Sigh-Annual appointment with OB

"Anne Rogers" wrote in message
...

Some career tracks make it very difficult to shelve for a year and then
return at the same level. You're either full time or you're not in it at
all.

Oh yes, I know that, I've been there myself, Nathanael was born in the
middle of my Ph.D. but in the end I delayed going back due to
breastfeeding and eventually decided not to go back at all, but going back
full time after a years break would have been doable.

But since it was doable, then yours is not the career track where it is not
doable (or exceedingly difficult).

But from talking to her that it
doesn't seem that because of that she is not bothered about breastfeeding,
it's more she was bottle fed, she is fine, it's not really all that
important.

She's probably thought it all out and maybe doesn't desire to discuss her
personal life with you? I don't think I'd be interested in defending or
explaining myself to someone who's not really a close family member or
otherwise not affected by my actions.

toypup writes:

"Anne Rogers" wrote in message
...

Some career tracks make it very difficult to shelve for a year and then
return at the same level. You're either full time or you're not in it
at all.
Oh yes, I know that, I've been there myself, Nathanael was born in the
middle of my Ph.D. but in the end I delayed going back due to
breastfeeding and eventually decided not to go back at all, but going
back full time after a years break would have been doable.

But since it was doable, then yours is not the career track where it is
not doable (or exceedingly difficult).

Do you have a specific career track in mind where you think this is true,
though? I ask because my own is a career track where it's commonly held
that it's not doable or exceedingly difficult, and I held that as an
unexamined assumption for many years. However, once I really asked myself
what exactly I thought would happen if I took a year out, I realised that
it wasn't as clear cut as that. In the end, I did it, and don't for a
moment regret it. My career prospects are perhaps not as good as they once
were, but that's more because I'm not working 60+ hour weeks any more than
because of the actual time out.

I'm fortunate in living in a country where my right to return to my job
after a year is protected. Thus what I was risking was not immediate
unemployment, but, maybe, being seen as out of date and incompetent once I
returned, leading to unpleasantness, lack of future promotion, and in the
worst case, the sack. I can see that it would have been far harder if there
had been no right to return. However, my experience leads me to know that
there are some, and suspect that there are many, people who *feel* that
taking a year out isn't an option for them where, in fact, it could be.

Sidheag
DS Colin Oct 27 2003

"Sidheag McCormack" wrote in message
...
Do you have a specific career track in mind where you think this is true,
though?

I hadn't really thought of a specific one, but I think if a person had
certain goals in mind, they would not be able to achieve it in a reasonable
amount of time if they did not continue to work.

I'm fortunate in living in a country where my right to return to my job
after a year is protected. Thus what I was risking was not immediate
unemployment, but, maybe, being seen as out of date and incompetent once I
returned, leading to unpleasantness, lack of future promotion, and in the
worst case, the sack.

Well, if you do not live in a country where you have the right to return to
work after a year, all those things you risk could certainly can your
career, don't you think? I mean, if you have no right to return to work,
and everyone sees you as incompetent and out of date, where do you think
your career will go, not to mention you'll be out of a job and who would
hire someone who is incompetent and out of date? You'd probably have to go
back to get retrained, which means basically starting over. It's doable,
but not something most people would want to do, if they are career-minded,
especially if they are near or have attained their goal.

She's probably thought it all out and maybe doesn't desire to discuss her
personal life with you? I don't think I'd be interested in defending or
explaining myself to someone who's not really a close family member or
otherwise not affected by my actions.

she's a good friend, anyway I shouldn't have even mentioned the work issue,
it seems entirely independent of her attitude to breastfeeding, which was
relevent to this thread because of her area of work (obgyn), though it may
be that her current happiness to return to work stems from her attitude to
breastfeeding. What I have posted is in no way a crisitcism of this women,
it just seemed relevant when Donna expressed surprised of her OBGYNs
attitude as I was equally surprised at this women's feelings, an educated
women who has presumably seen clear evidence of the good points in
breastfeeding.

Anne

Do you have a specific career track in mind where you think this is true,
though? I ask because my own is a career track where it's commonly held
that it's not doable or exceedingly difficult, and I held that as an
unexamined assumption for many years. However, once I really asked myself
what exactly I thought would happen if I took a year out, I realised that
it wasn't as clear cut as that. In the end, I did it, and don't for a
moment regret it. My career prospects are perhaps not as good as they once
were, but that's more because I'm not working 60+ hour weeks any more than
because of the actual time out.

Good point, I was in the same area as Sidheag, though at a much earlier
stage, in the end it would have turned out to be a good thing to have a year
out as it made funding available that hadn't previously been there, in the
end I decided though it was very possible to go back, that I personally
didn't want to as Nathanael was only going to be a toddler once and for me
that was just as important as his first year of life. I have absolutely no
critisism of the university, or the industry, the only thing that might have
changed thinks would have been if the nursery that opened in the same road
had opened 6 months earlier, but other than that, it was entirely my
decision. In fact I was able to discuss wit my boss that I wanted a family
and he actually advised me to have them during my Ph.D. rather than later.

Anne

toypup writes:

I hadn't really thought of a specific one, but I think if a person had
certain goals in mind, they would not be able to achieve it in a
reasonable amount of time if they did not continue to work.

That's not convincing! I'd have thought having "certain goals in mind"
is pretty much a definition of having a career (as opposed to a job). It's
definitely not the case that that ensures you can't achieve them in a
reasonable amount of time. Almost everyone can expect some delay in
achieving their goals if they take time out, of course, but that's very far
from saying that it's impossible to take time out. If there are people who
expect taking a year out to have no effect at all on, say, when they get
the next promotion, I'd have very little sympathy - but then, I don't
remember ever meeting such a person.

I'm fortunate in living in a country where my right to return to my job
after a year is protected. Thus what I was risking was not immediate
unemployment, but, maybe, being seen as out of date and incompetent once
I returned, leading to unpleasantness, lack of future promotion, and in
the worst case, the sack.

Well, if you do not live in a country where you have the right to return
to work after a year, all those things you risk could certainly can your
career, don't you think?

*Risk*, *could*, yes. As it happens, I'm confident that I could have found
a new job after a year, if I'd had to. It might not have been easy, I might
have had to be a bit more flexible than I'd ideally have liked about where
it was, etc., but the risk that it would have been impossible is low. If
your employment is not protected, then taking a year out is more risky than
if it is protected. I said as much. In neither case are the bad outcomes
certain to happen. In both cases, you need to work to minimise the chance
that being seen as out of date etc. actually happen to you. If someone's
bothered by the very existence of *risk* that something bad may happen,
they're in trouble, because no major life decision is risk-free. Again, the
idea that taking a year out carries risk is not at all the same as the idea
that it's impossible. I can't off-hand think of any career where the risk
of being seen as out of date etc. is much higher than it is in my own, so I
hypothesise that there are no such careers where the risk is so high that
the reasonable person would have to rule out taking a year's career break
because of that. I'm interested to hear candidate counter-examples.

You'd probably have to go back to get retrained, which means basically
starting over. It's doable, but not something most people would want to
do, if they are career-minded, especially if they are near or have
attained their goal.

I can't think of a single example of a career where a year out would mean
you'd have to retrain "basically starting over". Even in medical careers,
any necessary skill updating is not the same length as the initial
training, AFAIK.

I'm not understanding why you're so insistent on the dreadfulness of taking
a year out, if you don't have a specific example in mind. What's your
agenda here?

Sidheag
DS Colin Oct 27 2003

I can't think of a single example of a career where a year out would mean
you'd have to retrain "basically starting over". Even in medical careers,
any necessary skill updating is not the same length as the initial
training, AFAIK.

just wanted to say here, that a mutual friend of me and the person that I
mentioned and accidentally sparked this discussion is also in medicine, she
has taken a full year off each time, plus any leave she accrued, then will
work 3 days a week (she has to do 2.5, but thought with the travelling she
might as well do 3), she knows she has slowed things down, but she doesn't
care, also in her leave after her first she was able to study and take an
exam, which might well have been hard had she been working full time and had
children at home.

Anne

"Sidheag McCormack" wrote in message
...
toypup writes:

"Anne Rogers" wrote in message
...

Some career tracks make it very difficult to shelve for a year and
then
return at the same level. You're either full time or you're not in it
at all.
Oh yes, I know that, I've been there myself, Nathanael was born in the
middle of my Ph.D. but in the end I delayed going back due to
breastfeeding and eventually decided not to go back at all, but going
back full time after a years break would have been doable.

But since it was doable, then yours is not the career track where it is
not doable (or exceedingly difficult).

Do you have a specific career track in mind where you think this is true,
though? I ask because my own is a career track where it's commonly held
that it's not doable or exceedingly difficult, and I held that as an
unexamined assumption for many years. However, once I really asked myself
what exactly I thought would happen if I took a year out, I realised that
it wasn't as clear cut as that. In the end, I did it, and don't for a
moment regret it. My career prospects are perhaps not as good as they once
were, but that's more because I'm not working 60+ hour weeks any more than
because of the actual time out.

I'm fortunate in living in a country where my right to return to my job
after a year is protected. Thus what I was risking was not immediate
unemployment, but, maybe, being seen as out of date and incompetent once I
returned, leading to unpleasantness, lack of future promotion, and in the
worst case, the sack. I can see that it would have been far harder if
there
had been no right to return. However, my experience leads me to know that
there are some, and suspect that there are many, people who *feel* that
taking a year out isn't an option for them where, in fact, it could be.

Almost any field where the technology changes quickly would be difficult. My
mother stayed out as a Medical Microbiologist while she had
babies/toddlers/preschoolers at home. By the time she was ready to go back,
she discovered that the techniques and apparatus used were so different that
she'd have to almost start over-and decided that it wasn't worth it. She was
a SAHM and perpetual volunteer throughout my and my brother's school years,
and currently coordinates science education programs like science fairs and
competitions for the university (which is effectively a paid volunteer
position-it used to be a job a faculty member got stuck with, but after the
person assigned had a medical crisis, she stepped in and took over, and they
eventually started paying her).

According to my husband, in IT even working can make you unqualified for
most jobs in the industry, because the technology changes so fast, and while
you're building experience on one niche, there are dozens of others where
you have no experience whatsoever. So, while he left college and grad school
qualified for a wide range of things, at this point he is very locked into
DBMS design and related areas simply because after 8 years in that field, he
doesn't have the skillset for say, web applications development. Taking more
than a few weeks off for maternity leave just isn't done.

One thing which I love about teaching is that it is easy to stop and come
back later. And, given what the federal government is doing right now, I'm
hoping that by the time I go back, sanity will have returned. ANd in my
district, as a tenured teacher, I have priority on any openings for the next
5 years, without having to go through the full application process again (I
gave up my assured position after one year). But that's a real luxury.


Sidheag
DS Colin Oct 27 2003

Donna Metler skrev:
According to my husband, in IT even working can make you unqualified for
most jobs in the industry, because the technology changes so fast, and while
you're building experience on one niche, there are dozens of others where
you have no experience whatsoever. So, while he left college and grad school
qualified for a wide range of things, at this point he is very locked into
DBMS design and related areas simply because after 8 years in that field, he
doesn't have the skillset for say, web applications development. Taking more
than a few weeks off for maternity leave just isn't done.

I've been in IT for 25+ years. I've had two maternaty leaves - one 15
months - one 7 months. I'm not a boss - I'm a highly specialized
technician who is very dependent on her knowledge. But 25+ years have
given me so much broad knowledge that even new concepts just seem like
variations over old themes.

My speciality changes every 5-10 years - sometimes gradually and
sometimes suddenly.

It is possible, and it get easier and easier the more times you try.

Tine, Denmark

Donna Metler writes:

Almost any field where the technology changes quickly would be
difficult.

Difficult, yes, but I'm in such a field, and it hasn't been impossible for
me.

My mother stayed out as a Medical Microbiologist while she
had babies/toddlers/preschoolers at home. By the time she was ready to
go back, she discovered that the techniques and apparatus used were so
different that she'd have to almost start over-and decided that it
wasn't worth it.

That sounds like a lot more than one year out, though. I certainly wouldn't
claim that one can be out for an arbitrary length of time and still go back
without a lot of difficulty - just that in no field I can think of is one
year really prohibitive. (And even so, my betting is that if she'd chosen
to go back, she'd have found that her experience would have counted for
more than she thought - but that's unproveable.)

According to my husband, in IT even working can make you unqualified for
most jobs in the industry, because the technology changes so fast, and
while you're building experience on one niche, there are dozens of
others where you have no experience whatsoever. So, while he left
college and grad school qualified for a wide range of things, at this
point he is very locked into DBMS design and related areas simply
because after 8 years in that field, he doesn't have the skillset for
say, web applications development. Taking more than a few weeks off for
maternity leave just isn't done.

And there's the rub. Something can be *just not done* for no very good
reason. And again, eight years is very different from one year. About eight
times different, in fact :-) *And* I'd suggest that the "no experience"
here is at least as important as the "eight years out" thing. I could go on
- it's quite a different situation from someone established in a career
taking one year out and then going back, in fact.

What makes me feel strongly about this is that I *so* nearly bought the
idea that it was impossible for me to take a year out. Fortunately, I
caught myself in time to ask myself "well, *why* is it impossible? what
would happen?". But I was *so* close to doing myself out of a wonderful
year with my baby because it was Just Not Done to take a year out, for no
good reason at all. Sure, I've had to work hard to catch up on crucial
parts of what I missed. Sure, I felt I had to do the odd bit of work stuff
while I was on leave, to keep my hand in (less than I intended, in fact,
since I had the non-sleeping model of baby). Sure, my career has taken a
bit of a hit. But the sky did not fall. Maybe there really are careers out
there where the sky really would fall if someone took a year out, but I bet
there are more where women are limiting their own options through not
challenging the cultural assumptions.

One more point: think about the enormous discrepancy in normal lengths of
maternity leave across the developed world, from a few weeks being normal
for many US women, to a year being normal for many Scandinavians, with the
UK where I am and many other places somewhere in between. Yet the sets of
careers in those places, the skillsets those careers require, is more or
less the same, these days. What differs, apart from the financial stuff?
Not the actual difficulty of catching up after a leave - rather, the
cultural expectations.

One thing which I love about teaching is that it is easy to stop and
come back later. And, given what the federal government is doing right
now, I'm hoping that by the time I go back, sanity will have returned.
ANd in my district, as a tenured teacher, I have priority on any
openings for the next 5 years, without having to go through the full
application process again (I gave up my assured position after one
year). But that's a real luxury.

Sounds like a good situation to be in, yes!

Sidheag
DS Colin Oct 27 2003