

The reality is: It can be really hard to have two full time working parents and multiple kids, even (gasp!) school age kids! I am not ashamed to admit that I reached a point where I just couldn’t handle it all anymore, and more importantly, I didn’t WANT to handle it all anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish I could afford to stay home and be a mother and wife. Instead, I’m paying someone else to spend whole days with my child while I work at a career that is meaningless to me.

Being a mother is not “just” being a mother. People can love being a mother the same way another woman might love being a lawyer. Parents can prioritize being present for their kids over spending most of their time focused on furthering their career or just earning a paycheck.

But can't you do both? It' a false choice at times. Not always, but at times.

I heard someone use the term "full time mother' the other day -- I know what they meant, but are we not all full time mothers?

DP but are some of you being deliberately obtuse? OBVIOUSLY if someone else is caring for your child while you are at work, you are not doing as much “mothering” as a mother who cares for her child ALL THE TIME. So IN CONTEXT, NO! You are NOT a “full-time mother” (which as you said you know what they MEANT when they used this term).

This is not a value judgement, it is merely a fact.

(I have been both WOHM and SAHM FWIW)

So…full time mothering is something that only exists before age 5?

Once again, in context, when someone says “full time mother” they simply mean they’re actually, physically present taking care of their own kids. My mother is still my mother and will be until one of us dies, but I certainly wouldn’t describe her as a “full-time mother”.

So I ask again, are you being deliberately obtuse? Or can you really not wrap your brain around this concept?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do the people judging women have a problem with men who stay home?

Honestly, not as much, because it's less typical, which means to me that it's less likely they "just did it" because they were socially programmed to believe this was their role. They really thought about it and had to make a conscious move (in most cases, I know there are exceptions). I think I am more prone to thinking they are following their real passion.

I am realizing I also tend to think that the paid work men do tends to be more about "making a paycheck to support my family," which is fine and good, but tends to be more about producing widgets and being a cog in a machine versus actually contributing toward the world. There's some fact-based reason; women tend to be more in helping professions and non profit roles.

Wow. I like the honesty, but boy is this offensive!

+1! So much built in misogyny here. When men choose to stay home they must have thought about it and made a smart choice, unlike women who are clearly just doing what someone told them to do. Women have to go work in helping/caring professions because the world needs more of that, so it's selfish for them to stay home and care for their own families -- they need to do it for everyone!

Like where to even start, this is offensive no matter what your work/parenting situation is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll be honest since you requested it OP.

I have a low opinion of parents who do not even want to be the primary caregiver for their children when they are infants and toddlers. I think prioritizing material things and one's own career and self-fulfillment is selfish and indicates a lack of understanding of how important it is for young children to spend most of their time with someone who loves them completely and unconditionally.

A little off of your topic but completely relevant.

When I’m meeting someone who doesn’t work outside the house I am usually bracing for a comment like this, since they are handed out freely with out care for any of the reasons some one might have chosen to work. I have no other thoughts about their choices- how would I know better for them than they do for themselves?

What if I love my work and feel passionately about it and what it does for society, and chose to work even if I don't 'have' to -- do you think those people are less-than parents, too?

I don’t think SAHMs are leaving jobs like this, they’re leaving dead-end menial work. People who are happy and accommodated and valued stay.

Sure, but people are saying that they should, "I have a low opinion of parents who do not even want to be the primary caregiver for their children when they are infants and toddlers. I think prioritizing material things and one's own career and self-fulfillment is selfish and indicates a lack of understanding of how important it is for young children to spend most of their time with someone who loves them completely and unconditionally."

Yes but that’s what someone is saying. People say all kinds of things. The above sentence likely fills someone with a warmer feeling of superiority than saying “I wasn’t getting much out of my career, and I get a lot out of being home”. People aren’t always comfortable admitting they weren’t really getting much because it acknowledges that others were.

This works both ways though (I mean the judgment).

I did leave my job after I had a baby because it wasn't fulfilling and I realized it would be more fulfilling to be home. My job wasn't menial (SME with a decent amount of seniority) but I also wasn't in charge, had to deal with a lot of office politics/corporate BS, and was kind of burnt out. But I would tell that to people and they'd openly judge me for it. Like I remember saying this to a friend of a friend who asked if I'd been planning to become a SAHM ("No, but after my daughter was born, I just realized staying home with her was more appealing to me at this point in time than staying in my job -- I was ready for a change") and her response? "I think I'm honestly too smart to ever feel that way, my brain just could not be engaged enough staying home with a baby." Like literally this woman called me stupid to my face because I chose to quit a pretty decent job to stay home with my baby. That's the worst example but I remember getting a lot of comments like that during that time. Being a SAHM is pretty unusually in my social circles, so I went out of my way to frame it so people understood I didn't judge any woman for working instead of staying home (and still don't, it's what I always planned to do and it shocked me when I decided to do something else instead). But wow were some people rude to me about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish I could afford to stay home and be a mother and wife. Instead, I’m paying someone else to spend whole days with my child while I work at a career that is meaningless to me.

Being a mother is not “just” being a mother. People can love being a mother the same way another woman might love being a lawyer. Parents can prioritize being present for their kids over spending most of their time focused on furthering their career or just earning a paycheck.

But can't you do both? It' a false choice at times. Not always, but at times.

I heard someone use the term "full time mother' the other day -- I know what they meant, but are we not all full time mothers?

DP but are some of you being deliberately obtuse? OBVIOUSLY if someone else is caring for your child while you are at work, you are not doing as much “mothering” as a mother who cares for her child ALL THE TIME. So IN CONTEXT, NO! You are NOT a “full-time mother” (which as you said you know what they MEANT when they used this term).

This is not a value judgement, it is merely a fact.

(I have been both WOHM and SAHM FWIW)

So…full time mothering is something that only exists before age 5?

Once again, in context, when someone says “full time mother” they simply mean they’re actually, physically present taking care of their own kids. My mother is still my mother and will be until one of us dies, but I certainly wouldn’t describe her as a “full-time mother”.

So I ask again, are you being deliberately obtuse? Or can you really not wrap your brain around this concept?

+1, people are just looking for a reason to be mad about this. If a working parent would have to pay someone a full-time salary to do it, then it's a full-time job. So yes, a SAHM to kids who are not in school all day is a full-time mom in a way that I, a working mom with a school age child, am not. This is not offensive or some kind of insult to working mothers, it's someone trying to accurately describe what their life looks like.

This is equally annoying as when a SAHM gets mad about the phrase "working mother" because "aren't we all working?" Like yes, of course we are, I appreciate everyone's labor here, I'm just using a short hand to convey the fact that I have a paid job I do during the day instead of being a full-time mom.

Getting offended over unintentional semantics is exhausting!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll be honest since you requested it OP.

I have a low opinion of parents who do not even want to be the primary caregiver for their children when they are infants and toddlers. I think prioritizing material things and one's own career and self-fulfillment is selfish and indicates a lack of understanding of how important it is for young children to spend most of their time with someone who loves them completely and unconditionally.

A little off of your topic but completely relevant.

When I’m meeting someone who doesn’t work outside the house I am usually bracing for a comment like this, since they are handed out freely with out care for any of the reasons some one might have chosen to work. I have no other thoughts about their choices- how would I know better for them than they do for themselves?

What if I love my work and feel passionately about it and what it does for society, and chose to work even if I don't 'have' to -- do you think those people are less-than parents, too?

I don’t think SAHMs are leaving jobs like this, they’re leaving dead-end menial work. People who are happy and accommodated and valued stay.

I left my career in which I was happy, accommodated, valued, and relatively highly paid. But I couldn’t handle the lifestyle anymore of juggling that career while having three kids, one in daycare and two in before and after care, not to mention the chaos of summer camps and school breaks and snow days. We were all stressed and no one was happy at home. I miss my job sometimes, but my kids are so much happier that so far it’s been worth the sacrifice. I can always go back to work later, when we can all handle it better.

If things like snow days and school breaks are chaos then no, you’re not being accommodated. Some jobs just can’t— ER docs, nurses, etc.— but in 2024 a job that is done at a desk isn’t a matter of life and death, and a couple snow days per winter and breaks known about a year in advance should pose 0 hardship for a well organized employer. The other kind is who people leave.

Hmmm… I am in a better position than you to understand and speak to how I was treated by my employer. Have you never had a presentation or important meeting the same day as your spouse, and then whoops now a kid is sick or it’s a snow day! And school breaks add up to MONTHS out of the year (you know summer break is a thing right? and planning for, booking, and then doing the daily drop off and pick ups can get pretty complicated, especially with multiple kids)… You’re being ridiculous.

The reality is: It can be really hard to have two full time working parents and multiple kids, even (gasp!) school age kids! I am not ashamed to admit that I reached a point where I just couldn’t handle it all anymore, and more importantly, I didn’t WANT to handle it all anymore.

I am honestly jealous of women who have jobs where they could just drop everything for a snow day or if their kid was sick. The jobs I have had have not allowed for that flexibility. There is a certain expectation in some jobs that you are always available. That is why I left what looked like a good job on paper to stay home with my kids. I feel very fortunate I was able to do that. I don’t regret it for a second. I know if I had stayed on the path I was on, my kids would have suffered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll be honest since you requested it OP.

I have a low opinion of parents who do not even want to be the primary caregiver for their children when they are infants and toddlers. I think prioritizing material things and one's own career and self-fulfillment is selfish and indicates a lack of understanding of how important it is for young children to spend most of their time with someone who loves them completely and unconditionally.

A little off of your topic but completely relevant.

When I’m meeting someone who doesn’t work outside the house I am usually bracing for a comment like this, since they are handed out freely with out care for any of the reasons some one might have chosen to work. I have no other thoughts about their choices- how would I know better for them than they do for themselves?

What if I love my work and feel passionately about it and what it does for society, and chose to work even if I don't 'have' to -- do you think those people are less-than parents, too?

I don’t think SAHMs are leaving jobs like this, they’re leaving dead-end menial work. People who are happy and accommodated and valued stay.

I left my career in which I was happy, accommodated, valued, and relatively highly paid. But I couldn’t handle the lifestyle anymore of juggling that career while having three kids, one in daycare and two in before and after care, not to mention the chaos of summer camps and school breaks and snow days. We were all stressed and no one was happy at home. I miss my job sometimes, but my kids are so much happier that so far it’s been worth the sacrifice. I can always go back to work later, when we can all handle it better.

If things like snow days and school breaks are chaos then no, you’re not being accommodated. Some jobs just can’t— ER docs, nurses, etc.— but in 2024 a job that is done at a desk isn’t a matter of life and death, and a couple snow days per winter and breaks known about a year in advance should pose 0 hardship for a well organized employer. The other kind is who people leave.

Hmmm… I am in a better position than you to understand and speak to how I was treated by my employer. Have you never had a presentation or important meeting the same day as your spouse, and then whoops now a kid is sick or it’s a snow day! And school breaks add up to MONTHS out of the year (you know summer break is a thing right? and planning for, booking, and then doing the daily drop off and pick ups can get pretty complicated, especially with multiple kids)… You’re being ridiculous.

The reality is: It can be really hard to have two full time working parents and multiple kids, even (gasp!) school age kids! I am not ashamed to admit that I reached a point where I just couldn’t handle it all anymore, and more importantly, I didn’t WANT to handle it all anymore.

DP and I don't understand your reaction here. Read the post again. It sounds to me like they are criticizing your old employer, not you. Saying that if they (your employer) were truly accommodating, you wouldn't have felt that things like snow days caused chaos.

I continue to work full-time but agree that kids' schedules cause a lot of stress when you are trying to balance everything. The truth is that there are vanishingly few employers in the US who are truly family friendly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish I could afford to stay home and be a mother and wife. Instead, I’m paying someone else to spend whole days with my child while I work at a career that is meaningless to me.

Being a mother is not “just” being a mother. People can love being a mother the same way another woman might love being a lawyer. Parents can prioritize being present for their kids over spending most of their time focused on furthering their career or just earning a paycheck.

But can't you do both? It' a false choice at times. Not always, but at times.

I heard someone use the term "full time mother' the other day -- I know what they meant, but are we not all full time mothers?

DP but are some of you being deliberately obtuse? OBVIOUSLY if someone else is caring for your child while you are at work, you are not doing as much “mothering” as a mother who cares for her child ALL THE TIME. So IN CONTEXT, NO! You are NOT a “full-time mother” (which as you said you know what they MEANT when they used this term).

This is not a value judgement, it is merely a fact.

(I have been both WOHM and SAHM FWIW)

So…full time mothering is something that only exists before age 5?

Once again, in context, when someone says “full time mother” they simply mean they’re actually, physically present taking care of their own kids. My mother is still my mother and will be until one of us dies, but I certainly wouldn’t describe her as a “full-time mother”.

So I ask again, are you being deliberately obtuse? Or can you really not wrap your brain around this concept?

+1, people are just looking for a reason to be mad about this. If a working parent would have to pay someone a full-time salary to do it, then it's a full-time job. So yes, a SAHM to kids who are not in school all day is a full-time mom in a way that I, a working mom with a school age child, am not. This is not offensive or some kind of insult to working mothers, it's someone trying to accurately describe what their life looks like.

This is equally annoying as when a SAHM gets mad about the phrase "working mother" because "aren't we all working?" Like yes, of course we are, I appreciate everyone's labor here, I'm just using a short hand to convey the fact that I have a paid job I do during the day instead of being a full-time mom.

Getting offended over unintentional semantics is exhausting!

Your last line summarizes much of the inanity of these mommy-war threads. The same BS over and over again. All this ridiculous barb-throwing at each other, when we should be uniting to fight for better, more family-friendly policies for working parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish I could afford to stay home and be a mother and wife. Instead, I’m paying someone else to spend whole days with my child while I work at a career that is meaningless to me.

Being a mother is not “just” being a mother. People can love being a mother the same way another woman might love being a lawyer. Parents can prioritize being present for their kids over spending most of their time focused on furthering their career or just earning a paycheck.

But can't you do both? It' a false choice at times. Not always, but at times.

I heard someone use the term "full time mother' the other day -- I know what they meant, but are we not all full time mothers?

DP but are some of you being deliberately obtuse? OBVIOUSLY if someone else is caring for your child while you are at work, you are not doing as much “mothering” as a mother who cares for her child ALL THE TIME. So IN CONTEXT, NO! You are NOT a “full-time mother” (which as you said you know what they MEANT when they used this term).

This is not a value judgement, it is merely a fact.

(I have been both WOHM and SAHM FWIW)

So…full time mothering is something that only exists before age 5?

Once again, in context, when someone says “full time mother” they simply mean they’re actually, physically present taking care of their own kids. My mother is still my mother and will be until one of us dies, but I certainly wouldn’t describe her as a “full-time mother”.

So I ask again, are you being deliberately obtuse? Or can you really not wrap your brain around this concept?

+1, people are just looking for a reason to be mad about this. If a working parent would have to pay someone a full-time salary to do it, then it's a full-time job. So yes, a SAHM to kids who are not in school all day is a full-time mom in a way that I, a working mom with a school age child, am not. This is not offensive or some kind of insult to working mothers, it's someone trying to accurately describe what their life looks like.

This is equally annoying as when a SAHM gets mad about the phrase "working mother" because "aren't we all working?" Like yes, of course we are, I appreciate everyone's labor here, I'm just using a short hand to convey the fact that I have a paid job I do during the day instead of being a full-time mom.

Getting offended over unintentional semantics is exhausting!

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish I could afford to stay home and be a mother and wife. Instead, I’m paying someone else to spend whole days with my child while I work at a career that is meaningless to me.

Being a mother is not “just” being a mother. People can love being a mother the same way another woman might love being a lawyer. Parents can prioritize being present for their kids over spending most of their time focused on furthering their career or just earning a paycheck.

But can't you do both? It' a false choice at times. Not always, but at times.

I heard someone use the term "full time mother' the other day -- I know what they meant, but are we not all full time mothers?

DP but are some of you being deliberately obtuse? OBVIOUSLY if someone else is caring for your child while you are at work, you are not doing as much “mothering” as a mother who cares for her child ALL THE TIME. So IN CONTEXT, NO! You are NOT a “full-time mother” (which as you said you know what they MEANT when they used this term).

This is not a value judgement, it is merely a fact.

(I have been both WOHM and SAHM FWIW)

Obviously I know what they mean by the term. I just find it -- to precious and a bit insulting

[Anonymous]

I am kind of jealous. I think in many ways they have a much easier life because is simpler.

I somewhat enjoy my career but mostly view it as an ends to a mean. I find watching young children to be tedious and boring. Working is easier and I get paid.

My interests include working out, skiing, hiking, traveling, socializing and other activities. I don’t find playing with young kids to be fun. I could enjoy being a 1950s housewife where the kids play outside while mom keeps house. But today’s SAHM who is a glorified nanny? No thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll be honest since you requested it OP.

I have a low opinion of parents who do not even want to be the primary caregiver for their children when they are infants and toddlers. I think prioritizing material things and one's own career and self-fulfillment is selfish and indicates a lack of understanding of how important it is for young children to spend most of their time with someone who loves them completely and unconditionally.

A little off of your topic but completely relevant.

When I’m meeting someone who doesn’t work outside the house I am usually bracing for a comment like this, since they are handed out freely with out care for any of the reasons some one might have chosen to work. I have no other thoughts about their choices- how would I know better for them than they do for themselves?

What if I love my work and feel passionately about it and what it does for society, and chose to work even if I don't 'have' to -- do you think those people are less-than parents, too?

I don’t think SAHMs are leaving jobs like this, they’re leaving dead-end menial work. People who are happy and accommodated and valued stay.

I left my career in which I was happy, accommodated, valued, and relatively highly paid. But I couldn’t handle the lifestyle anymore of juggling that career while having three kids, one in daycare and two in before and after care, not to mention the chaos of summer camps and school breaks and snow days. We were all stressed and no one was happy at home. I miss my job sometimes, but my kids are so much happier that so far it’s been worth the sacrifice. I can always go back to work later, when we can all handle it better.

If things like snow days and school breaks are chaos then no, you’re not being accommodated. Some jobs just can’t— ER docs, nurses, etc.— but in 2024 a job that is done at a desk isn’t a matter of life and death, and a couple snow days per winter and breaks known about a year in advance should pose 0 hardship for a well organized employer. The other kind is who people leave.

Hmmm… I am in a better position than you to understand and speak to how I was treated by my employer. Have you never had a presentation or important meeting the same day as your spouse, and then whoops now a kid is sick or it’s a snow day! And school breaks add up to MONTHS out of the year (you know summer break is a thing right? and planning for, booking, and then doing the daily drop off and pick ups can get pretty complicated, especially with multiple kids)… You’re being ridiculous.

The reality is: It can be really hard to have two full time working parents and multiple kids, even (gasp!) school age kids! I am not ashamed to admit that I reached a point where I just couldn’t handle it all anymore, and more importantly, I didn’t WANT to handle it all anymore.

+1

Yes, there is a huge spectrum bt the binary of menial and deadend and “valued and accommodated.” And you need to expand your knowledge of careers if you think only doctors and nurses are justifiably unaccommodated. Childcare emergencies can happen any time and require immediate attention. Often if you are working a highly valued (and paid) position you do not have that much flexibility to just drop your day time work at moments notice.

I left a highly paid position in which I was valued and accommodated. But like PP mentioned, it still required juggling and prioritization on certain days. And I chose to prioritize my children for the early years of their life.