AIBU to think John Humphrys is going to annoy a lot of mums this am...

[suffolkblonde29]

Today presenter John Humphrys is quoted in The Times this morning talking about his ex-wife -

"Humphrys describes Wilding as “about as near perfect a mother as you can get” – a woman who “got pregnant and said, ‘I’m stopping work and I won’t start work again until the children – however many there may be – are in university.’ And she never did.”

Because that's how to be a perfect mother?! Oh gawd, my DD has no chance....

working parents should show a debt of gratitude to the hundreds of thousands of poorly paid nursery workers/carers

it upsets me that people resent childcare costs. Like it should be free. But the people looking after your children have bills. And they should have the skills and training necessary. If it costs you more as a family for both to work then one should look after the kids. It's a bit short sighted. Don't people realise children need to be supervised? Do they only work this out once the baby arrives?

Yes, so we should tackle why it's often men who end up being paid more. I've read of the pay gap narrowing for women in their 20s, or even women of that age being paid more than men in their 20s, not sure how accurate it is but if it is the case there should be increasing numbers of men who become SAHDs (I think the number is growing a little). Yes the majority of those workers are men but they shouldn't be.

I find intelligent debate interesting, but estateagents posts are just depressing and bigoted. Who says most mothers would prefer to be sole carer for their child?

I wanted my children to be comfortable and confident to be cared for by their dad as much as me, and also to be comfortable that while we were their primary care, they could be looked after wonderfully well by their cm /nursery too.
Oh and btw I was an avid breastfeeder too.

Munster - i have just had a baby and dh took 3 weeks off (1 paid, 1 unpaid and 1 hol) and on his return everyone was really off with him and he has been demoted. He only took 1 week with the other 2 dc and regretted it and really enjoyed his 3 weeks with the family. Sadly now he has realised too late what the cost would be. The types of jobs he has they don't tolerate that kind of absence, and i suspect they can only offer that type of job to someone with a sahp or no dc. They want long hours and not much work life balance.

Because often realistically the family couldn't survive if it were the man/higher earner to give up work - man does not necessarily equal high/higher earner nowadays though. Younger women are earning as much or more. The big gaps only appear after the woman has taken several years off and then goes back to a part time school hours only job.

That sort of job is in itself an issue, no parent should be made to feel they can't spend time with their children. All workplaces should facilitate fathers and mothers being able to spend time with their children, especially but not only when they're first born.

Depends on the sectors you work in i suppose. I worked in arts, charities and unis. The majority of my colleagues were female and married to men earning much more. The only way they could afford to earn so little in London was to have a higher earning partner - which often was in IT or finance.

Katharina exactly. Women in their 20s now outearn men of the same age group, yet, despite the number of stay at home fathers and fathers who are primary carers for their children increasing slightly, it's still so often women who are expected to put careers on hold.

An interesting view on Iceland and equality - especially on shared leave and incentives to take it

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/oct/24/iceland-best-place-to-be-women-equal-gender-maternity

There's no reason why IT or finance should be dominated by men, or why it would be specifically women who are able to do lower paid jobs because of being supported by male partners.

Exactly. Things have moved in the right direction - when mine were born 20 + years ago there was NO paternity leave. Dh was back at work the day after each birth. I had 12 weeks maternity leave. That was the norm. However, at least the legislation is now in place for parents to legally take more time. I would definitely encourage my children (ds as well as dd) to gravitate towards Family friendly work places too. I can't imagine why anyone would want a high flying city job which takes them away from their family- and that goes for women and men

and yet when you look at those working in IT and finance it is majority men and those working in lower paid 'caring' or 'admin' roles it is majority women. So there must be some reason?

DH is starting to feel the same now Munster. He misses us all terribly and with a 4 and 2yo and a newborn he is sad he doesn't see them at all in the week.

Gender stereotyping starts from a young age, girls being dissuaded or made to feel that subjects such as IT and Maths are "for boys" and girls aren't good at them (despite such inspiring figures as Ada Lovelace and many others). Given this many girls are then put off or not even considering studying subjects at university which would lead to careers in those fields.

Also I read recently of "gender blind" CVs in tech. When CVs didn't specify whether someone was a woman or man, women got many more job offers/interviews, when they did, men overwhelmingly did. There's inherent sexism holding women back even once they get into the fields.

So then there are reasons. Whether the reasons are 'right' is irrelevant, the reality is they affect us and we make our choices based on them.

Yes, but we shouldn't accept that it's how things are. It's holding back so many girls from fulfilling their potential.

One very significant reason of course is the society and its expectations. I'm the higher earner, DH was SAHD for a while. And we both constantly had and have to answer all kinds of questions that would never, ever be asked if the roles were the other way around. A lot of people find it easier to go with the flow.

Both DH and I work in the finance industry. The jobs are sometimes challenging but overall we have work-life balance. The modern finance industry want good people but also understand that people have lives and to attract the best they have to make the jobs attractive so that includes good money and respect for family life. I have friends work back office in Investment banks who work from home twice a week. The companies have the technology in place to make this work.

The most senior person in my division is female and she works 8.30pm till 6pm and not a minute more. My own boss is male and leaves early twice a week for school pick up. Another senior member of staff manages to run a dept whilst doing drop off and pick up every day. People do job shares, part-timers get promoted if they're good. Unless there's an emergency situation at work we do standard 9-5 a week with good holiday entitlement and flexible working patterns. You can be at home and keep abreast of things using a Blackberry you don't have to be there all the time.

There may be some relic organisations who expect their employees to be present 12hrs a day but they're becoming rare. Many companies are now working hard to attract senior females.

I'm sorry MrsKoala but if your DH was in a decent company and they wanted to keep him there is no way he would be demoted and get dirty looks for taking 3 weeks off paternity especially if they have technology available for him to be able to work from home which any large city org does. They must be trying to manage him out for some reason.

I'm sorry MrsKoala but if your DH was in a decent company and

They must be trying to manage him out for some reason

Maybe they are a crap company?

He wasn't working from home tho (he does one day a week).

He has worked for quite a few American companies and has found there attitudes and culture much harsher than here. When he worked half his time in DC his boss used to bang on about our European socialism in regards to worker rights.

His demotion isn't financial, they have just moved some staff out from under him, implying he has divided commitments.

its not IT or Finance btw.

Re: shared parental leave the uptake is never going to be good until paternity benefits are financially on par with maternity benefits. It's about paying the mortgage.

The sexism in these type of threads really depresses me. So all women secretly want to stay at home and look after their children? What does that mean for me, then, when I actively chose to return to work and for DH to be the SAHP (it could equally have been me). Am I 'outsourcing' childcare to DH?

I love my job and I wouldn't be able to get the same intellectual stimulation at home. After 2 weeks off I'm eager to get back into work and back to solving the puzzles that make my day interesting.

I would have loved to have quit working for 5 years and then gone part time, but when my kids were born it wasn't an option, I got two weeks off, 2nd on statutory pay, and that was with a "forward looking" organisation. My wife was actually very keen to give up work despite having a professional job, she earned a bit less than me, but since she was initially entitled to 6 months off, it was never seriously discussed the idea of me being part time. As far as I am aware, there are many women who are happy with giving up work to be the primary carer and actively seek that role, they don't want to go back to work and have a high flying career, and there is nothing wrong with that.

Part of the problem is that many professional jobs are just not that parent friendly, they expect you to be able to travel at the drop of a hat, or work late or have meetings at a time that suits someone in California. If employers went to greater lengths to accommodate parents then it wouldn't be easier for one parent just to quit working.