Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know. There is a mom in my son's class who is a law firm partner and she is the only one I have ever seen at drop off or pick up or at any type of school function. It's like the dad doesn't exist. So seems like she's the default parent.

What a shock - it probably depends whether law firm partner is the husband or the wife.

She picks her child up every day from school? This doesn't seem possible to me. Drop off I could see since many lawyers go in late, but pick up??

No, she doesn't pick up every day. I don't either. I work. But anytime I've been at pick up because of a special occasion (class party, holiday, etc), she is the one there.

She must work every night till 2 am.

This is troubling to me. I realize that partners are hugely well-paid, but are they really expected to have zero family time and no flexibility? That doesn't sound like a life to me.

Then again, DH and I both work full time and well under 200k. But at least we both see the kids every day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He says yes. I say no. I work full time and we have a two year old.

The summer my husband interned at a big law firm downtown, he realized that every male partner was on his second wife/family--none of their first marriages had survived. He decided to apply for the DOH honors program instead, because he wanted to be a parent more than he wanted to be a partner. Priorities.

My husband is a big law partner and has spent a lot of years at two different very big firms. I can only think of a few divorced partners at either place. There are few couples where one of them has not slow-tracked a career when kids came along, usually the wife but in a few cases the husband. I also know many government lawyers. A few are divorced, but not the majority. My anecdotal evidence contradicts your anecdotal evidence. I have never seen any statistics that show that the divorce rate is higher in big law than in other parts of the profession.

Agree. Actually, I think there were more divorced govt attys that we knew compared to firms. Probably because the govt hours were terrible (trial attys at DOJ), and the money was equally bad. At least at the firm the money made up for the hours, and you could actually afford to live closer in and outsource help.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He says yes. I say no. I work full time and we have a two year old.

The summer my husband interned at a big law firm downtown, he realized that every male partner was on his second wife/family--none of their first marriages had survived. He decided to apply for the DOH honors program instead, because he wanted to be a parent more than he wanted to be a partner. Priorities.

My husband is a big law partner and has spent a lot of years at two different very big firms. I can only think of a few divorced partners at either place. There are few couples where one of them has not slow-tracked a career when kids came along, usually the wife but in a few cases the husband. I also know many government lawyers. A few are divorced, but not the majority. My anecdotal evidence contradicts your anecdotal evidence. I have never seen any statistics that show that the divorce rate is higher in big law than in other parts of the profession.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is is why I SAH--so that there is always one of us available to make sure the kids are covered. On any given day, my DH can cover kid appointments/emergencies/activities, he just can't do it (on weekdays) with the regularity required when you have kids.

That being said, he does the majority of the kid stuff when he is home and has done about half of the Christmas shopping for the kids (Amazon makes it pretty easy).

This is also a big part of why I became a SAHM. Five years later, though, I'm really missing my career and want to go back to work, except the process of getting back into my old field while also being the default parent and having a biglaw partner husband who doesn't have a lot of flexibility is daunting at best.

I WOH but this is exactly why I never judge anyone for WOH, SAH or whatever. DH works and travels a lot but I have a ridiculously flexible job, and my parents are very, very, hands on. DD goes to preschool, and my dad watches DS and takes care of preschool pickup and drop off. On her days off of work, mom pitches in (and is retiring to help take care of the kids too). They often call on the weekends to ask if they can come watch the kids for a few hours in case we have things we would like to do. There is no way on earth we'd be able to manage without my work flexibility and my parents. Of course, I am still the default parent and it makes me crazy, oh well...

Thanks for this post. My DH is a big law partner and we have one 16 month old and another baby on the way. I have a Ph.D., but am now working just 10 hours a week for an old professor to keep my CV current. I can't tell you the number of times women have made a snide or dismissive comment to me about being a SAHM, mostly women that DH works with. But, I really don't think that I have any other choice given the fact that DH works 90 hours a week, we have no family that can help out, and we have to pay for (and arrange in advance) every minute that one of us isn't with our son. We could afford to just pay for tons of childcare and I could work full-time, but I would still be solo parenting most of the time on top of working for very little money after paying for childcare. Some of the women who have made mean comments to me have gone on to talk about how her MIL watches the baby during the day or her parents take the kids for sleepovers almost every weekend. I would work a lot more hours also if I had a back up system like that, so it feels extra mean spirited to pick on me for SAH without one. I wish people would think about the fact that the details of everyone's lives are different before they pass judgment on other people's choices. Good for you for your generosity.

Anonymous wrote:He says yes. I say no. I work full time and we have a two year old.

The summer my husband interned at a big law firm downtown, he realized that every male partner was on his second wife/family--none of their first marriages had survived. He decided to apply for the DOH honors program instead, because he wanted to be a parent more than he wanted to be a partner. Priorities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a partner, not senior associate, DH should have more control over his schedule. He will still work long hours, but is not at the back and call of a partner. Also, there are female partners who are still the default parent, in the sense that they are the ones who keep track of schedules, appointments, kids clothes, parties, presents, etc. sure, they have full time nannies, but they are still managing the household while being partner.

BTW, I know of big law male partners who still have time to coach their kids sport teams or volunteer on school committees.

Parenting is gendered, whether you are a big law partner or not. This means, OP, that if DH has enough time to get a coffee at Starbucks or had enough time to join a football fantasy league, or watch games on the weekends, he has enough time to go onto amazon and buy some presents for your kid. He just thinks he doesn't have to because it's a mother's job more so than a father's job.

No, he is at the beck and call of the clients, which is the same thing. Yes, OP's husband has time to shop online, but in the big picture, she will have to be the default parent unless he changes jobs.

Agreed. But this should be the topic of discussion between OP and her DH. Her DH should not depart from the assumption that she will work around his job, if that was not the express joint agreement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^IDK, the big law wives I know, are well aware of the tradeoffs. But we married our DHs before they were big law and love them nonetheless.

And you understand that you are the default parent, right? OP does not. She wants her cake and to eat it too.

Actually, OP did not sign up to be the default parent. Her DH signed her up for that, without consulting her.

The underlying assumption for many people on this thread seems to be that OP must work around DH. That he dictates the terms.

Well, yes. Not that her DH cannot buy Christmas presents for their child, but that generally OP will be the default parent.

There's a reason I'm married to a fed lawyer, not a biglaw partner.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a partner, not senior associate, DH should have more control over his schedule. He will still work long hours, but is not at the back and call of a partner. Also, there are female partners who are still the default parent, in the sense that they are the ones who keep track of schedules, appointments, kids clothes, parties, presents, etc. sure, they have full time nannies, but they are still managing the household while being partner.

BTW, I know of big law male partners who still have time to coach their kids sport teams or volunteer on school committees.

Parenting is gendered, whether you are a big law partner or not. This means, OP, that if DH has enough time to get a coffee at Starbucks or had enough time to join a football fantasy league, or watch games on the weekends, he has enough time to go onto amazon and buy some presents for your kid. He just thinks he doesn't have to because it's a mother's job more so than a father's job.

No, he is at the beck and call of the clients, which is the same thing. Yes, OP's husband has time to shop online, but in the big picture, she will have to be the default parent unless he changes jobs.

Not saying she won't be the default, most women are. But, it is undeniably true that being an associate means you have far less control over your time than a partner.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^IDK, the big law wives I know, are well aware of the tradeoffs. But we married our DHs before they were big law and love them nonetheless.

And you understand that you are the default parent, right? OP does not. She wants her cake and to eat it too.

Actually, OP did not sign up to be the default parent. Her DH signed her up for that, without consulting her.

The underlying assumption for many people on this thread seems to be that OP must work around DH. That he dictates the terms.

Anonymous wrote:As a partner, not senior associate, DH should have more control over his schedule. He will still work long hours, but is not at the back and call of a partner. Also, there are female partners who are still the default parent, in the sense that they are the ones who keep track of schedules, appointments, kids clothes, parties, presents, etc. sure, they have full time nannies, but they are still managing the household while being partner.

BTW, I know of big law male partners who still have time to coach their kids sport teams or volunteer on school committees.

Parenting is gendered, whether you are a big law partner or not. This means, OP, that if DH has enough time to get a coffee at Starbucks or had enough time to join a football fantasy league, or watch games on the weekends, he has enough time to go onto amazon and buy some presents for your kid. He just thinks he doesn't have to because it's a mother's job more so than a father's job.

No, he is at the beck and call of the clients, which is the same thing. Yes, OP's husband has time to shop online, but in the big picture, she will have to be the default parent unless he changes jobs.

DH is military, and he has actually taken on a lot of the shopping as his "thing" since he can't be there often. He'll comparison shop, read reviews, choose, order, send me an email, and the things show up at our door. He doesn't do clothes, but he'll do gifts, appliances, things that break or that we want to replace, whatever.

When he's home, he also has a few child-related jobs that he always does. Our children wake up at the crack of dawn, so he has taken on getting up with them, brushing teeth, and doing the initial morning "watch." It's maybe 20-30 minutes at 5am, but it's both helpful and his way of staying connected.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know. There is a mom in my son's class who is a law firm partner and she is the only one I have ever seen at drop off or pick up or at any type of school function. It's like the dad doesn't exist. So seems like she's the default parent.

What a shock - it probably depends whether law firm partner is the husband or the wife.

She picks her child up every day from school? This doesn't seem possible to me. Drop off I could see since many lawyers go in late, but pick up??

No, she doesn't pick up every day. I don't either. I work. But anytime I've been at pick up because of a special occasion (class party, holiday, etc), she is the one there.

She must work every night till 2 am.

As a partner, not senior associate, DH should have more control over his schedule. He will still work long hours, but is not at the back and call of a partner. Also, there are female partners who are still the default parent, in the sense that they are the ones who keep track of schedules, appointments, kids clothes, parties, presents, etc. sure, they have full time nannies, but they are still managing the household while being partner.

BTW, I know of big law male partners who still have time to coach their kids sport teams or volunteer on school committees.

Parenting is gendered, whether you are a big law partner or not. This means, OP, that if DH has enough time to get a coffee at Starbucks or had enough time to join a football fantasy league, or watch games on the weekends, he has enough time to go onto amazon and buy some presents for your kid. He just thinks he doesn't have to because it's a mother's job more so than a father's job.

Former biglaw partner, married to biglaw partner here: don't feel sorry for us or be jealous but the fact is that for his $MM draw, DH works ridiculously hard. I outsource a lot and take care of most of the rest. DH does as much of the sports-related kid activities as he can. We spend awesome time together taking awesome vacations several times a year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^IDK, the big law wives I know, are well aware of the tradeoffs. But we married our DHs before they were big law and love them nonetheless.

And you understand that you are the default parent, right? OP does not. She wants her cake and to eat it too.

She wants her cake and to eat it too...how? I think she's asking for a fair division of labor, which she shouldn't have to ASK for because he should be doing as much as she does by default. Poor lawyer, he works too hard = baloney. I've known a lot of wily lawyers who make their jobs work for them. I'm certain he could do the same. Well, okay, not certain, but woe-is-me sob stories about the pressures of truly cushy jobs do not garner much sympathy from me.

You think that a biglaw partner is a cushy job. You are truly ignorant.

To be fair, pp is most likely not an attorney nor married to someone who truly works a 70 plus hour a week job. I would wager a guess that most people who are saying that OP is the default parent absent her husband making a job change are a) people who have actually worked in Biglaw, or b) have a spouse with an hours intensive job. I happen to be both.