Should we more honest about the impact of children in careers ?

[mids2019]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-13184193/Lily-Allen-insists-choosing-motherhood-pop-stardom-love-children-ruined-career.html

Is Lily Allen being honest here and saying something that a lot of women (and possibly men) realise but don't openly admit to?

I think in a fundamental sense she has a point in that for women celebs and athletes having children if not logistically 'managed' can destroy a career. For women athletes the reality is for many having children is normally done at the still end of a career with the understanding at an elite level pregnancy and early years child reading can be difficult while meeting the extreme demands of competitive sport. You could argue Taylor Swift may or may not have had the career she had if she had given birth to a couple of children (possibly losing a little career momentum because of being out of the limelight for 2 or 3 years).

On the more mortal level having children can push you back on a career path as part time working may put you back relative to your peers and as children get older it becomes more difficult to move due to schooling and children friendship ties. Having children means there may be less opportunity to 'put in the extra mile to further you career by gaining a 'hard working' reputation.

Should we be more honest about this in society and admit even in 2024 there are sacrificed to be made having childen? Are these sacrifices something we can put down to a lifestyle choice of do we need to continue to press to remove any career disadvantage having children may bring?

What do you think the answer is OP? More dads becoming SAHP?

Even if my DH was a completely 50/50 parent I don't think I'd WANT to work FT.

The only way I'd even vaguely consider it would be if DH became a SAHD, but even then I personally wouldnt want that because it wouldn't be right for him or the kids (because of his personality)

Should we be more honest about the impact of children on careers?

I don't understand the question. Who isn't being honest about the impact of children on careers? Its obvious to everyone, surely? No one is trying to say children don't impact on careers - no one I know anyway.

The ‘you can have it all’ people who truly believe that, fair dues, but personally I don’t want it all, there’s only 24 hours in the day and in the future I’d rather my kids grow up reasonably well adjusted and happy and saying I was there for them. I think there’s a certain amount you can do and you need a separate life to your kids, but after that if you want to give something absolutely everything (alongside being there for your kids) you’re just hammering yourself into the ground and giving yourself both mh and physical issues and it’s not sustainable.

What helped us was taking shared parental leave. We have offices in the Nordic countries and it’s a lot more common there as paternal leave is use it or you lose it. They have a lot more women in senior positions.

It’s meant that we both feel equal in taking time off for illnesses. We check our calendars and see who has the more important meetings and work around that. My husband always does pick up and I always do drop off although recently I’ve been unwell and he’s done both.

We have a cleaner and do equal amounts of housework/childcare/mental load.

Since having the baby 2.5yrs ago we’ve both managed to get promotions.

I guess it is a personal choice but does society force people into such choices?
In the end it’s us though, society makes comments but they’re forgotten the next day, it’s us that carry them and believe they’re important

Yes it needs talking about all the time. The female pay penalty and the ‘fatherhood bonus’. Inequalities in parental leave and expectations etc.

as a teacher at a girls school where the girls are generally hugely feminist I’m saddened that careers conversations often are massively influenced by future childcare concerns but there don’t seem to be the same conversations at the boys’ school. I’d prefer the conversations were more about flexible working, challenging cultures etc rather than not choosing some careers because theyre not family friendly. However even at 15-18 they believe the system is so stacked against them they should work within it not against it. Few aspire to be business owners, no politicians which is a shame as I’d vote for them in a heartbeat

This post hits the nail on the head for me.

Do you think some of the reason for the increased demands of children’s needs is an insidious way of pressuring women more? (Just using here)
in much the same way that women moving into healthcare as doctors or education as teachers devalues the profession both financially and in terms of respect given

there was a great episode of Mrs America on bbc when one of the women said that there’s no chance of equality because while women want to move into men’s spaces and work, no men are clamouring to stay at home and do the domestic and emotional labour. Until we teach boys how joyful raising children and keeping home can be there’s no incentive to do it. But constantly talking about how hard it is (although it does need acknowledging) are we putting off our sounds AND our daughters!

I’m facing the exact same thing. DP earns twice what I do and while he’s offered to reduce his hours etc it would mean a massive lifestyle hit and given the shit schools round here, would mean losing the opportunity to privately educate them if needed. Something is going to have to bend, likely me. I worry about it at 3am.

Well we do talk about it. A lot. But we are ignored: either by men because "meh doesn't impact me" or younger women who haven't had children because "meh we have equality" (actual discussions i have had over the years I've worked.

We could and should be voting for political parties that make it easier for us all to live our lives and still have children (and we must all acknowledge that life post children is very different for a while)

Such as (but not restricted to): better protection for women in the world of business, better support from the state for SAHP, better ML provision, and compulsory parental leave for the (for want of a better expression) father or parent that didn't give birth.

There needs to be much better awareness in younger people who haven't yet embarked on a career or parenthood that children affect your life and that it is ALWAYS going to be something that literally affects the mother more than anyone else. And that society can mitigate these things, but it has to have the will and the backbone to do it. and leaders who aren't afraid to suggest and implement good strategies.

I was impressed by a recent interview with Julianne Moore where she said that for years she only accepted roles in films which were being shot within 15 miles of her home in NYC as she didn't want to sacrifice time with her children. Was just refreshing to hear someone being honest about the compromises that are sometimes necessary if you want a family life and a career. I really dislike celebs who pretend that they are 100% hands on mothers whilst maintaining a frenetic career and conveniently not mentioning the army of nannies.

Fortunately most mothers I know see their children as the most fulfilling and important part of their life and think any sacrifice in terms of career was worth it.

Fortunately most mothers I know see their children as the most fulfilling and important part of their life and think any sacrifice in terms of career was worth it.

And the men?

I did it slightly in reverse which worked out well for me - children in my mid to late 20s and then started my career "properly" in my early 30s as the children got older. I've always worked for people who value work-life balance too though so appreciate this wouldn't be possible with many career paths.

I agree there’s not a lot of honesty about just how much work - unglamorous, un-intellectual work - it takes to raise children and how much of that inevitably falls to the woman. And not all children are able to tolerate long hours at nursery / wrap around childcare /
being looked after by people outside the family, particularly if there are any SEN to consider. Add to the mix a super demanding career (or even a non-career job with exacting requirements), and mothers end up in an awful position a lot of the time.

I was raised in the 80s when we were all assured we could ‘have it all’ and that this should be easy, provided I wanted it enough. And while I can recognise on a cognitive level that was a load of shit, I still have a lot of guilt and shame, on an emotional level, that I’m not a CEO or an astronaut or brokering world peace while also raising a brood of beautiful well-mannered children with a balanced diet and excellent gut health.

Unrelatedly, I fancy the shit out of David Harbour.

I'm not sure about the famous people examples as it is questionable whether a singer would continue on a trajectory of success they had when they were younger- isn't that more an industry problem, i.e music industry favours young people. Older singers are usually the exceptional ones or the ones that presumably they think are profitable despite talent.

At a general level I think it depends on the kind of work you do. In an ideal world the sacrifice is not made but many people want to spend more time with their children than work so without the perfect system in place it is one or the other, in this country anyway!

And yet millions of mothers around the world have managed it. Maybe it's worth looking at them to see how it is possible.

Fortunately most mothers I know see their children as the most fulfilling and important part of their life and think any sacrifice in terms of career was worth it.

that is the kind of tripe, sorry to say, that is holding us back. Alongside Julienne Moore we need the Ryan Goslings, the Chris Pratts, the Cilian Murphys and ALL THE REST saying "yes, i decided to prioritise my young children for the few years they really need a parent" before we start to make real progress.

To hold out a glimmer of hope: i started my late-blooming "career" post 2nd DC at the time my DH took over the last 18 months of parental leave, and supported me in long business trips abroad etc etc. This is what we need more of. To reverse the "Who Cooked Adam Smith's Dinner"ness of it all (woman supporting successful man) with a bit more man supporting woman to achieve potential.

Like it or not a lot of mothers want to prioritise their children. Not all of course.

and many want to have a career. That isn't the point. As long as we only talk about women in the children/career axis men are sitting pretty.

I want more men to speak up (and step up - match the actions to their words). It is getting tiresome.

Because i hear a lot "well i'm not a feminist" followed at some point by "wah wah i don't have a good pension". Not from all women who want to prioritise their children, but enough.

The government has spent a huge amount on subsidised childcare to get women back into the workplace after child bearing so I think at society level there is the expectation women want (and should) get back into the workforce.

I think there is a bit of a contradiction between women saying they want to show back to prioritise children and a government saying this is lost talent and a drain on the economy because of lost work.

When our son became unexpectedly very ill, DH essentially worked from home as much as he wanted for a year, and has been given incredible amounts of leeway and understanding ever since. Which is wonderful.

I...got sacked after asking for two days off to look after him when he came home from hospital.

Basically I fulfilled the stereotype of 'mother who prioritises family over the job we're paying her for' and my husband was universally met with 'oh what a wonderful hands-on father'.

We can't fucking win in any regard here.

Personally, I refused to let this happen. My lines in the sand were drawn about 8 years before DD came along.

DH worked away when she was small. No family nearby so 95% of childcare fell to me. I took voluntary redundancy and extended my mat leave to 18 months, doing some ad hoc consultancy to keep my hand in. When he stopped working away when she was a toddler he took over 50/50. I went back to work full time. She’s now 13 and for the last 2.5 years I’ve been the one that works away for half the week and he does everything at home. We are both very senior in our fields and have the same income.

I’ve always been the one to buck gender expectations: I didn’t want to get married, didn’t change my name when we did, don’t do DH’s washing or ironing, he cooks his own food when I’m home (we have very different diets).

On another thread the response to this was that I had internalised misogyny, but to me I think we have a very equal partnership. I wasn’t prepared to give up “me” just because I chose to become a wife and mother.

Men to speak up at a societal level or political level or corporate level, how does 'speaking up' manifest?

Waiting for men to speak up will be hell of a wait in my mind. I think these.things are often pioneered by women in positions of authority but if the women do not have children then they are mot particularly motivated by the cause.

We have to get our elected representitives and business owners and unions to do their bloody jobs.

I agree with pp that we have to work hard to buck the trend, but it has been my experience that if you are the first woman in your company to do this, it makes it easier and more acceptable for the others to do it. And that goes, by the way, for me saying to one of my assistant managers who constantly took time off for sick kid (not in UK there are very good rules here) that maybe her husband might want to do that when we are in our busy period (tax audit) rather than her drop the team in the shit every time junior got a sniffle. And i could point to my DH and say "sure, it's hard for him, but when i have the auditors in our family recognises that I am priority for those few days and he does it"

At year end i sometimes took my primary aged DCs to the office with me at weekends because i knew they'd behave*, we had lego and cars and one of those carpets for playing cars, and that they would behave. Because my DH was a chef and worked weekends and couldn't take them. We were flexible about our arrangements in that way. If i had a trip to China he took care of them, organised wrap-around care when needed (and my mum sometimes came over). If he had a big event at a weekend, the week before i had to do a bit more at home.

We need to do a pincer movement: Legislators at the top, and us at the bottom coming together to normalise women and men doing the best thing for their families as well as "allow" women to have a career post children if that is what they want.

*was criticised for that by some managers. Until the day one of them brought his 2 year old in, and tried to fob her off on the female staff (it was a weekday) because his wife (SAHP) wanted to go to Paris for the day. And he was Dad Of the Freaking Year.

The issue here is that women’s choice is either “work full time and hardly see your kids or maybe don’t even have any” vs “be a SAHM and ruin your career”. There’s no middle way. No option for women to work part time in professional roles until their kids start school. No option to have a good job but still be able to wfh if your kids are off sick. Or to work until 3pm, pick up the kids and work more hours at home later. A small number of companies support parents like this but not many.

The problem basically is the attitudes of employers and the way jobs are set up to suit non-parents. When do you ever see a well paid professional job advertised as part time or flexible? The only part time flexible jobs are the shitty low skilled ones. And employers still expect that men won’t have any parenting responsibilities - when my DH said he couldn’t work on a particular day because I was having surgery and he would have to look after the kids and me as well, his employer’s response was “well can her mother not do it?”