Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you need a day nanny and a night nanny to raise your children, what is the point of even having kids?

But once you make partner, and have tons of money , your time is much more flexible (business development lunches, client interaction, etc). Kids are entering older elem and quite capable to travel, take on adventure, help guide them towards building their own life. Plus you will have money to give them almost endless options, they can pursue arts or charitable work and not have to make the trade offs BigLaw parents have to make.

This is either sarcasm, or you are an optimistic 3L. The partners at my firm are in the office earlier and later than most of the associates. After a few years of being partner, they look like they've aged 20 years.

Optimistic. But once partner is like 50, can't they coast on connections and book of business? The relationships and wisdom from experience are their assets, not hours in the office. They still need to respond to clients like rabbits on cocaine, but most clients are probably home for dinner too most nights. They then task their associates to the grindstone.

Even if this was true (It's not), do the math on that. If you have children when you are in your early 30s, by the time you're in your 50s, your kids are off at college.

Optimistic. But once partner is like 50, can't they coast on connections and book of business? The relationships and wisdom from experience are their assets, not hours in the office. They still need to respond to clients like rabbits on cocaine, but most clients are probably home for dinner too most nights. They then task their associates to the grindstone.

lmao.

I am one of those not-so-rare sahms to a biglaw lawyer. Due to layoffs, the firms he was working for restructuring, (the place he started is down to 30 lawyers now in their main office... down from over 200), etc, everything has been lateral for years. It is good money, but not "big" money, not by any means. It has been decent money, for some time. Decent enough to sock some away in a 401K and pay down loans while affording DC. Nothing more.

His new firm wants him to push to be partner track... honestly, I do not want this. It sounds like a giant pita. The money he makes now is fine, he's usually home before 8PM and he usually can work from home on the weekends.

I am pushing inhouse jobs at him.

And why don't I work, you ask? Why am I not "contributing?" Because my contribution would be a dead loss if I had to outsource everything I'd have to outsource to make it work. And by that, I mean the simple exercise of picking up my children before and after school.

Anonymous wrote:When you need a day nanny and a night nanny to raise your children, what is the point of even having kids?

Honestly. I know that this is an unpopular DCUM opinion but I honestly don't understanding creating children that you don't see just to chase more money. I feel so badly for your kids.

I'll put in a plug for biglaw, having spent 8 years there earlier in my career. I was a litigator and while I worked hard, it wasn't all crazy all of the time. I generally billed 2000-2200 the years I was there, with ebbs and flows in workload month to month. After having my first child, we put her in daycare and I started leaving at 6:00 almost every night for pickup (DH, also biglaw, handled some pickups as well). Once I got used to it, it wasn't that hard. I commuted on a bus and was always above ground and responsive, we lived very close to the daycare, so I could get her home quick, and then I could monitor email through dinner, bath, bedtime. Once she was down, I almost always logged back on to keep working. I found that as long as you were responsive and gave an idea of when you could get the assignment done, most people were fine. I also found that my concentration and efficiency improved when I had a more finite period in which to bill hours before leaving the office. I had to travel some, so that got sticky, but we have family nearby and relied on them. I had my son 3 years after my daughter was born and started leaving closer to 5:30 or earlier. It was hard and tiring for sure, and I had no free time to myself, but it gave me 2 paid maternity leaves of considerable length, a lot of savings, great experience, and a good name on my resume.

That said, as my kids get older, I hope that both DH and I can be around more and more. I'm at mid-law and still work plenty. I really do enjoy it, but all the tradeoffs in the prior posts are quite real. At the end of the day, I don't think chasing the prestige ("prestige"?) or the money is how I want to spend my time. But, I also freely admit that I didn't have the option. I wasn't on partner track, even before having kids. It may be that I would have made different choices if I had been.