Work-Related Help Needed

themosthappy91

First of all sorry this is way long. TL;DR: I am being asked to take on way too much extra work at a job I otherwise like a lot.

I have been at my current job for about two-and-a-half months. Let me just start by saying that I really like it- I like what I do and I like the company I work for. I get along with everybody who works here and I believe in our mission as an organization. The branch of the company I work for (we dabble in many things) is a small local newspaper with a staff that is comprised of five reporters and one editor who oversees us. 

That being said, I am fully freaking out right now. 

About a month into me working here one of our reporters quit. Two or three weeks later another reporter quit. I just found out a third reporter gave his two week notice today. Commence freaking out.

None of the reporters have left for reasons that have to do with the actual job, other than the fact that it’s a starter-level position that does not pay very much (think in the range of $30,000 a year). They are all just moving on to bigger and better things after putting in a year or two with this company.

That being said, I do not understand how myself (who again, has been here for less than three months) and one other reporter are supposed to cover everything until we get new hires.

Our company hiring process is very long (it took me about six weeks from first applying to finishing the interview process) and because we are a small paper in a small town we get relatively few applicants.  On the one hand, I understand that there’s no point hiring people who aren’t qualified or a good fit just to fill positions, but on the other hand our need for new people is about to be pretty dire. I feel frustrated that the higher-ups in the company seem content to take their sweet time finding the perfect fit while us reporters are drowning in work.

I am already pretty unhappy with the amount of extra work I’ve been asked to take on covering two openings, and I can’t even imagine how awful it’s going to be with three.

What do I do!? It’s not like we can just stop putting out a paper, so I know that the two remaining reporters and our editor are going to be asked to pick up all the slack. I really like my job when it’s just my actual job that I’m being asked to do, and I think it’s unfair that what I’m doing now is not at all what I signed up for. Please advise me!!!

[Deleted User]

Can you speak with a direct supervisor about your concern (your editor)? Personally, I would probably just try to get through it and hope it would be better soon, because I would be hesitant to bring it up with anyone, lest they think I'm a slacker (I am NOT saying you are, either). But, if it is going to cause problems with the quality of work you are going to put out, because you'll be scrambling to get stuff done, then it does need to be addressed. Especially if you think this is not going to be fixed any time soon. 

If you do speak to someone, I think it is best to phrase it in a way that does not make them think you are incapable, but that you are concerned about how to handle the extra work that is coming in. Whatever you do, do not bring up the fact that it wasn't what you signed up for. I 110% get that it sucks when that happens, because it happened to me, but realistically jobs do change based on the needs of the company. Perhaps say something like "I understand that Other Employee and I will need to take on some of the work previously covered by People Who Left. How would you prefer that I prioritize my work when these new assignments come in?"

TrixieJess

Do you have a job description? Did you sign and employee contract? Both of these things will outline the terms of your employment and how much you should be making for you position. If you are doing more than what is in your job description then you need to bring that to the attention of your immediate supervisor and HR and let them know that either your duties need to be cut or your pay increased to compensate for your work load.

labro

Journalist speaking here.

High stress and intensity are your bread and butter as a reporter. It's a tough and challenging job on a good day and this is your opportunity to shine and rise above. When the new hires are made, your supervisors are going to remember all of the hard work you did and reward you for it. Don't take this opportunity to go back to someone and say "this isn't in my job description" unless you want to be the first person to be let go if the company ever has to cut back on employees. Being able to take on the challenge of multiple big stories is pretty normal with small town newspapers especially since they normally can't staff a ton of reporters as it is. I assume you already have weekly meetings? Maybe you need to start having daily meetings in the morning or semi weekly if daily is too much to talk about the stories you are working on and any gaps in the paper.

Most newspapers subscribe to news services like the AP too for extra filler on national and world news so it's entirely possible your paper may take on slightly more filler to cover for the two of you. And I'm sure some people (like editors) may also take on extra work reporting the news.

I hope this all doesn't come out as "suck it up and get over it" but seriously, this can turn out to do great things for you. You can ask for a raise, you can rise up in the ranks faster than normal, and this is also great experience for your resume when you eventually move on to bigger and better things!

themosthappy91

TrixieJess said:

Do you have a job description? Did you sign and employee contract? Both of these things will outline the terms of your employment and how much you should be making for you position. If you are doing more than what is in your job description then you need to bring that to the attention of your immediate supervisor and HR and let them know that either your duties need to be cut or your pay increased to compensate for your work load.

That’s the thing- yes, I have an employment contract that outlines my responsibilities, but I kind of feel like it’s unfair/unproductive for me to play that card. If everyone I work with said “I’m not going to do anything beyond what is in my job description,” where would we go from there? We couldn’t continue to produce a paper. Our publication would have to fold over a temporary work shortage.

We are also a small company, so I know for a fact there is just no money to increase our salaries significantly. I’m considering asking for a slight pay increase, but I know anything they give me realistically wouldn’t be fair compensation for this huge but temporary increase in my workload.

I totally get that what you are proposing is the obvious answer, but I guess that’s why I’m here asking for more creative solutions.

TrixieJess

themosthappy91 said:

TrixieJess said:

Do you have a job description? Did you sign and employee contract? Both of these things will outline the terms of your employment and how much you should be making for you position. If you are doing more than what is in your job description then you need to bring that to the attention of your immediate supervisor and HR and let them know that either your duties need to be cut or your pay increased to compensate for your work load.

That’s the thing- yes, I have an employment contract that outlines my responsibilities, but I kind of feel like it’s unfair/unproductive for me to play that card. If everyone I work with said “I’m not going to do anything beyond what is in my job description,” where would we go from there? We couldn’t continue to produce a paper. Our publication would have to fold over a temporary work shortage.

We are also a small company, so I know for a fact there is just no money to increase our salaries significantly. I’m considering asking for a slight pay increase, but I know anything they give me realistically wouldn’t be fair compensation for this huge but temporary increase in my workload.

I totally get that what you are proposing is the obvious answer, but I guess that’s why I’m here asking for more creative solutions.

You can use your work load as leverage. I'm coming at it from an HR point of view. I have to follow the letter of the law when dealing with employees. You can discuss with your manager ways to block your time differently or to work share. The problem with you continuously taking on more and more work without asking for at least a change to your job description or compensation is that you will get screwed over and you will be the first person to get piled on anytime something comes up.

themosthappy91

TrixieJess said:

themosthappy91 said:

TrixieJess said:

Do you have a job description? Did you sign and employee contract? Both of these things will outline the terms of your employment and how much you should be making for you position. If you are doing more than what is in your job description then you need to bring that to the attention of your immediate supervisor and HR and let them know that either your duties need to be cut or your pay increased to compensate for your work load.

That’s the thing- yes, I have an employment contract that outlines my responsibilities, but I kind of feel like it’s unfair/unproductive for me to play that card. If everyone I work with said “I’m not going to do anything beyond what is in my job description,” where would we go from there? We couldn’t continue to produce a paper. Our publication would have to fold over a temporary work shortage.

We are also a small company, so I know for a fact there is just no money to increase our salaries significantly. I’m considering asking for a slight pay increase, but I know anything they give me realistically wouldn’t be fair compensation for this huge but temporary increase in my workload.

I totally get that what you are proposing is the obvious answer, but I guess that’s why I’m here asking for more creative solutions.

You can use your work load as leverage. I'm coming at it from an HR point of view. I have to follow the letter of the law when dealing with employees. You can discuss with your manager ways to block your time differently or to work share. The problem with you continuously taking on more and more work without asking for at least a change to your job description or compensation is that you will get screwed over and you will be the first person to get piled on anytime something comes up.

That is a good point- I hadn't thought of asking for a change in my official job description to at least have some sort of written acknowledgement of what I'm doing. 

I'm not too worried about becoming the go-to person for extra work to pile on because like I said, my one fellow remaining reporter and my editor are also in the same boat and having to take on way more than they should. So at least we're all in it together! Haha.

themosthappy91

labro said:

Journalist speaking here.

High stress and intensity are your bread and butter as a reporter. It's a tough and challenging job on a good day and this is your opportunity to shine and rise above. When the new hires are made, your supervisors are going to remember all of the hard work you did and reward you for it. Don't take this opportunity to go back to someone and say "this isn't in my job description" unless you want to be the first person to be let go if the company ever has to cut back on employees. Being able to take on the challenge of multiple big stories is pretty normal with small town newspapers especially since they normally can't staff a ton of reporters as it is. I assume you already have weekly meetings? Maybe you need to start having daily meetings in the morning or semi weekly if daily is too much to talk about the stories you are working on and any gaps in the paper.

Most newspapers subscribe to news services like the AP too for extra filler on national and world news so it's entirely possible your paper may take on slightly more filler to cover for the two of you. And I'm sure some people (like editors) may also take on extra work reporting the news.

I hope this all doesn't come out as "suck it up and get over it" but seriously, this can turn out to do great things for you. You can ask for a raise, you can rise up in the ranks faster than normal, and this is also great experience for your resume when you eventually move on to bigger and better things!

This is a great response! I love hearing from people in the field.

Okay I feel like I'm not being really fair because I left a lot of things out of my OP to make it less horrendously long... but just to clarify since you've brought it up- in all honestly I have no desire or plan to rise up in the world of journalism. 

I have absolutely no experience or training as a journalist- I'm a good writer who applied for a "features" (i.e. fluffy stuff- local festivals, interviewing local people with cool stories to tell etc.) reporter position on a whim and ended up getting it on my merit as a writer and my enthusiasm for the place I live. We are an ultra-local oriented company and do not report on state or national news unless it has a clear and direct tie to something local (so sadly no AP filler). I'm doing this job for a couple years max before I get pregnant (hopefully!), because I really want to be a stay at home mom once I have my first kid.

So, my position is kind of weird. I have less incentive to put in long hours because I'm not hoping for a future in this line of work, but I obviously still have pride in my work and want to do a good job. Plus I do love my company and want to be an asset to them for as long as I'm here.

I think your suggestion about pushing for twice-weekly meetings is a great idea. I think that would help us stay on top of things a lot more.

 

labro

Ok, I had to think about this for awhile and gather my thoughts.

Here's my opinion, take it or leave it, but consider it for a bit first.

You say you plan on leaving the job anyway to be a SAHM in a couple years. IMO, if you actually have found a passion for writing, I'd still try to maintain some sort of relationship with this paper. Even a bi-weekly or monthly parenting/life column. Think about it, what are you planning to do in 18 years when (hopefully) your kid is out of the house and in college and doesn't need you full time anymore? If you've maintained some sort of minimal working relationship, you have a job to go back to that you enjoy and get fulfillment from.

Anyway, as to the now. I think you should just stick with it and keep it up. The extra work sucks (but like I said before, this is SO normal for the industry) and it's going to take a lot of time and organization, but it won't last forever and two years is still a long time in the future in some ways. I think working with your team to organize and plan as much as possible will help to undermine the upcoming craziness and in two months or less it's entirely possible you'll have one or two new people working again (student interns, people like you who wanted to try out writing for a paper, etc.).

TrixieJess

labro said:

Ok, I had to think about this for awhile and gather my thoughts.

Here's my opinion, take it or leave it, but consider it for a bit first.

You say you plan on leaving the job anyway to be a SAHM in a couple years. IMO, if you actually have found a passion for writing, I'd still try to maintain some sort of relationship with this paper. Even a bi-weekly or monthly parenting/life column. Think about it, what are you planning to do in 18 years when (hopefully) your kid is out of the house and in college and doesn't need you full time anymore? If you've maintained some sort of minimal working relationship, you have a job to go back to that you enjoy and get fulfillment from.

Anyway, as to the now. I think you should just stick with it and keep it up. The extra work sucks (but like I said before, this is SO normal for the industry) and it's going to take a lot of time and organization, but it won't last forever and two years is still a long time in the future in some ways. I think working with your team to organize and plan as much as possible will help to undermine the upcoming craziness and in two months or less it's entirely possible you'll have one or two new people working again (student interns, people like you who wanted to try out writing for a paper, etc.).

I agree with all of this. You should be able to do this from home. It may be difficult, but you can do it.

themosthappy91

labro said:

Ok, I had to think about this for awhile and gather my thoughts.

Here's my opinion, take it or leave it, but consider it for a bit first.

You say you plan on leaving the job anyway to be a SAHM in a couple years. IMO, if you actually have found a passion for writing, I'd still try to maintain some sort of relationship with this paper. Even a bi-weekly or monthly parenting/life column. Think about it, what are you planning to do in 18 years when (hopefully) your kid is out of the house and in college and doesn't need you full time anymore? If you've maintained some sort of minimal working relationship, you have a job to go back to that you enjoy and get fulfillment from.

Anyway, as to the now. I think you should just stick with it and keep it up. The extra work sucks (but like I said before, this is SO normal for the industry) and it's going to take a lot of time and organization, but it won't last forever and two years is still a long time in the future in some ways. I think working with your team to organize and plan as much as possible will help to undermine the upcoming craziness and in two months or less it's entirely possible you'll have one or two new people working again (student interns, people like you who wanted to try out writing for a paper, etc.).

I hear what you are saying. And I agree with you that ultimately the right thing to do at this juncture is just tough it out- though I have gotten some good ideas from this thread about how to make it more bearable. My two main takeaways are 1) make efforts to increase office-wide communication in order to improve organization and delineation of responsibilities, and 2) get documentation whenever and wherever possible to acknowledge the extra work I'm taking on.

As for your suggestion about maintaining a relationship with the paper, that's a good thought but ultimately not something I'm likely to pursue for several reasons. Well first of all, we are a completely and deliberately editorial and opinion-free paper so we don't actually do things like weekly columns, so there's that. 

But really my main reason is that, while I do really enjoy writing, my true passion is for raising a family (at least from this vantage point) and I'm just not interested anything that distracts from that in the earliest years of motherhood (and again, that's from the outside looking in so I acknowledge things could change). The secondary reason is because if I do have time and energy and desire to take on extra responsibilities, I'd really like to use that time to try my hand at a different type of writing- I've always been interested in trying to write like a young adult historical fiction novel, as weird as that sounds. 

You know, I think it's interesting (and good!) that the world has changed so much that my pursuit of what once was basically the only option for women (being a SAHM) definitely raises some eyebrows and I frequently get asked the very question you pose- "What are you going to do in 18 years when your kids are gone?" I think it's 100% a positive thing that women are finding it much harder conceive of basing their entire identity around being a mom, and I'm happy to explain my perspective on it. 

I am lucky enough to know that, unless something catastrophic happens, at that juncture in my life (and realistically much earlier- once your kids start high school they are on their way to becoming much more independent and won't necessarily benefit from having a SAHM anymore) I will have the financial stability to pursue a lot of things- I could seek employment as a teacher (that's what my Masters is in), I could become heavily involved with a local non-profit in my community, I could do some freelance writing, I could run for the local school board (I have a background in politics and hope to keep up with my contacts in that field) etc. So I am thinking about that eventuality and you are right to bring it up! And really, thanks to you and everyone else who have helped me frame this mentally as more of an opportunity than exclusively a burden. .

lovesclimbing

I am in almost the exact same boat. I also work for a small news organization. We have not lost reporters, but rather simply have a small staff. A few months ago, a guy left and they asked me to do his job, which would take up half my work day (four hours). I told them sure, but they'd be getting half the stories out of me every day. My editor said "oh." Guess what? They found another person pretty quick.

You have to learn to say no, and I know it's hard.

Sure, you could just suck it up, but they will likely just take advantage of you. If you guys are taking care of everything without complaining, what incentive do they have to hire more people?

My husband's job is not in news but it's similar in that they've had two people leave and there hasn't been a strong push to fill the positions. So my H goes in on the weekends and whenever they need something, and sure he gets overtime (which I don't), but they're still taking advantage of him. They have lost employees before because they work them hard until they get burned out and quit or they're so tired, they make a disastrous mistake and are fired.

huskypuppy14

themosthappy91 said:

labro said:

Ok, I had to think about this for awhile and gather my thoughts.

Here's my opinion, take it or leave it, but consider it for a bit first.

You say you plan on leaving the job anyway to be a SAHM in a couple years. IMO, if you actually have found a passion for writing, I'd still try to maintain some sort of relationship with this paper. Even a bi-weekly or monthly parenting/life column. Think about it, what are you planning to do in 18 years when (hopefully) your kid is out of the house and in college and doesn't need you full time anymore? If you've maintained some sort of minimal working relationship, you have a job to go back to that you enjoy and get fulfillment from.

Anyway, as to the now. I think you should just stick with it and keep it up. The extra work sucks (but like I said before, this is SO normal for the industry) and it's going to take a lot of time and organization, but it won't last forever and two years is still a long time in the future in some ways. I think working with your team to organize and plan as much as possible will help to undermine the upcoming craziness and in two months or less it's entirely possible you'll have one or two new people working again (student interns, people like you who wanted to try out writing for a paper, etc.).

I hear what you are saying. And I agree with you that ultimately the right thing to do at this juncture is just tough it out- though I have gotten some good ideas from this thread about how to make it more bearable. My two main takeaways are 1) make efforts to increase office-wide communication in order to improve organization and delineation of responsibilities, and 2) get documentation whenever and wherever possible to acknowledge the extra work I'm taking on.

As for your suggestion about maintaining a relationship with the paper, that's a good thought but ultimately not something I'm likely to pursue for several reasons. Well first of all, we are a completely and deliberately editorial and opinion-free paper so we don't actually do things like weekly columns, so there's that. 

But really my main reason is that, while I do really enjoy writing, my true passion is for raising a family (at least from this vantage point) and I'm just not interested anything that distracts from that in the earliest years of motherhood (and again, that's from the outside looking in so I acknowledge things could change). The secondary reason is because if I do have time and energy and desire to take on extra responsibilities, I'd really like to use that time to try my hand at a different type of writing- I've always been interested in trying to write like a young adult historical fiction novel, as weird as that sounds. 

You know, I think it's interesting (and good!) that the world has changed so much that my pursuit of what once was basically the only option for women (being a SAHM) definitely raises some eyebrows and I frequently get asked the very question you pose- "What are you going to do in 18 years when your kids are gone?" I think it's 100% a positive thing that women are finding it much harder conceive of basing their entire identity around being a mom, and I'm happy to explain my perspective on it. 

I am lucky enough to know that, unless something catastrophic happens, at that juncture in my life (and realistically much earlier- once your kids start high school they are on their way to becoming much more independent and won't necessarily benefit from having a SAHM anymore) I will have the financial stability to pursue a lot of things- I could seek employment as a teacher (that's what my Masters is in), I could become heavily involved with a local non-profit in my community, I could do some freelance writing, I could run for the local school board (I have a background in politics and hope to keep up with my contacts in that field) etc. So I am thinking about that eventuality and you are right to bring it up! And really, thanks to you and everyone else who have helped me frame this mentally as more of an opportunity than exclusively a burden. .

I'm curious how you know this. Do you have a trust fund with millions and millions of dollars. because 15-20 years is a long time. And if your husband is financially well off now, that doesn't necessarily mean he will be in the future. You never know what could happen.

I also think it would be hard to become a teacher after 15 years of not teaching. Things change so much, you would be out of the loop and probably have to go and get more schooling.. My mom has her college degree in education and though she taught for a couple years when I was a baby, she never went back to it after we were in school. 

There is nothing wrong with wanting to be a SAHP, but it can adversely effect your ability to get a career job after not working for so long.

themosthappy91

huskypuppy14 said:

themosthappy91 said:

labro said:

Ok, I had to think about this for awhile and gather my thoughts.

Here's my opinion, take it or leave it, but consider it for a bit first.

You say you plan on leaving the job anyway to be a SAHM in a couple years. IMO, if you actually have found a passion for writing, I'd still try to maintain some sort of relationship with this paper. Even a bi-weekly or monthly parenting/life column. Think about it, what are you planning to do in 18 years when (hopefully) your kid is out of the house and in college and doesn't need you full time anymore? If you've maintained some sort of minimal working relationship, you have a job to go back to that you enjoy and get fulfillment from.

Anyway, as to the now. I think you should just stick with it and keep it up. The extra work sucks (but like I said before, this is SO normal for the industry) and it's going to take a lot of time and organization, but it won't last forever and two years is still a long time in the future in some ways. I think working with your team to organize and plan as much as possible will help to undermine the upcoming craziness and in two months or less it's entirely possible you'll have one or two new people working again (student interns, people like you who wanted to try out writing for a paper, etc.).

I hear what you are saying. And I agree with you that ultimately the right thing to do at this juncture is just tough it out- though I have gotten some good ideas from this thread about how to make it more bearable. My two main takeaways are 1) make efforts to increase office-wide communication in order to improve organization and delineation of responsibilities, and 2) get documentation whenever and wherever possible to acknowledge the extra work I'm taking on.

As for your suggestion about maintaining a relationship with the paper, that's a good thought but ultimately not something I'm likely to pursue for several reasons. Well first of all, we are a completely and deliberately editorial and opinion-free paper so we don't actually do things like weekly columns, so there's that. 

But really my main reason is that, while I do really enjoy writing, my true passion is for raising a family (at least from this vantage point) and I'm just not interested anything that distracts from that in the earliest years of motherhood (and again, that's from the outside looking in so I acknowledge things could change). The secondary reason is because if I do have time and energy and desire to take on extra responsibilities, I'd really like to use that time to try my hand at a different type of writing- I've always been interested in trying to write like a young adult historical fiction novel, as weird as that sounds. 

You know, I think it's interesting (and good!) that the world has changed so much that my pursuit of what once was basically the only option for women (being a SAHM) definitely raises some eyebrows and I frequently get asked the very question you pose- "What are you going to do in 18 years when your kids are gone?" I think it's 100% a positive thing that women are finding it much harder conceive of basing their entire identity around being a mom, and I'm happy to explain my perspective on it. 

I am lucky enough to know that, unless something catastrophic happens, at that juncture in my life (and realistically much earlier- once your kids start high school they are on their way to becoming much more independent and won't necessarily benefit from having a SAHM anymore) I will have the financial stability to pursue a lot of things- I could seek employment as a teacher (that's what my Masters is in), I could become heavily involved with a local non-profit in my community, I could do some freelance writing, I could run for the local school board (I have a background in politics and hope to keep up with my contacts in that field) etc. So I am thinking about that eventuality and you are right to bring it up! And really, thanks to you and everyone else who have helped me frame this mentally as more of an opportunity than exclusively a burden. .

I'm curious how you know this. Do you have a trust fund with millions and millions of dollars. because 15-20 years is a long time. And if your husband is financially well off now, that doesn't necessarily mean he will be in the future. You never know what could happen.

I also think it would be hard to become a teacher after 15 years of not teaching. Things change so much, you would be out of the loop and probably have to go and get more schooling.. My mom has her college degree in education and though she taught for a couple years when I was a baby, she never went back to it after we were in school. 

There is nothing wrong with wanting to be a SAHP, but it can adversely effect your ability to get a career job after not working for so long.

Well I did say unless something catastrophic happens! But yes, between the field that my husband is in, which is very stable and relatively lucrative, and family money I do think I will have some flexibility at that point in my life. I mean obviously I wouldn't be considering being a SAHM in the first place if we couldn't get by without me working!

And you're absolutely right about not being able to just pick up teaching after 15 years- I would definitely have to return to school/retake several licensure exams etc. It's an option, but honestly not one I'm likely to pursue. Truthfully I don't really except to return to a traditional career after leaving the workforce to raise my kids- like you said, it's challenging to pull off, and there are enough other things I'd like to devote my time to that if finances allow, I don't expect to feel the desire to do so.

STARMOON44

themosthappy91 said:

huskypuppy14 said:

themosthappy91 said:

labro said:

Ok, I had to think about this for awhile and gather my thoughts.

Here's my opinion, take it or leave it, but consider it for a bit first.

You say you plan on leaving the job anyway to be a SAHM in a couple years. IMO, if you actually have found a passion for writing, I'd still try to maintain some sort of relationship with this paper. Even a bi-weekly or monthly parenting/life column. Think about it, what are you planning to do in 18 years when (hopefully) your kid is out of the house and in college and doesn't need you full time anymore? If you've maintained some sort of minimal working relationship, you have a job to go back to that you enjoy and get fulfillment from.

Anyway, as to the now. I think you should just stick with it and keep it up. The extra work sucks (but like I said before, this is SO normal for the industry) and it's going to take a lot of time and organization, but it won't last forever and two years is still a long time in the future in some ways. I think working with your team to organize and plan as much as possible will help to undermine the upcoming craziness and in two months or less it's entirely possible you'll have one or two new people working again (student interns, people like you who wanted to try out writing for a paper, etc.).

I hear what you are saying. And I agree with you that ultimately the right thing to do at this juncture is just tough it out- though I have gotten some good ideas from this thread about how to make it more bearable. My two main takeaways are 1) make efforts to increase office-wide communication in order to improve organization and delineation of responsibilities, and 2) get documentation whenever and wherever possible to acknowledge the extra work I'm taking on.

As for your suggestion about maintaining a relationship with the paper, that's a good thought but ultimately not something I'm likely to pursue for several reasons. Well first of all, we are a completely and deliberately editorial and opinion-free paper so we don't actually do things like weekly columns, so there's that. 

But really my main reason is that, while I do really enjoy writing, my true passion is for raising a family (at least from this vantage point) and I'm just not interested anything that distracts from that in the earliest years of motherhood (and again, that's from the outside looking in so I acknowledge things could change). The secondary reason is because if I do have time and energy and desire to take on extra responsibilities, I'd really like to use that time to try my hand at a different type of writing- I've always been interested in trying to write like a young adult historical fiction novel, as weird as that sounds. 

You know, I think it's interesting (and good!) that the world has changed so much that my pursuit of what once was basically the only option for women (being a SAHM) definitely raises some eyebrows and I frequently get asked the very question you pose- "What are you going to do in 18 years when your kids are gone?" I think it's 100% a positive thing that women are finding it much harder conceive of basing their entire identity around being a mom, and I'm happy to explain my perspective on it. 

I am lucky enough to know that, unless something catastrophic happens, at that juncture in my life (and realistically much earlier- once your kids start high school they are on their way to becoming much more independent and won't necessarily benefit from having a SAHM anymore) I will have the financial stability to pursue a lot of things- I could seek employment as a teacher (that's what my Masters is in), I could become heavily involved with a local non-profit in my community, I could do some freelance writing, I could run for the local school board (I have a background in politics and hope to keep up with my contacts in that field) etc. So I am thinking about that eventuality and you are right to bring it up! And really, thanks to you and everyone else who have helped me frame this mentally as more of an opportunity than exclusively a burden. .

I'm curious how you know this. Do you have a trust fund with millions and millions of dollars. because 15-20 years is a long time. And if your husband is financially well off now, that doesn't necessarily mean he will be in the future. You never know what could happen.

I also think it would be hard to become a teacher after 15 years of not teaching. Things change so much, you would be out of the loop and probably have to go and get more schooling.. My mom has her college degree in education and though she taught for a couple years when I was a baby, she never went back to it after we were in school. 

There is nothing wrong with wanting to be a SAHP, but it can adversely effect your ability to get a career job after not working for so long.

Well I did say unless something catastrophic happens! But yes, between the field that my husband is in, which is very stable and relatively lucrative, and family money I do think I will have some flexibility at that point in my life. I mean obviously I wouldn't be considering being a SAHM in the first place if we couldn't get by without me working!

And you're absolutely right about not being able to just pick up teaching after 15 years- I would definitely have to return to school/retake several licensure exams etc. It's an option, but honestly not one I'm likely to pursue. Truthfully I don't really except to return to a traditional career after leaving the workforce to raise my kids- like you said, it's challenging to pull off, and there are enough other things I'd like to devote my time to that if finances allow, I don't expect to feel the desire to do so.

My concern about this always comes from seeing my mom's friends. Many of the women in my town growing up didn't work. And when your husband leaves you for his secretary when you're 55, even if you have the education, it's so hard to transition back into the workforce, make enough money to sustain your lifestyle (which sounds frivolous, but it can be devastating to have to leave the town all your friends live in because you can't afford it), and that is actually meaningful to you. No one plans on getting a divorce, but we all know it's reasonably common.

themosthappy91

STARMOON44 said:

My concern about this always comes from seeing my mom's friends. Many of the women in my town growing up didn't work. And when your husband leaves you for his secretary when you're 55, even if you have the education, it's so hard to transition back into the workforce, make enough money to sustain your lifestyle (which sounds frivolous, but it can be devastating to have to leave the town all your friends live in because you can't afford it), and that is actually meaningful to you. No one plans on getting a divorce, but we all know it's reasonably common.

[Cutting down quote tree]

Yeah, you're right that this is a risk. And like I said, I'm in the fortunate position of having family money that would allow me to get by, though not indefinitely and not at the same level of "lifestyle" that I would have become accustomed to by that point, of course. 

But the bottom line is, I'm not going to decide to keep working despite the fact that I both want to and can afford to stay home with my children just on the off chance that things don't work out with my husband one day. I believe in being prepared for curveballs to some degree, but not so much so that I'm going to give up getting to stay home with my future babies just to avoid possibly having difficultly getting back in the work force in twenty years if I need to.

Honestly the biggest wrench that I can reasonably foresee getting thrown in my plans is if I am unable to have children- that would be something that would come to light relatively soon and would cause me to have to rethink a lot of what I see myself doing with my life. That's a question I really hope I don't have to seriously contemplate! 

julieanne912

themosthappy91 said:

STARMOON44 said:

My concern about this always comes from seeing my mom's friends. Many of the women in my town growing up didn't work. And when your husband leaves you for his secretary when you're 55, even if you have the education, it's so hard to transition back into the workforce, make enough money to sustain your lifestyle (which sounds frivolous, but it can be devastating to have to leave the town all your friends live in because you can't afford it), and that is actually meaningful to you. No one plans on getting a divorce, but we all know it's reasonably common.

[Cutting down quote tree]

Yeah, you're right that this is a risk. And like I said, I'm in the fortunate position of having family money that would allow me to get by, though not indefinitely and not at the same level of "lifestyle" that I would have become accustomed to by that point, of course. 

But the bottom line is, I'm not going to decide to keep working despite the fact that I both want to and can afford to stay home with my children just on the off chance that things don't work out with my husband one day. I believe in being prepared for curveballs to some degree, but not so much so that I'm going to give up getting to stay home with my future babies just to avoid possibly having difficultly getting back in the work force in twenty years if I need to.

Honestly the biggest wrench that I can reasonably foresee getting thrown in my plans is if I am unable to have children- that would be something that would come to light relatively soon and would cause me to have to rethink a lot of what I see myself doing with my life. That's a question I really hope I don't have to seriously contemplate! 

This.  I can't remember if it was Starmoon in another thread awhile back or not, but the idea that you shouldn't give up working to stay at home with your kids if you have the opportunity on the off chance that your husband cheats on you in 20-30 years is absolutely ridiculous.  While I think you should always keep an eye on finances and be aware of what's going on, living in paranoia like that is not healthy at all.

And, for the record, my mom stayed at home with us when we were little.  Once we were in school, she did some training and resumed her career just fine, first part time then full time, and that was in a medical field where everything is constantly changing.