[pkaler]

Yup.

Woke up at 6am. Child 1 woke up at 7am. Dropped her off at daycare at 8am. All the other children were being dropped off by their dads, too. Full day of work ahead. Dinner at 6pm. Bath at 7pm. Bedtime and story at 8pm. Usually calls with Bangalore from 9pm to midnight but it's Labour Day over there. Sleep at midnight.

Rinse. Repeat.

[basisword]

My one concern with this is the risk of eventual burn out + mental health issues which will have its own impact on the children. Full time career + very present parent during the weekdays might just not be possible. WFH definitely helps make it significantly more possible though.

Also worth not forgetting that in most cases the fathers of millennials were a hell of a lot more present and emotionally available than their fathers etc. I'm sure we'll make plenty of our own mistakes that our children will try to avoid when their turn comes.

[mschuster91]

> Full time career + very present parent during the weekdays might just not be possible.

Guess why birth rates are crashing - and why they crash hardest in Asia, especially Japan.

[purplerabbit]

And guess why trad household structures are (still) popular in some circles

[nradov]

Those household structures aren'tpopular, they're just common when women have no other options. I have nothing against those structures, they work great for some families. But the reality is that they often force the wife into becoming an unpaid caregiver for her in-laws (who constantly criticize how she runs the household).

[mitthrowaway2]

I don't really understand this mindset that being at home and raising your kids is only something you do when forced to. For my family, if we had more options -- ie, more money -- then both of us would be stay-at-home parents. It's much more of a joy than going to work.

[lotsofpulp]

Your comment presupposes something different that nradov’s comment.

The aforementioned “trad households” do not have a financially independent wife, which is what nradov is referring to when they write

> force the wife into becoming an unpaid caregiver for her in-laws

Typically, the in laws or the husband would control the assets, and hence be able to exert more influence.

> For my family, if we had more options -- ie, more money -- then both of us would be stay-at-home parents.

In the absence of a trust fund, most women (and men) will choose to be able to fend for themselves.

[purplerabbit]

So confidently stated! My wife had ludicrous options and chose it — what draws you to this conclusion?

[illiac786]

Parent said often, not always. Counter examples is an anecdote.

I would like to see good statistics on this.

And your wife’s opinion on her choices.

[something765478]

Women are just as responsible for enforcing traditions as men are. You could just as easily argue that men are the ones with less choice; after all, it is much more socially acceptable for a woman to work than for a man to be a stay at home dad.

[mothballed]

It's also false that a stay at home has essentially resigned themselves to ruin in the event of divorce/disagreement. Someone who has been a stay at home long enough to be unemployable, in the vast majority of states, will be rewarded with alimony and if applicable child support to the point they will easily be taking about 50% of the spouse's salary for long enough to retrain.

Of course the spouse has the risk the other ex-spouse will sabotage themselves and end their incomes to avoid paying the order, at which point they may be thrown into prison if they are found. But are they worse off than the employee who can be fired at a moment's notice and go broke by a boss who isn't sabotaging himself at all and bound by no such judicial order? Maybe so, but it's not by some gigantic long shot.

[Ancapistani]

It's 2026. Barring severe manipulation/abuse, why would you choose to get married and have children if you're a woman who doesn't want to raise them?

[illiac786]

Severely missing the point here. It’s about being criticised and not recognised while doing so. It’s about lack of choice – and no, when you’re 25, you don’t know what this does to you over time. And when you finally do, it’s too late, you’re not going to run away with your kids and no job.

[walletdrainer]

Completely absurd, most good looking, well-educated Eastern European women with a plenty of options would disagree with you.

Your comment seems to imply that they’re stupid.

[michaelchisari]

Except "trad" households (full time SAHM in a nuclear home) are not traditional. Tradition is not something only the upper-middle class in a post-war boom attained for a short period of time.

Throughout human history, it was rare for only two people to raise a child, let alone one. Or for women to not bring money into the home.

Like many "trad" trends, it's based more on advertising and television than history.

[compiler-guy]

At the very least, you need a whole society of aunts and uncles and grandparents and cousins, and deep friends to truly do any kind of traditional family structure in the traditional way. Otherwise it's just emulating an extremely narrow portion of the trad that didn't exactly exist in the first place.

[mschuster91]

> At the very least, you need a whole society of aunts and uncles and grandparents and cousins, and deep friends to truly do any kind of traditional family structure in the traditional way.

"It takes a village to raise a child" was meant literally. However, the glory of capitalism required people to move to where the jobs were, turning that millennia-old principle upside down ever since industrialization. And car culture was the ultimate fatal blow, when children can't even walk their own neighborhood any more.

[krapp]

I remember when Hillary Clinton said "it takes a village to raise a child" and she was mocked by conservatives and accused of undermining parental rights and wanting governments to control families.

And when BLM made it part of their charter to encourage community support for children beyond the typical nuclear unit they were accused of a radical Marxist agenda to "destroy families."

For some reason the very concept of extended families and community engenders deep anger and hostility from some Americans, and that's odd for a nation of immigrants considering how common the "whole society of aunts and uncles and grandparents and cousins" is in the rest of the world.

[watwut]

They are way more popular among men then women. The thing is, women were mostly living that ... it is new only for men

[mitthrowaway2]

What do you mean?

[grvdrm]

Are the 9pm and later calls w/Bangalore an every day thing?

Here's my routine.

5am: wake up/coffee

5:30ish: gym

6:30ish: back, clean kitchen, take out trash, make lunch for 2 kids

7:30: nanny arrives, and I sit down at desk, and kids are now awake

8:30: walk older kid to school

9-5:30: work or whatever else. I run my own business so some days feel very busy, some the opposite. I just try to be intentional with my time.

5:30 p: start dinner

6:30 p: dinner (or earlier depending on demands)

7:30 p: kid bed time

8:15-8:30: done w/kids. time for a bit of TV or wind-down, catch up with my wife about her day for as long as I can manage to stay awake

9:30-10: bed time (ideal day)

I stopped working at night unless it is critical for a next-morning thing. That leaves me absent from some opportunities that I might otherwise get spending more time on work, but I also have more time to focus on me/marriage/non-work-life

My point in sharing is that I make space on purpose for me. Your schedule sounds (and I am presuming) like you don't have much time for you. Is that right?

[retired]

I'm in awe of people who are able to wake up in the middle of the night voluntarily!

[mekdoonggi]

Don't take this as criticism, but I wonder if you could ask the Bangalore folks to get to their point faster and get some more sleep. Very important for health.

[veryfancy]

And it’s great.