Back to the topic at hand: OP, life with small children and two working parents is stressful. There is a lot to do, and little time in which to do it. However, there is a laundry list of options toi mitgate the stress.

1) A short commute (this usually means sacrificing space to live close in.Pay close attention to the length of the office to childcare leg of your journey)
2) Jobs with flexible hours or the ability to telework
3) A cleaning service
4) A meal service
5) Nearby grandparents who are good for a few hours of childcare
6) A stay at home parent

You can mix and match these to fit your personal preferences. The stage where your kids are really needy is short in the greater scheme of things. Even kindergarten is 6 hours per day now. Also, women who work part time report the greatest life satisfaction,.

If this is stressing you out, for heaven's sake, haul your tucchus off of this parenting website and back to Tinder.

Back to the topic at hand: OP, life with small children and two working parents is stressful. There is a lot to do, and little time in which to do it. However, there is a laundry list of options toi mitgate the stress.

1) A short commute (this usually means sacrificing space to live close in.Pay close attention to the length of the office to childcare leg of your journey)
2) Jobs with flexible hours or the ability to telework
3) A cleaning service
4) A meal service
5) Nearby grandparents who are good for a few hours of childcare
6) A stay at home parent

You can mix and match these to fit your personal preferences. The stage where your kids are really needy is short in the greater scheme of things. Even kindergarten is 6 hours per day now. Also, women who work part time report the greatest life satisfaction,.

If this is stressing you out, for heaven's sake, haul your tucchus off of this parenting website and back to Tinder.

The thread has already been derailed by another wohm vs sahm debate.

OP, find a woman whose vision of post-kid life is compatible with your kids. And yes, that can include a dual working parent household.

Regardless of what recent threads suggest, not all women want to be sahms. There are many women who don't want to be sahms even if their husbands make enough for them to do do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By mistake, I read the other thread about all women aspiring to be housewives. Need to know what I'm working with here.

Why, what did you read in the other thread that concerned you?

Because I've never been driven by a desire to "provide" for someone. Am I in the minority?

Uh, no. I really hope you're not in the minority. My parents came to this country with three little girls under two so we could get educated, have careers, and NOT have to rely on a man to provide for them. Those posts are so sickening to me.

You fool. So when nannies/daycares raise kids, it is not sickening. But when mothers do it is..

Your parents did not do a good job of raising you. Maybe they should have both stayed home.

. . . says the college-educated person that made it a goal of marrying a rich man to provide for them.

I'm a new poster. To be clear, staying home with my kids is not about ME. it's about CHILDCARE. It's about providing my children with the absolute highest quality childcare available - a parent. it would be a cold day in hell before I leave one of my babies in some random daycare for 50 hours a week.

Good for you. I've never understood why the interests of the kids are always left out of these discussions. It all seems to revolve around finances, career advancement, having "me time" for the parents, how to outsource domestic life. There is never a debate about the most important issue - raising the children.

+1.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By mistake, I read the other thread about all women aspiring to be housewives. Need to know what I'm working with here.

Why, what did you read in the other thread that concerned you?

Because I've never been driven by a desire to "provide" for someone. Am I in the minority?

Uh, no. I really hope you're not in the minority. My parents came to this country with three little girls under two so we could get educated, have careers, and NOT have to rely on a man to provide for them. Those posts are so sickening to me.

You fool. So when nannies/daycares raise kids, it is not sickening. But when mothers do it is..

Your parents did not do a good job of raising you. Maybe they should have both stayed home.

. . . says the college-educated person that made it a goal of marrying a rich man to provide for them.

We are LMC, you narrow minded person.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Medical specialist, 5th year big law associate, high finance, 2-3years post MBA at MBB consulting - those are the four paths I know tons of late 20/early 30 people making 250k+

Did you go to a top school or tailgate state?

The pool of people making 250k+ is still exceedingly small. It may seem a bit bigger because odds are you live almost within that rarefied circle and such jobs will concentrate you to key markets in key cities where much of the income is eaten up by very high COL.

DH pulls in 300k but he's in his early 40s and it took him 20 years to get to this level, through both hard work and some luck. He's in the corporate world and has a quite senior role.

By the way, I am an Ivy graduate and I've seen the average incomes of graduates of my fine Ivy and it's well below 250k. Some of the most successful people I know are tailgate U graduates and they were phenomenal at sales or started their own businesses.

if you work in tech, it seems everyone is making 250k after age 30 - starting salaries at Microsoft for PM's and Devs is 120-130 at age 21/22.

Mouth that would necessitate moving up to a director level? Most programmers don't have the chops to be that level of management unless they get an MBA.

At MICROSOFT. Good lord you all have ridiculously high aspirations. You are equating the *average* with working as a developer for top top top tech company. <5% of software development grads will be going to work for companies on caliber with Microsoft, Facebook, etc. Give me a break!

Did you go to Arizona State or something?

Most people I know are working at Google, Facebook Amazon etc. They all make 200k+

Hah, I am the LMC Ivy grad. Working as govt scientist. Yes I know many people who work at Microsoft and Google, but we don't discuss salaries. That's where an UMC background is handy, because your oldest friends from childhood and maybe family members, will talk more frankly about money -- but the folks I grew up largely work as nurses or sales for a rural hardware company.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By mistake, I read the other thread about all women aspiring to be housewives. Need to know what I'm working with here.

Why, what did you read in the other thread that concerned you?

Because I've never been driven by a desire to "provide" for someone. Am I in the minority?

Uh, no. I really hope you're not in the minority. My parents came to this country with three little girls under two so we could get educated, have careers, and NOT have to rely on a man to provide for them. Those posts are so sickening to me.

You fool. So when nannies/daycares raise kids, it is not sickening. But when mothers do it is..

Your parents did not do a good job of raising you. Maybe they should have both stayed home.

. . . says the college-educated person that made it a goal of marrying a rich man to provide for them.

I'm a new poster. To be clear, staying home with my kids is not about ME. it's about CHILDCARE. It's about providing my children with the absolute highest quality childcare available - a parent. it would be a cold day in hell before I leave one of my babies in some random daycare for 50 hours a week.

Good for you. I've never understood why the interests of the kids are always left out of these discussions. It all seems to revolve around finances, career advancement, having "me time" for the parents, how to outsource domestic life. There is never a debate about the most important issue - raising the children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By mistake, I read the other thread about all women aspiring to be housewives. Need to know what I'm working with here.

Why, what did you read in the other thread that concerned you?

Because I've never been driven by a desire to "provide" for someone. Am I in the minority?

Uh, no. I really hope you're not in the minority. My parents came to this country with three little girls under two so we could get educated, have careers, and NOT have to rely on a man to provide for them. Those posts are so sickening to me.

You fool. So when nannies/daycares raise kids, it is not sickening. But when mothers do it is..

Your parents did not do a good job of raising you. Maybe they should have both stayed home.

And what happens when DD marries a man for money, only to be stuck in an abusive relationship with no back-up plan? Or DD's husband is permanently disabled? Or decides to leave DD for a hot, younger wife? Unless DD has a sizeable trust fund, she's screwed.

I am not defending staying at home. For many who make the choice, it has nothing to do with PP's "relying on a man to provide for them". It is a practical and very good choice for many when their kids are young. You raise some very valid points, which I agree with.

My response was to PP's "sickening" comment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By mistake, I read the other thread about all women aspiring to be housewives. Need to know what I'm working with here.

Why, what did you read in the other thread that concerned you?

Because I've never been driven by a desire to "provide" for someone. Am I in the minority?

Uh, no. I really hope you're not in the minority. My parents came to this country with three little girls under two so we could get educated, have careers, and NOT have to rely on a man to provide for them. Those posts are so sickening to me.

You fool. So when nannies/daycares raise kids, it is not sickening. But when mothers do it is..

Your parents did not do a good job of raising you. Maybe they should have both stayed home.

. . . says the college-educated person that made it a goal of marrying a rich man to provide for them.

I'm a new poster. To be clear, staying home with my kids is not about ME. it's about CHILDCARE. It's about providing my children with the absolute highest quality childcare available - a parent. it would be a cold day in hell before I leave one of my babies in some random daycare for 50 hours a week.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By mistake, I read the other thread about all women aspiring to be housewives. Need to know what I'm working with here.

Why, what did you read in the other thread that concerned you?

Because I've never been driven by a desire to "provide" for someone. Am I in the minority?

Uh, no. I really hope you're not in the minority. My parents came to this country with three little girls under two so we could get educated, have careers, and NOT have to rely on a man to provide for them. Those posts are so sickening to me.

You fool. So when nannies/daycares raise kids, it is not sickening. But when mothers do it is..

Your parents did not do a good job of raising you. Maybe they should have both stayed home.

Are you claiming by being a SAHM, you are a better parent than those that work? Sorry, trolling DCUM while you're "working" at home doesn't make you a good parent.

No stupid. I am not claiming anything. I am addressing the "sickening" comment from PP above..

I am not competing with WOHM. I am actually going back to work in a couple of years. And I have an aunt watching my babies right now while I "troll".

Do what works for you and stop judging other people's choices.

Calling PPs "fool" and "stupid" for sharing their opinion. Good luck on that job hunt.

You are as stupid as they are if you failed to notice what the issue is here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By mistake, I read the other thread about all women aspiring to be housewives. Need to know what I'm working with here.

Why, what did you read in the other thread that concerned you?

Because I've never been driven by a desire to "provide" for someone. Am I in the minority?

Uh, no. I really hope you're not in the minority. My parents came to this country with three little girls under two so we could get educated, have careers, and NOT have to rely on a man to provide for them. Those posts are so sickening to me.

You fool. So when nannies/daycares raise kids, it is not sickening. But when mothers do it is..

Your parents did not do a good job of raising you. Maybe they should have both stayed home.

Are you claiming by being a SAHM, you are a better parent than those that work? Sorry, trolling DCUM while you're "working" at home doesn't make you a good parent.

No stupid. I am not claiming anything. I am addressing the "sickening" comment from PP above..

I am not competing with WOHM. I am actually going back to work in a couple of years. And I have an aunt watching my babies right now while I "troll".

Do what works for you and stop judging other people's choices.

So a SAHP that doesn't even stay at home with their child, defending the SAH lifestyle? Interesting to say the least.

Reading comprehension is not your strength, is it?

Go back and try again, silly. I did not defend the stay at home lifestyle. In fact, earlier in this thread, I mentioned that it was not necessary.

I stay at home with my children; I just have help at the moment. Don't you ever have any?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By mistake, I read the other thread about all women aspiring to be housewives. Need to know what I'm working with here.

Why, what did you read in the other thread that concerned you?

Because I've never been driven by a desire to "provide" for someone. Am I in the minority?

Uh, no. I really hope you're not in the minority. My parents came to this country with three little girls under two so we could get educated, have careers, and NOT have to rely on a man to provide for them. Those posts are so sickening to me.

You fool. So when nannies/daycares raise kids, it is not sickening. But when mothers do it is..

Your parents did not do a good job of raising you. Maybe they should have both stayed home.

Defensive much?

Nope. You? I am just stating the truth. You'd have to be a fool to fail to see how a mother doing what nannies or daycare providers do is somehow worthy of less respect than those nannies or daycare providers. And I am assuming that you respect nannies and daycare providers.

Yes, respect for the working. . . And respect for those that stay at home and actually take care of their children. Those that stay at home, troll DCUM and call others' names for sharing their opinion, and then state they are a SAHP but their aunt is actually watching the children. Good luck in your job search.

I don't have any respect for those who think others choices are sickening.

lol. My aunt is watching my babies today. Get it? Stupid!

I will do very well with my job search, thank you.

If people like you who cannot read and comprehend have jobs, then there is definitely a job out there for me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By mistake, I read the other thread about all women aspiring to be housewives. Need to know what I'm working with here.

Why, what did you read in the other thread that concerned you?

Because I've never been driven by a desire to "provide" for someone. Am I in the minority?

Do you even have kids?? DH and I both wanted to work (and we do) but it was heartbreaking not having a choice between working and staying home.

No kids. I recently finished grad school and have been getting my career started in DC. But I do not realistically foresee my income increasing beyond low six figures. I guess I just didn't realize this was such a deal breaker for women this day in age.

Come back and tell us how tired and stressed you are when both you and your wife work long inflexible hours, don't have time for your kids and your family is stressed. You are naive.

This is exactly the problem. Many lower middle class strivers come to high COL areas and do jobs they love or have an important mission, only to realize later they should have been chasing the $$$ if they want kids and TIME to see those kids.

OP this DH learned this lesson the hard way and my career is too advanced to change to make more lucrative. But you should tack now into and be more ambitious about income. I was so excited to make twice as much as my parents had ever made together, $80k... hah hah was so naive. Probably still naive because I really have no idea how people swing these $500k careers. But do wish I had investigated when I was younger and could take more risk.

OP - I did not come from a LMC background. Maybe my outlook is skewed because I was raised in a two income household. My mother still works because she loves her job and she is at the top of her field.

I am also clueless as to what these high-income individuals do for a living. I have friends working in numerous fields and none of them are raking in 250k+. In addition, there is little chance they ever will. Those jobs are difficult to come by. I cannot imagine just waltzing in to a job like that.

Umm, you wither need to make enough jointly to pay for daycare or a nanny, or for your wife / partner to stay home tilnthe kids are school aged.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Medical specialist, 5th year big law associate, high finance, 2-3years post MBA at MBB consulting - those are the four paths I know tons of late 20/early 30 people making 250k+

Did you go to a top school or tailgate state?

The pool of people making 250k+ is still exceedingly small. It may seem a bit bigger because odds are you live almost within that rarefied circle and such jobs will concentrate you to key markets in key cities where much of the income is eaten up by very high COL.

DH pulls in 300k but he's in his early 40s and it took him 20 years to get to this level, through both hard work and some luck. He's in the corporate world and has a quite senior role.

By the way, I am an Ivy graduate and I've seen the average incomes of graduates of my fine Ivy and it's well below 250k. Some of the most successful people I know are tailgate U graduates and they were phenomenal at sales or started their own businesses.

if you work in tech, it seems everyone is making 250k after age 30 - starting salaries at Microsoft for PM's and Devs is 120-130 at age 21/22.

Mouth that would necessitate moving up to a director level? Most programmers don't have the chops to be that level of management unless they get an MBA.

At MICROSOFT. Good lord you all have ridiculously high aspirations. You are equating the *average* with working as a developer for top top top tech company. <5% of software development grads will be going to work for companies on caliber with Microsoft, Facebook, etc. Give me a break!

Did you go to Arizona State or something?

Most people I know are working at Google, Facebook Amazon etc. They all make 200k+

News flash: most people in the world/DC/region are not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Medical specialist, 5th year big law associate, high finance, 2-3years post MBA at MBB consulting - those are the four paths I know tons of late 20/early 30 people making 250k+

Did you go to a top school or tailgate state?

The pool of people making 250k+ is still exceedingly small. It may seem a bit bigger because odds are you live almost within that rarefied circle and such jobs will concentrate you to key markets in key cities where much of the income is eaten up by very high COL.

DH pulls in 300k but he's in his early 40s and it took him 20 years to get to this level, through both hard work and some luck. He's in the corporate world and has a quite senior role.

By the way, I am an Ivy graduate and I've seen the average incomes of graduates of my fine Ivy and it's well below 250k. Some of the most successful people I know are tailgate U graduates and they were phenomenal at sales or started their own businesses.

if you work in tech, it seems everyone is making 250k after age 30 - starting salaries at Microsoft for PM's and Devs is 120-130 at age 21/22.

Mouth that would necessitate moving up to a director level? Most programmers don't have the chops to be that level of management unless they get an MBA.

At MICROSOFT. Good lord you all have ridiculously high aspirations. You are equating the *average* with working as a developer for top top top tech company. <5% of software development grads will be going to work for companies on caliber with Microsoft, Facebook, etc. Give me a break!

Did you go to Arizona State or something?

Most people I know are working at Google, Facebook Amazon etc. They all make 200k+