Jump to content

Career VS Family


Recommended Posts

After reading that topic about the lawyer who has a lazy husband, I keep thinking outside of her giving him the what's what...how anyone thinks they can "have it all" in today's modern world.

 

We've seen so many times how Corporate America is very anti-family, despite any messages they try to put out otherwise. They overwork everyone, lay off people who need the job to support children, and often times make people have to choose between staying late or going home to the family.

 

I can understand the plight of the household that needs the two incomes, or the single parent who is left with little choice...but I never understood when I see some who are working very hard to get a Bachelors and possibly Masters, and they network their way into the big job, now they're working 80-90 hours a week, but somehow still think it's perfectly ok and "doable" to have a family.

 

I just think there's something wrong with that. Something wrong with raising your kids on daycare or nannies if you don't have to. Something wrong with living a life where you see your children here and there because you're off doing the career thing for way more than full-time.

 

Maybe I'm wrong, or missing something, but male or female...if you want children in your life, then maybe it means you have to forget about those dreams of being the partner in the firm, or CEO, or being at "the top". Not if it means living a distant life from your family. I feel like if you want to get to "the top" then you might have to give up on the ideas of marriage and family...and devote it all to the career.

 

Does anyone here understand what I mean? Agree/disagree?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In all the following scenarios, your partner had better be a full partner and not one who expects to be waited on hand and foot. This includes domestic and childcare implications.

 

You can have it all by being self-employed, working from home, having a nanny and domestic help.

 

As for Corporate America being anti-family, to a degree, although times are changing in that working from home part-time, at work part-time, even as a CEO, is a consideration.

 

or

 

You work during the day, nanny cam on, come home and spend quality time with your family, then work after they go to bed.

 

In both out-of-home scenarios, you will need a nanny and domestic help.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
In all the following scenarios, your partner had better be a full partner and not one who expects to be waited on hand and foot. This includes domestic and childcare implications.

 

You can have it all by being self-employed, working from home, having a nanny and domestic help.

 

As for Corporate America being anti-family, to a degree, although times are changing in that working from home part-time, at work part-time, even as a CEO, is a consideration.

 

or

 

You work during the day, nanny cam on, come home and spend quality time with your family, then work after they go to bed.

 

In both out-of-home scenarios, you will need a nanny and domestic help.

 

Being a working mum isn't bad like people make it out to be, but I see that people often have issues with leaving kids with nannies and at daycare and I can understand that. Nannies are pretty expensive and I can't afford any.

That is why I leave my child with my parents during the day. I think it works out much better that way, I don't have much faith in childcare centers and nannies. just my opinion though.

As for working 80-90 hours, well I know a couple of people who do this(including a woman). I don't think I could do that, I would die of exhaustion if I worked like that and had a child as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

I don't see why companies have to make excuses for employees who have children when there might be other employees who don't. If you made the choice to be a parent then that is your choice and you can't expect the company to make exceptions for you because that would be unfair on others who don't have children. Your kids are your choice and your responsibility - not your employers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Being a working mum isn't bad like people make it out to be, but I see that people often have issues with leaving kids with nannies and at daycare and I can understand that. Nannies are pretty expensive and I can't afford any.

That is why I leave my child with my parents during the day. I think it works out much better that way, I don't have much faith in childcare centers and nannies. just my opinion though.

As for working 80-90 hours, well I know a couple of people who do this(including a woman). I don't think I could do that, I would die of exhaustion if I worked like that and had a child as well.

The more I read about this entire issue of career and mothers on LS, the more militant it makes me get, in that women can be excellent mothers while working, regardless of nannies, daycare or family mom. I've seen many a working mother child, grow up to thrive. I've also seen more than enough SAHM children, grow up and be horrid. Of course the reverse also holds true.

 

There's excellent childcare available. So any woman that wants to be a mother, can do it with no guilt and also pride in their accomplishments. It's quality of time, not purely quantity of time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's quality of time, not purely quantity of time.

 

Hah! I don't think that any mother could rationally say that it is possible to mother without guilt. Guilt is part of being a parent - you can't be perfect all the time unless you are seriously delusional, and there will always be moments you feel guilt about.

 

"Quality time" is a myth. You can't schedule an hour or two to take you kid out for ice cream and expect the precious moments to begin. IME the best times I had were with my Dad, when he was picking me up from school - I would overflow with information about my day. By the time mom got back from work, or woke up to get ready for her night shift, her "how was your day?" was answered with a couple of words. Kids don't have great longterm memory.

 

Check out this article:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/terry-real/the-myth-of-quality-time_b_84181.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hah! I don't think that any mother could rationally say that it is possible to mother without guilt. Guilt is part of being a parent - you can't be perfect all the time unless you are seriously delusional, and there will always be moments you feel guilt about.

 

"Quality time" is a myth. You can't schedule an hour or two to take you kid out for ice cream and expect the precious moments to begin. IME the best times I had were with my Dad, when he was picking me up from school - I would overflow with information about my day. By the time mom got back from work, or woke up to get ready for her night shift, her "how was your day?" was answered with a couple of words. Kids don't have great longterm memory.

 

Check out this article:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/terry-real/the-myth-of-quality-time_b_84181.html

While I can respect your choice blind_otter, why do you feel it's the only one that's right for everyone? Do you feel that all SAHMs are great mothers? I've seen some piss poor ones!

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why I'm not a career man and will never marry a career woman. I choose to live in a smaller town and work for a smaller company that allows me to work 40-45 hrs/week and have most weekends off. I stay away from the rat race that is corporate America (the big city, Wall Street type environment) and agree it is anti-family. It's out of control capitalism at its finest.

 

Yes, I have a decent job and could progress, but I am going to resist moving up the corporate ladder if it means more hours and less free time. I remember my dad's company trying to force him into a supervisory position at work. He did it for a few weeks, then went back and basically told them to put him back into his old position. He told them (I'm paraphrasing) "screw you, I like my old job, I'm good at my old job, and I don't want to work 60+ hours a week. If you want to fire me go ahead. I don't want to constantly advance". He said they were surprised, but they put him back into his old job, and he worked it until he retired. Ironically enough, all the supervisors were fired within a few weeks of him going back to his old position. :laugh:

 

I pretty much take his attitude. I work hard and do a good job, but I have no desire to be a boss or supervisor who works 60+ hrs a week. Though I don't tell the people I work for because no one would hire me if I told them that. In today's corporate environment it is about never ending advancement, the mentality that your "job is not just a job, but a career" :rolleyes:. Let the career people have their great careers and their crappy personal lives. But not me. Give me a job, let me do it, and give me enough time to have a family life.

 

IMO if you have one the other will suffer. You can't have both, but many idealists and career types will tell you otherwise. I choose to have an ok career where I won't be rich or highly successful but I will have enough time and money to raise a family.

 

And if the family thing doesn't work out, then maybe I'll throw myself into some career later in life. I notice a lot of older guys I have worked with in the past tend to throw themselves into their careers when their family life is crappy. :laugh:

Link to post
Share on other sites
While I can respect your choice blind_otter, why do you feel it's the only one that's right for everyone? Do you feel that all SAHMs are great mothers? I've seen some piss poor ones!

 

I don't feel it's the only one that's right for everyone, and I certainly don't think all SAHP's should be mothers, or that all parents should stay at home.

 

I'm just pointing out that quality time is a myth. Let's not personalize this.

 

I've also seen, and personally know, some working moms who are stretched to the limit of their capacities and are constantly on edge. It IS really hard to work all day, come home, and start your second shift. You can't know how hard it is until you've walked in their shoes. You can sit on the sidelines, observing friends or speaking from experience babysitting, but you can't know until you have to care for a child 24 hours a day - how hard it can be.

 

Especially with an infant. I've known some working moms who have nervous breakdowns because they go back to work too soon after having their baby. Society puts a lot of pressure on women, specifically, to have a career, have a family, maintain their home, and be able to juggle all this without any stress or anxiety. It's just not possible for most people.

 

I do think it's possible to work and be a parent. Lots of people do it. Mental health of children does not hinge on whether their parents spend a lot of time with them - as long as they have competent, consistent care as children, they tend to turn out OK.

 

But I also don't think it's possible to work 60+ hours a week and be there for your kids. When would they even see you? In the original post you'll see where D-Jam mentioned people who work 80-90 hours a week and still want to have a family.

 

Let's not pretend it won't be heartbreaking to see your child cry for their nanny or babysitter when they need comforting, rather than their mom or dad. The truth is, it's just a reality that some parents have to cope with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't feel it's the only one that's right for everyone, and I certainly don't think all SAHP's should be mothers, or that all parents should stay at home.

 

I'm just pointing out that quality time is a myth. Let's not personalize this.

 

I've also seen, and personally know, some working moms who are stretched to the limit of their capacities and are constantly on edge. It IS really hard to work all day, come home, and start your second shift. You can't know how hard it is until you've walked in their shoes. You can sit on the sidelines, observing friends or speaking from experience babysitting, but you can't know until you have to care for a child 24 hours a day - how hard it can be.

 

Especially with an infant. I've known some working moms who have nervous breakdowns because they go back to work too soon after having their baby. Society puts a lot of pressure on women, specifically, to have a career, have a family, maintain their home, and be able to juggle all this without any stress or anxiety. It's just not possible for most people.

 

I do think it's possible to work and be a parent. Lots of people do it. Mental health of children does not hinge on whether their parents spend a lot of time with them - as long as they have competent, consistent care as children, they tend to turn out OK.

 

But I also don't think it's possible to work 60+ hours a week and be there for your kids. When would they even see you? In the original post you'll see where D-Jam mentioned people who work 80-90 hours a week and still want to have a family.

 

Let's not pretend it won't be heartbreaking to see your child cry for their nanny or babysitter when they need comforting, rather than their mom or dad. The truth is, it's just a reality that some parents have to cope with.

These are the reasons why you made a personal choice to stay at home. Once again, I can respect that.

 

For women who make personal choices to remain in a high-wage career, this is their choice to make. Children know who their mothers are, they can differentiate, regardless of caregiver. As long as the mothers have properly bonded with their child and continue doing so, children will be fine.

 

I have friends of both varieties, SAHM and career women. One of my friends chose to stay home with her second child. This child turned out whiny and spoiled, a complete mama's boy. She finally decided to go back to work when her son started kindergarten. Thank goodness she did! The quality caregiver she hired, put the child back on track. He's now well socialized, happy and no longer a mama's boy!

Link to post
Share on other sites

For women who make personal choices to remain in a high-wage career, this is their choice to make. Children know who their mothers are, they can differentiate, regardless of caregiver. As long as the mothers have properly bonded with their child and continue doing so, children will be fine.

 

Children bond with the people they see the most - regardless of how bonded they were for the 6-12 weeks of maternity leave the mother took. It's just a psychological fact.

 

And yes, I know in Canada there is longer maternity leave available. That is just not a reality in the US.

 

I have friends of both varieties, SAHM and career women. One of my friends chose to stay home with her second child. This child turned out whiny and spoiled, a complete mama's boy. She finally decided to go back to work when her son started kindergarten. Thank goodness she did! The quality caregiver she hired, put the child back on track. He's now well socialized, happy and no longer a mama's boy!

 

That has to do with her parenting style more than anything. I've known very outgoing and independent children who were raised by SAHPs. From your story, it was good to get a caregiver who had obviously better parenting skills into his life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Children bond with the people they see the most - regardless of how bonded they were for the 6-12 weeks of maternity leave the mother took. It's just a psychological fact.

 

And yes, I know in Canada there is longer maternity leave available. That is just not a reality in the US.

Seeing and being a great parent are different things. For example, abusive parents. I don't mean totally smack 'em around abuse, I'm talking about emotional abuse or negligence, not to the point of criminal. Even over-sheltering can cause many issues in the future. Sometimes over-bonding can be detrimental. Since there's no license for people to get before they become parents, all kinds of people who shouldn't become parents, become parents. Every child is a product of nature and nurture. If they grow up believing that drama = love, they're going to become that way.

 

That has to do with her parenting style more than anything. I've known very outgoing and independent children who were raised by SAHPs. From your story, it was good to get a caregiver who had obviously better parenting skills into his life.
Once again, it's reliant on the individual. Some people, like my friend, make better working parents. She's a portfolio manager and does better with a more driving lifestyle of having both external intellectual stimulation and also, the softer side as a mother, when she gets home. Sure, she works long hours but part of those hours are after her children go to bed.

 

In going back to work, she stopped being overly-protective, creating a mama's boy.

 

Don't knock differences due to personal preference. Some people can do it all and others can't. Some thrive under stress and pressure, others fold. Human beings are different.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't knock differences due to personal preference. Some people can do it all and others can't. Some thrive under stress and pressure, others fold. Human beings are different.

 

I agree with this statement - some people really can do it all. And I will reiterate, I don't think that all moms need to stay at home.

 

But, I disagree with this statement:

 

So any woman that wants to be a mother, can do it with no guilt and also pride in their accomplishments. It's quality of time, not purely quantity of time.

 

That's all I was saying. There is no such thing as "quality time." Also, I want to meet the mother who can be a mother without any guilt. I've never met a single one, and nowadays I know more mothers than ever.

 

I've seen it with my S/O - he loves our son, and is jealous of the time I get to spend with him and the fact that he sees all our son's milestones either on video, or after the fact. Yesterday he worked 11 hours and got to spend 30 fussy minutes with our son before the baby fell asleep. Not good times.

 

You can't schedule those precious moments. Children are spontaneous.

 

In any event, I hope that when you have children, you can do it all. I would be eager to hear if your opinion is still the same after you have children.

 

I think that the whole concept of "having it all" puts a lot of negative pressure on women, especially.

Link to post
Share on other sites
But, I disagree with this statement:
Then we'll have to agree to disagree. Don't knock it for everyone.

That's all I was saying. There is no such thing as "quality time." Also, I want to meet the mother who can be a mother without any guilt. I've never met a single one, and nowadays I know more mothers than ever.

 

I've seen it with my S/O - he loves our son, and is jealous of the time I get to spend with him and the fact that he sees all our son's milestones either on video, or after the fact. Yesterday he worked 11 hours and got to spend 30 fussy minutes with our son before the baby fell asleep. Not good times.

 

You can't schedule those precious moments. Children are spontaneous.

Once again, each person is different. While some resent the time away, others might consider it a blessing. This doesn't mean they need to feel guilty, to be good parents.

 

In any event, I hope that when you have children, you can do it all. I would be eager to hear if your opinion is still the same after you have children.

 

I think that the whole concept of "having it all" puts a lot of negative pressure on women, especially.

Whether I can do it all or not, is moot. I strongly stand behind anyone who wants to make that choice and can do it. I strongly stand against any limitation of women due to stereotypes or personal angst. It's individual-based and I've seen and know it can work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Then we'll have to agree to disagree. Don't knock it for everyone.

 

I'm not sure I see where I am "knocking it for everyone". You keep saying that, but I never did that.

 

I made a statement - there is no such thing as "quality time". And I stand by that statement, not only through my experience as a parent, but also from my experience as a child.

 

I also said it's nearly impossible to parent without any guilt. But I also understand that, not being a parent, you can't understand this aspect. There will ALWAYS be things you feel bad about because no one is the perfect parent and I have never met a single parent who had no regrets.

 

In any event, it seems to me that, for the most part, children grow up in spite of what we do more than because of what we do as parents. Everyone has to make the choices they need to make in their life.

 

But I still don't think you can work 80-90 hours as week - as stated in the OP - and be a good parent. I don't even know when you WOULD parent, when would you see your kids?

Link to post
Share on other sites

blind_otter, I'm not certain why you're so adamant about pushing forward something that isn't for everyone.

 

I can't fathom why women should be shoved into stereotypical boxes. In scenarios like this, as expressed in my earlier posts, there are supportive SOs who also put their energies into both career and home.

 

My g/fs husband runs his own IT business, with a 60 - 80 hour work week. When he gets home, he's all about family too. They shift, to ensure for full coverage and have both a caregiver/aka nanny and also domestic help. Both kids are excelling, very happy children. They know who their parents are and it's blatantly evident there's strong love between them all through quality time.

 

Why is this not acceptable to you?

Link to post
Share on other sites
blind_otter, I'm not certain why you're so adamant about pushing forward something that isn't for everyone.

 

Um, I'm not. Have you actually read my responses?

 

I'm not responding to this thread anymore. I keep saying the same thing. You keep insisting I'm saying something that I did not say.

 

Have a great day.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't feel it's the only one that's right for everyone, and I certainly don't think all SAHP's should be mothers, or that all parents should stay at home.

post 9

 

I agree with this statement - some people really can do it all. And I will reiterate, I don't think that all moms need to stay at home.

post 13

 

um. yeeeeah.

Link to post
Share on other sites
sugar_and_spice
The more I read about this entire issue of career and mothers on LS, the more militant it makes me get, in that women can be excellent mothers while working, regardless of nannies, daycare or family mom. I've seen many a working mother child, grow up to thrive. I've also seen more than enough SAHM children, grow up and be horrid. Of course the reverse also holds true.

 

There's excellent childcare available. So any woman that wants to be a mother, can do it with no guilt and also pride in their accomplishments. It's quality of time, not purely quantity of time.

I agree with this. Some posters on here are stating their opinions as if they are facts.:rolleyes: Stop forcing your opinions on others. Your own experiences don't stand for everyone, so stop generalising.

 

---

I also agree with your others posts, and agree that there is such a thing as quality time. I know mothers who are working and are good mums, so I definitely don't think only SAHM's are good mothers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If 2 parents choose to have careers, why must they have a child? Seems selfish. Are children a novelty to play with on occasion? Or should they be the priority?

 

I would never marry a woman so cold, and so money hungry that she would actually give birth, and then be in a hurry to go back to work. Much more important things on Earth than making money. And then spend this money on a nanny, lol.. I mean if you do not want to raise your own child, do not have one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people with common sense realize there are only so many hours in a day. People with agendas argue ridiculously, simply to further their agenda.

 

I would NEVER date a woman so cold that she would actually give birth, then hand the child over to a nanny, as though the child is a pet, toy, or novelty to occasionally spend "quality time" with, when it fits into her schedule. Women who do this are usually selfish on all fronts. They are not true to their company, and their performance falls. They are not true to their own child, as their performance falls in that regard as well. They are simply looking out for themselves. They are not true to their husband, as their performance falls in that regard as well.

 

I suppose someone could raise a German Shepherd in a 500 sq ft apartment as well. And the dog might turn out fine. But is that optimum? Or would it be better to not have a large dog in an apartment? Selfish people might not care about what is best for the dog, and might just be thinking of themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with this. Some posters on here are stating their opinions as if they are facts.:rolleyes: Stop forcing your opinions on others. Your own experiences don't stand for everyone, so stop generalising.

 

---

I also agree with your others posts, and agree that there is such a thing as quality time. I know mothers who are working and are good mums, so I definitely don't think only SAHM's are good mothers.

Women make choices in their lives and when they make those choices, they feel strongly about it. I can respect any woman for her choices, whether SAHM or working mother. I have difficulty respecting anyone who has to ram their personal choices down other peoples' throats.

 

If you look at how many dysfunctional individuals exist today, staying at home or not, isn't what causes issues.

 

Sky's the limit for women who WANT to accomplish anything. We limit ourselves. Limiting ourselves can be a good thing, since it's a form of self-preservation. Jumping on the band-wagon for "women can't do", due to personal choice or preference, is distressing. Those are limitations women should ignore.

 

I don't know about most of you but my fondest memories of quality time with my mother, aren't with her washing the dishes, doing laundry or mopping the floor...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that there's no such thing as quality time. There was another thread about this not too long ago and I said as much.

 

And I really didn't see where BO was shoving her views down anyone's throats. Having been both a SAH mom AND a working mom, there is no comparison between the two. I know which one felt right for our family. I can never see myself handing my child off to a nanny. But I guess that works for other people.

 

I wonder why when he hear about celebs who don't use nannies (even though they can afford them) they are applauded for actually raising their children themselves? There must be a reason for that, no?

 

But yeah, what other people do is THEIR business. I admit though that I have a much higher regard and respect for those people who actually raise their kids themselves and don't buy into the notion about "quality time."

 

Good for you, BO!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to pick on you, TBF but I wanted to also comment on this quote:

 

There's excellent childcare available. So any woman that wants to be a mother, can do it with no guilt and also pride in their accomplishments.

 

First, no not "any women" can to that without guilt. The quality of the childcare is not the point. It's the fact that someone OTHER than the parent is spending the bulk of the child's day with them.

 

Also, some women actually don't think there's any greater accomplish to take pride in than raising our own children...I mean for some of us there's no comparison between scoring that big account and being the main influence in our child's life.

 

To me there is no greater accomplishment than raising your own child or children.

 

It's like that expression about people on their deathbed...which would they say, that they wished they had spent more time at the office or that they wished they had spend more time with their families?

 

In the end, the former means little and says almost nothing about the kind of person you are...the latter speaks volumes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Touche, you're pulling exactly the same thing that B_O pulled. You've made your choices in life and feel they're the best choices. What you fail to understand is that they're not the best choices for everyone.

 

In denigrating someone else's choices, you're in essence saying "My choice is the best choice for everyone". Don't expect that your choices in life are going to be everyone else's. They're not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...