Manic Mommies podcast: 168 Hours = More Time For You?

I was the subject of last week’s Manic Mommies podcast, which you can download by going to the ManicMommies website.

Two main take-aways from this interview. First, the idea of changing the language from “I don’t have time” to “it’s not a priority” really resonates with people. And second, I wish parents in general would be honest about their childcare situations. Erin asked me when I found time to write 168 Hours with little kids, and I was quick to clear up any idea that I wrote it during nap time. Most fathers do not expect to do their work only during nap time, though I had a brief fantasy about people starting to ask men in Big Important Jobs this question. (“Wow, that was quite an investment portfolio you put together! And you have three little kids! Tell me, when did you find the time?”)

5 thoughts on “Manic Mommies podcast: 168 Hours = More Time For You?

  1. It is great to see more conversations about childcare and how to spend enough time with your kids and work a reasonable full-time week, and to realize there are folks out there who do it. And for those who don’t who work more than 45 hours it is better to be honest about that too though most women don’t work 40 hours. The latest issue of Oprah magazine (which is disappointingly 80% about shopping) has a shopping piece featuring outfits on five real go-getter women from very different fields and very different ages, many of whom speak of getting out the door without Cheerios on them, but have big big jobs.
    Also Redbook has an article about hiring a personal shopper but the biggest flaw with the article is it doesn’t provide any info on how to do it where you are. I know laura wrote a piece on this but just for nyc and I’d like to see a piece on this for real women all over the country. Parenting magazine this month suggests a girls getaway weekend at a spa where the rooms literally cost $1000 a month. I mean those editors over there are on something. I’m all for girls’ weekend for mommies but $1000 a night is out of the question!

  2. The time will come before we know it. Men are spending more time with their kids then they used to.

    1. That is true. I am thinking my next book will be about how people spend their work hours, particularly moms and dads with young kids. And I mean to include dads. Because I do know more of them are thinking about this issue, and much is changing.

  3. Yeah I was kind of surprised about the people (umm women) who posted on that blog that how can you pay for someone else to lovingly care for your kids? I mean how can you NOT to and keep your sanity as a mother? Not to mention your professional identity, the example you set to your children as a working and engaged citizen. That is a major reason why I work, so that my kid can have the best of everything, and by that I mean loving interactions by folks who are paid to make sure loving interactions happen: The cleaning woman who allows me to be a loving interactor, the pediatrician I can put her with I trust, the daycare worker who I know loves her and she loves, the librarian in our good neighborhood who loves that she sits in the front row at story hour. The neighbor who helped me learn to breastfed better who my kid thinks is her aunt. How can you not have this and those who wrote in otherwise I think it reflects a backlash that is out of date. A good post would be to do the 168 hours X 2 and then to do it for people’s kids. This lets you see where the spouse and the men are. It is getting out of fashion for the child to prefer the mother or for fathers to be checked out.

  4. I REALLY like the idea of 168 hours x 2 for parents . . . Laura, you may end up becoming a marriage counseling expert. That is assuming you could talk the husband/father into actually doing it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *