I had a very similar situation a year ago. My mom was diagnosed with colon cancer in October 2020, had surgery then, and then went through chemo December - February. I moved from CA to FL to take care of her during the time, and it was extremely tough.
I tried to manage my work while going through it, and negotiated with my manager that I'd be working roughly 50% of my time with the possibility for unexpected days off (my mom had several hospitalizations for transfusions which were unplanned/unexepcted). It wore me out tremendously emotionally, and at the end of it I got a poor performance review for that time period.
I strongly regret not taking "family leave," which if you're in tech your company should offer. If I had taken it, I would have maintained good performance standing in my company as they default you to it if there's insufficient data. Instead, even though my manager was on board with giving me a good performance review, the "bar raisers" decided I hadn't done enough work in that time, and it had knock-on effects on my burnout, because on top of getting back to work normally post-chemo while already being exhausted, I now also had to work extra hard to get out of a bad performance situation.
Additionally, while I did get a good bit of work done during that time, if I had had the time completely free to take care of my mom I would have done a better job taking care of her, and would have had more time to also do self-care, which is extremely important when going through such a difficult time and watching someone you love suffer.
I really wish you the best, I completely understand your situation and you can reach out to me at ryan @ mcafeeryan [dot] com if you want to chat about any of it. It's going to be hard, it's going to suck, and you will get through it.
Yeah honestly it's a bit wild to me that this is a controversial take, and the proposals to "solve" this problem have largely been to cut people off from benefits.
I have a pretty unpopular take on this, being married to someone with severe pet allergies. That take is, dogs (and cats) have no place on an airplane, and responsible adults shouldn't get pets that they can't find sitters for or board while they are away.
Planes are enclosed-air spaces, and the allergens from your dog make anyone with allergies miserable for the entire duration of the flight. Every single time we end up on a plane with a dog (even the "hypoallergenic" ones), my wife ends up sick. Not to mention the fact that there are plenty of people with severe phobias of dogs, and that the animals themselves tend to be extremely uncomfortable on flights. That last factor has actually led to a number of innocent people sitting next to folks with dogs getting bit, etc on planes.
Actual service animals do still belong, because they provide an actual service, are extremely well-trained, and are worth the allergen/phobia tradeoff because folks who need them literally need them.
The amount of entitlement that pet owners have to impose the downsides of their pets on others boggles my mind sometimes.
I have a pretty unpopular take on this, being married to someone with severe pet allergies. That take is, dogs (and cats) have no place on an airplane, and responsible adults shouldn't get pets that they can't find sitters for or board while they are away.
Planes are enclosed-air spaces, and the allergens from your dog make anyone with allergies miserable for the entire duration of the flight. Every single time we end up on a plane with a dog (even the "hypoallergenic" ones), my wife ends up sick. Not to mention the fact that there are plenty of people with severe phobias of dogs, and that the animals themselves tend to be extremely uncomfortable on flights. That last factor has actually led to a number of innocent people sitting next to folks with dogs getting bit, etc on planes.
Actual service animals do still belong, because they provide an actual service, are extremely well-trained, and are worth the allergen/phobia tradeoff because folks who need them literally need them.
Your experience and GPs are definitely valid, but I will say that there are many different San Franciscos if you try out places that aren't downtown or the Mission.
The Sunset and Richmond have very little of the homeless problem and I never have to watch out for feces, and they are generally clean areas. The commute is a bit worse to a lot worse depending on where you're going, but they do have bus/Muni lines that will get you where you need to go and you don't need to leave to do fun things (they are self-contained mini cities with great food, services, etc in walking distance).
If you want to have a shorter commute, Noe Valley is similar to those but slightly dirtier due to proximity to the Mission. There are tons of other great neighborhoods that are clean and relatively clear of homeless people with various tradeoffs of commute time and proximity to nature, such as Potrero Hill, Mission Bay, and Bernal Heights.
Ever since moving out of the area adjacent to Market St I've come to really love San Francisco and find that most of the criticisms I hear of it are honestly uninformed as to the real nature of the city in 70% of its neighborhoods.
Counterargument: in SF I'm always surprised by the number of people who choose to live in areas they dislike (ex: the Tenderloin), paying astronomical rent, and never being near green space, just for the sake of their commute.
I pay the price of a 1-hour commute each way every day, but I live in the Sunset right by Golden Gate Park (imo one of the best urban parks in the country), and every night when I get home I have the peace of the trees, while still technically being in the city and having plenty of walkable restaurants, groceries, and services. I also get 850 square feet for the same price that many in worse areas of the city pay for 350, and on the weekends I'm already right by the park and the beach. Additionally my wife and I both feel safe walking around at night and frequently go for walks after dinner, and when we lived closer to downtown we couldn't really do that.
In my experience people (myself included) tend to mostly deal with what's near them when thinking about spending their free time. That means for folks living _in_ the city they rarely end up experiencing the parks and never get away from the crowds that create such a feeling of anonymity. I didn't even know what I was missing out on until I made the move, and despite my frustrations with my commute I wouldn't trade it back and neither would my wife.
I tried to manage my work while going through it, and negotiated with my manager that I'd be working roughly 50% of my time with the possibility for unexpected days off (my mom had several hospitalizations for transfusions which were unplanned/unexepcted). It wore me out tremendously emotionally, and at the end of it I got a poor performance review for that time period.
I strongly regret not taking "family leave," which if you're in tech your company should offer. If I had taken it, I would have maintained good performance standing in my company as they default you to it if there's insufficient data. Instead, even though my manager was on board with giving me a good performance review, the "bar raisers" decided I hadn't done enough work in that time, and it had knock-on effects on my burnout, because on top of getting back to work normally post-chemo while already being exhausted, I now also had to work extra hard to get out of a bad performance situation.
Additionally, while I did get a good bit of work done during that time, if I had had the time completely free to take care of my mom I would have done a better job taking care of her, and would have had more time to also do self-care, which is extremely important when going through such a difficult time and watching someone you love suffer.
I really wish you the best, I completely understand your situation and you can reach out to me at ryan @ mcafeeryan [dot] com if you want to chat about any of it. It's going to be hard, it's going to suck, and you will get through it.