Single working mum struggling!!

Pods1987

Looking for some advice please. I'm a single mum to my gorgeous son who is 6. I have worked part time since he was 2 but nearly a year ago now I made the decision to better my career and got promoted to a full time higher position at work. I really enjoy the job and the new challenge but I have this major doubt in the back of my mind that I'm not doing the right thing.
I've always been a hands on mum and love spending quality time with my son. I thought as time went on this feeling would shift but it's still there!! Am I doing the right thing? I'll never get these years back?
Financially I am doing a lot better and it's great being able to afford holidays and little luxuries here and there but I'm still not satisfied!! I miss doing school runs, I miss doing his homework with him, I miss just sitting there with him and not thinking of the million things I have to do to get organised for the following day. I'm constantly rushing from here to there and I feel like I'm drowning!!!
I have great support from my family with collecting him after school and his father is also involved in his life in a big way.

I know what a blessing a child is, he is everything to me and I feel like this time I will never get with him again!!
My home doesn't feel like a home anymore, it's just somewhere we sleep and eat.

I've spoken to friends and family about how I feel and they all say the same thing, that 'it's hard but your doing this for him'.

I would prob just get by on a part time job with benefits etc but I don't want to rely on the state either.

Please help, any advice appreciated .

mushypeas12

It frustrates me reading a post like this and women then looking for equal rights in the work place. They can't have it both ways.

Lux23

mushypeas12 wrote: »

It frustrates me reading a post like this and women then looking for equal rights in the work place. They can't have it both ways.

Excuse me? Being a parent doesn't mean that you forego equal rights in the workplace. The OP is talking about something that many parents struggle with. A parent should absolutely be entitled to a decent job and be able to participate in the childrens' life as much as possible.

OP, I suppose you have to work out if missing out on the day to day things with your child is worth it. If you don't think it is then maybe you need to think about cutting back your hours so you can be home more. Are you sure this isn't just guilt you're feeling?

SF12

I am a working mum

I figure I'll never lose the guilt feeling.Ever. But as your son gets bigger, you'd be left sitting at home more and more and (I feel), in 10 years time, you'll be sitting there with nothing to do while he's out most of the day.

You could try managing work slightly differently - maybe discussing your options for working from home, or reducing your hours slightly (spread a 35 hour week over 5 days) or something.

As for the last poster, we don't "want it both ways". I get angry reading posts like yours to be honest. Do you have kids? This is a woman's life. These are the decisions and choices we are faced with.As a society, women are educated and encouraged to engage in the work force. To expect all women to sit at home once they have a child is not on. All we want is a bit of understanding from employers that 9-6 5 days a week will not suit all mothers all the time, and that a bit of flexibility goes a long way. If we are going to operate on the basis that women should have kids and stay at home, then we might aswell stop educating women after the age of 12 or so. Because really, that's what the implication is - why pour all that money into educating girls to third level when they might have kids down the line?

Flexibility is all we are looking for, and not forever either. And honestly, if you don't have kids then you really, really don't understand.

martinsvi

I grew up without ever seeing my parents, mom was out the door at 7AM, working multiple jobs, back at late-o-clock.. dad was at sea abroad. Seeing how they struggle just to provide for me and my sister, I think that made me a better person. From very early days I realized the value of hard work and effort, value of education and opportunities. I'm not sure if part time sit at home mum can be a role-model for anything these days, we need to show kids that food on the table is earned not just received "due to the circumstances", it appears that less and less people understand this

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

SF12

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I agree, sorry, I didn't mean to come across like that. I know my own other half would love to spend more time with our little one too and would like more leave to spend with her.

P_1

Is there any possibility of getting some kind of flextime arrangement in the job? It should never have to be a black/white choice between one or the other.

bikermartin

SF12 wrote: »

I am a working mum

I figure I'll never lose the guilt feeling.Ever. But as your son gets bigger, you'd be left sitting at home more and more and (I feel), in 10 years time, you'll be sitting there with nothing to do while he's out most of the day.

You could try managing work slightly differently - maybe discussing your options for working from home, or reducing your hours slightly (spread a 35 hour week over 5 days) or something.

As for the last poster, we don't "want it both ways". I get angry reading posts like yours to be honest. Do you have kids? This is a woman's life. These are the decisions and choices we are faced with.As a society, women are educated and encouraged to engage in the work force. To expect all women to sit at home once they have a child is not on. All we want is a bit of understanding from employers that 9-6 5 days a week will not suit all mothers all the time, and that a bit of flexibility goes a long way. If we are going to operate on the basis that women should have kids and stay at home, then we might aswell stop educating women after the age of 12 or so. Because really, that's what the implication is - why pour all that money into educating girls to third level when they might have kids down the line?

Flexibility is all we are looking for, and not forever either. And honestly, if you don't have kids then you really, really don't understand.

Do yo not think an employer owes you something ? There is any number of people out there willing to work and not putting restrictions on their availability. I worked with people in the past that tried this on ...... but they eventually left as they could not deal with the workplace enviroment anymore. Why would the OP not go self employed/ consulting if they have confidence in getting the work.

And this is an aside note of what I see happening in my road. Parent down as single, claiming OPF and working on the black market :mad::mad:

I will at some stage report them, I have little money, and I am not going to sit back and watch theese people have a happy life at the tax payers expense. Theese people would not work a real job and they would not hack having to go to work each day :mad:

bikermartin

mushypeas12 wrote: »

It frustrates me reading a post like this and women then looking for equal rights in the work place. They can't have it both ways.

Well said

Lux23

Blueshirts out in force today.

bikermartin

Lux23 wrote: »

Blueshirts out in force today.

maybe you will find an employer that will give you nice handy hours that fit in with family/wschool times....... ha ha ....... good luck in finding them :P

Lux23

I happen to have an employer who offers flexitime, many do. I don't have kids but I understand that having kids means that your work/life balance will change somewhat.

Mrs OBumble

Lux23 wrote: »

Blueshirts out in force today.

Mod-Note: Less of this please.

There's no problem with free and frank discussion of this issue, from a range of perspectives. But keep it civil.

duploelabs

I started my own business since january, I work 7 days a week and I actually see my kids more than when I 'worked for the man'. Create yourself a business that means you can work around your kid's hours and be a better parent. I know it sounds like an oxymoron and I am absolutely knackered but I've no doubt that I'm a better single dad for it for my two kids, and feel better for myself running my own business.

endacl

mushypeas12 wrote: »

It frustrates me reading a post like this and women then looking for equal rights in the work place. They can't have it both ways.

You see, the thing is, what you're whinging about would benefit everybody. Working dads should also have an expectation of a healthy work/life balance, and time to spend with their young children.

You're kinda missing the essential point of 'equality'.

vertmann

When I was a bit older than your son, my mum went back to work. At the time I'd rather have had her at home all to myself all of the time. When I look back with adult eyes I see an awful lot of positives. The main one is that it taught me and my brother to fend for ourselves and gave us invaluable life skills. I never really had my mum around to help with my homework and I'm glad. It meant I had to figure things out for myself and led on to my getting a good leaving and a good degree. I really don't get why parents have to hover and help their kids with their homework, I really don't. Don't forget that kids are resilient. Your son's not going to suffer if he's collected by other relatives and has to spend a few hours with them. I've got a lot of nice childhood memories of the grandparents/aunts/uncles who minded us and the fun we had with our cousins.

mitresize5

Hey OP,

If it makes you feel any better then this isn't a struggle for you cause your a single mum.

It is a working parents problem.

Wanderer2010

SF12 wrote: »

I am a working mum

I figure I'll never lose the guilt feeling.Ever. But as your son gets bigger, you'd be left sitting at home more and more and (I feel), in 10 years time, you'll be sitting there with nothing to do while he's out most of the day.

You could try managing work slightly differently - maybe discussing your options for working from home, or reducing your hours slightly (spread a 35 hour week over 5 days) or something.

As for the last poster, we don't "want it both ways". I get angry reading posts like yours to be honest. Do you have kids? This is a woman's life. These are the decisions and choices we are faced with.As a society, women are educated and encouraged to engage in the work force. To expect all women to sit at home once they have a child is not on. All we want is a bit of understanding from employers that 9-6 5 days a week will not suit all mothers all the time, and that a bit of flexibility goes a long way. If we are going to operate on the basis that women should have kids and stay at home, then we might aswell stop educating women after the age of 12 or so. Because really, that's what the implication is - why pour all that money into educating girls to third level when they might have kids down the line?

Flexibility is all we are looking for, and not forever either. And honestly, if you don't have kids then you really, really don't understand.

But that's discrimination against people who don't have children. Nobody bar you cares that you have kids. I don't, your fellow workers don't and your company definitely doesn't. You are hired to do a job under the company hours and if you can't do that job then either get another job or stay at home with your kids. For years women have shouted for equal pay and equal rights which I agree with 100 percent but you have to do equal work and having a child does not remove you of that responsibility.
I work in an office where a few of the women are constantly giving out that the boss should be more "understanding" of women with kids and they look for half days, fob the work off to other people and pull the typical woman card of crying or getting upset if put under any pressure. Frankly this isn't Jerry a Springer park your home life at the door and get on with the job. And please don't patronise me and say I obviously don't have kids. No I don't but that's irrelevant I have a lot of of other pressures in my life but I know my workplace hired me for a reason and I have to just get on with it. If a man got upset and wanted flexibility to collect kids he wouldn't get half the sympathy a woman gets. Double standards...

mushypeas12

I am most likely going to be setting up my own business within the next five years all going well! The industry sector I'm in is roughly split 50:50 between male and female workers! I can gaurantee you I will not be employing any female workers! And it's not being sexist, it's just me making a good business decision to maximise my profits.

Wanderer2010

mushypeas12 wrote: »

I am most likely going to be setting up my own business within the next five years all going well! The industry sector I'm in is roughly split 50:50 between male and female workers! I can gaurantee you I will not be employing any female workers! And it's not being sexist, it's just me making a good business decision to maximise my profits.

Wow that probably won't elicit a good response maybe specify as to why you won't hire them? Not being funny but being a man doesn't automatically make you a reliable worker

oisinog

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

But that's discrimination against people who don't have children. Nobody bar you cares that you have kids. I don't, your fellow workers don't and your company definitely doesn't. You are hired to do a job under the company hours and if you can't do that job then either get another job or stay at home with your kids. For years women have shouted for equal pay and equal rights which I agree with 100 percent but you have to do equal work and having a child does not remove you of that responsibility.
I work in an office where a few of the women are constantly giving out that the boss should be more "understanding" of women with kids and they look for half days, fob the work off to other people and pull the typical woman card of crying or getting upset if put under any pressure. Frankly this isn't Jerry a Springer park your home life at the door and get on with the job. And please don't patronise me and say I obviously don't have kids. No I don't but that's irrelevant I have a lot of of other pressures in my life but I know my workplace hired me for a reason and I have to just get on with it. If a man got upset and wanted flexibility to collect kids he wouldn't get half the sympathy a woman gets. Double standards...

You are getting it wrong most modern employers understand if you have a happy workforce you have a productive workforce. I was told recently by a union secretary in my work that it was to accommodating of staff and has resulted in over 250 different working patterns. I personally work my 35 hours a week over 4 days to spend time with my daughter. My wife would live to do that but she is a manager and needs to be at work 5 or 6 days a week.

December2012

What you should do OP, is try and maximise the family time you do have. If you get home in time before he goes to bed, maybe play a board game together, build some Lego, or do some colouring in. Something you can do together.

How are your weekends? Do you spend time doing something with your son?

Diziet

mushypeas12 wrote: »

I am most likely going to be setting up my own business within the next five years all going well! The industry sector I'm in is roughly split 50:50 between male and female workers! I can gaurantee you I will not be employing any female workers! And it's not being sexist, it's just me making a good business decision to maximise my profits.

It's both sexist and unlawful. And you are of course reducing your choice of talented people by 50%, so I am not convinced it even makes financial sense.

Lux23

mushypeas12 wrote: »

I am most likely going to be setting up my own business within the next five years all going well! The industry sector I'm in is roughly split 50:50 between male and female workers! I can gaurantee you I will not be employing any female workers! And it's not being sexist, it's just me making a good business decision to maximise my profits.

Why won't you hire any female employees? Why do you think your profits will be maximized by hiring only men?

SF12

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

But that's discrimination against people who don't have children. Nobody bar you cares that you have kids. I don't, your fellow workers don't and your company definitely doesn't. You are hired to do a job under the company hours and if you can't do that job then either get another job or stay at home with your kids. For years women have shouted for equal pay and equal rights which I agree with 100 percent but you have to do equal work and having a child does not remove you of that responsibility.
I work in an office where a few of the women are constantly giving out that the boss should be more "understanding" of women with kids and they look for half days, fob the work off to other people and pull the typical woman card of crying or getting upset if put under any pressure. Frankly this isn't Jerry a Springer park your home life at the door and get on with the job. And please don't patronise me and say I obviously don't have kids. No I don't but that's irrelevant I have a lot of of other pressures in my life but I know my workplace hired me for a reason and I have to just get on with it. If a man got upset and wanted flexibility to collect kids he wouldn't get half the sympathy a woman gets. Double standards...

I don't want anyone to care that I have kids. In fact, I feel that I have to prove myself twice as much to an employer BECAUSE I have kids. I work a full week. My boss and my fellow workers do have kids. I do not do the "typical woman" card of crying or fobbing off work. What type of women do you work with?!

I will be patronising I'm afraid. You genuinely don't understand until you have kids. To say your life turns itself upside down is an understatement. Cliche, but there you have it, because it's true. A year ago I would have said exactly the same thing as you. In fact, today I still say it about some of the women that I work with. But today, it's tempered with the knowledge that I now know exactly what is involved when you are working and have kids, and that I do do my damnedest to try not to let my family life impact on my work. By flexibility, I don't mean that a company turns itself inside out to suit each individual. I mean it could offer a couple of options, depending on your business, such as allowing employees to work a 30-35 hour week spread over 5 days, or allowing flexitime as starting at 7 and finishing at 3:30/starting at 10, finishing at 6:30, that kind of thing. If the couple of options that are available don't suit people, then yes, they need to go find somewhere else with different options that might suit them better. But most people will actually meet their employer halfway on the arrangements, if they are in any way reasonable employees.

I would argue that men don't get the sympathy, because men have created the situation in society where it is seen as the woman's job to take care of kids. Having said that, look at the men that replied to this thread about their working situations with kids - clearly it is no longer a "woman" thing, but more and more is becoming a "parent" thing.

As for it being discrimination against people who don't have kids - how is it? There's nothing stopping anyone from availing of flexi - time hours (everyone does where I am, kids or no kids), or working a four day week if they can afford it. There's just no need for many people to even consider reduced hours before they have kids, so they usually don't.

Anyway, none of this is helping the OP with her problem, so maybe it should be saved for another forum.

Ken Shamrock

mushypeas12 wrote: »

I am most likely going to be setting up my own business within the next five years all going well! The industry sector I'm in is roughly split 50:50 between male and female workers! I can gaurantee you I will not be employing any female workers! And it's not being sexist, it's just me making a good business decision to maximise my profits.

Hahahahaha you poor sod. My office consists of 70% female and 30% male in a male dominated industry, yet the output from the females are much higher than that of the males. Their workrate and organisation are much higher.

This is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard and I would be very very surprised If you ever managed to start your own business with that attitude.

mushypeas12

Lux23 wrote: »

Why won't you hire any female employees? Why do you think your profits will be maximized by hiring only men?

Look, I know there is a chance if I take on a female employee she could be exceptional and conversely I could take on a male employee who could be a disaster. However, from my experience so far from working in the industry there is a far greater risk of the female employee turning out to be a poor performer especially if they have young children.

You asked me why I won't hire any female employees. Here are my reasons:

1. The extra headache and cost to me regarding maternity leave, hiring temporary replacement staff, time off for looking after her children, etc. I'm running a business, I don't care about her children.
2. In a lot of circumstances when women have kids, that becomes their priority. You could have the most ambitious, career driven woman but then she has a child and she feels "guilt" if she tries to advance her carer at the expense of not spending quality time with her child. This seems to be what is happening with the OP. I want to hire ambitious people who want to progress their careers and not unmotivated stagnant ones.
3. Men are way easier to deal with. You ask a man to do something he does it. You ask a woman, she will find problems where there aren't any.
4. The industry I'm in is quite analytical and mathematical. IMO men are better in these areas. This is proven with males outperforming females in maths and physics because you can't learn off material for these subjects. You either have a natural ability for it or you don't.


Obviously, as I said previously, a lot of men are useless. However, by conducting rigorous recruitment and interviewing techniques, I would mitigate the risk of hiring one greatly.
I don't think what I'm going to do is unlawful as long as I can justify I picked the best candidate that was the best fit for my business.

SF12

mushypeas12 wrote: »

Look, I know there is a chance if I take on a female employee she could be exceptional and conversely I could take on a male employee who could be a disaster. However, from my experience so far from working in the industry there is a far greater risk of the female employee turning out to be a poor performer especially if they have young children.

You asked me why I won't hire any female employees. Here are my reasons:

1. The extra headache and cost to me regarding maternity leave, hiring temporary replacement staff, time off for looking after her children, etc. I'm running a business, I don't care about her children.
2. In a lot of circumstances when women have kids, that becomes their priority. You could have the most ambitious, career driven woman but then she has a child and she feels "guilt" if she tries to advance her carer at the expense of not spending quality time with her child. This seems to be what is happening with the OP. I want to hire ambitious people who want to progress their careers and not unmotivated stagnant ones.
3. Men are way easier to deal with. You ask a man to do something he does it. You ask a woman, she will find problems where there aren't any.
4. The industry I'm in is quite analytical and mathematical. IMO men are better in these areas. This is proven with males outperforming females in maths and physics because you can't learn off material for these subjects. You either have a natural ability for it or you don't.

Oh dear.

Humans reproduce. That is an unalienable fact of life. Any good business will build in allowances for that, rather than seeing it as a "hassle". Trying to stop younger lads showing up drunk for work on Mondays, or needing to leave early for sports training - or needing to take time off to share minding their sick child with their partner - could be a hell of a lot more hassle.

Your 4th point is actually shocking. I believe studies have proven quite the opposite. Are you suggesting that only men have a natural ability for maths? Were you brought up in 1950s Ireland? Did I mention I'm an engineer?

Studies have shown that economies that have more involvement from working women do better than those that have less women in workplaces. One could probably infer (and there is likely data to back it up) that successful companies have a good mix of sexes.

Women only have young kids for a brief period of their lives. You have a woman with a 45 year working career (these days) - maybe 10 years max of that is spent with really young kids. And out of those 10, only 2/3/4 non-subsequent years (depending on the number of kids they have) will be spent with tinies. It's not forever.

When it's your wife/partner/girlfriend facing an attitude like that from her employer about your child, it's likely your understanding will suddenly change drastically.

LegacyUser

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

should be more "understanding" of women with kids and they look for half days, fob the work off to other people and pull the typical woman card of crying or getting upset if put under any pressure. Frankly this isn't Jerry a Springer park your home life at the door and get on with the job. And please don't patronise me and say I obviously don't have kids. No I don't but that's irrelevant I have a lot of of other pressures in my life but I know my workplace hired me for a reason and I have to just get on with it. If a man got upset and wanted flexibility to collect kids he wouldn't get half the sympathy a woman gets. Double standards...

I work in an office where none of the women have kids and all of the men do and all have taken half days, left early, come in late etc etc in relation to their kids but I work for a Danish company which means both parents are treated very fairly. Only yesterday my supervisor got a call from his teenage son and he took a half day to go help him with something. I'm a woman with no kids and no plans to ever have any but I have no issue with them taking them time off like that as I get back that time back at other times when I feel like having a late morning or finishing up early.

To the OP as someone who had two full time working parents I can say I wouldn't have changed that. Myself and my brother got plenty of parent time but also plenty of time to do our own thing. Every now and then our mum would take a weeks holiday and tell us she was going to be a 'proper mammy' for a week and god did we hate that! She would drive us mad for the week just being there all the time with nothing to do with herself.

jimmycrackcorm

OP, welcome to the world of most working Fathers. Forgive me for not having any sympathy as I'm too busy providing for my kids future.