To think if I had paid £6k a year to have my daughters educated by this woman

[catgirl1976]

I'd want my money back

www.buzzfeed.com/patricksmith/head-teacher-tells-girls-you-cant-have-a-career-and-be-a-mum#.xfVk8JvGg

Glad she's stepping down.

I get telling girls there is a glass ceiling, but she's pretty much telling them to roll over and accept that.

I get telling girls that it's a valid choice to choose not to have children, but her message over all is appalling.

As a head of a girls school she should encourage the girls to fight against the inequality. Feminism is primarily about identifying and trying to get rid of power inequalities in our society, not just male/female inequality.

200 years ago you could say to a black child in England "your mother and I are slaves and owned by the Earl of XXX so you will become a slave as well and just accept it".

Should they have accepted that?

We cannot have social change or mobility if we simply accept the massive inequalities in our society and don't try to change them.

For example: Working class white boys - well you're just not going to amount to much are you? All the statistics say that - so just accept it.

I agree you can do anything but not everything. Well said.

I think flexibility and the growth of jobs suitable for people who wish to work part time only happens when there is few people going for those roles. Supply and demand as it were. If I was to compete with a workforce who were more flexible and equally well trained it would be more difficult.

As it is, I often get asked begged to work another day, and because I am working in a niche area I can and often say yes oh perhaps Tuesday or whatever suits me but I can only work between school hours, or what ever...and they say oh thank you!

I think she speaks the truth tbh.
There are many professions that don't work easily once you have children, irrespective of what the father does.
Everybody doesn't work for corporates, or from home.

It's wrong not to tell girls to strive to overcome such barriers though.

wtf is a glass ceiling, sounds painful?

If I can put in my two penn'orth. I had a great and fulfilling career for 15 years, met the right man ten years into it and the biological clock/maternal instinct reared. I had no idea until I had a baby how much I wanted to be a mother. I hadn't dreamt I'd give up work but I did and it was emotionally non negotiable. My husband did not have the same urge so I facilitated him and did so happily. I'd never have imagined it as an option.

I had eight years at home, went back, retrained and have been working full time again for ten years. I intend to work fir another ten years at least - until state pension age. I think Tha has been liberating for women. It is empowering to say at interview "I have 15/10/5 unbroken career years ahead of me; what is the average time a senior role is filled here before the incumbent moves on?

I can only speak for me but as long as women have the urge to have babies and to nurture they need to be aware of the importance of more flexible pathways. I'd have been horrified if my dh had said when ds was 12 weeks old "can you go back to work now, because I want my turn". Was I selfish or was he? I don't know but I think we did what we were individually wired to do and that men and women are different. I think it's important to recognise and understand those difference because I'm not sure it's all about nurture.

Beau

I was similar really in that I had no idea what I would feel like after giving birth.
I never returned to my career though or any work, but it was my choice.
My dh continued with his career and both he and I were happy to manage our lives like this.

I too think we need to bring our dds up with the reality of what it's like, not to dissuade motherhood and career but to instill that it is a juggle and for those not wanting to have a juggled life it may mean they have to choose one or the other.

The working world is still set up for a society where only one parent works. That's what has to change. It needs to be perfectly acceptable for an employee to take 5 years out to look after children, and to be facilitated to come back with whatever retraining that requires. Only then will parents truly have options.
That head isn't wrong, but she's got a funny definition of 'feminist'.

Agree with everything Mehitabel6 has said.

That headmistress was telling it like it is. The only thing the headmistress missed out is the fact that boys/men cannot "have it all" either.

"“You Can’t Have A Career And Be A Mum”"

That is the headline.

My first question is, are those the words she actually used?

The text in the article seemed to suggest that she was actually just trying to point up how difficult some of the choices can be.

I'd reserve judgment until I knew what she actually said. The media like to sensationalize.

The taxpayer does not appear hugely keen to fund the extra cost of part time working. Wanting, eg, to work part time as a GP does not decrease the cost of your training, and if you take several years out, the updating and retraining costs have to be added on top of that. Add to that the fact you would now need double the number of GPs and those GPs that are working are around less to experience the more unusual cases or get to know specific patients well, and then think about how annoyed you get when you can never see the same GP twice and you can see how hard the reality is to resolve satisfactorily for everyone. The current government is certainly heading in exactly the opposite direction from enabling more part time working, instead wanting to wring more hours and far less flexibility out of already full time workers. Then look at all the threads from parents who don't like job share teachers, and from part time teachers and GPs who complain their "part time" jobs are anything but, except when it comes to pay... And then add to that the fact that even in a world where work genuinely was more flexible, children can need you in the blink of an eye, whereas even the most flexible of employers requires some kind of certainty as to what you are up to and when... and I think you would find it hard to come to the conclusion that the world of work will become more fair for women in the near future without that being done at the expense of children.

cel982 five years after having a child my wants and needs and soul had changed. One can never go back to what one did in the past one can only move forward equipped for the future and responding to internal and external changes. We need to take change on board as a positive thing because we are ever growing and ever developing.

Sure, Beaufort, but someone who has spent years studying and training for a particular role shouldn't have to sacrifice their children's formative years in order to stay on a career path. Current structures, having been devised with only men in mind, don't facilitate child-rearing and so force a lot of women to choose.

When do children's formative years end?

And women who do prioritise their careers, and leave childcare to the DH, risk losing custody of their children in the eventuality of a split.

I have to say I was very much "Erm...so a man can have children and a career but a woman can't?"

Yes, thats the reality for a lot of people. Until you admit the problem you're never going to find a solution.
Far too many people think that by pretending we can do anything, be anything, do everything then the problems will disappear. We need a lot more honesty before anything else.

The answer I think is to think sensibly about your choices which I think girls, and for that matter boys don't always do.

That might mean vocational degree v academic degree, active choice to live near family help etc.

And feminism might like to re define having it all- can having a good marriage, happy children, happy home life, smaller part time job count as having it all?

Can we not just take a step back and think how sad it is that this lady hasn't be able to have both a career and family?

I am all for women prioritizing their careers and I am so thankful I am in the US where they have government policies to encourage this. I would like to see childcare be much more affordable and for the image of a nanny being only for the super rich be seen as something from the past. If you have a career and want to continue working having a nanny is a necessity and there is nothing wrong with leaving your child(ren) with nanny while you go out to work.

DH is at the bottom of senior management and there are no women in his peer group. The one single female above him is the CMO who is leaving next year. She is excellent and I think her contributions to the Board have been admirable. All the candidates to take over her position are male. I asked DH why no women. He said none had applied for the role.

Also, why should having it all mean a smaller PT job. I want to have a FT job along with my 3 kids, just as DH does. Why shouldn't I be able to achieve that?

I don't think you should be able to take 5 years out of work and then expect an employer to pay for your retraining. However, at your own cost and in your free time employers should support a return to work.

I don't think that raising children and having a career necessarily go hand in hand with marriage/ partnership.
It's the men that need to change their attitude and if a woman wants to progress in a career and have children then it should be down to their partner to go pt or put his career on hold for a while.
We need to encourage women to find such a partner.

Why should having it all mean having a full time job?

Having it all means different things to different people.

By working part time, I have more time to persue research interests, and hobbies.

Having it all for me means attaining a situation where you are fulfilled, for some that might mean career with nanny, for me that would leave me dissatisfied, therefore I would not feel I have it all.

I am often asks why I don't go for promotion. I am not mad, but have a good work life balance what suits me.

Well said Constance. I was lucky to be pick a career where PT is possible, albeit with significant career costs, but these things shouldn't be down to sheer dumb luck.

Childcare is never going to be the whole solution. Nursery is the easy bit. 8-6 in school and wraparound, 5 days a week, would be tough for a lot of junior school children. Nannies are never going to be a solution for vast swathes of the population, because most people don't earn enough to pay someone else's salary plus tax, NI, pension etc and have enough left over to make working worthwhile. We need more acceptance of people working reduced hours.

That is what we should be challenging the status quo. A nanny shouldn't be paid from taxed wages. They should be paid from pretax wages and the nanny should pay taxes on their salary plus the family pay NI and employer contributions. Childcare should also be paid this way.

8-6 for junior school children is fine for the vast majority if the morning and after care is properly set up. DD does morning and one hour of aftercare with a nanny picking her up at 3:30pm. Last year she stayed until 6pm and was fine. It was DH who was panicked and couldn't cope with the stress of getting home to pick up DS at 5:30pm and DD by 6pm. He finishes at 4:30pm at the latest if in the office. If he is travelling he does day trips and leaves early and generally returns by 6pm. Any mother would be breaking their neck to pick the kids up while DH threw his hands up and decided we were hiring a nanny as he didn't want the stress.

I am now looking to hire a nanny for the morning hours too. It would be great if I could leave for work by 7:30am and be home earlier. It is stressful walking the kids to school. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. I am taking a back seat with starting work at 9:30am.

I don't think there are enough people willing / trained to be Nannies for them to become widespread, let alone affordable.

I'm all for equality, but I worry about the children in all this. A poster upthread has described US childcare being available 7.30-6 with all meals provided. I think back to some children I've worked with who weren't particularly happy or social at school and remember how sad they were coming up to the end of the school day. They'd done their time and were going on to more of the same; a busy roomful of noisy children when all they wanted was one to one with mummy. I have seen depression set in upon a child - a sadness that doesn't lift, a detaching from everything because there is nothing safe and fun to set against the exhausting round of being cared for by people outside the family. A lot is said about different choices being right for different mothers but those choices ought to be tailored to the child involved as well. They haven't asked to be born and their needs should come first. (Yes I know that many families need two incomes but the thread is mainly addressing women's choice to work). Some children need to be at home, or in an extended family set-up, outside school hours. Maybe we should ask ourselves not if it's possible for a woman to have it all, but if it's possible for a child to have it all (i.e. all they need for emotional security and personal fulfilment) in group childcare for 9-11 hours a day.

We do get tax breaks like the ones you indicate here in the UK. You can get childcare paid before tax.

Our careers if you like both could involve time away from home overnight at the same time. Not good planning on our part! Our only solution would be a live in nanny, but I don't want another person living in our house.

Careful planning does allow one full time one part time without a live in nanny.

I wish more employers would allow part time working as it does allow a door to be left open very easily to return to full time work. I am not deskilled in any way, not do I need retraining.

My DH employer would not allow part time working, but mine does!

I disagree that 8-6 is fine for the vast majority. I'd do it if we had to but I'd rather not. But it's a judgement call for each child's parents. Some parents think boarding school is fine for their 7 year olds, and their opinion is no less valid than mine.

However since there are different opinions on this, and we live in countries with thumping huge GDPs, we should be able to support some alternative solutions so that people who want to be able to collect their children from school can do that without compromising work completely. People shouldn't have to work FT to be successful.