Congratulations on the new job and your good planning!

Comgratulations op!

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Thank you to everyone for your input. I have accepted the job.

The company has said that I can do 30% - 40% travel and I will have flexibility to manage it. DH is scaling his travel back so that one of us will be at home. As a back up we are also getting a live in nanny so that the kids have a stable routine. We already have a cleaner and lawn service.

I have a lot of flexibility and so does DH when we are not travelling so one of us will be at home most of the time so Im hopeful that this will work out for us as a family.

As I have said before I took 5 years off from work when my kids were born as I felt that was the best thing for our family. I now feel confident that we are all in a position to cope with my stepping up at work. I feel lucky to have the option and I know that if this all falls apart I will step down from this.

Thanks once again - particularly to those of you who took the time to post thoughtful comments.

If it really works out this way, especially the part about DH scaling back and being home more, then this could be even better than the situation you have now. While you won't have a ton of family dinners, it sounds like there's the potential for you kids to get a good amount of time with both parents. I think that with a live-in nanny, you will both need to be diligent about not filling up your off-work hours with self-care things (gym, dinners with friends, salon, hobbies, classes, golf, sailing, whatever) and actually plan to spend most of that time with your kids while they still want to do that.

Anonymous wrote:I am absolutely disgusted that people like OP exist.

Would you have the same attitude if OP was a man? Apparently, her dh had a similarly intense career while OP stayed at home for 5 years.

Do it, find a reliable on-call overnight caregiver in case you truly need to travel overnight while DH is gone.

I am absolutely disgusted that people like OP exist.

OP here. Thank you to everyone for your input. I have accepted the job.

The company has said that I can do 30% - 40% travel and I will have flexibility to manage it. DH is scaling his travel back so that one of us will be at home. As a back up we are also getting a live in nanny so that the kids have a stable routine. We already have a cleaner and lawn service.

I have a lot of flexibility and so does DH when we are not travelling so one of us will be at home most of the time so Im hopeful that this will work out for us as a family.

As I have said before I took 5 years off from work when my kids were born as I felt that was the best thing for our family. I now feel confident that we are all in a position to cope with my stepping up at work. I feel lucky to have the option and I know that if this all falls apart I will step down from this.

Thanks once again - particularly to those of you who took the time to post thoughtful comments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the unknown factor here is what kind of kids you have. I keep thinking of a certain friends' kids. The kids are independent and I really think they would be fine with parents who were not often around, as long as their basic needs were met and they have transportation to activities. They are exceptionally independent and emotionally straightforward. I have one kid sort of like that, and one who's not. My one who is not couldn't cope with the separation: he needs us and no nanny will do it.

Take heed. Is either kid a sensitive child that craves your time and attention?

I know a family that similarly to OP had two high power career parents. They had two kids who are now in their late 20s. Their caregivers were the couple next door who ran a home daycare / did afterschool care and then ended up doing all care when parents weren't home, including overnights at times. As they got older, they went on vacations with their caregivers and really became part of their family. The younger daughter always tried to get her parents to engage more. Even though they had this 'other' family, she craved and wanted attention and validation from her parents. She struggled with feeling loved and wanted and felt guilty that this other family had to raise them. She had a very hard time in her late teens and early twenties with her mental health and while she is doing fine now, she has mostly cut contact with her parents. The other daughter never really seemed to care to much, it didn't bother her and she just went about her life. But just like she didn't really need them too much then, she doesn't need them too much now either.

The parents are now older, one is semi retired and the other winding down their career. The oldest daughter has two young kids and the parents want to be grandparents but the daughter really doesn't have a need to have them actively in their lives. They now want to spend time with their kids / grandkids and neither daughter really wants to or has a desire to be closer to them. Both daughters are still in closer contact with the couple they spent the majority of their time with while growing up.

I think the parents truly thought they were working so hard and sacrificing family time because it would benefit them down the road, but now they are down the road and they have lots of money but very little relationship with either daughter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the unknown factor here is what kind of kids you have. I keep thinking of a certain friends' kids. The kids are independent and I really think they would be fine with parents who were not often around, as long as their basic needs were met and they have transportation to activities. They are exceptionally independent and emotionally straightforward. I have one kid sort of like that, and one who's not. My one who is not couldn't cope with the separation: he needs us and no nanny will do it.

What kid is "fine with parents who were not often around"..as long as their basic needs were met.???!! Do you honestly think this is how children feel?? Jesus, every kid needs their parents whether they act like or not. They may not show you or tell you straight up that they need you around, but they do. And when the shit hits the fan and their "parents aren't around", who or what do you think they will turn to? Kids who don't get enough attention sometimes make stupid decisions in order to GET that attention from you. I don't think I need to spell out what that means.

What is more important to you? Money or your kids? Your kids need you, period.

+Infinity. Some people here are indeed delusional from too many years of worshiping money and power.

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

Plenty of dummies here lost their moral compasses ages ago.

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing in this world short of starvation and/or homelessness that would make me take that job. Or even consider it. But you do you. Happy Mothers Day.

+1
Even if I didn't care about seeing their milestones and everyday lives, I wouldn't want them remembering the nanny watching them hit their first home run or act in the 4th grade play or taking them out for ice cream on the last day of school. No amount of money is worth that stuff.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to continue to advance in your career - DO IT!!! Once you get into more senior level types of jobs, the opportunities for advancement shrink and shrink. And if you end up in the job you are in for a while without moving if you are in a more junior job to have gotten back into the workforce, it is very likely you will stagnate there. (ie. imagine yourself in your same role 10 years from now... or longer. When you are going up a career track you think it will keep advancing forever, when you get higher on the pyramid of whatever field, it no longer works like that). AND, once you've established yourself in a more senior role, more flexibility (and financial rewards that help afford more life flexibility/options) will kick back in. BUT if you think you are not planning in even some balance of 'career focus' moving forward in life, then stay. And, if you do have some career focus - don't take job advice from those who are not in the game. There is a certain set that will always tell you to stay home as much as possible & balance - and don't get that you can be a very engaged parent and also have a career too.

This seems like some good advice. I don't actually think that you can be a very engaged parent and also have a career, but I am not really sure that every child needs a very engaged parent. I don't know the names of every kid in my sons' classes, don't go to every sports practice and game, and only see their teachers at parent/teacher conferences. I do read with them every day, do their math homework with them, and listen to their middle of the night worries, and know their friends, so I am not disengaged, but not DCUM level engaged.

But my kids have white skin, high SES, a team of great teachers and educators available to them, every book/technology/extra curricular activity they could need, 2 parents, four grandparents, and a nanny who obviously love them, and penises. If they can't make it with those advantages, there is probably not much that my giving up my career would have done for them.

I agree with this, that the kids have certainly enough advantages in life to be fine either way.
And I agree with the PP that if this is now or never I would probably choose to do it.
Also being present is something else than spending every night with them: one night with a nanny every month is not going to make a difference. If you travel more but have shorter days when you don't it is not clear to me that this means less presence for the kids.

BUT I personally refused a similar opportunity as it was both more traveling but also much longer hours. I would have been much less present and I am not sure that it would have hurt the kids but I would have missed on some of the best years with them. 6 and 8 are such perfect ages and my hopefully mistaken belief is that it goes to hell around 13. So this means 5 years with the elder which goes in a blink. I would have missed on this amazing years with them. I decided that I would take these opportunities later (they may not arise all the time but in my field it is not a now or never) when the kids don't want to talk to me anyway. I love my work and am very clear that the kids leave soon enough so I would not do anything that would harm my career (leaving for a few years would have been a no no in my field) but am ok with slowing things down a little bit if it allows me to enjoy both my work and my precious time with the kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to continue to advance in your career - DO IT!!! Once you get into more senior level types of jobs, the opportunities for advancement shrink and shrink. And if you end up in the job you are in for a while without moving if you are in a more junior job to have gotten back into the workforce, it is very likely you will stagnate there. (ie. imagine yourself in your same role 10 years from now... or longer. When you are going up a career track you think it will keep advancing forever, when you get higher on the pyramid of whatever field, it no longer works like that). AND, once you've established yourself in a more senior role, more flexibility (and financial rewards that help afford more life flexibility/options) will kick back in. BUT if you think you are not planning in even some balance of 'career focus' moving forward in life, then stay. And, if you do have some career focus - don't take job advice from those who are not in the game. There is a certain set that will always tell you to stay home as much as possible & balance - and don't get that you can be a very engaged parent and also have a career too.

This seems like some good advice. I don't actually think that you can be a very engaged parent and also have a career, but I am not really sure that every child needs a very engaged parent. I don't know the names of every kid in my sons' classes, don't go to every sports practice and game, and only see their teachers at parent/teacher conferences. I do read with them every day, do their math homework with them, and listen to their middle of the night worries, and know their friends, so I am not disengaged, but not DCUM level engaged.

But my kids have white skin, high SES, a team of great teachers and educators available to them, every book/technology/extra curricular activity they could need, 2 parents, four grandparents, and a nanny who obviously love them, and penises. If they can't make it with those advantages, there is probably not much that my giving up my career would have done for them.

LOL. Poster, I don't know who you are... but I love you.

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.

OP already said that she alone makes enough to support her family. So how much money is enough?

Anonymous wrote:Ironically, I think it's easier to work outside the home when kids are younger versus older. You might have a couple of years but as your oldest approaches middle school, demands from school and extras increase and your nanny may not appreciate it. I would say no. You can always "go for it". When your kiddos are closer to college age. FWIW, I work full time and DH and I have four kids from elem to high school.

I agree. HS was the hardest on me in terms of constraints on my time. You can hire a nice lady to solve things for little kids. Big ones, not so much.

If you do take this job, get a full time nanny and treat her very well (with a separate house cleaner).