leaving children for 6 months

Person_one

quantumleap wrote: »

I'd agree with that. Equally, if they had me most of the time and not their Mum, then they'd be fine. However, in the OP's case, I don't think either of those two scenarios are the case and as such I believe both her husband and children would struggle without her and I think her absence would have a negative effect on her children.

Oh of course, I don't think she should go either but we seem to have slightly widened the discussion!

I don't think any parent of either gender should take the commitment of raising children so lightly as to drop it for six months when something better comes along.

sassyblue

Person_one wrote: »

I don't assume they all do at all, but then I didn't assume no men can be nurturing!

That was silly, who did that then, l didn't.

duchy

picnmix wrote: »

This is exactly like my DH, he is a fantastic daddy, loves our children more than anything, has the ability to be the main carer, but openly states he would never want to do it alone.

No!

Most single parents don't CHOOSE to do it alone but many of us make a very good job of it !

In an ideal world everyone would live in neat two parent families, all jobs would be local enough to supply enough money and fantastic work/life balance -often though in the real world compromises need to be made -and sometimes sacrifice to reach goals that ultimately benefit. It isn't a one size fits all answer.

picnmix

duchy wrote: »

What about if he was a zooligist and had the chance to work with giant pandas in China for six months ? Would your reply be the same ?

What if the personal trainer stint brought in enough to open his own business thus securing his family's future ?

I suspect there's an awful lot of hairdresser/personal trainer snobbery goin' on here

I am certainly not being snobbish towards the OP's career and used the personal trainer comparison as that would be a comparable occupation towards the OP, I could of course stated that a man came on and asked the same question and he was a hairdresser. That was probably my error. I couldn't give a rats bum what the OP does as a job, I certainly do not look down on anyone who works and the job that they chose, I think good hairdressers are worth their weight in gold, as Person-one stated, I need a good hairdresser! (to note I also do not look down at personal trainers etc)

If the OP had come on and asked the same question that involved Giant Panda's etc etc I would say the same.

picnmix

duchy wrote: »

Most single parents don't CHOOSE to do it alone but many of us make a very good job of it !

In an ideal world everyone would live in neat two parent families, all jobs would be local enough to supply enough money and fantastic work/life balance -often though in the real world compromises need to be made -and sometimes sacrifice to reach goals that ultimately benefit. It isn't a one size fits all answer.

For goodness sake, why all of a sudden are we brining single parents into the equation. The part of my post you have quoted is based on my DH, not anyone else, and a lighthearted response to quantum's post, I also stated that I believed there was no reason her husband could not look after the children as the sole carer (apart from some comments made in previous posts about the OPs DH agression).

You have also quoted my post but have chosen to remove some of it in your quote, so doesn't really read as I posted.

FatVonD

Welshwoofs wrote: »

What I'd find interesting is how many of those rubbishing her career choice actually have a career worth a damn themselves

Funnily enough in my post number 372 I actually likened my job to the OP's but, since you ask, I work in publishing (art editor)

Seanymph

surely the only relevance to her career choice is opportunity.

If someone worked in a field reliant upon studying giant panda's in the wild to gain data then obviously the opportunities to do that close to home would be limited.

The opportunity in the UK for career advancement as a hairdresser by a means other than leaving your family for 6 months is probably slightly wider.

That isn't job snobbery - but reality. As a hairdresser she has alternatives to this........ for a man studying giant panda's in their natural environment I'd think going would be the only solution.

Lunar_Eclipse

StumpyPumpy wrote: »

Rubbish. Complete and total drivel. You may dream of spending your time pregnant and being the sole care giver to an ever increasing brood as some sort of supermum, but it is no more primal than liking shoes. It is an ill-conceived stereotype. Nothing more.

Are you on a wind up? (mothering v shoe fetishes, implying men are better drivers when it's widely known that statistically women are much safer, women & men possess the same skill sets etc.)

FatVonD

duchy wrote: »

What about if he was a zooligist and had the chance to work with giant pandas in China for six months ? Would your reply be the same ?

Mine would be but I'd understand more why it would be gut-wrenching to turn it down and, if I were in that position, I'd be looking for ways to make it work (eg. taking the family with me.)

faerie~spangles

I just can't see how the OP going away for six months to work as a hairdresser/stylist, doing the hair of the blue rinse brigade is going to further her career.

I note the OP hasn't told us the type of cruise ship. It could be a job on one of those 18 to 30 party cruise ships.

Now if the OP had posted: I have an amazing chance to go to (insert city of choice) for 6 months and train with (famous hairdresser) but it means leaving my children for the duration of the course, should I go?

I would be championing her and telling her it was a golden opportunity and she'd be a fool not to.