Honestly, how do you manage dual income marriage with kids?

[Anonymous]

Two working parents is very, very doable if you don’t choose to take these high travel/unpredictable hours types jobs. Sounds like you care too much about prestige.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You hire help.

Full time help age 0-5 kids
Afternoon help age 6-10
Housekeeper driver thereafter

That or live near grandparents who pitch in a lot. Especially with long travel trips.

[Anonymous]

You hire help and you prioritize your marriage over kids sports/activities/whatever.

We screwed up by not hiring help and prioritizing the kids activities. We spent our weekends going in different directions so the kids could play sports. We were too exhausted to do date nights during the week (plus the kids had homework, practice, etc.).

Here we are at 50 and we’ve grown apart.

Friends and family with a SAHM are much happier than we are.

[Anonymous]

You could both grow up. You're married, not a sexy bf and gf anymore. Also, 400k HHI is a lot of money, even in DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you think a $400K combined household income means that you both have jobs "that don't pay much", then you clearly have a spending problem. When DH and I were making a combined $150K, we had two in daycare and were paying $3500/month for that plus a $2700/month mortgage and still able to save a little money each month.

On your salaries, you should be able to have a full-time nanny.

You had a spending issue as your mortgage was way to high as was your child care.

3500 for two kids is very reasonable/cheap for this area.

+1 and 2700 for mortgage is smart if it enabled them to buy something close in because if this was anytime in the last 20 years, that home appreciated well and they got great earned equity out of it. Or maybe it was farther out but paid off. A mortgage is not too high as long as you can make the payments and the house holds value, as it's a form of savings with potential for investment returns as well. It was especially a no brainer when rates were low, it's a trickier proposition now. But if people can make that happen on a 150k income, it's one of the best things they can do with their money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Two working parents is very, very doable if you don’t choose to take these high travel/unpredictable hours types jobs. Sounds like you care too much about prestige.

This, so many jobs don't require travel at all, or very minimal travel.

I think people enjoy the self-importance of business travel, plus I thinks sometimes people with young kids like business travel because it gets them away from their kids. I traveled a lot for work before having kids and then moved to a job with zero travel when we decided to have children. My DH travels once or twice a year but it's planned well in advance so it's not too hard to figure out. We just view this as the stage of life we are in. We've talked about me going back to a higher-frequency travel job after the kids leave for college, and DH moving into something more consulting base so that he could travel with me. There might even be an opportunity for me to work for one of my current clients overseas for a bit, and we could relocate for a few years.

But that's not the phase of life we are in now. Now our focus is our kids and creating a stable and happy home life for them to grow up in. That means minimizing work travel and maximizing how much we are both present at home to the extent we can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you think a $400K combined household income means that you both have jobs "that don't pay much", then you clearly have a spending problem. When DH and I were making a combined $150K, we had two in daycare and were paying $3500/month for that plus a $2700/month mortgage and still able to save a little money each month.

On your salaries, you should be able to have a full-time nanny.

You had a spending issue as your mortgage was way to high as was your child care.

3500 for two kids is very reasonable/cheap for this area.

Not on that income with a $2700 mortgage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was in your situation. I quit my lawyer job and took a job at my kids school so that I had the same hours as they did.

We are still earning the equivalent income as before since I no longer need to pay for aftercare/summer camps/cleaners/lawn care/exc.

We also got a dog as I was home more.

My extended family thinks I threw away all my education and that I am a sucker if my DH leaves me. All I know is I had to take the risk to try to preserve the family I had and I am much, much happier as a result.

Exactly this. You make your choices and then you live with them. I quit a more interesting, prestigious job to work in a school so I would have better hours and summers off. You can’t have it all, so I prioritized what was most important to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP it seems like you want a life that is impossible to have and are super bummed you're not getting it.

You want a fun job that gives you a good lifestyle and is intellectually stimulating, meaningful, and fun. You want to have kids and want to give those kids adequate care. You want a functional household. You want time with your partner and time to decompress after one of you travels. And you want a relatively low-stress existence.

It might just be impossible to have a great job, great marriage, great family life, great mental health, and great home. For the vast majority of the world's population, it is impossible. Sometimes what we need isn't a workaround to get what we want, sometimes we need to accept reality for what it is and find a way to be content with that.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you're both too impressed with your jobs where no one will remember you a week after you're gone.

+1000, especially since at around 200k per job, most of the prestige of their job is simply being able to say something like "I'm a professor of economics at GW" or "I'm the director at XYZ nonprofit." It's the kind of thing that will impress a certain population of people in DC and maybe some family and friends outside the area, but ultimately is not that big a deal. They aren't surgeons or entrepreneurs or some job where other people's lives or livelihoods depend on them showing up to work.

OP, many of us who had jobs like this ultimately realized this and adjusted our careers and lives to focus more on family. My DH shifted to a government job where he still does work he finds meaningful but only travels a couple times a year and has very standard hours. I moved to a 30 hour a week schedule where I don't travel at all, and rather than owning a few projects where I am the ultimate person responsible for them, I consult on a larger number of projects and am more of a specialist. We both still find our careers fulfilling, but making these shifts cost us about 50k a year in income but gained us a huge amount of flexibility and time. We now take real family vacations, we have regular date nights, we are both more relaxed and sleep better and eat better. Also, as our kids have gotten older we've come to see this transition as a kind of obvious precursor to retirement -- we see our lives more expansively and recognize work is one component of a fulfilling life but far from the only one.

I think one day you are going to wake up and look at your career and wonder why you gave up so much for so little.

Excellent advice! I think DMV puts too much emphasis on work achievement and not enough on all the other good parts of life. Kids grow up and leave and you don’t get that time back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP it seems like you want a life that is impossible to have and are super bummed you're not getting it.

You want a fun job that gives you a good lifestyle and is intellectually stimulating, meaningful, and fun. You want to have kids and want to give those kids adequate care. You want a functional household. You want time with your partner and time to decompress after one of you travels. And you want a relatively low-stress existence.

It might just be impossible to have a great job, great marriage, great family life, great mental health, and great home. For the vast majority of the world's population, it is impossible. Sometimes what we need isn't a workaround to get what we want, sometimes we need to accept reality for what it is and find a way to be content with that.

+1 you either need one person to have a slightly less "prestigious" job that's more W-L friendly (WFH, less travel, etc.) - you should be able to do that without a huge pay cut.

Or one person leans in and gets a higher paying private sector job. So more $ for outsourcing.

Our salary bracket is similar but we picked jobs that were less demanding (but maybe don't check all the boxes in your first post). There are a lot of DC jobs like that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you're both too impressed with your jobs where no one will remember you a week after you're gone.

+1000, especially since at around 200k per job, most of the prestige of their job is simply being able to say something like "I'm a professor of economics at GW" or "I'm the director at XYZ nonprofit." It's the kind of thing that will impress a certain population of people in DC and maybe some family and friends outside the area, but ultimately is not that big a deal. They aren't surgeons or entrepreneurs or some job where other people's lives or livelihoods depend on them showing up to work.

OP, many of us who had jobs like this ultimately realized this and adjusted our careers and lives to focus more on family. My DH shifted to a government job where he still does work he finds meaningful but only travels a couple times a year and has very standard hours. I moved to a 30 hour a week schedule where I don't travel at all, and rather than owning a few projects where I am the ultimate person responsible for them, I consult on a larger number of projects and am more of a specialist. We both still find our careers fulfilling, but making these shifts cost us about 50k a year in income but gained us a huge amount of flexibility and time. We now take real family vacations, we have regular date nights, we are both more relaxed and sleep better and eat better. Also, as our kids have gotten older we've come to see this transition as a kind of obvious precursor to retirement -- we see our lives more expansively and recognize work is one component of a fulfilling life but far from the only one.

I think one day you are going to wake up and look at your career and wonder why you gave up so much for so little.

I find the work that I do intellectually fascinating and the hours I put in beyond 40 have opened up so many opportunities I wouldn't have had otherwise. I'm not trying to impress anyone, I just really care about what I do. If that's not where you're coming from, of course it makes sense to prioritize being less stressed out. But if you do, it's a real loss to give up the potential for career advancement, which affects you not just now but for the years when your kids are off living their own lives. Being intentional about how you want to spend your time is great, but the answer isn't necessarily going to be working less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you're both too impressed with your jobs where no one will remember you a week after you're gone.

+1000, especially since at around 200k per job, most of the prestige of their job is simply being able to say something like "I'm a professor of economics at GW" or "I'm the director at XYZ nonprofit." It's the kind of thing that will impress a certain population of people in DC and maybe some family and friends outside the area, but ultimately is not that big a deal. They aren't surgeons or entrepreneurs or some job where other people's lives or livelihoods depend on them showing up to work.

OP, many of us who had jobs like this ultimately realized this and adjusted our careers and lives to focus more on family. My DH shifted to a government job where he still does work he finds meaningful but only travels a couple times a year and has very standard hours. I moved to a 30 hour a week schedule where I don't travel at all, and rather than owning a few projects where I am the ultimate person responsible for them, I consult on a larger number of projects and am more of a specialist. We both still find our careers fulfilling, but making these shifts cost us about 50k a year in income but gained us a huge amount of flexibility and time. We now take real family vacations, we have regular date nights, we are both more relaxed and sleep better and eat better. Also, as our kids have gotten older we've come to see this transition as a kind of obvious precursor to retirement -- we see our lives more expansively and recognize work is one component of a fulfilling life but far from the only one.

I think one day you are going to wake up and look at your career and wonder why you gave up so much for so little.

I find the work that I do intellectually fascinating and the hours I put in beyond 40 have opened up so many opportunities I wouldn't have had otherwise. I'm not trying to impress anyone, I just really care about what I do. If that's not where you're coming from, of course it makes sense to prioritize being less stressed out. But if you do, it's a real loss to give up the potential for career advancement, which affects you not just now but for the years when your kids are off living their own lives. Being intentional about how you want to spend your time is great, but the answer isn't necessarily going to be working less.

Then don't have kids, or have kids with someone who will take up the slack so that you can work your extra hours. There is no scenario where all the adults pursue their intellectial passions >40 hours a week and the kids also get what they need.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you're both too impressed with your jobs where no one will remember you a week after you're gone.

+1000, especially since at around 200k per job, most of the prestige of their job is simply being able to say something like "I'm a professor of economics at GW" or "I'm the director at XYZ nonprofit." It's the kind of thing that will impress a certain population of people in DC and maybe some family and friends outside the area, but ultimately is not that big a deal. They aren't surgeons or entrepreneurs or some job where other people's lives or livelihoods depend on them showing up to work.

OP, many of us who had jobs like this ultimately realized this and adjusted our careers and lives to focus more on family. My DH shifted to a government job where he still does work he finds meaningful but only travels a couple times a year and has very standard hours. I moved to a 30 hour a week schedule where I don't travel at all, and rather than owning a few projects where I am the ultimate person responsible for them, I consult on a larger number of projects and am more of a specialist. We both still find our careers fulfilling, but making these shifts cost us about 50k a year in income but gained us a huge amount of flexibility and time. We now take real family vacations, we have regular date nights, we are both more relaxed and sleep better and eat better. Also, as our kids have gotten older we've come to see this transition as a kind of obvious precursor to retirement -- we see our lives more expansively and recognize work is one component of a fulfilling life but far from the only one.

I think one day you are going to wake up and look at your career and wonder why you gave up so much for so little.

I find the work that I do intellectually fascinating and the hours I put in beyond 40 have opened up so many opportunities I wouldn't have had otherwise. I'm not trying to impress anyone, I just really care about what I do. If that's not where you're coming from, of course it makes sense to prioritize being less stressed out. But if you do, it's a real loss to give up the potential for career advancement, which affects you not just now but for the years when your kids are off living their own lives. Being intentional about how you want to spend your time is great, but the answer isn't necessarily going to be working less.

Then don't have kids, or have kids with someone who will take up the slack so that you can work your extra hours. There is no scenario where all the adults pursue their intellectial passions >40 hours a week and the kids also get what they need.

My husband works about 40 hours a week. But what I was responding to said very little about the kids, it was about how it's so nice to be more relaxed and sleep and eat better, not about the kids, and how unless you're a surgeon your work just isn't that important and you're doing it to impress people. And that's just not my experience at all. I'm happy to trade off for more stress because I really like what I do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you're both too impressed with your jobs where no one will remember you a week after you're gone.

+1000, especially since at around 200k per job, most of the prestige of their job is simply being able to say something like "I'm a professor of economics at GW" or "I'm the director at XYZ nonprofit." It's the kind of thing that will impress a certain population of people in DC and maybe some family and friends outside the area, but ultimately is not that big a deal. They aren't surgeons or entrepreneurs or some job where other people's lives or livelihoods depend on them showing up to work.

OP, many of us who had jobs like this ultimately realized this and adjusted our careers and lives to focus more on family. My DH shifted to a government job where he still does work he finds meaningful but only travels a couple times a year and has very standard hours. I moved to a 30 hour a week schedule where I don't travel at all, and rather than owning a few projects where I am the ultimate person responsible for them, I consult on a larger number of projects and am more of a specialist. We both still find our careers fulfilling, but making these shifts cost us about 50k a year in income but gained us a huge amount of flexibility and time. We now take real family vacations, we have regular date nights, we are both more relaxed and sleep better and eat better. Also, as our kids have gotten older we've come to see this transition as a kind of obvious precursor to retirement -- we see our lives more expansively and recognize work is one component of a fulfilling life but far from the only one.

I think one day you are going to wake up and look at your career and wonder why you gave up so much for so little.

I find the work that I do intellectually fascinating and the hours I put in beyond 40 have opened up so many opportunities I wouldn't have had otherwise. I'm not trying to impress anyone, I just really care about what I do. If that's not where you're coming from, of course it makes sense to prioritize being less stressed out. But if you do, it's a real loss to give up the potential for career advancement, which affects you not just now but for the years when your kids are off living their own lives. Being intentional about how you want to spend your time is great, but the answer isn't necessarily going to be working less.

Then don't have kids, or have kids with someone who will take up the slack so that you can work your extra hours. There is no scenario where all the adults pursue their intellectial passions >40 hours a week and the kids also get what they need.

My husband works about 40 hours a week. But what I was responding to said very little about the kids, it was about how it's so nice to be more relaxed and sleep and eat better, not about the kids, and how unless you're a surgeon your work just isn't that important and you're doing it to impress people. And that's just not my experience at all. I'm happy to trade off for more stress because I really like what I do.

No, I'm the one who wrote that and it's about all of it. Being more relaxed and eating/sleeping better is directly related to the kids, and the marriage. You only have so many hours in the day and you chose to have a family. So the trade off is not just about what YOU are willing to sacrifice for your job. When you carry that stress around because your job is so important to you, your family has to carry it too. Maybe with some jobs that weight feels worth it to the family. If you are saving lives or in a leadership role where you are having a huge impact, your spouse and kids might be able to feel like they are contributing to that with their sacrifice too, and that can make the family trade offs easier to bear. This is how many military families function.

But if it's just a job you personally find intellectually stimulation and enjoy doing, but where the social importance is more mundane, your spouse and kids are unlikely to feel like what they sacrifice for your career is worthwhile. They'll just resent it.