Pregnancy/Maternity Questions

[formant]

Very strange how you equate amount of income or spare cash with how good or crappy your life would be.

There are people out there who struggle day to day but are perfectly happy yet you seem to think that being able to pay the bills and have extra would still be crappy.

Must admit I am surprised you married a lecturer with limited earning potential because you seem a little too focused on income and cash I must admit.

Not married yet. Financial difficulties put a strain on any relationship, as does financial dependence. That's not something you can just ignore for idealism's sake. I have zero interest in the wealthy provider type. I can and will provide for myself.

[formant]

Trying to remember from when my Mrs had the same. If I remember correctly, your not even allowed to drive for certain amount of time, are you?

Lucky that I don't have to. Even when I do go into the office I go by train. Not fond of driving after years of excessive daily commuting.

[formant]

I dont think anyone is saying you should be a stay at home mum. Its just a fact that you're having a baby and people here know how it goes whether you like it or not.

I happen to also know several people who went back to full-time office employment or even teaching after 2 weeks (not uncommon across the pond, where paid maternity leave barely exists). That's not what I'm planning to do. I plan to work from home, no more but probably initially less (if feasible) than my contractual 20/hrs a week. I don't know a single person who's been chained to their bed for weeks after birth, so I'd like to say that scenario is pretty unlikely.

[formant]

Yeh. But the fact of the matter is that women have the babies not the guy. Women do the breastfeeding also.

If your going to have kids then the woman HAS to the above. Then SOMEONE has to the rest of the stuff be it the guy or the woman. If the guy stays home to look after the baby then fair enough.

BUT, you both will not be able to focus 100% on career/earnings AND have children. Simple fact of life.

Last time I checked exclusive breastfeeding is not a legal requirement.

Working part-time and trying not to lose this pretty awesome contract to me does not equal focusing 100% on career/earnings.

[formant]

Yep, thats how it works in this modern world of ours, but formant here is ready to buck the trend and hope it works out for her. Some of the girls have given her the answers that she wanted to hear and all is good in her world. I hope she comes back and updates us on her progress so we have a case study for future threads.

The only answers I came here for were the ones in my original post regarding notification periods. The moral drama was brought on by people like you. I don't need assurance nor am I particularly fussed by those who think that what I'm doing isn't doable. Fact is, many before me have done it and christ, if something does go wrong then I can still deal with the consequences at that point.

What did I expect? This place is bound to be full of main-earner males with stay-at-home partners, who couldn't possibly imagine that it's not all hormones but a good portion of personal choice when women give up on their careers once they start to reproduce. Just admit that you like that traditionalist distribution and feel defensive whenever that's challenged.

[psychocandy]

LOL. Nope. Like I said. If my mrs earnt more than me I'd happily stay at home with the kids. Cant fault it. :-)

[formant]

LOL. Nope. Like I said. If my mrs earnt more than me I'd happily stay at home with the kids. Cant fault it. :-)

Glad to hear it - that wasn't aimed at you anyway. Most men would have issues with their partner earning more, let alone the idea of being a stay-at-home dad. I find that silly, but you hear it everywhere. (there are about as many women who wouldn't consider a lesser earning partner of course)

When working full-time perm I earn more or less the same as my other half. Full-time contract I'd make quite a bit more. But full-time is unlikely to happen before next summer or autumn anyway.

[RasputinDude]

that wasn't aimed at you anyway.

Oooh. Me? Is it me? Please Miss? I haven't had a turn for ages.



Sorry. Couldn't resist.

[formant]

Oooh. Me? Is it me? Please Miss? I haven't had a turn for ages.



Sorry. Couldn't resist.

Hint: It was a pretty direct response to the quote I posted.

Other than that....if the shoe fits...*shrug*

[formant]

Our preconceptions are shaped by what's most common in our environment - If you do a google on the topic of when to return to work you'll find very different views on US sites/discussions . Maternity leave there seldomly extends past 6 weeks, but often not even that's allowed without the risk of losing one's job. Taking only two weeks doesn't seem to be uncommon there at all, depending on the type of work (and I probably have the ideal type of work for that). Lurking over at Netmums (UK), plenty of UK mothers have also successfully returned to work after 2-4 weeks, often in physically much 'tougher' environments like retail, often no doubt pushed by financial necessity. It really isn't just a movie or tv scenario.

So yeah, I think the UK and European perception as to how much time is 'necessary' strongly correlates with what's allowed and the norm in standard employment. And for every 'my wife totally changed her mind and never went back to work' you'll easily find a mother saying just how bored she got with maternity leave and how for the next child she wants to return to work much earlier. Having spoken to a number of female friends and acquaintances who have had children, neither of them state that they would not have been physically or mentally able to do my type of job after 2 weeks - two of them (freelance WFH researchers/journalists) have done exactly that in fact and coped fine. So, seriously, unless I suffer from some seriously horrible complications, I have no reason to expect this to go completely belly up.