AIBU to ask how do you manage it all if you work full time and have kids?

[dillydally24]

I have two DC (both under three), work full time in a 50-60 hour a week senior role and have no time for anything. I have a lot of help - a full time nanny and a cleaner who comes twice a week - but our house is often a bit of a tip and I never do anything for myself. My DH helps out, but his work is more demanding than mine, so he doesn't make a huge impact. We also have a dog and a house renovation in the go. If you work full time and have young kids, how on earth do you manage it?! Any tips are gladly received. It is this just the way it is for the next few years while the kids are young...?

She ,but who is bringing up the child when they see their parent's for a few hours a day,if that? When the parent is tired, after a long day at work?

Please inform us where we can get the exact same job as you and your husband TopGub. Because clearly, this is what we've all been missing. Silly me, to have been under the impression that all families are all different.

@shefellinthemarsh

Except the families you know where all the dads work and all the mums are sahm in sexist land?

I'm struggling with the " if I was a man no one would bat an eye" I think that's missing the point..

Two people have decided to bring a child into the world, surely at some point both those people or at least one of them, puts their needs first at least whilst they are small?

It's just if I had no intention whatever to spend any time beyond weekend with the child because neither I nor Dh wanted to compromise on our working day at all, I would probably decide not to have DC.

Perhaps when our careers slowd In later years consider fostering?

@Summerwhereareyou

At how many hours worked does it cross over knto not meeting their needs?

Yes TopGub. Here in 'the sexist land' everyone is exactly the same. I can hardly tell who my own sexist husband is most of the time. Got him confused with the sexist bloke down the road.

#FreetheSAHMs

@shefellinthemarsh

Well reasoned points

Top gub I don't know and I don't like to sound critical because so many parents really need to work to pay modest houses and bills.
I can't understand the people, two people who choose to have DC but not compromise an inch on their work day when they could afford too but they choose not too.

So their DC go Into nursery from a young age, into a " Room" of babies. Then they stay late ,ebry day.rhen. this rolls on for early morning clubs, after school clubs for ever more

I find it an odd way of thinking.
It doesn't matter who does if the mum or dad but both not giving an inch, why?
Where are the needs of the child met?
Who is thinking of their needs when neither parent will budge on their job

They are small for such a short blink of an eye, I'd rather struggle a bit and share the child care between us and a nursery or child minder ,even from v young but not every single day from 7am to the last moment the nursery shuts.

But are the wives of SAHDs sexist, I wonder?

@Summerwhereareyou

I presume because they love both their careers and their children?

I wouldn't give either up

If the op thinks she can meet her kids needs and work those hours I'm sure she knows better than us.

I wouldnt accept her ohs input as being good enough though

If people love their career that much at what point does perhaps having DC at all fall into the / it's not fair on child category?
If both parents want to work 5 day's a week?

Obviously this is just my personal opinion but my last job did give me some deeper knowledge of nurseys and some leave much to be desired.
Obviously some have camera now which are better.
Personally I can't understand the mindset of choosing to have a child, being able to afford less hours but deciding not to budge an inch.
Not for any other.reason except career love.

Sometimes I think I have taken a wrong turn on here and am in Dadsnet or even Grampsnet.

Both parents working 5 days is pretty standard?

Hardly neglecting needs or abuse.

I've worked in nurseries too (a long time ago tbf) they were fine.

Although I'm not sure of the relevance as the op uses a nanny anyway

And the op has said it's career love

Hard as it may be for you to understand that women can love their careers

@JanisMoplin

Sometimes it's honestly like the 50s.

Its at least 20 to 30 years behind most other forums in terms if attitudes to working mothers

But even if you think that both parents shouldn't continue to work FT, it's still highly sexist that it's almost always women who are expected to or (perhaps more importantly) expected to want to be the one to compromise their career. I thought there was a very telling comment by someone a few posts back saying that a man having a SAHM isn't sexist, it's just a situation where a man earns enough to "enable' his wife to stay at home - subconsciously implying I think that this is something women inherently want. Even in a SAHD situation I'm not sure the wife would be described as 'enabling' her husband to SAH - I think it would be described as the man/couple 'deciding' that he would SAH. I think these little linguistic things are quite telling. I have no issue whatsoever with a parent deciding to be a SAHP - my issue is with the massive gender assumptions around this.

That’s a ridiculously simplistic attitude.

Why is it not fair on the children to spend time in good quality childcare? The OP has a nanny. They are looked after by someone they have a close relationship to in their own home. I don’t think you can get better than that. (I don’t assume that SAHMs are better. My nanny definitely did a better job in the preschool years than I would have done.)

Why do we assume that children in these dual career families don’t have enough time with their parents? By my calculations in an average week the OP is spending about 40 waking hours with her children, compared to the nanny’s 50 hours (assuming she spends the majority of the weekend with them). Given that she is working full time, that a pretty decent balance. And I would guess she spends almost all her annual leave with them.

And the comments about finances are just weird. Having a financial buffer gives children all sorts of positive opportunities, why wouldn’t you want that? We literally never have to say ‘no’ to our children. Obviously we do say no because we don’t want to raise spoilt brats. But equally it’s so good to be able to give them the things they want. For example, at the beginning of the year I asked them where they wanted to go on holiday, they chose some destinations and we booked them. The eldest chose to see an old school friend who moved abroad so we’ll holiday there for one trip. It’s such a pleasure to see how excited he is and know we can do that for him. And the icing on the cake: because we have a financial buffer we can take unpaid leave to spend the summer with the kids. DH will do it this year and I’ll do it next. All this is because we worked like the OP when they were little and now have money in the bank and flexible, well paid jobs that we enjoy but don’t rule us.

We can but only aspire to be exactly like you and your husband TopGub. Exactly.

<scuttles off to put the clothes through the mangle>

@shefellinthemarsh

You seem to have taken my comments awfully personally.

What exactly is it you're so annoyed/offended by?

I find it an outrage TopGub. All of it.

#FreeTheSAHMs.

I find high earning men 'enabling' sahms an outrage

🤷‍♀️

But I cant take you seriously so...

It really is too much. These terrible husbands. Imagine daring to enable your own family. The fiends! There should be a law against SAHMs. Ban them I say! Pay another woman minimum wage instead.

Full time is about 37 hours a week. I do 9:00-5:30 and I find that's more than the majority of mums I know. 50-60 hours a sounds crazy. You must rarely see your children during the week? I'd really cut your hours if you can.

@shefellinthemarsh

Or they could look after their kids themselves?

"Or they could look after their kids themselves?"

Yes because anyone can just swan in to work and announce that from now on they are only going to work 35 hours per week. Because all jobs are exactly the same. Anyone, in any role, should just work 35 hour weeks or shifts. Perfectly possible. I don't know what all the fuss is about.

Never mind if your business collapses and you have to make thousands redundant. Never mind if you mysteriously lose your job that paid £500k. It you lose your house and the kids get taken out of school - don't worry!

The people I know who grew up with neither parent around tended to suffer for it more obviously when they were teens/young adults as the nanny's left and the relationship with their parents weren't very close as teens need so much input on a daily level to have that understanding. Of course not all cases but many.
DH worked 55 hour weeks for a bit as I was ill and we were skint. I made him stop asap to make sure he had more time with the kids. They feel these things especially when they see other families.
Also where is the joy for you. Yes work can be gratifying but life needs variety. Where are your friends in all of this? Who will you have I'd things go tits up and DH isn't there? No