Discussion in 'The RoundTable' started by lsutiga, Jan 25, 2013.
I just thought you should feel special.
Well, I think you're full of yourself, amigo.
That sounds grody to the max.
That would be the first 500 or so, maybe.
What's so grody about me responding that I responded to Shane's drunken post for my 10,000th?
Hopefully with the way technology continues to change the way business is done, I think the ideal situation is for both parents contributing to family income while also being home as much (collectively) as past generations. Women are more educated than ever before and should use their skills in whatever capacity makes sense within their particular stage of family/career (including varying degrees of part vs full-time work).
It helps if the parent is present. Uhmmmm, and I agree it is the parent's responsibility to raise, in all ways, their children.
i was going to use the word sanctimonious, but that will do too.
Sanctimonious is a good word!
I don't mind the "morally superior" bit, but the hypocritical aspect kind of stings.
By the time a child is in school, a working mother is likely to see her child almost as much as a stay-at-home mom. For many working moms, if they leave their career for a period of time when their child is young, they may never regain the footing they lost in their careers over the time lost. It's also an issue with retirement. I'm currently set to retire when I'm 57, which I wouldn't have been able to do if I'd taken time off before my kids were in school (I'd have been out for around 8 straight years.)
By the time a child is in school, the die is cast!