City lawyer - have resigned - now having second thoughts - help!

[Ronipops]

Well, title says it all really. I resigned this week after it all got too much. I'd been agonising over it for weeks and then after a particularly difficult day I just did it. Now I've done it, I'm having second thoughts! Is this normal or a sign that I've made a mistake?

Ostensibly I have a good flexible working arrangement (4 days, slightly shorter days) but, in practice, I have been working a lot more than that recently - which is the problem.

My DS is 18 months and I just feel it is unfair on him for me to work so much. My DH is a lawyer too and so we're both working in demanding jobs. On the other hand, I am scared about being at home all the time and not finding another job which is challenging / decently paid.

I thought the agonising would stop once I had made the decision!

What should I do? Even if I wanted to go back now, could I? Everyone knows I've resigned.

I feel in turmoil.

Xenia when DH took a 6 month break from work and I was the breadwinner, after sex should I have left him cash on the bedside table or put a little extra in his housekeeping allowance so he could buy himself something nice?

I suppose that depends on the quality of the sex. And plenty of full time workers do most of the childcare after work and weekends and housework and then find on divorce their stay at home other gets children, house, money, the lot. Anyway that's a different topic.

The main point is most women who give up proper careers regret it and their children rarely thank them from it. They lose status, money and long term income and also all the pleasure you have if you have a career you love, in working in it from 45 - 65 and beyond and instead you have low income bits and pieces, flower arranging and time to get depressed during the menopause. So if the question was regretting giving up even a part time job my advice was get back in there, feel the adrenalin flow and enjoy for you and your children the best of all worlds which is full time work in a proper career you enjoy.

Xenia makes some interesting points about the bargain that is struck when a woman decides to become a SAHM.

Not many men give up their careers and earning power because they have children. And so there is still s real and huge inequality in terms of whose responsibility it is to earn money and look after children.

When one person works oth and the other is a sahp it DOES change the relationship, of course it does. It doesn't always make it worse of course but it does make a difference.

my ds just got his offer from cambridge xenia he thanks me! I love my life - 17 years sahm and in the words of Edith - i do not regret a thing

sex great btw

congratulations to Notanotter and her cub, fabulous news. That gives me hope. I used to be a 'high flying lawyer' but have been a quasi prostitute/SAHM for the last 4 years. DS1 wants to apply for Cambridge next year and perhaps he will stand a better chance due to my career change

We have spent most of this weekend, and I spent a good part of the end of last week, filling out (private) school application forms. One of the questions that crops up frequently is the one that allows the school to find out whether a parent is at home for the children at the end of the school day...

I doubt they ask that in the UK but France is not the same.

In the UK the parents which are tend to be those who are not very good with chidlren, not very well educated and the children they want are those with clever successful mothers, who tend to make the better parents, better than housewives.

I gave up the law 12 months ago. I haven't worked since. I don't miss it. It has never crossed my mind to consider myself a quasi prostitute and my relationship with DH is the same as it always was. We too are filling in private (secondary) school application forms and they all ask us to state the occupation of both parents.

Always bear in mind that Xenia's marriage didn't work out and she ended up subsidising her ex-husband. We are all affected by our own expeiences!

I have plenty of former school and university girlfriends in the UK who are both highly educated and experienced in the work place who no longer work. However, my friends don't live in London - they live outside, and their DHs commute into the city. They made that choice as a family in order to have a SAHP and a lower stress lifestyle (mainly due to lower housing costs). They all use a mix of private schools and state grammars, too.

Is it a lower stress lifestyle though? Who for?

I feel sorry for the (usually) DHs who commute far enough to make housing cheaper though, when we looked into it houses in commuter belt like Tonbridge, Harpenden etc. were the same cost as / more expensive than in London Zone 3 plus you have to buy expensive travelcard and parking at the station if you are lucky .... so they sit on trains for hours every day or stay in town during the week, it's a bit lonely for them.

It is a lot to ask of someone to say, you need to work hard enough and be successful enough to support me, children, mortgage, etc. for the next 20 years. That is in effect what women ask their DHs if they give up work completely (since as Xenia points out high earners will not be able to walk back into high paid work after 5, 7, 9 years) but if they keep their hand in part time then there is always the option to increase hours even if it is likely that they will have lost some earning potential overall.

What if the breadwinner doesn't like the job, gets made redundant, etc.? What if the spouse is then not very happy about moving house or whatever? Surely that can easily breed resentment and difficulties in a partnership.

I don't think I would like to put that pressure on my DH and am very glad he does not put it on me.

It's certainly not the choice I have made, or would have made have partly grown up with that model. But a lot of people like it - or are at least very aware of the compromises they make to have that life, with a lovely house and garden in a gorgeous village.

The lifestyle I cannot understand is the double-commute ie both husband and wife commuting into London from a village.

Quite and I have agreed with you before Bonsoir (I'm a regular namechanger sorry!) about weird English fantasy life of living in thatched cottage vs reality of commuting and provincial boredom.

I think that the healthy attitude Europeans have to living in cities is why there are more high powered business women in Paris and Madrid as I am sure their DHs are working too, certainly those I have met are in high-powered couples.

When I see high-powered women giving up work I think, that's all very well for now, but I hope you have a plan or savings for things not working out so that as a couple neither of you find yourselves trapped.

Even worse is when they park the children and wife bored in the real country and buy a place in town so they can commit adultery with gay abandon and leave the wife to be a 24/7 slave all week to the household.

ironlike is right that a lot of these choices for women are not very fair on men and heaps of men, perhaps not the old ones but many of the younger ones just won't accept that choice and knowing how UK divorce law works they just won't let their wife go part time unless they're like some of the ones I've met who regale me with supposedly impressive stories of how the money is hidden off shore or the business isn't sold until just after the divorce or the 101 methods they use to ensure their family doesn't get their money post divorce. Anyway most professional women don't like that feeling of being reliant on a man, the dependence of it and in our culture we are valued largely by what we earn as well as our families. If I meet a man who is unemployed that puts me off. Conversely if I meet one in work who has never had a child that puts me off too. I want rounded people who work and have families.

Anyway thequestion was would she regert it. Answer is in my view probably yes so get back to work pronto - full time work can be fun. We don't hear enough about women who love being at the cutting edge of whatever they do professionally. A lot of them do really really like it. They aren't all there sitting wishing they worked 3 hours a day in some kind of non - job, some pin money kind of thing.

No idea about working as a lawyer, but I have experience of resigning a good job.

Fortunately, I felt good about it and had a couple of projects up my sleeve to keep my brain active.

I retrained into a profession where once qualified, always qualified. I took off many years and walked back into a job when it was time to return.

Could you do freelance work for a local firm just to keep your foot in the door? Could you set up your own business, working from home? Are you interested in practicing a different branch of the law?

I would encourage you to think of the opportunities your new predicament brings you. There must be plenty. But if you can't see a bright side, then don't be afraid to swallow your pride. What is the worst that could happen?

BLP in the City might be worth contacting. They have put a service together for customers whereby you can hire a lawyer on a day rate (rather than by the hour) for a specific piece of work, a period of time, or on an ad hoc basis just like any other contract resource. You would contract with BLP as they underwrite the service you provide but you would not be permanent staff and the idea is that you can name your hours. I haven't used it yet but I will definitely be doing so as it would be far more beneficial to me to have someone come on site for a few days a week and work through some contracts for me. I can't offer any employment law work but since every HR team in the City is snowed under, I'd suggest contacting firms directly and setting yourself up as a consultant. You will easily be able to charge £650 per day.

Best of luck - I had my 12 week scan this week for my first and I'm already stressing about what I am going to do about my job.

I found the best thing to do was to go full time.

4 days in this sort of job is really the worst of both worlds. You are never really doing 4 days so you get stressed about cramming everything into the 4 days and then are still bothered by work on the other day.

The easiest thing to do is go full time - it's far easier with the work load and I have found work FAR more flexible now that I come in every day. It actually makes it easier to have the odd afternoon off every now and then tbh.

It doesn't apply to every job but certainly the ones with a lot of personal responsibility for your workload iyswim

Xenia - I am a senior city lawyer at a magic circle firm. Currently on mat leave with my 6 month old son. I will not be going back and will become a SAHM when my Mat leave runs out. A 'moral' duty to other women?? Get real! Do you think any of your colleagues at your original top 5 magic circle firm would have thought twice before making you redundant/screwing you over if it improved the bottom line? We each owe a duty to do what is best for ourselves and our families, whatever that may be in the given circumstances. For someone so 'pro sisterhood' you are incredibly judgemental of other people's individual choices and circumstances. I think you are a little resentful that your life hasn't allowed you to enjoy fully enjoy your 5 children and have to justify your choices with such venom that it is laughable. I personally think SAHMs have the last laugh - getting to spend all that time with children? Brilliant. No work stress, no standing on a packed tube scuttling into their little cubes to churn out another document which, in the grand scheme of life, is pretty meaningless, scuttle home, try desperately for some 'quality' time before little Johnny falls asleep, then get out blackberry and carry on. If you AS A FAMILY UNIT can afford not to - why? I have 'lived the dream', am/was on partnership track. And I tell you what - it means sod all compared to watching my little man smile at me in the morning, or when I take him to the park etc. I realise that this is my take on things, but to call SAHMs quasi prostitutes is fcking insulting and just shows what an ignorant, miserable, bitter old woman you are. Rant over

Ooh greatballs - that's what I said but you said it so much better

Greatballs, I get that you're responding to Xenia's fairly inflammatory remarks, but is this:

"I personally think SAHMs have the last laugh - getting to spend all that time with children? Brilliant. No work stress, no standing on a packed tube scuttling into their little cubes to churn out another document which, in the grand scheme of life, is pretty meaningless, scuttle home, try desperately for some 'quality' time before little Johnny falls asleep, then get out blackberry and carry on."

particularly helpful or sisterly either? You're being pretty derogatory about other people's life choices too you know. Surely the best response in the face of Xenia's comments is more "I'm happy with what I do, I don't agree with your analysis of it", not bashing other women who choose to do differently?

Greenwich B - the BLP thing is called Lawyers On Demand and it's not as great as it sounds! (bitter experience)

quite right jinty - my apologies

I was made (unofficially) redundant from v big City firm after the firm found out I was TTC (I miscarried at work ). They didn't go through a formal redundancy procedure, they just paid us off.

The partners was pretty honest with me (unofficially) as to the reasons and paid me and others off to go quietly and shut up. I would affect their, under pressure, bottom line if I took maternity leave and then asked to come back part time/fixed hours. They had two people off of ML at the time. Funnily enough, the other five in my team who were all were all women of childbearing age in relationships. Go figure

...the point being, there was no sisterhood when we affected the bottom line. It's what's best for the individual.

greatballs - sorry, was that last post responding to me? If so, thanks v much. I recognise the provocation you were under .

yes ribena - was to you - you are of course right. the only point i really, calmly want to get across is that all members of a family unit must do whats best for the family in any given c/stances...the quasi prostitue comment just made my blood boil....