Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people like working. It gives them an identity and purpose apart from family life. It’s also empowering to earn money yourself. None of this disappears when children are born.

And if you grow apart later, it’s good to have a current skill set in case you have to support yourself again one day. It happens.

I understand this. I liked my job too and it gave me a sense of purpose, but I had to re-prioritize my goals ad staying in the workforce made it difficult for me to have to do everything.

This will sound much meaner over a post than if we were speaking. But I don’t mean it in a mean way. OP, everyone comes to the table with different skills and strengths and talents. Some women who stayed in the workforce had stronger skills in the workplace and homefront which allowed manage both more easily than you were able to.

NP, this is such an obnoxious viewpoint. My doctor mom would say the same thing. But after being raised by a go-getter, do it all-er, who felt vastly superior to stay at home mom’s, I chose to be a stay at home mom myself. My mom didn’t do it all, she just thought she did. I’m the one who suffered from her ambition and narcissism and chose not to inflict my children with the same. Get over yourself, you’re not managing as well as you think you are, unless you’re part time or your spouse stays with the kids. Nannies are not parents.

+100 found that incredibly obnoxious as well. Stronger skills on the homefront? If you're that smug it's unlikely you have the skills you think you do.

NP but it’s true. Some women are just scattered and disorganized. They have good degrees and everything, but maybe a neurological condition comes up and they are unable to handle things.

You sound so smug and delusional. Neurological conditions? There are only so many hours in the day. You can’t be a good parent and a good BigLaw partner at the same time. Something has to give. You’re delegating and delegating. Sure, a lady can clean your toilets well enough, but a nanny/au pair is not going to love your kid the way a parent does.

Some people, men and women, value parenting more than they value boardrooms. It’s okay to make the choices you’ve made, but don’t kid yourself that they don’t come at a huge cost, one way or another.

Some people are not able to manage both. Really it’s okay. Clearly you should not be balancing both with your negative attitude. You just see problems. You _have- to think that no BigLaw partner could be a good parent. Easiest way to justify not wanting to stay in BigLaw or that you were never going to make partner anyway.

Lol, I’m not a lawyer. It’s just what I’ve seen, knowing many, many lawyers. I have friends who are doctors who work part time. They manage both. Lawyers, never, unless they’re in-house. Same goes for investment banking. I have never seen anyone, male or female, manage both a BigLaw/investment banking career and being a good parent.
It does not happen.

Walk around NYC in the late morning, watch the nannies jabbering away on their phones, while walking dirty looking children in their strollers. Those kids do not look well taken care of (and yes, I can tell they are with their nannies because of obvious racial differences). The kids have messy hair, dirty fingers and cheeks. They keep trying to talk to their nannies, but the nannies don’t care. It’s pretty heartbreaking. But I am positive that their parents think everything is perfect.

Stop kidding yourself about how well you manage. There is always a price. You should know that; it’s basic microeconomics.

So you never worked at BigLaw? Your husband never worked at BigLaw? And you sure have a lot of opinions on the parenting of people you “know” in these careers. Sure lady. Lol. Here is a news flash. Lots of SAHM have kids with dirty hair and nails, unhappy children, etc. inattentive parents are inattentive whether they work or stay home.

Also you are posting on a DC board. Life does look different here.

PP, I do know what I am talking about because I was a legal assistant in BigLaw. After seeing what I saw, I opted out of going to law school (even though I had excellent credentials). All of the partners I met were horrible parents. Most of them went out of their way to purposefully work on holidays, especially Thanksgiving and Christmas, because they couldn’t bare being with their families. I’m sorry, but that is how it was. I chose to get a masters in something else. (I do work, but if money were not an issue, I would not.)

I don’t know know a single SAHM who isn’t on top of her kids being well manicured. Not one. The SAHMs I know volunteer at school and organize a million different things. There kids often times seem more talkative and confident and better adjusted. That’s how I see. I wish I could be a stay at home mom.

My SIL is a SAHM. Her kids are a mess. She's lazy and so is her husband. She doesn't cook or clean and her mother/my MIL does the laundry for the kids. They never have the supplies they need, they're rude, always attached to their iPads, etc. But I don't know why I'm even responding to you, your posts tell me all I need to know about you.

NP here. You can’t group all SAHMs together. I’m a well educated SAHM. I’m ivy educated and had a great career before deciding to stay home with my kids. My job was too demanding and Dh has an equally high demand job. We live in an affluent area and the SAHMs are all very involved. I do not envy the kids with nannies. There are some kids who are thriving with a great nanny and parents with big jobs but I would not say those kids are in a better situation. Most moms I know have complaints about the nanny and don’t have the best situation. They keep at it.

I miss my career. I will likely go back. For now, I am home with my three children and this is what is best for our family.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people like working. It gives them an identity and purpose apart from family life. It’s also empowering to earn money yourself. None of this disappears when children are born.

And if you grow apart later, it’s good to have a current skill set in case you have to support yourself again one day. It happens.

I understand this. I liked my job too and it gave me a sense of purpose, but I had to re-prioritize my goals ad staying in the workforce made it difficult for me to have to do everything.

This will sound much meaner over a post than if we were speaking. But I don’t mean it in a mean way. OP, everyone comes to the table with different skills and strengths and talents. Some women who stayed in the workforce had stronger skills in the workplace and homefront which allowed manage both more easily than you were able to.

NP, this is such an obnoxious viewpoint. My doctor mom would say the same thing. But after being raised by a go-getter, do it all-er, who felt vastly superior to stay at home mom’s, I chose to be a stay at home mom myself. My mom didn’t do it all, she just thought she did. I’m the one who suffered from her ambition and narcissism and chose not to inflict my children with the same. Get over yourself, you’re not managing as well as you think you are, unless you’re part time or your spouse stays with the kids. Nannies are not parents.

+100 found that incredibly obnoxious as well. Stronger skills on the homefront? If you're that smug it's unlikely you have the skills you think you do.

NP but it’s true. Some women are just scattered and disorganized. They have good degrees and everything, but maybe a neurological condition comes up and they are unable to handle things.

You sound so smug and delusional. Neurological conditions? There are only so many hours in the day. You can’t be a good parent and a good BigLaw partner at the same time. Something has to give. You’re delegating and delegating. Sure, a lady can clean your toilets well enough, but a nanny/au pair is not going to love your kid the way a parent does.

Some people, men and women, value parenting more than they value boardrooms. It’s okay to make the choices you’ve made, but don’t kid yourself that they don’t come at a huge cost, one way or another.

Some people are not able to manage both. Really it’s okay. Clearly you should not be balancing both with your negative attitude. You just see problems. You _have- to think that no BigLaw partner could be a good parent. Easiest way to justify not wanting to stay in BigLaw or that you were never going to make partner anyway.

Lol, I’m not a lawyer. It’s just what I’ve seen, knowing many, many lawyers. I have friends who are doctors who work part time. They manage both. Lawyers, never, unless they’re in-house. Same goes for investment banking. I have never seen anyone, male or female, manage both a BigLaw/investment banking career and being a good parent.
It does not happen.

Walk around NYC in the late morning, watch the nannies jabbering away on their phones, while walking dirty looking children in their strollers. Those kids do not look well taken care of (and yes, I can tell they are with their nannies because of obvious racial differences). The kids have messy hair, dirty fingers and cheeks. They keep trying to talk to their nannies, but the nannies don’t care. It’s pretty heartbreaking. But I am positive that their parents think everything is perfect.

Stop kidding yourself about how well you manage. There is always a price. You should know that; it’s basic microeconomics.

So you never worked at BigLaw? Your husband never worked at BigLaw? And you sure have a lot of opinions on the parenting of people you “know” in these careers. Sure lady. Lol. Here is a news flash. Lots of SAHM have kids with dirty hair and nails, unhappy children, etc. inattentive parents are inattentive whether they work or stay home.

Also you are posting on a DC board. Life does look different here.

PP, I do know what I am talking about because I was a legal assistant in BigLaw. After seeing what I saw, I opted out of going to law school (even though I had excellent credentials). All of the partners I met were horrible parents. Most of them went out of their way to purposefully work on holidays, especially Thanksgiving and Christmas, because they couldn’t bare being with their families. I’m sorry, but that is how it was. I chose to get a masters in something else. (I do work, but if money were not an issue, I would not.)

I don’t know know a single SAHM who isn’t on top of her kids being well manicured. Not one. The SAHMs I know volunteer at school and organize a million different things. There kids often times seem more talkative and confident and better adjusted. That’s how I see. I wish I could be a stay at home mom.

My SIL is a SAHM. Her kids are a mess. She's lazy and so is her husband. She doesn't cook or clean and her mother/my MIL does the laundry for the kids. They never have the supplies they need, they're rude, always attached to their iPads, etc. But I don't know why I'm even responding to you, your posts tell me all I need to know about you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had what would be considered a rather prestigious finance job and quit to stay at home and be with my kids, close to 20 years ago. Here is my take.

Finances: I was sort of in a unicorn situation where I had family money and would have been fine if we got divorced, DH also had plenty of savings/family money, enough for us to be comfortable even if something happened to him. Me brining in my income (which was significant) wouldn't have made a significant difference in our lives. I could've also gone back to work if after a year or two I regretted the decision.

Personal: I was well educated, great at my job, and loved it. However, I would've rarely seen my baby if I'd kept working. Working remotely or part time was not an option. Times were different, this was in the early 2000s. I think if I'd been a few years younger, I would've gone this route. I worried about not feeling fulfilled, honestly, I didn't love all the aspects of taking care of small children. However, it was not all about me. I was doing what I felt was best for my family. We did not have any family around to help. AT. ALL. This was big and I think people underestimate how helpful it is to have someone who is around, even just once or twice a year, or in true emergencies. DH's job was very demanding and he wasn't around either. For posters that say DH pitched in cooking dinner every night, did laundry on weekends, etc., not everyone's job affords these options. I could hire whatever help I wanted to help me, and basically had a blank check. Many people bad or mediocre, some were good, and a few were excellent. It was really hard to find the excellent ones who were available all the hours I would've needed to have kept working myself.
Also, it turned out my kids had some learning disabilities and other challenges. That can completely change the situation too.

Men who work see their kids rarely as well, and many women also have demanding jobs, but you never see men asked to justify their jobs. That's the issue with OP.

DH didn't have an issue seeing the baby, soon to be kids, here and there... some days for 5-10 minutes, some days not at all. In fact, he preferred it that way. I don't know how to say it other than that he didn't have a whole lot of interest in the kids when they were young. While I was never asked to "justify" staying home or not, I, on the other hand, felt like my heart would've been ripped out of my chest if I'd only seen our baby 10-15 minutes each morning/night. I stayed home, he worked all the time. It worked for everyone.

Also... Remember you are in this for the long game... although DH did very little kid stuff or traditional housework when the kids were young... Fast forward 16 years... we had a wild teenage boy. DH took over with then, I was way out of my league while DH knew exactly what to do. I don't know what I would've done without him. As DS is now in college, DH is a much better mentor with career stuff/life stuff for a 20-something year old young man than I could ever be.

You are a parent for life, not just the baby toddler years... there are stages... and they never end. For those of you with little kids, or even school-aged kids, this can be hard to see.

Well, some of us wouldn't have had kids with someone who wanted to see them so infrequently. I would have no respect for a man like that. Also, I'm not sure what kind of jobs you think people have, but I certainly never saw my kids for only 10-15 minutes each morning and night. You are doing some bizarre mental gymnastics here to justify yourself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people like working. It gives them an identity and purpose apart from family life. It’s also empowering to earn money yourself. None of this disappears when children are born.

And if you grow apart later, it’s good to have a current skill set in case you have to support yourself again one day. It happens.

I understand this. I liked my job too and it gave me a sense of purpose, but I had to re-prioritize my goals ad staying in the workforce made it difficult for me to have to do everything.

This will sound much meaner over a post than if we were speaking. But I don’t mean it in a mean way. OP, everyone comes to the table with different skills and strengths and talents. Some women who stayed in the workforce had stronger skills in the workplace and homefront which allowed manage both more easily than you were able to.

NP, this is such an obnoxious viewpoint. My doctor mom would say the same thing. But after being raised by a go-getter, do it all-er, who felt vastly superior to stay at home mom’s, I chose to be a stay at home mom myself. My mom didn’t do it all, she just thought she did. I’m the one who suffered from her ambition and narcissism and chose not to inflict my children with the same. Get over yourself, you’re not managing as well as you think you are, unless you’re part time or your spouse stays with the kids. Nannies are not parents.

+100 found that incredibly obnoxious as well. Stronger skills on the homefront? If you're that smug it's unlikely you have the skills you think you do.

NP but it’s true. Some women are just scattered and disorganized. They have good degrees and everything, but maybe a neurological condition comes up and they are unable to handle things.

You sound so smug and delusional. Neurological conditions? There are only so many hours in the day. You can’t be a good parent and a good BigLaw partner at the same time. Something has to give. You’re delegating and delegating. Sure, a lady can clean your toilets well enough, but a nanny/au pair is not going to love your kid the way a parent does.

Some people, men and women, value parenting more than they value boardrooms. It’s okay to make the choices you’ve made, but don’t kid yourself that they don’t come at a huge cost, one way or another.

I know this is what you have to say to justify your choices, but.... in 2024, there are a LOT of people who are biglaw partners and very good, very involved parents. I took a step back to part time for 7 years when DS was young. Now I work 2000 hours a year and make seven figures and I am around DS -all- the time. As long as you have enough work, no biglaw partners are going into the office more than 1 day a week anymore. We are also all high achievers and very organized. Not everyone can manage their lives like we do. But many of us really do have something that is very close to "having it all".

I’m not trying to be mean. I know people like you. I really do. A lot of them. You manage a lot, so much, and that’s awesome, but something has to give. The moms I know like that are not on top of their kids’ stuff as much as they think they are. They miss things. Some are important, so aren’t. For instance, if I send out an evite to one of my kids’ birthdays, the big career moms are always the last to respond. They don’t get around to it, unless their kids remind them. Obviously, that’s not very important, but it’s annoying to their children. But other stuff is way, way more important. We had a very bad situation at our private a few years back. The stay at home moms were so on top of it. The big career parents ignored it altogether. I won’t go into details, but I was simply shocked how blasé the working moms were. I’m sure they tell themselves it got handled, but I’ll bet their kids feel differently. You cannot delegate parenting. If you do, it shows.

Something always has to give. Always.

Did any Dads care? Your post was so funny it made me laugh out loud. Yes, working moms and dads at your school had more to care about than private school tempest in a teapot.

The working parents did not care. The SAHMs did. I guess I am sexist because I don’t see many men who excellent fathers or grandfathers, but I see many women who are excellent mothers and grandmothers. I’ve always assumed it was because men are more selfish and women are more selfless. I don’t think many men have it in them the way that many women do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people like working. It gives them an identity and purpose apart from family life. It’s also empowering to earn money yourself. None of this disappears when children are born.

And if you grow apart later, it’s good to have a current skill set in case you have to support yourself again one day. It happens.

I understand this. I liked my job too and it gave me a sense of purpose, but I had to re-prioritize my goals ad staying in the workforce made it difficult for me to have to do everything.

This will sound much meaner over a post than if we were speaking. But I don’t mean it in a mean way. OP, everyone comes to the table with different skills and strengths and talents. Some women who stayed in the workforce had stronger skills in the workplace and homefront which allowed manage both more easily than you were able to.

NP, this is such an obnoxious viewpoint. My doctor mom would say the same thing. But after being raised by a go-getter, do it all-er, who felt vastly superior to stay at home mom’s, I chose to be a stay at home mom myself. My mom didn’t do it all, she just thought she did. I’m the one who suffered from her ambition and narcissism and chose not to inflict my children with the same. Get over yourself, you’re not managing as well as you think you are, unless you’re part time or your spouse stays with the kids. Nannies are not parents.

+100 found that incredibly obnoxious as well. Stronger skills on the homefront? If you're that smug it's unlikely you have the skills you think you do.

NP but it’s true. Some women are just scattered and disorganized. They have good degrees and everything, but maybe a neurological condition comes up and they are unable to handle things.

You sound so smug and delusional. Neurological conditions? There are only so many hours in the day. You can’t be a good parent and a good BigLaw partner at the same time. Something has to give. You’re delegating and delegating. Sure, a lady can clean your toilets well enough, but a nanny/au pair is not going to love your kid the way a parent does.

Some people, men and women, value parenting more than they value boardrooms. It’s okay to make the choices you’ve made, but don’t kid yourself that they don’t come at a huge cost, one way or another.

Some people are not able to manage both. Really it’s okay. Clearly you should not be balancing both with your negative attitude. You just see problems. You _have- to think that no BigLaw partner could be a good parent. Easiest way to justify not wanting to stay in BigLaw or that you were never going to make partner anyway.

Lol, I’m not a lawyer. It’s just what I’ve seen, knowing many, many lawyers. I have friends who are doctors who work part time. They manage both. Lawyers, never, unless they’re in-house. Same goes for investment banking. I have never seen anyone, male or female, manage both a BigLaw/investment banking career and being a good parent.
It does not happen.

Walk around NYC in the late morning, watch the nannies jabbering away on their phones, while walking dirty looking children in their strollers. Those kids do not look well taken care of (and yes, I can tell they are with their nannies because of obvious racial differences). The kids have messy hair, dirty fingers and cheeks. They keep trying to talk to their nannies, but the nannies don’t care. It’s pretty heartbreaking. But I am positive that their parents think everything is perfect.

Stop kidding yourself about how well you manage. There is always a price. You should know that; it’s basic microeconomics.

So you never worked at BigLaw? Your husband never worked at BigLaw? And you sure have a lot of opinions on the parenting of people you “know” in these careers. Sure lady. Lol. Here is a news flash. Lots of SAHM have kids with dirty hair and nails, unhappy children, etc. inattentive parents are inattentive whether they work or stay home.

Also you are posting on a DC board. Life does look different here.

PP, I do know what I am talking about because I was a legal assistant in BigLaw. After seeing what I saw, I opted out of going to law school (even though I had excellent credentials). All of the partners I met were horrible parents. Most of them went out of their way to purposefully work on holidays, especially Thanksgiving and Christmas, because they couldn’t bare being with their families. I’m sorry, but that is how it was. I chose to get a masters in something else. (I do work, but if money were not an issue, I would not.)

I don’t know know a single SAHM who isn’t on top of her kids being well manicured. Not one. The SAHMs I know volunteer at school and organize a million different things. There kids often times seem more talkative and confident and better adjusted. That’s how I see. I wish I could be a stay at home mom.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people like working. It gives them an identity and purpose apart from family life. It’s also empowering to earn money yourself. None of this disappears when children are born.

And if you grow apart later, it’s good to have a current skill set in case you have to support yourself again one day. It happens.

I understand this. I liked my job too and it gave me a sense of purpose, but I had to re-prioritize my goals ad staying in the workforce made it difficult for me to have to do everything.

This will sound much meaner over a post than if we were speaking. But I don’t mean it in a mean way. OP, everyone comes to the table with different skills and strengths and talents. Some women who stayed in the workforce had stronger skills in the workplace and homefront which allowed manage both more easily than you were able to.

NP, this is such an obnoxious viewpoint. My doctor mom would say the same thing. But after being raised by a go-getter, do it all-er, who felt vastly superior to stay at home mom’s, I chose to be a stay at home mom myself. My mom didn’t do it all, she just thought she did. I’m the one who suffered from her ambition and narcissism and chose not to inflict my children with the same. Get over yourself, you’re not managing as well as you think you are, unless you’re part time or your spouse stays with the kids. Nannies are not parents.

+100 found that incredibly obnoxious as well. Stronger skills on the homefront? If you're that smug it's unlikely you have the skills you think you do.

NP but it’s true. Some women are just scattered and disorganized. They have good degrees and everything, but maybe a neurological condition comes up and they are unable to handle things.

You sound so smug and delusional. Neurological conditions? There are only so many hours in the day. You can’t be a good parent and a good BigLaw partner at the same time. Something has to give. You’re delegating and delegating. Sure, a lady can clean your toilets well enough, but a nanny/au pair is not going to love your kid the way a parent does.

Some people, men and women, value parenting more than they value boardrooms. It’s okay to make the choices you’ve made, but don’t kid yourself that they don’t come at a huge cost, one way or another.

Some people are not able to manage both. Really it’s okay. Clearly you should not be balancing both with your negative attitude. You just see problems. You _have- to think that no BigLaw partner could be a good parent. Easiest way to justify not wanting to stay in BigLaw or that you were never going to make partner anyway.

Lol, I’m not a lawyer. It’s just what I’ve seen, knowing many, many lawyers. I have friends who are doctors who work part time. They manage both. Lawyers, never, unless they’re in-house. Same goes for investment banking. I have never seen anyone, male or female, manage both a BigLaw/investment banking career and being a good parent.
It does not happen.

Walk around NYC in the late morning, watch the nannies jabbering away on their phones, while walking dirty looking children in their strollers. Those kids do not look well taken care of (and yes, I can tell they are with their nannies because of obvious racial differences). The kids have messy hair, dirty fingers and cheeks. They keep trying to talk to their nannies, but the nannies don’t care. It’s pretty heartbreaking. But I am positive that their parents think everything is perfect.

Stop kidding yourself about how well you manage. There is always a price. You should know that; it’s basic microeconomics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had what would be considered a rather prestigious finance job and quit to stay at home and be with my kids, close to 20 years ago. Here is my take.

Finances: I was sort of in a unicorn situation where I had family money and would have been fine if we got divorced, DH also had plenty of savings/family money, enough for us to be comfortable even if something happened to him. Me brining in my income (which was significant) wouldn't have made a significant difference in our lives. I could've also gone back to work if after a year or two I regretted the decision.

Personal: I was well educated, great at my job, and loved it. However, I would've rarely seen my baby if I'd kept working. Working remotely or part time was not an option. Times were different, this was in the early 2000s. I think if I'd been a few years younger, I would've gone this route. I worried about not feeling fulfilled, honestly, I didn't love all the aspects of taking care of small children. However, it was not all about me. I was doing what I felt was best for my family. We did not have any family around to help. AT. ALL. This was big and I think people underestimate how helpful it is to have someone who is around, even just once or twice a year, or in true emergencies. DH's job was very demanding and he wasn't around either. For posters that say DH pitched in cooking dinner every night, did laundry on weekends, etc., not everyone's job affords these options. I could hire whatever help I wanted to help me, and basically had a blank check. Many people bad or mediocre, some were good, and a few were excellent. It was really hard to find the excellent ones who were available all the hours I would've needed to have kept working myself.
Also, it turned out my kids had some learning disabilities and other challenges. That can completely change the situation too.

Men who work see their kids rarely as well, and many women also have demanding jobs, but you never see men asked to justify their jobs. That's the issue with OP.

DH didn't have an issue seeing the baby, soon to be kids, here and there... some days for 5-10 minutes, some days not at all. In fact, he preferred it that way. I don't know how to say it other than that he didn't have a whole lot of interest in the kids when they were young. While I was never asked to "justify" staying home or not, I, on the other hand, felt like my heart would've been ripped out of my chest if I'd only seen our baby 10-15 minutes each morning/night. I stayed home, he worked all the time. It worked for everyone.

Also... Remember you are in this for the long game... although DH did very little kid stuff or traditional housework when the kids were young... Fast forward 16 years... we had a wild teenage boy. DH took over with then, I was way out of my league while DH knew exactly what to do. I don't know what I would've done without him. As DS is now in college, DH is a much better mentor with career stuff/life stuff for a 20-something year old young man than I could ever be.

You are a parent for life, not just the baby toddler years... there are stages... and they never end. For those of you with little kids, or even school-aged kids, this can be hard to see.

Anonymous wrote:My mother was a SAHM and so were many women in my family including myself. We're not less educated or less smart for what we've chose. We chose differently because we made family our priority, something that is hard when you work full time.

I'm grateful that women today have the option to go to work if they want to, but judging by their posts, many were led to believe that being a homemaker less than chasing money at some corporation. The smugness in this thread is baffling.