AIBU to want a highflying career as well as being a Mum?

[ManhattanMama]

I've only been back at work for 2 weeks and am already having conflicts between work and homelife which I'm struggling to resolve. I work in investment banking, and before having DS (nearly 7 mths old), I used to work 8am - 6.30pm at a minimum, usually longer. Obviously I've already cut back on my hours, and am generally doing 8.30 to 5.30 which just about leaves me enough to time to dash to daycare to pick DS up before 6.30 (I have to take 2 trains to get there).

The problem I've got is that my job just isn't a predictable 9-5 kind of role - things happen which mean that I may have to start early or work late. I've been asked to take part in a Women in Banking mentoring program which means I'm committed to being at work late every Thursday for the next 6 weeks - I asked DH before agreeing whether he was happy for me to do it and he said yes but (surprise, surprise) - the first time I'm home late and he's in a real strop with me because he had to get all of DS's stuff ready for daycare and do the late night feed by himself. He was literally ignoring me this morning as he was so annoyed, so I had it out with him and he said "Now you're a mum you should be happy to just turn up and do the 9-5 then get home to be with our son, not spending time networking and trying to be the career woman".

AIBU or is this completely out of order? Why can I not have a career AND be a good mum? I've worked my rear end off to get to the position I have at the moment and I don't want to do a half-arsed job now just because I have a baby. Things aren't being helped by the fact that everytime I talk to my Mum she says "DS must be finding it so hard only seeing you for an hour a day" - she gave up work to have kids and thinks I should do the same.

What do you think? AIB selfish to want to keep working even though we can afford for me to stop? Career aside, I don't think I could cope with being home with DS all day - it's much harder than working!

Sorry it's so long...

You will never get agreement on these threads because we are all very different.
I find child development fascinating and I would find investment banking deadly boring. Luckily not everyone thinks the same or the country wouldn't operate! I think that we should celebrate the differences rather than try and insist that one view is right.

Perhaps I should be clearer about milestones - I get as excited as anyone when they happen - it's just I don't think the witnessing has to be my experience and mine only. I'm not very territorial.

as far as i can tell the best job to get is with the council

I work too and have used full-time daycare in the past for a small baby. Honestly I don't now feel I was doing anything close to the best thing for that child. I don't feel bad about my decision or think I am or was a bad parent, but I do regret it.

While I don't find myself thinking "why do some people have children at all?", I do think it's probably a lot easier at the early stage the OP's at to see/feel the effects of doing a job in a 'half-arsed' way than it is for her to see/feel the effects on her and her child of no closely involved parent for 5 days out of 7. She knows her job well and she's got the pre-baby years of doing it to compare things to when judging how she's getting on with it now. It's harder to make that comparison, and therefore notice possible effects, with the baby - there's no 'control' baby unless you do something different with later ones (and even then of course babies are different anyway). On the other hand, there is research about early attachment (I don't mean 'attachment parenting' as discussed on parenting boards, I mean the Bowlby stuff) and also research about daycare, which while no research gives certainty, isn't looking very positive for the effects of some kinds of childcare on under-threes.

Please understand that I don't say this because I want to criticise parents who both work outside the home - I work too after all (now part time), but just because I've found myself reluctantly moving towards thinking this, which makes me feel a bit sad and disappointed and conned with the whole 'have it all'/'do it all' expectation that's set up for us all.

I think the future as far as it goes will be in some very different working practices for men and women (totally agree about 50:50 and no men being allowed to get away with not knowing how to pack a nappy bag!), and less of a long hours culture. Until we've got that, then it's going to be very very hard for anyone who wants 2 x 'full time career' jobs to do that with kids - hard to manage practically, and I think probably not as great for their kids as it would be if one or both of them worked less. So, to be honest, if it was me now, and finances didn't demand working long hours, I would personally be trying to reduce my hours (as I say, a conclusion I came to in the end fairly reluctantly). Not for ever, but for the early years.

Generally I agree with all the points about 50:50, getting used to saying no, delegation etc. I don't really agree with the "why do people have kids?" sentiment, on the other hand I reluctantly find myself not really agreeing with the "the children will be absolutely fine even if both parents have high-flying careers" message either. I think kids do deserve hard work - I think sometimes the best time for that hard work may be in forging new paths for a career or in rebuilding it after school has started, as a way of enabling closer parenting early on, rather than in earning extra money while they're small for them to have a better future 'later'. Like I said, not a conclusion I particularly rushed to embrace, but something I have come to think in the end.

I'm not sure that I agree with that Elderado - I think that IME the children need me/dh more as they are getting older, not less. A committed nanny was a good substitute for me when they were small but doesn't cut the ice the same any more.

In fact my own working pattern was to work 2 days a week when they were very small, then 3 days a week, then I worked 4.5 days a week for a while, did a couple of years full-time and have now gone back to 4 days a week with most of the school holidays off. The advantage that seniority gives you should not be underestimated - something that a second career would not usually afford at the time that you need it most. That buys a lot of school plays, sports days, open days, swimming galas, football matches etc.

A lot of high-flyers are by nature perfectionists, and as Pru says, perhaps the best thing to do is to drop the notion that you can be perfect at work and as a mother. But good enough, is good enough for me

parenting in the modern nuclear family age doth totally suck in this respect eldorado. you see women and men all used to work all the time. with babies in tow and children working! it was not always thus...I'm not harking back to a golden hunter gatherer age, but balancing 'having it all' messages against the still massive levels of gender inequality (not just in the parenting domain, everywhere) against a culture of individual supremacy against the breakdown of the extended family set up against our wishes and desires, our material needs and our children's emotional needs is fucking impossible imo. something gives somewhere.

and all of us need to strive to make it possible for women to get the support they need from their partners and vice versa and employees to get the support they need from their employers in order for our children to get the hugely important emotional building blocks they need in infancy. because when they don't get them, we all suffer.

manhanttanmama it ain't easy. you're getting great advice on this thread.

indeed soapy, good enough is most definitely good enough. 'perfect' or the attempt at that totally fucks kids up you know!

I agree about children needing easy access to parents when they're older too - personally my ideal working pattern would still take place within school hours, once children got to that age. Or rather it would be a joint working pattern between both parents that meant one or other of us had all out-of-school hours covered - so not necessarily one parent doing 8-6pm or longer (usually the father) and another (usually the mother) doing 9.30-2.30, which seems to be as close as we can get sometimes! And also agree about seniority giving benefits. I also feel quite strongly about women hanging on to as much financial independence (or the capability thereof) as possible. It's just that mixed in with that I now also think babies don't do as well as they could with most of the most typical childcare we have available, and that's wrong too. So finding the right solution from that whole mix of factors is difficult - the best way out really would be the less screwed up system with less of a long-hours culture. Wonder if it will ever happen here!

Also, how much more INTERESTING it is to parent, say an 11 year old, as opposed to a 3 year old. I am doing both at the moment and the 3 year old is just demanding and not terribly rewarding, whereas the 11 year old is a joy and really very interesting. We should allow ourselves to reap the rewards of the hard work we put in when they're little by having plenty of time away from work when they're older.

Pru's wise post is correct. But some of us, male and female, regard those things you miss - changing 10 nappies a day instead of 4 as just avoiding effectively domestic service of a very dull and low grade kind. If it drove Pru to depression and being on pills doesn't that just show most adults really get more out of life if they both work and have children? I never felt I missed out. I did find it hard expressing breastmilk at work but when you balance out the gains for me (wonderful work I enjoy 30x more than I would enjoy 12 hours a day at home with even my gorgeous 5 babies) there was no contest.

The secret which fathers have known for years is to make yourself part of their internal world, let them bond with you by trying to get home on time when you can, lots of time with them at weekends, lots of cuddles and physical affection when you are around after work and that way there is no lack of bond or love at all just because you happen to be out in the working day when the under 5s are home. Then when they're 3 they're probably at nursery school in the morning anyway and before you know it they're at school from 9 - 3.
As they get older it is less of a dilemma because what they need from you is security, love, ability to raise issues with you but not time in the same sense as small children need of continuous care.

Yes, seniority helps. It was much easier for me at 36 with the twins than 22/24/26 with the first three because we had more money by the later years and more control and power over work things but I don't think that is a reason to wait if you want children younger. I certainly don't regret having done that. It's great in your 40s to have three at university and even then they have a lot of things they like help with and to chat about. Yesterday's question was why the girl she knew had to die in Ecuador on that coach - who know, but those issues as they get older and even which the 9 year olds are not the same ones as a baby that wants to clamp itself limpit like to its father and mother and needs to be prized off as they go to work.

I know men and women who work in these very well paid extreme jobs. They all work out different compromises. Some have househusbands. Some have husbands who do things like write poetry. Some both work and they both to an extent compromise at work by trying to get home by 6 every other day. Others find childcare to cover the late evenings. If the children have consistency and continuity then they don't suffer but they do suffer from a parent at home who hates it at home and resents every minute he or she is "just" doing that and they do suffer if they never see their parents and have a change of nanny every other week (that is a very rare situation however).

Eldorado, you said: "I also feel quite strongly about women hanging on to as much financial independence (or the capability thereof) as possible. It's just that mixed in with that I now also think babies don't do as well as they could with most of the most typical childcare we have available, and that's wrong too. So finding the right solution from that whole mix of factors is difficult - the best way out really would be the less screwed up system with less of a long-hours culture. Wonder if it will ever happen here!"

Eldorado, yes, it is a dilemma. But at the end of the day, I am confident in saying that ft, pt non-working parents put their children's interests first.

So whilst you feel that childcare is not ideal, others on this thread (including me) feel that the childcare has brought lots of benefits to their child, by providing a richer tapestry of experiences which complement the stable environment and security provided by them, in the limited hours that they are in childcare. And mind you, it is limited even if the dcs are with a ft nanny or in ft nursery as mine are. Because working parents still work bloody hard when they are at home with their dcs to give the cuddles and attention and security on weekends and mornings/nights.

But if my dcs did not settle in nursery, and a nanny does not work out, and then a cm does not, I would revisit my working arrangements, as I am sure other posters would too. We are all trying to do the best by our dcs. If children are visibly and obviously thriving in childcare, I don't see the dilemma.

It is possible to have too much of a 'good' thing. I ended up taking my ft SAHM mother for granted, as did my father. And actually became quite selfish, because I always had her to do things for me. I could not cook or iron when I left home. That is not the model I want for my dcs.

Xenia's last post is a nice description of how working parents with full on careers balance out the demands of raising a family with their work over time.

Xenia, it is true what you say about how to bond with children even if you don't have the quantity of time with them. My dh does not see his dcs for more max 2 hours a weekday. I walk through the door at 4 pm and dh walks through the door at 7:30 pm. There is no difference in the scramble for him. Their faces light up and it is like a second wind for them.

Weekends are reserved for family. We do so much more child-centred activities on weekends with our dcs than my SIL who is a SAHM - that is our choice. Even if we are just kicking around at home, it is with dcs, watching them play with each other and acting for us, or soothing hurt feelings and bumped knees, mediating little squabbles that end with them skipping off holding hands, baby tantrumming in the corner and then falling into our open arms when he is done.

Dh and I have watched only 1 adult movie at the cinema since dd was born 4.7 years ago. We have not gone on a holiday which was not organised solely with our dcs' interest and needs in mind (self-catering). As they are both under 5, we accept very few dinner socialising events. It is our special time with dcs and they love it. It is perfectly possible to combine demanding careers with raising a happy family, even when they are young.

That's largely how we work too blueshoes - except that because we both work in senior public sector management, dh does manage to see a lot more of the dcs during the week, taking on 50% of the school run and one afternoon pick-up.
Ds, who is nearly 9 and starting to see which way the cookie crumbles for him and all the other children in his class, with their various permutations of 2 high flyers/1 high flyer + 1 SAHP/public sector proles etc, volunteered the other day that he felt we had the best of both worlds as a family. So as luck would have it, the balance has been struck correctly for our children.
But, as you say - "adult" trips to the cinema? Ha! Evenings out? Possibly five in total, in nearly nine years. "Nice" holidays with adult pursuits prioritised? None .
Agree that spending as much time with your growing children is so important. In the run-up to secondary transfer this is becoming particularly apparent.

I have newfound admiration for wohm and wohd.

I have been a sahm for a few years working part time here and there. I am now in week 2 of full time work (training) and have 2 weeks to go before reverting to part-time night work.

I am absolutely knackered.

I feel like life is passing me by and I have no fun.

I feel disconnected from my children because I am so knackered when I get home. It is an effort to be interested in their day and not fall asleep on the sofa.

I don't know how wohm fit in full time work, housework, parenting and a social life.

I will never complain about being a sahm again.

Of course I continue to mull this, & the meaning & measurement of "balance" - as there is far more to the equation than crediting minutes spent with the child against a debit of minutes spent away from him/her.

For instance - I do the school run every day (ds just 9, dd 7.5). That requires a slight accommodation re work - I had to make clear to my office (but, NB, and this is important, it wasn't that difficult a negotiation) that I am not to be expected in before 9.30, unless I have special advance notice & arrangements.

The run takes 45 minutes & we walk + ds & I do one stop on the Tube after dropping dd. Those 45 minutes are totally precious & important time - we talk about the coming day, make plans for later on, cover whatever concerns there might be, do jokes, locate robins by song ... basically get all three of our brains cheerily in gear while we're well-rested & feeling bright. And it isn't hard to see that that time outweighs a lot more than 45 mins of exhausted post-school crash-out time.

Other thing, re childcare - horses for courses, as they say. We've just been walking in Greek mountains, & ds & dd did more than 25km over the week - and I credit that, absolutely & finally, to the energetic nanny we had when they were toddlers, who got them walking everywhere, in a simple matter of fact "this is what you do" way. Not being sporty myself, I just wouldn't have done the same, & so wouldn't have ended up with these wonderful strong-legged children.

mymama - don't give yourself a hard time - it's an adjustment. Nobody finds it easy at first, but you get into a rhythm & it gets so much better.

Eldorado, whilst I don't agree with you, I DO really respect the reasoned way you have made your points and I think many of us career mums could have a good banter with you over a wine bottle or two (though I guess this is the teetotal virtual equivalent).

Anyway, am horribly busy at work so this is a cheat - I am reposting a comment I posted on another thread a while back (there are some bits relating to some specific accusations made about working mums, so ignore soem of the 'anna' comments - I don't have time to edit at the moment - you'll get the jist of what we were being accused of (not knowing our children, in a nutshell). I remember spending a while on this post when I originally drfated it as I was tryign to express to SAHM why I think I am doing the right thing...

*

I think it is really sad when people feel that they cannot have it all, and even sadder when others - who know nothing about your family life - assume that you are lying when you say that you can have it all, and that they assume it has to come at the cost of sacrificing your children's happiness.

Yes, there have been times when I've been a bit embarassed at missing some work events (weekend off-sites overseas are the usual casualties, because that is sacred family time), and yes, of course there are times when I'd give anything to roll over in bed and not face the commute in to a day of stressy meetings or an early-morning flight to Frankfurt (but I had those days too before I had a family), and yes, there are times when my DC's and I have had a really really great family day and the sun is shining the next morning and DS is sleeping and I just want to stay at home and go down the beach again with them, but I can't.

It is really difficult to get the balance right and you have to have the most organised mind on the planet to keep up the confidence to forge ahead, but you can forge ahead. Work is still the challenge it always was, children or not (in fact I find it all slightly less stressful now that it is not the centre of my universe), and career progress is still possible if you still work hard and show that you are as committed as ever (I have earned more as a mother than I ever did before). You can always find a tiny piece of space for yourself if you need to as well, so long as it is planned carefully. My DH has his Rugby on a Saturday afternoon and I have my studies on Sunday morning. Then we plan the time with our children accordingly. If you stay organised, stay flexible, and pick yourself a partner who appreciates that parenting is a joint effort requiring joint commitment and joint sacrifice, then it can be done and when you get offered that key promotion and know that other women coming up behind you will also get the same opportunities because you have shown the bosses what mothers can do, it is one of the most fantastic feelings in the world.

And Anna - in response to your beliefs about the limitations of the working mother: on Sunday my DH will accompany DS to Touch Rugby, Monday I will take him to his school swimming group, Wednesday I am going on a school trip with him to watch a ploughing match and Friday DH will go to the school harvest festival service. DH or I have done every Doctors trip. His best friends are called Harry, Adam, Callum, George, Kyle, William and Jasper, and the only time he wears clothes I haven't personally bought him is when he is given them as presents by his grandparents. His current nanny has known him since he was 3 months old when she looked after him in the local nursery and he adores her. He spends time now and then with his nanny at a home for adults with learning difficulties owned by relatives of the nanny where he plays with the adults, and he spends other days on the beach, in the woods, playing with friends in the park or running round the garden with his dog. His grandparents take him to and from school two days a week and that is always followed by a trip to a local wild animal sanctuary. His class at pre-prep has 8 children in it and two devoted teachers who have been at the school for more than a dozen years. They take the children out to the orchards and to play in the school 'forest' every day, rain or shine. When he is 7 his school day will include two hours of sport every single day, right up until he is 18 years old. That it what having it all really means and it is a lifestyle I have worked for and am immensely proud to have achieved for my son (I do not come from a moneyed family - every penny of this lifestyle has been earned by me and my DH). My DS comes home exhausted and happy and wakes up happy. I cannot for the life believe how my stopping work and thus removing from him many of these activities and opportunities could possibly benefit him in any way.

**

BTW, takign a career break, or workign significantly reduced hours whilst my DS was a baby/toddler would have been career suicide for me (and I am sure to other MNers posting here)

Actually, I posted on the Op's other thread. And i have come back to this one.What struck me what how utterly miserable her situation is.
I thought Sparkles post was OTT and badly phrased, but she does have a point. This poor woman is not getting any real time with her lovely baby.
AND all of this , for what ?
She said on the other thread, that she lives in an average house, supporting parents admittedly, but doesn't have grand holidays. Her dh gives his all and is at beacon call of clients. She does a long day .
And they don't even have the material luxuries that this kind of presurised environment, should come with.
God, I feel really sorry for her. Sounds FUCKING MISERABLE.

OP's other thread?

I don't think the OP sounded utterly miserable. More that she doesn't have things working as smoothly as she needs which is causing her some stress - hence the reason for the post. I also don't think you need a big house, grand holidays and other luxuries to be happy.

She was asking for advice, and there seem to be a couple of options for her to consider - one is to increase her support for her existing work environment - DH to get more involved, possibly additional childcare at the end of the day. Another option suggested is to see whether she has the flexibility to reduce her hours to help relieve the pressure.

Both of these are valid suggestions - and it is really for the OP to look at her life, and make the changes necessary to make it more manageable for her.

Unless ManhattanMama's posted under another name, I think Oblomov's got her mixed up with someone else?

I do wonder about the modern wisdom that says women should wait to get married/have kids. If we married at 20 and had kids ASAP, they would be at school when we hit 30 and we could start our careers then.

The way it is now, we just reach the exciting part of our career then have to give it up to have babies. Of COURSE we want to have both, and that's not a bad impulse, but I really wonder if we'd be better off doing it all the other way round.

Except that BEAUTIFUL, soapy and bink just said that parents become less, not more substitutable, when children get older. My dcs are still young so I am not as qualified to comment but I can see it happening with dd 4.7 who loves for me to be at the school gates.

I don't think there is any one way. It depends on when you meet your ideal partner (no pressure!), what sort of career you have in mind and the commitments it requires, how supportive your partner is, how demanding your dcs are at whichever stage of their lives. Too many variables to plan it out in advance.

Beaulifal, that's the way i am hoping things will pan out for me in the end. I have chosen to have my dd young and will be trying for another soon then hopefully by the time my dc are older, i will know what i want to do.

I am not lucky enough you see to know exactly what i want to do as a career. Dp has a small shop which i help him run although in the male dominated world we live in, he is seen as "the boss" while i am seen as "his partner" instead

So hopefully in years to come i will develope some ambition for something and make it trually my special achievment. If not then it's not the end of the world to me, i will always have my dc being my best achievment in my life. Fingers crossed