Anonymous wrote:9 years old and 4th trade have been a game changer for us, as the teachers start preparing the kids for middle school. The work was more intense and rigorous, and my child's maturity level changed dramatically over this past year. I'm not sure I'd want to leave him without at least one stable and present parent during this time of transition for him.

I think the younger one would be ok.

I'll also add, if this is something you only plan to do for a year or two tops, then go for it! Despite what some people think, great career opportunities do not always come around, and you never if or when you'd get this type of opportunity again. Plus, you'll be trailblazing for other women, as you show this employer that it is possible for women to have that type of job and perform well, while having a family that supports them.

Good luck with whatever you decide!

But how can her family support her? Her husband travels biweekly and you know the kids won't like having 2 parents who travel so often. So where is the support? The support would be if her husband cooled down his ladder climbing and worked a non-travel more flexible position to be there for the kids so she could advance in her career.

And stop with the trailblazing BS. I am so sick of that crap. Society has become so much worse with the increased work load for what used to be typical 9-5 jobs. The advancement of 24/7 electronics and both parents feeling they have to work full time leaves very little family time, down time, and stress-free time. People don't know their neighbors. Nannies are raising kids. Families are barely in their house. Kid's lives are organized down to the hour every single day. They don't have a minute to think for themselves or go off and find friends to play with. And study after study shows that even when both parents work FT and make the same exact amount of money, the woman does between 65-85% of all household duties and child rearing. Trailblazing? No. Adding more work/stress in our lives? Yes.

9 years old and 4th trade have been a game changer for us, as the teachers start preparing the kids for middle school. The work was more intense and rigorous, and my child's maturity level changed dramatically over this past year. I'm not sure I'd want to leave him without at least one stable and present parent during this time of transition for him.

I think the younger one would be ok.

I'll also add, if this is something you only plan to do for a year or two tops, then go for it! Despite what some people think, great career opportunities do not always come around, and you never if or when you'd get this type of opportunity again. Plus, you'll be trailblazing for other women, as you show this employer that it is possible for women to have that type of job and perform well, while having a family that supports them.

Good luck with whatever you decide!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Contrary to others many jobs that claim extensive travel can actually be done with less travel than the previous incumbent or as advertised. Some people travel for work because they like it. And give be a break about the "on the deathbed nobody ever wished she worked more". On the deathbed nobody also never wished not to have money to retire, to pay for care for an elderly parent with dementia, or unanticipated special needs. There are legit competing priorities to more time with your children.

+1 I travel more than I would like with small children, but having a "top job" meant that it wasn't catastrophic when my husband unexpectedly lost his "top job." I wouldn't trade the financial security and ability to provide my children with what they need without having to count pennies. And every once in a while, I take my kids with me on business trips, which teaches them something about the world as well.

What do the kids do when you actually have to do business on the business trip? You bring them with you to the meetings, dinners, nights out, and conferences? Do they miss school? This seems weird.

It's not "weird." I used to do this when my kids were little, and even with an older kid, it can be worthwhile, if it's a cool enough place that it's more enriching to miss school. Of course the kids don't come to meetings and business dinners and conferences. A grandparent or spouse or nanny needs to be with them while you're working, and then you do off hours or weekend sightseeing together.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Contrary to others many jobs that claim extensive travel can actually be done with less travel than the previous incumbent or as advertised. Some people travel for work because they like it. And give be a break about the "on the deathbed nobody ever wished she worked more". On the deathbed nobody also never wished not to have money to retire, to pay for care for an elderly parent with dementia, or unanticipated special needs. There are legit competing priorities to more time with your children.

+1 I travel more than I would like with small children, but having a "top job" meant that it wasn't catastrophic when my husband unexpectedly lost his "top job." I wouldn't trade the financial security and ability to provide my children with what they need without having to count pennies. And every once in a while, I take my kids with me on business trips, which teaches them something about the world as well.

What do the kids do when you actually have to do business on the business trip? You bring them with you to the meetings, dinners, nights out, and conferences? Do they miss school? This seems weird.

Not PP, but I also bring our kid to conferences, when spouse is able to come along. Conferences are largely on the weekends in my field, so no issue missing much school. Many colleagues also bring their families when able to and their spouses are able to come.

Anonymous wrote:I've completely stagnated in my job for 14 years. it's a pretty good job - doing well by DC standards - but if you don't keep going up the ladder when you have times to advance earlier, you won't. You will stagnate... which to me leaves me a less stimulated, challenged, and fulfilled person .. and those also can make you a worse mom... -- from the other side of the fence

I have moved up the ladder without needing to travel or work more hours. As a matter of fact, I have the ideal hours, am the boss and can make my own hours. That just seems like your position. I picked a position that would work with family life in the future.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Contrary to others many jobs that claim extensive travel can actually be done with less travel than the previous incumbent or as advertised. Some people travel for work because they like it. And give be a break about the "on the deathbed nobody ever wished she worked more". On the deathbed nobody also never wished not to have money to retire, to pay for care for an elderly parent with dementia, or unanticipated special needs. There are legit competing priorities to more time with your children.

+1 I travel more than I would like with small children, but having a "top job" meant that it wasn't catastrophic when my husband unexpectedly lost his "top job." I wouldn't trade the financial security and ability to provide my children with what they need without having to count pennies. And every once in a while, I take my kids with me on business trips, which teaches them something about the world as well.

What do the kids do when you actually have to do business on the business trip? You bring them with you to the meetings, dinners, nights out, and conferences? Do they miss school? This seems weird.

I've completely stagnated in my job for 14 years. it's a pretty good job - doing well by DC standards - but if you don't keep going up the ladder when you have times to advance earlier, you won't. You will stagnate... which to me leaves me a less stimulated, challenged, and fulfilled person .. and those also can make you a worse mom... -- from the other side of the fence

the difference is the OP said they are financially fine. It is not like she is going from no money and struggling to this job. She has a good paying job and so does DH. The balance currently works, people are just stating that it may not be balanced if she changes jobs so either DH needs to make changes to get that balance or the scales will always be skewed toward work over family.

Anonymous wrote:Contrary to others many jobs that claim extensive travel can actually be done with less travel than the previous incumbent or as advertised. Some people travel for work because they like it. And give be a break about the "on the deathbed nobody ever wished she worked more". On the deathbed nobody also never wished not to have money to retire, to pay for care for an elderly parent with dementia, or unanticipated special needs. There are legit competing priorities to more time with your children.

+1 I travel more than I would like with small children, but having a "top job" meant that it wasn't catastrophic when my husband unexpectedly lost his "top job." I wouldn't trade the financial security and ability to provide my children with what they need without having to count pennies. And every once in a while, I take my kids with me on business trips, which teaches them something about the world as well.

When my husband applied to his job it said "20% travel". He went to a work trip exactly once in five years.

Anonymous wrote:It's really up to you. You can only call on friends so much but you have to do what makes you happy. Our lives changed significantly when my oldest turned 9. School became more intense and so did his sports. He's only in one, not travel, but it became more time intensive. He needed me and DH there more emotionally and it was only the start. We both WOTH but that was the year I choose to scale back. I was happy with that decision personally and professionally. I still work FT but less hours and not all the extras.

Wrong. You don't "have to do" what makes you "happy," whatever that means.

You "have to do" what's best for your marriage and kids.

I cannot imagine a situation like this that is best for kids that age, btw

Contrary to others many jobs that claim extensive travel can actually be done with less travel than the previous incumbent or as advertised. Some people travel for work because they like it. And give be a break about the "on the deathbed nobody ever wished she worked more". On the deathbed nobody also never wished not to have money to retire, to pay for care for an elderly parent with dementia, or unanticipated special needs. There are legit competing priorities to more time with your children.

My dad always taught us kids over money. But to each his own.

For me it took a cancer diagnosis to realize I had my priorities wrong. I then switched jobs so I could eliminate most travel and be involved in the kids' lives more. I have zero regrets.

Anonymous wrote:Your kids will resent it, one parent working late hours and traveling is enough. Both intense careers is not fair to the kids and you, as the Mom, will feel guilty. Problem with kids today is because no one is home for them 100% to count on and foster upbringing.

+1

Overworked parents = entitled kids due to exhaustion.