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.

By the way, as I said before, I think OP should take the job. She should just also hire another nanny or perhaps an au pair...

Really retro you've never come across parents (usally SAHMs but not always) who've made competitive parenting a career? I have and I don't even have children yet. My mum is a primary school teacher and can diagnose a mother with "kiddyitis" at 50 paces. My SIL who was a high achiever with a stellar international career pre-kids has now channelled all that drive and intelligence into her two children, spends her time lurking at the school and won't even countenance the idea of someone else walking them to or from school as "she needs to be there".

I work in a senior job but luckily not generally late hours - I'm usually home by 6 - 6.30. It's interesting, autonomous & has goof benefits. But I will need to go back to my job FT after mat leave, I will need a FT nanny (luckily we can afford one, I know not everyone is so lucky) & I only get 4 weeks' holidays. 4 days weeks + 9 weeks holiday sounds amazing to me. My mum (aforementioned primary school teacher) was the breadwinner for our family of 3 kids when my dad was out of work - we had no money, certainlyno nanny! My little brother and I were latch key kids. All 3 of us did well at school and went on to university. I admire my mum for her work to keep us afloat. It never occurred to us to resent her for it.

The idea of two parents in well paid jobs with plenty of money for treats and extras and nice holidays, not worrying about the boiler breaking or our uniforms falling apart, plus mum at home one day a week & lots of holidays would have seem pretty awesome to me in 1992!

^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?^

What a snide and mean comment.

I wanted to re-iterate the point between big jobs and little jobs. I have a relatively big job, which I am giving up soon, for a career change. This is for family reasons, but I plan to continue being ambitious in my career, just fit with the school calendar instead.

Big jobs with companies can bring benefits like several months' paid maternity leave. The idea that all women with big careers would waive maternity leave is far too general. I took a year with each of my three, and of each year, 9 months were fully-paid. I enjoyed this time with my babies a lot, and the stability of my income still coming in, and the knowledge that I had a job to return to, helped to bring peace of mind.

My "big job" also enabled us to relocate at a massive expense to the company, to within 30 minutes of my parents. We also halved the distance to my in-laws. Having a "big job" has really brought benefits to our family. The children are happy and secure, with strong attachments to both parents, lots of time and love with their grandparents and an excellent nanny who makes sure that they are where they need to be at the right time, that they can spend time in the home environment and also socialise with their friends in a home environment. It can be a big juggle, but it is one that the OP and her DH sound perfectly capable of.

AmandaClarke cites an extreme example; I haven't witnessed anyone that bad, but I certainly recognise what she's saying, as I'm sure many of us do. Those mums who cross a line from being 'involved and caring', to living vicariously through their children rather than through their own aspirations and achievements. I see it in a woman I know who is currently micromanaging her eldest through AS levels and planning which University is 'good enough' for her daughter. Heaven forbid that the daughter might have ideas and aspirations of her own!

And of course I'm not suggesting that all parents who stop working are like that, but unfortunately some are and it isn't pretty. Far better to have your own aspirations and to support your children in theirs

There are some women like Amanda describes where I am. They gave up any semblance of a career on having children, let the husband earn (and dictate) everything. They lived at the primary school. Now the children are getting older, the gloss of the SAHM is coming off. A lot are panicking about money now as the potential of a divorce looms and they realize the husbands have hidden a lot from them. Many are now looking for work, to try and claw a bit of independence back, but of course are struggling because they have either been out of the workplace too long or were unskilled to start with (and spent years talking about how well "we" were doing and what good bonuses "we" got this year when in fact the husband was earning and controlling the lot).

It's interesting. When you first start having children the appeal of being at home with your babies, making cakes, going to classes etc is great (I have been there on maternity leaves). But when I see women in their thirties now (I am early forties) about to jack it all in I really wish I could fast forward them a glimpse of this life and say, try and keep a bit of independence and career going as you may well regret it in 10y time otherwise.

And yes, I do see some of the pity and oh what a shame your kids have to go to after school clubs all the time comments now as a bit of envy creeping in, in some cases.

I very much recognise the women Amanda is talking about too. At my son's nursery there is a woman there who I mistook- for a whole term as one of the teachers because of her presence, and her behaviour.

It was when she was busy (at her own instigation) discussing with me in a very authoritative manner my DS's difficulty settling in and making friends that finally his key worker took me aside and explained she was another mother, not one of the workers.

Op is taking the job,she needs to maybe get new nanny,put mil back in her box
Yes passive and open disapproval is meted out to ft working women,not so much to dad
Every school has the alpha-housewives they monopolise teacher,pta and exist through child

excellent succinct summary there! Couldn't agree more :)

scottishmummy can you go to the holiday rental thread that is descending into a bun fight and summarise that too please! Thanks. :)

Well I'm sure many sahp could quote stereotypes and extreme examples of wp which aren't pretty.

The fact is the children of parents who take an interest and are involved in their children's education do better,a lot better.So much so Michael Wilshaw wants them spread around schools instead of clumped in favoured schools.Many,many parents can't afford private fees and an interest and involvement in their kid's education is all they've got.They should be encouraged not belittled.

Methinks a big of green eyed envy is at work here.

oh please

Being interested in your childrens' education does not mean you need to hang around your child's school like a bad smell and be bossy and officious to teaching staff and other parents.

My mum was always busy working & could not have been less interested in being a school busybody and I was always top of the class, dux at high school & have two degrees.

don't be so ridiculous - are you seriously saying that only SAHMs can or do take an interest in their children's education? And I was not describing stereotypes - but specific women I know.

Trust me I am not envious of anyone who spends their days mixing the paints in a classroom

The 7 Stages of Business Travel Stress

Here's an article from the Harvard Business Review that popped up in my inbox today. Thought it might interest you, Shreddiez, and help you to prepare.

You've decided to go for it. Good for you. The worst that can happen (imo) is that you realise that it doesn't work as you had hoped and you hand in your resignation.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

^^ That's my favourite quote from the thread.

Oh please are you seriously saying sahp hang round schools all day mixing paints waiting for divorce?

Believe you me I am not envious of anybody only seeing their dc 3 days a week.

I also know women like that. They tend to parents who were formerly in high powered careers who treat their children's education as a major project which will impact on the size of their bonus. I think you're very lucky never to have come across one retro!

Forago I know some very unpleasant wp examples,want me to share and stereotype every wp?

No thought not.

No I didn't say that actually. I was talking about overly obsessed parents, not SAHPs generally.

Oh do share

Actually Pear go for it, feel free. I am not one of them so not in the slightest bit bothered. All a bit too close to the bone is it?

No Odd I simply live and taught in the real world not MN Home Counties/London world.

And you know what if they are happy and more importantly their kids are happy who gives a shit?I suspect only the jealous.

Anyhoo you carry on with your sahp character assassination it's utter tedium.

I think you are confusing SAHPs and tedious professional mothers with severe kiddyitis. They are not synonymous.

I think it goes without saying that parents being interested and involved in their children's education will have a beneficial effect. It's fairly obvious, like saying that parents who talk to their children, feed them nutritious food and put them to bed at a reasonable hour will have a beneficial effect.

It's a pretty big leap from there to suggest that it means hanging around in schools all day!!

Fwiw (and obviously this is just an anecdote) when my eldest started reception she was at a village primary where there were far more working parents (including me- I was working 3 days a week until the youngest started school) on the PTA and governing body. Oh and quite a few parents who didn't work who didn't seem particularly supportive of their children's education, and who's interest in the school extended only as far as a fag and a gossip at the school gate before heading home.