To feel that if you don’t work 9-5 and have no family to help you’re screwed for childcare once your DC start school.

[legoonthetable]

Most people accept that they take a huge financial hit in terms of childcare costs in the pre school years, but do so knowing that they keep their place in the career ladder and once DC are at school the child care would go down. I naively never considered that this wouldn’t be the case for us and am just feeling totally screwed by my lack of choices, despite a good well paid job. And I know I’m far from alone. I work shifts which include 8am starts, midnight finishes and nights. There is no flexibility with start times and I rarely leave on time. DH works 14 + hr days leaving at 7 and rarely home before 7 + logging on again form home. His company is not family friendly and atm moving jobs isn't an option. He has to be at his desk by 8am. School wrap around care is from 7.30am-6pm. Its simply not possible to drop DC at breakfast club and be at work by 8 and we often have an hour at the other end that we also often can’t cover. We had the same nanny for 6 years and agreed to keep her on once youngest DC started school mostly for continuity. She agreed to do a tiny amount of general housekeeping in the 6 hours a day she was child free. She refused to clean, which I didn’t think was unreasonable; she’s a nanny, not a cleaner. Without going into details it pretty quickly became clear that whilst she was absolutely brilliant for our pre school DC doing the school run and holiday childcare for older children wasn’t her thing. We made her redundant and we’ve been struggling along abusing using friends, neighbours, and random paid help(no family close enough to help regularly)since. I have a friend in a similar position (totally different field of work). She employs a nanny-housekeeper. And whilst she loves coming home to a tidy house and a cooked meal, she doesn’t think her employee is that great with her DC. And I’ve heard many others say you either have someone who keeps the house going or someone who is brilliant with DC but its rare to get one person who is brilliant at both. My choices now are either to employ a nanny- housekeeper and accept that most of my salary will essentially go towards paying someone to do very little for 6 hours a day while I work my bollocks off for the next 13 years or give up work…….because if the financial gain is minimal (despite doing a fulfilling job that I mostly enjoy)there really seems no point. I’m not expecting anyone to come up with some magical solution…..I think we’ve been through every possible option, I’d just like some solidarity with people in the same position.Tonight I'm really angry about it.

OP, I can’t believe that when you were told you could have it all, you honestly thought that meant it would be possible to work long, often unsociable hours and still have a normal family life.

There are flexible empmoyers - flexible or reduced roles are not always career-ending roles where you don't need qualifications

If you're rural, that genuinely is the case the majority of the time. Any flexible/school hours jobs around here are either in schools as TA's/dinner ladies, in supermarkets or going to work in the local pub while your other half has the kids.

I work in retail management but going back to that once I have children will be next to impossible - I don't work set days so arranging childcare is impossible as I'd have to pay for 5 days a week when in reality I'd only need 3 (I just never know which three) and I can't afford to pay out for childcare I don't need.

People say there are childminders willing to do this. I've never found one. Similarly, people say "they can be flexible", I found them much more rigid than nursery.

OP, you need an au pair.

It’s not as easy as a lot of posts suggest. I used to work early shifts 5 days a week. My employer changed this to 3 7.30-9pm shifts with 2 days notice. I literally rang every childminder in my area. None start before 7.45 or work beyond 6. Dh works until 7 5-6 days (own company and couldn’t afford to pay someone else to work extra as no one would come in just for 5-7 so he’d need to lose 5 hours a day).
We don’t have room for an aupair (dc share rooms). No family nearby, and I have no friends so no help there either.
I can’t find another job as I’m only qualified for this specific vocation and have no other experience, and the only employer in my county was this one. Working further away would add 1.5 hours travel time at least, so no childcare... I tried applying for other things, with no luck. I’ve had to take a career break as there were literally no options (ok, boarding maybe, but I don’t feel it’s best for my dc, so no!)
I’m angry about this too.

I have a childminder. Mornings aren’t an issue for us since DP starts work at 9 and works 25 mins away from the school so we do breakfast club. After school, however, we both finish no earlier then 5pm so have a childminder collect the DC from school. It’s no biggy and that is lots of people’s reality.

Alternatively some people choose to have an au pair. A friend of mine growing up always had one. They weren’t very good at cooking but seemed nice enough .

I agree your DH needs to be part of the solution rather than a major part of the problem. Why isn’t he stepping up, asking for flexible working or reduced hours? He needs to be with his kids the evenings you are on late shift. I’m guessing you are 3 days early shift one week, 3 days late shift one week, so he has only 3 evening sessions to cover a fortnight and only til the children’s bedtime? He needs to come home at a sensible time on the nights you are working, do dinner, homework, bedtime then prep for the next day and he could be on his home computer working by 9/10 ish.
Why are you expecting childminders, au pairs, after school club workers etc (mainly women though not always) to work extremely long hours or do early starts or late finishes to suit you and your DH. Do you think they got told at school, you will have to work long days , early starts, late finishes ( to the detriment of their family lives) so that other women can “have it all”?

I could have written your post.

To all the posters saying find a different job, we’re doctors. Family friendly hours for doctors are hard to find. So to get a new job would mean to leave medicine.

It’s not as easy as a lot of posts suggest.

I don't think people think it is easy. They just think that it is usually possible with some will and determination and the attitude that childcare isn't just a woman's responsibility. I feel that the main problem is often that women seemed to take full responsibility. It might have been worthwhile for your DH to employ someone for three or four hours each day so that he could pick the children up at 6 p.m. Obviously there would be a cost associated with this but it might have been outweighed ultimately by you keeping your earnings and career.

For what it’s worth, we opted to make it work with the option of paying a full time nanny and living with the fact that very little is done during the

I feel your pain OP. The line you are fed isn't really actually true IMO, unless you have huge amounts of money to throw at the issue and are happy to delegate childcare to an outside provider.

I had a similar experience when DC started school, I compromised work wise and I sort of thought that it would get easier as they got older.

However, I've found it's the opposite- their lives get more complicated as they get older, communication becomes precious, the opportunity to chat about their day, guide them when things get tough, and help them navigate around the 'big stuff' becomes more and more important. I've found I want it to be me or DH that does this- so I'm still compromising work wise so that I can be available after school and during evenings.

It is a juggle, and a compromise. What and how you compromise depends on what works for your family.

I've sacrificed an element of my career, and my earning potential to be available for DC. That's a decision I had to make, and for me it was the right one, albeit a tough one.

I agree that the ‘you can be anything line’ is bullshit. I also resent the implied ‘which means you have to do everything’ that comes with it when it’s applied to women.

FamilyOfAliens I agree. I went to a comp in the 80s and all the girls were taught that any career was open to them (I know of a couple of girls who went on to be vets/doctors) but having a family etc was never mentioned - no-one was ever sold the lie that you can have everything. I'm not sure who these people who are apparently selling the lie actually are.

OP I think that your belief that you and your partner can both have high flying careers working variable hours AND have a family without spending a decent amount on childcare is so naïve.

Have you considered trying to get in contact with some of the retired members of your community?
There may well be some people who are still physically able to run around after kids and want a bit of extra money living near you.
My nan used to supplement her income by babysitting for local children, they worked shifts in a hospital. Given enough notice she would easily pop over and sort the kids out for school/pick them up and help with homework etc then stay in the house once the children were asleep until one of the parents got home.
She didn't mind that the hours were a bit odd either (I think she quite liked the break from my grandad!)

*their parents worked shifts

Unfortunately it means that you have to find work that is a better fit for your family. Having it all is a fairy tale

But the simple truth is we can’t have it all. This lie, I would suggest, is responsible for large amounts of mental health issues, marriage breakdowns and many other social problems.

Lets start with this. Completely.

...flexible or reduced roles are not always career-ending roles where you don't need qualifications
They really are, in a huge number of sectors.

And this. Take pretty much any frontline public service and you’ll find there are very senior people at the top (who aren’t necessarily on huge salaries either) who still work shifts. They can’t say when you have a heart attack/your house is burning down/there are flashfloods or civil unrest “sorry I only work 9-5 now because I have children”. And there are often in relationships where OH works in the same field at a similar level. I’ve met many many couples who swap children in the car park or the staffroom. There was a “why do all GP’s work PT” thread recently and the general MN consensus was “how dare you choose to work PT, you chose your career, suck it up”. And any doctor who leaves should, according to MN, pay back all their training costs to the state.

The lack of childcare isn’t the problem it is the number of hours a day you and your H work.

The lack of childcare is entirely the problem. If I was to maximise school wrap around care I’d only need 2hrs 45 minutes of additional childcare 3 days a week. The only options to cover this are either an au pair or a nanny, the latter costing 2/3 of my salary.

if you want to drag the kids first thing to a childminder then to a club. It's a long day for them, not really fair. Totally agree, which is why we had a nanny for so long, and why I expect I'll either get another one or give up.

I know several women who have given up high powered legal careers where they worked 70-80 hours per week, and retrained as teachers. I certainly wouldn’t be giving up my current job to retrain as a teacher. Aside from the holidays, are there any other perks? It’s a damn hard job, and most of the teachers on MN want to leave.

If economics reigns supreme in the end then employers really should be taking in to account that they are losing good people because of parenthood. This too. 25 years of training in an essential service where there is a severe shortage. In my field I'm like hen's teeth.

You need to work as a team here. At present it seems very one sided. It is one sided. DH earns a lot more than I do. There is no flexibility in his job. His boss is a woman. She’s worked 14 hr days her entire career and had a full time nanny for her DC. She isn’t going to cut him any slack. If he asked for flexible working he’d be laughed out of the office. One of his colleagues took 4 months paternity leave. Everyone knows who isn’t getting a bonus this year.

3 days is my ‘flexible’ working. I can't do anything about the shifts. I simply can't say "I won't be there for morning handover at 8am because breakfast club doesn't start till 7.30". It doesn't work like that.

To blame your school for not teaching you something when you’re in your 40s is ridiculous. I don’t think it is. I don’t blame just the school, I blame society at large. Girls were and are told they can be anything. No-one finishes the sentence with "but only if you either don't have a family or prioritise your job over your children". Most people in my position have worked their arses off to get to a senior position just in time to have kids by their mid to late 30’s and then realise that it just isn't possible to combine their life's work with a family.

You seem to be playing the “yes, but” game. I agree.....doesn't make it better though. I have options. I just don't like any of them.

“ I bet some of your kids friends mums would love extra money !!” I’m pretty confident they don’t. They are happy to help out when I’m totally desperate, but none of them want to commit to have extra children on a regular basis.

On the plus side at least this is a choice for you. There are others who want one of the three but can’t have it at all. Still very hard for you but hopefully puts things in perspective. I totally see that, which is what makes me even more angry, on behalf of all those woman who don’t have a choice. I know so so many mums worn to a frazzle trying to keep their jobs/marriages/lives afloat, because they were fed the ‘you can have it all lie’. They have a DP who earns less, so they have no choice but to keep going. And the “DH just needs to step up” comment isn’t helpful. We all know DHs who will never step up……and LTB isn’t the answer to that!

Why are you expecting childminders, au pairs, after school club workers etc (mainly women though not always) to work extremely long hours or do early starts or late finishes to suit you and your DH. Do you think they got told at school, you will have to work long days , early starts, late finishes ( to the detriment of their family lives) so that other women can “have it all”? Of course they didn’t. But if we want equality in the workplace and want woman to take increasingly demanding jobs then we need 50% of men to step down in the workplace so they can step up at home….and we are a long long way off that happening.

Well, this is why we have the gender pay gap. Few posters here seem to place much value on the OPs career development or what she brings to the job. It's no surprise we don't have as many top female surgeons, CEOs, judges, civil servants, professors, police chiefs etc if women are given the advice that if you're a mother and have a job with awkward hours you just need to 'find a new job.'

And this post pretty much sums it all up. I get that we are fortunate, we can afford a nanny-housekeeper who won’t do either the childcare or the housekeeping as I would. But that isn’t really the point. I had never invisaged that 2/3 of my salary for the best part of 25 years would go on paying someone else to keep my home afloat 3 days a week. And aside from the money, the stress is off the scale. Employing someone or having someone live in your house is stressful, breaking your neck to get to school before wrap around care closes is stressful. Bugging asking your friends and neighbours to hold the fort while you go to a meeting is stressful. And for many women it simply isn't a choice.

jnh22. yes. Thats my choice.

You can have everything- you “just” need tonplan well in advance and pay.
i had kids late (so on a senior enough level now that i can work fairly independently), chose my career path carefully (to get to this level), and pay a fortune on childcare. but i have a highly payed career, 2 kids and it works.

Of course they didn’t. But if we want equality in the workplace and want woman to take increasingly demanding jobs then we need 50% of men to step down in the workplace so they can step up at home….and we are a long long way off that happening

I will reply to your reply, who are these mythical 50% of men, obviously not your DH it seems?
Yes we are a long way from that happening if both men and women make excuses for working dads. Be the change that you want and expect more from your DH.

Girls were and are told they can be anything. No-one finishes the sentence with "but only if you either don't have a family or prioritise your job over your children"

That’s very true (and very pithy - it's a good strapline!). But - isn’t that true for men as well? If you’re a man in a “big job”, you don’t get any more flexibility. And if you have a spouse at home (men or women), you also have the stress of being the sole earner. There’s no easy answer.

OP I worked shifts and it was tricky but it works.

I had a childminder that was prepared for me to drop the kids off at 6am and collected them often about 830pm. I never got away on time. The shifts varied - meaning it was on different days. If I was down for a sat/sun or both I'd still have to pay the agreed weekly amount....my lovely Dad cared for them on a weekend.

They're will be a lovely flexible childminder somewhere near by. It's a case of rimging around

But what did you envisage OP? (ignoring the fact that it shouldn't just be your salary paying for the childcare)

I would argue that Yura's compromise was having children later and taking the risk that it might then never happen.

Everyone I know with children has made compromises in some way. Some like me gave up their jobs because my DH earnt way way more than I ever could and gradually I am now building up a business from home (will still never earn as much as DH but the flexibility makes life a lot less stressful for us all). A friend who works in the NHS has gone back to work part time - if one of her children is ill she has to take the time off as leave or go in on her non-working days. Her DP used to drop off the kids at breakfast club on his way to work. Another couple are teachers - the DH took a step down in his career so that the DW could step up - he does all drop-offs/pickups. Others have taken child friendly jobs e.g. as TAs. I remember only one dad at baby groups - his wife had quite a high flying career. Other friends have chosen not to have children (or only have one) and focus on their careers.

My conclusion is that unless you have relatives for childcare there will always be stress/a financial cost to having children. It's part of the deal of having children.

It sucks but there are solutions.

You can't have your cake and eat it when you've got kids I'm afraid.

You either pay for a nanny or you find a different job.

It's your jobs that are the problem, not your childcare. You and your husband are giving everything to your jobs.

This. I’d say your position is pretty unusual in that both partners work such consistently long hours.

Maybe this isnt what you want to hear....but it does get much easier once they are at secondary school. Before then i found it hard, and i work from home a lot of the time.

You can have everything- you “just” need tonplan well in advance and pay.

I still don’t agree. Yes, you can pay someone else to look after your children...but the OP’s point was that she wanted to spend time with her children and make them at least an equal priority. But, in reality, senior jobs aren’t 9 to 5. Or term time only.

That said, I do have one friend who “has it all”. She has a stay at home husband and they aren’t hugely materialistic, so, while she’s done bloody well, she’s never been tempted to go for one of the head banging investment jobs that would earn her millions but mean she had to work most weekends.