to want to accept amazing job opportunity without being judged for "deserting" my three children.

[Shreddiez]

I have three children aged 8, 5 and 1. I have always worked a 3 or 4 day week since having them. DH works full time and travels quite a bit. We have no family help but we do have a live-in nanny.

I have been offered an amazing job. An opportunity like this will never come-up again: fascinating work, good money, chance to make a real difference.

The new job would mean a lot of travel and when home I'd hardly see the kids Mon-Thurs, by hardly I mean maybe 20 mins in the morn. But I'd usually be home all day Fridays and I would get nine whole weeks leave a year that I could take over school holidays.

I intend to accept the job but am shocked by people's reactions. A friend referred to me deserting my kids, my MiL (who NEVER helps with the kids) keeps making veiled references to how sad it all is, even the nanny keeps joking how the one year old will think she is the mother.

Is it normal to suffer such passive aggression for wanting to work? Is it so bad to be out of the house 4 days out of 7 if you know you can be fully present and involved for the other three days? Doesn't nine weeks leave actual mean I will see the kids as much as someone who works three days if averaged over a year? And why do I have to justify this? Why can't people celebrate my efforts to do well at work and at motherhood? I feel so judged and its making me second guess myself and my choices.

I've just seen this. I've just returned from a 3 day trip to the continent. the short answer is, go for it. and I'm glad to read the last page to see that you have indeed gone for it.

In our case, DH works from home (in a professional capacity) and we can't afford a nanny (live in or otherwise). We have 2 kids.

most weeks, older one is in afterschool care, and then some sports on a couple of days. the younger one is in full time nursery. Last three days, DH was the one who did the drop off, pick ups, and yes, I know I'm lucky that he can do that (otherwise, I'd still travel but we'll have no doubt other plans in place).

go for it!!

I am one of those who said Tay I have tried a similar job situation but that it didn't work me (with my very particular family setting).
However I agree with mother that there is a tendency for women to stop working when they have kids and then arrive at 50yo, the dcs gone and they realize they have nothing left to look forward too (there is thread going on atm along these lines). And I am not talking just about SAHM but also the ones that decided to go part time, take a less demanding job, fit to school hours etc.
It is true that a man would never have to ace these comments re abandoning the dcs and I think the answer lies in finding the right balance between work and home whilst keeping in mind that the dad can make similar adjustments as the mum That way both partners keep not just their earning potential but also their enjoyment for a job they live (which is the case if the OP).
And the dcs are getting looked after by two happy parents instead of having one happy parent and the other resentful

I don't see the leap. I really don't. I went back to work full time when my DDs were 6 months old. I worked 8 till 4 with a 75 minute commute at each end. Yes, I was there every day - but mornings were a rush of get up, get dressed, get breakfast, get to nursery whilst evenings were a rush of pick up, get home, get washed, get fed, get to bed. I can honestly say that the only time I felt was quality time with my DDs was at weekends and during those times when I was on annual leave. I don't see what the OP is doing as a leap from that, more like a step. The DCs have a solid attachment to their nanny as well as their parents - I don't believe for a second that they will change their attachment. My DDs didn't, despite being with the same keyworker 10 hours a day 5 days a week.

It is true that a man would never have to ace these comments re abandoning the dcs

I completely disagree. If dh came home and told me he'd just taken a new job that involved lots of travel and would mean he wouldn't see the kids for pretty much four days straight i'd hit the roof.

Creeping back to say I've just been discussing the job with my potential new employers and they have suggested that I could consider relocation which would cut the travel some but disrupt the family more. I don't think its a real option as DH is unlikely to be able to relocate with his job, but its an interesting thing to consider: whats worse, moving children's' home and school but seeing them more or keeping home and school stable but being away frequently?

If we relocated we would live as expats and nannies would be a totally normal part of life. Our nanny probably wouldn't want to come.

It is however all academic because of DH's job.

For those asking what I do, I don't want to make myself too identifiable but despite accusations on this thread i am neither an MP or a banker!

No need to creep, Shereddiez. Be proud.

I think there needs to be an end to this childish "line" that keeps being said over and over again by this type of thread, something along the lines of "Well if DH and do it so can I, hm, "

It is about raising children that are emotionally secure, that have a parent around. I don't think it matters if its the mum or the dad, but certainly not the nanny. And please don't tell me that your "9/14/20 year old looks perfectly well adjusted even though I only saw him at weekends and holidays", you don't know your child well enough to know how they are feeling. And no, its not about being a slave to the home and being SAHM for ever, its about finding a balance, where you put these young people that did not ask to come to the world FIRST.

Actually I never said SAHMs. Many of the women I'm thinking of do work, but in jobs that they feel don't satisfied with. And it's interested me that it's not just about their jobs but their focus. Quite a few people on this thread have talked about All You Will Miss. (And some have made distinctly snide comments about how the OP is clearly rather career oriented at the expense of her child-rearing responsibilities.) My point was that focusing on these early years can have a horrid rebound later.

I do think the op has balance though, she has 3 says every week with them. I really agree that re days you work are absolutely not quality time with the dc whether at home or not. Good luck with the new job op

My husband travels a lot with work and is often away more than four days at a time. It is true some people in our family do feel sorry for him and he gets a lot of remarks along the lines of 'poor him, missing out on seeing the children' but no-one implies he's a bad dad because of it and that's the difference.

So much judgy pontificating on this thread!

Op, congratulations. The only thing you can do is try the job. If after a year you feel it's not working, change it.

Oh, and get used to people making rude and offensive comments about the quality of your parenting - unfortunately they don't stop when you're a professional woman.

Knew you weren't either a banker or an MP. MPs actually work all the hours god sends (that really is not a family friendly profession) - all weekends, most evenings. It's a shame that people don't know that. I know they are unpopular but they don't deserve some of the opprobrium they get. I know (or used to know) some - in all parties. Professionally and the odd one a bit socially. They all work hours that I simply cannot conceive of.

As for being a banker - well you mentioned wanting to make a difference so obviously not a banker (I work in financial services so am allowed to say that).

Cannot believe some of the posts on here, it's like going back in time to the 50's

urgh these comments are fucking me right off! many of the comments are from WOHMS who are just questioning whther OP has covered all bases/eventualities.

I would say the same if OP was the "original" worker, and her DH was considering a similar role change.

It just bugs me that people who riase valid concerns as to the wellbeing of the children primarily are instantly dismissed in such patronising terms

anyway, OP has made her mind up and I wish her the best.

But this thread has annoyed me.

Given if you're working 9-5:30 you probably only see your DC for an hour in the morning and evening I think this could well be better for the DC. You do need to think about backup though, be that another nanny, reciprocal agreements with friends or moving closer to family members.

it's like going back in time to the 50's

I think there are two different issues here.

The first is whether it is right for children to be left without parents caring for them for long periods and without a parent in the same country regularly.

The second is whether it is the woman who should take the rap from people for taking up a job offer which takes her away from home for long hours whether her DH is already doing the same.

The first is nothing to do with gender equality. It is about the welfare of children which is the responsibility of both parents.

The second is all about equality. They just see the woman handing the childcare over to the nanny without considering the fact that the man has handed it over too.

If the father had been the primary carer and the OP already doing this new job, would he be getting so much grief about taking the job? I'm not sure.

I don't know why everyone is saying nobody would think twice about a man taking such a job. I would not be happy if my OH took a job that meant he didn't see our DCs (or me) 4 days a week. I think it is doable if you have one parent who is about for the children, either at home or working 9-5 without a really long commute. That way the children still have a home life. I don't know the situation of the OP's DP (as the thread is too long to read) but speaking in general 4 days out of 7 with no parental contact is not a life I would want for my DC.
What is the point in having a lot of money if you don't see your young DCs from Sunday night until Friday morning every week?

OP, I'd keep the school and nanny to be honest, they need some stability in their poor lives. I feel so sorry for your dc, however you wrap it up just sounds like you are disserting them from where I am.
I find it hard to see how you are surprised or shocked by the comments from others you refer to in your OP.
Anyway, you seem to have justified it now so its all ok isn't it?

I'd consider the relocation but I'd give the job a year first. I know several people (all bankers) who have relocated their families and then lost their jobs/hated it. They usually have to be out of the country within 30 days. Lots to consider with relocating but it also gives your DH a chance to get used to the idea and see if here are opportunities for him in the same region.

Also - for me having been down this road, it's also worth noting as a possible flag. Check the contract that they can't require you to relocate if they decide that the hours / holidays they have offered don't work for them any more.

I was "required" to relocate and so took redundancy. Relocation to the specific country did not give DH any opportunity and I had a seriously ill parent at the time. It would have given us some lovely opportunities though. I don't regret not having the opportunity to get used to hot and cold running staff though - very difficult to give that up and come home.

OP if it weren't for DH's job making it academic, I would say it would depend on where you would be relocating to. DH and I always said that if one of us were to get an opportunity to relocate abroad while the DC were small enough to not be disrupting their education too much then we would take it and sort out the second job afterwards. Unfortunately we seem to have drifted past that stage (well, DC1 is right on the edge of that age band now) without it happening.

Anyway, as you say, it's academic.