4 ms·
It isn't a bad take to the extent that society doesn't accept this. I had to care for two relatives from my mid-20s, almost every employer and prospective empl
by skippyboxedhero 4y ago
It isn't a bad take to the extent that society doesn't accept this.
I had to care for two relatives from my mid-20s, almost every employer and prospective employer has had a massive issue with this. I worked somewhere where employees would knock off throughout the day for their kids, the boss would disappear every Friday afternoon, I took no holidays, no days off, my mother had a stroke and I had to take her to the hospital, I did this in my lunch hour, came back an hour late...lost my job.
I agree with you completely, it is going to be a bigger and bigger issue because parents will start dying more slowly than my relatives but in the West there is a massive stigma against caring for your parents (this is most bizarre because the govt expects you to look after your parents...my relatives didn't get care until a few years ago because I was expected to do things, my employer had a very different interpretation of my responsibilities).
It is unfortunate being forced to pick, I am in my early-30s now, career has gone. I don't regret one second of it, strong family ties are a tremendous comfort even if you are only giving care. But it is frustrating because you get a pass for kids, and not for parents. I understand I can't have a high-flying career but it is just a wasted opportunity. The reality is that the article reflects a viewpoint that already exists (there are structural reasons too, it isn't possible to have high labour mobility and people with multiple caring responsibilities...it doesn't work).