In wanting DH to put career on hold to care for DS rather than go FT at nursery?

[IndieRar]

Bit of background: I run my own company and work full time. DH is employed full time, we have similar income but mine slightly more. DH took 7 months parental leave to care for DS and loved every moment, after I went back to work when he was 12 weeks old. DS is 12 months old now.

Since his return to work, DH had been doing longer days and not working Fridays so DS only in nursery four days a week. But he has to work longer days and over the weekend to make up the contracted hours.

We're considering putting DS in Nursery five days a week as DH can't go on doing compressed hours and thinks his career will suffer if he goes down to four contracted days.

I wouldn't entertain the idea of dropping a day as it's my company and I really enjoy it. But then selfishly I don't want DS to be in Nursery full time either and want DH to drop a day or half a day. He doesn't particularly like his job but he doesn't want to be at a disadvantage for promotion if he's seen as part time (even though 30 hours is still considered full time).

We don't know anyone else whose child is in nursery full time, nor any couples where the dad was/is the main career on parental leave and considering reducing hours. Nor are there any senior people in his company on reduced hours (or many women for that matter).

Although FT nursery is fairly financially crippling, it's not a huge leap in cost from 4 to 5 days so not really a deciding factor. It's a very long day for him though and may mean that he ends up wanting his key worker more than us if he's there more! He really enjoys Nursery and is thriving but is exhausted at the end of his four days. I can't work from home as it's not the kind of thing I can do from home and look after DS at same time.

Do/did any of you have little ones at Nursery full time and would you do it again? Has anyone got any advice for me? Am I being massively selfish in wanting DH to step back in his career to look after DS one day a week? AIBU in wanting DS to only be in four days when I'm not prepared to reduce my own hours? WWYD and why?

Thanks Mumsnet for any wise insight you can offer into my conundrum. Sorry for the really long post!

Enid but 4 day weeks may well affect their careers

And I agree lannie it doesn't but coincidentally it's always what works for their little family. And as he earns more it makes sense

Op why can't he continue with compressed hours?

What the OP needs to do is to get over her “selfish” wish for their DS not to be in full time nursery given she “won’t entertain” dropping a day of her work.

Or get a nanny.

And I would say the same if the sexes were reversed, it makes no difference

Get a nanny.

Both my DDs have been full time at nursery (even when I am part time) because they loved it, kept them occupied, liked the routine...long list of positives. The key negative that I found is that they were exhausted by day4 and struggled with day5. However we've had flexibility to send them late & collect early thereby giving them a shorter day. However they did tend to fall ill/ catch bugs once they were tired by day4 and if there were a bug going around at nursery. That effectively cost us a few days off work & nursery in the following week! So 5 days is no problem but be prepared for more illness & downtime.

For those who didn't RTFT, here's my response from further up:

Thank you all. Genuinely appreciated most of the comments and reading your experiences. It's very reassuring. We don't have to feel guilty about an extra few hours it turns out!

I should probably have titled the thread along the lines of full time nursery query in Childcare but I don't think I'd have got quite so many replies!

We've just agreed to ask nursery for him to go to five days when he goes back next week. DH is still going to try doing a short day Friday (his company is very flexible) but at least that'll be up to him and he's going to continue doing earlier starts so he can build up flexi. He'll still be FT which is what matters to him. We are a team and have agreed this works best for all of us right now. Then maybe I can also do the odd shorter day too.

My DH is a SAHD to our two DD. I'm on mat leave at the moment but he'll be looking after both on his own from April (3.5 yr old and 6 month old by that point)

He has never been career orientated whereas I enjoy my job and earn a comfortable amount for us to live as a family. It was always the plan that he would stay home with our children, before they came along. He's blossomed as a person since they came along and is a wonderful dad. But it's bloody hard work and he has sacrificed his career for us. If he wasn't 100% on board I could see him being resentful of the situation (I would be in his shoes if I had an ounce of reluctance in me)

It's worked out really well for us somehow, especially as we have no family near us who could help fill in gaps but if he ever became unhappy with the situation we'd need to think of another plan together.

Basically, I think you need to have an honest chat with him, and if he doesn't want to decrease his hours you need to come up with a solution together, and you might need to accept it's not your ideal.

Why do you have to work so much? These are precious years for your son that he’ll never get again. You might regret not spending more time bringing him up and caring for him once he’s older and the opportunity has passed. A few years is nothing in the context of a whole career, but it’s everything for your son.
Some things money can’t buy.

I’m so curious as to how come your company couldn’t cope without you even for half a day or a day a week, in the age of mobile and internet communication. You say you’ll do the ‘odd shorter day’. How come it’s so hard to be away?

One thing to bear in mind at the nursery is how many other FT children there are. If there are none/few then a week's activities (e.g. making an Easter card or a Diwali lamp or similar) will be done on a rota so they will be done a few times during the same week so everyone gets a chance to do them. If your DC is one of the few who is always there, it may get a bit repetitive for him. He also may be conscious that everyone else gets a mummy or daddy day and wonder why he doesn't.

My dd went to f/t nursery from 9 months old and absolutely loved it. She thrived in her environment and I never experienced her wanting her key worker more than her parents. Will be sending my ds to f/t nursery in February when I go back to work and anticipate he will settling in as well as dd did but every child is different so we shall see.

I would 100% get a nanny. Personally I think 47-48 weeks a year in nursery for long days is way too much. Your DC is going to miss out on so many 'normal' childhood experiences inside the walls of the same nursery setting day in day out. I don't think it's fair.

Let him be at home with a nanny so he can go to different parks and museums and play centres and swimming, and the post office and supermarkets- just so he can see the outside world. You are not going to be able to make up all of those experiences at the weekend when you are trying to keep on top of your house and life-admin.

I have absolutely nothing against nurseries, especially for older children. However, I would definitely not want to put my child into one for the length of time you are proposing.

Yes you are being v selfish.

You should both do 90% hours - every other Friday or a half day off each a week

@ferntwist I wonder this too, why wouldn't you want to sacrifice some of your time to be with your child. I can't relate at all to this dilemma, imo op should take on some of the childcare herself...what's the point in having children if you don't want to do that.

Both me and dh are in ft work and the kids have been in ft nursery from the start (apart from mat leave of course) and they are very well adjusted happy children who love(d) their time at nursery but still do not prefer their key worker to us lol :)
It works for us, there is definitely nothing wrong with that. Fwiw if we could drop a day to go to 4 days we would seriously consider it. But not 3 days, we are both reasonably career orientated.

Also just as a FYI -anything below the ft hours in a company is considered (legally speaking) part-time. Finally it is unlawful to treat a part timer differently because of that ie they shouldn't suffer any detriment from being part-time. Just FYI.

@ferntwist because I'm very specialised and have many years experience in what we do. I'm training people up but it takes a long time.

When I was on mat leave, mistakes were made which cost the company/me thousands to correct. I ended up being available on email throughout and having to go to the office with my newborn weekly to keep on top of things.

When I was pregnant the plan was for DH to go part time after PL and use the extra day when DS in nursery to retrain and job hunt for something more fulfilling. That's what he wanted to do. He changed his mind, which is absolutely fine, and has decided to focus on his current career and stay full time and seek promotion. DH was always going to be the main carer.

Which is why we find ourselves in this position. But it's fine, DS will be fine FT in nursery. It's a big one and they do lots of stuff outside too.

"why wouldn't you want to sacrifice some of your time to be with your child ...[...]...what's the point in having children if you don't want to do that."

But surely that applies to the OP's DH just as much as to the OP herself? Why is the woman always expected to want to stay home and look after the children, but the man isn't?

@lannie of course it applies to dh aswell, but as op has said he has taken on most of the childcare. It's not a matter of op doing it because she's a woman, it's a matter of lo being out into full time nursery because op couldn't possibly reduce her hours by even 1 day a week.

What about the child's needs? Yes they are fine in nursery, and nursery is invaluable to those that need them and a completely legitimate form of childcare. But in this case it doesn't seem to be a necessity of this type, more that op simply doesn't want to spend any of her work time with her baby.

I guess this pov might be unpopular of even a bit harsh, but if you have a baby, surely you want to spend time with it?

Candyfloss - I never see that type of response written to men, or about the self-employed husbands of female posters. I should note at this point that my personal view is it shouldn't matter what sex you are - both parents should be able to look after the child and/or have a career as best fits their family's circumstance.

You could easily have written that OP's OH should want to spend time with the child he created and looked after for the last year. Why can't he possibly reduce his hours even by 1 day a week? What about the child's needs? He has a baby, so surely he would want to spend time with it? etc etc.

I see the point that her OH has done most of the childcare so far, and so OP should 'take her turn', but I don't think I've ever seen a taking-turns argument applied to men going PT after mat leave because the woman has done her share of the childcare and now it's his turn. Normally the views are that it would be silly to harm a second career, his career is too important, that he doesn't know how to deal with baby (see the numerous threads about man refusing to look after baby for even short periods), that she's bonded with baby etc.

I'm glad the OP and her husband have reached a decision that works for them. I just wish society held fathers to the same standards as mothers. It's a shame we (as a whole) expect that women should sacrifice on behalf of their children, but don't wonder more often why men 'don't want' to spend time with their own children (with the acknowledgement that there are plenty of men who would like to who fight an uphill struggle against a system set up for female carers and male breadwinners).

TL;DR: It would be nice if these type of decisions were made irrespective of gender. But when it comes to childcare, there's definitely a bias towards trying to protect the man's career (sometimes at the expense of the woman's).

The OP has been back and explained that she’s in a very specialised role and that even dropping a day would have a big negative impact on her business. So I don’t get why anyone is questioning her on it and playing the emotional card ‘oh they’re only young once.’

As mothers I think we should respect the fact that not all women want exactly the same things and that’s OK. Women can be the worst for competitive sniping, and wanting some measurable evidence that their way is ‘best.’ Maybe it’s to do with the martyr and sacrifice aspect... if you sacrifice your career, you want some tangible ‘evidence’ that it’s been worthwhile; you want your children to be happier, cleverer, more successful.

Come on women, we’re better than that.

No personal axe to grind: like I said, I worked 3 days a week until my kids started school, but I’d never claim that that’s the ‘best’ way. The children of my full time working friends have grown up just as happy and well adjusted. My decision was about me wanting more time at home- not about anything being wrong with full time nursery. And if my dh had been keen to have more time at home then we would have compromised on that- perhaps worked 4 days each.

I was fortunate to be in a line of work where I could drop to 3 days for a few years and then step back up to full time to get my career back on track- though even so, working part time for a while has impacted on my pension and probably slowed my career a bit.

The OP isn’t in that position- she’s running her own business and clearly in a specialised field and she’s happy doing what she’s doing. Her DH wants to progress in his career too. Sounds like a balanced set up- good on them.

Very well said Babbitywabbit

@LannieDuck I completely agree. How many times do we hear on MN about men with super important jobs who must work excessively long hours and can’t possibly cope without the help of a SAHW. No-one ever seems to question why these men should bother having children since they seem to have such a limited role in their lives (beyond providing the money). Yet should a woman want a FT career and a family, there are always people jumping in with comments about “why bother having a baby” or “the poor child stuck in a Nursery”. I can’t believe it is almost 2018 and we are still having this same discussion.

I can’t comment on the OPs situation but both DH and I worked FT and, due to flexible working hours, our DC spent about 50% of their preschool waking hours in childcare (it’s a bit less now that they are in school). For us this was a worthwhile trade off for career progression and long term financial security. Although we are far from rich, it has enabled us to buy a house in a nice area (and in the catchment for good schools) and to provide the DC with decent holidays, extracurricular activities and savings for university. All things that I didn’t have as my DM didn’t work and I grew up in a family where money was a constant worry. For me financial security and providing opportunities in life is at least as important, if not more so, than the exact number of days spent in nursery which the child probably won’t even remember.

Yes!