New single-family house 140 - Is it financially feasible like this?

I would talk to your employer or change jobs if I were you. Or does your job require physical presence (the job itself, not the possibly narrow-minded boss with a negative view of people)?

I am the HR manager in a company that is very production-heavy. In other words, we have almost 400 employees in production who must work on site. Personal contact is very important there. Maybe home office would be possible two days a month, when you really only have paperwork to do. Otherwise, home office with a child probably only works from a certain age of the child. Our son is 1.5 years old. He can't really keep himself occupied for long and he also couldn't care less who you have on the phone / in the video conference. The much more important point has just been mentioned: Most parents (including us) don't want a "weekend relationship" with their child. If it were absolutely necessary, one might have to swallow that toad temporarily, but for me it is a kind of luxury that not everything is tightly stretched financially, meaning that you still have reserves and at the same time spend active time with your child. If I had the opportunity to work only four days, I would take it despite the financial losses.

This was not meant to be an "attack," but one often reads here in the forum that part-time work is assumed as soon as a child comes along. I definitely agree with you that many individual factors play a role there... I just wanted to generally put this question out there.

We have the mentioned "frog" because we don't know it any other way so far; if the house is finished, we might switch to the luxury of reduced working hours.

This was not meant as an "attack," it’s just that you often read here in the forum that part-time work is assumed immediately when a child comes along. I definitely agree with you that many individual factors play a role there, ...I just wanted to raise this question in general.

We have the mentioned "bitter pill" because we don’t know it any other way so far; maybe we will switch to the luxury of reduced working hours once the house is finished.

I didn’t take it as an "attack" either ;)
Just wanted to tell you OUR reasons for it :)

I didn’t take it as an "attack" either ;) Just wanted to tell you OUR reasons for it :)

What should not be underestimated either: Especially at the beginning, children can be quite demanding, including short nights. A house also requires more work than an apartment, especially if there is a garden involved. If both work full-time, things can get quite stressful at times.

Where does the idea always come from that you only work part-time once the child is here?
If you want to, you can manage both full-time and have no grandparents nearby, it's not that comfortable but it works.

Sorry, but that's nonsense. It depends so much on the individual circumstances that you can't just say everyone can do that. For example, working hours, distance to the workplace, care times (where we live there are only a few kindergartens that offer care until 4:00 PM), etc...

Three years ago I experienced something funny in a training session:
During the break, we talked about the topic of childcare and one participant was also of the opinion that it was absolutely no problem if both parents worked full-time. It works for him after all.
A little later, the planning for the week was supposed to be adjusted a bit so that it would fit better timewise with the exercises. The advantage would have been that Thursday and Friday would have ended much earlier.

Exactly this participant, for whom everything works so great full-time, was absolutely zero flexible. He couldn't stay 15 minutes longer than originally planned on any of the days. Being there earlier was also not possible. If both work full-time, the whole everyday life is completely planned, I understand that. But that just doesn't work in every profession.