5 ms·

My one concern with this is the risk of eventual burn out + mental health issues which will have its own impact on the children. Full time career + very present

My one concern with this is the risk of eventual burn out + mental health issues which will have its own impact on the children. Full time career + very present parent during the weekdays might just not be possible. WFH definitely helps make it significantly more possible though. Also worth not forgetting that in most cases the fathers of millennials were a hell of a lot more present and emotionally available than their fathers etc. I'm sure we'll make plenty of our own mistakes that our children will try to avoid when their turn comes.

mschuster91 6mo ago
> Full time career + very present parent during the weekdays might just not be possible. Guess why birth rates are crashing - and why they crash hardest in Asia, especially Japan.
- purplerabbit 6mo ago
  And guess why trad household structures are (still) popular in some circles
  - watwut 6mo ago
    They are way more popular among men then women. The thing is, women were mostly living that ... it is new only for men
    - mitthrowaway2 6mo ago
      What do you mean?
  - michaelchisari 6mo ago
    Except "trad" households (full time SAHM in a nuclear home) are not traditional. Tradition is not something only the upper-middle class in a post-war boom attained for a short period of time. Throughout human history, it was rare for only two people to raise a child, let alone one. Or for women to not bring money into the home. Like many "trad" trends, it's based more on advertising and television than history.
    - compiler-guy 6mo ago
      At the very least, you need a whole society of aunts and uncles and grandparents and cousins, and deep friends to truly do any kind of traditional family structure in the traditional way. Otherwise it's just emulating an extremely narrow portion of the trad that didn't exactly exist in the first place.
      - mschuster91 6mo ago
        > At the very least, you need a whole society of aunts and uncles and grandparents and cousins, and deep friends to truly do any kind of traditional family structure in the traditional way. "It takes a village to raise a child" was meant literally. However, the glory of capitalism required people to move to where the jobs were, turning that millennia-old principle upside down ever since industrialization. And car culture was the ultimate fatal blow, when children can't even walk their own neighborhood any more.
      - krapp 6mo ago
        I remember when Hillary Clinton said "it takes a village to raise a child" and she was mocked by conservatives and accused of undermining parental rights and wanting governments to control families. And when BLM made it part of their charter to encourage community support for children beyond the typical nuclear unit they were accused of a radical Marxist agenda to "destroy families." For some reason the very concept of extended families and community engenders deep anger and hostility from some Americans, and that's odd for a nation of immigrants considering how common the "whole society of aunts and uncles and grandparents and cousins" is in the rest of the world.
        kelipso 6mo ago
        But when leftists says things like community support, it doesn't bring up images of traditional villages and extended families. It brings up images of communists saying things like abolish the family. Naturally, due to their history. It's not like leftists are known for their traditional family values now or then, so why should it be taken that way?
  - nradov 6mo ago
    Those household structures aren'tpopular, they're just common when women have no other options. I have nothing against those structures, they work great for some families. But the reality is that they often force the wife into becoming an unpaid caregiver for her in-laws (who constantly criticize how she runs the household).
    - purplerabbit 6mo ago
      So confidently stated! My wife had ludicrous options and chose it — what draws you to this conclusion?
      - illiac786 6mo ago
        Parent said often, not always. Counter examples is an anecdote. I would like to see good statistics on this. And your wife’s opinion on her choices.
        xboxnolifes 6mo ago
        The counter example my be anecdotal, but the original claim is also baseless. It's not anecdote vs data, it's anecdote vs nothing.
        illiac786 6mo ago
        Agreed, when I asked for statistics I was addressing the parent comment, that might have been unclear.
        purplerabbit 6mo ago
        I'd love to see statistics as well. My wife self-reports as very happy and talks a lot about how proud she is of the decision. I'll acknowledge that we are privileged in terms of support -- 3 relative families within 30 minutes and most people in a 100 meter radius attend the same church. Even in our setup, however, we really wish we could swing a multi-generational setup and have grandparents around all the time. Maybe the Amish are on to something!

mschuster91 6mo ago

> Full time career + very present parent during the weekdays might just not be possible. Guess why birth rates are crashing - and why they crash hardest in Asia, especially Japan.

purplerabbit 6mo ago
And guess why trad household structures are (still) popular in some circles
- watwut 6mo ago
  They are way more popular among men then women. The thing is, women were mostly living that ... it is new only for men
  - mitthrowaway2 6mo ago
    What do you mean?
- michaelchisari 6mo ago
  Except "trad" households (full time SAHM in a nuclear home) are not traditional. Tradition is not something only the upper-middle class in a post-war boom attained for a short period of time. Throughout human history, it was rare for only two people to raise a child, let alone one. Or for women to not bring money into the home. Like many "trad" trends, it's based more on advertising and television than history.
  - compiler-guy 6mo ago
    At the very least, you need a whole society of aunts and uncles and grandparents and cousins, and deep friends to truly do any kind of traditional family structure in the traditional way. Otherwise it's just emulating an extremely narrow portion of the trad that didn't exactly exist in the first place.
    - mschuster91 6mo ago
      > At the very least, you need a whole society of aunts and uncles and grandparents and cousins, and deep friends to truly do any kind of traditional family structure in the traditional way. "It takes a village to raise a child" was meant literally. However, the glory of capitalism required people to move to where the jobs were, turning that millennia-old principle upside down ever since industrialization. And car culture was the ultimate fatal blow, when children can't even walk their own neighborhood any more.
    - krapp 6mo ago
      I remember when Hillary Clinton said "it takes a village to raise a child" and she was mocked by conservatives and accused of undermining parental rights and wanting governments to control families. And when BLM made it part of their charter to encourage community support for children beyond the typical nuclear unit they were accused of a radical Marxist agenda to "destroy families." For some reason the very concept of extended families and community engenders deep anger and hostility from some Americans, and that's odd for a nation of immigrants considering how common the "whole society of aunts and uncles and grandparents and cousins" is in the rest of the world.
      - kelipso 6mo ago
        But when leftists says things like community support, it doesn't bring up images of traditional villages and extended families. It brings up images of communists saying things like abolish the family. Naturally, due to their history. It's not like leftists are known for their traditional family values now or then, so why should it be taken that way?
- nradov 6mo ago
  Those household structures aren'tpopular, they're just common when women have no other options. I have nothing against those structures, they work great for some families. But the reality is that they often force the wife into becoming an unpaid caregiver for her in-laws (who constantly criticize how she runs the household).
  - purplerabbit 6mo ago
    So confidently stated! My wife had ludicrous options and chose it — what draws you to this conclusion?
    - illiac786 6mo ago
      Parent said often, not always. Counter examples is an anecdote. I would like to see good statistics on this. And your wife’s opinion on her choices.
      - xboxnolifes 6mo ago
        The counter example my be anecdotal, but the original claim is also baseless. It's not anecdote vs data, it's anecdote vs nothing.
        illiac786 6mo ago
        Agreed, when I asked for statistics I was addressing the parent comment, that might have been unclear.
      - purplerabbit 6mo ago
        I'd love to see statistics as well. My wife self-reports as very happy and talks a lot about how proud she is of the decision. I'll acknowledge that we are privileged in terms of support -- 3 relative families within 30 minutes and most people in a 100 meter radius attend the same church. Even in our setup, however, we really wish we could swing a multi-generational setup and have grandparents around all the time. Maybe the Amish are on to something!