To put my career before my child

[Madisonthecat]

Before I get started I’ll start by saying I think I am but really need some advice from the wise women (and men) of Mumsnet.

Currently not working and have been offered two roles which is fantastic, know I’m really lucky.

Role 1 - three days a week, 9-5, public sector job. Pretty straightforward and could do it reasonably comfortably in the time allowed with little requirement for overtime I think.

Role 2 - amazing opportunity, great pay (£15,000 more than role 1) and amazing benefits. BUT.... it’s full time only, will probably require lots of overtime, travel and be pretty stressful day in day out. It’s a sector I love and would really enjoy getting back into.

What do I do? I would love to do role 2 and if I was childless would take it in a heartbeat. But I have a 3 year old and a partner who works long hours in a demanding role too and can’t help feeling that it’s really not in the best interests of my child to take it. My partner will do a few things around the house (cooking) but I definitely do the lions share of housework and 95% of childcare currently. My previous role after mat leave was 3 days a week and worked well for us as a family as I was happy to pick up the slack. We have no family support at all.

This time I guess I feel conflicted because it’s basically a dream job and I feel sad that as a Mum it feels seems you’re forced to choose between a varied, interesting and well rewarded career or putting your children first and taking something less challenging and with less pay but providing a much better work/life balance.

I will miss my child hugely if I take role 2 as it’s also a fairly long commute (1 hour each way) and would have to accept hardly seeing them on weeekdays. What would you do??

Btw I’ve put this in AIBU as I’m after quick responses. Need to confirm either way tomorrow. Help!

It's quite unpleasant for people to imply that a SAHM can't also be a good role model for their daughters.

I think it says a lot about how society values different roles, and agree that is quite unpleasant.

e.g. Two women work in childcare / early education. One does so by working FT in a nursery. The other does so by being a SAHM. Is the SAHM NOT valuable - or worth less - because what she does is not paid?

Two women work similar hours. One is in a commercial setting, the other as an early years teacher. Both had to have degrees to access their jobs, though the commercial setting is better paid [itself a reflection on how society views the roles]. Is the woman working in the commercial setting worth more because their job is not to do with children? Which is more valuable to society?

You can use the love your children deeply argument whether yoiu are male or female to work or not to work surely. I amazingly love my chiildren deeply too and yet I have happily sent them to school rather than home educated them and I work full time. That does not remove the love. Your husband probably loves you deeply but he still goes to work. In fact you can argue that for many women keeping a career going in case a man disappears or dies or loses his job is one of the best things you can ever do for your children.

(I have worked in a predominantly male, commercial environment, an evenly mixed academic environment, a primarily female profession and as a SAHM. I would suggest that I could be a good role model to my DD in all of those, though some would regard the first two as 'better' - why? I am the same person, with the same qualificiations, in all cases working my hardest and for very similar hours?)

I don't think 'love' is about physical presence. It is about priorities and care.

So it is not about whether, routinely, you work FT, PT or not at all, but about whether you are prepared to prioritise / value your child's needs.

Oh good, this has turned into a debate about who is a better role model/of more value to society.

I don’t feel like we have enough of those on Mumsnet.

In the OP’s case it is clear that she wants to take Role 2 more than Role 1 but is worried about the repercussions for her family.

Some of that could be mitigated by using some of their increased income to outsource some of the housework, and ideally by getting her partner to step up and do a greater share of the childcare and housework.

Whichever option she chooses she is likely to have regrets. But in both cases these years when her children are young will pass by in a flash, whereas when you are 55 and your kids have left home and you’ve got 10+ years before you retire but you’re stuck in a job you find unfulfilling with few prospects to move elsewhere, that time will pass more slowly.

If I’ve understood correctly (haven’t RTFT), the OP is not married either. I wouldn’t put my career on the back burner without that legally binding marriage contract.

YY to Role 2.
Opportunities don't come along as often as you think and as you get older it becomes trickier to find good roles. Plus you don't want to feel bitter and resentful in old age as you look back and feel you compromised what you wanted to ensure everyone else was okay.

You can make it work and as it sounds like you'll be quite senior you'll probably have more freedom to be more flexible once you get established there. If it doesn't work then you tried and you could possibly negotiate part time in your higher paid role.

This thread is a depressing read as it feels the majority think you should role over and do the easier role - while your DH gets to continue having an exciting, FT job. Not fair but in the patriarchy we just accept that in a couple men get priority when it comes to careers and women get laboured with all the bloody wifework.

cantkeepawayforever I think as always what people think about others gives away a lot about what they think about themselves. The reason that so many are desperate to put down SAHMs is because they want to emphasise that the decision they have made to be a WOHM is emphatically the right one. To concede that there are any notable advantages to being a SAHM, or indeed that a SAHM can still be a good role model would force them to question their ethos that being a WOHM is definitely best. I'm not saying that being a SAHM is definitely best for everyone either but I find those that are unwilling to accept that every option has it's pros and cons are most uncomfortable with their decision so need to beat down anyone taking the alternative path in order to prevent any internal doubts they may have creeping in.

Bumpitybumper

What an eloquently written and very well put post! I think there is a lot of truth to what you're saying.

Job 2!

bumpitybumper I feel the same way when I read posts by SAHMs labouring the point that mothers who work are missing out on precious moments with their babies and - worse - implying that those mothers love their children less.

Sure, as a working mum you will miss out on some precious moments. You will also miss out on some frustrating, boring and rubbish moments as well (particularly the ones where you are covered in someone else’s bodily fluids and can’t remember when you last had an uninterrupted adult conversation or took a shit in peace).

And as a SAHM you will have all those moments with your children but you will miss out on other things, both good things like promotions and forming a close working relationship with your colleagues, and bad things like having a nightmare boss or a gruelling commute.

Either way, it’s a little off topic since the OP isn’t trying to decide between working or staying at home, she’s trying to decide between two job offers.

When I had my first child a wise old lady gave me these words ...

If you die a company will replace you in weeks and you will be forgotten over time.

If you die your child will never replace you will never be forgotten.

What do you think it’s worrh investing your time in?

Job 1 if it was me, personally. Ten minutes ago DS was 3, now he’s starting senior school in September. It flies by.

Annette, that comes across like emotional blackmail and that “wise old lady” sounds like an interfering old bag. I’d have told her to do one.

Spending a smaller percentage of your time at work isn’t just about your kids though. I spend some of my part time days reading, going for a run, baking, gardening, seeing friends - I have given so many hours of my life to work in my 20s and 30s and I’m not sure the reward was enough. If I ended up as a ceo it might have been! But not that type of job. I want to enjoy life, and not be too stressed to be happy. If you get a lot of pleasure in your job it may be different

why is it 'sad' that as a mum you make different choices? as a parent obviously you make different choices - number one you chose to hve kids - do what you like with your career to create the balance you want - but own the decision don't moan about it.

This thread is so annoying on that everyone assumes that working FT damages a child. Many millions of children worldwide have turned out perfectly fine with two parents working FT.
If you don’t want to pursue a career or work FT then fine, but don’t pretend it’s the only way to raise happy, healthy children.

oly5 ‘everyone’ assumes that? Are you reading the same thread as us? Most people are telling her to take the job

Oly I can think of a few real life cases where the child would have been better off having less time with their parents.

For example:

My aunt is one of those pushy helicopter parents with the result being that her kids have a complete meltdown every time they get a bad grade and are incapable of doing anything for themselves.

My siblings and I would probably have been better off if my mum had gone back to work because my brother really didn’t achieve his full academic potential with her constantly breathing down his neck (she thought she was doing the best for him but it actually put him off learning) and we are getting guilt tripped now about the fact that her career never went anywhere because she gave it all up for us.

I also used to work as a nanny for a family where both parents worked long hours and the child had been in full-time nursery since she was 6 months old. They took a long time to conceive their second child, and then the mum took voluntary redundancy and stayed at home. She later confessed to me that her second child was a lot more spoilt, demanding and needy. (She didn’t use those exact words but that was obviously what she meant.) Her elder daughter was a complete delight.

Bumpitybumper Post wasn’t that well put or eloquent,it was one sided
The usual retort is working mums must be insecure in their choice so berate sahm
Notably,this doesn’t seem to apply other way.sahm aren’t accused of being insecure in choices

Lipstick I suggest you read my post again. My closing statement is about anyone (WOHMs, SAHMs or WAHMs) who cannot acknowledge that there are pros and cons to all approaches. I think the need to bash others and demean their choices is often driven by insecurity.

I could have told you on page 1 that your thread would go this way, OP.

I’m a working mother, as opposed to a SAHM, and I’ve always been vocal in my defense of working mothers (because men don’t get this shite) BUT...

The amount of posts carelessly throwing childcare into the same category as housework has actually made me feel a mixture of sad/guilty/conflicted like never before.

It’s not just about children as a job is it? It’s about your relationship and wanting to be with them/be there for them.

I’m now lucky enough to work from home and have found a semblance of a balance.

I just...Some of it doesn’t sit right with me. I hate kids being seen as a chore to be taken care of like housework.

I have found all the advice to take option 1 so depressing.

I think you need to take option 2 but negotiate some working from home/starting early, leaving early days etc. Also, get your partner to do the same. Also, stop doing all the housework?!

I wouldn’t ask folk the question.id crack on with job no 2

No brainer. Role 2. Get a year experience under your belt and move on if you don't like it, or suss out how feasible it would be to apply for flex working.

Either way you're putting your DC first. Just in a different way.

Quality of time counts, not quantity. And your dp will have to help out more or pay for cleaner to do more hours if needed.

£15k extra would make a massive difference to your DC lives. Holidays, you could take a couple of weeks parental leave a year, savings for them.........and you stand a chance of having a career again.

As I say, absolute no brainer for me. My kids are my priority and I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Under par - it’s not depressing. I’m so much happier taking option 1 and living life with my children. We still have enough money and everyone is happy. Life is for living and enjoying not working and giving your best years away for a souless company to profit from you.