To say that the expression 'no one ever looked back and wishes they'd worked more' is not true?

[Loosemoosegoose]

This is something you read on Mumsnet a lot. I can't help but think it's not often true. When taken literally, perhaps, but it tends to be used in the context of finding a fulfilling career versus prioritising family. I have been blessed with both a wonderful DD and a very fulfilling career and honestly, I need both in my life. I subscribe very much to the idea that there is absolutely no reason a woman can't have it all, she just can't necessarily always have it all at exactly the same time and there are times when taking time to focus on family or career is what is needed but generally, there are also times when you can give both all you've got and balance the two beautifully.
Of course there are some who do not want one or the other (or either) but I feel that a woman's career can often be dismissed by phrases like this because it minimises the value many people do place on their life's work. I want to be able to look back on my life and feel that I did give my career my all because I work in a field I am incredibly passionate about and if I didn't do all I could to continue in this profession and do my best in it, I know that I would look back and feel regret.

Interested in others views. Do you think it is possible to place as much value on your career as you place on being a parent and still be a good and present parent or do you think it is something you look back on and realise you sacrificed one for the other no matter how you try to balance it?

I've seen dozens of women.on here who SAH say that they regret giving up work. In other words, quite literally wish they worked more (or at all) during a given period. So, yeah.

I've known quite a lot of men who NEVER see their kids during the week, and frequently work at weekends too. I've never known a woman in that situation. Even women with very demanding careers working full-time, in my experience they are still seeing their kids at least some evenings. I think it's rare for women to be as detached from family life as some men are.

I can't speak for everyone, but I personally was a much better parent after I went back to my career. Did not enjoy being a SAHM, so was much happier, and appreciated my DC much more when I had my work alongside parenting.

I think it’s more to do with those who have chased money as the ‘be all and end all’ and then realised too late it’s fairly meaningless, after you have enough to keep a roof over your head and major financial worries at bay.

Most (I would argue each and every single) job/career can be taken over by a new person, but often people in those jobs feel passionately they are the only one who can do it justice/cover all bases/care the most……. Of course, at the end of your life when someone has taken over and is making a success of the role, you’re not particularly missed unless you are one of the few people in history who have statues erected in their honour!

In that sense, people would be better off enjoying their job/career, but not letting it take over their enjoyment of, or their engagement in, other areas of their lives.

I think it depends what your job is. If you are doing something that feels worthwhile and valuable and really meaningful to you, and is of service to others like teaching, medical, charity work, some kind of public service, etc, then I think you might feel the way you do.

If you work in IT or sales or something and your job is simply a way to make money with no deeper purpose, then you probably won't.

Even in the meaningful jobs, people can get burnt out and regret how much they have sacrificed. I focus on work/life balance rather than "having it all"!

@stalkersaga

I've seen dozens of women.on here who SAH say that they regret giving up work. In other words, quite literally wish they worked more (or at all) during a given period. So, yeah.

But as a means to an end though, or for its own sake? I can see people wishing they had more money, but that's not quite the same thing as wishing you had worked more.

I regret not having worked harder or at least better. I did quite well in my career, relative to people I was at school with (ie from the same background) but I was downright lazy for large periods, I do feel I could have achieved more. Not necessarily in terms of earnings, I've got "enough" but I do feel I could have got more done, made more difference.

@asha456

What's wrong with enjoying work for its own sake as opposed to as a means to an end?

If you have a job you're really passionate about it can consume your life. You don't get to be successful in showbusiness, or as a CEO, or a highly influential academic or writer or scientist by just doing it as a "means to an end". You have to be consumed by it to some extent.

Clearly that's not for everyone and not everyone should feel they have to have that level of passion but don't you think this is worthwhile?

I find it slightly depressing that so many people seem to think work is only OK as far as it allows you to provide and that it has no value beyond that. If everyone felt like that we'd never have successful people.

I think if I had found that kind of fulfillment in my career we would probably not have kids. DH has it, I never did. So I think you're lucky. (Though am glad we did have kids).

I think when people say that they're talking about people overdoing it and not taking a step back to assess their actual priorities. If you're happy and fulfilled then you are doing it right, but that's not something everyone can manage.

I think it's not really about work as such

It's more like Things you enjoy Vs things you dislike.

If you get to a point in life and your finite time is winding down, do you want to look back on life filled with things you enjoyed and loved or things you didn't enjoy or love?

If you love your job, you won't have wasted your time. If you hate your job, you will feel like you've mortgaged the time you could have been with your children in exchange for handfuls of sand.

I’ve never met anyone who retired late 40s/early 50s who regretted it. Not one person. They all found fulfilment in their lives doing things that didn’t involve work, although they are all very busy people doing different things with their lives. There’s a reason the concept of FIRE has gained so many followers over the past few years.

I worked as a lawyer in a big firm for 10ish years. All the usual stresses and demands to produce billable hours.

Being diagnosed with ulcerative colitis forced me to look elsewhere, and I found a job in labour relations that I loved and while challenging gave me more time off.

Whenever I ran into old colleagues from the law firm and asked how they were, I got one of two answers.

The first was, "Oh, I am so so busy, no time for anything else." Said with an air of poor me but also a bit virtue signaling.

The other was, "I need more clients to reach billing targets. Woe is me, I am stressed to the max."

That is where my thought that no one really wants their headstone inscribed with something like, "They worked super hard, had no weekends off, and billed 2,500 hours a year" comes from.

I am glad I left. I suppose I should thank my bothersome guts.

I've only ever heard this phrase as "no one ever said on their death bed: I wished I worked harder".
Which is a rather stronger statement, and makes more sense than OP's (deliberately?) washed down statement.

In my (absurdly male dominated) line of work, a lot of people work way too long hours (as in, I've had colleagues fucking die on the job because they tried to keep working through flu or pneumonia) for very little additional reward. Aiming for a good work/life balance is very sensible advice. Nothing to do with telling women to stay at home.

As for women staying at home and doing chores... surely that's still work, even non-remunerated?
And me and DH certainly don't look back at our weekends and think "I wished I'd spent more time doing the laundry or emptying the dishwasher". Any corner that can get cut, does get cut. Life's too short to iron pants.

I agree with most.
You've got the expression wrong and are using it completely out of context and your argument about women balancing careers and families isn't really related to the expression.

SO, depends which question you want people to answer really.

You don't get to be successful in showbusiness, or as a CEO, or a highly influential academic or writer or scientist by just doing it as a "means to an end". You have to be consumed by it to some extent.

Consumed by it, yeah... Like my colleagues who died on the job. Great plan. Not. Academia is bonkers, not something to aspire to.

@RobotValkyrie

Right, whatever. I wouldn't want to be an academic either. But surely you can see that some people want to do things they are really fired up about, rather than just being salarymen? There's nothing wrong with loving your job.

[quote thepeopleversuswork]@asha456

What's wrong with enjoying work for its own sake as opposed to as a means to an end?

If you have a job you're really passionate about it can consume your life. You don't get to be successful in showbusiness, or as a CEO, or a highly influential academic or writer or scientist by just doing it as a "means to an end". You have to be consumed by it to some extent.

Clearly that's not for everyone and not everyone should feel they have to have that level of passion but don't you think this is worthwhile?

I find it slightly depressing that so many people seem to think work is only OK as far as it allows you to provide and that it has no value beyond that. If everyone felt like that we'd never have successful people.[/quote]
Oh there's nothing wrong with enjoying your work but in the situation you were describing, women who had been SAHM and later regretted it, I thought the implication was this was for financial reasons.

@RobotValkyrie

You don't get to be successful in showbusiness, or as a CEO, or a highly influential academic or writer or scientist by just doing it as a "means to an end". You have to be consumed by it to some extent.

Consumed by it, yeah... Like my colleagues who died on the job. Great plan. Not. Academia is bonkers, not something to aspire to.

Yes and you often see older CEOs , actors etc saying they wish they hadn't missed out on family so much. Many of them then get a younger wife and try to have a "second go" at a family life.

@asha456

It is primarily financial reasons in this specific case.

But there's a whole narrative running throughout this thread (and others) that suggests anyone who actually enjoys work and throws themselves into it slightly to be pitied because either they are a desperate workaholic or because they don't see their children.

Which I think its misleading and depressing. A good job which you enjoy is a massive net benefit to you and your family. Not everyone wants this sort of job and that's fine. But I feel I have to challenge the idea that being passionate about your job always has to be to the detriment of your family.

And yes I don't think this is particularly aimed at women. I hear it often said to men like my father and father in law who spent years giving everything to the job, believing they were valued, indispensable, for it to end in a medical crisis and a realisation that the company that they had given up so much for would happily screw them over and replace them the next day. It happens so often.

It is an annoying phrase, and untrue.

One thing I wish I'd been aware of at university is that it's possible to get a banking job, work hard for ten years and have earned enough to buy a massive detached house and never work again. I knew bankers earned a lot but had no idea you could retire at thirty.

I kinda wish I'd done that...

[quote thepeopleversuswork]@asha456

It is primarily financial reasons in this specific case.

But there's a whole narrative running throughout this thread (and others) that suggests anyone who actually enjoys work and throws themselves into it slightly to be pitied because either they are a desperate workaholic or because they don't see their children.

Which I think its misleading and depressing. A good job which you enjoy is a massive net benefit to you and your family. Not everyone wants this sort of job and that's fine. But I feel I have to challenge the idea that being passionate about your job always has to be to the detriment of your family.[/quote]
I think that a high stress job, even if you love it and are deeply passionate about it, is detrimental to your mental and physical health. That's just what stress does to humans if it's endured frequently or all the time.

That's a fair trade off though, for the fulfillment you might ultimately feel if you do a job really well and make a big difference. But yes, stress is bad for your wellbeing and is to detriment, even if you enjoy it. It's just whether it's worth taking that hit on balance. In some cases it is.

Your detriment*

You can make back money, but not time. Time is so precious.

I think if you really enjoy your job and would actually do it if you weren't being compensated then you are extremely lucky and that is great for you. Not necessarily a "big important" job. Hairdressers are apparently very happy - I think perhaps because they effect a tangible, visible positive in people's lives - they send them out looking and feeling better which must give them such positive feelings.

The reality is that for most people, work is a means to an end. That's not desirable but it's the reality. If you can find something that you don't hate too much and supports your desired lifestyle while giving you the opportunity to enjoy it, I feel like that's a more achievable goal for most people.