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!

Can’t imagine a man posting this!

it’s funny isn’t it, the salient points of this dilemma are different to different people depending on their priorities.

Frankly, I wouldn’t cut my hours back if not married because of the whole paying twice issue - loss of career prospects/earning potential and then another hit if you split and your dp hoardes his/her savings that you’ve facilitated them to make.

Clearly there are many women/primary parents who would rather risk paying twice for the time with their dc though.

@apples if you read my posts carefully you will see that I don't judge anyone for the decisions they make . There is no judgement in my posts ....yours, however, are laden with implied judgement and emotive language designed to make women who work full time feel guilty. Didn't you say that full time childcare damaged young children?

I do have issues with posts written in a way that would make the OP feel guilty for choosing option 2.

Blaa - yes I said that because if you actually look at the research - it all says across populations full time childcare is damaging to very young children and babies (under 2 I think). I’m stating facts that have been proven! That’s not to say each individual child is harmed - some thrive, some are better off than at home. But there is a slight negative effect on children, across thousands of children.

@apples can you direct me to this research please?

It’s literally everywhere - google it
www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/body/much-young-nursery-stressing-child/amp/

@apples sorry I mean academic, peer reviewed research not the first newspaper article you found on Google

Most of it says slight negative effect across populations for children under 2. Better outcomes for very disadvantaged children in nursery than at home. After 2 beneficial all round (although very very long days bad).
That’s a simplistic summary but my post earlier was about a 6 month old that was put in nursery full time - I can’t see how that’s best for that baby

I’ve got two kids blaa - I don’t have time to find research for you. Look yourself.

@apples again you're not providing me with credible, robust academic research. Newspaper articles are often not considered fully impartial (or credible) and therefore should be taken with a pinch of salt.
And again, you're offering your opinion in a judgemental manner.

Much of the research states the quality of the childcare provision is key. Children in high quality childcare settings often display better communication skills, problem solving skills and fine motor skills. The impact is also more significant for children from low socioeconomic groups. These positive effects can carry on into adolescence and even beyond

@apples have I touched a nerve? I don't need to go an look because, unlike you, I only post on topics that I actually know something about. I don't spout headlines from the media and present them as fact

‘From my experience people who have this unconditional belief and acceptance of their parents are really wired differently, they are happier and more self assured by default than those who have a different relationship with their parents (more formal or feel that they only deserve love through certain achievements).’

Though I take great pains to emphasise that parents working does not, imo, preclude the type of relationship she describes, I do agree with Isay’s longer post.

‘I think your closeness with your child has more to do with your personalities than how many hours you spent at home.’

It’s the connection you create, not simply the number of hours spent or your personalities. Indeed, isn’t the whole point that personalities are actually shaped by the caregivers in the vital early years? That’s certainly why I felt a strong need for us as the parents to do most of the caregiving from 0-3.

Group childcare can damage boys
Biddulph has always stuck his neck out on this. Now, he points to new research by neuropsychologist Dr Allan Schore, showing increased vulnerability of boys’ brains in their first year. “The research indicates that probably no boys under the age of one should be in group care,” he says. “It is still less desirable in their second year, and still second-rate to what we can provide in their third. Girls are somewhat more resilient, but that too depends on the girl.” By the age of three, part-time group care can be a plus. “As an author I have a choice: to make everyone feel good, or to tell the truth. Attachment really matters and you can’t pay someone to provide love. It has a cost down the track.”

From the Times last Saturday, full article here, you need to have subscribtion or register for limited free access.
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/how-to-raise-boys-talk-to-them-about-porn-never-tell-them-not-to-cry-2vt963mkr

Quality time with their parents is far more important for children than quantity of time. Just because a mother stays at home that doesn't make her a great parent and it doesn't guarantee a good lifelong relationship with their kids either.

It is so upsetting to hear from those who are trying to argue that full time working moms are somehow damaging their children (but... not those who HAVE to work of course, only those who CHOOSE to work are apparently damaging - because somehow a toddler knows the difference?)

Historically most stay at home mothers would have spent the vast majority of their day on chores because running a house did actually take all day what with the absence of the modern appliances we take for granted today, and the kids would have been left to fend for themselves or cared for by the extended family. Those stay at home moms who were rich would have hired help to care for the children. There was none of this helicopter parent mentality. Society did not die out.

As an author Steve Biddulph has a choice and as feminist I also have a choice not engage in his misogynistic writing.

I have read numerous studies (published as recently as March this year) that discuss the benefits of early child care -specifically on boys.

However, we could all go back and forth discussing various research but the important thing is to understand it’s not one size fits all and we should respect individual choices and leave out the judgmental attitudes

I put both my boys in nursery FT from 6 months Fortunately they have survived this dreadful start in life and are growing up into lovely, happy boys (as are all their friends who attended nursery from a young age).

Seriously though, I spent a lot of time prior to going back to work reading the peer-reviewed, published literature on this subject. I may be a bit out of date now, but at the time I found absolutely zero studies which were able to demonstrate any negative impact of good quality childcare on children’s long-term happiness and outcomes. Overall I didn’t find any evidence which would warrant me throwing away my career and making the family financial vulnerable. I certainly wouldn’t have made such a decision on the basis of a few opinion pieces in the newspapers.

To be honest, given the numbers of children (and babies) who have attended nursery in the past few decades, I think if there was any real impact on brain development etc, then we would be aware of it by now.

Now the DC are at school, DH and I are benefiting from the flexibility that a senior position can provide. It’s probably an unpopular opinion, but I have always found that school age DC need a parent around far more than babies and toddlers do.

As an author Steve Biddulph has a choice and as feminist I also have a choice not engage in his misogynistic writing.

Amen to this. And yes to the fact that the SAHM devoting most of her time to enriching her relationship with her children is a very new 'ideal' -- in times up until very recently, before labour-saving household gadgets/easily-prepared food/fridges/washing machines etc etc became commonly available, a SAHM's time would have largely been spent on housework, cooking and shopping for food, or supervising and working alongside servants doing that.

And of course the separate sphere/Angel in the House ideology is itself a post- Industrial Revolution middle-class phenomenon, when it became a sign of prosperity for a man to live far away from his shop/factory/source of wealth, and to be able to keep his wife and daughters 'idle'. Before that work and domestic space were far more intertwined.

So it's not that only now, suddenly the last couple of generations of babies are outsourced to childminders, rather than receiving the concentrated FT attention of their mothers.

I've seen children not do well at nursery and others who thrive. My DDs thrive and thank goodness for that. I work FT and I'm crap at home with them all day, they are much better off being in a stimulating, caring childcare setting and then our time spent at home is devoted to each other. It works for us, I'm lucky I can go back to work like this. But childcare and the response of the child is so individual.

I would advise all women to not sacrifrice their careers unless their partner/husband steps up to equal childcare.At a minimum there must be equal pension and savings irrespective of earnings.

Judges are moving to 2 year max spousal maintenance, (Baroness Deech bill) CMS has a fixed cap on high earners so no guarantee of fair CMS.Often its not sufficient to cover childcare costs.

The only way women with children are protected financially is to continue with a job that could enable them to be self sufficient.Given nearly 50% marriages/relationships break down its a very real risk.

I can only talk for myself as a child, and my own kids who seem to be the same in personality.
I would have preferred home and presence of a family member (doing their own adult stuff most of the time, but nearby, visible and heard) to any glorious institution where I would be in a group of kids, doing however amazing and varied and interesting activities. When I was little at the nursery I missed home walls and family presence absolutely desperately. However i was in a boarding weekly setting for Army children (between ages 3 and 6.5, not in UK), so my experience is not standard nursery. School age I spent 90% of holidays in youth camps, which made me allergic for life to any kind of group living and team work. However I'm sure there were kids who didn't mind the boarding nursery or spending all holidays away from the family.

My youngest just started free 15 nursery hours, in an amazing tiny home-like nursery with very caring and lovely staff, with lots of activities the likes of which her and I rarely get to do. But she still has a crestfallen look on her face when she hears today is a nursery day(I have to take her for a maximum of 4 hours at a time for now to prevent her getting too upset). She'd rather watch me do whatever and follow and chat to me all day than be away from me and home.
But I see some children there younger than her being dropped off and content to say goodbye to their parents and making a beeline for the toys. If I had kids like that maybe the prospect of work outside home while they are little wouldn't seem like a bad idea at all to me, but the way my children are I feel it's in everyone's interest that it's a parent who is looking after them most of the time. And from the time I did have to work full time with 3 DC for 2 years, even if it was far more exciting than staying at home looking after my children, in the end I felt more robbed of the hours spent with them and getting to know them than robbed of a career when I jacked it in to work from home doing something not very stimulating but more family friendly in my case.
Maybe if I thought I'd be unemployable or won't find anything interesting to do once the youngest is older I'd be trying to balance it in a different way, but I don't feel any doom and gloom about my professional future/fulfilment so just enjoy my present, in spite of our limited means.

@stretch you are completely right. It's the quality of the childcare that's key. Some recent studies have offered an interesting insight - in the past when they've measured brain activity of young children in childcare they have often claimed that increased activity denotes stress. However, some recent research suggests it could actually be excitement and stimulation.

@lifebegins very true. It's not just the immediate benefits that need taking into consideration but we need to consider the long-term impact on ourselves, our security and independence

OP, I have been reading this thread since you started it.

If I had responded 16 years ago, I'd have said you would have to be borderline insane to do any kind of job which took you away from your DC.

Now, divorced, penniless and unqualified (despite a PhD), I would encourage you to take the job. I know it feels impossible at the moment that your marriage could ever fail - but you never know what's round the corner.

I gave up a university teaching job when mine were small. They have all now late teens) since then said I should have kept my job, because I am always denying them handouts due to a lack of funds.

My DC have no idea what I gave up so that they could poke around in puddles. Neither should they. I love them beyond belief, as every single poster on MN does with their own, and no job on Earth could compensate for the time I spent with them before they started school.

So all I can say is that everyone has to make their own decisions, and there are no right answers. If you had asked this 15 years ago, I'd have been quite militant. Now, though, I just wish you well.

I have 3 DC over 16 who all had weekend jobs since the age of 14-15 and never expected any handouts, neither did it occur to me they should be getting any 😐
We've lived without going on holiday (except camping/staying with friends for a weekend) and never being able to afford anything in terms of organised, outsourced, paid-for excitement for years so that we could afford the best house possible, and I would have been quite down if my DC started complaining that they are missing out in life due to absence of such stuff in their life. We even struggled to pay £5 a day for the bus for DS to be able to travel to grammar school, and we know he is thankful we make sacrifices in other areas so he can go to that school.
If he expected me to buy him Xboxes etc I would have laughed in his face, he did get a job and bought himself a PS4, good phone etc. No job now due to a house move and exam years, but he's taking it in his stride :). If we did have far more money I'd be directing it towards travel, subsidising education and future house deposits for DC, which I still hope to do. If it didn't work out I'd at least know I've equipped them the best I could for life as adults anyway. (It has worked so far with the eldest who lives independently, earns and actually even buys presents for younger siblings which I'd think of as too lush! :))

But basically most parents try to do the best they can with the resources and knowledge they have, and that's all our children can hope for :)

^^ As *Isayeichnotheich says. Mine sort of expect handouts, but they are not and will never be forthcoming. Though they wouldn't have been when XH and I were marrried, either. Basically, we are all just muddling along one way or another.