High earning mothers

[ClarissaG]

I'm interested to start a discussion group for Mums and Mums to be who are juggling (or planning to juggle) a high flying career and motherhood. I loath to use the term 'Power Mums', but those who earn enough (£100k plus) to afford a team of help, but have the kind of pressures and working hour expectations that that level of salary brings.

I read the Mumsnet Guest blog with interest (www.mumsnet.com/Talk/guest_blogs/1977242-Why-is-society-so-unsupportive-of-high-achieving-power-mums) but the comments less so.

Is there scope for a supportive group for such Mums with practical ideas, experiences and thoughts rather than judgement about whether we can 'have it all'?

I am mid thirties, a VC, 12 weeks pregnant and have not yet told my fellow partners. I want it all but have no idea if that is realistic or how my future is going to pan out!

I lasted a month before I rang up and started planning when to come back. My problem was that I had a hideous pregnancy and really could have done with 9 months off for that. Dd arrived by emcs after 3 days of labour. It was my third operation in under a year. Then I got mastitis twice in the first month and had no help at all, not even dh at home

I still felt better than I had during any of the pregnancy.

I really think that there has to be flexibility as the experience of pregnancy childbirth etc can vary so widely and for some women it is life threatening. I know several women who needed several months to recover and would never have survived without extreme medical intervention. The flexibility needs to be there without the pressure to conform to a certain pattern.

I think the key here on the length of maternity leave is being confident enough to give yourself permission to choose whatever length of time suits you and not (excuse my language!) giving a shiny shit whatever anyone else thinks such that you feel you need to justify it. The 4 months I took off worked for me. No way I could have taken a year off because my career might never have recovered. At 4 months, and with a lot of hard work before and after, I was able to carry on as if I hadn't been off. I would have loved another couple of months off though. On the other hand, no way I could have been back in 2 or even 5 weeks. Not only was I not physically ready, but I wasn't emotionally/mentally ready at that time either. First time around, I was just overwhelmed and second time, I just wanted to spend my time cuddling and smelling my baby.

Good points novice and kickass

Laura When I say I don't feel I am "emotionally" ready to go back right now at 2 weeks postpartum, I don't mean in terms of my mental ability to do the job - that, I agree, hasn't changed a jot. It's more the emotional readjustment between spending all day with my new baby and going back into the corporate life. There is such a contrast for me between the two lives. I am not ready yet to leave my bubble of spending all of my time with her. But I know I won't feel like this forever.

I think I would feel different if I ran my own business as, if I wanted, I could hop more easily between work and home. I think I feel a bit 'all or nothing' about my job.

This isn't about guilt. This is a personal feeling. I think I'll know when I'm ready - probably when the boredom starts to outweigh the fuzzy feeling!

Enjoy the fuzzy feeling. I get so fed up of people talking as though working mums don't have those same feelings.

Dd is 10 now and still a hug from her can get rid if any irritation and make my day better. The whole judgement if working mums is just so pointless that I rarely bother to engage with it. Somehow it seems to ramp up even more if you have some money and use more expensive childcare like a private nursery or a nanny.

There are some people who I am sure say things behind my back because dd is at an 'exclusive' private school rather than the local state school, but they can just get over themselves.

I do wish there was more peer pressure on men to take the full 2 weeks paternity leave though. And I also think it should be at full pay as standard then it would be a no-brainer likethe 16 weeks for Ice* .

Yes, I understand all those points. I suppose if you work until you go into labour and return at 2 (or 6) weeks you haven't any mental adjustment getting back. Of course that does not mean you don't adore that baby. Some of the best experiences of my entire life have been breastfeeding those 5 babies, just about nothing matches how important and special that was to me. I certainly adore babies. The suggestion that women who work don't like babies or don't have a maternal instinct that some people off this thread sometimes express is simply not so for many of us. It is just we may not want to do it 24/7.

i am sure I was helped by having my first child about 15 before my peers so there was no one to compare with and also by the fact I have always been different from most other people in terms of my interests so I don't have the same need to conform that others have which is lucky.

Like kickass I had a dreadful pregnancy - was either in hospital, in bed or in a wheelchair for the entire duration apart from a month at around six months when I was sort of functional but still very weak and throwing up every day. I think I might have enjoyed mat leave more and maybe had a bit longer off if I hadn't had such a dreadful pregnancy. I found having my ability to work/think/function like myself completely destroyed for so long devastating as I enjoy my work so much. So really I was pretty desperate to get back and feel more like myself. I hope that a second time, even if the pregnancy was just as bad (which we have to prepare for) I would at least feel more sure that I would get myself back eventually.

I agree with KickAss. I think its important to acknowledge that it isn't an either or situation with your dcs. As I said, I could happily have spent more time at home just cuddling my new born, but being pragmatic, the longer I had off, the harder I would have had to work to re-establish myself. I work in a client environment, there are other people who would happily permanently service those clients and I would have had to start all over again in building up clients and portfolios etc. therefore I could have taken a year off, been bored after 6 months and worse spent the next 2 years after maternity leave re-establishing myself, being stressed and not being "available" for my dcs. Or I could take 4 months, wish it were a little longer, and go back part time for the first year. I chose the latter.

I always find it a combination of weird and interesting when people on MN talk about needing society to make their men behave in a way that is acceptable to them. My dh works in a very male deals environment in the City. He is part of senior management, and his colleagues all have wives at home. The men don't take the full 2 weeks maternity leave. My view was that's fine. They're not married to me. I needed and wanted dh at home for the entire 2 weeks both times and therefore that's exactly what he did. I didn't give 2 hoots for what Jonny in the next door office did, because he wasn't married to me. I think its so important that we women are confident enough to set the boundaries for what is and isn't acceptable in our marriages/household.

Absolutely novice. DH's career is very demanding and very male dominted (investment banking), but if it ever gets to the point where his career demands mean I can't work - i.e. he can't pull enough weight at home to make it feasible - then he will have to change career. Simple as that. Plenty of other wives may be happy to say "ok then I'll be a SAHM and you support us financially" - but they are not me. DH understands this and appreciates that, in return, it means all the financial pressure is not on him.

That said, I've not yet had any joy in persuading DH to take extended paternity leave if and when we have another DC.

Any views on this? Will any of your DHs/DPs take extended paternity leave? Or maybe they already have? The rights are there legally now but I gather uptake is pretty small.

I believe mine would have done if it had been available then.

DH was planning to split the mat leave with me next time. In fact I don't think we will - partly to do with the probable timing (it's likely he'll only recently have gone back to work after a long research leave) and also because we are planning to hire a nanny and would want her to carry on but can't really afford to keep a nanny once the mat pay drops a lot. But he was keen on the idea and we still may well do that if the second baby comes along a lot later than planned.

It's definitely the case that if at some point we decide to move out of London and have one of us either stop working or shift career to something more relaxed/part-time/home-based, it will definitely be DH who will downshift. We've discussed this quite a lot so it is a real possibility. He finds his job quite stressful - although he is very successful - and also he comes from a long line of writers/journalists/"public intellectuals" (he is French!) on his Dad's side so definitely hankers after that sort of life a bit. Whereas I think I would actually enjoy the higher level management roles that you need to do to progress after a certain level, and I also really need and enjoy the structure of being at work most of the time (though I enjoy working from home one day most weeks).

My DH isn't planning on taking extended Paternity but is taking a month off (two weeks paid and then two weeks holiday). I didn't really think he was that fussed about it and perhaps just doing it. However he is starting to look for another job which I am supportive of (currently v unhappy with his company at the moment) but said he wanted wait until after the baby arrives so he could take this time off paid. It was nice to hear that at least for him, he was happy to push for a month off of work at this time as it mattered to him being there.

We had an agreement that if nannies didn't work out he would give up work - we discussed that even before we were engaged and that was a pragmatic decision based on the fact I would in due course earn more.

I suppose my point about long maternity leaves are that is some of us find hours of childcae and cleaning boring and are married to interesting men who aren't boring why woudl we think our spouse would want to do something we don't want to do when we can both afford to have someone else do it? I am not against both parents being home initially but I don't see why if neither spouse wants to be home long the man or woman is at fault for that different choice. The longer leave whatever your gender usually does your career no good anyway and it just confuses the child who needs to get used to its norm early on rather than having a whole series of changes - mother full time x months, father full time y months, then third set of massive disruption when it goes to nursery or with a nanny.

To be clear my DP did take his leave both times. But feel sorry for other women when I hear of men not taking it. It seems to be depend a lot on the culture within the company or industry as well as whether or not the woman works.

Laura I'm not saying men should take long paternity leave just for the sake of it (same applies to long maternity leave).

But I do think it's a good idea for fathers to have experience of being in sole charge of their child, for a reasonable period of time (say a week or two). In other words they should have at least a glimpse of what being on maternity leave is like.

I think that would help to avoid what often happens after maternity leave, which is that the mother becomes "main parent" and ends up with most of the child related responsibilities at the weekend/outside work hours, simply because she's the one with the main child caring experience and the father has never really done it alone.

Mini pie is right... And along side more men at every level taking family leave, there should be more women particularly senior women declaring that they do work as well as do school runs! How wonderful would it be if there was less of the 'work till midnight, sleep for 4 hours and then get up again at 4am to get ready to get to work for 6...' And more of the normalised workday....

So wouldn't it be great if there were women in senior roles stopping at 3-4, do pick up, drop off at brownies, swim, athletics, cook dinner, and then they could re log back on at 8-10? Even better if men did that too.

One shouldn't have to compete with the bugger who does 80h weeks and told that that is the 'norm'. If he wants to do the 80h, that's fine, but that should be seen as exceptional... Not average/normal.

NK, that is my dream. I am feeling more and more that the business world is completely unbalanced. This is not even about kids, it's about life - how can anyone be healthy, well adjusted, productive when working minimum 60 hours weeks, no lunch beaks, late nights wtc? There is no money worth this life.

I would advise any young person, male or female, to stay away from finance. And on a personal level, while I of course draw satisfaction from my career and good salary, I'm also profoundly dissatisfied with the way things have panned out. I wish there was a way out that doesn't lead me all the way to being a SAHM.

I think I am lucky because actually my working days often are quite like what NK describes, though there are some real blindspots - for instance it is still standard for research seminars to begin at 5, 5.15 or even 5.30 and not finish until 7, and that's not counting any drinks/socialising/follow-up with the speaker that you might want to do afterwards - and of course that's often the most important bit in terms of career development. It's very difficult to attend these with a young family, and even more difficult to be the person convening them, which is obviously an important role in terms of career visibility/networking. This does make me cross and is something I would like to see change. But there is a lot of flexibility in academia - that has its downsides too, as there is huge and very internalised pressure and in the nature of research/writing it is never "done". Also the pay is not great!

In other news, we have just chosen our nanny who has accepted (only verbally so far but she sounded quite enthusiastic). Any hints or tips on how to navigate all the admin and other elements of this next phase? And on establishing a good relationship from the off?

Softcookie - it's not just finance though (although at least in finance you get the 'financial rewards')...I'm in academia and there's a guy who started off same time as me, and made professor in under 10 years. he also however has no life (self-admitted), and can be found at the office on the weekends, and on weekdays till 11pm etc. He has been held as the guy who we should emulate... with comments from senior management like 'like at X!! he's published these 10 papers and has got a million pound grant from ESRC!!'...

so although I do not begrudge his promotions - afterall if he works like that and gets the outputs, he should be recognised and promoted, this does not mean that the rest of us have to work that way and that this is the only way to get promoted/recognised.

As a parent 'in the know', I would want my children to attend a university where they have excellent teachers and researchers. So not one where solely researchers are rewarded and teachers are slammed. So where the Brian Coxes are teaching the year 1s as well as the PhD programmes....

NK your post made me laugh as I am applying to the ERC at the moment - pretty long odds though so I am not holding my breath! You're right I think that this "type" of academic are often not so good at teaching, or don't particularly enjoy it.

Yes, in my profession (law) long hours are seen as absolutely essential to recognition, promotion, etc. Which makes sense to some extent because we (largely) bill by the hour so more hours=more money made for the firm. But it shouldn't be the be all and end all (what about quality over quantity?) and there should be options available that don't require such horrific hours.

However, I wouldn't want to finish at 3pm in order to do the school run and then log on later. I'd rather work 9-6 and then not have to log on in the evenings. But that's just preference, the main point is the same i.e. why are long hours so necessary.

I also wonder if the logon later is sustainable in the long term. Great when you have small children who are tucked up in bed by 7, but what about when they get older and have activities to go to and supper gets pushed back. Are you going to log on at 9.and work till midnight?

I did exactly that last night, then didn't get to sleep until 3 am as I hadn't wound down.

I am usually pretty strict about trying to keep work and home separate as I find I just don't switch off unless I do, so I tend to stay at my desk until I am done for the day, but that is easy for me as dd is older and right there down the hallway when I want to see her.

Having said that, I am trying to extend my professional reputation so presenting papers at conferences, and I am thinking about trying to get something published. However, I really struggle to find the time without work taking over my life. Still, I want to do it just because I think that I should (partly due to something that Laura Bridges wrote on here one time). As an intelligent and thinking woman, I should be using those skills,and I also like to exercise my brain.

Every so often I think about how much better my career would have been if I had never had dd and I don't even feel guilty and I kind of plan to pick up my career once dd is old enough and off to college (if not before) but I still get caught up in taking her to activities etc.

Sometimes I long for a 1950s style housewife to run around after me.

I wonder sometimes just how essential these long hours are and what would happen if we didn't do them. When I got back from holiday last September I decided that I was going to prioritise having dinner with my daughter which meant I needed to leave the office by 6.30. It wasn't always going to be possible - if I had meetings or dinners etc but on the days when there was no firm commitment I decided I would just walk away from my desk and whatever wasn't finished would have to wait. And I was strict about accepting evening appointments too - only if they were necessary and unavoidable. This regime lasted until January and what stopped it was that I got involved with a really interesting project that I didn't want to walk away from each night. So I do question the extent to which we do it because we think we have to or because we want to rather than because we actually need to.

I must say now that my youngest are 15 it is so much easier. That does not mean I choose shorter hours actually as there is very little I like as much as my work except perhaps sex but I do control the hours. I took time off on Monday morning to do the first mow of our lawn and because of how I work based often from home that is possible.

I do think women should try to put themselves forward to speak. I did a conference plan on Monday and I put 100% speakers down who were female ( I had been asked to plan it) and I did that as an experiment. It will be interesting to see if it comes off how many we end up who are female.(I would speak and chair too so at least they will have me).

Doctors cut hours from what was often 100 (in my father's day) as a young doctor to 48 now. Senior doctors say the younger ones can be half as good as they have half the experience. There is a lot of sense in that. In most professions the fewer hours you put in the worse you are. My older daughter (in a City law firm) had an example - they did a lateral hire to her department (rare for her firm) and the other lady came in , her age adn stage but had so many fewer hours as she had come from a firm with much shorter hours so although they were both 1 or 2 years PQE the longe rhours firm meant your 2 years PQE in practice and in terms of how good you were were a better PQE (assuming you have not died of exhaustion in the meantime). Every morning before 7 I am reading stuff to learn more about my area. The more I do the better I am 0 within reason ( I try to get to bed at 10 every night).

All we are all saying is that men and women make choices. 90% of men and women don't earn very much and don't do very well. A few of us like work, picked a high paid career and like it and put in the hours and lean in and some of those who do this are male and some female (probably more male currently because more women than men get offered a choice by a spouse of not to work or work short hours or for pin money as a man will keep them).

I can decide everything. I work for myself. I generate my own business on a daily basis. Since I moved to this way I have not shortened by hours. i have not wanted more hours doing childcare or housework. I take 2 weeks off a year. When i was employed it was 4 weeks. However it doesn't feel like work because I like it and I decide the day and the hours on the whole (although I didnt' feel like getting out of bed today early to get the children to 7.45am badminton but then I thought in 2 or 3 years these 30 years of being a parent with things like that to do will be over so not long and not really a trouble - in fact people get more depressed when they have no work and no family at home as they don't have an impetous and the meaning in life which work and family give most of us - they become an unhappy lotus eater once they get their nirvana of total idleness).

Right I'd better get on with earning a crust.