Quick poll; working full time

[tldr]

For no particular reason, I am wondering how many of you work full time/are part of a couple where you both work full time.

If you don't, was that always your plan? Would you be able to if you wanted to? (Child-wise, not finding-work-wise)

I'm kind of musing that none of the adopters I know work full time (or have both parents working full time), mostly because their DC wouldn't be able to handle long days with school/CMs/breakfast clubs etc, but then I compare that with social services 'all you need is love' narrative.

I'd hate to see adoption become the preserve of the wealthy or middle classes, and I can't imagine how much shit an LA would get if they started openly saying they needed SAHPs, but I can't help but think, if it's what our kids need then SS should be upfront about it. And I can't imagine how let down I'd feel if I'd been left on the breadline by this.

So what are you all doing?

I work school hours, so I can do drop offs, pick ups. DH works FT. It's certainly not what I imagined I'd do, but it was v obvious when I was returning from leave that FT wouldn't work.

I'm currently off work, but am returning to what in another job would be 'full time hours', but in my job is part time. I'm also changing my job to allow more working from home. I'm a single adopter, and have always been clear that my job is important to me.

If I could afford to work less, I would, and may well do in the future, as while I think LO will be fine at nursery, as it's one setting, after school care could be difficult, as it would mean two settings.

I do think we are unusual in that we were matched with that in mind, and it will suit us both, I think.

I think most children, not just adopted, need a parent at school pick up/drop off at least a few days, once school age. Nursery, with its long hours, and no homework is one thing, but I know very few families where all the adults work full time, and a school age child is in 8-6 every day. If they have to, the child is usually cared for by grandparents, so they can do the phonics etc. So when you say 'non of the adopters you know', I would say 'none of the parents of school age kids I know', not in 9-5 jobs, anyway. Some work from home, or juggle shift work, but school kids need parenting.

On prep course there was a couple who both intended to work full time. I don't know if they were approved, but I was very surprised by their attitude!

I'm a SAHP. I have been since I had my bc 6 yrs ago. I won't go back to ft work now but I'll need to do something around school hours when ds starts nursery/school.

I was working crazy hours when I worked and was completely unable to leave work at work working for a despotic control freak wasn't fun either

I don't think it would work for my children if I worked ft. But I am lucky that I have that choice and even luckier in that I have a few options of flexible work I could do. I know that's not the case for most.

DH now earns more than I would have and works fewer hours so it was a no-brainer really. But it was tough financially at first. I remember sitting in cafés with my NCT group wondering if I had enough for a cup of tea!

I have used the word 'work' far too many times I now realise but cba to edit...

And that's nearly some personal information there tldr. I shall have to edit the spreadsheet. At the moment it just says 'tldr - international woman (?) of mystery'.

We both work FT, but flexibly. Dp mostly works from home. I split my time between the office and home. I agree with you that adopters generally don't work FT. Our forays into child-minders have not worked at all well. Dd2 has been with us for over six years and babysitters are still completely out of the question.

Tbf, it was a post about 'work'

I, deluded fool that I am, thought I'd be going back FT. Discussed it during home study. Said if push came to shove we could just about afford for me to not. That was it. No mention that actually, quite a lot of AC can't handle after school care or anything of the kind, so that actually I should think more along those lines...

conserve, you've no idea how often I read that post to see what I was giving away. I started writing this thread at 6.30.

Are you Ed Balls maybe? The new project has just come to a sudden and untimely end and you're weighing up your alternatives...

This is an interesting and pertinent post

I am apparently a lazy and entitled person to not be working, despite the fact I supported myself financially from the age of 16 to 42 without the help of any other person. I'm very interested to hear what others say. The fact that I have a 12 year old who simply cannot be left in the care of any childminder and have zero family friends support is, I'm told, irrelevant!

You've hit a sore spot here Op.

Forgot to add that the nursery years are easy because they are open all the time apart from bank holidays and run from 7.30am to 6.00pm. Once at school it's 9.00am until 3.30pm ish. Then there's school hols - 13 weeks per year ( that's 9 weeks more than my total annual leave entitlement used to be) plus school training days, snow days, and illness days.

Who told you you're lazy/entitled cats? I'm guessing Mumsnet?

But if you're claiming benefits, which I presume from your post you are, the government/Mail will tell you that too. I think that's what's bugging me.

Were you ever told it might be hard for you to work FT? Do you wish you had been? Do you resent that you weren't? (Assuming you weren't, of course...)

conserve, not ed balls, though I dance a lot like him.

I think MN views SAHMs as lazy and entitled even without the benefits. I'm not sure why. And I'm an idiot because my DH will leave me and I won't have a career and I'm an anti-feminist.

Quite why it's so bloody important to everyone that I participate like a good little capitalist I'm not sure.

I do think SS were rubbing their hands together when they met us - a naice professional person who is at home with the kids. Not sure they would have said anything about stopping work though. I don't think they really know much about attachment or life beyond AO tbh.

Is WAH the ideal maybe?

If it makes you feel better catsnick both my husband and I are at home full time as we have ltfc and adopted child both of whom have v complex needs and need 1 to 1 care 24/7. Dh did work until our ac arrived 18 months ago but it then became impossible . Even though we foster some people have made digs about getting a proper job but I think they are only entitled to say that when they have looked after a complex child with v little respite (having 1 night away soon first day off in 2 yrs and still doing morning care before going and evening care when back next day) for 9 yrs .
I feel I have never worked harder and it is the same for most adoptors i am sure. So ignore all ignorance and do what suits you is my advice. You wont regret giving your child as much time as you can imo x

I work PT, DW works FT flexibly. I'm currently retraining for a job which lends itself to working termtime school hours as I don't think DD could cope with After School Care.

I know lots of families where two parents work FT, but no adoptive families where that is the case.

I do 3 days, hubby 4 days and self employed so does school runs etc when I am working. DD is in nursery 2 days which is more than enough for her. We are lucky that we can earn enough this way to lead the life we do.
Sometimes I hate the pressure of being the one bringing the majority of the money in but I do actually like my job a lot which helps.

I am currently on adoption leave, DP works PT. I usually work PT.

our children could not cope without one of us there to pick up from school every day - so our schedules have to work around each other. we have no additional care due to the children's complex emotional needs.

to be fair to ss they did know this when they placed our first 2 children - and as such I agreed to reduce to PT from FT work, we get an adoption allowance that just about covers that shortfall financially and is guaranteed till the first 2 are 18 - as long as I remain PT only.

i know no adopters with primary age children who works FT.....they are all either PT, SAHM, or a combination of 2 PT parents........
but i do know several adopters who work FT with older children aged 11+ so there is hope!

Sorry to write and run last night, t'was late.

tldr that opinion of me comes from friends and family around me, not overt but at times quite palpable.

I have worked FT and supported myself since the age of 16. Got myself through uni and into a professional career in and amongst. When I was assessed to care for my DC I was single and in FT work, intending to return to FT work once my 3 months of adoption leave was up. During the court proceedings the Children's Guardian recommended that I be given some financial support to enable me to work PT. This was also recommended at panel but nothing came of it.

I returned to work FT after 3 months. DC was in FT nursery. My DC had behavioural difficulties that were disregarded by professionals until she was 8. I worked FT for 2 years and it nearly killed me. During that time I met my current OH. After 2 years of FT work and DC I resigned from my job and have been financially supported by my OH since. He's quite a high earner so we don't, and shouldn't, get any welfare benefits.

However, having been independent for so long I struggle a lot with having no income of my own and no identity beyond that of a mum. But I don't see how I could return to work on any reliable basis due to my Dc's needs. My DC is in mainstream education and doing well. However they have a high need of social/emotional support and their general stability requires me to be available much of the time outside school. My DC's special needs are not obvious (due to the high level of therapeutic parenting she has had) and most people around us tend to think that I'm making it up. I know for a fact that I'm considered to be a 'kept woman'.

This upsets me, I don't know anyone amongst my friends and family who could manage my DC for even a week. High levels of vigilance are required to look after them, plus a highly developed bullshit detector and finely tuned sense of how they are coping emotionally on a day to day basis.

This is not where I planned to be and I dread to think where we would've ended up if I'd not met my partner. I honestly believe that without my constant presence and input my DC would not be in the place she is. She would not be coping in school and would not be able to keep and make friends or join in with group activities.

One of the most difficult aspects of it for me is that I've considered myself to be a feminist since my early teens, even when it became unfashionable! I've been independent and earned a respected position professionally. How can I claim to still hold my feminist principles today when I'm a SAHM and totally financially dependent on my OH? What message does this give to my DC when gender equality is something I have drilled into them from an early age?

And tldr you are right in many respects, we would have crashed and burned as a family by now if my OH didn't earn enough to provide for us all.

conserve you have it in a nutshell, even within children's services there is very little understanding about attachment, early trauma and the longer-term implications for adopted children.

And breathe cat, just breathe!

Sorry, rant over!

To be grudgingly fair, I do remember a SW on our prep course saying (with a beaming smile) "And of course, depending on the needs of the child, mummy may not go back to work." Naturally this was followed by much discreet eye-rolling among we prospective adopters, wondering how single parents (like me) managed that, or why it might not be daddy who didn't go back to bloody work.

That was the only reference to that possibility, and matching panel / CPR etc all seemed to think that LO was "low needs" (ho ho) and were satisfied with my plan to take 12m leave then return to my original part-time work.

It took a year for LO to cope with separation at nursery for 2 hours, 3 times a week. I extended my leave for another 6m and lived off the vapours of my savings... Not to worry, said the LA, it'll be school next and all will be fine.
It took the entire first year of school to get LO able to handle 5 mornings a week. I worked from home during those 3 hrs a day, but was desperately skint. Thanks to brilliant psych and paediatrician support, the LA cobbled together a 12m adoption allowance.
LO is now repeating the school year, doing a full day most days, and I am finally back at work, 20m later than I planned to be. Just don't ask me how bad the sleep still is, or how hard it is to think properly at work.

All the above goes alongside the fact that I adore LO, wouldn't change a hair on their head, and they bring me real joy every single day. But to answer your question about the real financial resources you might need to support a traumatised child? About a hundred times more than I had was led to believe.

I went back to work FT. DH also works full time. But we are both flexible. I work 3 days in a fortnight from home and DS is at schoolmand I walk to school with him almost every day. There is only 2.5 hours a day I am not with him - and we have a nanny (how middle class and privileged I sound and am...) so he can come straight home after school and doesn't have to go anywhere in the holidays. The nanny is hugely expensive but necessary - otherwise I wouldn't have gone back to work FT or possibly even PT (she gives him stability and consistency and is like an aunt to him). That's how I do it.

I'm returning to work in the new year after almost 14 months. I'll be doing 30 hours over 4 days. Single adopter so relying on two full and two half days at nursery (he's settled in well so hoping the ramp up in hours will go well!) and two half days with my mum.

In a couple of years when he starts school I'm hoping I can do 8-2.30 over five days so breakfast club or grandma then I can do pick up.

That's the plan anyway!

In an ideal world I would stay off until school age but I can't afford to and so far he's a relatively straight forward little fella so I wouldn't qualify for adoption allowance.

Im a single adopter, working part time. Whilst at primary I did four short days to fit school hours, now i do the same hours over 3 days. I try to keep all appointments, therapy sessions etc to my non working days. Having been an avid reader of the AUK boards before approval I never expected to be able to work full time and retain my sanity. I was 47 when I adopted and quite frankly over the career thing. I did move from a charity sector job with only statutory entitlements to a much higher paid civil service role. So when I went part time it wasnt such a huge financial hit. My sons SWs wanted a single parent who worked part time, and with him having additional needs they had to put their hands in their pockets and came up with a generous adoption allowance. This is what makes working part time possible for me and means I can spend his DLA on extras for him. My earned income is too high for working tax credits but I do get a small amount of child tax credits. So financially we dont do so badly. I have no problem being the scourge of society ie a singe mum (by choice!) on benefits. I worked from university to 47, I still work, and will be working in some capacity until Im 65. My son was let down by many people, including the LA who left with birth family way too long. He deserves a mum who can be around enough to meet his needs. But to be honest at times it still feels too much. Ideally Id give up work competely for the next two or three years, but my pension has already taken too much of a hit and I dont want to have to try and get back into the job market at 56/57.
I dont think not having paid employment would say anything about my political views or being a feminist, or my value to a society. In a working life of 45 years, Im 'taking out' for maybe 10-12, for the most important reason of all, to be mum to a damaged child. Don't really care what other people think.

I work 4 1/2 days but termtime only. It's hard. Ds has far more complex needs than we were led to believe and I've had to take time off for appointments and exclusions from school. He also cannot be left with anyone other than me and dad or he goes crazy so childminder out of the question, though he can cope with after school club with 1:1. If I had a choice I would not work as I think he needs to be home schooled for a while until he is stable. If we had had any idea of his needs we would have applied for support to allow me not to work full time.

This is a really interesting (and, for me, timely) thread.

DH went back to work a few weeks after introductions, I went back after about 8 months. DD went to nursery, then transitioned to school with breakfast club / after school club apparently without problems.

However, due to other circumstances I am not currently working, and we are all finding it significantly easier all round with this set up. It pains me and my feminist beliefs intensely, but I am seriously considering not working full time again until DD is much much older. I suspect that DD could just about get by with both of us working, but it doesn't seem right when I think she will flourish so much more with one of us (more specifically, me) at home much more than full time work would allow.

We don't get any direct financial support from the state for DD - higher rate tax payers so no child benefit, and no allowance. Which of course is fine because we chose to have DD, but I do wonder sometimes whether there should be a non-means tested adoption allowance provided as a matter of course

I work part-time. I have done so ever since dd was born 12 years ago; so when we adopted ds I had adoption leave and we Mr back.

Dh works full-time.

Hello, sorry, I asked the question, then disappeared into real life.

I'm pleased few of us are on the breadline, but frankly, I don't think anyone should be put in that position unknowingly, and I think atm it is mostly unknowingly.

I also find it interesting for how many of you its at odds with your core beliefs/self-perception. I never imagined myself being quite so Mum as I am - I used to travel a bit (2 or 3x year) and not once did anyone in SS say 'you know you won't be able to do that?'. In fairness, they also never said it to my DH and he's had to quit business travel too - LO is still far too fragile to cope with an absence (and this is child with allegedly no issues).

If I stay only working as I am until LO is grown, I'm effectively saying no more career for me, which jars very much with who I think I am. Of course, if my LO needs me, she needs me, but a heads up would have been nice!

I'm not trying to say there's no responsibility on me/other adopters to figure that out for ourselves, but I find it interesting that they say things like 'therapeutic parenting means you can't use the naughty step' instead of 'therapeutic parenting means your LO will likely/possibly require a continuity of care that will preclude using after school clubs or any business travel pretty much forever'.

Just musing really.

I'm eight years into my adoptive journey as a single parent, and am now a foster carer, so I'm definitely not wealthy! My daughter, who is very nearly nine, was placed as a baby, without any obvious needs. I have never qualified for an adoption allowance or a settling in grant. What I would say is that my daughter needs me home now, eight years on, as much as a newly or recently placed child.