Did you ever decide it’s not worth it?

[Personyouneedisnannymcphee]

Genuinely just curious here. I’m a nanny and work for an absolutely lovely family. The parents both work jobs that means they have to do long hours and additional work in their spare time. During the week their littlest gets up, goes to nursery, comes home to have dinner and falls asleep almost immediately after so they barely see her awake. BUT I will say, every spare chance they get they devote to their children and are able to afford absolutely lovely experiences that the children enjoy. Those times aren’t often but they really do make an effort.

I say all this to say I am not judging and understand completely that their hard work provides these amazing experiences when they get the chance and I am more than happy to be the one caring for their children as I adore them.

I just wondered has anyone ever decided that the lack of time they get to spend with their children isn’t worth the experiences working those hard, high responsibility can provide.

I am 100% not shaming. Just curious

Probably for the benefits of socialising with other children.

I don't have that set up personally, but I can see how it works for some. I'm sure they get a lot of satisfaction from their career, plus they enjoy the time spent with their kids. Thing about kids is that more time spent with them isn't necessarily more enjoyable. Sometimes it's actually more fun in smaller doses and it's nice getting to miss them a bit.

I work part time so it's a bit different, but I wouldn't want to be a SAHP even though I could afford it.

I think it's far harder to be working full time or close to full time for modest income where you aren't at nanny level and have the negative side of lack of time but non of the positives of the kind of money for anything over and above having somewhere to live and paying your bills and the odd modest holiday

My husband is a high earner. I am a sahm as it just wasn't feasible going back to work with no childcare and him out the house every hour under the sun.

Obviously I'm there with the kids and I genuinely do appreciate the time I've had with them. Him, although he would like not to work so many hours I think the nice house, horses, private school has become a thing that he thinks the kids NEED. I honestly would be happy with a small house, no private school (although I do think it suits particularly our oldest well). The kids miss him and he is missing out on so much and I have to be honest I think their relationship suffers for it.

@Newuser82 I think people forget that it can often be down somewhat to a partners aspirations too - in recent years it's become more common to expect both partners to be 'filling the pot' - kids or not

We're definitely in the "squeezed middle" money wise rather than "high fliers" but for our family it's definitely better to have two full time workers rather than one full time and one part time and struggling to afford things like swimming lessons/worrying if the car breaks etc.

Plus the biggest thing for us is the income multiples needed for mortgages in the South East. We'll never be able to buy a house in our city without two full time incomes!

@Crikeyalmighty I would agree that it's generally more common for both parents to work. I have explained why I don't but I'm not quite sure what you mean sorry? I have no huge materialistic wants and my husband knows that. I rarely buy anything for myself for example. I'm happy when the kids are happy and I honestly believe they would be happier if their dad was around more even if that meant that they had less money spent on them in general.

My mum was always around when I was growing up. I am always around for my own DC too. If they are unwell I drive to pick them up from school. Readily available at any moment.

Fair enough, we don't go on skiing or luxury holidays but emotional support is always there at home for them all.

DH and I are not materialistic people and don't care for spending money unless it's necessary. I would rather be around for the DC and their emotional needs especially in this crazy world we live in. It's vital they have that rock of support at home in my opinion.

Like a couple of previous posters, DH's career was like this, but at least I was around!

DH was working very long hours (and earning a high income) when the DC were small. It's definitely been worth it for us, because in his current role he's still on a high income, his hours are much more civilised (and since covid he's mainly wfh) and he has a great relationship with the DC (now teens).

We are different to the family you work for OP because I gave up my (similarly) high flying career, was a SAHM for a few years and when I went back to work I changed jobs to something less stressful and more family friendly (but still a professional role). I'm happy with my choices too - I've loved being a hands on mum.

Absolutely no regrets here.

Yes, I gave up work for 3 years when DS was little for exactly the same reason, as we barely saw him during the week (we were fortunate we could afford to) I didn’t love being a sahm at all, both situations came with massive highs and lows for me. I returned to work, covid hit, and now dh is the main sahp

Ditto, I had a SAHD and when I look back on my childhood, that's what I remember, him always being there. He walked me to and from school, was always home after school and came on my school trips. We didn't have much either, but it was a very happy childhood. I'm now a SAHM too, although it will only probably be until DC is around 3.

We worked long hours including weekends in our own business with longstanding employees to look after (so we couldn't just cease trading).
The end goal was to sell up, which eventually we were able to do. Now I work in a school and DH works PT.

Money is much tighter, but it's so good to be around for the (now secondary aged) DC more.
DH won't ever go back to FT, he's late 50s. I will, probably this year due to finances, but at least one of us will be around.

They attended nursery before I was employed. Also I am employed during after school hours only which is what I wanted. I do spend time caring for the littlest when they get home from nursery while parents finish up work and on occasional weekends or extra evenings

Children don't care about "absolutely lovely experiences", they just want their parents there.
One of mine wrote on a card as an older teenager that I was always there for them, I knew then that I'd made the right decision in putting them first rather than my career. I built up my career once they were adults.

Both my parents worked shifts in factories when I was a child, so couldn’t always be at home. Sometimes FT work isn’t a choice, especially for lower earners.

I worked p/t until my youngest went to school and then f/t in consulting with a lot of travel, and DH also in a busy professional role in the days before WFH was a thing. No relatives close by so we paid for childcare.
Amazingly I had a great relationship with my parents, and now have similar with my own grownup kids (both working in interesting professions). We were involved with their lives as much as we could be, helped with school and sports team stuff, had family rituals to do things together, took a lot of great holidays etc . Most importantly we provided love and stability, and talked and listened a lot. It wasn’t perfect but it seems to have worked.

I love my children but I also need the stimulus of work, and the independence and challenge it gives me. I don’t believe that having children requires either parent to subjugate all of their needs where options are available. Not all working parents are absent parents. And not all children of SAHM parents turn out happier/better adjusted than those whose parents had to, or wanted to, work full time.

It depends on circumstances as well as the individuals. My mum was a SAHM, and I would have loved to spend more time at home with DD when she was younger, but her father left us when she was tiny and it was down to me to pay for everything. Luckily I had / have a good career in the City, but while that pays for day to day life, and extra curriculars, I can’t stretch to fancy holidays etc, much as I’d like to. The alternative to me not really seeing her because of work would have been homelessness and life on benefits though, so it was the least-worst option.

Ah. Yes

It's well known fact that only sahms can be there for their children

It's impossible otherwise

I am that family.

The reason I do it is because I see the bigger picture. YES my 9 months old is in FT nursery and I barely see him in the week, BUT I'm doing this as I'm retraining.

Once i'm finished I'll be on great money and will be working 2-3 days a week, meaning lots of time left to spend with the family.
DS will go to a great private school and will have amazing holidays etc.
DH will also be working part time.

It's interesting how many people on here say they've given up a good career for family time, and to be around their kids.

Then you have threads of people complaining about being underpaid and struggling financially, that they work just as hard as the high fliers, and that's it's not fair etc.

Well here you have an example that high fliers do compromise family time for career (at times), and as a result it IS fair that my household has a high income.

I would have done it. Before you all tell me I'd have felt differently when my children were born - I was a nanny, and had thought this all through very carefully. I wanted a fast-paced job career with tons of social interaction, enough money to have choices, and someone more domestically-minded than me to raise my kids when they were small.

I think (hope) I was a reasonably good nanny but the work clarified for me that, much as I love children, I find babies pretty tedious full-time and I'm never going to enjoy the endless faux-enthusiastic repetitions necessary to a toddler's development! I think teenagers are great. By the time my expected children would be teens, I'd have been in a sound position to downscale my career and explore different paths (I did this anyway).

I'm sure I'd have felt intense desire to spend every minute with my own little drool-and-shit machines after birthing them, but I knew it would be the wrong choice for me. Some people are more gifted as parents than others. It makes sense to pay them while you do what you're cut out for.

It’s an interesting question, which doesn’t affect me personally as although I work full-time, I’m a teacher at my kids school so we have a lot of time together - I’m only really away from them for 2 hours in the afternoon and 3 in the morning! I will say that I’d prefer to be ultra busy and have enough money to have quality family time when we do get time. Lovely meals out, day trips, holidays, expensive activities like zoos, amusement parks, shows, shopping trips, and so on. Because one of my best friends doesn’t work - she’s a stay at home mum - and while she gets a lot of time with her kids, she’s often stressed about money so not feeling her best/can’t afford to take the kids to nice places which makes her feel bad/can’t afford to buy the kids nice things and so on. So her time with her kids is more, in terms of physical duration, but less, in terms of quality, than, say, my DSis and her husband who have very busy careers and schedules but high salaries and the time they spend with their kids is blissful.

Strongly disagree! Kids DO care about and value treats and experiences and they also benefit from them too. It gives them a wonderful childhood and lovely memories.

I'm a working mum although I have Fridays off. I work because I love my job. I worked hard at school, at university, climbed the ladder in my 20s. Ironically, I ditched the career path I was in and now work in the arts, but absolutely love it. I do feel guilty about not seeing my kids as much as other mums but I would be bored to tears, frustrated and (knowing me) would be setting up some sort of home business within about a fortnight if I was at home all the time.
The extra money is helpful for us as a family, but not necessarily essential as my DH earls well. I work because being a SAHM just doesn't interest me. I am also 100% confident that the childminder does a better job at rearing them than I would! She is amazing and has the patience of a saint.

I was that child, and hated it. The times with my parents were magical but they were rare and required huge effort. I would rather just have my parents be there everyday in a completely mundane way.

If I can provide another perspective though, what I learnt after talking to my parents and experiencing the world on my own – sometimes it's a bit "all or nothing" if that makes sense?

People tend to see it as a spectrum – parents can ease up on work a bit, earn a bit less and spend a bit more time with kids, overall still earn a very desirable amount.

But, for example, you have expertise in or got lucky in this particular fast-paced/demanding industry that just happens to pay like crazy, and if you changed industry to become a "normal" earner, you might actually start having cost of living struggles, etc. Just 1 example – doesn't necessarily have to be the industry factor, could be particular job or circumstances, etc.

I think nowadays with remote working etc though you can make a horizontal / simultaneous career move much easier, for example through consulting, and so on. Back then, you were tied to 1 particular job, often with the expectation that it was for life or at least (for high-fliers) a decent chunk of time at that company.