Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I didn't say her employment is a luxury. I wasn't even talking about her choosing to work. I was basing my judgement on her returning to work one day after having had a baby, and then proceeding to complain how hard it is to 'have it all'. FWIW, the very phrase 'having it all', as well as the fact that she's writing up blog posts, sort of points to the fact that they're not likely to be a struggling family wearing themselves thin trying to put food on the table. She wouldn't be writing about trying to 'have it all' and worried about chipped polish if that was the case, she'd be too busy surviving. I'm assuming she is not self employed as she refers to conference calls, and I have not heard of employers who demand that a woman be back to work next day after giving birth, nor do I think it would even be legal. Therefore I'm inclined to think it was at least partly a choice on her behalf. I'm also judging the fact that it seems extremely short sighted to be having a child, a second child no less, without factoring in at least a month for the natural and necessary recuperation and bonding for mom and baby. Like I said, what would they have done if she ended up having to stay at the hospital?
I am sort of judging, and that's because what comes through to me, in her post (and sorry, by writing a public post she opens herself up to public opinion, so I don't apologize for having it), is that she expects popping out a baby to be something she does 'on the side', while not taking a second away from her 'main' life which includes career. To me that is a weird and distorted view. Having a baby is a major life-changing event. It's something to be planned carefully, and that includes proper recuperation, the way you would treat recovering from surgery - except more important because there's another human being involved! It should not be treated like going in to get your teeth cleaned. Those very first days should be spent resting, and bonding, and having a ton of physical contact with your newborn. She doesn't even seem to be worried about missing that while taking conference calls, she's concerned about chipped toenails.
Her situation is very different than a working mother who returns to work after maternity leave, having spent those first few weeks with her baby, and having arranged for quality childcare.
I pretty much agree. Even if they need her income to keep her husband's business afloat, there had to be an extreme lack of planning for her not to be able to take a week or 2 or 6 off. Either that or she's thriving on the chaos, as some do.
and I'm wondering how much of the article is even true. We all know about "poetic license". Maybe she thinks this story endears her to her readers but according to the responses in this thread...not so much.
Jeebus..... seeing all this sparring about SAHM vs WOTH makes me glad all over again that all of my kids have fur.....
I had heard of the "mommy wars," but never actually seen it in action.....
PS... PLEASE don't take this as an indictment of those of you who chose to have children.... It is NOT and I would hate for it to be misconstrued as such!!
and I'm wondering how much of the article is even true. We all know about "poetic license". Maybe she thinks this story endears her to her readers but according to the responses in this thread...not so much.
I didn't say her employment is a luxury. I wasn't even talking about her choosing to work. I was basing my judgement on her returning to work one day after having had a baby, and then proceeding to complain how hard it is to 'have it all'. FWIW, the very phrase 'having it all', as well as the fact that she's writing up blog posts, sort of points to the fact that they're not likely to be a struggling family wearing themselves thin trying to put food on the table. She wouldn't be writing about trying to 'have it all' and worried about chipped polish if that was the case, she'd be too busy surviving. I'm assuming she is not self employed as she refers to conference calls, and I have not heard of employers who demand that a woman be back to work next day after giving birth, nor do I think it would even be legal. Therefore I'm inclined to think it was at least partly a choice on her behalf. I'm also judging the fact that it seems extremely short sighted to be having a child, a second child no less, without factoring in at least a month for the natural and necessary recuperation and bonding for mom and baby. Like I said, what would they have done if she ended up having to stay at the hospital?
I am sort of judging, and that's because what comes through to me, in her post (and sorry, by writing a public post she opens herself up to public opinion, so I don't apologize for having it), is that she expects popping out a baby to be something she does 'on the side', while not taking a second away from her 'main' life which includes career. To me that is a weird and distorted view. Having a baby is a major life-changing event. It's something to be planned carefully, and that includes proper recuperation, the way you would treat recovering from surgery - except more important because there's another human being involved! It should not be treated like going in to get your teeth cleaned. Those very first days should be spent resting, and bonding, and having a ton of physical contact with your newborn. She doesn't even seem to be worried about missing that while taking conference calls, she's concerned about chipped toenails.
Her situation is very different than a working mother who returns to work after maternity leave, having spent those first few weeks with her baby, and having arranged for quality childcare.
1. She works from home. So she did spend the first few weeks with her child.
2. Legal? FMLA only applies to employers with more than 50 employees. So if she is working for a small firm, than yes, they can absolutely and LEGALLY require her to be back at work.
3. FMLA is unpaid. She is a reporter so is likely technically free-lance aka self-employed, meaning there is no paid sick days, leave, etc.
4. The bolded is a ridiculous claim to make when a large proportion of our country are low income families who cant afford for a parent to take off a month unpaid. Based on the "shoulds" in that sentence poor people should just never have children.
5. Giving birth is not like having surgery for all women, probably not even for most, unless you actually had surgery like a c-section or episiotomy. I was physically fine the next day after having mine. My best friend had a 10lb baby her first time around and was physically recovered in the same time frame. My tiredness came from lack of good sleep at night not from some sort of physical trauma.
6. I am just going to say it. I didn't bond with my daughter the day she was born. The first day I slept off my pain meds, took a bunch of pictures, dealt with visits from too many relatives, and didn't have any of the reality of her as person set in until the weeks and months to follow. And the kicker is, my daughter slept for almost two days herself. Just because you bonded in the first day does not mean everyone does and also does not mean that people who bonded later did anything less than perfect.
People can "discuss" their expectations on parenting until the cows come home, but when push comes to shove and that baby shows up, the "expectations" fly right out the window in the face of outside demands on time and attention. Those earnest, sincere discussions between partners prior to the wedding/baby on "how we will split everything 50/50", etc., are so well-meant, but until you are bleary-eyed with fatigue, trying to finish up an important research project for a client at 1:00 am when the baby refuses to sleep, and you are typing the report one-handed while holding the baby in the other arm, and your spouse has to be up at 4 am for a conference call with Japan, that "50/50" is charmingly optimistic.
It will never be 50/50. At some point, it's going to be 0/100. At another point, it's going to be 100/0. or 70/30, or 25/75.
I had no idea that I would be a SAHM. Never in the plans, not even once. As a child of the 60's and 70's, with both parents working, I just assumed that I would work while raising a family. So, when I became a SAHM, that "50/50" went out the door -- when it came to the kids, and when it came to my earning power. I learned to allow myself plenty of time for consulting projects, because a report I could do in two days pre-baby suddenly turned into 2 weeks. My husband was a very hands-on dad when he got home and on weekends -- for him, it was relaxation, he used the kid-time as his decompression time. He eventually became self-employed, and then we were BOTH at home full time!
But over the long term -- we both contributed to our family in our own way, we both raised two wonderful kids, and wonders of wonders, I re-entered the work force and am fully employed because I CHOOSE to be. My husband took four years off to pursue his Ph.D. -- that was HIS choice, and I supported it fully. (Men should have choices, too, don't you think?)
Great, being a stay at home mom works for you. Ok, but so what?
None, of that remotely discounts anything I said nor certainly not the notion that couples should discuss their expectations. And please show where I said anywhere that things had to be 50/50 all the time?
People in this country seem less willing today than ever to live more simply and "unplugged." It really has become the goal of most to make money and have "perceived success." That generally takes more than one income to do. However, people do not have to live this hamster wheel existence. It is entirely a choice.
When people begin to live simply, quit worrying about having the best and being best, and what everyone thinks, all that stress suddenly abates. This change, however, comes not only with a loss of some creature comforts, but also with a social price, such as feeling "different" or isolated. Most people are not willing to pay that price. The possibility of social rejection on the grounds of an alternative lifestyle is scary to most people.
No one is saying that a woman has to choose between a career and family. She can still have both, in my opinion. But my point is that not everyone has to have this high-octane career in order to make enough money to live in the biggest house in the best school district so that the kids have hope of one day being part of the same stressed-out rat race.
6. I am just going to say it. I didn't bond with my daughter the day she was born. The first day I slept off my pain meds, took a bunch of pictures, dealt with visits from too many relatives, and didn't have any of the reality of her as person set in until the weeks and months to follow. And the kicker is, my daughter slept for almost two days herself. Just because you bonded in the first day does not mean everyone does and also does not mean that people who bonded later did anything less than perfect.
You're not the first woman I've heard say this. And if I'm honest with myself, I'm not sure I would be a person that "instantly bonds" either.
A woman wrote a book a while back about how people aren't honest about what it's really like to have kids. I can't remember the title-- it was something along the lines of "What mothers won't admit" or something like that. The point of the book was that she was shocked at how ambivalent she felt about her first kid and how she felt like she was an awful person because of it, until other mothers told her they didn't feel like the experience was a Snuggies commercial either.
1. She works from home. So she did spend the first few weeks with her child.
2. Legal? FMLA only applies to employers with more than 50 employees. So if she is working for a small firm, than yes, they can absolutely and LEGALLY require her to be back at work.
3. FMLA is unpaid. She is a reporter so is likely technically free-lance aka self-employed, meaning there is no paid sick days, leave, etc.
4. The bolded is a ridiculous claim to make when a large proportion of our country are low income families who cant afford for a parent to take off a month unpaid. Based on the "shoulds" in that sentence poor people should just never have children.
5. Giving birth is not like having surgery for all women, probably not even for most, unless you actually had surgery like a c-section or episiotomy. I was physically fine the next day after having mine. My best friend had a 10lb baby her first time around and was physically recovered in the same time frame. My tiredness came from lack of good sleep at night not from some sort of physical trauma.
6. I am just going to say it. I didn't bond with my daughter the day she was born. The first day I slept off my pain meds, took a bunch of pictures, dealt with visits from too many relatives, and didn't have any of the reality of her as person set in until the weeks and months to follow. And the kicker is, my daughter slept for almost two days herself. Just because you bonded in the first day does not mean everyone does and also does not mean that people who bonded later did anything less than perfect.
The author did say she popped a stitch, so she presumably had an episiotomy. Even if they were dirt poor and she didn't get sick pay or disability pay, with the smallest bit of planning, she could have taken a few days off. Maybe not 12 weeks or 6 weeks, but 1 or 2 weeks surely.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
