Who is living life the right way?

[flowergirl24]

Sister A and Sister B met up over the Christmas period. Their lives have gone in different directions and they are both late 30s. They both have 3 DC.

Sister A works 60 hours a week in a stressful job. She manages to take the children swimming at the weekends but they don’t do activities after school during the week. She has invested money in rental houses, and is concentrating on being able to have a better quality of life in the future.

Sister B works 8-10 hours a week. She has ponies and the children enjoy riding after school. She is not focused on a career at all, but does a lot of driving the children to after school activities. Sister B has expensive cars and is living for today, with no concern for the future.

Who is doing life right?

Are you a nuclear licence holder?

Which is why both scenarios should be considered because it is absolutely true for some. I see the opposite, women are often encouraged to go part time or be a SAHM with very little thought to pensions, loss of earnings etc and just told that money isn’t everything or that they’ll never get the time back.

It isn’t something that should be considered lightly.

Maybe keep you’re beak out and concentrate on your own life not what other people are doing?

I'd bet large amounts of money that you are "Sister A"

The answer is both of them. They are living the life they want.

How are you living ?

Yep. You just need to mind your own business.

There’s no “right way” to live a life, it’s whatever makes you happy.

Saying that, I grew up with a workaholic mother and it really put me off being career/money obsessed. All that work only to get really, really ill in her late 40s and end up back in square one with her children having to support her on pretty much everything.
Obviously this isn’t what happens to everyone, but seeing it all unfold… nope. Give me my quiet days and my peace.

Sister A probably needs to find a way to reduce her hours so that she is only working her contracted hours or as near to them as possible. She will burn out. Kids or no kids, it’s not a life. Where is her time to rest and recharge.

Sister B is lucky that she doesn’t need to work because her husband is able to support them as a family. Ponies are expensive so I’m guessing he is a high earner. Sister B is able to spend time with her children and indulge in her hobby. If her husband leaves her she will be vulnerable though.

Neither situation is ideal - but then many of our situations aren’t perfect and we do the best we can, or what we see as being the best, for our families.

OMG! Ali, is this you? 🤗

Sister A is jealous of Sister B and secretly want this lifestyle and is trying to kid themselves they have the better life and that in the future they will get one up. However I assume that if sister B husband is able to afford to keep sister B in this lifestyle now he has made provisions to maintain it. You don’t have to have rental properties to do this - i good pension will do a better job without the stresses of rental.

I dunno. If you asked the children, who would they say is having the better childhood? Your children may grow up to be more ambitious than their cousins, but do you really want them to work 60-hour weeks in stressful jobs and spend very little time with their own families like you are doing? There needs to be a balance surely. Lots of money is great, but it doesn't make up for the lack of experiences and family time in childhood.

I am a civil servant on a six figure salary who works 55 hour weeks and has three kids so I get it. My kids are a bit older though, I was in a job share for a few years when they were very little.

Do you love your job? That’s the key to me. I couldn’t work these hours and leave the kids as much as I do if I didn’t love what I do and find it interesting and stimulating. I also enjoy the people I work with.

i ensure I buy extra leave and take seven full weeks off every year all of which we spend as a family. That makes me feel more present and involved. I also NEVER work at weekends. My other golden rule is to be fully present when with the kids - no staring at phone and scrolling etc.

Sister A/ you - working too many hours;

• breaches working time rule
• too little time with your children, weekends at least should be entirely for them if you are working those hours in the week
• no time with DH in the evenings, not good for relationship
• Can’t attend any school assemblies/visits/meetings etc so children miss out there
• Children don’t have opportunity to pursue activities they want to explore
• Children will get to an age of staying up beyond 8pm and be even more aware of mum not having any time for them
• What future are you getting which you wouldn’t have without these hours?
• Does’t sound like children are your focus, only a post children life is the focus

Sister B - sounds like a much better quality of life for her, Dh and children. Lower hours than the average but seems to be able to live well on it. What future do you think she is sacrificing for it?

Both are quite extreme. How is sister B paying for expensive cars? I feel sorry for the kids of sister A (unless there’s a stay at home dad??) I think the competition between both is unhealthy. They should focus on what works for their own family ( I hope sister A focuses more on family and spends time with her children, and I hope sister B is actually spending quality time with her kids because it sounds like she’s just ferrying them off all the time).

As a rule, I don't think there's a right or wrong. But imo, with young DC, sister B is closer to the 'right' way. Your DC are only this little for a short while and you don't get that time back.

Longer term, not sure the busting a gut now for an amazing retirement is a fool proof plan either. Not to be morbid but DH and I have seen too many people we know recently who were doing similar but died before/shortly after they got to that magic date in the future when they'd start living (much younger than you'd expect). Yes, you have to be sensible & plan for a hopefully long and healthy retirement, but not at the expense of living your life now. For example, in our house, it's DH that works the long hours as main earner but he still makes sure he spends quality time with DC every evening (with the odd exception) as that's what's going to build that bond for them. She won't care about the wage he brings in, she'll just remember if Dad was there & part of it all.

this is just massively unhealthy and I’m pretty sure it breaks working hours laws.

Get control of your hours.

you can be replaced at work. You can’t be replaced at home. Spend your time here you’re appreciated.

you had my sympathy when I thought you might be running your own business. You’ll be paid the same regardless of whether you put in the extra hours or not.

learn to delegate & argue to employ others according to capacity, not do everything yourself.

I agree with everyone else that ultimately there is no 'right' way to live your life, however I do feel really sorry for the children of Sister A and feel that their childhood and life experiences are being sacrificed on the alter of Sister A's financial ambition.

Without knowing everything then it's hard to comment on Sister B's long term financial position. She may currently rely on her DH to fund her lifestyle but it could be totally possible that in the event if divorce she could still be better off than Sister A. She could get at least half of some considerable marital assets and she could also potentially increase her working hours and salary should she need to.

If sister A is enjoying work and the family is flourishing then it's fine. Finding a fulfilling job is important and families don't need non-working or low-working mothers to be happy. I am proud of my work success and think women need challenge and stimulation outside of parenting.
I am also divorced as my ex had an affair and married the AP, so being financially independent has been hugely important.

And do they get any benefits? Yeah everyone would be doing it the right way if someone else is picking up the tab for their privilege not to work - be it a husband or the taxpayer.

It’s those who work to pay everything else that are the mugs.

Who pays for the ponies?

Absolutely agree on this. As a civil servant they will be employed for full time 37.5 hrs. Unlikely in the current environment they will be paid overtime unless it's a very crucial role. I mean very crucial. So why on earth they are doing these hours I have absolutely no idea.

I think the impossible question to answer here is whether the family is 'flourishing' as that is an extremely subjective concept. I have a friend who is extremely ambitious and similarly to Sister A works almost all hours. My friend thrives on doing this but it is only possible because the kids have very little opportunity to do playdates, extra curricular activities or even just spend time with her. It is heartbreaking talking to the kids about how they would like to do various clubs but can't and don't get to do much on the holidays except when my friend uses her very limited leave (and even then work often creeps in). They feel the difference between their own lives and those of their friends acutely, especially as they have got older and kids start to talk to each other more about what they do outside of school.

My friend seems oblivious though. The kids are loved and don't complain too much to the parent as they say 'there is no point'. They just get on with things and accept this is their lot in life. I wouldn't say they are 'thriving' though and I do think when the kids get older then they may start to question their parent's priorities. Ultimately these kids have never had a chance to pursue a hobby, interests, instrument, sport etc that could have changed their lives and made them more rounded people. I say this as someone that never got the chance to do that stuff either and I am incredibly envious of friends that had these opportunities and I see how this has enriched their entire lives.

Neither is right or wrong. There are pros and cons to everything.

I think both are quite high risk strategies in their own way.

Sister A doesn't have much free time/family time to really deepen her relationships with her kids. There's a risk they'll look back and view her as largely absent or resentful over a lack of oppertunity to do explore extracurricular activities and develop their own passions and interests.
Another risk is that she doesn't live long enough to retire or dies/gets a chronic health condition early in retirement and can't enjoy her money or security to the same extent. There are no pockets in shrouds.

Sister B sounds heavily reliant on her partner, which carries it's own risks, there's no mention of her plans for financial security in the future, maybe she is investing appropriately or maybe not? If not I would probably take on another day or two of work and stick it in a pension or high interest savings account.

My ideal would be a middle ground between the two.

My answer is only going to based on my own preferences. I would rather be sister B. Spending time with my children and being there for them has always been my priority. I can't see how it's possible to do that as well as I'd like with a 60 hour work week. However you do whatever you prefer and, other than your own immediate family, who cares what anyone else thinks?