Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it amusing that someone thinks D is respected. They are the ones people always wonder why they even bothered having kids and think they are cold hearted.

It depends on who you define as “everyone.” Their main arena in life isn’t the elementary school playground. So, while they may not be respected by the neighborhood moms, they might be very well respected at work, which is where they spend most of their time.

You can be respected at work and still not respected as a good parent.

Anonymous wrote:I find it amusing that someone thinks D is respected. They are the ones people always wonder why they even bothered having kids and think they are cold hearted.

It depends on who you define as “everyone.” Their main arena in life isn’t the elementary school playground. So, while they may not be respected by the neighborhood moms, they might be very well respected at work, which is where they spend most of their time.

I find it amusing that someone thinks D is respected. They are the ones people always wonder why they even bothered having kids and think they are cold hearted.

I have a sibling who is sort of D, but while they are well paid for their fields, they are not extremely high income for their area, and money isn't solving all the issues created by their work schedules (lots of evening meetings that run late, each of them needing to travel for work regularly on top of long hours). They used to have a nanny but when their oldest went to elementary they stopped to try to save money. It's a lot to manage and I see it taking a toll on them and their health/ mental health.

A is the best for kids.

We're modified C... I'm the bigger career/earner but also generally have more work schedule flexibility as well. And we have a full-time nanny/house manager.

I'd love to just WFH part-time and not need the full-time nanny/house manager, but doing so would be way too financially stressful right now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some observations- most of the ones who have replied B just state it without an explanation. Because it’s the obvious choice perhaps? Or because they don’t want a SAHM/Wohm fight? Others who mention A or C usually elaborate more and back it up by saying that’s what they are doing- there seems to be a need to justify the choice here. D is uniformly unpopular.

I like “B” the best. I have some ADHD tendencies and so does my husband. I’m happy to be the working parent or the at home parent, but I find being split between both to be difficult, and things get dropped.

OMG! You have no idea how much this comment helps me. I have ADHD and part of me really wants to go back to work, but I would still be the primary parent and I really struggle when I have more than one big thing going on in life (most recently it was dealing with homeschooling to avoid virtual learning during the pandemic while also doing a bathroom renovation; I had to postpone the renovation). So since my husband doesn’t care what I do, and i have always done best when I’m not split between two big things, I’m sticking with B.

I don’t even have ADHD and I relate to this. I did go back to work PT when my kids started school, but even without an ADHD brain, I find balancing even my PT job and being the primary parent to be really hard. My DH actually does quite a bit, and Covid has enabled him to WFH some which helps a lot. But I still find that I’m never really performing well at both things at the same time. Something always gets back burnered.

But we also don’t have/can’t afford outsourced help (not even house cleaning). So I’m truly juggling kids, work, household management, etc. Again, DH helps a lot. But it takes the form of unloading the dishwasher or making dinner once a week. I’m the one organizing, scheduling, planning, etc. I really do not think I could do this with a full time job, even if we had weekly cleaners.

That’s so interesting. I can handle a 60 hour workweek, but I struggle a lot with a 20 hour workweek plus being the primary parent, even though it probably doesn’t actually require more hours of total work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some observations- most of the ones who have replied B just state it without an explanation. Because it’s the obvious choice perhaps? Or because they don’t want a SAHM/Wohm fight? Others who mention A or C usually elaborate more and back it up by saying that’s what they are doing- there seems to be a need to justify the choice here. D is uniformly unpopular.

I like “B” the best. I have some ADHD tendencies and so does my husband. I’m happy to be the working parent or the at home parent, but I find being split between both to be difficult, and things get dropped.

OMG! You have no idea how much this comment helps me. I have ADHD and part of me really wants to go back to work, but I would still be the primary parent and I really struggle when I have more than one big thing going on in life (most recently it was dealing with homeschooling to avoid virtual learning during the pandemic while also doing a bathroom renovation; I had to postpone the renovation). So since my husband doesn’t care what I do, and i have always done best when I’m not split between two big things, I’m sticking with B.

I don’t even have ADHD and I relate to this. I did go back to work PT when my kids started school, but even without an ADHD brain, I find balancing even my PT job and being the primary parent to be really hard. My DH actually does quite a bit, and Covid has enabled him to WFH some which helps a lot. But I still find that I’m never really performing well at both things at the same time. Something always gets back burnered.

But we also don’t have/can’t afford outsourced help (not even house cleaning). So I’m truly juggling kids, work, household management, etc. Again, DH helps a lot. But it takes the form of unloading the dishwasher or making dinner once a week. I’m the one organizing, scheduling, planning, etc. I really do not think I could do this with a full time job, even if we had weekly cleaners.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ideal family situation is the Asian family (I'm not asian.) Both parents work and care for the kid's but the grandparents also live with or nearby and care for the family, too. The nuclear family is a catastrophe.

I think you can really only do this for one generation though. The parents who worked while their kids were growing up aren’t going to become the grandparents who provide free childcare for the grandkids.

Why not? This us exactly what my Dh and I would become, and I see this happening around me.

I’m really sorry. I guess that I have just never seen it. The boomers I know who entered the workforce with inter generational homes and significant help with childcare did not reciprocate. And the people I know now who have significant grandparent help with childcare have a mother who either stayed at home or had a job to make ends meet, but never had a career the way people are talking about it here.

This is the PP currently in the second generation of this set-up. Don’t be sorry! You are right, at least in my case, that our parents’ careers were not “big” careers as people talk about on DCUM. My H and I have typical DC careers but I still hope we can retire early and be with our grandkids. Hell, I’m ready to retire now

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ideal family situation is the Asian family (I'm not asian.) Both parents work and care for the kid's but the grandparents also live with or nearby and care for the family, too. The nuclear family is a catastrophe.

I think you can really only do this for one generation though. The parents who worked while their kids were growing up aren’t going to become the grandparents who provide free childcare for the grandkids.

I think it’s less about will than timing.

You most often see this in immigrant families where the grandparents had kids young (either before or after immigrating) then worked really hard to give them a good life/education (often with a SAHM at first and then both parents working, sometimes with unique arrangements like a family business where kids go after school so family is together without compromising work).

But then their kids become highly educated young professionals. They have kids in their mid-30s. If these kids also don’t have kids until their mid-30s, it will be very hard for them to do for their kids what their parents did for them. Maybe a little, but by 80, a person can no longer be a childcare plan.

Also, even if you can make this work with timing, it works best if each generation only has one kid. Grandma/grandpa are not going to be the childcare plan to two households at once.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ideal family situation is the Asian family (I'm not asian.) Both parents work and care for the kid's but the grandparents also live with or nearby and care for the family, too. The nuclear family is a catastrophe.

I think you can really only do this for one generation though. The parents who worked while their kids were growing up aren’t going to become the grandparents who provide free childcare for the grandkids.

I think it can work. The bigger challenge is that many parents and therefore grandparents are much older when the kids are born these days, and the grandparents are more likely to have health issues or too be old to really watch multiple small kids for extended periods.

I grew up in one of those family situations you describe. However, my grandma was in her 40s when her first grandchild was born. Today, many grandparents are in their 70s when their first grandchild is born.

Oh wow that’s true. You’re just as likely to see somebody caring for their own children and their parent than you are to see a grandparent care for the child.