Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Yes thank you. 100% if we could afford it, neither my husband nor I would work for money. This cannot be uncommon.

I just went on a girls trip with friends. I am the only SAHM. Everyone else works. Some are divorced. DH earns more than possibly everyone combined on the trip, including their spouses. My friends all said they wished they had my life and I am living the dream. The most competent one in the group is high earning but like high six figure earning so very high for a woman, but not so high for a man. She is going through a divorce and likely will have to buy her husband out on the house and pay him alimony and child support. She will also be on hook for kids’ college.

She would probably have a much worse quality of life if she was a SAHM in her 50s divorcing. My mom was SAHM and gave up her career to support my father’s career, which required frequent moves. They separated when I was in high school, but she felt trapped in the marriage for years before they separated. I realized she was unhappy when I was in 3rd grade, mainly because she was pretty vocal about how miserable she was. If you have millions banked or tons of family money it may worth the risk. For lots of people, however, it is a big stretch financially and risky if things don’t work out.

DP. Maybe? Divorce sucks. Alimony and child support exist for a reason, although obviously the way that plays out varies wildly. I understand that people get screwed by divorce every day but I still think the lesson is to try not to have children with someone who would treat you poorly if things go wrong; NOT to live your life unhappily working and outsourcing childcare (if that describes your situation) because of what if. There are so many good reasons to work and good reasons to stay home (depending on the person), but this logic always strikes me as the absolute saddest.

Anonymous wrote:I found maternity leave extremely isolating, personally. It's not about the money.

Well, having a newborn in general is isolating because you’re pretty homebound. As your kids get older, they get out more, as do their caregivers.

I found maternity leave extremely isolating, personally. It's not about the money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It annoys me when the “seven figure DH” SAHMs parachute in bc because for them, it wasn’t much of a choice. Since they’re not into having careers, then they weren’t giving up much.

The type of woman who attracts a man who earns seven figures is usually well educated. Most of the women I know married to successful men were also successful in their careers. I gave up my career to stay home with my kids. I didn’t expect to stay home. I didn’t expect to miss my baby so much when I was at work at my demanding job. I went expecting the juggling of kids and a career to be so difficult, especially when your husband has a very demanding job. I really hated leaving my baby with a nanny.

Well educated? It’s called pretty privilege.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Yes thank you. 100% if we could afford it, neither my husband nor I would work for money. This cannot be uncommon.

I just went on a girls trip with friends. I am the only SAHM. Everyone else works. Some are divorced. DH earns more than possibly everyone combined on the trip, including their spouses. My friends all said they wished they had my life and I am living the dream. The most competent one in the group is high earning but like high six figure earning so very high for a woman, but not so high for a man. She is going through a divorce and likely will have to buy her husband out on the house and pay him alimony and child support. She will also be on hook for kids’ college.

She would probably have a much worse quality of life if she was a SAHM in her 50s divorcing. My mom was SAHM and gave up her career to support my father’s career, which required frequent moves. They separated when I was in high school, but she felt trapped in the marriage for years before they separated. I realized she was unhappy when I was in 3rd grade, mainly because she was pretty vocal about how miserable she was. If you have millions banked or tons of family money it may worth the risk. For lots of people, however, it is a big stretch financially and risky if things don’t work out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Are you unable to think of ways in which you could enrich yourself or your life intellectually outside of a performance plan by your boss? Seriously?

There are many factors at play here. DH’s salary, amount of savings, family money, etc.

Some women don’t have high earning husbands or the marriage isn’t strong enough or there isn’t enough savings. These matter for someone deciding to give up their income and become dependent on their spouse financially.

It was my lifelong dream and a core value DH and I shared.

To OP - you are getting many varied strong opinions here. Clearly there is no one way for everyone. This is a hard question but not really that hard.

You have to sit down and really figure out what your priorities are. Write them down. Rank them. List the pros and cons of each option bc all option have both pros and cons. Your pros may be my cons. Write down your values, what brings you joy, what bring you fulfilment. Try to write all this down honestly. Try to remove fear from your reflections. Try to remove what other people think of you as a factor. Unless that is really important to you, then you have to include it.

Then, write down a decision, and let it sit with you for a few days. See how your gut feels about it. If it doesn't feel right, write down a different decision and see how that feels over a few days. Repeat as needed. Then you'll have your answer on what is right for you. And you can feel good about your decision and own it and not look back. You have to accept the cons with the pros. ONe thing, if you decide to be SAHM completely, some advice on here about having your own account and pay yourself sounds really good.

-signed a physician who loves her job and also wanted to be primary caregiver to her kdis. So went part time 3 days/wk after first kid was born. Caution - it's not the utopia some people make it seem, there are sacrifices at both work and home, I often feel like I'm not doing either to the best of my ability, but it's right for me because I hate routine and with this schedule, every day is a little different.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Yes thank you. 100% if we could afford it, neither my husband nor I would work for money. This cannot be uncommon.

I just went on a girls trip with friends. I am the only SAHM. Everyone else works. Some are divorced. DH earns more than possibly everyone combined on the trip, including their spouses. My friends all said they wished they had my life and I am living the dream. The most competent one in the group is high earning but like high six figure earning so very high for a woman, but not so high for a man. She is going through a divorce and likely will have to buy her husband out on the house and pay him alimony and child support. She will also be on hook for kids’ college.

Pp again. My oldest is now in high school. I can’t tell which kids had a working mom or SAHM. Almost all the moms work, although many seem to have hobby type jobs. Some start businesses that likely don’t turn a profit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It annoys me when the “seven figure DH” SAHMs parachute in bc because for them, it wasn’t much of a choice. Since they’re not into having careers, then they weren’t giving up much.

The type of woman who attracts a man who earns seven figures is usually well educated. Most of the women I know married to successful men were also successful in their careers. I gave up my career to stay home with my kids. I didn’t expect to stay home. I didn’t expect to miss my baby so much when I was at work at my demanding job. I went expecting the juggling of kids and a career to be so difficult, especially when your husband has a very demanding job. I really hated leaving my baby with a nanny.

🙄

Or she just got lucky. Doubt he was making 7 figures in his 20s.

And plenty of the women who get lucky find their husbands trade in for a younger model. Tale as old as time.

Np. She did get lucky. There are many well educated women with careers who do not have spouses earning 2 mil.

It doesn't change the fact that many women married to high earning spouses are well educated and had good careers before deciding to SAHP.

Doctors marry doctors. Attorneys marry attorneys, and so on. This is very common. Some will remain dual income, and some will have one partner step back once there are children in the picture.

Pp here. Maybe I was lucky. I have fellow well educated friends who are now the breadwinners and have husbands who didn’t do as well as them professionally. If my husband didn’t earn millions, I would likely still be working.

I have very highly competent friends. Some don’t sleep and do it all. I do think those women seem a little less in tune with their kids, only because they can’t spend as much time with their kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Yes thank you. 100% if we could afford it, neither my husband nor I would work for money. This cannot be uncommon.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t want strangers raising my children.

They're probably better at it than you.

Why would a random daycare worker be better at taking care of kids than their own parent?

Yes, every parent is a fit to parent by virtue of being a parent. Anyone who is paid to provide childcare could never be as fit. 🙄

Yeah I think parents are more fit to be a parent than some low paid daycare worker who focuses 9-5. A parent is more invested and more loving to the child than any paid employee. That’s reality.

I've heard so many people say about their hired caregivers "She really cares about our child."
No doofus, she cares about a paycheck.

I mean he or she might very much care about the child. Does the parent care more? Most likely yes.