Perhaps the issue is classifying it as a "problem" in the first place. As in, why is it considered problematic to want to spend more time w/ kids knowing it aff

Perhaps the issue is classifying it as a "problem" in the first place. As in, why is it considered problematic to want to spend more time w/ kids knowing it affects work-related opportunities? We generally accept that we can't master dozens of hobbies at once due to the inability to put the necessary time and effort into all of them, so why then is it considered a failure to pick one of the choices if the two conflicting activities are family time and main job? I think the author comes to the right conclusion: they come to terms to the fact that spending time w/ kids is a good reward for them, for making the trade-off of not becoming a CEO. I suppose one could argue that guilt for choosing kids over work is more of an issue for men because of societal expectations wrt income earning responsibilities. But then again, at the end of the day, regardless of whether you're a man or a woman, do you really want society to dictate what happiness/success should look like for you personally? If anything, someone who is in a position to be able to turn down a CEO position ought to be considered a highly successful individual by any societal standards </two-cents>