How was Amy Coney Barret able to raise SEVEN kids while building her career?

[Anonymous]

Notre Dame also has an extremely generous tuition benefit for children of faculty, which they are about to lose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do people keep going on about the Handmaid’s Tale? We know the connection with Atwood being inspired by Barrett’s religious group but ACB has never expressed ideas like women shouldn’t have birth control or work outside the home right? She’s not a Serena Joy or Aunt Lydia type.

[i]She’s against abortion but so are a lot of other women.[b]

I am too, but I don't think Roe v Wade should be overturned. She does and that's a problem for all women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nannies.
Living in a ultra-religious community that REQUIRES the women to help each other.
A mother who believes in the same philosophy of the ulta-religious community and probably moved in with her.
An academic career that allowed her to take copious sabbaticals and teach low class loads in return for no tenure and fewer grants due to publications. (She has 12 - a comparative professor in her field at her age has 30-40).

Even with all that the only reason she's at the top of the list for SCOTUS is because Trump is down in the polls with conservative suburban white women over this pandemic and distance learning thing. The liberal suburban women who just hated him from the day one wouldn't have voted for him anyway.

Wait a minute. I cannot speak to her research productivity as I am not in law and I do not know the norms of publications and grants in her field, but my understanding is she has had tenure (promoted to a full Professor of Law) since at least 2010--which is basically 8 years after she started. So that really doesn't match your narrative above, especially if she took a couple parental leaves. In most fields the timeline to get promoted from assistant to associate (which is the point where you have tenure) is ~6 years and associate to full is ~5 years. This can be longer if there are parental/medical leaves or shorter if there is exceptional productivity. I don't know if law is similar to other fields (if it were going from being hired to a full prof in 8 years would be accelerated progress), but there seems to be nothing suggestive of not getting tenure in her timeline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nannies.
Living in a ultra-religious community that REQUIRES the women to help each other.
A mother who believes in the same philosophy of the ulta-religious community and probably moved in with her.
An academic career that allowed her to take copious sabbaticals and teach low class loads in return for no tenure and fewer grants due to publications. (She has 12 - a comparative professor in her field at her age has 30-40).

Even with all that the only reason she's at the top of the list for SCOTUS is because Trump is down in the polls with conservative suburban white women over this pandemic and distance learning thing. The liberal suburban women who just hated him from the day one wouldn't have voted for him anyway.

Wait a minute. I cannot speak to her research productivity as I am not in law and I do not know the norms of publications and grants in her field, but my understanding is she has had tenure (promoted to a full Professor of Law) since at least 2010--which is basically 8 years after she started. So that really doesn't match your narrative above, especially if she took a couple parental leaves. In most fields the timeline to get promoted from assistant to associate (which is the point where you have tenure) is ~6 years and associate to full is ~5 years. This can be longer if there are parental/medical leaves or shorter if there is exceptional productivity. I don't know if law is similar to other fields (if it were going from being hired to a full prof in 8 years would be accelerated progress), but there seems to be nothing suggestive of not getting tenure in her timeline.

She also had a chaired faculty position prior to becoming a federal judge

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has said in interviews she had a lot of extended family around in South Bend, including her husband's aunt who did most of the childcare while they were working. She and her husband took turns being the "default parent" and and he picked up more slack at certain points with kid logistics like activities and doctors appointments (like when she became a judge he picked up slack, when they were babies she did the heavy lifting). Notre Dame is pretty good with leave/teaching release policies for tenure track faculty and she was able to bring kids into the office with a basket of toys to play while meeting with students (this is not atypical of universities...being a faculty member is a stressful but flexible gig day to day). She also said living in South Bend helped because it's such a small city and if she needed to leave campus to get to her kids' elementary school or activities, she could be there in 10 minutes, whereas in a larger city it would be much more challenging.

I went down a youtube rabbit hole wondering this same thing last night. That's just what she said to a panelist of Notre Dame law students.

So, basically she didn't raise her kids, which is the obvious answer.

Look, that's like saying that every working mother doesn't raise her kids, which isn't fair. I know some really successful Catholic moms in demanding professions, and one characteristic that they have in common is that they don't need a lot of sleep. Barrett's husband can cook (I think she said this in the Notre Dame Alumni club speech) and that is extremely helpful. Her husband's aunt provided childcare and that is super-helpful as well. I presume that they paid her, but there is a huge trust level with family members that enabled them both to continue working. I do wonder how they were able to take care of the two adopted children with so much "outsourcing" to the aunt. The first adopted child was severely malnourished when adopted at 14 months and the second adopted child was 3 years old, which necessitates a huge adjustment. Somehow, they made it work. I've been to South Bend and most faculty live within 3 blocks of the university. Easy peasy commute, often by walking or bicycle. Even the downtown is 10 minutes away. Lots of students around to provide extra babysitting, if needed.

The didn't do anything special with the "adopted" kids or just relied on things like th school system. Lets be real. She was around nights and some weekends but didn't do any of the hard work with those kids. If those kids had SN, as a parent with a child with SN, who needed daily therapies when young, I cannot imagine she was doing any of it and had the aunt and nannies do it all. One person would find it very hard to raise 7 kids at once with 7 very different needs or they just ignored all the needs. They are a family for show, not substance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else feel strangely ambivalent about her?

OTOH, I abhor her politics. OTO, I'm impressed despite myself by what she has accomplished. When I was younger, I had hoped for something similar to her lifestyle.

I never wanted to have seven kids because that's crazy but I had hoped for 3-4 plus two demanding professional jobs. We weren't able to do it. Husband has the demanding job, I have the mommy tracked job. I'll never end up as a federal judge.

That’s because you’re trying to do it on your own. She had her aunt as a full time nanny and countless nearby family members to help out. That’s a support network most families can only dream of.

Why have kids if your expectation is others will raise them so you can continue to live your life? She didn't do much mothering to those kids. Kids need their parents. Child care 9-5 is fine, 24/7 is not.

[Anonymous]

Child abuse aka irresponsible parenting.

[Anonymous]

I’m not impressed with her religion or politics, but a working woman with a litter of kids has my respect as a working mom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If I were an academic I’d have 7 kids too. DH and I are both in biglaw, and our careers aren’t compatible with a huge family. Looking back I should have tried to go to government right after law school.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has said in interviews she had a lot of extended family around in South Bend, including her husband's aunt who did most of the childcare while they were working. She and her husband took turns being the "default parent" and and he picked up more slack at certain points with kid logistics like activities and doctors appointments (like when she became a judge he picked up slack, when they were babies she did the heavy lifting). Notre Dame is pretty good with leave/teaching release policies for tenure track faculty and she was able to bring kids into the office with a basket of toys to play while meeting with students (this is not atypical of universities...being a faculty member is a stressful but flexible gig day to day). She also said living in South Bend helped because it's such a small city and if she needed to leave campus to get to her kids' elementary school or activities, she could be there in 10 minutes, whereas in a larger city it would be much more challenging.

I went down a youtube rabbit hole wondering this same thing last night. That's just what she said to a panelist of Notre Dame law students.

So, basically she didn't raise her kids, which is the obvious answer.

Look, that's like saying that every working mother doesn't raise her kids, which isn't fair. I know some really successful Catholic moms in demanding professions, and one characteristic that they have in common is that they don't need a lot of sleep. Barrett's husband can cook (I think she said this in the Notre Dame Alumni club speech) and that is extremely helpful. Her husband's aunt provided childcare and that is super-helpful as well. I presume that they paid her, but there is a huge trust level with family members that enabled them both to continue working. I do wonder how they were able to take care of the two adopted children with so much "outsourcing" to the aunt. The first adopted child was severely malnourished when adopted at 14 months and the second adopted child was 3 years old, which necessitates a huge adjustment. Somehow, they made it work. I've been to South Bend and most faculty live within 3 blocks of the university. Easy peasy commute, often by walking or bicycle. Even the downtown is 10 minutes away. Lots of students around to provide extra babysitting, if needed.

The didn't do anything special with the "adopted" kids or just relied on things like th school system. Lets be real. She was around nights and some weekends but didn't do any of the hard work with those kids. If those kids had SN, as a parent with a child with SN, who needed daily therapies when young, I cannot imagine she was doing any of it and had the aunt and nannies do it all. One person would find it very hard to raise 7 kids at once with 7 very different needs or they just ignored all the needs. They are a family for show, not substance.

You can't possibly know this. This is such bs. Look, I don't have much patience for conservative activists either but lying about her life does nothing for the abortion rights cause.

[Anonymous]

Its very sad how she describes her kids. She has a rescue complex and these kids are for show. She's not raising them, others are. https://heavy.com/news/2018/07/amy-coney-barrett-family-parents-father/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has said in interviews she had a lot of extended family around in South Bend, including her husband's aunt who did most of the childcare while they were working. She and her husband took turns being the "default parent" and and he picked up more slack at certain points with kid logistics like activities and doctors appointments (like when she became a judge he picked up slack, when they were babies she did the heavy lifting). Notre Dame is pretty good with leave/teaching release policies for tenure track faculty and she was able to bring kids into the office with a basket of toys to play while meeting with students (this is not atypical of universities...being a faculty member is a stressful but flexible gig day to day). She also said living in South Bend helped because it's such a small city and if she needed to leave campus to get to her kids' elementary school or activities, she could be there in 10 minutes, whereas in a larger city it would be much more challenging.

I went down a youtube rabbit hole wondering this same thing last night. That's just what she said to a panelist of Notre Dame law students.

So, basically she didn't raise her kids, which is the obvious answer.

Look, that's like saying that every working mother doesn't raise her kids, which isn't fair. I know some really successful Catholic moms in demanding professions, and one characteristic that they have in common is that they don't need a lot of sleep. Barrett's husband can cook (I think she said this in the Notre Dame Alumni club speech) and that is extremely helpful. Her husband's aunt provided childcare and that is super-helpful as well. I presume that they paid her, but there is a huge trust level with family members that enabled them both to continue working. I do wonder how they were able to take care of the two adopted children with so much "outsourcing" to the aunt. The first adopted child was severely malnourished when adopted at 14 months and the second adopted child was 3 years old, which necessitates a huge adjustment. Somehow, they made it work. I've been to South Bend and most faculty live within 3 blocks of the university. Easy peasy commute, often by walking or bicycle. Even the downtown is 10 minutes away. Lots of students around to provide extra babysitting, if needed.

The didn't do anything special with the "adopted" kids or just relied on things like th school system. Lets be real. She was around nights and some weekends but didn't do any of the hard work with those kids. If those kids had SN, as a parent with a child with SN, who needed daily therapies when young, I cannot imagine she was doing any of it and had the aunt and nannies do it all. One person would find it very hard to raise 7 kids at once with 7 very different needs or they just ignored all the needs. They are a family for show, not substance.

You can't possibly know this. This is such bs. Look, I don't have much patience for conservative activists either but lying about her life does nothing for the abortion rights cause.

Read the articles. She goes on and on about the kids special needs. How do you think they got their needs met? You think she's like some of us shagging her kids every day to multiple private therapy appointments given she's focused on her career. She couldn't even bother to bring all the kids with her and only brought three and left the others with babysitters and friends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not impressed with her religion or politics, but a working woman with a litter of kids has my respect as a working mom.

She's not parenting those kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has said in interviews she had a lot of extended family around in South Bend, including her husband's aunt who did most of the childcare while they were working. She and her husband took turns being the "default parent" and and he picked up more slack at certain points with kid logistics like activities and doctors appointments (like when she became a judge he picked up slack, when they were babies she did the heavy lifting). Notre Dame is pretty good with leave/teaching release policies for tenure track faculty and she was able to bring kids into the office with a basket of toys to play while meeting with students (this is not atypical of universities...being a faculty member is a stressful but flexible gig day to day). She also said living in South Bend helped because it's such a small city and if she needed to leave campus to get to her kids' elementary school or activities, she could be there in 10 minutes, whereas in a larger city it would be much more challenging.

I went down a youtube rabbit hole wondering this same thing last night. That's just what she said to a panelist of Notre Dame law students.

So, basically she didn't raise her kids, which is the obvious answer.

Look, that's like saying that every working mother doesn't raise her kids, which isn't fair. I know some really successful Catholic moms in demanding professions, and one characteristic that they have in common is that they don't need a lot of sleep. Barrett's husband can cook (I think she said this in the Notre Dame Alumni club speech) and that is extremely helpful. Her husband's aunt provided childcare and that is super-helpful as well. I presume that they paid her, but there is a huge trust level with family members that enabled them both to continue working. I do wonder how they were able to take care of the two adopted children with so much "outsourcing" to the aunt. The first adopted child was severely malnourished when adopted at 14 months and the second adopted child was 3 years old, which necessitates a huge adjustment. Somehow, they made it work. I've been to South Bend and most faculty live within 3 blocks of the university. Easy peasy commute, often by walking or bicycle. Even the downtown is 10 minutes away. Lots of students around to provide extra babysitting, if needed.

The didn't do anything special with the "adopted" kids or just relied on things like th school system. Lets be real. She was around nights and some weekends but didn't do any of the hard work with those kids. If those kids had SN, as a parent with a child with SN, who needed daily therapies when young, I cannot imagine she was doing any of it and had the aunt and nannies do it all. One person would find it very hard to raise 7 kids at once with 7 very different needs or they just ignored all the needs. They are a family for show, not substance.

She reminds me a little of Sarah Palin in this regard. The family implodes in the spotlight because there’s no foundation.

[Anonymous]

If she actually had to parent and care for 7 children she wouldn’t be anti-choice.