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.

stopping my own mother did as you did, stayed at home, but came from a very progressive background as a number of her female relatives worked full time. She absolutely encouraged my sister and me to think outside of just stating at home with children. I can honestly say I do not see any difference in outcome between my many cousin's families, with 2 working parents and my own. Children were the absolute priority in all family situations not just in our family where my mother remained at home.

I think that holding onto your view long term whereby you will be disappointed if your daughters do not stay at home with their children is only a potential source of future tension but I get what you mean because I would be the same if my daughters did not breastfeed for example which is equally ridiculous.

You may make it work but I can't see the harm in teenagers being told the truth. Children are inconvenient, children change your life and children need time.

I am going by high flying people that I know personally ,and they are not home by 7pm and they can be away from home for significant periods.

At least the Head is right to point out that you will have to arrange your high flying career to give a work/life balance and not just fall into it expecting to get it.

My DH was out of the house before they were up and home after 7pm and commuted to London. He didn't have it all - he missed a lot. He could only do it because I worked locally part time. Had I commuted with him to London it would have been unworkable unless we had a live in nanny- and hen we would both have missed out.

I agree with the Guardian article - society's fault is that nobody is saying this to boys. Equal parental leave is just tinkering at the edges, rearranging deck chairs, just like many of the other (albeit positive) changes in the workplace. Cultural change seems as far away as it has ever been. I worked with a female chief constable who was very open about the fact that she only achieved so highly because she sacrificed having children and her husband gave up his career to support her as well as not having children. That was a few decades ago. But it's still happening today. A colleague's response to my husband stating that he could not attend an evening meeting because I had a meeting to go to that evening was: "So your wife's job is more important than yours?" My husband replied that our son's care was more important than a meeting.

I don't work 60 hour weeks. I earn above average. My choices have sought to reach a balance between my family's happiness and wellbeing and my own. I have been fully supported throughout by a fantastic dh and father to our child. But it didn't stop me feeling torn in two and slipping into depression when I returned to work. My boss's (a woman and mother of two) expectations were high - almost like she expected me to make the same choices she had (to pursue a career at the expense of spending time with her family). She told me a story once about playing hide and seek with her 4yo, hiding in a cupboard so she could reply to emails on her blackberry. I mean, wtf?!

And I will always remember the time I was delayed at work because my boss expected me to deal with some crisis or other. I didn't even have time to call my cm to say I'd be late. When I arrived all the other children were tucking into their dinners while ds was sat there eating the only thing he had left in his lunchbox. I burst into tears.

A friend of mine was educated by Mrs Durham. She says she really is an excellent teacher, but she's thoroughly disappointed in her for teaching young women to accept the glass ceiling rather than smash through it. I think we need teachers to be realistic - it's fucking hard to have it all, striving for balance will drive you to the brink as you deal with the weight of a whole host of expectations on you and your earnings might be lower even if you think you're managing. Even if you remain in the workplace your career is likely to stall for a few years as your male colleagues and other childless women bypass you. It's right to tell young women it'll be hard. It's utterly wrong to effectively tell them they should not aspire to change it.

It's right to tell young women it'll be hard. It's utterly wrong to effectively tell them they should not aspire to change

YY I think culturally things are getting worse in some ways. The recent recession, all recessions really, and their drives for efficieny and the adminification of traditionally more family friendly jobs like teaching are just further exasperating the problem.

another I do realise there are plenty of children who do perfectly well with a childminder or nanny. I'm not saying a SAHP is necessarily the best family because there are so many other variables.

No one is forcing anyone to have children. It's necessary to look at the specific child/ren and acknowledge that, if you're going to have them, the decision of where they spend the majority of their lives should be made, if possible, on the basis of what will be optimum for them.

What annoys/concerns me is when parents get so focused on having it all for themselves that the unhappiness/boredom of their child becomes completely overlooked. And I think it is quite easy to overlook because many children explode with joy when they see their parents at the end of childcare, making it easy to suppose that they 'love it'. We hear a lot about how dreadful it is if mothers are unfulfilled (and I don't desperately enjoy this stage of my life, if I'm honest) but I chose to have them and at this point, it's overwhelmingly apparent that my shy, introvert DD would find childcare overwhelming. She flourishes in her own space. I couldn't go off to another life knowing she would be exhausted, bewildered and overstimulated for most of her waking hours. Not unless I absolutely had to. But for another child it might be just what they needed.

I really don't think that there will be tension if either of my children choose to combine high-flying careers with parenthood. Their ages are currently preschool and I'm already accustomed to swallowing slight feelings of disappointment about my ideas for what they will like and do in life. By adulthood, I'll just be relieved they're completely responsible for their own outcomes!

mehit I don't see a problem with young people of both sexes being told that children are a responsibility (I really don't think they're an inconvenience).

But I very much dispute the notion you're trying to state as fact that no families can make it work.

I know lots and lots of uber successful people and they are a mixed bag family-wise. Some spend too much time in the office (especially the older male generation). Some make sure that a parent is at every sports day, parents evening, production. You see many many dads doing school drop offs these days!

I think that is a very good post LittleLion.
Sometimes I think that I am living in a parallel universe to be told that 2 parents can be very flexible and still have high flying careers. I wonder quite what they mean by 'high flying'. I have no doubt they do it, but they are lucky. My son, single and childless, works in London- if America phones at 5pm ( being 5 hrs behind) and wants something done they do it. Saying they have to pick up from the childminder at 6pm or they promised to do bath time won't advance them. There was very high competition for the job so plenty of others to step into his shoes.
When you read my link on Margaret Thatcher you see that her idea of family life and her daughter Carol's were very different. Carol did not like the fact that everything had to be high speed and on to the next thing. No time to just 'be'.

Depends on the job, but many people would have a nanny not a child minder and be able to work from home.

Of course children are inconvenient. If you have a big presentation to do and you have been up half the night cleaning vomit off the floor and changing sheets, or you are rushing to work and they throw a strop about doing up the car seat straps etc etc etc you would know that!

And I'm not saying that all people aspire to live like that, but clearly many people do without any detrimental effect.

But if you have a nanny you are missing a lot.
Working from home is ideal but I am not sure how many people who are really focussed on climbing a career ladder can do it.

mehit choosing an American firm was always going to be his problem (I'm sure he knew that beforehand and).

Work on the Asia desk and things are different. My mate's DH goes in at 4.30am and leaves when India shuts shop, so always ready for pick ups .

Look, I'm not saying it's always simple. Of course t's not. But stating as fact that it's impossible is simply untrue.

I work very regularly from home.

I've just signed up to a project that is huge. They care not where I do the work!

But many people do work from home (particularly if self employed) and many people have nannies and see loads of their children but have an extra hand to deal with the sick and car seat struggles.

Realistically, people in more 'low flying' jobs often have no choice but to work long hours but can't afford to pay for help.

It's not either/or.

Why is working from home seen as a solution? Do people mean 'working from home so you can also take care of your child' or 'working from home and your nanny can look after your child'? Having worked from home when ds was little, the former is not viable. And as to the latter I think I would find it harder to have my child around me while someone else looked after him. It's more tempting to interfere or pop downstairs for a cuddle or whatever.

Working from home means less travel and more flexibility.

Obviously you need to be happy to let your nanny get on with things while you are around, but many people are.

We are all different.

Yes merry I can see that it will mean less travel - in my case it meant more time with ds after I collected him from the cm (work was an hour away, my cm 15 mins). But in many professions it is still not practical. So much of so many jobs depend on interacting face to face with other people which requires working in the office.

I suppose my point is that women must still make a career choice based on whether or not they will be able to work from home - and for many that still closes doors.

So much of so many jobs depend on interacting face to face with other people which requires working in the office.

Yes, but not all jobs, and that is the point.

I suppose my point is that women AND MEN must still make a career choice based on whether or not they will be able to work from home - and for many that still closes doors.

He didn't choose an American firm- he works for a British firm. When triple figures were applying for every job he didn't go quibbling about clients and working hours!

I begin to think we are talking about different things. People manage careers and children.
I am talking about women smashing the glass ceiling and being on par with men for top jobs.

Well at least she's talking about it to her pupils, pointing out that there will be choices to be made and that one option to consider is to not put yourself in the position of being a carer. I feel quite bemused and a little bitter that neither my teachers nor parents told me about the choices that are necessary when you have a family and want to continue the career you built up. I know it sounds brattish, as it is all so obvious to me now, but I didn't have a clue 10 years ago! If I had had a bit more information I could have planned a bit better, either by choosing a life partner who would have done more/all of the caring or a job which was more flexible. I feel as if those of us educated in the 80s/90s were expected to go and have the great careers but still expected to be primary carers for families, which isn't possible!

Like a PP said, it needs to become a cultural norm that men are just as responsible for caring for children as women. I bet then corporate culture will shift more quickly to allowing flexibility for caring commitments.

I do think it's a bit odd for her to say she's not a feminist though.

Well our DC are teens now and out of the house for swathes of time. DH and I can work at home or not as required.

We just spent the October half term fortnight travelling in Asia with our DC . Lap top and phones mean work still gets done where ever.

And what do you suppose is the ratio of men v women who have to make such choices?

We are all different which is why I think the Head was just being realistic and pointing out that choices have to be made. She said it to girls because it was a girl's school. It needs saying to men too.