Work-life balance a challenge for couple Too much protection depletes vitamin D

Dear Amy: Recently, my husband said that for him, work will always be the first priority. This is something that he has never “divulged” in our five-year marriage.

This pains me, as I would assume that our marriage/ family would be the first priority, with work/career being a close second. We have gone back and forth, and it seems he can’t wrap his mind around my lack of understanding on his position.

He likens putting his career first to putting our marriage and family first.

We do not have any children yet, and I now find myself slightly sick to my stomach thinking about how I may have married a man that will never consider me his first priority.

I’m not quite ready to throw in the towel, but I’m wondering what your advice would be? — Heartbroken Wife

Dear Heartbroken: You should view your husband’s actions as being better indicators for where his priorities lie. Did this whole question come up in the first place because he is prioritizing his work over your marriage?

Both of you are responding to the whole “work” question in gender-traditional ways: he sees himself first as a worker and provider, and you see yourself first as a spouse and a family member.

It would be very easy for your husband to simply deliver a loving lie and say to you, “Well, honey, you will always be Number One.”

Realistically, in one’s career, there are times when work has to come first. There are also many times when work takes a back seat, by choice.

A more nuanced view for both of you would be to look at life as a waxing and waning of needs and interests through time.

By all means, do not have children until you are comfortable with the work-life balance in both of your lives.

Readers can send email to askamy@amydickinson.com or letters to “Ask Amy” P.O. Box 194, Freeville, NY, 13068.

Dear Dr. Roach: I walk outside almost every day for at least an hour.

I also cover myself from head to toe — wearing long pants and long sleeved shirts, with the backs of my hands covered and a widebrimmed hat with a bandanna covering my neck and lower chin areas as well.

With sunglasses on, ready to go, my husband jokes that I look like I am going to rob a bank!

But after numerous skin cancers, I do not want any sun.

Therefore, the only skin exposed to the sun is on my 10 fingers.

Is that enough exposure to get a daily dose of vitamin D? — J.P.

It is very difficult to get vitamin D from the diet, so the body makes its own in the skin, when exposed to sunlight.

However, people differ in their ability to make vitamin D (in general, lighter-skinned people are better able to make vitamin D than darker-skinned ones).

Where you are on the planet and at what season also determines how effective the sunlight is at helping your body do that.

So to be clear, the amount of skin that needs to be exposed depends on a great many factors.

People who wear sun-protective clothing, like you do (and those who do not go outside at all) can be at high risk for having vitamin D deficiency.

I understand your reasoning given your history of skin cancer.

However, I would recommend either taking a vitamin D supplement (1,000-2,000 IU a day is common) or getting your vitamin D level checked regularly by your doctor.

From what you are saying, I doubt that you have been allowing enough skin exposure to get adequate vitamin D.

Write to Dr. Roach at ToYourGoodHealth @med.cornell.edu.