How are mothers supposed to go back to work??

[ArtichokeAardvark]

I've just had the dreaded call from nursery to come and collect DS. 'Hello Mrs X, I'm afraid your son is unwell, please could you come and pick him up asap'.

My son is teething. Yes, he's a bit grumpy, but he's teething. Yes, he has a temperature but it's only 38.0 so not exactly an emergency. They admitted themselves he's running around happily with the other children, just being a little bit whingier than normal.

But no, I have to collect him. No they can't even give Teetha homeopathic stuff without a doctor's prescription. And please could I keep him home for 24 hours after his temp goes back to normal.

I am slammed at work. I'm the only person in my department this week and I'm desperately trying to tie up everything this month before I go on mat leave. I would drop everything if my son was genuinely unwell, but for god's sake he's TEETHING.

How the hell are mothers meant to be able to go back to work? This happens with depressingly regularity and my employer is luckily understanding but their patience is beginning to wear thin...

Try having a dc with sn! I lost several jobs and still did an emergency pick up this week ... from university! (She lives at home still)

I’ve just given up work (resigned last week) after going back when DS2 was 4 months he’s now 1 and the combination of commuting 1hour 30 mins each way, sleepless nights and illness has made working totally untenable for me. There needs to be a radical overhaul. And yes I’ve split the sick time 50/50 in-fact OH has done most of it but he’s self employed and has definitely taken the financial hit.

Father, friend, Granny, aunt, uncle, au-pair.
They are sick that often, I never found it a problem when I was working.

**not sick that often

I don't think the man necessarily has the less flexible job but the usual debate doesn't take into account people that are not normal PAYE employees.

Dh and I both work where we get paid by the day but his dayrate is quite a bit higher than mine, so if he takes a day off we're £300 ish worse off than if I did, so unless circumstances were exceptional I would do it.

Also many couples feel it is better than one person's career takes a hit rather than both taking a hit from this sort of thing.

I think nurseries should have the option of a seperate sick bay to look after poorly (if just the standard virus, I'm not talking about d&v or chicken pox etc) which parents can pay extra for rather than having to pick up kids.

It does annoy me, I almost feel like they exaggerate how high the temp or symptoms are as so many times I've picked up my toddler and they've been fine.

Also many couples feel it is better than one person's career takes a hit rather than both taking a hit from this sort of thing

That's pretty short termist thinking - if you let one partner's career tank, then you are affecting their earning capacity for the rest of their lives. This affects pension contributions and savings as well. So the couple as a whole will be increasingly worse off as the years go by. Better to let both partners be mildly affected but actually progress in their careers than to let one totally grind to a halt.

@Toomuchtrouble4me, some people, like us, have precisely zero family. No room for an au pair even with a 5 bed house. I don’t have friends at home all day that could pick up one of my children either. Neither of our jobs are flexible. Neither court proceedings nor classes can be rearranged to suit our child care needs. I teach in a school for children with complex needs. Schools like ours cannot just call an agency and get a supply teacher in. And tbh, our parents desperately need the respite that school provides and our children need the continuity of care. And when my children all decide to inconsiderately get chickenpox one after the other rather than together, that singlehandedly wipes out most good will.

So many people up in arms about the 50:50 parenting. Sometimes it's just not practical! Not everyone's lives are the same. My DH works abroad most of the week and is in Central London other days. I, on the other hand am at work 3 miles from school. Of course I'm going to collect if I get the call.

Noknickerelastic interesting though isnt it, that he has a job like that. Neither my H nor I can take jobs with long commutes (although we do commute into the city from a suburb, an hour or so) or with travel. Because we have to do half the childcare, so the option isn’t there

@Passthecherrycoke, yes for for some couples it does work that way. I’m a teacher. My husband earns 5x what I earn. This is due to career choice and nothing to do with me sacrificing my own career for him or our children. So whilst I love my job and feel immense job satisfaction, if one of us had to give up, that would be me. We simply could not survive on my salary. But our respective sex has no bearing on that. If I’d opted for law and him education it would be the other way around I’m sure.

But neither of you have given up work have you waiting? You’re muddling along, like the rest of us. I earn five times what my H does, I wouldn’t expect him to give up work

Although I agree, there certainly are some couples who can’t do 50:50. Just not as many as claim it

Thinking about it though, the most brilliant example I’ve seen is a couple where one is a hedge fund manger and one is a nurse. And they share childcare! You would struggle to get a bigger wage disparity really.

Yes, muddling along. Although I’ll certainly be advising my children (daughters and son) to think carefully about choosing a career that affords some flexibility in the future.

We share responsibility 50:50 with our male partners. Half the sick days each. It's not rocket science

I earn more than my husband but in my last job I got paid dependant leave, he didn’t. So it certainly wasn’t rocket science that it was me that took the leave if needed (not often thankfully as my parents would often have them)

It was a no brainer given that I got paid if I was there or not. Plus I worked in a department where there were 30 odd of us doing the same job as me so plenty of capacity to spread the work.

Absolutely. We lasted about 9’months before both changing to more flexible workplaces.

Totally agree with everyone who says men need to pull their weight.

In many, many cases they just don’t want to. And therefore don’t take the career hit.

“ My DH works abroad most of the week and is in Central London other days”

Strange how it’s so rarely “my DW......”

Facilitated men!

I think it often depends on life opportunities as well. When I met DH I was working part-time as I had my girls and my Nana (who brought me up) was too old to offer a lot of help. Their father had scarpered to the military when he decide family life wasn’t for him

DH was widowed and had his Mum and MIL to help, along with a childminder, to work full time

When we got together I upped my hours as I gained the back up of his Mum and MIL. If needed we did almost 50:50 and took turns each; often him more because of the nature of my job.

However, by chance then he got an offer that we had to sit down and really consider because it meant a lot of time away for 4/5 years, but would mean we were in a financial position that neither of us could even have imagined when we were younger.

We went for it, but with very careful plans. I gave up work, but we still pay into a pension for me. The youngest go into childcare one day a week so I can keep up relevant voluntary work so I’m not deskilled (and I actually love having the time to commit to the voluntary thing). We have plans in place to ensure I still get time to myself. There are savings in my name that I can access. So if the worst happens my CV has taken a bit of a dent, but I’ve not fallen behind in best practise or law changes.

Noknickerelastic interesting though isnt it, that he has a job like that. Neither my H nor I can take jobs with long commutes (although we do commute into the city from a suburb, an hour or so) or with travel. Because we have to do half the childcare, so the option isn’t there

Exactly this!! Both me and DH have not gone for jobs or turned them down because of the impact it would have on childcare. It's funny how there are so many men who choose to take jobs that mean they can't be flexible or work away for considerable amounts of time. I know sometimes there isn't always a choice but in a vast amount of couples there is more scope for flexibility. I've done research on this area and have spoken to women about the restrictions on their careers...it's interesting and depressing in equal measures.

Yeah, plenty of these men have other choices.

And if their wives take a huge hours and pay cut or even stop earning they can argue that they “have” to do it because they’re sole earner.

The blindness to the workings of the patriarchy is stark on this thread.
The short answer to the original post is - as many people have pointed out - a combination of decent childcare, flexible jobs and a joint commitment to raising your children, including taking time of work. Take any of these out of the equation and it's a lot harder. But it is the last one - both agreeing to take time off - that is the most symbolic and potentially game changing. If women keep accepting barriers to men stepping up for their children then all childcare stays solidly in the female realm. Nothing changes. Employers of men don't have to change their expectations of men in the workforce, women don't get to breathe a bit more in their job, and we have another generation of children seeing mum's doing all this caring stuff as the norm.

Hang in there. It's definitely hard. Maybe a childminder would be more flexible?

@Griefmonster Agreed. I also think it’s unfair that female-dominated workplaces have to bear the brunt and cope with the flexibility that mothers are (rightly!) demanding, while male-dominated workplaces avoid having to do this.

It is really difficult, OP. Not helped by knee jerk reactions from nursery either! Not all of us have family local or available, or a DH who can share childcare. It's so hard to find something that fits.