The kids went back to school, and my husband and I drove over 1000 miles and climbed a lot of stairs last weekend. We returned to a quiet house.
But this week’s post is not going to be about that. Instead, it’s a time to stop and reflect on one year of FillingTime. To do that, I’m merging my personal and professional identities and bringing AI into the conversation. I will admit that I’ve been experimenting with AI throughout this year of FillingTime, just as I have in my professional life. I do not think I could have published weekly for a year without AI. Let me explain…
I started writing TwinLife: Having It All in order to work through my feelings, struggles, and celebrations during my life as a mother of twins who worked outside the home in a pretty demanding job. It was a way to stay engaged with my inner, personal writing self while I was pursuing tenure. I did not want to lose my voice while I was focused on publishing professionally.
But writing is hard, and my time and energy was limited as I focused on my job and my kids. So I only wrote on TwinLife when I had something to say. It became a space for me to emote when needed, not one I curated regularly.
This past year of writing FillingTime was different. I challenged myself to write weekly, and it forced me to look at my week (and reflect through my camera roll) on a regular basis. I needed to find something to say, which sometimes forced me to curate my empty time and sometimes left me wondering at the end of the week what was worth emoting.
There were weeks where I faced the blank screen and just wrote, posting nearly first draft pieces like I did when I was writing TwinLife. There were weeks when I didn’t have the focus, nor did I have the energy to write my way through it (as I do in my professional writing). In those moments, with my self-imposed deadline looming, I’d talk it out like I used to do with my mom when I was struggling to write – except now I used Voice Memo. Whether I was driving home from work, making dinner, or sitting in the hot tub, I could turn on the recorder and just talk through my week. Then with a click of a button or two, I could grab the transcript and drop it into AI.
AI would take my transcript, which came in a single, very long paragraph, and break it into a clean paragraph form that I could read and reflect on. If my thoughts had coherence, I copied the clean version of my spoken words and started editing. If I was a little all over the place, I used AI as a thinking partner to help me find a thread worth writing about.
Every once in a while, I asked AI to generate a full draft based on my initial input. I never used that draft. It was always crap and never really me. In fact, in one conversation with ChatGPT, where I tried repeatedly to get it to edit its output to be something I found acceptable, I told it that it was crap. It agreed with me and told me my blog was much stronger when I drafted. It was right.
I’ve had fun playing with AI through this writing process, and recently, I’ve been bringing multiple AI chatbots into conversation with each other. I ask one or more for feedback on my writing, and then I give the feedback to the other one to see what it says. I feel like I have my own personal writing group, and to be honest, it’s making my writing better.
All this to say, I’ve been writing for a year, and I thought it would be useful to pause this week and see how my writing partners thought I should start filling my time based on everything I have posted on FillingTime. AI is particularly good at thematic analysis, so I asked ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini to analyze FillingTime.org. Importantly, I told them not to use any of the chat history in their analysis and to focus only on the blog itself. I asked for the output to include a description of the author and recommendations for how this person could fill their time.
Gemini’s response came quickest, but it was the most superficial. It didn’t teach me anything I hadn’t already considered. ChatGPT and Claude (which took the longest in its analysis) gave me different insights, some of them overlapping and some of them distinct. I used them as thinking partners, feeding them each other’s responses and asking them to incorporate ideas that could enhance their own analysis.
By the time I was done, I had a pretty clear picture of where I might go in this next year of FillingTime.
First, here is Claude’s final analysis.







I particularly liked the way Claude characterized my husband’s and my partnership of being “co-conspirator[s] on spontaneous adventures” and a “companionate team.” Like Chat, Claude thinks I should convene, create, and protect unscheduled time.
ChatGPT’s executive summary complements Claude’s more detailed report and gets to the heart of the recommendations for FillingTime.

In Chat’s first analysis, it said my time this past year led to this equation:

The purpose is important, I think.
One thing missing from both of the analyses is that I need to find my purpose for giving back. Volunteering has been a core part of my identity for as long as I can remember. Moving forward that purpose might be in convening women over 50 (Claude suggested I start a podcast!), but I’m not sure that’s it. During TwinLife, my life was full of volunteering. I did relatively little of it this year comparatively. I want to get back into the community and find a place, not tied to my kids, that can use my talents and skills.
As I continue to search for that right fit, I think my AI thinking partners are correct: I need to convene, create, and give myself permission to leave space empty. I’m already working on the plan to fill my time!





































