Time magazine had an article recently on super achieving moms on Wall Street and their stay-at-home husbands. The same author did a follow up piece on her blog that broke it down even further about being a house husband to a power mom on Wall Street. Her conclusion and the comments on the Time website offer insight into both sides. They also provide a compelling argument for tort reform and a good excuse to lovingly smack any lawyer who thinks that they don’t earn enough money.
The author of the piece, Vivia Chen writes a blog about lawyers and their lives. It’s kind of like the Jackson Browne song except not as catchy. In her post she tells the story of many Wall Street power women embarrassed or hesitant to talk about their husbands staying home with the kids. She points out that the arrangement might be more proudly displayed if the women made LOTS of money.
One woman she interviewed said that the problem might be that women lawyers don’t make enough money to justify having the father stay at home. “Making a half a million to 1 million doesn’t compare with what bankers bring home”, one attorney said.
In what world is a lawyer earning $500,000 not enough to have one parent stay at home? I know, New York City is expensive. If that’s the case then move to another city where you can earn $350,000, purchase a big house, have a much lower cost of living and have a parent stay at home.
Those parents, made the choice to put their career and living situations first and that is awesome. Just like you might move closer to the office so that you can get home quicker; every decision has pros and cons. In the case of the power women they’re feeling a bit of the same thing that a stay at home dad feels when they’re on the playground.
To be clear, it’s not that a parent has to stay at home. Many families don’t have one that stays at home and that’s great for them. However, the focus of the article was a parent that stays at home and how the women deal with it.
Chen’s article is right on target. It’s the attitude of the people she interviewed that boggles my mind.
My mind was shaken even more by reading the comments on the Time magazine article. I know, the comment section is where passive aggressive people try to score cheap points, but sometimes those trolls are just so stupid and just can’t be ignored.
Some of the comments are from men stating that they want to be a stay at home husband so that they can watch hockey. One mother is talking about her daughter’s lazy husband who stays at home. Comments about men getting their balls back, respect, sexual tension and other mind numbing stuff that you shouldn’t read because you have more important things to do.
The point is, stay at home, don’t stay at home. If you’re going to have children talk about how you’ll be raising them before you even start conceiving them. Do you want to stay at home? Do you want more family income so that the children can go to a private school? Whatever you decided for your family is awesome and great because you decided it.
Now if you didn’t think things out then that’s a problem. Children are expensive. In the words of Michael Jackson, “If you can’t feed the baby, then don’t have the baby”. He didn’t include any lyrics about whiny lawyers who complain about earning $500,000 a year, unless you count Smooth Criminal, which is also appropriate.
Facebook
Twitter
Flickr
GooglePlus
Youtube